• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: tryptakid | Foreigner

The Ferguson thread / additional race discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Worth killing piggies over yes.

I don't know how anyone can take you seriously honestly... Don't you have another thread where you're basically celebrating the fact 3 police officers lost their lives to a crazed murderer? If you think that's the answer to anything then you truly are delusional and I would laugh my head off if you actually acted on any of the insane shit you post.
 
Really, I thought this was a totally random thing that hasn't happened before. Police in riot suits? No way. Police beating innocents, reporters, shootings? No way. NO SHIT!! This is happening all the time. Your so fuckin enlightened dude.
 
He was roughly 6 or 7 feet from the officer and chose to start coming towards him after repeatedly being asked to drop the knife. Anyone in moderately good shape can cover that distance in under a second. A tazer is good and fine but it's a one shot deal meaning that if the officer misses the violent suspect he's likely getting stabbed at least in this incident.

Well if he was such a big fella it should be pretty hard to miss him with the tazer one would think. Honestly, if between two Officers taking one tazer shot each neither could hit a man at close range then I would have to question whether they are well trained enough to be carrying these sorts of weapons to begin with.

The police took an oath to protect and serve but not to let violent criminals assault them or worse. I agree that it's unfortunate the man is dead, but he left the officer with no other option IMO. Unfortunately mental illness, background, etc. doesn't hold any weight when the officer's life is at risk

The Police outnumbered this man two to one, assuming both Police officers were armed with a tazer, baton and can of pepper spray each, on top of their guns, this means they had eight weapons between them to Powell's single knife. You are entitled to your opinion that the Officers were in the right by shooting him, but to suggest they had no other options available to them is nothing short of a joke.


Officers are trained to shoot to stop the threat. Like I think I already said in this thread a single shot is not going to bring most people down unless it's to a vital area. Some people that are shot don't even realize it until sometime later. Either way just because they shot him doesn't mean they know he's incapacitated.

If you cannot tell that a man is incapacitated after he has been shot six times and is now rolling around on the floor then you have NO business carrying a gun. There is simply no justification to fire a further three rounds into a man at this point in the confrontation. If one wanted to make the ridiculous argument that more force was necessary at this time, the Police could EASILY have switched to one of their multiple non lethal options.

Yeah, it's not exactly smart to try to overpower the police. Rocket science, I know. :\

I don't see where anybody said assaulting Police Officers was smart, that doesn't give Police the right to murder someone for doing so. They have the right to defend themselves but when a man is on the floor with six bullets in him he does not need to be shot again, let alone three more times, this is not rocket science either buddy.

Why is it that in other Countries Police Officers manage to handle violent people, often armed with knives, clubs or other potentially deadly melee weapons without killing them, and in many cases without the use of a gun whatsoever, but in the United States, shooting to kill is a first resort in situations where an outnumbered suspect is armed with a melee weapon, or in some cases not armed at all?

I would imagine that Police training is as big of a part of the problem as the increasingly militarized attitude of Police Officers over there, but clearly this is a problem that needs to be addressed, those you are enlisting to protect the public are killing members of the public needlessly. That is not to say that the people being killed were without fault, but their deaths were avoidable.

Policing is a dangerous job at times, all Police Officers know this when they sign up, it seems a bit ridiculous to me to argue that as soon as an Officer is faced with any degree of risk to their personal safety they have a right to kill the person posing that risk. Police should be trained to weigh up that risk and respond to it in a proportionate manner, it seems like in the US they rarely do this.
 
Last edited:
I don't see where anybody said assaulting Police Officers was smart, that doesn't give Police the right to murder someone for doing so. They have the right to defend themselves but when a man is on the floor with six bullets in him he does not need to be shot again, let alone three more times, this is not rocket science either buddy.

Every day in England police go about their business without guns and have no problem disarming knife wielding maniacs without killing them. Seems that ain't rocket science either :\

http://thedailybanter.com/2014/08/uk-police-stop-someone-knife/

==============================================

But how do other police forces around the world deal with knife wielding attackers? Do they resort to the same lethal tactics when presented with a potential threat? Let’s look at the UK, a nation where the police (in most cases) do not carry firearms.

In this video, a man with a large machete is standing outside Buckingham Palace. The police carefully gage their distance, then shoot him with a Taser gun. The confrontation ends almost instantaneously as the man drops the knife when his body begins to convulse:

[video=youtube_share;OFddlI9QHJk]http://youtu.be/OFddlI9QHJk[/video]

In this video, a knife wielding man who appears to have serious mental health issues is surrounded by dozens of police officers. He goes after them, but the police avoid danger by (shock) moving out of the way:



Sure, it’s not the most effective way of dealing with the situation, but it’s infinitely better than blasting someone away who clearly needs psychiatric help.

The officers who shot Powell did have a choice. They could have moved away from him. They could have gotten back into their car to protect themselves. They could have run away. All of those options are preferable to killing someone, and those tactics are used in other countries where human life is deemed more valuable than the need to assert authority.
 
And here's how Australian police do it

[video=youtube_share;aWnWbJy7Imk]http://youtu.be/aWnWbJy7Imk[/video]

(I caught this live on ABC News 24 - the moment when that happened was pretty sweet =D)
 
^ very good point bit pattern and i entirely agree with you. The only problem is that almost all American cops are addicted to donuts and as result, they can't move around as efficiently as UK police. This is why they are so fond of using guns.
 
^ And a lot of people here have glass jaws and are insanely scared of getting knocked upside the head.
 
Well if he was such a big fella it should be pretty hard to miss him with the tazer one would think. Honestly, if between two Officers taking one tazer shot each neither could hit a man at close range then I would have to question whether they are well trained enough to be carrying these sorts of weapons to begin with.

A tazer isn't full-proof like I already said, and with the time it would take for them to produce them and shoot them the suspect could already be on them.

The Police outnumbered this man two to one, assuming both Police officers were armed with a tazer, baton and can of pepper spray each, on top of their guns, this means they had eight weapons between them to Powell's single knife. You are entitled to your opinion that the Officers were in the right by shooting him, but to suggest they had no other options available to them is nothing short of a joke.

As they say, don't bring a knife to a gunfight.

If you cannot tell that a man is incapacitated after he has been shot six times and is now rolling around on the floor then you have NO business carrying a gun. There is simply no justification to fire a further three rounds into a man at this point in the confrontation. If one wanted to make the ridiculous argument that more force was necessary at this time, the Police could EASILY have switched to one of their multiple non lethal options.

He wasn't "rolling around", he rolled towards them so they continued firing.

I don't see where anybody said assaulting Police Officers was smart, that doesn't give Police the right to murder someone for doing so. They have the right to defend ollbut when a man is on the floor with six bullets in him he does not need to be shot again, let alone three more times, this is not rocket science either buddy.

So if you were armed you would just let someone stab you and take your weapon? That makes no sense.

Why is it that in other Countries Police Officers manage to handle violent people, often armed with knives, clubs or other potentially deadly melee weapons without killing them, and in many cases without the use of a gun whatsoever, but in the United States, shooting to kill is a first resort in situations where an outnumbered suspect is armed with a melee weapon, or in some cases not armed at all?

Why is it that Australians talk so much crap about a country that they don't even live in? :\

I would imagine that Police training is as big of a part of the problem as the increasingly militarized attitude of Police Officers over there, but clearly this is a problem that needs to be addressed, those you are enlisting to protect the public are killing members of the public needlessly. That is not to say that the people being killed were without fault, but their deaths were avoidable.

Value your life? Don't assault or endanger a cop. Pretty easy really. And it's pretty obvious the second guy wanted to suicide by cop and go out as a martyr so he got his wish I guess.

Policing is a dangerous job at times, all Police Officers know this when they sign up, it seems a bit ridiculous to me to argue that as soon as an Officer is faced with any degree of risk to their personal safety they have a right to kill the person posing that risk. Police should be trained to weigh up that risk and respond to it in a proportionate manner, it seems like in the US they rarely do this.

It's not their job to put the life of a violent criminal above their own. They gave him plenty of time to drop his weapon but instead he chose to come towards them screaming for them to kill him.
 
Bloodthirsty racist murderers!!!...

Special Coverage

Mo. troopers spotted playing basketball with Ferguson youth


att00001.jpg


by KMOV.com Staff

KMOV.com
Posted on August 22, 2014 at 6:32 PM
Updated yesterday at 6:41 PM

(KMOV.com) -- As the situation in Ferguson continues to show signs of quieting down, News 4 found examples of law officers reaching out to the community, most notably reaching out to kids in the neighborhood.

Some Missouri Highway Patrol officers in Ferguson are trying to make positive, lasting impressions.

“I’ve been on the highway patrol for 21 years,” said Corporal Christensen, “This has been one of the best assignments I’ve had.”

Of course, the troopers’ main job is to support local law enforcement, but they said that doesn’t mean each day they can’t make a new friend or change minds about law enforcers.

“We’ve met a lot of people who are concerned about their community, about things that are going on here,” Christensen continued, “It’s very important that we invest in that – those children. Who knows, the seed might have been planted in that young man’s mind that one day he might want to be a Missouri State Trooper or a police officer in St. Louis or Ferguson or elsewhere.”

Melonie Montgomery lives in Ferguson with her young family. She said she understands what the past few weeks have meant to some young black males and knows a few minutes with these troopers will hopefully go a long way with her family.

“I have an older son who wants to be a police officer and I don’t want this to discourage him from pursuing the career he wants,” Montgomery said, “And just being able to see them in a more personable light, you know, I think it’s an amazing thing. To be with the kinds and spend time here and actually be here and speak with us, one on one, it really helps the atmosphere of Ferguson.”

http://www.kmov.com/special-coverag...basketball-with-Ferguson-youth-272368621.html
 
A tazer isn't full-proof like I already said, and with the time it would take for them to produce them and shoot them the suspect could already be on them.

There is this insanely hard concept to grasp called moving the fuck away as the knife wielder approaches you, you make it sound like the Police had to be fucking stationary while they used their weapons.

Also, as I said earlier, if the Police Officers in question would be in any real danger of missing not one, but two tazer shots between them, at a large suspect in close proximity, you have to wonder what they are doing carrying these sorts of weapons in the first place.

He wasn't "rolling around", he rolled towards them so they continued firing.

Yes, how threatening, a man on the ground with six bullets in him vaguely rolling in your direction. At this point they could easily have walked in the opposite direction, there is no way this man was a threat to them, if he was any threat he wouldn't be rolling around he would be back on his feet with the fucking knife in his hand.

You also failed to address the fact that even if you deemed more force necessary at this point (which in my mind would be ludicrous) they could easily have switched to non lethal force.

So if you were armed you would just let someone stab you and take your weapon? That makes no sense.

What makes no sense is that you could get this impression from anything I have said. They were armed with more than guns and did not have to resort to lethal force, bit_pattern has posted numerous videos on this very page illustrating how easy it should be for Police to deal with a knife wielding maniac without resorting to lethal force. More than anything else, I am against the fact they fired three rounds into a man who was lying on the ground already shot, he was in no position to stab anybody at that point.

Value your life? Don't assault or endanger a cop. Pretty easy really. And it's pretty obvious the second guy wanted to suicide by cop and go out as a martyr so he got his wish I guess.

The issue is some people don't value their life, it doesn't mean a public servant should go out and shoot them. It seems pretty ridiculous to suggest that in a legal framework where euthanasia of terminally ill is illegal that the Police should be able to shoot mentally ill suspects dead, even when there are other options available to them. The fact this guy wanted to commit suicide by cop, rather than do anybody else actual harm, is one of the reasons they should have been more reluctant to resort to deadly force.

It's not their job to put the life of a violent criminal above their own. They gave him plenty of time to drop his weapon but instead he chose to come towards them screaming for them to kill him.

Resorting to anything less than shooting this man could hardly be described as putting his life above their own, neutralizing the threat he posed to them through non lethal methods would have been just as effective a way of taking him down. The problem here is they put no value on his life what so ever.
 
Last edited:
]Some Missouri Highway Patrol officers in Ferguson are trying to make positive, lasting impressions.

You do realise it was highway patrol that the governor brought in to relieve the local knuckleheads who were running around gassing people and arresting journalists in the first few days, right?

But, yes, clever PR photo-op is clever - playing bball with some kids projects a positive image that certainly takes the edge off the weeks of terrorising the local community and enacting a state of virtual martial law 8)

You're a spin doctor's wet-dream :\
 
Obviously this article is a bit ridic, but how do you explain the stats? Yeah poverty is a good explanation but you dont see the murder rates like this in E. Kentucky. THoughts
http://www.vox.com/2014/8/21/6053811/white-on-white-murder
"Blacks represent 13% of the population but commit 50% of the murders; 90% of black victims are murdered by other blacks," writes Time's Joe Klein, calling for "provocative" thinking on race in America. "The facts suggest that history is not enough to explain this social disaster."

THERE ARE MANY COUNTRIES WHERE WHITE PEOPLE MURDER EACH OTHER AT A MUCH LOWER RATE THAN YOU SEE HERE IN THE UNITED STATES

Yet the disturbing truth, according to the FBI's most recent homicide statistics, is that the United States is in the wake of an epidemic of white-on-white crime. Back in 2011, the most recent year for which data is available, a staggering 83 percent of white murder victims were killed by fellow Caucasians.

This is not to say that white people are inherently prone to violence. Most whites, obviously, manage to get through life without murdering anyone. And there are many countries full of white people — Norway, Iceland, France, Denmark, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom — where white people murder each other at a much lower rate than you see here in the United States. On the other hand, although people often see criminal behavior as a symptom of poverty, the quantity of murder committed by white people specifically in the United States casts some doubt on this. Per capita GDP is considerably higher here than in France — and the white population in America is considerably richer than the national average — and yet we have more white murderers.

To understand the level of cultural pathology at work here, it's important to understand that 36 percent of those killed by whites are women — a far higher share than you see with black murderers.

Clearly, the social disaster of white violence has complicated roots. But the beginning of an answer is to admit that we have a problem. It's striking that President Obama, who's frequently found time to comment on the height of black men's waistlines, seems oblivious to this torrent of white killing. To be fair to the White House, however, it would be uniquely difficult for Obama to address this delicate issue. The real tragedy is that none of Obama's 43 white predecessors have addressed it either. Indeed, looking back on America's political iconography, there are disturbing trends toward the glorification of white violence. Peer inside the US Capitol building, and you'll find a monument to Confederate President Jefferson Davis — the leader of an insurgency that caused an unprecedented quantity of violent white deaths.

But whatever the causes or past mistakes, the important thing is to confront this important subject in the future. As we look ahead to a 2016 matchup that should give us two Euro-American major party nominees for the first time in a decade, perhaps America can finally get the debate about white violence it deserves
 
Why is it that Australians talk so much crap about a country that they don't even live in?

Because we have experience living in a country where police (for the most part) manage to do their job without murdering unarmed teenagers - we have the perspective you lack to see just how fucked up things have gotten over there.
 
There is this insanely hard concept to grasp called moving the fuck away as the knife wielder approaches you, you make it sound like the Police had to be fucking stationary while they used their weapons.

Cops aren't trained to runaway from criminals. Ever heard the stand your ground law? It also applies to conceal carrying citizens.

Yes, how threatening, a man on the ground with six bullets in him vaguely rolling in your direction. At this point they could easily have walked in the opposite direction, there is no way this man was a threat to them, if he was any threat he wouldn't be rolling around he would be back on his feet with the fucking knife in his hand.

You also failed to address the fact that even if you deemed more force necessary at this point (which in my mind would be ludicrous) they could easily have switched to non lethal force.

Right, because in a life and death situation with seconds or less to react you can just hit the pause button and go back to the drawing board. IMO which is obviously the minority on here the officers responded appropriately in both incidents.

The issue is some people don't value their life, it doesn't mean a public servant should go out and shoot them.

In self defense it does and honestly I don't feel sorry for them. The common denominator in both incidents is that both people could've lived to see another day if they hadn't done anything wrong and did what the officers told them. Despite how I may come across in this thread I'm not one to blindly defend the police, but I highly doubt that the officers involved in either instance started their day hoping to have to kill someone.

It seems pretty ridiculous to suggest that in a legal framework where euthanasia of terminally ill is illegal that the Police should be able to shoot mentally ill suspects dead, even when there are other options available to them. The fact this guy wanted to commit suicide by cop, rather than do anybody else actual harm, is one of the reasons they should have been more reluctant to resort to deadly force.

You lost me here, I don't know what euthanasia has to do with anything. And what the suspect was thinking or what he had for breakfast that day isn't going to change how the police respond. I said it before and I'll say it again, don't bring a knife to a gunfight.
 
This group in Ferguson is the Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP), who really has no respect even within the revolutionary socialist community. It's been called a cult and is a stubborn and deeply misguided Maoist organization. It's leader, Bob Avakian has been a laughing stock among leftists for decades. Of course this is the group that makes headlines :|

Ah ffs the RCP that figures. They are a joke and certainly are not revolutionary. I even think the Stalinist's laugh at them :p . It would figure that those would be the guys the media would focus on :|

I don't know how anyone can take you seriously honestly... Don't you have another thread where you're basically celebrating the fact 3 police officers lost their lives to a crazed murderer? If you think that's the answer to anything then you truly are delusional and I would laugh my head off if you actually acted on any of the insane shit you post.

So how are 3 dead uniforms a bad thing? Perhaps that person saved 3 families getting phone calls saying "sorry can you please come pick up your loved one at the morgue we had to shoot and beat them into submission". Think about it they think nothing about shooting us so why should we feel the least bit bad if they get shot down like dogs? Plus noone forced these losers to become piggies so they know they can get their face blown off when they sign up. Yes my poor Liberal heart bleeds for those dead heroic piggies. Oh wait i'm not a Liberal :\ . Fuck the police :D
 
So how are 3 dead uniforms a bad thing? Perhaps that person saved 3 families getting phone calls saying "sorry can you please come pick up your loved one at the morgue we had to shoot and beat them into submission".

What about the phone calls to the families of the slain officers informing them that their family member won't be coming home because they were murdered by a crazed gunman? Like it or not cops are people too.

Think about it they think nothing about shooting us so why should we feel the least bit bad if they get shot down like dogs?

Who's us? I've never been shot by a cop. It's amazing how if you don't fuck with them they leave you alone.

Plus noone forced these losers to become piggies so they know they can get their face blown off when they sign up. Yes my poor Liberal heart bleeds for those dead heroic piggies. Oh wait i'm not a Liberal :\ . Fuck the police :D

Uh, I believe that cops already know the dangers of the job when they sign up. Like it or not society is always going to have some sort of police and a need for such because of the stupid people. Even if you removed the whole police force from a country what do you think would happen? Citizens would form vigilante groups to protect themselves and if you think those groups would be any less corrupt than some police forces I think you'd be in for a rude awakening. But either way what you say is insane and you sound like you have a lot in common with the batshit crazy tweaker couple that gunned down the 2 cops in the pizza place while they were having lunch. Like I think I already asked, are you prepared to carry out the crazy shit you talk about and go down as a martyr for your cause? If you think that murdering cops is the right way to go about things and will change anything for the better I think it might be time to find some new meds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top