Police Officers Are Mostly Parasites

[Teenwolf]

All those on the left in the "this Proud Boy deserved to die for pepper spraying someone" camp, will you have the same stance if/when an Antifa protester pepper sprays a cop or a right-wing marcher, or throws a bottle or rock at one and gets shot and killed? I'd hope so. Your position seems clear--anyone who pepper sprays you without cause other than the hate they feel for you deserves to be killed. I'm still not clear if you all feel that if that PB had not been shot if it would be just if the state later executed him for his crimes, and I'm still not clear on why you'd think he should be killed at the time of the offense but not later once a court convicted him. Unless, again, any of you are claiming this security guy was in fear for his life. But that doesn't seem to be the claim here. It is just that this guy was a scumbag who pepper sprayed a guy and he got shot and killed for it, and that is the right response when someone pepper sprays you or harms you wrongly in some other non-lethal way. If so, I'm just not sure you guys are thinking through that line of reasoning. You may not shed tears for this Proud Boy, but your stance that lethal responses are appropriate for non-lethal attacks leave open the justification for many killings like this of many people you would have more sympathy for.

Here's my thinking. If the security guard responded by firing multiple rounds, that would be executing a lethal response. Firing one shot is different. Its putting down a threat that is initiating violence, and if the person initiating the violence dies, its kind of on them. There are variables you are claiming to know that cannot be known. Was the PB going to stop escalating violence after the slap and bear mace? Would he stop before killing someone? It was unprovoked, so we cannot know the intended threshold the provocateur of violence was pushing towards. Was the security guard attempting to murder the PB, or stop the violence being directed at him from a hostile stranger?

The other factor is that the PB in question was a giant hulk of a man. The broad face slap from him would have equated a closed fist right hook from someone else. It would have done some damage, maybe a concussion. That doesn't equate a death sentence, but he wasn't given one. He was shot once to stop his actions, and he died in the process of preventing his causing more violence.

I would always prefer a non lethal action to prevent death, but I don't see any more reasonable response here that would have more assuredly put down the threat and also protected his life.

[chancellor]

Who said anything about not fighting back? I'm talking about proportionate response and the tremendous weight of taking a life. I'm not defending the man himself, I'm defending the concept that life has tremendous value and should only be taken when there is no other choice.

Life has tremendous value; where I differ is "no other choice". Any individual - left or right - deserves the right of self-defense against an unprovoked, vicious attack of any sort. Your implication is the act of self-defense must use some level of high-level judgement to determine if lethal force can be applied. I think that's foolish. Any attack that's intended to severely injure, incapacitate, or kill another individual can and should be met with any level of force necessary. Incapacitation can lead to fates many would consider worse than death.

To your logic, I should allow a rapist to proceed since that's not attacking someone with the intent to take their life. Sorry, I'd put a bullet in them, too.

[Gregg]

Man, all you guys don't put much value on life, do you? That man seemed like a scumbag and he clearly crossed a line for which a proportionate response would have been a major beat down. But instead, he is dead. His life is over. Gone. There have been lots of horrible people, lots of WS's and Neo-Nazi's who have reformed and done a lot of good in the world. Sure, it was a hell of a long shot that he would have been one of them, but it could have happened. But you guys think it is justice that he is dead? How is that equitable to the crimes he committed?

Would any one of you sentence someone to death for those crimes? If not, why are you totally fine with him being killed for them in the street? Are any of you claiming that security guard actually feared for his life? Or do all of you really agree that non-lethal attacks warrant lethal responses? I'm sure all the LEOs that shoot protesters that throw bottles at them and the heavily armed Israeli soldiers that shoot Palestinians doing the same would agree with you. Do you not think that cops get punched, spit on, bitten? Do you not think correctional officers get piss and shit and blood and spit thrown at them? Just so we are clear here, you all think those cops are in the right for killing the people that do that to them. I know how mad I'd be if someone did that to me, and if someone who does that gets beaten into three months of rehab, I'm not donating to their gofundme, but ending another person's life is just a line I do not think should be crossed unless you think your life is in danger, and the correctional officer getting piss and shit and blood and spit thrown at him has more logical reason to fear for his life and long term well being (disease) than someone getting bitch slapped and maced does.

You all have an interesting one here. I find myself both agreeing and disagreeing with points made by each side.

If a man my size yells at me I am going to kill you. I probably should let that go. If the same man has a knife and says I am going to kill you. I should probably shoot him unless I can run away.

If a giant hulking man says I am going to kill you I should probably also shoot him...unless I can run away.

Unfortunately cases and discussions like this make me want to get my conceal and carry rather than not.

[Sour Masher]

I would always prefer a non lethal action to prevent death, but I don't see any more reasonable response here that would have more assuredly put down the threat and also protected his life.

And this is why we would be better off if we were not all carrying lethal weapons--if all you have is a gun to stop an attack, you are going to use it and someone will end up dead. The PB brought bear mace to a gun fight and got killed. I'm sure his side will learn from that and bring the guns again next time.

[Sour Masher]

To your logic, I should allow a rapist to proceed since that's not attacking someone with the intent to take their life. Sorry, I'd put a bullet in them, too.

You better hope you are a good shot so you don't kill the victim too. What I assume you would do would be to command the rapist off the victim first and if he did not comply, you'd shoot him. If he did comply, shooting him would be murder, I believe, in most societies. Would I feel bad for the guy you murdered? Nope, not at all. But wouldn't it still be murder? I think you are in law. I'm open to being schooled on this.

According the the police report and eye-witness accounts, Keltner was arguing with protesters and inexplicably decided to disengage them and engage the guy who was armed and not even involved in the shouting. He open hand struck Dollof, then Dolloff pulled his gun and shot while Keltner discharged his bear mace simultaneously with the shot (from listening to the video, I hear the spray go off half a second before the shot, so the mace was sprayed first). All of this occurred within seconds:

"Two seconds after Mr. Keltner struck Mr. Dolloff, Mr. Keltner was shot and splayed on the pavement." Is the quote from the eye witness who took the photos. I will move from the ethics, which we can't seem to agree on, to the legal. Is Dolloff in any jeopardy for prosecution? It seems like it might come down to--was the shot a retaliation for the slap, or a response to the bear mace being pulled and sprayed? Is it legal to shoot someone who is macing you? I don't know.


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/12/b...-shooting.html

[Teenwolf]

And this is why we would be better off if we were not all carrying lethal weapons--if all you have is a gun to stop an attack, you are going to use it and someone will end up dead. The PB brought bear mace to a gun fight and got killed. I'm sure his side will learn from that and bring the guns again next time.

You say this as though the PB was unjustly physically harmed. He wasn't. The lesson isn't bring more weapons. The lesson is don't start shit.

If any Antifa member was a hulking mass of a man, approached a white nationalist at a rally, smacked him into tomorrow and bear maced him without physical provocation, they should know it could have lethal consequences. The difference is Antifa are non-violent, they would never instigate in these ways.

If the only danger is against those who initiate violence, protestors are safe. Breaking windows and looting doesn't count as violence, its civil disobedience. Even that is mostly done by right wingers looking for escalation and to de-legitimize the cause. So we're safe.

[Sour Masher]

You say this as though the PB was unjustly physically harmed. He wasn't. The lesson isn't bring more weapons. The lesson is don't start shit.

Right, and I'm sure PB's will take that to be the lesson. Actually, maybe you are right, I really don't know. Bullies are often cowards, so I am sure this will give some of them pause. It may also embolden some others to escalate.

My fear is that it could lead to baiting behavior to justify murders. Here is an example: I teach at a school that experienced racial tension last year that made national news. Trump spoke about it, bringing the right-wing students to his rallies and praise them. They released video of POC on my campus acting in embarrassing ways--shouting things that made them look bad (the video was released the same day, edited, making me think, that was their intent all along). A large group of POC intimidating a small group of white students. That was the narrative. The video that was edited and released and garnered thousands of comments that mostly agreed the POC were in the wrong. And based on the video, I understood why. It was cringe worthy.

But the other side of it, though, what was not in the video, that was purposefully edited out of the video, was the right-wing group had put up pro-gun signs on the day of a school shooting, and seemed to be baiting students who passed by to get responses. And while taking videos of the crowd, they were smiling and saying racism wasn't real. And a bunch of young POC got really pissed at that and said things they should not have and got a lot of blow back for it. It did not escalate to violence, but it got close. I could easily have seen one of those students striking one of the right-wing trolls, if they had started calling them n-word, or gotten more extreme with the baiting. And then, would the right-wing student been allowed to just shoot the puncher? After all, it was a large crowd of POC and just a few right-wing students who could claim they were fearful of the "mob." (BTW, once the campus police showed up, one of the right wing girls went from smirking calmly at the anger she was causing with her comments and still baiting while holding a camera, to shaking and tears, telling the officer she needed protection once she saw him, it was like a light switch). If so, don't you see this kind of baiting becoming a tactic? Use words to get you physically attacked, shoot and kill, rinse and repeat.

That is basically what happened with Rittenhouse. He put himself out there looking for someone to confront him, and when someone did, he shot and killed. It did not need to happen. It should not have happened.

[chancellor]

According the the police report and eye-witness accounts, Keltner was arguing with protesters and inexplicably decided to disengage them and engage the guy who was armed and not even involved in the shouting. He open hand struck Dollof, then Dolloff pulled his gun and shot while Keltner discharged his bear mace simultaneously with the shot (from listening to the video, I hear the spray go off half a second before the shot, so the mace was sprayed first). All of this occurred within seconds:

"Two seconds after Mr. Keltner struck Mr. Dolloff, Mr. Keltner was shot and splayed on the pavement." Is the quote from the eye witness who took the photos. I will move from the ethics, which we can't seem to agree on, to the legal. Is Dolloff in any jeopardy for prosecution? It seems like it might come down to--was the shot a retaliation for the slap, or a response to the bear mace being pulled and sprayed? Is it legal to shoot someone who is macing you? I don't know.

It's highly likely he'd be charged had he shot the individual in response to an open hand attack (i.e, being slapped). That would fail the "proportional response" test most states have for lethal self-defense. It is highly unlikely he'd be charged after being hit and maced in an unprovoked attack. It is possible a DA would charge him for failing the "proportional response" test, but I doubt it.

[Teenwolf]

Right, and I'm sure PB's will take that to be the lesson. Actually, maybe you are right, I really don't know. Bullies are often cowards, so I am sure this will give some of them pause. It may also embolden some others to escalate.

My fear is that it could lead to baiting behavior to justify murders. Here is an example: I teach at a school that experienced racial tension last year that made national news. Trump spoke about it, bringing the right-wing students to his rallies and praise them. They released video of POC on my campus acting in embarrassing ways--shouting things that made them look bad (the video was released the same day, edited, making me think, that was their intent all along). A large group of POC intimidating a small group of white students. That was the narrative. The video that was edited and released and garnered thousands of comments that mostly agreed the POC were in the wrong. And based on the video, I understood why. It was cringe worthy.

But the other side of it, though, what was not in the video, that was purposefully edited out of the video, was the right-wing group had put up pro-gun signs on the day of a school shooting, and seemed to be baiting students who passed by to get responses. And while taking videos of the crowd, they were smiling and saying racism wasn't real. And a bunch of young POC got really pissed at that and said things they should not have and got a lot of blow back for it. It did not escalate to violence, but it got close. I could easily have seen one of those students striking one of the right-wing trolls, if they had started calling them n-word, or gotten more extreme with the baiting. And then, would the right-wing student been allowed to just shoot the puncher? After all, it was a large crowd of POC and just a few right-wing students who could claim they were fearful of the "mob." (BTW, once the campus police showed up, one of the right wing girls went from smirking calmly at the anger she was causing with her comments and still baiting while holding a camera, to shaking and tears, telling the officer she needed protection once she saw him, it was like a light switch). If so, don't you see this kind of baiting becoming a tactic? Use words to get you physically attacked, shoot and kill, rinse and repeat.

That is basically what happened with Rittenhouse. He put himself out there looking for someone to confront him, and when someone did, he shot and killed. It did not need to happen. It should not have happened.

This is already happening all over the place. Right wing attempts to spark protest on campus, then proceed to harass the police for not beating the black people being blamed for agitating. This is going to sound weird, but the best way to protest these monetized trolls (like the 'gun girl', Kaitlyn Bennet), is actually to follow them around playing popular copyrighted music. It makes their interactions worthless because they can't publish it to YouTube.

As for Rittenhouse, here's how I view it. The first person killed by Rittenhouse apparently was instigated by him, but I believe he acted in self-defense of an attack. Not saying he was justified, as I don't know all of the details, but I'm quite sure that particular shooting was a response to being rushed at or attempted to be disarmed or something. The 2nd and 3rd shooting victims, which have video evidence, show non-lethal attempts to disarm Rittenhouse responded to with lethal force. Someone swinging a skateboard to disarm the active shooter is a justifiable action (though not a smart or advisable one), and that shooting is unjustified.

Again, the issue is police. Rittenhouse attempted to turn himself in and cops waved him past, allowing the subsequent shootings to take place. Rittenhouse's 2nd victim is 100% a result of police inaction, and police sentiments towards blue lives matter terrorists. If police didn't side with the Proud Boys, we'd all be much safer.

[Gregg]

Life has tremendous value; where I differ is "no other choice". Any individual - left or right - deserves the right of self-defense against an unprovoked, vicious attack of any sort. Your implication is the act of self-defense must use some level of high-level judgement to determine if lethal force can be applied. I think that's foolish. Any attack that's intended to severely injure, incapacitate, or kill another individual can and should be met with any level of force necessary. Incapacitation can lead to fates many would consider worse than death.

To your logic, I should allow a rapist to proceed since that's not attacking someone with the intent to take their life. Sorry, I'd put a bullet in them, too.

Agreed. We have a a moral right to defend ourselves and others.

We do not have a moral right to execute wrath. If we have to kill or see someone killed our hearts should be broken not gleeful.

[Mithrandir]

Agreed. We have a a moral right to defend ourselves and others.

We do not have a moral right to execute wrath. If we have to kill or see someone killed our hearts should be broken not gleeful.

Really? If I was to see every convicted child molestor shot and killed, my heart would be filled with glee.

[Gregg]

Really? If I was to see every convicted child molestor shot and killed, my heart would be filled with glee.

That is much easier to say on a message board than carry out. Prison Executioners do not come away without a toll on their mental health.

[Ken]

Really? If I was to see every convicted child molestor shot and killed, my heart would be filled with glee.

This thread has taken an interesting turn.

We've started with the premise that police officers are "mostly parasites". We've had documented instances of police tampering with or even creating evidence to get the convictions they've wanted. Guilt or innocence, doesn't really matter. It's definitely opened my eyes to a lot of issues, and I'm thankful for that.

But now we've decided that, for the next step, we just want to execute those who have been convicted. Forget due process, just shoot them. If anyone thinks they've done something horrific, no judge or jury needed, just execute them.

If I'm connecting the dots correctly here, we're just okay with killing innocent people? And it fills our hearts with glee?

I guess we now know how to handle the trolly problem - first - take out the 5 that on the track we're on. Then backup and make sure we run over that straggler on the other track too..

[Mithrandir]

That is much easier to say on a message board than carry out. Prison Executioners do not come away without a toll on their mental health.

I doubt it. Seeing terrible human beings die is no big deal.

[Mithrandir]

This thread has taken an interesting turn.

We've started with the premise that police officers are "mostly parasites". We've had documented instances of police tampering with or even creating evidence to get the convictions they've wanted. Guilt or innocence, doesn't really matter. It's definitely opened my eyes to a lot of issues, and I'm thankful for that.

But now we've decided that, for the next step, we just want to execute those who have been convicted. Forget due process, just shoot them. If anyone thinks they've done something horrific, no judge or jury needed, just execute them.

If I'm connecting the dots correctly here, we're just okay with killing innocent people? And it fills our hearts with glee?

I guess we now know how to handle the trolly problem - first - take out the 5 that on the track we're on. Then backup and make sure we run over that straggler on the other track too..

I was not clear enough in my post.

I would be gleeful if every "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" child molester who was given their due process was legally executed. No one who is innocent.