- Joined
- Oct 12, 2009
- Messages
- 23,909
- Reaction score
- 11,003
- Location
- New Jersey
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
US News is right wing?
I really don't care, you are free to live in delusion all you want. *shrug*
Pants On Fire: PolitiFact Tries To Hide That It Rated 'True' in 2008 Obamacare's 'Keep Your Health Plan' Promise - Forbes
But you keep livin the dream man. /facepalm
Forbes said:PolitiFact rarely troubles itself with evaluating actual facts, instead considering itself a kind of super-objective think tank that can omnisciently predict the future.
There’s nothing wrong with trying to assign realism to the predictions about the future that politicians make. But that’s not fact-checking. It’s prediction-checking. And that is why PolitiFact’s very name is itself a “Pants on Fire” lie; it should instead be called “PolitiPrediction.” But that wouldn’t provide as much opportunity for self-righteous preening.
this story just proves a little theory I've been working on: If you fight with a policeman and will probably end up dead
95% chance the cop is acquitted, unless the Feds get involved.
You can't deprive yourself of human qualities. It's an action applied on to someone else just like humanizing.
That is pathetically wrong, as usual.
There absolutely was no imminent threat to the cop. When you are fleeing with your back to a gun, you are at your most vulnerable.
The cop had no reason to shoot him.
Like I said to Stonewall, that may be the case, but if I had to guess I'd say that less than 50% of shots fired hit their targets, that means there are a lot of HP's flying around....
Here is an excerpt that says that NY City Police hit their target 34% of the time....
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/08/nyregion/08nypd.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
So I'm not sure that the 66% of HP's that missed make the world a safer place....
I'm not dramitizing it. HP's cause more damage than FMJ's. That's why there is an agreement not to use them in war, but we use them on our own civilians. Just pointing it out.
I think manslaughter should be what the officer is convicted of. The number of years he has to sit in jail is for others to decide, not me.
It is that same crowd who supported Michael Dunn for shooting into a car of teens and then running away.
Always wrong. All I can say is, Mr Dunn you have a new cell mate.
Here's one for thought. The police officer does not appear to be angry at all. You would almost expect him to be so mad he would be swearing at the guy. Wouldn't surpize me if his attorneys demand a mental evaluation. His demeanor almost reminds me of robcop.
They are "more likely" to kill a bystander. That is your argument? Never mind that the risk will be greater with a perfect shot? That an fmj will go through more and create more bystanders? Even on the other side of a wall? Seriously?
The only logical round is HP. It stops. Maybe not fast, but faster than an fmj.
Of course there is the cop script about what to write in the police report so you can get away with murder. I was in fear for my life.
The second thing I notice about these police shootings is that they shoot way too many rounds. It seems to part of the police "script" that if you have to shoot someone, be sure he's DEAD so there is only ONE version of what happened before the grand jury. Dead men can't testify against you.
In this case, the victim was never a threat, but he certainly didn't need to be fired at 8 times. How many police shooting victims survive the shooting?
It's despicable.
No my argument is that 66% of HP's miss their target, which means that bystanders that are hit are injured more grievously then they would have if hit with FMJ.
No my argument is that 66% of HP's miss their target, which means that bystanders that are hit are injured more grievously then they would have if hit with FMJ.
Look, this isn't a point I really want to stand on. It might be the case that it's the difference between getting hit by a car and a bus, but my understanding is that FMJ's cause less damage than do HP's and with 66% or more (LA county police miss 73% of their shots fired). Add to that the undocumented numbers of people shot on purpose who were innocent, I'm saying it's worth having a conversation about how badly we want the bullets we use to harm the people we shoot. Again, not that I disagree with you about the millitary, but the fact is, we use FMJ's in war because the don't cause the same kind of damage that HP's do, but we use them on our own people in situations where the police often don't have enough information to make decisions.
The government doesn't keep handy statistics about the number of peoples who's homes are raided by mistake, the number of people that are shot by bullets that miss their targets, the number of people shot because they looked like someone else......But here is a site of alleged accidental incedents that often involve shootings.
https://the7thpwr.wordpress.com/accidental-police-shootings/
If he has a wife and kids, they won't.I hope he's convicted of murder, and im sure his family will file a civil suit so they will get his house:lamo, not to mention he will probably go broke with legal fees, this POS COPS life is pretty much ruined!!:applaud..
The witness made a very peculiar statement that would not have been made had the suspect not had the taser.
“I remember the police [officer] had control of the situation,” he said. “He had control of Scott. And Scott was trying just to get away from the Taser.
But like I said, he never used the Taser against the cop.”
Man who filmed S.C. police shooting: Maybe God ‘put me there for some reason’ - The Washington Post
That is an indication that he had the taser but didn't use it.
And the Officer never said he did used it either. Only that he took it.
That's certainly how it looks on the video. If it was the victim's wallet or some other personal possession, do you think Officer Slager would have gone back to retrieve it? And even if he did, why would he pick it up after dropping it next to the victim's body? In fact, why would the officer pick up anything from the crime scene except his weapon? And in so doing, why would he drop it next to the victim's body and then subsequently pick it back up later? There's only one reason a cop would do something like that: To plant evidence. But I think Officer Slager was either talked out of going through with it once the other cop came on the scene OR he realized he was being filmed and quickly changed his mind. Either way, he tampered with evidence on the scene and that alone hurts his credibility as to what actually happened.You are speaking nonsense.
Yes his statement is evidence and no it is not a blatant lie. That is a ridiculously false claim.
And what do you think he did with this taser?
Are you assuming like everyone else that he picked it up and then dropped it by the suspect to set the suspect up?
If that is the case, then why can he be seen picking it up again and placing it in his utility belt? Obviously it wouldn't be to plant anything. Duh!
If you knew procedure, he was securing his weapon just as he called to have is car secured.
I can keep going if you want, but I think you are going to dismiss anything that doesn't fit your left agendad world view.
read the "analysis"
PolitiFact.com - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"University of Minnesota political science professor Eric Ostermeier did an analysis of 511 selected PolitiFact stories issued from January 2010 through January 2011. He said "PolitiFact has generally devoted an equal amount of time analyzing Republicans (191 statements, 50.4 percent) as they have Democrats (179 stories, 47.2 percent)..." Republican officeholders were considered by Politifact to have made substantially more "false" or "pants on fire" statements than their Democratic counterparts. Of 98 statements PolitiFact judged "false" or "pants on fire" from partisan political figures, 74 came from Republicans (76 percent) compared to 22 from Democrats (22 percent) during the selected period reviewed. Ostermeier concluded "By levying 23 Pants on Fire ratings to Republicans over the past year compared to just 4 to Democrats, it appears the sport of choice is game hunting - and the game is elephants."[24] The study was criticized by PolitiFact editor Bill Adair and the MinnPost, with Adair responding, "Eric Ostermeier's study is particularly timely because we've heard a lot of charges this week that we are biased — from liberals ... So we're accustomed to hearing strong reactions from people on both ends of the political spectrum. We are a news organization and we choose which facts to check based on news judgment.[25] A writer with the left-leaning magazine The Nation argued that findings like this are a reflection of "fact-checkers simply doing their job... Republicans today just happen to be more egregiously wrong...."[26] A writer with the right-leaning Human Events claimed that after looking at Politifact's work on a case by case basis a pattern emerged whereby Politifact critiqued straw man claims; that is, "dismissed the speaker’s claim, made up a different claim and checked that instead." The conservative magazine noted Politifact's use of language such as "[although the speaker] used [a specific] phrase... in his claim, [it] could fairly be interpreted to mean [something more general that is false]..." Human Events cited Bryan White's PolitiFactBias blog to state that "from the end of that partnership [with the Congressional Quarterly] to the end of 2011, the national PolitiFact operation has issued 119 Pants on Fire ratings for Republican or conservative claims, and only 13 for liberal or Democratic claims".[27]"
but you probably really believe them.
NYPD is s horrid example, as their lack of accuracy has become legendary!
I referred to over-penetration, not misses - big difference.
The only open racism I've ever seen from the NYPD as a matter of policy was thier "We aint hirin whites" when I went for a job. lol
And they have much less chance of penetrating their target and harming innocent bystanders. I prefer the philosophy that it's better to do real harm to suspects (since the bar for lethal force is a high one, despite the POS cop in this OP) than to do incidental harm to innocent people in the vicinity.
Again, it is a life or death situation...so death is the presumed outcome when *lethal* force is warranted.
What percent of FMJs miss? Are you claiming that the type of bullet affects accuracy? And how much is the secondary damage to bystanders by fragmented bullets?
Sure, and I agree, the problem is, I was referring to the misses. NYC miss rate of 66% is pretty representative of the national miss rate for all the statistics I can find.
To risk not getting crucified in the public, risking their careers and to prevent their towns from being looted and set on-fire, chiefs will have a propensity to fire or arrest officers before all the facts are known.
Military probably uses FMJs because they're cheaper.
No idea if that's true but it wouldnt surprise me.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?