Yes, yes we should.

Agreed. This isn't a black v. white thing. It's a poor/working class tool v. the wealthy thing. The police are there to protect wealth and property of the wealthy. The poor and working class are generally not in a position where the police are there to protect them. At least not at this current moment.


It's a systemic failure really. I know get really frustrated with the bad cops, but even the good cops have their hands tied when it comes to really protecting and serving. There's too many things that put them in a position where they are antagonizing the community, and not really helping it.

---

With all due respect, JIB, you clearly are just twisting my words and intent to make your non-sensical point. Whether there is an official quota or not, we all know that police are motivated by their higher ups, and they are motivated by elected officials to write tickets. The motivation is there, whether it's officail or not... Here's a source <a class="bbc_url" href='http://jungle.jaguars.com/index.php?/topic/18457-at-least-three-police-officers-killed-by-snipers-during-dallas-protest-chief-says/page-5'>http://jungle.jaguars.com/index.php?/topic/18457-at-least-three-police-officers-killed-by-snipers-during-dallas-protest-chief-says/page-5</a>


If you have to tackle a black male that you just approached I would call that using militarized style policing. It's definatley not community policing. But I know, you feel that shooting a guy point blank is justified. Whether you disagree with the verbiage I'm using or not, the fact remains. The way the police have been handling citizens can be seen as a militarized occupational force, not a peacekeeping relationship with the community.


I find it very fitting that you ignore these MAIN POINTS that I'm making in order to try and muddy the waters with definitions that really have no importance in regards to what I'm trying to express.

As for what equiptment I would define as such, I think of the gear and equiptment used during Ferguson.

 

You mean riot gear?  Was that day-to-day interaction with society?  It is rapidly becoming that way.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

The daily duty equipment of a police officer is in no way similar to battle gear. You may look to SWAT as having similar equipment, but once again, it is not battle gear. In regards to militarized style policing, this is another made up term like "assault weapon". The military incorporated police training once learning it would be a necessity in Iraq and elsewhere when establishing security among villages. This was not a traditional role of the military. Civilian police didn't adopt a military tactic, the military adopted the police tactic.

---

AAAAArrrrmmmaagggeeeeddooonnnnnnnnn

---

Agreed. This isn't a black v. white thing. It's a poor/working class tool v. the wealthy thing. The police are there to protect wealth and property of the wealthy. The poor and working class are generally not in a position where the police are there to protect them. At least not at this current moment.


It's a systemic failure really. I know get really frustrated with the bad cops, but even the good cops have their hands tied when it comes to really protecting and serving. There's too many things that put them in a position where they are antagonizing the community, and not really helping it.

 

I can't agree with it being a "systemic" issue when the vast majority are playing by the rules and doing good.

 

That is a complete misperception.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

You must not know many, if any, police officers. While there are some who have a warrior or God complex, the majority do not. Sweeping generalizations of groups of people is one of the reasons this nation, and this messageboard, is so divided. That, and the need for people to feel as if they have to compartmentalize themselves and others into groups that do nothing but cause strife.


When did we stop looking at and treating each other as people? As human beings? With respect and courtesy? It seems anymore we have negative reactions to anything and everything instead of taking a breath and forming a rational thought and coming up with a solution. Everything now is about who is right, who is better, who is smarter, who is more persecuted. We are all in this together. No man is an island. What happens to one of us happens to all of us. It may not affect us all in the same way but it affects us all the same. Everything has a cause and effect. Consequences are not punishment for our actions, they are the effect.


Everyone here is intelligent and knowledgeable in different ways from their life experiences which I think is fantastic. What's sad is when differing opinions on matters cause breakdown in communication and people start name calling and throwing insults and acting like petulant children who aren't getting their way. That's the road society is taking and no one is noticing it because it's been a slow boil for a long time. The bad thing is, in our society horrific things are happening. It's not just a CoC warning or an all out ban. It's death and destruction to and of humanity and we are all the problem because we are all allowing it with how we use our words and actions. And how we don't. If things keep going as they are we won't need ISIS or the Taliban or any terrorist group to dismantle this nation. We're going to do it all by ourselves.

There's alot here to unpack... and I agree with you regarding broad labeling of any group of people.


But I want to point out that the point I was making regarding the militarization of our peacekeepers was an attack on the system, not on the actual officers.


That's a key point. I have made a point in all my posts to separate the good cops from the corrupted one's.


My discussion specificall on this topic is not a critique of police officers. It's a discussion of human nature.


It is my opinion that is you create an army setting, human nature would cause anyone (not just cops, but any man or woman) to begin viewing the society in militaristic way.


Therefore, I do not think I'm categorizing all cops as warriors, but stating that from a psychological point of view if the system decides they want a militarized police force, you are systemically undermining the relationship between the community and the police as peacekeepers.


I don't think this position is off base or prejudice to officers, but a critique of the system.

---

I can't agree with it being a "systemic" issue when the vast majority are playing by the rules and doing good.


That is a complete misperception.

I would call it systemic because police brutality occurs in every community throughout the nation. To me, that's the definition of systemic.


I do agree with you that not all officers go off the deep end. That most are trying there damndest to do the right thing. But the system sets up a situation where brutality is inevitable. The system is the problem.

---

White Christian shoots blacks.... Liberals blame racism and religion


Muslim man shoots gays.... Liberals ignore Islam and blame guns.


Black man shoots whites at BLM rally and the shooter specifically says he was targeting whites... Liberals ignore race and blame the system.




Don't be stupid.

Don't be a liberal.

---

I would call it systemic because police brutality occurs in every community throughout the nation. To me, that's the definition of systemic.


I do agree with you that not all officers go off the deep end. That most are trying there damndest to do the right thing. But the system sets up a situation where brutality is inevitable. The system is the problem.

 

The exception does not make the rule.

 

The only thing "systemic" is that we're talking about crime and enforcement, where there is inherent danger and the possibility or brutality because of the very nature of the situation.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

The shooter straight up said it was race morivated. How anyone can be stupid enough to still say this wasn't a race issue is mind numbing.

---

If these BLM people were serious, they'd start policing their own neighborhoods with the Black on Black killing and crime instead of blaming "Whitey" and the system.

---

The interesting thing about this debate is that if you look at the actual statistics, I suppose white people should be out there protesting that white lives matter.

<a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.dailywire.com/news/7264/5-statistics-you-need-know-about-cops-killing-aaron-bandler'>The Washington Post, hardly a bastion of conservatism, is tracking police related killings. Numbers don't lie.</a>

I said this earlier, the media shows what they want to show.

---

If these BLM people were serious, they'd start policing their own neighborhoods with the Black on Black killing and crime instead of blaming "Whitey" and the system.

Exactly, but they can't bring up racism if they do that.

---

The exception does not make the rule.


The only thing "systemic" is that we're talking about crime and enforcement, where there is inherent danger and the possibility or brutality because of the very nature of the situation.

No doubt that the nature of the job creates situations where violent actions are inevitable.


However, I would argue that violent actions do not mean brutality should be expected.


Based on the number of deaths by officer, not to mention brutality that did not lead to death, I would argue that it is not the exception, but something that occurs far too often and throughout the entire nation.


The frequency and pervasiveness makes it impossible not to see it as a systemic problem. And as flsprt points out, police brutality happens across all races--black, white, and brown. The point is that when you are confronted by police, you should expect to survive the interaction without any brutality.


The system makes it way to easy for cops to abuse their power.

---

The shooter straight up said it was race morivated. How anyone can be stupid enough to still say this wasn't a race issue is mind numbing.

So the shooter speaks for everyone? He speaks for all the protesters? He speaks for me? He speaks for the cops?


Come on, man. Think it through

---

Long story short, Back in 1983 I was drunk and armed with a hunting knife. In a public park after hours. I had a cop pull his weapon on me as I approched him. I stopped dead in my tracks. Followed his intructions to the letter, and I walked away with him in cuffs but alive and uninjured.

---

No doubt that the nature of the job creates situations where violent actions are inevitable.


However, I would argue that violent actions do not mean brutality should be expected.


Based on the number of deaths by officer, not to mention brutality that did not lead to death, I would argue that it is not the exception, but something that occurs far too often and throughout the entire nation.


The frequency and pervasiveness makes it impossible not to see it as a systemic problem. And as flsprt points out, police brutality happens across all races--black, white, and brown. The point is that when you are confronted by police, you should expect to survive the interaction without any brutality.


The system makes it way to easy for cops to abuse their power.

 

Sorry, but simply using words doesn't make an argument convincing.  "Impossible not to see" - absolutely false.  That's the problem with some people, they can't see the world in any way other than their already pre-drawn conclusions.

 

That's not being open minded at all.

 

The truth is, the vast majority of all peoples should expect to and DO survive the interaction without brutality.

 

Again... you're unsuccessfully spinning that the exception makes the rule, when in reality the opposite is true.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

So the shooter speaks for everyone? He speaks for all the protesters? He speaks for me? He speaks for the cops?


Come on, man. Think it through

Well do you agree that these police officers were killed because of a race issue?

---

Fallout from the Dallas event?

 

How can police hope to protect themselves at these events - protests, marches, etc?  They can't lock down every building along the way.   

 

This will affect every police encounter with the public.  Cops are gonna be trigger happy, so if you have an encounter with the police, please follow their instructions and don't be aggressive or argumentative.  Don't escalate the situation.  Keep hands where they can be seen unless instructed otherwise.  No reason to get shot over a speeding ticket.

 

You can bet Obama, Feinstein, Schumer and the anti-2A crowd are ready to roll out new legislation. 

---

Sorry, but simply using words doesn't make an argument convincing. "Impossible not to see" - absolutely false. That's the problem with some people, they can't see the world in any way other than their already pre-drawn conclusions.


That's not being open minded at all.


The truth is, the vast majority of all peoples should expect to and DO survive the interaction without brutality.


Again... you're unsuccessfully spinning that the exception makes the rule, when in reality the opposite is true.

Meh, agree to disagree, then. But if you'd like to continue the debate...


I think the difference we have is based on what you and I are considering a exception.


It sounds to me that you believe that 600 police caused deaths so far in 2016 out of 275,000,000 citizens is a small enough percentage that it is an exception.


I disagree. I feel that based I the fact that our first world nation has a death by cop rate 70 times higher than other first world countries, there's a systemic problem, and not an exception or outlier statistic.

---