• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme court ruling on police

Simpletruther said:
Um, goofy tribal nonsense.
Click to expand...
Defensive response.
It's simple. You cry about race baiting. Yet ANY discussion ever held on here about George Floyd or Tamir Rice or Breonna Taylor or any of the police shootings of black people is automatically defended and excused away by the same crop of people.
NO ONE is being fooled. Those of us who live in a normal world do not see these kinds of executions by police of white people.
Racism is an ugly reality. People who pretend NOT to hold racist views but constantly cry fowl when racist actions by police is exposed, are in fact exposing themselves.
You can play your defensive attitude for those who share your attitudes, but this shooting probably would NOT have happened if the driver had been white.
I am of German descent, my parents were German, and when I hear a German here or there claim 6 million Jews weren't gassed during the Nazi regime, I know where their head is at.
Same with people who claim that black people aren't unfairly targeted by police, I know where their head is at. It becomes even MORE clear where their head is at when they get VERY defensive.
 
anatta said:
terrible decision in terms of the blizzard of lawsuits likely over "events leading upto" . street cops have to make split second decisions.
Cops are gonna need immunity then, or they will be frozen trying to process "events leading upto" evaluations in real time
Click to expand...
Or they could, you know, do the right thing even in tough situations.

Whatever happened to that ole "personal responsibility" thing that Republicans lied about for years? Is that only for poor people in tents or handicapped people on Medicaid?

Plus, Trump loves pardoning criminals. He's got their back.
 
anatta said:
well SCOTUS gave POTUS immunity for anything done in the course of presidential duties - cops should get the same treatment in that they really can't be thinking of liability in an imminent threat situation
Click to expand...
You're using a bad decision to support a worse decision.

We live in a society based on laws and the fair application of laws. The idea that anyone is above the law kind of throws that out of the window.
 
SNOWFLAKE said:
Defensive response.
It's simple. You cry about race baiting. Yet ANY discussion ever held on here about George Floyd or Tamir Rice or Breonna Taylor or any of the police shootings of black people is automatically defended and excused away by the same crop of people.
NO ONE is being fooled. Those of us who live in a normal world do not see these kinds of executions by police of white people.
Racism is an ugly reality. People who pretend NOT to hold racist views but constantly cry fowl when racist actions by police is exposed, are in fact exposing themselves.
You can play your defensive attitude for those who share your attitudes, but this shooting probably would NOT have happened if the driver had been white.
I am of German descent, my parents were German, and when I hear a German here or there claim 6 million Jews weren't gassed during the Nazi regime, I know where their head is at.
Same with people who claim that black people aren't unfairly targeted by police, I know where their head is at. It becomes even MORE clear where their head is at when they get VERY defensive.
Click to expand...
Nonsense.

How about you quoting me defending this cop.
 
Jezcoe said:
I don't mind cops making traffic stops.

They shouldn't use the traffic stops to try to fish for more charges.
Click to expand...
a lot of criminals other then traffic violations are caught that way. Cops are gonna cop. its what they do
 
SNOWFLAKE said:
Defensive response.
It's simple. You cry about race baiting. Yet ANY discussion ever held on here about George Floyd or Tamir Rice or Breonna Taylor or any of the police shootings of black people is automatically defended and excused away by the same crop of people.
NO ONE is being fooled. Those of us who live in a normal world do not see these kinds of executions by police of white people.
Racism is an ugly reality. People who pretend NOT to hold racist views but constantly cry fowl when racist actions by police is exposed, are in fact exposing themselves.
You can play your defensive attitude for those who share your attitudes, but this shooting probably would NOT have happened if the driver had been white.
I am of German descent, my parents were German, and when I hear a German here or there claim 6 million Jews weren't gassed during the Nazi regime, I know where their head is at.
Same with people who claim that black people aren't unfairly targeted by police, I know where their head is at. It becomes even MORE clear where their head is at when they get VERY defensive.
Click to expand...

What a jump. From reckless driving to whatever that is.
 
Simpletruther said:
https://www.police1.com/use-of-forc...ope-for-excessive-force-claims-against-police

A unanimous decision that hopefully we all can get behind.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Some context would have been nice.
www.scotusblog.com

Supreme Court revives excessive force suit against officer in deadly Houston-area traffic stop

The Supreme Court on Thursday revived a lawsuit filed by the mother of a Texas man who was shot and killed during a traffic stop by a police officer on […]
www.scotusblog.com www.scotusblog.com
 
anatta said:
terrible decision in terms of the blizzard of lawsuits likely over "events leading upto" . street cops have to make split second decisions.
Cops are gonna need immunity then, or they will be frozen trying to process "events leading upto" evaluations in real time
Click to expand...

UK police dont have imunity from prosecution and are still able to do the job just fine.
I don't see a problem with them having to follow rules about how they treat the public.
 
Simpletruther said:
If a police is citing you and you move forward it is reckless.
Click to expand...

Just how scared of the public are you that you can claim simply moving towards an officer is a threat?
What next, is breathing a threat?
 
Peter said:
UK police dont have imunity from prosecution and are still able to do the job just fine.
I don't see a problem with them having to follow rules about how they treat the public.
Click to expand...
its not so much following cut and dried rules as split second life and death decisions. SCOTUS is trying to make sure justice is served by taking into account the totality of the event. but the actual decision is an exigent circumstance - which should be the consideration of the decision
IMHO ( and SCOTUS ruled 9-0 )
 
anatta said:
well SCOTUS gave POTUS immunity for anything done in the course of presidential duties - cops should get the same treatment in that they really can't be thinking of liability in an imminent threat situation
Click to expand...
Yeah, let's give law enforcement a bullshit "I felt threatened" defense for when they over-reach and kill somebody. That will surely work....lmfao
 
Peter said:
Just how scared of the public are you that you can claim simply moving towards an officer is a threat?
What next, is breathing a threat?
Click to expand...
In a car???? Are you serious? That is reckless.
 
If you're so shit scared of the public you think everyone is out to murder you then maybe, just maybe being a cop isn't the job for you.

Perhaps get a job that doesn't involve interactions with the public?
 
anatta said:
terrible decision in terms of the blizzard of lawsuits likely over "events leading upto" . street cops have to make split second decisions.
Cops are gonna need immunity then, or they will be frozen trying to process "events leading upto" evaluations in real time
Click to expand...

Or we could always improve officer training and hold them to higher standards. Right now, it takes more hours of training to become a cosmetologists than a cop.

It’s weird how cops in the rest of the developed world somehow manage.
 
anatta said:
terrible decision in terms of the blizzard of lawsuits likely over "events leading upto" . street cops have to make split second decisions.
Cops are gonna need immunity then, or they will be frozen trying to process "events leading upto" evaluations in real time
Click to expand...
Cops should be held to a higher standard than everyone else not a lower one. What do you
suppose would have happened if a citizen did what the cop did?

The reasonably scared cop rule is a piece dog shit. It needs to go away.

And btw cops are generally indemnified by their
employers. The city pays the suit not the cop. That needs to change too.
 
Peter said:
UK police dont have imunity from prosecution and are still able to do the job just fine.
I don't see a problem with them having to follow rules about how they treat the public.
Click to expand...

Police in the US don't have immunity from prosecution either.
 
Well since I am usually accused of hating anything the Right does, I guess I'll say I agree. The totality of the events is important for context to understand and properly judge the events. If you are charged with breaking the window of a car, breaking and entering, and they disallow you to explain that there was a Child in the Car and it was nearly a hundred degrees outside. You would be furious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom