American Politics XII: We Can Do Bad All By Ourselves

[Reverend Norv]

Who did the cops defend by shooting a fleeing man?

The cops were on duty to defend and protect all citizens from the bad guys. This guy shot at the cops. I ask you again and all persons on NS. Do you think this guy did anything wrong shooting at the cops? I strongly do. Do you condemn this guy for shooting at the cops? I strongly do.

And I once again answer:

this bad guy has no legitimate reasons to shoot at the cops. I strongly condemn this bad guy for shooting at the cops. Do you condemn this bad guy for shooting at the cops? Do any of you condemn this bad guy for shooting at the cops?

Of course I condemn the bad guy for shooting at the cops. He should have been arrested, tried, and convicted of attempted murder.

But that's not what happened. Instead, he was shot dozens of times in the back, while he was running away. He wasn't tried and convicted. He was summarily executed.

This guy might have been a saint who made one terrible mistake. Or he might have been an absolute monster. It does not matter. Agents of the state do not get to deprive Americans of their lives without due process of law, no matter who they are or what they've done. That's what this is about.

But I know better than to expect a good-faith response.

[Umeria]

Who did the cops defend by shooting a fleeing man?

The cops were on duty to defend and protect all citizens from the bad guys. This guy shot at the cops. I ask you again and all persons on NS. Do you think this guy did anything wrong shooting at the cops? I strongly do. Do you condemn this guy for shooting at the cops? I strongly do.

All citizens includes the bad guy, you know. If people break the law they're supposed to be arrested and handled by the courts, not shot while they're running away.

[Greater Miami Shores 3]

The cops were on duty to defend and protect all citizens from the bad guys. This guy shot at the cops. I ask you again and all persons on NS. Do you think this guy did anything wrong shooting at the cops? I strongly do. Do you condemn this guy for shooting at the cops? I strongly do.

And I once again answer:

Of course I condemn the bad guy for shooting at the cops. He should have been arrested, tried, and convicted of attempted murder.

But that's not what happened. Instead, he was shot dozens of times in the back, while he was running away. He wasn't tried and convicted. He was summarily executed.

This guy might have been a saint who made one terrible mistake. Or he might have been an absolute monster. It does not matter. Agents of the state do not get to deprive Americans of their lives without due process of law, no matter who they are or what they've done. That's what this is about.

But I know better than to expect a good-faith response.

This guy is no saint for shooting at the cops.

[Umeria]

And I once again answer:

But I know better than to expect a good-faith response.

This guy is no saint for shooting at the cops.

Did you miss the "It does not matter" part?

[Reverend Norv]

And I once again answer:



But I know better than to expect a good-faith response.

This guy is no saint for shooting at the cops.

Certainly not. But he was still an American citizen. And the Constitution guarantees that American citizens cannot be deprived of life without due process of law. For what he did, he deserved trial and conviction, according to the laws of this land. He did not deserve to be shot in the back in the street while he ran away - without a trial, lawyer, or jury. That's the point here. What he did doesn't matter. In this country, nobody gets executed without a trial, no matter what they've done. Wouldn't you agree?

[Diuhon]

This guy is no saint for shooting at the cops.

Certainly not. But he was still an American citizen. And the Constitution guarantees that American citizens cannot be deprived of life without due process of law. For what he did, he deserved trial and conviction, according to the laws of this land. He did not deserve to be shot in the back in the street while he ran away - without a trial, lawyer, or jury. That's the point here. What he did doesn't matter. In this country, nobody gets executed without a trial. Wouldn't you agree?

well, to be fair, some of us do think some people are too toxic to deserve trial

some of us think of hitler, others think of trump, while alberto here thinks of this guy

it's just up to the little perversions and extenuating circumstances put in place to justify and get away with murder

for instance, it may be that your invasion of russia has faltered while your slaughter of jews has proceeded apace

or it may be that you don't care about destroying a million people as long as you stay in power

or it may be that you shot a cop, once, threw the gun away, and then ran

[Greater Miami Shores 3]

This guy is no saint for shooting at the cops.

Certainly not. But he was still an American citizen. And the Constitution guarantees that American citizens cannot be deprived of life without due process of law. For what he did, he deserved trial and conviction, according to the laws of this land. He did not deserve to be shot in the back in the street while he ran away - without a trial, lawyer, or jury. That's the point here. What he did doesn't matter. In this country, nobody gets executed without a trial, no matter what they've done. Wouldn't you agree?

I agree, but the guy was a cop killer who missed.

[Tarsonis]

If I remember right, didn't they fire 90 rounds in total?

What's a typical full magazine? 8*12 = 96, for example.

Depends on the weapon but most departments use barrettas or glocks, chambered in 9mm which tend to have magazines in capacity of 15-17.

[Diuhon]

Certainly not. But he was still an American citizen. And the Constitution guarantees that American citizens cannot be deprived of life without due process of law. For what he did, he deserved trial and conviction, according to the laws of this land. He did not deserve to be shot in the back in the street while he ran away - without a trial, lawyer, or jury. That's the point here. What he did doesn't matter. In this country, nobody gets executed without a trial, no matter what they've done. Wouldn't you agree?

I agree, but the guy was a cop killer who missed.

alberto

dude

how can he be a cop killer if he didn't kill a damn cop?

[Greater Miami Shores 3]

I agree, but the guy was a cop killer who missed.

alberto

dude

how can he be a cop killer if he didn't kill a damn cop?

He shot at the cops, GMS Crazy Cuban Alberto.

[Reverend Norv]

Certainly not. But he was still an American citizen. And the Constitution guarantees that American citizens cannot be deprived of life without due process of law. For what he did, he deserved trial and conviction, according to the laws of this land. He did not deserve to be shot in the back in the street while he ran away - without a trial, lawyer, or jury. That's the point here. What he did doesn't matter. In this country, nobody gets executed without a trial, no matter what they've done. Wouldn't you agree?

I agree, but the guy was a cop killer who missed.

True enough. But in this country, nobody gets executed without a trial, no matter what they've done. You just agreed on that. So it does not matter that he's a cop killer who missed. The right thing to do was to arrest him, charge him, put him on trial, and convict him. And to shoot him in the back in the street, without a trial or lawyer or jury, was wrong. Do you agree?

[Tarsonis]

This guy is no saint for shooting at the cops.

Certainly not. But he was still an American citizen. And the Constitution guarantees that American citizens cannot be deprived of life without due process of law. For what he did, he deserved trial and conviction, according to the laws of this land. He did not deserve to be shot in the back in the street while he ran away - without a trial, lawyer, or jury. That's the point here. What he did doesn't matter. In this country, nobody gets executed without a trial, no matter what they've done. Wouldn't you agree?

Nobody deserves it, but that's ultimately irrelevant to whether or not it was justified. What someone deserves is an arbitrary idea that will likely vary in accordance with with people's opinions. What's justified depends on whether or not the actions were in accordance with pre-established standards operating procedures. From the information I have, while the shooting might appear excessive due to the rounds fired, the shooting was justified in accordance with pre-established standards, and legal precedent.


More information is probably needed to know for sure.

[Tarsonis]

I agree, but the guy was a cop killer who missed.

alberto

dude

how can he be a cop killer if he didn't kill a damn cop?

he's an attempted cop killer.

[Forsher]

What's a typical full magazine? 8*12 = 96, for example.

Depends on the weapon but most departments use barrettas or glocks, chambered in 9mm which tend to have magazines in size of 15-17.

So, we're probably talking more cops (~8) than as many as it would take for them to have, on average, emptied their clips (~6).

Alternatively, they probably fired, on average, somewhere between 66 and 75% of their magazines.

Whether this is a substantive improvement on having to reload (as suggested, facetiously in the only instance I saw) or not, I leave as an exercise to the reader.

[Greater Miami Shores 3]

I agree, but the guy was a cop killer who missed.

alberto

dude

how can he be a cop killer if he didn't kill a damn cop?

What Tarsonis just said to you. He has me on ignore.

[Reverend Norv]

Certainly not. But he was still an American citizen. And the Constitution guarantees that American citizens cannot be deprived of life without due process of law. For what he did, he deserved trial and conviction, according to the laws of this land. He did not deserve to be shot in the back in the street while he ran away - without a trial, lawyer, or jury. That's the point here. What he did doesn't matter. In this country, nobody gets executed without a trial, no matter what they've done. Wouldn't you agree?

Nobody deserves it, but that's ultimately irrelevant to whether or not it was justified. What someone deserves is an arbitrary idea that will likely vary in accordance with with people's opinions. What's justified depends on whether or not the actions were in accordance with pre-established standards operating procedures. From the information I have, while the shooting might appear excessive due to the rounds fired, the shooting was justified in accordance with pre-established standards, and legal precedent.


More information is probably needed to know for sure.

I agree on the distinction between - essentially - "is" and "ought" as far as legal justification is concerned. I suspect that this was neither justified nor deserved, as I outlined here. But I very much doubt that GMS is thinking in terms of that distinction, and I'd like him to admit - as you just did so readily - that at a minimum, no one deserves to get executed in the street without a trial.

[Forsher]

alberto

dude

how can he be a cop killer if he didn't kill a damn cop?

He shot at the cops, GMS Crazy Cuban Alberto.

Is your name actually Alberto or is this "I called you Hector because I'm racist"?

(He actually called him Hector because he's a crazy stalker.)

[Greater Miami Shores 3]

He shot at the cops, GMS Crazy Cuban Alberto.

Is your name actually Alberto or is this "I called you Hector because I'm racist"?

(He actually called him Hector because he's a crazy stalker.)

Yes my name is actually GMS Crazy Cuban Alberto, lol.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzckshDwCJk&t=131s

[Umeria]

Certainly not. But he was still an American citizen. And the Constitution guarantees that American citizens cannot be deprived of life without due process of law. For what he did, he deserved trial and conviction, according to the laws of this land. He did not deserve to be shot in the back in the street while he ran away - without a trial, lawyer, or jury. That's the point here. What he did doesn't matter. In this country, nobody gets executed without a trial. Wouldn't you agree?

well, to be fair, some of us do think some people are too toxic to deserve trial

some of us think of hitler, others think of trump, while alberto here thinks of this guy

I might get flack for this, but everyone deserves a fair trial including Hitler. It's not like the result would be any different.

[Cannot think of a name]

Prisoners.

24.

If I were to continue, it'd be a very long list, dude.

I think it's weird that New Zealanders are this impressionable in regards to American cinema.

Really? Because elected officials referred to a specific scene in 24 to justify 'enhanced interrogation' despite the people who's job it was to get information saying that scenario never happens.

[Forsher]

I think it's weird that New Zealanders are this impressionable in regards to American cinema.

Really? Because elected officials referred to a specific scene in 24 to justify 'enhanced interrogation' despite the people who's job it was to get information saying that scenario never happens.

Unless those were elected officials from NZ, it doesn't really have any bearing on Ors Might's sentiment.

Indeed, the most obvious reason why you might find [foreign country]'s alleged impressionableness to [reference country]'s media to be weird is precisely a reason why you wouldn't be surprised that [reference country]'s people are impressionable regarding their own media.

[Nationalist Northumbria]

I literally did, though.

Ha!

No you didn't. You stated "Well, but it would work" and didn't say anything else to elaborate on that point, and after that you complained that Eahland had the "burden of proof" when in reality you, the one who introduced the concept in the first place, had the full burden of having to prove your concept.

Not how it works.

By your standard, someone asking for proof that the Moon is made of cheese is wrong to doubt that the Moon is made of cheese.

Hi. Completely neutral third-party here.

I've read the thread train. It's nothing like that. It's very obvious that you're in the wrong with this. Please stop.

'Neutral' Yeah, sure...

[Dogmeat]

Ha!

No you didn't. You stated "Well, but it would work" and didn't say anything else to elaborate on that point, and after that you complained that Eahland had the "burden of proof" when in reality you, the one who introduced the concept in the first place, had the full burden of having to prove your concept.

Not how it works.

Hi. Completely neutral third-party here.

I've read the thread train. It's nothing like that. It's very obvious that you're in the wrong with this. Please stop.

'Neutral' Yeah, sure...

Yes how it works. And yes: neutral.

Any objective observer can see that your argument is crazy. Several have.

[Saksoni]

Happy 4th July Americans, hope you dont die from firework accident like last time

[Neon Lunar Eclipse]

Happy Birthday, America. With love from Czechia