Jump to content

 

 

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Thinker said:

You've missed the point. If you skip on in the video that JFK posted, to around the 1:11 mark, Sam Harris words it far better than I could, but the gist of it is that if you are wrongfully arrested, resisting arrest is not going to convince the policeman that he's made an error - it's only going to dramatically increase the risk of you getting hurt. And that's especially true in America where the presence of a cop automaticallly means a firearm is present.

 

I've bookmarked the section below -and I honestly believe if you listen to it for 2 minutes, you'll find nothing to disagree with.

 

 

"To not comply in the heat of the moment." Yes I did listen properly and I suppose the debate really should be about gun law. Only problem is Harris is talking about the specific Floyd incident (and we all know he was no angel) and we have to wonder about all the specific situations in all the other deaths we have had (black and white). What is incomprehensible to me is that, given the huge publicity and the sensitivity of the moment with police units being defunded and so on, we have had yet another incident (in Atlanta last Friday) of a man being shot twice in the back (pathologists' report). He apparently grabbed the officer's taser and began to run. One would think that the officer should have called for back-up, given chase - anything but open fire, knowing that it could have led to another riot.  After all, tasers are not meant to kill (although ex-footballer Dalian Atkinson was tasered to death). Yet no and the result is another death.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, alexscottislegend said:

Then, by extension, it must be ok for a cop to shoot first? I think the UK cops still have on the whole a more civilised attitude than the robocops in the states. In fact I commend them for their forbearance in London on Saturday. 

Yes, it’s IS OK for a cop to shoot first - care to know why ?  Because they have the right to discharge a firearm in the carrying out of their duties.  They are, or should be, professionally trained to know WHEN the discharging is lawful, legal and within the remit of their duties.

 

Suggesting a policeman should wait until AFTER someone has fired at them is lunacy - the person shooting at a policeman is highly likely to be a criminal, plain and simple.

 

If you are seriously suggesting a police officer should wait until after he has been shot at to discharge his weapon we should ALL be fearful, because anarchy would be right around the corner with no police officers attempting to ensure the public’s safety.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gonzo79 said:

Being judgemental about Bangladesh is an indirect act of white supremacy and also Islamophobic. 

I'm pretty sure you are being ironic here since you know fine well I am not the latter. Bangladesh I alighted upon as just one example. I could have said China instead I supppose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, alexscottislegend said:

Aye, work or starve. I didn't compute it the OECD did. Actually no it technically isn't slavery but when you think of the profits made it's robbery. They still use kids in Bangladesh.

So it “technically isn’t slavery”.  Your own words.  It isn’t slavery.  Glad we got there in the end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, craig said:

Yes, it’s IS OK for a cop to shoot first - care to know why ?  Because they have the right to discharge a firearm in the carrying out of their duties.  They are, or should be, professionally trained to know WHEN the discharging is lawful, legal and within the remit of their duties.

 

Suggesting a policeman should wait until AFTER someone has fired at them is lunacy - the person shooting at a policeman is highly likely to be a criminal, plain and simple.

 

If you are seriously suggesting a police officer should wait until after he has been shot at to discharge his weapon we should ALL be fearful, because anarchy would be right around the corner with no police officers attempting to ensure the public’s safety.

Read my latest post. I am suggesting that I much prefer the British cop's approach; the US cops certainly lack training and make mistakes. Maybe I worded it badly: the Italian police are trained to not react until they think they are being threatened.

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, alexscottislegend said:

"To not comply in the heat of the moment." Yes I did listen properly and I suppose the debate really should be about gun law. Only problem is Harris is talking about the specific Floyd incident

He didn't focus on George Floyd when making his statement about resisting arrest being a very bad idea which was the focus of the segment posted.. Didn't even mention him. He said it was a very bad idea to resist arrest at all, ever, for anybody.

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, alexscottislegend said:

Read my latest post. I am suggesting that I much prefer the British cop's approach; the US cops certainly lack training and make mistakes. Maybe I worded it badly: the Italian police are trained to not react until they think they are being threatened.

ANY police officer shouldn’t reach until they believe they are being threatened.

 

You say the guy in Atlanta shouldn’t have been fired upon.  What if he had tased the cop he took the taser from and then took his firearm from him whilst he was incapacitated ?  That officer’s life was at risk.

 

Even if he felt it was wrongful arrest he literally broke the law right there by taking the officer’s taser - yep, that would have endEd up well in court wouldn’t it ?
 

you can’t compare the British police to the US police.  British police know there is a fairly low (though not zero) chance of someone carrying a weapon.  The opposite is true in the US.  The threats against life are far greater in the US

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Gonzo79 said:

I see Lammy is calling for the government to take action on systematic racism now.

 

He hasn't really provided much in the way of suggestions though.

I thought that, though he was right about no point in having yet another public enquiry. The MacPherson Report should have pointed us in the right direction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

He didn't focus on George Floyd when making his statement about resisting arrest being a very bad idea which was the focus of the segment posted.. Didn't even mention him. He said it was a very bad idea to resist arrest at all, ever, for anybody.

And he’s absolutely spot on.  Because the ONLY thing that resisting will do is escalate matters.  It will NEVER de-escalate them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.