Slashdot Mirror
Using a Bomb Robot to Kill a Suspect Is an Unprecedented Shift in Policing (vice.com)
A police standoff with a suspect in the killing of five police officers in Dallas came to an abrupt end on Friday morning in an unusual way. The police said that negotiations broke down, an exchange of gunfire happened, but then they had no option but to use "bomb robot and place a device on its extension for it to detonate where the suspect was." Motherboard explains the unprecedented shift in policing. From an article: Peter W. Singer, an expert in military technology and robot warfare at the New America Foundation, tweeted that this is the first known incident of a domestic police force using a robot to kill a suspect. Singer tweeted that in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, soldiers have strapped claymore mines to the $8,000 MARCbot using duct tape to turn them into jury-rigged killing devices. Singer says all indications are that the Dallas Police Department did something similar in this case -- it improvised to turn a surveillance robot into a killing machine. Improvised device or not, the concerns here mirror a debate that's been going on for a few years now: Should law enforcement have access to armed drones, or, for that matter, weaponized robots? In 2013 Kentucky Senator Rand Paul staged a 13-hour filibuster that was focused entirely on concerns about the use of armed drones on US soil. Last year, North Dakota became the first state to legalize nonlethal, weaponized drones for its police officers. [...] The ability for police to remotely kill suspects raises due process concerns. If a shooter is holed up and alone, can they be qualified as an imminent threat to life? Are there clear protocols about when a robot can be used to engage a suspect versus when a human needs to engage him or her? When can the use of lethal force be administered remotely?
Brings a new definition for Battlebots.
"I mean you call something a war, and pretty soon everyone is going to be running around acting like warriors." -- Major Colvin
Regan declared The War On Drugs and, unsurprisingly, people started acting like warriors. We now have a militarized police force that, in many areas, is effectively an occupying military. Guess what happens when an occupying military starts killing civilians? Insurgents are created.
I have a feeling this situation is going to spiral out of control pretty quickly.
Just be careful - robotics are becoming easier to use / knowledge on these is becoming more widespread. The more they are used in this fashion, the more people will think to do it. It won't be just police. It is just a tool, but as a society, we should definitely do our best to stay away from using killing force simply because it's the easy option. They may not have had a better choice in this case, but this will be a recurring issue.
"If a shooter is holed up and alone, can they be qualified as an imminent threat to life?"
In this case, definitely yes. Obviously a blanket judgement cannot be made for all cases. Each situation is entirely different.
5 people are dead. 5 more are in the hospital.
There are major perceived racial issues and conflicts at hand, and you want to focus on the specific equipment at hand?
This was not an autonomous killing machine. It was similar to an RC car with an explosive charge attached to it. All other attempts to kill the gunman had failed, and putting even more people into extreme risk was ill-advised. Putting him down *hard* was the best possible option given the situation.
The gunman was actively shooting other people. At that point, killing them via whatever method is the only sane option. The situation had already been escalated beyond most thresholds.
Turning the conversation into a "but... robots are evil" mess detracts from the very real issues at hand.
The police should be required to always give the option of surrender first (something that is currently broken in the policy). If a suspect refuses to surrender and continues hostile behavior then the choice seems pretty clear to me. If a suspect does not surrender, but ceases endangering the lives of others, then the policy should be to wait it out. You'd think someone would have already written a manual on this...
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
http://philly.curbed.com/2013/5/13/10244298/how-philadelphia-became-the-city-that-bombed-itself
"It has been 28 years since police lieutenant Frank Powell leaned from a helicopter and tossed a gym bag packed with C-4 and Tovex explosives onto a residential rowhome in West Philadelphia, leading to the deaths of six adults and five children, along with the complete destruction of 61 homes.
On May 13, 1985 at about 5:30 PM, Philadelphia gained the immortal moniker of "The City That Bombed Itself"; a brutal ending to the city's longstanding struggle with an organization that called itself MOVE."
They'll need to be pretty good to correctly target the blacks, er, whoops, "criminals" that the cops really want dead.
Since when is "progress" dependent on precedence? This is merely the next logical step, an "evolution"
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
This isn't an issue, as long as there is a human controlling the robot.
It's like saying that using a rifle raises issues because the rifle is isn't close to the target. Using the robot merely slows down the process of moving the killing object from the source to the target.
No, a real issue would be autonomous killing devices. They are coming and will probably be in use before there is general awareness of them. Their use is more likely after that experiment that showed an autonomous robot pilot was better than a skilled human pilot.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
This is a tremendous shift. They didn't just detonate a bomb nearby the subject, the PLACED a bomb near the subject and detonated it. In my opinion that is not law enforcement, that's assassination.
Opinions aside there are a few questions raised: does the bomb squad keep a stock of bombs around? Are they fragmentary devices? Undirected charges or directional? Did they fabricate this bomb themselves or repurpose an existing explosive? Is this something they train for or were they improvising on scene (potentially risking even more lives)? Who made the risk/benefit determination? Similarly, who approved this action? The police chief? The Mayor? Governor? FBI? Justice department? Was compliance with the posse comitatus act waived? By whom?
Until robots get a vote, they will always be abused like this.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
Ignoring the Robot issue, Should police have lethal explosives in their arsenal?
Explosives are explosives. I'm sure most SWAT teams are equipped with breaching charges. That's all you would need. It's not like regular patrol officers are walking around with a grenade on their belt.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
How has the hashtag inspired violence? The police killings of blacks is what is inspiring the violence and murder.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
#MEINKAMPF, #LEBENSRAUM and #BLUTUNDEHRE spring to mind.
Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
What I wondered is: did the suspect have a gas mask? If not (I haven't seen anything that said he did), why not launch some tear gas - or even have the robot deploy it - rather than an explosive device?
If they took the guy alive, then perhaps they could have gotten information on accomplices etc.
WTF. Dude this guy had nothing to do with BLM. BLM came to be because of murder and violence not the other way around
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Authorities have bombed suspects, and their children, in our shameful past.
I hope the racist old days aren't back now that many Conservatives are now openly-racist, and even nominated a fascist as the Republican Presidential candidate.
http://www.telesurtv.net/engli...
The hashtag against racist violence is to protest the violence, not to inspire it, but the racist-right can't handle the idea of black people having the same rights as the rest of us do, so they'll pretend that a murderous nut is the fault of Black Lives Matter, even though he was shooting at BLM protesters in addition to the police.
Racist right? Like Stalin? Like the national socialists? You keep on talking about the "right" but libertarians are "right" and are all about individualism to an extreme rather than collectivism and centralised control.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
I think all hashtags have inspired exactly the same amount of violence.
Excellent use of rhetoric and ad hominems. Surely you are the voice of reason that all of us on the "racist-right" need to listen to!
Why was this lie given a +5? The term War on Drugs was used for nearly a decade before Reagan was elected. Why reward this person that is obviously paid to disrupt this site.
They effectively used a suicide bomber with an IED to get the job done.
Something that we, as America, have a tendency to denounce whenever it's used against us. .. outstanding.
We're not going to shoot them anymore, we're going to blow them up . . . . . . lol .
What's next ? We going to strap a suicide vest on the K9's, let them run the suspects down ? :|
Maybe fill a police car with explosives and drive it into the house the bad guys are holed up in ?
Here's a thought, maybe someone should take a step back and figure out what the problem is
here. ( Hint: Police keep killing folks. Many of them unarmed, in handcuffs, and mostly black )
Of all the people killed by police under questionable circumstances, how many times were the police
prosecuted for it ?
Exactly.
Once enough folks lose faith in the system, they will cease to rely upon it. The results can be quite
devastating. The police love to tell everyone " This is a war ! ". Though now that folks are no longer playing
by their rules, the game becomes a little more difficult to play doesn't it ?
I suppose the same argument can be made for the Government's behavior as of late. ( I'm looking at you
FBI ) When the rich and powerful get a free pass to do whatever they want, the rest take notice. When
that system pisses enough people off, I would expect the reaction will be very similar.
If the same thing happened when LBJ declared the war on poverty, I wouldn't want to hang around an unemployment office.
Libertarians are central, not right. They tend to be socially liberal and fiscally conservative.
Conservatives by definition are authoritarian and dislike individual liberties IE want to outlaw freedoms like flag burning. They tend to want things to stay the same, to conserve their ways..
Liberals by definition want to encourage INDIVIDUAL liberties.
Both sides taken to extreme become the same though.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
So you call out ad hominems and sweeping generalizations by using ad hominems and sweeping generalizations?
When you cant win, ad hominem.
That is a pretty racist thing to say, as per the definition of racist.
blacks dont disobey the law any more then us whites. They are arrested for it more though, even for crimes that us whites commit multiple times more than, and then they pay for it more with harsher sentences.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
lazy? i missed the part where they are obligated to risk life and limb to stop an active shooter. when you are actively murdering people(shooter did not surrender as far as I know), don't complain when victims brothers in arms get pissed and come to stop you. and by stop, i mean, shoot you in your head(or blow it off with a bomb). deadly force is met with as much disproportional violence as possible. this ends threats quicker and tends to make others think twice before attempting anything like it again.
one does not actively start a fight with a well trained militia. last i heard, we have not had one go on a shooting spree and thus did not need to be put down.
Truer words have never been spoken
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
The police can't kill people with bombs, they have to use small explosions in shells to speed up a specific projectile, not an accidental one with a bomb, like god intended it to be.
"most" Citation please? how many people are in BLM, how many have you personally confirmed as have been celebrating police deaths etc?
When you cant win, ad hominem.
You heard it here first.
(sometimes I wish I hadn't worked on that)
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Others have mentioned the "war of drugs" term was coined in 1971. This was in response to the violent drug gangs that rose to prominence in the late 1960s and early 1970s. New York and Detroit was especially dangerous.
Look up Frank Lucas aka "Superfly", Griselda Blanco aka Black Widow aka the Godmother, Felix Mitchell aka "The Cat", etc.
Blanco alone is responsible for at least 200 murders.
If you want to talk about Reagan, compare the situation in the cities in 1979 vs 1989. Fact is, the drug gangs were greatly reduced during that time frame, though Los Angeles continued to have a problem during the 20 years of democrat control of California that followed.
If they can carry the bomb on the thing, couldn't they just put a taser on it?
Step 1: Get in position
Step 2: Fire taser.
Step 3: Storm the position.
Step 4: If he resists, shock him again.
Lethal force was no longer called for once he was contained. Police have no business having never mind using explosive as an intentionally deadly weapon, realy nothing past a breaching charge or flashbang.
No sir I dont like it.
The dude explicitly stated he wanted to hurt white people, and he had pro-BLM posts all over. When you shoot 17(?) people and only two of them aren't cops, you have to wonder how much he was actually targeting the protesters.
Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
when they burned Chris Dorner alive? Not really unprecedented...
In Canada, the BLM movement unfortunately chose to demonstrate during the pride parade in Toronto and felt justified to delay someone else's cause for 30 minutes. I think the hashtag should be #BlackLivesMatterMOST.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
NO. First officially publicized death by drone in the US.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
All cops are the problem though, because even if they aren't racist killers themselves they're aiding and abetting the ones who are. The few whistleblower cops who are actually innocent get blackballed and quickly cease to be cops.
If the police don't want to be attacked like this, they should stop acting like a criminal gang of thugs and terrorists themselves.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Why should the police be forced to expose themselves to someone who already killed several cops?
Good point. They can quit and go home. I'm not going to force anybody to remain a cop.
But as long as they want to wear that uniform? They have standards to meet, very high ones. Many of them have failed. Worse, many of them have not been held to account.
This time? I don't know, but I doubt their claims, and I would seriously question their conduct. The possibility of angry vengeance taking hold? All too real. But I do not see them being questioned which will have a price.
The smart play would have been to capture him alive. Regardless of the cost in potential lives, the real situation now is not in their favor.
Though to be honest, they'd probably have fucked that up too. Another Jack Ruby or that guy who killed Dahmer would take the fall.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
We do not have autonomous robots. There is always a human pilot flying that predator done. Even with semi-autonomous drones that fly to a target and fire; there is someone selecting that target and programming the drone.
As with all current A.I., we tell it what the game is and the success conditions. A.I. that decide the rules of the game and discover winning conditions; those are a good 60 ~ 100 years away.
Seems like the USA is going more and more into a civilian war ...
aaaaaaa
That was not the statement. It was racist because it is an over generalization of black people as a whole.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I know people will become uncontrollably outraged about this, but it's a standoff weapon. Just like a spear, a bow and arrow, an explosive tossed through a door or window, a gun, or even a vehicle employed as a weapon.
This is half a stones throw from sending a JDAM through the roof, or one of those crazy ISIS bomb trucks. At what point do they stop being peace officers and become domestic warriors? This is a terrifying development; We expect to see things like this in Afghanistan or Syria, not Texas. At what point did we go ahead and just put a big X through the "Alive" part of "Dead or Alive"?
I like how you limit studies into "non-biased", my assumption is those that are biased are the ones that disagree with you..
Looking at the DOJ numbers blacks commit higher crimes per capita, but so do whites.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
And drones in general is that you can kill a man without risking an Officer's life It sounds fucked up when i day it like that, but the whole situation's foobared. I mean, when it's this easy to take out a perp why wouldn't you?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
A breaching charge would need to be placed incredibly close to a human being to kill them. Giving cops a belt full of grenades is not the same thing as giving them access to a few breaching charges.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Per wikipedia: "According to the US Department of Justice, blacks accounted for 52.5% of homicide offenders from 1980 to 2008, with whites 45.3% and "Other" 2.2%." So if you account for 52% of murders I would imagine you'd probably also account for about half of shootings by police and... guess what? Blacks make up about 50% of police shootings. -Keep in mind that blacks are only 12% of the population in the US.
The next time a robot starts driving towards a perp, that robot is going to get shot up.
"at least an hour"? Was he, or was he not, contained and not able to shoot at more targets? If he was contained, then they have no justification for using lethal force...much less strapping an explosive device on a robot.
Further - why SHOULD the police be forced to expose themselves to someone who already killed several cops? BECAUSE IT'S THEIR JOB. They are not there to pass sentence, they are there to enforce the law and protect the public wellbeing.
The worst aspect about this is accountability. I've noticed a trend in corporate America where decisions are made less and less by one person, and are now more often made collectively (or at least are given the appearance of having been made collectively). The advantage of this is that, if the decision is made by multiple people, then no single person can be blamed if the decision is a bad one. It's a safe way to manage. If several people can agree to do something, then no one has to take the heat if there is a failure somewhere down the line. "Passing the buck" is, of course, as old as civilization itself, and Harry S. Truman had a sign made for his desk in the oval office that read, "The buck stops here." But in this new method of decision making, the buck isn't passed, and it never lands anywhere, it simply does not exist.
This concept applies to the use of robots. No single person wields the weapon. Many people are involved in the operation of the robot. Therefore, no single person can be held accountable if anything goes wrong. I worry that, in the future, more and more policing will be done remotely. No single person will be making the decisions, so that it will be easier to make poor decisions and get away with it.
Proverbs 21:19
Does anybody else remember that guy Christopher Dorner who declared a personal war on the MIC?
I am pretty sure I can't be the only one who was fascinated by how a flashbang "detonated ammo stores" in the vacation home of some total stranger in which he'd holed himself up and turned the entire building into a smoldering crater, quickly cut away from by all video news coverage as the black smoke rose out of the center.
That is some supreme 'Officer John Law is always right' gymnastics. Hope you didn't pull a hamstring. They didn't blow up the fucking building, so I guess they exercised great restraint.
Yeah, sorry, but the classical usage of the term liberal in the US was murdered in the 30's by FDR.
Not sure if BLM is a movement with leaders or something more like Anonymous. More than likely those BLM supporters who want to kill cops are the minority.
Still I hardly hear a peep from them about cases where the cop does wrong and is prosecuted and ends up convicted of a crime ( or when everyone fully expects that and the cop is sitting in jail ). I hear the noise from BLM about cases where the cop most likely won't suffer any legal sanctions.
Therefore, if we generally expect the legal system to come to correct conclusions, then we would expect BLM to be generally wrong about the cases that anger them.
...
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf
It wasn't an autonomous system, it was a remotely operated device. Still it's a bad move, especially since it causes further emotional disconnection to the event and limits sensory input for operators that are already showing a tendency to murder first and not care about the questioning. Something that can only get worse with that shift. Additionally, they used EXPLOSIVES to kill him. You know, one of those rather non-targeting area effect fuck everything in range type nasties? Oh yeah, real good choice with the limited sensory input from a remotely operated device dumbass.... Ever hear of collateral damage and over use of force? Really not the right way to go, but then again, I doubt anyone expected the cops to bring any SUSPECTS in alive for this shooting. Of course, they may not have murdered the right guy, but hell, it's not like anyone can ask him questions now.
There is so much wrong with this entire thing.
"Conservatives by definition are authoritarian"
And modern liberals aren't authoritarian? To the point of legislating soft drink cup size? Or the shape of cucumbers in EU?
"Liberals by definition want to encourage INDIVIDUAL liberties"
That would be the definition of LIBERTARIANS and maybe CLASSIC liberals.
What inspired this cycle of violence was a problem even more basic than the race angle: the steady drift to more militarized law enforcement. What just happened was another step on this road. In the eyes of the police now, we're all burka-clad Fallujans.
Coming soon - the first purpose-built dog shooting robot.
The left-right paradigm is incredibly flawed. It depends on what axis you are measuring them. When it comes to market regulations, libertarians are to the far right of conservatives, by saying that business should have virtually no regulations, where liberals want lots of regulations and conservatives want few. If you are talking things like government healthcare, libertarians are as far right as is logically possible. By any modern definition of the term "Centrism", you are terribly incorrect in your assertion.
How has the hashtag inspired violence? The police killings of blacks is what is inspiring the violence and murder.
It has inspired violence by creating a perception that police thinks and acts otherwise. That perception is ubiquitous. While blacks do get killed by police at higher per capita rates, the hashtag created a perception that blacks are the new indians and cops are the new cowboys trying to wipe out the indians. Which is absurd. Policing black neighborhoods saves more black lives than it takes. Most of black homicide victims are killed by criminals rather than by cops. So cops' presence in black neighborhoods is an overall net positive for the those neighborhoods. The fact that some policemen can't handle the stress of the job, snap and kill innocent civilians is an indication that there needs to be better periodic re-evaluation of the police officers for suitability for non-desk jobs. The fact is that more innocent white people are killed by cops than innocent black people, but per capita rates are higher for blacks. But the difference in these per capita rates does not rise to the level of exaggerated perception that there is a war on black people being fought by cops. This perception was not born out of reality. It was born out of the BLM movement.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Ahh, but you missed the "individual" part. Cup sizes and the like are buisness regulations, not individual regulations. The laws in NY did not prevent you from bringing in your own cup.
Liberals in general want to protect INDIVIDUAL liberties. Due process, 1st amendment, yes even the second amendment.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
No, that happened last week. https://yro.slashdot.org/story...
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
"A.I. that decide the rules of the game and discover winning conditions; those are a good 60 ~ 100 years away."
Nope. There's at least one example of a company that developed an AI that can be given any random game and it will figure out the rules and how to win. They let it play Nintendo. Google bought them. The more general field is called reinforcement learning.
they have, that you did not see it does not mean they have.. BLM has never called for people to retaliate. individual members may have, but not the organisation.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
So this puts us even with the Nazis... How nice.
Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
And limit due process whenever it suits them. And get rid of some personal property rights. And take away some religious freedoms. And deny freedom of speech to anyone who organizes as a corporation. And take away freedom to carry groceries in plastic bags. Etc, etc, etc, etc.
They don't believe in individual liberties at all.
Many (but not all) libertarians, especially the American variety, are very much right-wing when it comes to egalitarianism, in that they have no problem with a tiny elite subset of the population controlling all the wealth and thus power of society, so long as it's "not the government" doing that.
The original left-right divide was not just about liberty but about equality as well. The left was for the common people, against the aristocracy; that was their ends. Their means was removing the authority of the aristocracy and granting liberty to the common people. Being nominally in favor of liberty, but perfectly OK with an aristocratic elite ruling over the common people so long as it's done by "libertarian" means, is hardly in line with the history of the left, and much more squarely aligned with the original right.
(In truth, the existence of an aristocratic elite is evidence that the supposedly libertarian principles by which they're operating aren't so libertarian after all, and some kind of authoritarian power still remains for them to exploit. There are libertarians who acknowledge this, libertarian socialists; "socialism" doesn't equal authoritarianism. My personal suspect for that bit of authority remaining to exploit is the enforcement of certain kinds of contracts, especially those of rent and interest, but also things like exclusivity and non-compete arrangements).
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
If the suspect Johnson was shot and killed during exchanges of gunfire twenty minutes into the standoff, no one would care. He was a shooter, he was shooting at cops, he got shot. It would become a part of the tragedy that was last night, but no one would be calling for the head of the Dallas police officer who fired the gun with the bullet that ended his life.
Instead, DPD negotiated with him for hours. They gave him every opportunity to peacefully end the standoff, to lay down arms and leave with his life. I can only speculate on how those hours passed since we don't have details yet. But you don't spend that time before you drive a robot in with an explosive device without giving him several warnings. Johnson knew the only way out was if he laid down arms and came out with his hands up. Johnson chose not to do so. Instead he chose to continue to be a threat to the people of Dallas, to continue taking shots at police officers, and to continue to make threats on the citizens of the city. His life was in his own hands.
It is a tragedy that the end was what it was. This man chose to plan, organize, and execute a planned attack upon law enforcement officers who were guarding citizens demonstrating peacefully. This isn't about war, this is about terror. For the most part no one here in the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex is blaming anyone except for the individuals who carried out this attack. The rhetoric and platforming is primarily coming from y'all, the rest of the world. Here we're just mourning the loss of five officers who died in a peaceful situation for absolutely no reason other than other people were consumed by hatred enough to ambush them in the line of duty.
I don't care what the sides are. I don't care about anyone nitpicking the means. I care about the people around me. Y'all should too. And that's where it should end.
Citations of limiting due process? and property rights? understand that just because someone claims to be liberal does not make them liberal. Dont confuse democrat with liberal, or republican with conservative. Kim Davis for example was not a liberal.
The corporation thing is not really a thing, and would not be an individual liberties issue if it was.
As for the groceries, now you are just going off the rails, I Did no know that was a liberty, even if it is businesses giving you free plastic backs to carry things in is not an individual liberty. I dont think you know what the individual part in individual liberties mean.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
Some liberals lie and say they want "reasonable" gun restrictions when their goal is a total ban (except for the elites). It's all about getting the thin edge of the wedge under the door.
Upon seeing her Clinton gun ban enacted in 1994, she said: “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . ‘Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in,’ I would have done it.”
Gun Control Misses Mark: Sen. Feinstein Shoots-off Mouth, Hits Foot
The Second Amendment must go: We ban lawn darts. It’s time to ban guns
Feinstein is a liberal closing in on the border of the loop to authoritarianism, as I stated in my previous post.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
You seem to be confusing republican/democrat with conservatives/liberals.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
All cops are the problem though, because even if they aren't racist killers themselves they're aiding and abetting the ones who are.
This is going to get me flamed, but I'm past the point of giving a crap. Let's change out a few words here and see how it works
All blacks are the problem though, because even if they aren't gang bangers and killers themselves they're aiding and abetting the ones who are.
Let's try a less inflammatory one
All programmers are the problem though, because even if they aren't bad programmers themselves they're aiding and abetting the ones who are.
There are good people and bad people, good cops and bad cops, good programmers and bad programmers. How about we quit painting with such a broad brush?
What infuriates me is the lack of accountability. I understand that cops have a shitty job, and I understand that the use of force is probably justified the majority of the time. Even if the majority of them are justified, that leaves a percentage that aren't. Where is the accountability for those? On the other hand, where is the accountability for the citizens dancing and taunting police officers after they came to stop a local 7-11 from being looted, while the officer's brothers are laying dead?
ED-209
Have gnu, will travel.
It has inspired violence by creating a perception that police thinks and acts otherwise. That perception is ubiquitous.
I think all those dead guys is what created the perception, buddy.
Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
"Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
Only one thing about the whole recent train of events is new:
Smartphones. They've either ripped our heads out of the sand, or overturned a rock, whichever metaphor you prefer. Now what police have long been accused of, and what could reasonably be viewed skeptically, is out in the open.
Should the shooter have done it? No, but that's immaterial.
Was it wrong? Yes, but that's immaterial.
Should he have been engaged with lethal force? Yes, but that's immaterial.
Brutalize a population long enough, and they'll strike out. Forget right and wrong: they WILL, and we can't talk it away or threaten it away. If you don't remove the stimulus, it will just keep happening. And thanks to the smartphone, we now know whether the stimulus is still around or not.
Just as the CIA with Ollie North was importing shitloads of cocaine into the us, and teaching inner city drug-dealers to make Crack, with was as destructive as Free Base, but easier on the supply chain.
I knew several guys who flew planes full of coke back into the us, completely covered by the govt.
The last two died mysteriously after all that started hitting the papers; one died in a parachuting fail while smuggling a planeload, and the other disappeared after a meeting...
Smokescreens all...
Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
That has happened Since the Clinton Administration; things were in pretty good shape when he left office.
The biggest Fuck we got was the "Fight Two Wars completely without funding them" that drove the economy into a tailspin.
How long can you just print money to support your government?
Apparently from 2001 to 2008... :(
The only thing Congress has done since then is try to repeal Obamacare and outlaw abortion; both complete wastes of time and energy.
Truth isn't Truth - Guliani
Agreed, 100%. Every time a cop is dumb enough to commit a crime on camera, I notice something disturbing: they're never looking around in nervous anticipation of encountering one of those many "good cops." They know damn well that even cops who are too honest to initiate criminal activity, will turn a blind eye to the crimes of their co-workers, and probably even lie to cover up those crimes. No one expects every cop to be a perfect little angel. No one expects that from any group. But when Hans Reiser murdered his wife, he got put behind bars where he belongs, and so no pervasive mistrust or hatred of programmers arose from that trajedy. If every programmer could count on the police to cover up their crimes, people would harbour just as much animosity towards programmers as the police are currently facing, if not more. It's about accountability. You can't trust someone who flaunts their unaccountability, and cops have been doing that more and more.
http://mediatrackers.org/wisco...
http://www.washingtontimes.com...
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news...
http://www.campusreform.org/?I...
http://www.mediaite.com/online...
http://taxprof.typepad.com/tax...
http://www.climatedepot.com/20...
http://freebeacon.com/issues/s...
http://overlawyered.com/2015/0...
http://legalinsurrection.com/2...
http://dailycaller.com/2014/03...
This was "controlled detonation" of a person, not an explosive.
Is that like legislating what plants I can grow and eat? "Conservatives" have ZERO ground to stand on here. They sold that plot of land to stop people who were not using "personal responsibility" correctly and causing a "public health hazard" by smoking weed despite the fact that the Constitution does not allow them to do so.
Not sure if BLM is a movement with leaders or something more like Anonymous. More than likely those BLM supporters who want to kill cops are the minority.
Seriously? There are founders, leaders and members of BLM that have been assaulting people and another, at least one for running a under-age prostitution ring and under-age sex trafficking, the one from Toronto has repeatedly said "they wanted to kill white people" and then at the protest in Toronto they brought out more anti-police, anti-white rhetoric.
Yeah really, these are self-professed members acting in violent, criminal and in general scum like ways. There's no real difference between them and the ye olde racists of yesteryear.
Really though, more whites are killed by police then blacks in the US by a huge number. But there's zip on the media about that. You heard about the last two blacks, how about the last two white guys who were gunned down that literally happened a few days/weeks before that.
Om, nomnomnom...
Even military language is standard operating procedure for police.
Police do not patrol neighborhoods, they patrol sectors. Even in small towns it is broken into sectors.
When I think of sectors, I think of militarized zones with fences and lines that need monitoring.
In order for this cycle to end there needs to be respect on both sides. #Blacklivesmatter need to call out people who are being idiots and inciting, #Police need to call out over aggressive idiots on their ranks that are abusive with force instead of condoning it silently as a bystander.
According to reports, this was one man with an AR-15 and a bunch of ammo and look at the damage.
It has to stop on both sides and it has to stop today. It is not cool when someone mows white people down with an assault rifle and it is not cool when police harass Americans for "DWB", driving while black. It is not cool that black people have to teach their children to comply with police or risk getting shot. It is not cool that so many people have nonviolent felonies that they can't get a job. It is a giant cluster mess.
This will take action from society as a whole to fix. I saw an encouraging first step in Detroit recently.
Jobseekers get nonviolent records expunged.
It is not cool that Hilary Clinton gets a get out of jail free card.
It is not cool that General Patraeous gets probation.
It is not cool when teens like Ethan Couch with affluenza walk away with probation or little jail time.
It is not cool that cities like Flint and poisoned with lead just because they are poor.
It is not cool that America rebuilds New Orleans but lets Detroit rot even though it suffered an economic Sunami of Free-Trade Agreements.
It is not cool that some kids can get a decent public education and others can not based on their zip code.
It is not cool that Jails are now a "For Profit" business further preying on people on the margins of society.
It is not cool that America incarcerates more people per capita than any other modern country in history.
American is not perfect, but Trump was right when he said the "system was rigged". While we might not be perfect, we believe in a union of people working together for the common good, freedom, and the hope of liberty and pursuing happiness. The hope to live a good life that doesn't have a violent end because you walked down the wrong street or drove in the wrong neighborhood.
I would encourage everyone looking at these events today not to take a sides, but ask,
"What can we do to fix this, before it gets worse?",
"How can we heal the racial divide?"
"How can we love our neighbor?"
The natural tendency is to be tribal, pick your tribe and then prepare to war with the other tribe. It's human, it is how we survived long ago. If we go down that path, more will die. America is awash with guns and ammo and the killing of whites, blacks, gays, muslims, seeks, mexicans NEEDS TO STOP.
Reflect and ask yourself, "how can I be the change I want to see in the world?"
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."
#HASHTAGSSUCK
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Seriously? Thats like saying 10 years ago days had the right to marry -- just the opposite sex.
C'mon, you didn't need that to be on par with the Nazis.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
IIRC, the only winning move was not to watch the movie.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I actually find Liberals WORSE than conservatives for being authoritarian.
When you would or kill 12 cops in Texas you aren't going to be given the opportunity to surrender.
Oh, wait . . . that hasn't been true since forever. But hey - since they aren't military, this isn't the government using the military against civilians. Never mind the BDU's, assault rifles, helicopters, armored vehicles, flak jackets, tactical training . . . nothing to see here, people. Move along.
"Seems to?"
You ever been pulled over by a cop shouting at you to NOT show them license and insurance? The cop is clutching at straws on this one.
I was specifically responding to your claim that "blacks dont [sic] disobey the law any more then [sic] us whites". I'm not disagreeing that the statement "The black disregard of law and order inspires the police to defend their lives." is racist, because it is.
Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
Presumably this robot, under police control, had a video camera so the operator could guide it to the target. I'd like to see that video. I'd be Ok with it not showing the gruesome outcome, but the trip to the target, what the target was doing at the time and the eventual detonation. You'd think that a robot carrying a package to an armed man would have been been viewed with some suspicion, even for this unprecedented action. Did it get close enough to see the target? Did it confirm that the target still armed and dangerous at the time? If he aimed his gun at the robot, will that be construed as an aggressive act against a police officer? Who detonated the bomb? If it's a legal, justifiable action, then knowing who did it should be public.
That doesn't contradict anything he said. The "offending rate" is based off convictions. There is no such thing as ground truth in this case.
The fact this is labeled insightful +5 speaks volumes. May not have murdered the right guy????? They were trying to negotiate with him and he was shooting back. There is video of him in front of the community college EXECUTING an officer. Open your eyes and use your brain for once.
what B.S.
Use a nuclear missile for murdering a suspect, while you're at it
aaaaaaa
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Since every individual has to make money somehow, "business" regulations are effectively the same thing as individual regulations. A guy who is the sole proprietor of a bodega is just as tied to a soda tax as Walgreens. The idea that the government has any say whatsoever in a private transaction between two individuals (other than perhaps ensuring a free market... perhaps) is antithetic to classical liberalism.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
In the 80's, the Philadelphia police dropped two bombs from a helicopter onto the headquarters of a black liberation group. It destroyed 65 houses and killed 10 people, including 5 children. The police shot at people trying to escape the resulting fire. So no, this is not a new thing. The police have always been in the business of reckless killing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Programmers aren't generally required to police other programmers, and the job description for "black person" doesn't entail policing other black people. The job description for "police officer" does include enforcing the law, and they do an appallingly bad job of that when the person committing the crime is another police officer. Obviously, that doesn't mean it's morally right to shoot random police officers, but there absolutely is culpability far beyond the "few bad apples" who actually get caught doing bad things.
It always kind of amazed me that the police unions use the phrase "a few bad apples" all the time to describe those guys. Do they not know what the rest of that fucking saying is and what it means?
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
No, that's a false analogy because the vast, vast majority of black people are neither gang bangers nor aiding and abetting them. In contrast, police officers with enough integrity to refuse to aid and abet their corrupt coworkers are so far and few in between that they're newsworthy.
See, you agree with me! The only difference is that what you characterize as "lack of accountability" I characterize as criminal conspiracy and collusion.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Bullshit. You could argue that all cops in departments that kill innocent people are the problem, but even then I don't think that's right. In jurisdictions where they haven't had any killings where the justification is even a little bit in doubt, you can't say those cops are the problem too. Dallas has a pretty good police force, from what I hear. Their police chief is black, and I doubt he's aiding and abetting the cops who are racist killers.
Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
WTF. Dude this guy had nothing to do with BLM. BLM came to be because of murder and violence not the other way around
He clearly stated to police before being blown up he was angry AT BLM.
His manifesto posted online also clearly states this.
Angry at the fact they lost focus and had let Sharpton sully the message, that they were not radical enough.
With his anger, he chose to shoot at white people.
That's just because you like the authoritarian slant of the conservatives, and don't like the points the liberals are authoritative on.
Learn to love Alaska
What, you mean with rebels trying to kill as many cops as possible in a mis-guided act of vengeance for racists cops killing black people?
Honey, it's already happened.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
"lie" means "something I don't like", at least how you use it.
Learn to love Alaska
...just because someone claims to be liberal does not make them liberal...
Hooray for tautological personal, private definitions of terms!
I don't think you know what the individual part in individual liberties mean.
A grocery store owner isn't an individual, I guess. Hooray for tautological personal, private definitions of terms!
Detroit as lots of problems, but poverty isn't actually the worst or most intractable of them.
* Detroit is fairly small in terms of land area compared to cities like Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, and Atlanta... and a HUGE portion of its land area was polluted decades ago in ways that would probably shock people in CHINA.
* If sufficiently-bad environmental pollution is discovered on a tract of land, the current owners are legally on the hook for 100% of the clean-up costs... regardless of whether those costs exceed the value of the land, and regardless of whether the current owners actually had anything at all to DO with the pollution. During the early 20th century, American factories did some really awful things that would never pass muster today... and Detroit was Ground Zero for American Industry. As a result, no sane company will DARE to take ownership of land in Detroit that's likely to be polluted. Not even if the city/county/state/feds gave it to them for FREE. Because that cheap/free plot of land could end up costing them literally unlimited amounts of money for clean-up costs. And the city can't even indemnify purchasers, because the city ITSELF is insolvent & the feds could still turn around and force the new owner to eat 100% of the costs itself.
* Pollution aside, most of Detroit is what's called a "lienfield" (pun on "minefield"). Many of the properties in Detroit have old city liens whose amounts far exceed any conceivable value of the property. In theory, the city could write the old, uncollectable liens off in order to get the property back into productive use again... but in reality, it can't afford to. The value of those old liens might be a polite fiction that exists only on paper... but it's a polite fiction that's propped up what's left of Detroit's credit rating. If Detroit started writing off old liens, its credit rating would plunge.
If America wants to save Detroit (the literal city of Detroit... the larger metro area is doing just fine), the best place to start would be to change the laws for environmental liability so that someone who buys a property there in good faith, then discovers an environmental nightmare below the surface that they literally had nothing whatsoever to do with, could at least wash their hands of the loss and walk away without being on the hook for more than what they paid for the property.
Note that this problem isn't unique to Detroit... cities all across the "Rust Belt" have problems with abandoned factories rendered untouchable by legal liability. Detroit just happens to have a lot MORE of them relative to its total land area. THIS is the #1 reason why when a factory closes, the land it sat on sits abandoned more or less "forever", and new factories only get built on virgin land (usually, far away from those same factories).
This is also part of the reason why some have advocated having the City demolish entire blocks that have been abandoned by their owners... individually, those derelict properties are worth less than nothing... but as a vacant lot that's a square block in size, they might start to become interesting to investors. Especially if those same investors can buy SEVERAL adjacent square blocks & get the City to agree to vacate the streets & infrastructure dividing them so the property can be redeveloped as a single huge structure. And more importantly, with residents gone from the area, the former neighborhood can become the site of a new factory (that would NEVER be allowed to get built next to a residential area, no matter HOW poor it is).
This isn't just a "racist killers" problem, though (I used those words only to reflect the AC's terminology). Merely managing to have a department that isn't so egregiously out of control that the officers are murdering people is not good enough! I have zero doubt whatsoever that I could find all sorts of other police corruption in Dallas or any other jurisdiction, from petty stuff like failing to write up a DUI for the drunk officer that got pulled over all the way up to racial profiling and civil forfeiture.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Been watching these assholes sling their weight around for almost 50 years. Fuck the assholes who make the laws who empower the police. Police are just another cult group like the NRA or the Catholic Church, preying on peoples fears. Everyone wants us to feel sorry for the Police since they got ambushed, yet I didn't see any of those same assholes bitching about their fellow cult members shooting unarmed citizens. Downmod away.
Surely if we look only at murder rates only we can within some reasonable margin of error conclude something from them. Take the FBI chart for 2013 (below) that we've probably all seen before. Black and white homicide rates are close to tied -with white homicide perpetrators being slightly fewer. Now, of course I assume the causes are cultural and socioeconomic (fixable) but I don't see how we'll ever address crime in this country effectively if we constantly make excuses for the offenders: https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/c...
So when an obvious remote-controlled car bomb is driving through the streets towards a public place anybody blocking its progress is likely to get prosecuted for obstruction of police operations? What do we need terrorists for if we must not obstruct car bombs patrolling our streets? And if I am a fanatic suicide killer wanting to take along a bunch of hostages I don't even need to bring my own explosives any more but will get remote-controlled delivery?
This is a really, really stupid Pandora's box to open.
But then if the U.S. weren't eager to open and maintain really, really stupid Pandara's boxes, they'd accept the judiciary of the International Court of Justice, would destroy their chemical weapons stashes, would sign the treaty against anti-personnel landmines and destroy their stashes and so on.
In your rush to make a racist non sequitur, did you not notice the part where said black man just murdered multiple people? Or is this the new reincarnation of 'hands up don't shoot'?
You seriously think it's some evil plan to take all your guns away so they can oppress you and you can't resist? Wtf is wrong with you? Here's some food for thought - there were loads of armed civilians in Dallas, as far as I can tell none of them did anything to stop the shooters, they just ran for cover and pissed themselves.
If you take guns away then nobody needs guns, and police only need non-lethal arms to do their jobs and they can't use the excuse of the suspect having a gun to shoot some poor person.
You aren't living in some distopian world where you're forced to eat recycled people and slave away in mines to produce resources for an elite group living in paradise somewhere.
The mods here went full on conservative about a decade ago.
As I understand it:
The mods are chosen algorithmically from the non-anonymous Slashdot users.
The meta-mods, who moderate the moderators' decisions (and affect the algorithm's future awarding of moderator points) are self-chosen.
Are you saying that the algorithm went right-wing? Or that the meta-moderators drove it that way?
Or are you saying that you, personally, are so left-wing that the general membership's moderation looks right-wing to you.
= = = =
A hint, though:
Many left-wingers apply social pressure to each other to conform to certain behavioral templates. This includes agreeing with a number of ideological points, regardless of whether they are consistent with observed reality - or each other.
To someone who has internalized this idea system, any questioning of any of its points is a sign of heresy or non-membership. This calls for immediate criticism - to return the straying sheep to the fold or to attack a non-member of the flock.
Such criticism often takes the form of labelling the heretical speaker as right-wing, i.e. a member of the perceived largest group of enemies.
To a true believer, any deviation honestly appears to be a product of the alleged vast right-wing conspiracy.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
"most" Citation please? how many people are in BLM, how many have you personally confirmed as have been celebrating police deaths etc?
It's just the same blanket characterization you used on the 'racist right.' How many have you personally confirmed of the 'racist right' to be racist? Most? Citation please?
You could look at the same chart and say why do we keep making excuses for men that commit murders? They are 10x more likely to be perpetrators compared to women. That seems to be a much bigger differential than race. But hey, nobody says anything about that. Just mention it and you are some kind of reverse sexist. The real picture is more complicated than simple statistics can portray.
The biggest Fuck we got was the "Fight Two Wars completely without funding them" that drove the economy into a tailspin.
That got started at least as far back as when LBJ ran both the Vietnam adventure and the Great Society on the government's credit card - to the tune of progressively impoverishing future generations as the interest mounted. (And it was cited as a problem at the time.)
(WW II and the "Korean Police Action" ran partly on credit, too. But at least in those days there was some intent to actually pay it off eventually.)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
You are drawing a false equality/similarity. The majority of police shooting are NOT directed at homicide suspects. So it would not be surprising to find that if one broke down the distributions of citizens killed by police to find a racial disparity in homicide suspects being killed and, as you point out, this wouldn't be surprising. However since the majority of police do not involve homicide suspects it is hard to say. It is even harder to say because the Republican controlled Congress has blocked funding to study police violence.
The founders of this nation distrusted standing armies, viewing them as inherent threats to liberty. The Second Amendment was primarily established as a way to secure the ability of the People to defend their Nation. The burning of the Capitol in 1814 might well have heralded the death of the civilian militia: the defenders, though vastly more numerous, were unarmed or poorly armed, and completely failed to impede the British Army. Even before the War of 1812, with the purchase of the original six frigates of the United States Navy, we turned away from the path of the citizen militia, and since then we have gone so far away from the ideals of our founding as to have amassed the largest and most expensive defensive force that the world has ever seen.
There have been a handful of examples where the U.S. Military has been used against its own citizens, but overall the threat to (domestic) liberty has been negligible, although the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII could be an important exception to the rule. The Founders' fears of standing armies were completely mistaken -- or were they?
Until the middle of the 19th Century, guns were expensive, time-consuming to maintain and to fire, and police forces when they existed at all were armed with swords and clubs. During the middle of the 19th Century, however, we see a great shift in American society and culture. The Civil War spread both arms and conflict, and men like Samuel Colt both popularized and enabled gun ownership on a wide scale. It was (as far as I am aware) during this era that police forces were instituted -- and armed.
Today we have a national crisis. The country resounds with gunfire, and daily we hear of new atrocities, of acts of brutality, and of ever-greater police powers. I believe that we have taken the idea of the citizen soldier to its ultimate bloody conclusion, and that we must disband this hostile Army which has set itself over us. I believe we also have a duty to disband the Gun Culture or perhaps even to disarm ourselves as well, given the failure of the purpose of the 2nd Amendment and the examples of other countries around the globe. We have badly strayed from our founding principles. We have a new Civil War which is escalating daily. We need to drastically revise our society, starting with our Police.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
In that case, Trump's anti-immigrate, anti-Jew, anti-black, anti-trade, anti-free speech, pro-assassination policies represents all conservatives.
Bomb squads keep explosives around to destroy bombs. The standard operating procedure is to pick up the suspicious device, put it in a big, steel, blast-proof vessel, and use a glob of plastic explosive to blow it up.
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
How about some numbers:
.74%
.2%
Number of law enforcement officers in the US: 765,000
Number of LEO related deaths last year: 1,000
Deaths/LEO:.1%
Number of blacks in the US: 37,685,840
Number of black gang members in the US: 279,000
Blacks that are gang members:
Number of gang related deaths last year: 2000
Number caused by blacks: 600 (This assumes the same ratio of total gang members vs black gang members, 31%)
Deaths/gang member:
I'm not sure the point I was trying to make, but numbers are interesting, nonetheless. (I was going to just not post this, after forgetting what my point was, but I wasted too much time digging through the internet for numbers) WP has a good article analyzing the all police involved shootings in 2015: http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
Or waiting until he falls asleep. The same robot that blew him up could have kept checking on him as needed, but a better robot for this situation would be one that could place cameras to watch him until he falls asleep. That way the robot only needs to be strong enough to make a couple of visits, though it also depends on how much ammo he had for trying to disable robots.
Seems to me as though they didn't want to risk capturing him alive, though that also seems on the insane side. How can we know he was alone? Or perhaps even worse than the lone wolf scenario, what if he was an DAESH agent and the real objective of the attack was to start a race war in America?
Okay, now that I've clarified the problem in my own mind, I know what to search for. Sadly, I predict that today's slashdot won't offer anything--and if someone tried that comment would be modded into oblivion, so I won't find it anyway. Key phrases are "lone wolf" and "race war" and things along the lines of aborting a complete investigation. Perhaps the last bit would be to make it easier to control the spin?
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
In a no-hostage situation, sending in a robot with explosives seems like a pretty rational response to terrorist claiming to have explosives. And, law enforcement can always claim, "We were just trying to trigger his explosives, we weren't trying to kill the guy." The Dallas case isn't quite like that, but still I approve. Someone wants to hold police in an armed standoff, no sense putting law enforcement officers at risk -- go ahead and sign the guy's death certificate, then send in the robots. They told him, "Surrender or die", and he chose "die". Greatest common good is the path that harms the least number of additional persons. Property damage is cheap by comparison.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Harm is only justified in order to prevent even greater harm. And yes, that is the ethical justification behind war. According to Libertarians, one should never initiate the use of violence, but it is perfectly ethical to respond to violence with violence. So it's not that "violence is never the answer", it's more like "the only thing violence is the answer to is violence." Which doesn't even mean violence is the _only_ answer to violence.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Here's the source of the DoJ stat:
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub...
Unfortunately, there aren't really any consistent and nation-wide statistics on the race of people killed by police (no national database with consistent reporting), but here are some stats:
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub... (Table 5, pg 22)
2003-2009, 2011: whites make up a bigger percentage (47.8%) of deaths than blacks (28.4%)
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
2015: 990 people shot by police. 494 (49.9%) white, 258 (26.1%) black, 172 (17.4%) hispanic, 38 other, 28 unknown
https://www.washingtonpost.com... ... 52% through the year)
2016 so far: 509 total. 238 (46.8%) white, 123 (24.2%) black
we are 190 days into this year, which is a leap year (190/366
If you forward-project based on the current average, there will be 978 police shootings in 2016, 458 white and 237 black
http://www.theguardian.com/us-...
The Guardian has different numbers: 569 total. 279 whites. 137 black
If you use per-million numbers: 3.25 blacks/million, 1.41 whites/million
Is whether the general public should have access to weapons, not about the choice of means for law enforcement to kill somebody. And I believe it has been debated and answered plenty.
That might've been insightful if all of these people were homicide suspects, or at least suspects in some violent crime. The last dude was pulled over for a goddamned broken taillight. Do you really think all of this outrage is solely because they were black and not also because they were unarmed and not doing anything that justified remotely as much force as was used? That justified murdering them?
I don't know what the procedure is when a person has a gun. Obviously vastly different then when a person doesn't have a gun.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
He just killed 5 people and wounded others. The five he killed were armed and trained. Of course he was an imminent threat. Would you walk into a building some fuknut was likely trying to lure you into after all that? I'll admit that the remote control drones have encouraged a casual attitude toward killing in other theaters, but there was nothing casual about this particular event. They absolutely made the right call to not risk any more lives trying to take that guy. If I was going to debate against use of drones I wouldn't start with the incident where it was unquestionably the best decision.
I'm a liberal who favors "reasonable" gun control, which to me means a total ban (including elites). Many liberals disagree. Liberals in general disagree with each other frequently.
No need for your conspiracy theory.
And I say 'seems to' because I have not found an article that tells the real full story of what happened.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Why do cops have explosives?
Is C4 (or a hand grenade, or whatever they used) commonly required for their daily activities??
This signature is false.
I'm fine with them using robots and drones as such in lethal situations. I don't want police breaking out lethal drones for shoplifting.
"Lethal force was no longer called for once he was contained."
Maybe if the guy was surrounded by Texas Rangers, I could see him being contained. Dallas police can barely contain a donut and coffee.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
All blacks are the problem though, because even if they aren't gang bangers and killers themselves they're aiding and abetting the ones who are.
Perhaps if the police didn't act as though they think this is the case, they wouldn't have so much need to cover each other for being racist violent corrupt cunts?
This is revolting. Yes, he was (allegedly) a terrible person who had done terrible things. But this? Even the worst criminals have a right to a fair trial. I'm pretty sure that he fully expected to be murdered by the police no matter what, and the police fulfilled that expectation.
I worry greatly that these events will lead to still more murders by the police (currently we're at ~3/day in the US).
"operators that are already showing a tendency to murder first and not care about the questioning."
Mmmm delicious kool aid. The vast majority of police deal with difficult and dangerous situations all the time and an extremely small percentage of those turn into a situation where a cop has to use his or her gun. Even fewer of those turn out to be a situation where a cop "murdered" someone. Think for yourself instead of letting the media fill your head with exaggerations. The brainwashing on this subject has gotten to the point where the unstable are starting to commit violence so let's tone it down a bit.
As a scary LIE-BERAL I can certainly say that while banning guns would be ideal i dont think its realistic and would be happy with background checks for all gun transfers and database of armed citizens. Cars are useful but extremely dangerous but and we should treat guns exactly the same way.
"When it comes to market regulations, libertarians are to the far right of conservatives, by saying that business should have virtually no regulations, where liberals want lots of regulations and conservatives want few."
This is complete nonsense. Libertarians are about personal liberty, that doesn't inherently speak to "market regulations". A properly functioning free market requires regulation and libertarians, as a rule, should want that.
"The left-right paradigm is incredibly flawed."
Yes it is, including your version of it. Libertarian opposes authoritarian, there is more than one axis. Libertarian is neither left nor right.
"By any modern definition of the term "Centrism", you are terribly incorrect in your assertion."
You're too ignorant to be telling others they are "terribly incorrect".
"And leftists have been responsible for their fair share of killings."
What's the leftist's "fair share" of killings? You seem to be an expert on that subject.
I'm surprised you haven't slithered under a rock after all the times your as has been proven wrong, stupid, and moronic.
Next I'll call for your open slaughter. :)
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Conservatives are the ones who took away thes rights. If conservatives believe in certain unalienable rights, how come they cheered it on when foreigners suspected of terrorism were being tortured or held indefinitely without a trial?
like this in the vicinity of a hostile that is willing to take lives. What a wonderful thing to disable with a cheap jammer. Free bomb for the bad guys. It's already been done with drones and there are hackers now working on how to disable this sort of robot.
The second dumb thing is to be so short-sighted as to not regard how the next robot will be met. Remotely piloted robots are great for dealing with hostage situations in non-lethal ways (enabling communication, ferrying food or medicines for hostages)--or they used to be. Now, every robot will be regarded by the bad guys as a bomb-carrier. Seeing one approaching you there can only be one safe assumption: it is carrying a bomb. Act accordingly.
It is fine to argue the finer points of how to kill someone without exposing law-enforcement to danger. The robot worked very well for that this time. But from here on, it won't go so well and could create an even bigger disaster if the robot gets hacked.
I think your comments about the Constitutional aspects of this issue are spot on, but not quite the whole picture. I have elaborated on my concerns here, perhaps you could gratify me with your further opinion? In particular, I should like to note that there is no Constitutional justification for the police to bear arms (aside from the 2nd Amendment), that such was not envisioned by the Founders, and that in their capacity as war officers (as you adroitly term them) they fulfill all the fears that our Founders had relating to the tyrannies of a standing army. I do believe this now constitutes a Constitutional crisis, but of slightly different scope than you have identified.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
Racist right? Like Stalin?
No, like Mussolini.
You keep on talking about the "right" [...]
The term was "racist right". I think it's clear that Jeff was talking about a specific subsection of the amorphous mass that we call "the right", and was also not disputing that a bigoted subsection of "the left" also exists.
Extremists are bad, mmkay.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
Why bother surrendering if they are going to kill you anyway?
What else besides confiscation could they possibly want? We already have all the "reasonable" gun restrictions we need. What would help is simply ENFORCING the gun laws we have.
The trouble is that nobody on the left wants to do that. It might result in many of their most reliable voters ending up in prison.
Classical usage of the term "conservative" in the US was killed in the 70s by the religious right. We should probably come up with new terms.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
Since every individual has to make money somehow, "business" regulations are effectively the same thing as individual regulations. A guy who is the sole proprietor of a bodega is just as tied to a soda tax as Walgreens.
I don't know what the law says on this matter, but on a personal note, I have no problem with that guy (or Walgreens for that matter) ignoring the "soda tax" rules if they're also willing to give up limited liability.
Regulation is the price you pay for being a business and enjoying the benefits of being a business. If you want to opt out of being a business or being part of a business, that's your individual right. Of course, it's also your right to campaign against the "soda tax" or vote for candidate who oppose it, but we already knew that.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
Nutbars. Would seem to work.
A bullet also kills remotely, it just gets transported over an almost straight line and hits where it can be seen directly by the shooter. A killer robot moves around obstacles and the operator can see via a camera. However, a missile, grenade or mortar travels in an arc and explodes where it cannot be seen at all. So, using remote vehicles to deliver a killing blow isn't really a new idea.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
They actually interviewed him for like four hours with a hostage negotiator, and knew who he was working with (alone) and his motives (he wanted to kill white cops to avenge the guys who got dead over the last two days, and everyone else who was "lynched."
People should start thinking about the cost of what they want done for them and what they want done to their neighbors.
How many police do you want to get shot or to shoot people while enforcing your laws or collecting the taxes you want to spend on yourselves?
Do you really need that speed limit sign? That law against vaping? That prohibition on 19-year-olds drinking beer? Your free government mobile phone? That blue law? That marijuana law? That licensing requirement for barbers? Or cab drivers? That gun law? Those special government union privileges? Your high-speed rail dreams? Your composting law? Your animal cruelty law? Your abortion law? Your discrimination law? Your ethanol subsidy? Your favorite defense project? Your favorite clean energy project?
Is it really worth bullying people? Do you really want your neighbors to have a criminal record? Or be forced to register? Or be shot in a misunderstanding? Or end up in a shootout with police? Or be forced to leave their homeland in order to escape your controlling hand? Or your greedy hand?
What kind of person sends the police after his neighbors who are minding their own business? Would a good person do that? What if you decided to be kind instead? To forgive and be open? To be generous instead of self-interested? To understand and empathize rather than slur and dismiss?
Give it a try. If you want peace, be peaceful. If you want understanding, be understanding. If you want your people treated respectfully, be respectful and respectable.
The ability for police to remotely kill suspects raises due process concerns.
Really? "due process concerns." Why all of a sudden? The police aren't concerned about due process or most of the rest of the Bill of Rights. (Try reading it sometime.) Unless of course they somehow get charged with a crime themselves.
Basically it's back to the 1920's where they "Shoot first! Ask questions later." Unless of course you have been rendered unable to speak, or even breathe. It seems like the police don't even bother to drop a knife or gun on a dead suspect anymore to justify the murder. All they need do now is say, "I felt threatened."
Black lives matter. Cops lives matter. ALL lives matter. Come on... We can do better than this.
The Congressional Black Caucus was a heavy supporter of the "war on drugs" in the 1980s. The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 passed a Democratic House with 205 Democratic co-sponsors to 96 Republicans.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
Except, he wasn't. His stated goal was killing white people and police officers. He was a piece of shit, and the world is better off now that he's not in it.
I didn't say anything about conservatives, but they quite obviously selectively choose when they want to emphasize individual rights.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
I have no problem with that guy (or Walgreens for that matter) ignoring the "soda tax" rules if they're also willing to give up limited liability.
Absolutely. Limited liability is a huge government intrusion into the free market.
However, a sole proprietor does not enjoy limited liability, but they still have the burden of the soda tax.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Probably. The "Progressive Left" and their opinion on Stalin in 1946-56 would be worth examining. No, not just what a few Trotskites were printing in their newspaper, either.
Rubbish. You could build a drone today, equipped with a firearm, and software enough to detect and fire upon human targets.
and that is not the role of police anywhere within the United States of America
You might like for that to be the case, but from the outside it really does look that way.
How about u just Google BML and Toronto LGBT pride parade for yourself.
Or are you a special snowflake that needs to be spoonfed?
"They actually interviewed him for like four hours with a hostage negotiator, and knew who he was working with (alone) and his motives (he wanted to kill white cops to avenge the guys who got dead over the last two days, and everyone else who was "lynched.""
That's still no excuse for police to take the role of judge and jury to process him, find him guilty of capital penalty and execute the sentence.
I always thought it should be feasible to get "dead or alive" warrants by bench-trial-in-absentia in the time it took SWAT to kit up, in order to provide legal oversight of such decisions. I'm disappointed that nobody with power shares my idea.
Still, any and every time SWAT is brought in to neutralize a threat before bystanders get dead, that's exactly what police have been asked to do. The only difference is that this time an improvised guided missile was used, instead of a hit-squad with submachine guns and hollowpoint bullets.
Or drones.
It's an issue that now and forever every guy with a gun, who is surrounded by police or simply holed up somewhere and high on paranoia - is expecting to be exploded with bombs and perhaps robots.
And while this may or may not trigger a series of shootings of drones and toys - it most certainly will create a situation where now the perps expect that they are not getting arrested.
That it is a fight to the death. No negotiation. No deescalation. Cops will kill you so you must kill cops.
It's actually a bit ironic that Detroit depicted in RoboCop was actually mostly Dallas.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
The shootings were a muslim plot. The thing was with the video of Philando Castile and so on many whites were beginning to see that there is real injustice in the way that some police deal with minorities. There could have been a coming together and a call for improvement. Of course the muslims don't want this. Following the teachings of the hateful warlord Muhammad they want to drive people apart, attract black Americans to their own violent cult.
I don't see why they needed to kill him. If they could get close enough for a bomb they could arguable detonate it far enough away from him such that it would only stun him. So many options here yet they close to kill.
And modern liberals aren't authoritarian? To the point of legislating soft drink cup size? Or the shape of cucumbers in EU?
You are confusing standards with prohibition.
A law stating the size and system of measurement of cups used to serve beverages in restaurants is there so the owner/server can't fuck over customers with glasses that look big but actually contain less beverage than what the customer paid for.
Not really that important for Pepsi (until your kid complains to you asking you to fix the "injustice") but can be important when a bar full of sports fans starts complaining about half of their beer glasses being filled with only foam.
A law stating the size of cucumbers doesn't mean cucumbers of different size will be banned or thrown away - just that AFTER GOING OVER A SORTING GRATE the cucumbers of certain size will be used for pickling in jars of certain sizes while others will be sold fresh.
That's how you get your canape sizes pickles cheaply - without having to buy several jars of pickles and then handpicking the pickled pickles of puny proportions.
Both kinds of laws are there cause customers complain about being tricked by the salesmen or salesmen complaining about customers being picky - both sides demanding that the government officials do something about that.
Thus, the laws regulating standards.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
That doesn't contradict anything he said. The "offending rate" is based off convictions. There is no such thing as ground truth in this case.
The differential is so large that smoke fire falls close enough to the tree.
But y? If anything needs to be fixed, fix the reason behind it all.
Well here's my 2 cents. It seems that increasingly people lives matter less and less, not just black lives. Technology taking away jobs is not the reason though, not quite. I watched the heyday of Moore's law when people anticipated the dawn of a new age. Computers ran faster, did more, and computer makers tried to outdo each other. Now there is a reversed trend, mainly because the need for speed has fallen. Case in point, the Top 500 has stagnated. China showed up with a brand new supercomputer ass kicker, yet again for crying out loud, but no one else seems to want to move the needle. What is going on? I bought a faster laptop a couple years ago. I don't think I'm even going to try to buy a faster laptop for another couple of years because it would only be a teensy weensy faster. However, that's kind of beside the point because laptops are limited in size. It's desktops that should be widening the gap massively massively massively over laptops. I have 3 or 4 hr of battery life on an i7 laptop and it's almost as fast as my i7 desktop, which was a nice leap itself all of 4 years ago, but desktops should kick up at least a half horse to a full horsepower of CPU usage and do something.
Do what? Is there anything _useful_ to do while consuming 1 horsepower? The average joe wouldn't even consider it.
Oh, well, that just shows how useless people are. People lives don't matter, at least not in the perspective of the people in power. To people who have power, the masses are asses. So people are suffering here and there, what does that matter to someone with power? The days just keep going by regardless. Trump can talk but he can't do much about anything either. It's people who have to stop bitching and moaning so Trump won't have any more to say.
If people want to matter, they have to try harder. Can't just be another rat in the rat race. If people tried harder, desktop speeds would pick up way more bang for the buck. I really want to save on my next upgrade, ok, people?
Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
I don't know why "with a robot" is a complicating factor. Would a police sniper have been justified in shooting him? If yes, then I don't care what the weapon is. Take the guy down in the most expedient manner with the least possibility of harm to anyone else. If the use of the sniper was not justified, I still don't care what the weapon is, they're doing it wrong.
In my mind that's the only question. Was the use of lethal force justified? I don't know, but with multiple officers already down I'd say it's clear they tried other possibilities first. I'm willing to concede that the force may have been justified. And at that point, as I said, I don't really care what weapon is most expedient.
Chelloveck
I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Seeing all these things happen to humans in today's world and in a Big Country like USA. I can only wait for an END TO THIS BIG WORLD that we are only living HUMANS killing each other for living. I wish it was the END OF THIS WORLD in 2000. No Joking as there are no peace. Is these days killing our-self for living is the right thing to do? I can tell you in everyday on Radio/TV/internet you see only CRIMES, do the politicians Cares about this? no Cause they are not getting kills why would they bother for you as they only want your votes people.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander, pal - or did you forget how the left wing was blaming the Gabrielle Giffords shooting on "tea party rhetoric"? If the left wing can do it, what makes you think the Right won't learn from their playbook?
: the steady drift to more militarized law enforcement.
The police could have approached the suspect without fear of injury from his rifle fire if they had what is known as a "SWAT tank;" generally just an armored vehicle, often a modified version of a military Armored Personnel Carrier. They're used to get police into a building or close to a suspect despite them being armed. They could have fired tear gas canisters from the shielded rifle ports in the side of the vehicle, that sort of thing, and not have had to use the bomb on the robot to kill him.
These vehicles are stupidly expensive - unless you buy a military surplus MRAP, which is pretty much the same thing. But then you are "militarizing the police" and demonized for it.
From what I remember of the timeline, the suspect at this point had claimed to have planted explosive devices throughout the area, and there had not been enough time to validate the claim. So, he could easily have made a call on his cell phone to detonate remote bombs, rushed out at the surrounding officers with a suicide vest or gym bag of explosives, etc. I would have assumed had I been there that based on his own statements he was still a risk to the community and safeguarding that community was my primary duty. If his finger is on the call button, you can't give him a chance to detonate, so it's either a very well placed sniper shot if you have line of site, or something like what they improvised. If explosives had been found wired to a cell phone detonator, their efforts would have been applauded. I agree it's a very slippery slope, but we need to understand the full context here.
I have no idea why many people are appalled. This was the correct and safest option to halt the shooter and stop the threat to police and civilians. The shooter made no bones about stating that he wanted to "kill white people, especially cops". So at that point the police know the intention and have to respond with appropriate force after shootings/murders occurred to keep themselves and the public safe. If he had been in an enclosed area the option to use non-lethal force like tear gas may have been used but he was in a garage (open air space) where that was not a viable option. The Philando shooting was horrible but responding in kind as a domestic terrorist does nothing but make the situation worse.
The painful fact of the matter is that black people kill more black people, and cops kill more more whites than blacks. This is a case of myopia caused by the press and professional victimization industry.
From the standpoint of economy, the cops did the right thing. In the end, the shooter probably would have killed himself rather than be captured. You have to be suicidal to get in a fire fight with the cops.
But they didn't have to go this direction. At some degree of risk, they could have waited till he went to sleep and captured him.
End MGM. Get prospective parents of boys to Google: Men do complain
Don't forget Hitler was vegan, for animal rights, national health and all about loyalty to the collective.
Excuse me, but that's fucking retarded. Counter example: the US Constitution "We hold these truths to be self-evident...", meaning they existed to civilized folk prior to writing them down.
In Canada, the BLM movement unfortunately chose to demonstrate during the pride parade in Toronto and felt justified to delay someone else's cause for 30 minutes. I think the hashtag should be #BlackLivesMatterMOST.
Agreed. You know what the sadest outcome of that movement is? Native lives matter. Pretty much any metric of your choosing, natives have had it worse than any group - including police deaths per capita. Black lives matter throws every other repressed group under the bus with a me first attitude. The result being divisiveness between groups like blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans, among others, which ultimately makes it even easier to walk over their rights and injustices than if everyone banded together in unity.
Agreed. The evidence is beyond dispute.
Only boring people are ever bored.
If we're talking about unjustly killing people, then yeah, it's a killers problem. There are probably plenty of other things wrong with the Dallas PD, but that's not the topic we were on.
Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
Furthermore, almost no city budget is capable of such military-grade purchases. To afford Pentagon-level weapons suites, the police had to be granted to power to steal cash and property from people without the legal action that was traditionally required. For you foreign Slashdotters out there it may seem incredible that US police can do this, but they can.
Sorry, I had cops draw on me and I was not DWB or doing anything remotely illegal. They need to be reigned in with regards to their 'policies' on weapons use.
Compare these sentences of 13-18year olds to the affluenza teen.
Source: http://fairsentencingofyouth.o...
Racial Inequality in Youth Sentencing
The Campaign for the Fair Sentencing of Youth is dedicated to ending the practice of sentencing any young person to die in prison. This harsh, extreme life without parole sentence has a disproportionate impact on communities of color.
Human Rights Watch reports that more than 2,500 people in the United States have been convicted of a crime committed before they were 18 years old and sentenced to life without parole. One out of every 8 African-American youth who are convicted of killing someone will be sentenced to life without parole, however this is only the case for one out of every 13 white youth convicted of murder.[i]
The most extreme sentence that a person under the age of 18 can receive is life without parole, which occurs when young people are transferred from juvenile court to be tried as adults in criminal court. Young people sentenced to life without the possibility of parole have effectively been discarded by society. They will never again have their sentence considered or have their cases reviewed to see if they have grown or matured. Below is a list of facts that demonstrates the channel from school to prison–sometimes for life–to which youth of color are disproportionately subjected.
You can't use statistics. Numbers are racist. Doesn't matter if they're true -- if the outcome doesn't fit an agenda, it's racist. It just is.
More likely because a conservative would follow the constitution that puts all power not specifically enumerated to the Federal Government to the states and the people -- i.e. Individual Liberty.
You are referring to Right-Wing Progressives. This is wildly different from conservatism.
That's the basis of the American party system. The government will stomp on your neck, so we can just choose the color of the boot.
Learn to love Alaska
You are referring to Right-Wing Progressives. This is wildly different from conservatism.
No true "whatever I like to call myself", so you can feel superior and exclude all conversation that addresses your personal beliefs, so they can never be discussed or impugned. You win all arguments by never playing by anyone else's rules.
Learn to love Alaska
"I always thought it should be feasible to get "dead or alive" warrants by bench-trial-in-absentia"
Well, you'd have a point... except for the fact that one of the most important principles for a resemblance of justice is the right to be hear. A trial in absentia "just" because the judicial system (or worse yet, the executory arm) is in a hurry is only slightly better than not having justice at all (i.e.: negate the habeas corpus right).
The way for the SWAT to behave is not to give it a justice cover but to strictly tie it to the usual principles: you won't kill but in the most pressing menace to innocent lives. Not because you can't think of another resolution, not to protect third party goods, not to revenge your killed fellows.
"every time SWAT is brought in to neutralize a threat before bystanders get dead" ...the first thing to consider is if you wouldn't achieve your goal by just taking bystanders out of the way.
So human rights don't exist? Then how did the right to independence from Britain come about?
You aren't living in some distopian world where you're forced to eat recycled people and slave away in mines to produce resources for an elite group living in paradise somewhere, yet.
FTFY.
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
It's absolute proof that they are nothing more than cowards who want the power to dominate and kill others. They all belong in prison for this.
You are wrong.
No, I'm not =-)
Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
"Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
I don't like authoritarianism in any form. But Demoncrats want far LESS Freedom for individuals than Republicans do.
The Republicans are the ones pushing for the government using eminent domain to take your land and sell it to a private company. The Republicans are against open discussion between a patient and their doctor. The Republicans are against workers collaborating, while supporting the same thing when owners collaborate. The group that seems to be against "individual freedoms" is the Republicans. Like I said, roughly equal, just whether you don't mind the rights your favorite targets.
Learn to love Alaska
https://www.google.com/search?...
Conservative and Liberal is orthogonal to libertarian vs authoritarian. Both parties have tendencies for authoritarianism vs libertarianism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
or
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
And to give you an idea where each candidate in the current US presidential election resides:
https://www.politicalcompass.o...
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Statistics, which ACW was trying to allude to are not racist. Yelling racism every time someone talks about a race in any way makes the term meaningless.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
Let's see, Obama is pro-TPP, and so is Clinton, so you can say that they're trying to destroy that 200 remaining jobs in the US. The Democrats have EXPANDED the Patriot act so they hate the fact that US constitution limits what the government can do. The DEMOCRATS have eroded property rights with environental legislation to such a degree that a puddle on land that is a puddle 2 weeks a year can make it "wetlands." Don't tell me about the horrors of the Republicans until you examine the horrors of the Democrats. They are worse than the Republicans because they're "Doing it for the children!" Spare me.
The Democrats have EXPANDED the Patriot act
The one signed by a Republican.
Again, you are listing things both did. They are the same. You just like one better, thus convince yourself they are somehow better. That's a neurosis I can't help you with. But your irrational hate of Democrats doesn't change reality.
Learn to love Alaska
As your irrational hatred of Republicans cannot. At least I know this - and perhaps you do, too.
I explain I feel the same about both, but because I don't love the one you do, I must love the other one? You are broken. Your binary world doesn't work. Some of us don't like either side.
Learn to love Alaska
You're presuming I love one side. Pragmatically I support one side because the other one has concentration camps and gas chambers CLOSER TO THE FRONT OF ITS MIND than the other. It's not that they both don't have this, they do. Your simplistic ideas don't work, either.
Is it only shooting victims you are concerned about, cuz they guy brought down in Dallas wouldn't count as he was bombed.
Police are way too militarized & violence happy. How many police even carry a NON-lethal weapon to subdue suspects?
Of course, there are the killings that happen "by accident" in police custody, like 3 white women in Capitola, California in the 1st 3 months of the year that died by being left alone during opiate withdrawal -- something that their rules say should be done under medical supervision. Instead, they were put into the solitary 'detox' tank, where food is delivered to them, but otherwise are ignored.
The shooter in Dallas was explicitly upset about the two viral-videos of police murdering blacks that were in no way creating any threat to the police. In the Baton Rouge case, the mandatory personal-police-cams officers are supposed to wear when engaging in any police action were both left in their squad car -- if it hadn't been for a cellphone camera of an interested by-stander, there would have been no proof that the suspect was already pinned-down and helpless when the officer over him pulled his gun and shot the suspect, on the ground, point-blank in the chest.
The one in Minnesota -- the police asked for his license -- when he went for it, they shot him -- also caught on video showing he was not threatening the police or violent. He was survived by his wife and kid -- both in the car with him.
The cops can't continue to escalate violence w/o expecting any blow-back.
How many police shootings do you hear about in the UK, vs. the US? I have seen evidence that UK-prisons are far more humane than those in the US, that treat prisoners like animals. US prisons (a growth industry)and have a reputation for being "colleges" for criminals, where the idea of reform has been abandoned, and prisoners mostly learn to be "better" criminals from their peers.
Of course, I'm sure nonsensical laws, and long mandatory prison sentences have nothing to do with US officials (like a recent past V.P.) that have large investments in privately run prisons (like Chaney's, Texas-based, prison corporation).
My irony was clearly too subtle for you to detect.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.