What's new

Tough Day To Be In Law Enforcement

For me the difference is the power that cops have and expectations I have for them.

If I see a cop beating someone's *** for no good reason then its more upsetting to me than a looter looting. Because cops have power and I expect them to be trained and to be better than your average looter.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app

I definitely have higher expectations for cops and it's more than disappointing when they break the law, abuse their power and kill people just to kill.

Watching people loot and destroy innocent people's businesses and livelihoods makes my blood boil too. It boggles my mind that so many people (not saying you are) cheer them on or have no problem rationalizing it.

One of the first things I said in this thread is what I still stand behind and it's simple. Don't be a piece of ****.
 
So by the standards set by some of you here, Mitt Romney is now a liberal anti-cop pro looter Anti-America RINO, right?

 
Yeah, law enforcement having sex with someone in their custody is rape. The power dynamic is way off there.

I just had to see who was the moron arguing with you. So I clicked to reveal the ignored poster. Yeah, not at all surprised. He clearly interacts with some awful people online who are usually misinformed on some pretty far right propaganda. It’s one of the main reasons why I placed him on ignore.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I just had to see who was the moron arguing with you. So I clicked to reveal the ignored poster. Yeah, not at all surprised. He clearly interacts with some awful people online who are usually misinformed on some pretty far right propaganda. It’s one of the main reasons why I placed him on ignore.

You're a ****ing idiot. There's no other way of saying it.

Who do I interact with online? Lol.

I read CNN, KSL, Yahoo, (I know, I judge myself for that too) digg, and watch some YouTube videos and listen to Howard Stern.

****ing guy thinks Jazzfanz is far right propaganda but 75% of Jazzfanz posts are Thriller propaganda and being a crybaby.
 
Last edited:
So by the standards set by some of you here, Mitt Romney is now a liberal anti-cop pro looter Anti-America RINO, right?


Honestly, who? Who here has condemned protestors or conflated protesting with being any of those things?
 
We should take a trip down the Furguson thread lane.

I’ll bump it now. Enjoy!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I’m not sure how defunding will really work. I mean, we have to have some law enforcement for certain situations.

I would agree that not all situations need an officer, but if somebody is robbing a bank, we need people to protect life and risk.
 
So you’re only watching video after video of what one side has to say, which has been clearly sensationalized to near mythic status, despite knowing that for every crazy incident you’re being fed (and make no mistake, you’re being hand-fed everything you’re watching), there are likely tens of thousands of those same cops saving lives, dying in the line of duty, and putting it all out there for strangers each and every day?

You’re not a fool, and I know you know what’s really going on, so why are you acting like the village ka-mai?
I expect this kind of ludicrous thinking from Thriller; that’s rough company, bro.



Some police. I hate cops just as much as the next guy, and probably much worse, but even I can step back and see that it’s a foolish way to think and act, and absolutely no good comes from it. I’m a moron and can see that — what’s all you smart people’s excuse?



Petty and lame. What kind of weak-sauce insult/attack was that? Reminds me of my six year old daughter, tbh.
So I have some time to address this properly now.

First, I'm not watching videos only of what one side has to say. Not sure how you think you know what videos I've watched. You don't, and you're wrong.

Second, you think I'm being "fed" some kind of propaganda? Yes, of course I am. We all are. I've been fed propaganda from both sides (there are actually more than two sides, but I don't want to confuse you, so we'll pretend there are just two sides).

Third, you're making a completely meaningless point. Of course when I watch videos of police brutalizing civilians those videos are hand picked to demonstrate police brutalizing civilians. Do you think you informed me of something that I wasn't aware of? You needed to explain to me the subject of the videos I watched? When I click on a video that says it shows police brutalizing civilians I expect to see a video of police brutalizing civilians. No one is tricking me. I don't need you to explain that situation to me. If you wanted to make a valid point you might have suggested those videos weren't real (they are real) or that I was missing crucial context, such as the person who is kneeling with their hands behind their head had just stomped on puppies or murdered the cops kid or something. You didn't try to make that point though. Instead you suggested I was confused about what I watched. I wasn't. I watched dozens of incidents where the officers in the videos need to be arrested and convicted of serious crimes. That's what I saw.

Were there civilians committing crimes? Yes. And if identified I am sure they will be arrested and tried for their crimes. There's the difference. Do you see it?

Do cops save lives? Yes they do. Do we need a militarized police force that abuses people regularly in order to have first responders who save lives? No, we don't. The role of the police could be completely redefined so that the abusing people and killing innocent people was no longer part of the job description. That's what I'm advocating for.

Your thinking is what is ludicrous.

In human society we have a social contract. We all agree to behave according to a certain standard in order that we can all live together peacefully. When the police murder civilians and the repercussions never come then that social contract has been violated. If there is no social contract then there are no rules that say "looting is bad." When a community has had that contract repeatedly violated against them it is reasonable to expect that they will stop honoring their side of the contract as well. This concept has been expressed very well with the slogan "no justice, no peace."

You, and archie want to focus on the second violation of the social contract. I want to focus on the original violation.

In short, you're looking at the wrong thing, I'm looking at the right thing, but you wanted to explain to me about the second thing, like I didn't see it or I didn't understand it. How ****ing stupid are you that you aren't seeing the original problem? How ****ing ignorant are you that you think you're being clever pointing out the symptom to me, while you are blind to the cause?

You want to tell me I'm not so foolish as to be tricked by these actual videos of police brutality? How foolish must you be? How ignorant are you?

Next time you want to explain things to me you better be prepared better, because you look like an *** on this one.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top