Would police brutality fall if we began charging officers with manslaughter?

That's good to know. Although I did not ever ask you to interpret that specific excerpt. Right? Tell the truth, bro. lol

It is very unfortunate that you are being deceitful, again, but instead of steering clear of you...

I have changed my mind.

I shalt cloak-up in my, love, and use it to help you defeat the Peculiar Institution within your law enforcement ideals.

Yes sir that portion of the vid is clearly opposite of what I quoted from you. Bo clearly mentioned that ordeal then because of the reality of cops being dishonest when writing police reports. It's concise. It's so concise, he even quit training cops over it.

Nice try, bro.

 

Yes sir and when that is combined with Bo's "Time-Distance-Cover" scholarship that preceded it with respect to how Bo then said himself those tactics are no longer I repeat no longer I repeat no longer I repeat one last time no longer taught to cops in training (unlike 70's-80's cops?) therefore ... We get the resultant of what I keep saying about more unarmed people TODAY are getting shot by overzealous or xenophobic cops. Just exactly like Bo also explained it but in his own words.

And no, the truth does not care in what package it comes in, so you look bizarre by mentioning that this is not my vid which I posted on this website. This vid [Phyxius brought here] does present a compelling valid source from, the trenches, who you cannot ever reasonably dispute.

That is all which really matters here.

 

It should be evidence based and perhaps the police culture of protection needs to change a bit, but I can't support charging cops with manslaughter for genuinely accidental deaths.

If you're patrolling down a back alley and a man quickly pulls out a gun and points it at you, the cop kind of has to react. If it turns out the man was a cosplayer who was using a plastic gun without the orange tip... That's just devastating for everyone involved. It's a very small minority of evil people who would get off on that.

The job puts you in positions where accidental death is a possibility. If the cop can be shown to be negligent then sure. If intent was to murder then sure.

 

#TheLargerIssue #SingleParenting #Fatherlessness #ChildNeglectMaltreatment #MentalHealth #Solutions

Hello, Raffish. Considering the fact you run around this thread calling people liars and deceivers, I believe YOU and I should discuss the video broadcast by a man calling himself "Bo".

Raffish, lets discuss the very first line of the video you shared during which the presenter identifies himself as "Bo".

Is the presenter named "Bo", or is the presenter's name actually Justin King?

Raffish, is Justin King, aka "Bo" being deceitful when in one video he speaks with a distinct southern accent, while in other videos, like the one titled 'Anarchy 101', he speaks without a southern drawl or accent?



Peace.

​

___
American *(Children)* Lives Matter; Take Pride In Parenting; End Our National Health Crisis; Child Abuse and Neglect; End Community Violence/Fear, Police Anxiety & Educator's Frustrations

 

If a shooting committed by a cop has evidence that could get them charged with manslaughter, they likely are not gonna stay out of prison. By law, all shootings involving police officers are fully investigated by internal affairs, and the officer in questions is put on leave during the investigation. If there is evidence that could lead to a manslaughter conviction, the cop is likely going to be tried.

 

Would police brutality fall if we began charging officers with manslaughter?

It would decline if people were to stop resisting arrest and shooting at police.

 

​

No, I'm not running around any where. And you are being very disingenuous here, by blaming me, for your decision to be dishonest.

And it does not matter the tone nor accent used by Bo or Justin or JustBo or whatever his name is. If he told no lies in the vids, then yes, that is all which matters.

So let us go breakdown sentence number two, shall we?

 

So who makes sure they are investigating fairly?

 

The Bar Association, just like any other task associated with attouratt.

 

So what am I supposed to get out of that? Niether you or I were there to confirm or deny his story. Even if true, we don't know if he took it out of context. The fact is, police do write tge reports, but it needs to corroborate with the evidence. Also, this still doesn't give evidence that the cops of the 70's and 80's shot less unarmed people than modern day cops which you REFUSE to provide.

 

So the lawyers are investigating the lawyers? Aren't we back to sqare one of a group of people investigating there own?

 

How is the fact that cops aren't trained on auditory exclusion and time, distance, and cover leading to more cops shooting more unarmed people which you still didn't prove to be the case?

My original point was the video doesn't answer my question as to your evidence that the cops of the 70's and 80's shot less unarmed people than modern day cops, so why bring it into our conversation in the first place?

 

No, because the Bar has a vested interest in maintaing the imintegri of their profession whereas that of the state is simply to maintain power.

 

The same can be said about internal investigators. Their vested instrest is the maintaining of integrity in their profession. There are lots of cops who get fired or disciplined that you don't see in the news. I know three cops in my area that were fired.

 

No, it can not- the vested interest of the state (which the police is the domestic arm of ocontrol) is to maintain power over the populus.

 

So firefighters and EMTs wants to control the populus? What you are doing now is denying facts. The fact is, within every law enforcement agency, there's a unit whose sole purpose is to maintain the intigrity of the department just like the BAR.

 

I wasn't aware that firefighters and EMTs were condidered law enforcement?

The purpose of those units are to maintain a dog and pony show. When the purpose is to maintain power, such units are for show.

 

England's bobbies don't carry firearms. I'm not sure how they handle the rape gangs and others roaming the streets. I suppose they bring in the military? Maybe someone can explain.

My initial thoughts are, the police will allow things to happen, if they cannot use firearms. They will come in after others are shot up or killed and mop up the mess. Otherwise, I would think they would feel the need to be a great deal more violent, incapacitating the suspects without the use of firearms.

Yes, I think the violence would go up, even if the shootings of innocents goes down. Also, who would you send in to the gang controlled areas where the officers have less fire power than the gangs? How would those places be handled efficiently and safely?

 

They are apart of the state. Also, there are departments that are basically firefighters, EMTs, and law enforcement all rolled into one.

Evidence?

 

Because Time Distance Cover and Auditory Exclusion are only concerning the idea of avoiding firing on a suspect until lethal danger is recognized and verified but never assumed. Sir you show that you love the reality of USA cops now being allowed to wrongly assume that they only thought, they saw a gun or did see quick movements, therefore they killed an unarmed citizen where Time Distance Cover would have presented. Especially cover!

Yes you and today's overzealous cops have decided it is okay to shoot citizens who cops wrongly assumed as a threat to fire a weapon.

The Tamir Rice murder which Bo referenced and the Wal-Mart BB-gun murder he mentioned, were great examples, of the satanic way which you love for overzealous cops to police humans TODAY since cops have abandoned Time-Distance-Cover training.

I brought the vid into the discussion because the video answers your questions, clearly, where he mentioned the fact that auditory exclusion processes combine with Time Distance Cover Training, to...

Prevent cops from shooting people unnecessarily. Yes but unfortunately the militarization of USA police ceased that training a decade ago I repeat a decade ago I repeat a decade ago I repeat a decade ago because also prior to that decade ago is the 70's-80's IOW a time when cops benefited from Time Distance Cover and other anti-gunfiring/de-escalation training.

So I can help you here bro, if you lack the ability to comprehend that Bo only mentions Time Distance Cover for the purpose of verifying that TODAY's OVERZEALOUS cops would shoot less people, if this training gets reinstated. Yes as in here where I'd bet, that cops shooting less people, will ALWAYS result into less unarmed people being killed by cops.

 

Oh yes indeed they are, here in America. Especially firemen. And although EMT are as well ---it's still to a far-lesser degree whenever the EMT is, well, you know...

go to 1:35

 

Yes, they are part of the state, but that is irrelevant.

Police shootings: Trials, convictions are rare for officers

Cops are almost never prosecuted and convicted for use of force

 

And that's good. However, most cops are already trained on that. However, that doesn't always work. You may approach someone who initially looks like he's complying but then does something erratic when you're close.

No, I don't. I want police to mitigate the situation as much as possible but I also realize that the real world doesn't alway reflect what is taught in a textbook or class.

As far as the Tamir Rice situation, I believe what happened was the officers initially thought that they could roll up and talk to him. After all, he's just a kid. However things escalated quickly when Rice made a drawing motion with his arm as you could see in the video.

As far as the person in walmart with a BB gun. First off, he was waving it around rather recklessly. Second, when officers confronted him, they gave him distance, they were behind cover, and they gave him commands to drop the weapon. Instead he raised the weapon. It only takes a split second yo aim a firearm.

Well, that's not true, at least from where I got my police training.

Again, cops are trained to take their time, but they are also trained that not everything adheres to the textbook.

 

You said that police can't investigate their own because, as an arm of the state, their vested interest is to control the populus. So, do EMTs and firefighters wants to control the populus? After all they are an arm of the state.



[QUOTE]
Police shootings: Trials, convictions are rare for officers

Cops are almost never prosecuted and convicted for use of force[/quote]

Maybe that's actually a testament on how professional they are.

 

Can't see link.

Edit. Never mind, I can see it now.