"I don't care what the Supreme Court says." Police Officer----240, your opinion?

[Howard]

Cops should be required to pass a 250 question test about US Law. Furthermore, like many other professions, cops should only be granted a "license" to become a cop if they pass this test. Most other professions (doctor, dentist, social worker/psychologist, speech-language pathologist, nurse, etc) have to pass a test that is specifically geared toward their job. As such, cops should be required to pass a 250-question test about US Law!

No question, that every cop should know the laws they enforce.
I don't think any reasonable person can defend professional ignorance of any law enforcement officer.

BUT, let's get practical for a minute about the world we live in.
I have no idea why this guy feels compelled to video tape the police station and I think he was using a drone?
He's perfectly within his rights to do so, according to the law.

While he's under no obligation to say, it would interesting ( to me) to find out why he wants to do this.
Why?
It's possible that a terrorist could use a similar tactic and cover to launch an attack.
IF that happened everyone would demand to know how it could happen.
The media would delve into an investigation and demand answers.

In my opinion, this cop was just trying to do his job and be proactive.
Of course, we have the side of civil liberties that defends the video taker.
That's sound good, UNTIL the shit hits the fan and someone gets attacked.
THEN, these same folks demand the cops be proactive and help prevent attacks in advance.

[Howard]

No coach. They are not.

BLM does not hate police. They hate police who treat them unfairly.

As usual. Nuance is lost on you.

You're either with or against in your mind, but that's not how the world works. Adults that have the ability to reason and think for themselves don't think like that.

Ok, it's reasonable to assume that some BLM members support and respect good cops.
The problem is that I don't see or hear too much support of  the "good cops" from any BLM rally or speeches.
Maybe I missed the rally they had in support of them?

[The Ugly]

When it comes to fairness and equality it is about how they feel they are treated.

It's like systematic racism in America. You feel it's happening, but no one says it. Then you look at the history of documents once they are released and you find what you felt was happening was definitely happening all along.

Yes. Polls count in this scenario.

Also, statistics on imprisonment rates for, as I say again, non violent crimes are much higher for black people than white people. I've gone over that numerous times in threads here, but those are ignored.

So you believe those numbers are false and made up, or do they just not count because you don't want them to?

There are factual measures that correlate the "feeling" that people have.

No one cares though, at least not those who choose to not care in the first place. Either people see what is there, or they choose not to.

There is no changing anyone's opinion about the matter.

As someone who sees both sides, and has lived in both worlds. I have seen it myself. That's all the proof I really need.

Feelings, then. This is what we're supposed to concern ourselves with, no matter how irrational.

Gotcha.
 

[The Ugly]

While there are certainly people who hate police that may be BLM members.

Saying BLM hates police would be like saying all police hate black people because SOME do.

Or are you saying that all police hate black people as well?

No, sir. BLM says that. Cops are mostly fair, by and large. To the contrary, BLM is hate-based and racist. An aspiring terrorist organization for sure. Fact.

[Yamcha]

[The Ugly]

Shocking.

[SF1900]

No question, that every cop should know the laws they enforce.
I don't think any reasonable person can defend professional ignorance of any law enforcement officer.

BUT, let's get practical for a minute about the world we live in.
I have no idea why this guy feels compelled to video tape the police station and I think he was using a drone?
He's perfectly within his rights to do so, according to the law.

While he's under no obligation to say, it would interesting ( to me) to find out why he wants to do this.
Why?
It's possible that a terrorist could use a similar tactic and cover to launch an attack.
IF that happened everyone would demand to know how it could happen.
The media would delve into an investigation and demand answers.

In my opinion, this cop was just trying to do his job and be proactive.
Of course, we have the side of civil liberties that defends the video taker.
That's sound good, UNTIL the shit hits the fan and someone gets attacked.
THEN, these same folks demand the cops be proactive and help prevent attacks in advance.

Yes, I guess it's entirely plausible that a terrorist may use a similar tactic--fly a drone in order to gather information about a police station. However, that is the price we pay for living in a free society. Will some people use their constitutional rights in bad ways (terrorists video taping an area)? Of course. But, as you know, you can't take away someone's rights because of a few bad apples.

But I am no expert on the law or the constitution (so my above statement may not be correct), hence why I am not a lawyer, judge or police officer.

[Howard]

Yes, I guess it's entirely plausible that a terrorist may use a similar tactic--fly a drone in order to gather information about a police station. However, that is the price we pay for living in a free society. Will some people use their constitutional rights in bad ways (terrorists video taping an area)? Of course. But, as you know, you can't take away someone's rights because of a few bad apples.

But I am no expert on the law or the constitution (so my above statement may not be correct), hence why I am not a lawyer, judge or police officer.

Excellent points and you've stayed on the main crux of the debate:
Civil liberty vs security.

No freedom loving person wants to see a reduction in their personal freedoms and civil rights.
BUT, from a practical stand point, it often happens after a horrific event occurs.
For example, look at the invasive security measures we are required to endure to simply board an airline after the 9/11 attacks. Nobody seems to enjoy it but most understand why and prefer increased security over absolute freedom.

I wonder about the motives of the guy who shot the video of the police station.
I seriously doubt he was a terrorists and seemed quite sane and reasonable.
BUT, it seems to me he was doing it , because he could and wanted to be obnoxious.
I honestly think he was videoing the police station to bother them because he could.
In my opinion, he wasn't promoting civil liberties, he was being an asshole.

[TuHolmes]

Feelings, then. This is what we're supposed to concern ourselves with, no matter how irrational.

Gotcha.
 

Feelings and facts.

Again.

I will reiterate.

Documents have shown that black people were oppressed in regards to loans and the accumulation of property (the number one way people achieve wealth of any sort).

We fight wars because we "feel" that something or someone did something wrong, yet we won't give the same courtesy to those we feel are oppressed in ways in our own backyard.

Seems hypocritical.

The numbers are there. You want to ignore them. That's fine. It's your right. It doesn't make it occur less.

Documents show oppression. You ignore them.

The days of black people being hosed weren't centuries ago. It was 50 years ago. People are still alive who remember it.

Is it as bad as it used to be? Of course not. It's getting better. However, if all white people were treated and profiled like black people, white people would be pissed too.

[SF1900]

Excellent points and you've stayed on the main crux of the debate:
Civil liberty vs security.

No freedom loving person wants to see a reduction in their personal freedoms and civil rights.
BUT, from a practical stand point, it often happens after a horrific event occurs.
For example, look at the invasive security measures we are required to endure to simply board an airline after the 9/11 attacks. Nobody seems to enjoy it but most understand why and prefer increased security over absolute freedom.

I wonder about the motives of the guy who shot the video of the police station.
I seriously doubt he was a terrorists and seemed quite sane and reasonable.
BUT, it seems to me he was doing it , because he could and wanted to be obnoxious.
I honestly think he was videoing the police station to bother them because he could.
In my opinion, he wasn't promoting civil liberties, he was being an asshole.

Most people are willing to give up some rights at the airports because its a minor inconvenience. I mean, how often do most people fly (except business people).

Well, I guess its his right to be an asshole, as long as he is within the boundaries of the law.

[SF1900]

Feelings and facts.

Again.

I will reiterate.

Documents have shown that black people were oppressed in regards to loans and the accumulation of property (the number one way people achieve wealth of any sort).

We fight wars because we "feel" that something or someone did something wrong, yet we won't give the same courtesy to those we feel are oppressed in ways in our own backyard.

Seems hypocritical.

The numbers are there. You want to ignore them. That's fine. It's your right. It doesn't make it occur less.

Documents show oppression. You ignore them.

The days of black people being hosed weren't centuries ago. It was 50 years ago. People are still alive who remember it.

Is it as bad as it used to be? Of course not. It's getting better. However, if all white people were treated and profiled like black people, white people would be pissed too.

Feelings do matter in research. In fact, there are tons of methodological research theories that examine the unique, lived experiences of participants (Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis, Grounded Theory, Focused Observations and Groups, etc). What often becomes most important is when quantitative data (usually considered more "fact-based") confirms the interpretations of qualitative research (the stories and narratives of participants). So, you are correct in the sense that feelings/narratives/stories, are important when considering facts. Hard data (facts) do not often tell the whole story. Some of the strongest research methods use a mixture of qualitative and quantitative measures (of course there some shortcomings to this approach). Thus, feelings matter within the context of appropriate methodology.

[bigmc]

its really easy to pick on the cops

none of you idiots would last five minutes

it takes lawyers five years at university to grasp one aspect of it

yet cops are supposed to know it all

its getting stale all this anti cop shit

[SF1900]

its really easy to pick on the cops

none of you idiots would last five minutes

it takes lawyers five years at university to grasp one aspect of it

yet cops are supposed to know it all

its getting stale all this anti cop shit

Bigmc, this cop didn't know the basic right, which allowed an American to video tape in public. Furthermore, many cops attempt to disarm law abiding citizens from carrying guns, which is also a constitutional right. These rights are both basic constitutional rights. If the general public knows their rights, then cops should. The general public is not filled with lawyers. As I stated 2 pages ago, the order in which professions should know the law is, 1) judges, 2), lawyers, and 3) cops...........then everyone else. So, yes, cops should know the law better than the average citizen, but obviously not better than a lawyer or judge.

And you say the anti-cop stuff is getting stale, well, how do you think the black people feel on getbig about the constant anti-black threads every day? I am sure it's getting stale to them. It's even more prevalent than the anti-cop threads.

[TuHolmes]

its really easy to pick on the cops

none of you idiots would last five minutes

it takes lawyers five years at university to grasp one aspect of it

yet cops are supposed to know it all

its getting stale all this anti cop shit

I don't think it's about knowing it all. If you don't know something, you don't pretend to know it. Right?

I don't hate cops. Not at all. I think that good cops need to call out the bad ones when they are bad and not rally the troops around to protect them.

That's all.

[bigmc]

I don't think it's about knowing it all. If you don't know something, you don't pretend to know it. Right?

I don't hate cops. Not at all. I think that good cops need to call out the bad ones when they are bad and not rally the troops around to protect them.

That's all.

yeah i get that

but people jump all over it every time they fuck up and they start gloating

its distasteful

[240 is Back]

continually... right-wing media will take some random, immature, ignorant statement from some idiot teenager about BLM and repost it for 3 million people to read and shit on.

Remember the days when dumb asses would write in their diaries and maybe rant at the bus stop?   Social media, and the way the media repeats it, suddenly gives global platform to every idiot willing to make a cause look stupid.  

In the old days, if a person had a platform to speak to millions, they had worked hard to build it, and credibility came with it.  Today, we can just search for an idiot looking stupid who hashtags any cause, and he's magically their spokesman and we can have an entire 3 hour Rush Limbaugh segment talking about how much of a moron this kid is.  

[The Abdominal Snoman]

Feelings, then. This is what we're supposed to concern ourselves with, no matter how irrational.

Gotcha.
 

Over 40,000 people in America killed themselves in the year 2014 because of "feelings" they had. And those numbers are growing...Yeah, I think it's time society as a whole takes a look at "feelings" people are having...40,000 people is a massive number. Now imagine if those 40,000 people decided to take some people out before they killed themselves because of the "feelings" their having.

[Howard]

Feelings do matter in research.  Thus, feelings matter within the context of appropriate methodology.

This sums up my feelings on feelings.

[Howard]

Over 40,000 people in America killed themselves in the year 2014 because of "feelings" they had. And those numbers are growing...Yeah, I think it's time society as a whole takes a look at "feelings" people are having...40,000 people is a massive number. Now imagine if those 40,000 people decided to take some people out before they killed themselves because of the "feelings" their having.

Reading that, made me feel sad.

[residue]

its really easy to pick on the cops

none of you idiots would last five minutes

it takes lawyers five years at university to grasp one aspect of it

yet cops are supposed to know it all

its getting stale all this anti cop shit

not know it all, but know basic shit sure. i expect the people enforcing the laws to know rudimentary laws

[The Ugly]

Feelings and facts.

Again.

I will reiterate.

Documents have shown that black people were oppressed in regards to loans and the accumulation of property (the number one way people achieve wealth of any sort).

We fight wars because we "feel" that something or someone did something wrong, yet we won't give the same courtesy to those we feel are oppressed in ways in our own backyard.

Seems hypocritical.

The numbers are there. You want to ignore them. That's fine. It's your right. It doesn't make it occur less.

Documents show oppression. You ignore them.

The days of black people being hosed weren't centuries ago. It was 50 years ago. People are still alive who remember it.

Is it as bad as it used to be? Of course not. It's getting better. However, if all white people were treated and profiled like black people, white people would be pissed too.

U.S. Navy: "Mr. President, Japanese planes just bombed Pearl Harbor. Sunk our ships, destroyed our planes, several hundred presumed dead. Maybe thousands. The place is an inferno."

FDR: "Really? Japs, huh? Wow.... So how do you feel about this, then? Feels sorta wrong to me, no?"

[Howard]

continually... right-wing media will take some random, immature, ignorant statement from some idiot teenager about BLM and repost it for 3 million people to read and shit on.

Remember the days when dumb asses would write in their diaries and maybe rant at the bus stop?   Social media, and the way the media repeats it, suddenly gives global platform to every idiot willing to make a cause look stupid.  

In the old days, if a person had a platform to speak to millions, they had worked hard to build it, and credibility came with it.  Today, we can just search for an idiot looking stupid who hashtags any cause, and he's magically their spokesman and we can have an entire 3 hour Rush Limbaugh segment talking about how much of a moron this kid is.  

That's a relevant point.

BUT, I can't help notice the most passionate, vocal protests of BLM are for people who resist arrest and/or have criminal records.

Look at the famous case involving Micheal Brown in Ferguson , Ms.
The guy just strong arm robbed a clerk , refused to follow the cops instructions and then tried to wrestle away the cops gun.

The guy in Baltimore was a known drug dealer.

The guy in Baton Rouge had a record and refused to get down when the cops came in and told him to.

How do the police enforce the law if someone refuses to comply?
They use force. That rarely looks nice and pretty.

Why don't the BLM protests involve backing blacks wronged by the cops who complied with instructions?

[The Ugly]

Over 40,000 people in America killed themselves in the year 2014 because of "feelings" they had. And those numbers are growing...Yeah, I think it's time society as a whole takes a look at "feelings" people are having...40,000 people is a massive number. Now imagine if those 40,000 people decided to take some people out before they killed themselves because of the "feelings" their having.

What the hell do suicides have to do with whiny SJWs? Let their shrinks sort that shit out.

[240 is Back]

in the old days, if you were a voice on radio or tv, you had a reputation, a portfolio, a resume.  You were an expert whose opinion had enough merit to warrant a slot on the 6:30 national news cycle.  You mattered.

Social media gives every extremist asshat a way to reach millions. And any enemies of that viewpoint can always search hashtags and pluck out a random inbred dropout felon moron, screenshot an ignorant statement he posted to impress some vag, and suddenly "this man speaks for the ____ movement, and he calls for beheadings, arson, and sheep sodomy, obviously what ____ stands for"

I love fox news radio, but they cite these random meaningless idiots every week and give them millions of people to speak to.

[TuHolmes]

U.S. Navy: "Mr. President, Japanese planes just bombed Pearl Harbor. Sunk our ships, destroyed our planes, several hundred presumed dead. Maybe thousands. The place is an inferno."

FDR: "Really? Japs, huh? Wow.... So how do you feel about this, then? Feels sorta wrong to me, no?"

You over simplify.

Revolution. We felt that taxation without representation was wrong.
Civil War. People felt that states should be able to rule themselves. Other states felt the Union was more important than the states.
WW1. We felt that we owed it to our allies to support them.
Iraq 2002. We felt Saddam had WMDs. We felt he was evil. Things of that nature.