Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sorry I can't get you anymore positive rating but I totally agree with this statement ....QUOTE=mkpunk;45581233]The Tulsa case was a potential arrest but they shot an unarmed man for no damn reason that makes logical sense. Just not following directions isn't grounds for shooting.[/quote]
Apparently you only listen to talk radio because if you go back to these cases the one in New York where a guy was selling loose cigarettes the one in Louisiana a guy was selling CDs what crimes did they committed? come on you can't be this stupid. I think you're just a person full of hate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NDak15
If people don't want to get shot they need to stop committing crimes. Most of these cases the officers are justified.
I'll tell you one big difference between the two cities: Tulsa is very conservative. Being where Tulsa is, looting and rioting wouldn't go very far as the good guys are armed quite well there.
You should have stopped with "Tulsa is very conservative." The black people in Tulsa are also conservative, which means they are not prone to riot and tend a lot more to controlling their own young.
You should have stopped with "Tulsa is very conservative." The black people in Tulsa are also conservative, which means they are not prone to riot and tend a lot more to controlling their own young.
It has nothing to do with "good guys are armed."
Shhhh....you will bust their bubbles!
They honestly think their dozens of firearms are keeping them safe and their families protected from America's worldwide class warfare.
The justice system is inherently rigged to protect those who work for it. This includes judges, attorneys, DA's, and police. They all are fed by the same cash cow, and they all sleep together. Even so called "good cops" protect the "bad cops", so how "good" can they really be?
I think police shootings should automatically be sent to a grand jury. The very thought of being evaluated by outsiders would change the mentality of police departments.
Like you, I think most shootings done by cops are probably justified, but when I look at what happened to the terror suspect in New Jersey versus what happens to so many Black men, there's something not kosher here. There are too many American citizens being shot by police...something that should be a last resort.
Grand Juries are in the DA's pocket, and DA's back cops- so that solution won't work. The reality is that power corrupts, and absolute power (no accountability- which is the case for police) corrupts absolutely. It's part of human nature.
Making it impossible to hire bad cops by way of making all LEOs subject to obtaining professional insurance would be a start. If a county, state or even the federal government had to insure individual officers before they could be hired that might prevent hiring of LEOs who are too much of a liability. A national database of LEOs where disciplinary actions and complaints could be recorded could make this work. Its not ideal, but hey we got AL Capone not on all the really bad stuff he did, but for tax evasion....
Grand Juries are in the DA's pocket, and DA's back cops- so that solution won't work.
I see your point. Grand juries aren't the solution. But I wouldn't agree that grand juries are generally in the DA's pocket. Plenty of grand juries don't indict. I don't see them as the problem since the DA's office can still proceed to trial no matter if the grand jury indicts or doesn't. To me the problem is that the DA will not and does not go to trial if the accused is a cop, period. Statistically speaking. And if by some one in a billion twist of the stars an officer does find himself on trial, it's sky high unlikely that he/she will be found guilty of a thing, especially if the person they harmed was black at the time.
I see your point. Grand juries aren't the solution. But I wouldn't agree that grand juries are generally in the DA's pocket. Plenty of grand juries don't indict. I don't see them as the problem since the DA's office can still proceed to trial no matter if the grand jury indicts or doesn't. To me the problem is that the DA will not and does not go to trial if the accused is a cop, period. Statistically speaking. And if by some one in a billion twist of the stars an officer does find himself on trial, it's sky high unlikely that he/she will be found guilty of a thing, especially if the person they harmed was black at the time.
I cannot disagree with you- DA's and police sleep together. It is next to impossible to get a DA to put an honest effort into prosecuting a cop. We'll see what happens in Tulsa- that's a pretty clear cut case of murder. Sh'es been charged with Manslaughter, and I predict that a plea will be worked out where the charges are reduced, and she gets house arrest with electronic monitoring for a year or two.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
[/quote]
