Police Brutality...

[erikistired]

Originally posted by: nutcasert
Step One - Find names/addresses.

Step Two - Go to house.

Step Three - Apply gasoline to entire outside surface of house including windows and doors at 2 AM.

Step Four - Light said gasoline.

Step Five - Run around nude at funeral.


Seriously, I would find where they live, and I would wait outside their house with a nightstick, and make damn sure they cannot be identified with dental records. That sh1t is personal, treat it that way. If the b1tch thinks shes better than you then a little kidnapping/rape/murder is in the books. I know it sounds wierd, but you will feel better once that deed is done.

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
You know what fvck u people.

Honestly I'm in pain here and a few of you people find it funny and happy.

Fvck you all.

I honestly don't care. You are sick motherfvckers and someday karma will catch up to you.

In conclusion

Fvck most of you

oh and /sarcasm police brutality is all a lie.

Wow, police brutality early in the day...
Now, you're probably tempting moderator brutality if they decide that your comments are a little out of line with appropriate behavior around here. To be honest, given the way you react to minimal criticism (and I think most of it is just kidding around, such as the remark about sending a gift of some sort (whatever it was early in the thread.. donuts?), I wouldn't be surprised if you had said something to set the police off as you walked out. Maybe you said it under your breath, and feel that it doesn't count if you say it softly, even if the police heard it. But I highly doubt they told you to leave, and while you were leaving, they tackled you from behind for no reason, as you state.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: CadetLee

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: BigJ

So you'd rather be dead than paralyzed?

So the officer obtaining cover, calling in for backup, and confronting the thugs would do no good for you?

Not to mention you combined all the scenarios into one big one.

If it's one officer versus two thugs, with the officer already calling in backup, taking cover, and confronting the thugs, he'd be useless to you? Especially when only one is actively armed, since the other is giving it to you good.

Or if it's only one assailant, and he's stabbed you and is proceeding to rob you. Since you're paralyzed, might as let him go anway, right?

Yes, I would rather be dead than paralyzed, but that's not the point.

Any one of those scenarios represents a HUGE failure to observe your surroundings and avoid the situation.

In the event that you ARE at gunpoint, police officers, tacticians and experienced combatants the world over will tell you your best chance is still to draw your own weapon and shoot. It's a much better situation than being at the mercy of someone else. You take them by suprise because they don't expect you to disobey them. And if you're talking about "street thugs" then they're not very likely to be able to hit you, and may not even be willing to shoot you. Regardless, experience has shown it's better to take action than be a hostage.

If I had a huge failure to observe my surroundings and ended up in trouble, I'd definitely prefer if the police were able to help immediately rather than waiting for authorization..but hey, maybe that's just me, eh?

You shouldn't count on the police helping you at all, that's my point. Once someone's been killed, the police should conduct and investigation, find a suspect, get an arrest warrant, etc. Basically, it should just be to serve. Not to protect and serve.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: nutcasert
Step One - Find names/addresses.

Step Two - Go to house.

Step Three - Apply gasoline to entire outside surface of house including windows and doors at 2 AM.

Step Four - Light said gasoline.

Step Five - Run around nude at funeral.


Seriously, I would find where they live, and I would wait outside their house with a nightstick, and make damn sure they cannot be identified with dental records. That sh1t is personal, treat it that way. If the b1tch thinks shes better than you then a little kidnapping/rape/murder is in the books. I know it sounds wierd, but you will feel better once that deed is done.

You're such a badass. Wanna get a drink sometime?

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: nutcasert
Step One - Find names/addresses.

Step Two - Go to house.

Step Three - Apply gasoline to entire outside surface of house including windows and doors at 2 AM.

Step Four - Light said gasoline.

Step Five - Run around nude at funeral.


Seriously, I would find where they live, and I would wait outside their house with a nightstick, and make damn sure they cannot be identified with dental records. That sh1t is personal, treat it that way. If the b1tch thinks shes better than you then a little kidnapping/rape/murder is in the books. I know it sounds wierd, but you will feel better once that deed is done.

You've got the right idea. She had no right to touch him, and deserves to pay.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: CadetLee

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: BigJ

So you'd rather be dead than paralyzed?

So the officer obtaining cover, calling in for backup, and confronting the thugs would do no good for you?

Not to mention you combined all the scenarios into one big one.

If it's one officer versus two thugs, with the officer already calling in backup, taking cover, and confronting the thugs, he'd be useless to you? Especially when only one is actively armed, since the other is giving it to you good.

Or if it's only one assailant, and he's stabbed you and is proceeding to rob you. Since you're paralyzed, might as let him go anway, right?

Yes, I would rather be dead than paralyzed, but that's not the point.

Any one of those scenarios represents a HUGE failure to observe your surroundings and avoid the situation.

In the event that you ARE at gunpoint, police officers, tacticians and experienced combatants the world over will tell you your best chance is still to draw your own weapon and shoot. It's a much better situation than being at the mercy of someone else. You take them by suprise because they don't expect you to disobey them. And if you're talking about "street thugs" then they're not very likely to be able to hit you, and may not even be willing to shoot you. Regardless, experience has shown it's better to take action than be a hostage.

If I had a huge failure to observe my surroundings and ended up in trouble, I'd definitely prefer if the police were able to help immediately rather than waiting for authorization..but hey, maybe that's just me, eh?

You shouldn't count on the police helping you at all, that's my point. Once someone's been killed, the police should conduct and investigation, find a suspect, get an arrest warrant, etc. Basically, it should just be to serve. Not to protect and serve.

And nobody's saying that you should rely solely on the police. But if they're in the general vacinity and can prevent a heinous crime from being committed, you want them to go ahead and get a warrant, which can take hours to obtain, just so they can do something about it?

 

[MercenaryForHire]

This thread is great.

I'm going to go make a donation to my local PD tomorrow afternoon.

- M4H

 

[jlee]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: CadetLee

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: BigJ

So you'd rather be dead than paralyzed?

So the officer obtaining cover, calling in for backup, and confronting the thugs would do no good for you?

Not to mention you combined all the scenarios into one big one.

If it's one officer versus two thugs, with the officer already calling in backup, taking cover, and confronting the thugs, he'd be useless to you? Especially when only one is actively armed, since the other is giving it to you good.

Or if it's only one assailant, and he's stabbed you and is proceeding to rob you. Since you're paralyzed, might as let him go anway, right?

Yes, I would rather be dead than paralyzed, but that's not the point.

Any one of those scenarios represents a HUGE failure to observe your surroundings and avoid the situation.

In the event that you ARE at gunpoint, police officers, tacticians and experienced combatants the world over will tell you your best chance is still to draw your own weapon and shoot. It's a much better situation than being at the mercy of someone else. You take them by suprise because they don't expect you to disobey them. And if you're talking about "street thugs" then they're not very likely to be able to hit you, and may not even be willing to shoot you. Regardless, experience has shown it's better to take action than be a hostage.

If I had a huge failure to observe my surroundings and ended up in trouble, I'd definitely prefer if the police were able to help immediately rather than waiting for authorization..but hey, maybe that's just me, eh?

You shouldn't count on the police helping you at all, that's my point. Once someone's been killed, the police should conduct and investigation, find a suspect, get an arrest warrant, etc. Basically, it should just be to serve. Not to protect and serve.

I don't count on it -- but killing the option wouldn't be beneficial in any way, IMHO.

I forgot to charge my MX1000, and it just quit on me..so I'm done for the night. G'night all.

:beer:

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: CadetLee

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: BigJ

So you'd rather be dead than paralyzed?

So the officer obtaining cover, calling in for backup, and confronting the thugs would do no good for you?

Not to mention you combined all the scenarios into one big one.

If it's one officer versus two thugs, with the officer already calling in backup, taking cover, and confronting the thugs, he'd be useless to you? Especially when only one is actively armed, since the other is giving it to you good.

Or if it's only one assailant, and he's stabbed you and is proceeding to rob you. Since you're paralyzed, might as let him go anway, right?

Yes, I would rather be dead than paralyzed, but that's not the point.

Any one of those scenarios represents a HUGE failure to observe your surroundings and avoid the situation.

In the event that you ARE at gunpoint, police officers, tacticians and experienced combatants the world over will tell you your best chance is still to draw your own weapon and shoot. It's a much better situation than being at the mercy of someone else. You take them by suprise because they don't expect you to disobey them. And if you're talking about "street thugs" then they're not very likely to be able to hit you, and may not even be willing to shoot you. Regardless, experience has shown it's better to take action than be a hostage.

If I had a huge failure to observe my surroundings and ended up in trouble, I'd definitely prefer if the police were able to help immediately rather than waiting for authorization..but hey, maybe that's just me, eh?

You shouldn't count on the police helping you at all, that's my point. Once someone's been killed, the police should conduct and investigation, find a suspect, get an arrest warrant, etc. Basically, it should just be to serve. Not to protect and serve.

And nobody's saying that you should rely solely on the police. But if they're in the general vacinity and can prevent a heinous crime from being committed, you want them to go ahead and get a warrant, which can take hours to obtain, just so they can do something about it?

An expedited warrant system with 24/7 judges would be needed. But what's a little bit more expense and red tape amidst the web that is todays justice system?

 

[Gunslinger08]

File an official complaint, press charges, and file a civil suit against the officer and the city/county/state (whichever department she belongs to). Alert any local media that you know of. It helps to make as big of a sh!t out of it as possible. Someone will eventually listen to you. You just need to be determined.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: CadetLee

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: BigJ

So you'd rather be dead than paralyzed?

So the officer obtaining cover, calling in for backup, and confronting the thugs would do no good for you?

Not to mention you combined all the scenarios into one big one.

If it's one officer versus two thugs, with the officer already calling in backup, taking cover, and confronting the thugs, he'd be useless to you? Especially when only one is actively armed, since the other is giving it to you good.

Or if it's only one assailant, and he's stabbed you and is proceeding to rob you. Since you're paralyzed, might as let him go anway, right?

Yes, I would rather be dead than paralyzed, but that's not the point.

Any one of those scenarios represents a HUGE failure to observe your surroundings and avoid the situation.

In the event that you ARE at gunpoint, police officers, tacticians and experienced combatants the world over will tell you your best chance is still to draw your own weapon and shoot. It's a much better situation than being at the mercy of someone else. You take them by suprise because they don't expect you to disobey them. And if you're talking about "street thugs" then they're not very likely to be able to hit you, and may not even be willing to shoot you. Regardless, experience has shown it's better to take action than be a hostage.

If I had a huge failure to observe my surroundings and ended up in trouble, I'd definitely prefer if the police were able to help immediately rather than waiting for authorization..but hey, maybe that's just me, eh?

You shouldn't count on the police helping you at all, that's my point. Once someone's been killed, the police should conduct and investigation, find a suspect, get an arrest warrant, etc. Basically, it should just be to serve. Not to protect and serve.

And nobody's saying that you should rely solely on the police. But if they're in the general vacinity and can prevent a heinous crime from being committed, you want them to go ahead and get a warrant, which can take hours to obtain, just so they can do something about it?

An expedited warrant system with 24/7 judges would be needed. But what's a little bit more expense and red tape amidst the web that is todays justice system?

A little more red tape and expense is going to cost a lot of lives.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: CadetLee

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: BigJ

So you'd rather be dead than paralyzed?

So the officer obtaining cover, calling in for backup, and confronting the thugs would do no good for you?

Not to mention you combined all the scenarios into one big one.

If it's one officer versus two thugs, with the officer already calling in backup, taking cover, and confronting the thugs, he'd be useless to you? Especially when only one is actively armed, since the other is giving it to you good.

Or if it's only one assailant, and he's stabbed you and is proceeding to rob you. Since you're paralyzed, might as let him go anway, right?

Yes, I would rather be dead than paralyzed, but that's not the point.

Any one of those scenarios represents a HUGE failure to observe your surroundings and avoid the situation.

In the event that you ARE at gunpoint, police officers, tacticians and experienced combatants the world over will tell you your best chance is still to draw your own weapon and shoot. It's a much better situation than being at the mercy of someone else. You take them by suprise because they don't expect you to disobey them. And if you're talking about "street thugs" then they're not very likely to be able to hit you, and may not even be willing to shoot you. Regardless, experience has shown it's better to take action than be a hostage.

If I had a huge failure to observe my surroundings and ended up in trouble, I'd definitely prefer if the police were able to help immediately rather than waiting for authorization..but hey, maybe that's just me, eh?

You shouldn't count on the police helping you at all, that's my point. Once someone's been killed, the police should conduct and investigation, find a suspect, get an arrest warrant, etc. Basically, it should just be to serve. Not to protect and serve.

And nobody's saying that you should rely solely on the police. But if they're in the general vacinity and can prevent a heinous crime from being committed, you want them to go ahead and get a warrant, which can take hours to obtain, just so they can do something about it?

An expedited warrant system with 24/7 judges would be needed. But what's a little bit more expense and red tape amidst the web that is todays justice system?

A little more red tape and expense is going to cost a lot of lives.

It always does. Do you have any idea how many people get off on technicalities? How many people escape while an arrest warrant is being issued? How many killers go unstopped because search warrants can't be obtained?

Those lives are the cost of our liberty, and freedom from police oppression.

 

[Kaervak]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: Nebor
An expedited warrant system with 24/7 judges would be needed. But what's a little bit more expense and red tape amidst the web that is todays justice system?

A little more red tape and expense is going to cost a lot of lives.

Haven't you been paying attention? It's not a cops' job to save a life if he can, it's his job to stand there and wait for someone to be killed and then do something. Duh.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: Nebor
You shouldn't count on the police helping you at all, that's my point. Once someone's been killed, the police should conduct and investigation, find a suspect, get an arrest warrant, etc. Basically, it should just be to serve. Not to protect and serve.

So you'd be perfectly fine with someone killing everyone you knew and loved, as long as the police got right on that investigation afterwards? :roll:

- M4H

 

[erikistired]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: CadetLee

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: BigJ

So you'd rather be dead than paralyzed?

So the officer obtaining cover, calling in for backup, and confronting the thugs would do no good for you?

Not to mention you combined all the scenarios into one big one.

If it's one officer versus two thugs, with the officer already calling in backup, taking cover, and confronting the thugs, he'd be useless to you? Especially when only one is actively armed, since the other is giving it to you good.

Or if it's only one assailant, and he's stabbed you and is proceeding to rob you. Since you're paralyzed, might as let him go anway, right?

Yes, I would rather be dead than paralyzed, but that's not the point.

Any one of those scenarios represents a HUGE failure to observe your surroundings and avoid the situation.

In the event that you ARE at gunpoint, police officers, tacticians and experienced combatants the world over will tell you your best chance is still to draw your own weapon and shoot. It's a much better situation than being at the mercy of someone else. You take them by suprise because they don't expect you to disobey them. And if you're talking about "street thugs" then they're not very likely to be able to hit you, and may not even be willing to shoot you. Regardless, experience has shown it's better to take action than be a hostage.

If I had a huge failure to observe my surroundings and ended up in trouble, I'd definitely prefer if the police were able to help immediately rather than waiting for authorization..but hey, maybe that's just me, eh?

You shouldn't count on the police helping you at all, that's my point. Once someone's been killed, the police should conduct and investigation, find a suspect, get an arrest warrant, etc. Basically, it should just be to serve. Not to protect and serve.

And nobody's saying that you should rely solely on the police. But if they're in the general vacinity and can prevent a heinous crime from being committed, you want them to go ahead and get a warrant, which can take hours to obtain, just so they can do something about it?

An expedited warrant system with 24/7 judges would be needed. But what's a little bit more expense and red tape amidst the web that is todays justice system?

immediately followed by implant chips and HUDs in each officers visor so they can identify the victim and criminal and think "grant warrant". then the brain sensor sends the request to the courthouse and the 24/7 judge thinks "warrant granted" which is sensored back to the cop and shown on his HUD. then judge dredd shoots all the criminals and saves me, again, ftw.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: Nebor


It always does. Do you have any idea how many people get off on technicalities? How many people escape while an arrest warrant is being issued? How many killers go unstopped because search warrants can't be obtained?

Those lives are the cost of our liberty, and freedom from police oppression.

So why don't we abolish the police state and have ultimate freedom?

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: Nebor
You shouldn't count on the police helping you at all, that's my point. Once someone's been killed, the police should conduct and investigation, find a suspect, get an arrest warrant, etc. Basically, it should just be to serve. Not to protect and serve.

So you'd be perfectly fine with someone killing everyone you knew and loved, as long as the police got right on that investigation afterwards? :roll:

- M4H

I wouldn't be alright with them killing everyone. But I wouldn't blame the police for it. It's not their fault that someone decided to kill people, and it's not their responsibility to be lying in wait for when he decides to get all knife happy.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: Nebor
It always does. Do you have any idea how many people get off on technicalities? How many people escape while an arrest warrant is being issued? How many killers go unstopped because search warrants can't be obtained?

Those lives are the cost of our liberty, and freedom from police oppression.

And yet you suggest above that police should go obtain a 24/7 eWarrant before arresting someone? :roll:

Pardon me while I stroll around with an AR15 and a crazed look. Oh, don't worry, they won't get the warrant in time to stop my rampage. And when I'm done, I'll just flee to Mexico and drink tequila for the rest of my life!

- M4H

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: Nebor
You shouldn't count on the police helping you at all, that's my point. Once someone's been killed, the police should conduct and investigation, find a suspect, get an arrest warrant, etc. Basically, it should just be to serve. Not to protect and serve.

So you'd be perfectly fine with someone killing everyone you knew and loved, as long as the police got right on that investigation afterwards? :roll:

- M4H

I wouldn't be alright with them killing everyone. But I wouldn't blame the police for it. It's not their fault that someone decided to kill people, and it's not their responsibility to be lying in wait for when he decides to get all knife happy.

But if an officer saw your family being murdered, and could've done something about it, you'd be alright with them as long as they got 'em in the end, right?

 

[RGN]

You got your ass kicked by a girl, then you go on the internet to tell about it?


+1 man, tho, I'm not going to say you've got bgger stones than I, but you have something.

 

[Atheus]

Originally posted by: Nebor
It always does. Do you have any idea how many people get off on technicalities? How many people escape while an arrest warrant is being issued? How many killers go unstopped because search warrants can't be obtained?

Those lives are the cost of our liberty, and freedom from police oppression.

Talk like this is only ever heard from those who have never witnessed the nasty end of the police.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: Nebor


It always does. Do you have any idea how many people get off on technicalities? How many people escape while an arrest warrant is being issued? How many killers go unstopped because search warrants can't be obtained?

Those lives are the cost of our liberty, and freedom from police oppression.

So why don't we abolish the police state and have ultimate freedom?

I don't live in a police state.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: Nebor
You shouldn't count on the police helping you at all, that's my point. Once someone's been killed, the police should conduct and investigation, find a suspect, get an arrest warrant, etc. Basically, it should just be to serve. Not to protect and serve.

So you'd be perfectly fine with someone killing everyone you knew and loved, as long as the police got right on that investigation afterwards? :roll:

- M4H

I wouldn't be alright with them killing everyone. But I wouldn't blame the police for it. It's not their fault that someone decided to kill people, and it's not their responsibility to be lying in wait for when he decides to get all knife happy.

But if an officer saw your family being murdered, and could've done something about it, you'd be alright with them as long as they got 'em in the end, right?

No more than I would expect anyone else to get involved. I would be upset that he didn't intervene, just as I would be upset if any armed citizen didn't intervene. But I wouldn't blame them.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: Nebor


It always does. Do you have any idea how many people get off on technicalities? How many people escape while an arrest warrant is being issued? How many killers go unstopped because search warrants can't be obtained?

Those lives are the cost of our liberty, and freedom from police oppression.

So why don't we abolish the police state and have ultimate freedom?

I don't live in a police state.

If you believe we're so bad off that police officers should need to get permission before using any sort of physical force, than apparently you do.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: Nebor


It always does. Do you have any idea how many people get off on technicalities? How many people escape while an arrest warrant is being issued? How many killers go unstopped because search warrants can't be obtained?

Those lives are the cost of our liberty, and freedom from police oppression.

So why don't we abolish the police state and have ultimate freedom?

I don't live in a police state.

Then WTF are you complaining about? Shut your cock holster already.

- M4H