Police Officers Are Mostly Parasites

[GwynnInTheHall]

You're missing the point.

Eye for an eye is not a viable solution. White Supremacist cop kills POC. POC kills White Supremacist cop, rinse repeat, rinse repeat and we end up with no one left on either side.

That's not an intelligent plan that solves the problem. It's very short term thinking, and I know you are smarter than that.

Violence isn't solved through more violence, that only escalates.

That's a matter of opinion, not fact. We could sit here and trade examples confirming our bias toward our positions. It's probably best for us to leave it at disparate POVs and move on. Thanks for your input.

[Ken]

That's a matter of opinion, not fact. We could sit here and trade examples confirming our bias toward our positions. It's probably best for us to leave it at disparate POVs and move on. Thanks for your input.

Wait what? It's not opinion, you aren't addressing the problem with your naive suggestion.

If you meet violence with violence, it never stops, each side just keeps killing each other until there are none left under your plan.

How is that a solution to anything?

[GwynnInTheHall]

Wait what? It's not opinion, you aren't addressing the problem with your naive suggestion.

If you meet violence with violence, it never stops, each side just keeps killing each other until there are none left under your plan.

How is that a solution to anything?

Look Ken, we've managed to stay out of each others way for a good bit of time now. Let's keep up the good work.

[Ken]

Look Ken, we've managed to stay out of each others way for a good bit of time now. Let's keep up the good work.

You are missing it, tone isnt coming through how it’s intended. This isn’t a personal attack it’s a disagreement of how your plan can work.

If you invite retaliatory violence how does that ever stop violence? It’s a serious question and an important one if you are taking that stance.

[GwynnInTheHall]

You are missing it, tone isnt coming through how it’s intended. This isn’t a personal attack it’s a disagreement of how your plan can work.

If you invite retaliatory violence how does that ever stop violence? It’s a serious question and an important one if you are taking that stance.

Then please don't call me naïve.

Again, I disagree. If you hurt me and I kill you-{just an example}-It's over. What continues and does not depends on circumstance. It's a fact some respond to warm fuzzies, others to a kick in the ass. Cops know force, the respect force or the threat of it. Why do you think NOTHING has happened to any of the BLM protestors who have been armed while marching? It's not a coincidence. Cops are NOT going to stop their tactics anytime soon, no matter what is said or done--so in the meantime give some of the oppressed some justice and assuage their pain.

You can disagree if you like, but I feel I am right and you won't be changing my mind on this.

[Ken]

Then please don't call me naïve.

Ah, that's where you got hung up - I didn't call YOU naive, I said your suggestion was naive. Arguing the viability of the subject matter is always in play, that's never out of bounds or no one would ever be able to disagree.

Again, I disagree. If you hurt me and I kill you-{just an example}-It's over.

Except it's not over, not at all. Because the only way morality works is if you can apply it to others. If it's okay for you, then you have to say it's okay for others. So you kill me, my family kills you, your family kills someone else in my family, repeat ad naseam and we're all dead and accomplished nothing.

What continues and does not depends on circumstance. It's a fact some respond to warm fuzzies, others to a kick in the ass. Cops know force, the respect force or the threat of it.

So if your brother gets killed, then that's fine, no loss? And if several of my friends, who I know who are good cops get killed that's fine? Just because they are cops. No, that's not okay, and it doesn't solve anything, just as those idiot racists who kill people just because of the color of their skin are NOT okay.

Why do you think NOTHING has happened to any of the BLM protestors who have been armed while marching? It's not a coincidence.

No, that doesn't really make sense, at all, sorry. Gaige Grosskreutz had a gun in fact.

And the excuse for many police shootings has been "because I thought he had a weapon".

No, ambushing cops doesn't decrease violence, that's a false equivalence.

Cops are NOT going to stop their tactics anytime soon, no matter what is said or done

We've seen positive changes. Not nearly enough, but it's not time to give up and shoot each other, it's time to continue on.

--so in the meantime give some of the oppressed some justice and assuage their pain.

That's revenge, not justice. They are not equivalent.

You can disagree if you like, but I feel I am right and you won't be changing my mind on this.

No one was ever trying to change your mind, I'm pointing out the numerous flaws in your argument. You are obviously welcome to keep them despite the many flaws, but that doesn't make them right, as you know. They are very much misguided and frankly wrong. Which has some irony to it since the self-righteous behavior is in response to what you deem wrong. But no one here has ever tried to change you, we've simply pointed out that the self-righteous eye for an eye approach to this isn't going to lead anywhere positive, and in fact does more harm than good.

Again, I support your cause overall obviously, but you're wrong on the response.

[Teenwolf]

I think if 2020 saw as many "innocent" police officers killed as we normally see police kill innocent people in any given year, you'd probably see the police negotiating how they can appease the cop killers. I mean, police can't continue escalating violence endlessly, as we've seen there are limits to what some cities are willing to endure. At some point the mayor or whoever can snap the purse shut and force them to make cuts.

So violence isn't necessarily pointless. In fact, mass violence is often the tipping point to create great change. In Australia and Canada, we've both responded to mass shootings by banning assault weapons. These laws would not have been implemented if not for the massacres that preceded their passing.

[Ken]

I think if 2020 saw as many "innocent" police officers killed as we normally see police kill innocent people in any given year, you'd probably see the police negotiating how they can appease the cop killers. I mean, police can't continue escalating violence endlessly, as we've seen there are limits to what some cities are willing to endure. At some point the mayor or whoever can snap the purse shut and force them to make cuts.

You think so? After 5 officers were shot in 2016 in Dallas things have been better? Not seeing it.

So violence isn't necessarily pointless. In fact, mass violence is often the tipping point to create great change. In Australia and Canada, we've both responded to mass shootings by banning assault weapons. These laws would not have been implemented if not for the massacres that preceded their passing.

Not sure that's the best analogy, there have been record numbers of mass shootings in the US and it seems to only escalate.

[Teenwolf]

You think so? After 5 officers were shot in 2016 in Dallas things have been better? Not seeing it.



Not sure that's the best analogy, there have been record numbers of mass shootings in the US and it seems to only escalate.

Ken, you misrepresent what I just said. I said "as many police officers killed as we normally see police kill innocent people" You think all police in America only kill 5 innocent people per year? Let me be more specific, if 1000 officers were killed, do you think it would lead to zero reform? We saw the mass outpouring of sympathy for 5 officers killed (my town had a coffee shop respond by giving all LEO's FREE COOKIES after Dallas, and I'm not even residing in your broken shithole country). Imagine the public response to 1000 officers being killed. Would the public seek to increase violence... against themselves? You think police would continue to escalate violence without instead thinking maybe instead of defending themselves, they could DEFUND themselves, as those who seek to harm them are demanding, and lower the level of danger they face? You think NOT ONE police authority would decide to listen to that level of public pressure?

I'm not 100% sure of what would happen if violence escalated beyond proportions we can currently fathom. But neither can you say with any certainty that violence only leads to more violence.

[DMT]

Ken, you misrepresent what I just said. I said "as many police officers killed as we normally see police kill innocent people" You think all police in America only kill 5 innocent people per year? Let me be more specific, if 1000 officers were killed, do you think it would lead to zero reform? We saw the mass outpouring of sympathy for 5 officers killed (my town had a coffee shop respond by giving all LEO's FREE COOKIES after Dallas, and I'm not even residing in your broken shithole country). Imagine the public response to 1000 officers being killed. Would the public seek to increase violence... against themselves? You think police would continue to escalate violence without instead thinking maybe instead of defending themselves, they could DEFUND themselves, as those who seek to harm them are demanding, and lower the level of danger they face? You think NOT ONE police authority would decide to listen to that level of public pressure?

I'm not 100% sure of what would happen if violence escalated beyond proportions we can currently fathom. But neither can you say with any certainty that violence only leads to more violence.

Yep, just like we stopped invading and killing people in the Middle East after 9/11. The only violence that doesn't lead to "more" violence is annihilation like WW2. And the more is obviously in quotes for a reason. You guys are honestly totally delusional if you think attacking random cops is going to reduce violence. It's totally illogical.

Now, that doesn't mean that I think the current system is working or defensible in any sense. It's absolutely appalling that our justice system is so geared toward protecting what is obviously a very corrupt profession. I know this isn't a popular opinion, but I hate cops, all of them, and have since a young. There were no cops among my family or family friends to act as positive role models. I've encountered a few who weren't complete douchebag assholes, but most were. So, we are in agreement that significant reform is absolutely required. But that reform will go nowhere if violent attacks against cops sharply increase. To pretend otherwise is ridiculous.

[Teenwolf]

Yep, just like we stopped invading and killing people in the Middle East after 9/11. The only violence that doesn't lead to "more" violence is annihilation like WW2. And the more is obviously in quotes for a reason. You guys are honestly totally delusional if you think attacking random cops is going to reduce violence. It's totally illogical.

Now, that doesn't mean that I think the current system is working or defensible in any sense. It's absolutely appalling that our justice system is so geared toward protecting what is obviously a very corrupt profession. I know this isn't a popular opinion, but I hate cops, all of them, and have since a young. There were no cops among my family or family friends to act as positive role models. I've encountered a few who weren't complete douchebag assholes, but most were. So, we are in agreement that significant reform is absolutely required. But that reform will go nowhere if violent attacks against cops sharply increase. To pretend otherwise is ridiculous.

Its such an indictment of America that you can't even imagine your country taking the same actions to prevent massacres that other countries do. I understand your perspective after your country refused to respond to Sandy Hook and all the other massacres. Its just really sad.

Again, I'm not advocating for violence against police. What I'm saying is, if 5 Dallas cops getting shot resulted in Canadian coffee shops giving cops free cookies, what would the ripple effect be from 1000 cops being killed on the job? I cannot say for sure, and neither can you. Pretending you know exactly how that would play out, that seems ridiculous to me.

Police in Calgary voluntarily cut their own budgets to comply with the will of the people, and we didn't even have to kill any cops. I'm not dreaming anything, I'm watching changes happen in real time when enough public pressure is applied. It seems there is no amount of public pressure to force US cops to de-militarize and defund. But you haven't seen the pressure that results from 1000 dead cops, so don't pretend you know exactly how it would play out. Couldn't possibly be worse than the results of peaceful protest where the right wing rallies behind those who murder protestors. How could anything be worse than the status quo, where there exists an illusion of lawfulness being upheld and those abused by police are spat on by both the left and the right? Biden wants to expand police funding and calls protestors anarchists, so he fucking sucks on the issue. There is nothing to hold onto but the violence in the streets leading to change. If cops are killed without cause, thats bad, but if their deaths lead to police adopting alternative policies, thats good. Seems like simple math to me.

[Ken]

Ken, you misrepresent what I just said. I said "as many police officers killed as we normally see police kill innocent people" You think all police in America only kill 5 innocent people per year?

No you misunderstood. The 1000 has never happened obviously, but 5 have in Dallas which is a reasonable comparison on a smaller scale and Dallas didn't change (if you think it did, talk to Botham Jean)

Let me be more specific, if 1000 officers were killed, do you think it would lead to zero reform?

The idea of killing 1000 officers is gross.

We saw the mass outpouring of sympathy for 5 officers killed (my town had a coffee shop respond by giving all LEO's FREE COOKIES after Dallas

So did it work? All these people respond, did that violence work? What did it solve?

, and I'm not even residing in your broken shithole country). Imagine the public response to 1000 officers being killed.

If I try to imagine that, I can only imagine the hate and anger that would bring - we see it today.

Would the public seek to increase violence... against themselves?

Sorry that makes no sense.

You think police would continue to escalate violence without instead thinking maybe instead of defending themselves

You don't see that happening now? Every time the police shoot someone the immediate feedback is that they were defending themselves so they shot first and asked questions later. You know this.

, they could DEFUND themselves, as those who seek to harm them are demanding, and lower the level of danger they face?

If you think they would just defund themselves then you haven't been paying attention at all to the public conversation.

You think NOT ONE police authority would decide to listen to that level of public pressure?

To pressure sure, to violence, no absolutely not. They'd arm themselves more and shoot even quicker.

I'm not 100% sure of what would happen if violence escalated beyond proportions we can currently fathom. But neither can you say with any certainty that violence only leads to more violence.

You aren't sure what happens, but hell lets just kill 1000 people. Great idea. Genius I tell you.

[Sour Masher]

These perspectives on the left advocating for violence to fight violence is a good reminder that the path to hell is paved with good intentions, and it isn't just the right that believes such things. Convictions fueled by righteousness and the firm belief that bad acts are justified by noble ends is a story as old as history. We see it in every horror humanity has ever committed.

[Teenwolf]

No you misunderstood. The 1000 has never happened obviously, but 5 have in Dallas which is a reasonable comparison on a smaller scale and Dallas didn't change (if you think it did, talk to Botham Jean)



The idea of killing 1000 officers is gross.



So did it work? All these people respond, did that violence work? What did it solve?




If I try to imagine that, I can only imagine the hate and anger that would bring - we see it today.



Sorry that makes no sense.




You don't see that happening now? Every time the police shoot someone the immediate feedback is that they were defending themselves so they shot first and asked questions later. You know this.




If you think they would just defund themselves then you haven't been paying attention at all to the public conversation.




To pressure sure, to violence, no absolutely not. They'd arm themselves more and shoot even quicker.




You aren't sure what happens, but hell lets just kill 1000 people. Great idea. Genius I tell you.

You are such a joke. You can only win an argument by misrepresenting what I've said. If you want to devate what I've actually said, I'm happy to. If you want to make shit up and then display how you're a better and holier person, go for it.

You literally took a quote of mine and cut it in mid-sentence, then critiqued each half of my statement individually. You are such a fucking dishonest debater.

Where did I say "let's just kill 1000 people"? Why would anybody debate someone like you?

"Genius, genius I tell you" as a response to something I didn't fucking say!

[Teenwolf]

These perspectives on the left advocating for violence to fight violence is a good reminder that the path to hell is paved with good intentions, and it isn't just the right that believes such things. Convictions fueled by righteousness and the firm belief that bad acts are justified by noble ends is a story as old as history. We see it in every horror humanity has ever committed.

Why am I unable to hold both positions, abhorring violence while welcoming positive repurcussions from it? Saying "violence only leads to more violence" runs counter to the massacres that resulted in assault weapons bans. The bans would not have happened without the massacre, and i can still celebrate the ban while mourning the tragedy.