The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

I get that the left will think its just a coincidence and continue their defund the police efforts but for us on the right this is a given.

Travis Campbell, an economics PhD candidate at the University of Massachusetts, published his findings in a recent pre-print study examining the impact of BLM protests on police use-of-force incidents.

Campbell said his data suggested that BLM protests result in 'less police effort and less proactive policing,' which could explain both the decrease in police killings and the overall increase in murders.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9500789/Murder-rates-dramatically-cities-BLM-protests-researcher-finds.html

So police half-ass it when people get mad at them for killing people.

Yeah, I would too if my job was to deal with criminals and you won't let me protect myself. Fuck em, let the trash take itself out.

Interesting study.  I wonder how low we could get murder rates if we explicitly encouraged police to summarily execute suspected criminals on the street?

To a rational person, that sounds like an insane question, but that's actually the choice being offered here: is the reduced number of police shootings "worth" the increase in murders?  Apparently, American police are so lazy and corrupt that if you ask them to stop killing unarmed people, their only possible response is to refuse to do their job.  So I guess there's no other option, and we have to choose between letting the police murder civilians or letting civilians murder each other.  No other alternative!

(I notice that unstated in this study is the impact of BLM protests on illegal loose cigarette sales, counterfeit bill arrests, missing front license plates, and busted tail lights... which is weird, because all of those things (https://www.npr.org/sections/trial-over-killing-of-george-floyd/2021/04/20/989292294/where-the-chauvin-verdict-fits-in-the-recent-history-of-high-profile-police-kill) have led to unarmed black people being killed by police!)

I mean...it's kind of a "so what" situation.

You gotta protest police brutality if you think it's a problem.  If you don't think it's a problem, others gotta protest because you're not seeing that it's a problem.  If the cost is that there's less policing or somehow more murdering because people are protesting that brutality -- I mean...is the implication there that cops aren't doing as much?  Ok.  ...more reason to protest.  People (maybe not you, but people....like me) are generally unhappy with the way that policing works in this country.  So protests happen.



All that said, this is probably correlation.  Stresses are high, there's a pandemic that people are starting to emerge from, there are a lot of people out of work, etc.  There's a lot going on all at the same time.

Don't overlook states where abortion is restricted or made difficult to the point of impossible seeing a raise in crime rates 18 years later. That's a demonstrated link.

There is no epidemic of fatal police shootings against black Americans. You don't seem to understand that there are going to be people killed by police, some of those will be black. The police have fatally shot about 1,000 civilians annually for the past few years out of a country of 350 million. The black areas tends to be policed more heavily, because that is where people are disproportionately hurt by violent crime. For example, in New York City in 2018, 73% of shooting victims were Black, but Black residents only made up 24% of the city’s population.

The funny part is that it doesn't matter what a black person is doing. Because black people are beyond reproach. Even if they are in the process of committing a violent crime, they can do no wrong. If you call a homeless white person a bum, it's a fact. If you call a homeless black person a bum and you're a racist. If you call a white violent criminal a thug, it's a fact. If you call a black violent criminal a thug, you're a racist. And so on and so on.

If a black person is about to kill another black person with a knife and a police officer uses lethal force after giving 3-4 verbal warnings to the person with the knife. The media and ignorant black citizens make him out to be the racist bad guy for doing his job. Even if the cop was black and you didn't know beforehand, you guys would assume he was a racist white guy.The girl that was about to be stabbed by the fat chick isn't complaining. I bet if you or a family member was about to be killed and the police came and shot them you wouldn't be complaining either.

But now the WOKE liberals are screaming justice for Ma'Khia. The same Ma'Khia that starts swinging a knife wildly at another girl. The same Ma'Khia that  officer shouts verbal warnings to several times that she ignores. I guess we should have just let her kill the girl in pink right? You people look at everything in either black or white (pun intended). When most things in life are in the gray area and every situation is different

Since the white devil slave master police love to murder black people in the streets like animals. I'd love to see a few test cases run where majority black cities are policed by only black police officers. Since then the old tired "racist white cop" thing is off the table. What you think would happen? What fake outrage would you people complain about next?

This right here.   It doesn't matter if you're black, white, red, green or whatever.  Doesn't matter what color the cop is either.  If you're using a deadly weapon on someone and a cop sees you doing it, 99 times out of 100, you are going to get shot.

I honestly wish the cop who shot Ma'Khia had a good enough aim to shoot off her hand that was holding the knife rather than just shoot her dead.  Then she would've lived (minus a hand) and her victim's life would've no longer been in danger.   To me, that's a more fitting punishment.

I think you're creating a straw-man argument.  I've said this again and again.  I don't think you can link all these cases together.  Lethal force in some of these cases is justified or at the very least, non-criminal and I've kept saying that.

I feel like you're arguing against a position that I don't hold.

Meanwhile, when a cop is on video kneeling on the neck of a handcuffed black man for nine minutes and he dies, people (some of whom are posting in this thread) are quick to blame anything but the cop.  The suspect was a drug user!  He had a heart attack!

I mean, a police officer walked into a man's apartment and shot him dead when everyone (including you!) agrees he had done literally nothing wrong, and you were falling all over yourself to make excuses for her.

You don't see me on here calling a cop a racist for shooting an aggressive woman with a knife, but I do see you on here defending even the most egregious examples of wanton police brutality.

Maybe you do, maybe you don't. I'm arguing what the black community, media, celebrities, and white guilt/virtue signaling people are saying. Every black person killed by a white law enforcement officer is being portrayed as racist. When in fact only a small percentage fit that category. Regardless of what anyone says, Daunte Wright was a threat. That fat girl with the knife was a threat. When lives of law enforcement or the public are determined to be at risk, then law enforcement is authorized to use lethal force.

The cop was found guilty. I'm fine with that. He needs to be held accountable for his actions.  But I don't feel it was racially motivated or that the cop meant to kill him. And there is no proof of that.

No one made any "excuses" for her. I don't feel it was racially motivated or that the she meant or planned to kill him. And again, there is no evidence of that. I was simply giving my interpretation of what happened. I think Guyger, an off duty police officer(i.e. citizen), made a very grave error. She was found guilty and I'm fine with it.

I'm not defending anything. I'm disputing the racist angle you people seem to perpetuate every time a black person is killed by police. When in reality, most of the time it's justified. You may not be calling a cop a racist for shooting an aggressive woman with a knife. But you sure as hell ain't addressing the WOKE mob calling him a racist. I guess if you do that, you would have to question and admit that this whole "racist white cops out to kill all the black people" propaganda is nothing but a political stunt by the liberals and the media.

You're talking about undefined "woke mobs."
I'm talking about your own direct statements.
I think "personal accountability" is in order.

You're sidestepping the subject. I just gave you direct statements. Just to make them clear, both referenced cases resulted in convictions and I'm fine with that.

Are you saying that you agree with the WOKE mob that Floyd and Jean were killed just because they were black? What about Wright and Ma'Khia, do you think that they were slaughtered in the streets just because they were black? If not, why aren't you refuting the racist claims made by the WOKE mob?

Instead of having a conversation with nebulous groups that aren't here, why not just have a discussion with the people here trying to talk to you?

Because that's the real issue here. And some people here fit into those categories.

You "are fine with the convictions" today... after months of insisting that they shouldn't have been convicted.  But at no point did you admit you were wrong to defend them in the first place. Sidestepping, indeed.

You keep trying to focus on my supposed responsibility to condemn the woke mobs, but that claim rings hollow coming from someone who has personally issued statements that are at least as bad.  So instead of discussing liberal internet boogeymen, we should first address the words coming out of our own mouths.

No, I'm fine with a conviction when appropriate. After the trial, WHEN all the facts are out on the table. And although, I think he was guilty and should be held accountable. The political pressure on the jury made them over convict the guy. That's what's wrong with you Woke social justice warrior people, you don't even wait for any facts to come out. You convicted this guy in your mind the minute you found out it happened. I guess there are two ways you could look at it.

A. Chauvin did something stupid, reckless, and extreme and should be held accountable and found guilty of an appropriate charge.

or

B. Chauvin got to the scene and said to himself, "Hey, look it's a nigga. I'm gonna kill this motherfucker. Look at all these witnesses filming me. Fuck it, I'm gonna kill this motherfucker anyway. And Chauvin deserves the maximum sentences on multiple charges for one crime because he "wanted to kill a black person"

I condemn people when appropriate, after reasonable doubt has been eliminated. I have and do condemn Chauvin's actions. And I have and do condemn Guyger's actions. And WTF are you talking about "liberal internet boogeymen"? You drunk again?

Shortages are here https://www.theblaze.com/news/police-shortage-retirement-recruiting-philadelphia (https://www.theblaze.com/news/police-shortage-retirement-recruiting-philadelphia)

I know the source is super questionable .. but still .. if this is true .. good

now can we do the same thing for border control agents?

  Why is this questionable and why is this good? 

Video of cop kneeling on handcuffed man's neck for 9 minutes is released:
"Hold on guys, we need every single fact from the trial before we can fairly say that this cop committed a crime."

Video of suspect brandishing a knife before being shot by police is released:
"The person is obviously a dangerous criminal and lethal force was clearly warranted."

Doesn't seem like you think we should wait for all the facts every time.

We convicted him the moment we saw the video, exactly like how you declared Bryant's death was warranted the moment you saw that video.

You also keep insisting that these unarmed people are not being murdered just because they are black, which misses the point in two respects:

1) You, personally, consistently and repeatedly insist that no murder has occurred right until the moment the verdict is delivered saying otherwise (in both the cases of Guyger and Chauvin).
2) It's not about being murdered just because they're black; it's about being pulled over because they're black, being questioned because they're black, being detained because they're black, and having an extreme escalation of force because they're black.  It's about a system that works against black people at every step of the process.

No one is claiming that Chauvin woke up and said, "Gosh, I hope I get to kill a black person today."  That doesn't mean that his actions were not racially motivated.

You keep insisting that Fau, Dave and I "condemn the woke mobs" (i.e. liberal internet boogeymen) when we aren't personally saying the things you are criticizing.  Meanwhile, you are personally saying things we are criticizing you for.

So before we condemn the "woke mobs," you should first condemn your own statements (e.g. Floyd merely died from a drug-induced heart attack).

You're conflating two separate issues to misdirect the thread. They are two totally different situations, one was a trial which uses facts to determine the guilt of the accused. One is an attempted murder in progress that needs immediate attention.

Again, you're conflating two separate issues. An in progress attempted murder and a trial aren't the same thing.

So basically you're saying that I'm not the jury and can't deliver a verdict? Because until the jury decides that someone is guilty of murder, no murder has occurred. Only a death has occurred  They could come back with not guilty, manslaughter, or any number of charges. Murder is a legal distinction.

And like I've said many times, both did something wrong and both should be held accountable for the death of another human. That's why we have a trial and legal system and not mob rule. So the facts can be presented and a determination can be made.

George Floyd was pulled over, questioned, and detained for valid reasons. He escalated the situation when he resisted.

Dante Wright was pulled over, questioned, and detained for valid reasons. He escalated the situation when he resisted.

The fat chick didn't get pulled over, questioned, or detained because she escalated the situation by attempting to kill some one.

Do "you" think: Chauvin purposefully wanted or intended to kill Floyd? Knew Floyd would die? That Floyd's death was racially motivated?

Do "you" think: Kimberly Potter wanted to kill Daunte Wright? That it was racially motivated?

Do "you" think: Nicholas Reardon wanted to kill Ma'Khia Bryant? That it was racially motivated?

You know, it's kind of funny the double standard you push. I've repeatedly condemned Chauvin and Guyger actions. However, you don't seem to condemn Daunte Wright or Ma'Khia Bryant.

No.


Not sure, but he should have known that the actions could cause death.
 

The disregard for his safety was likely racially motivated, yes.


No.


No.  IMO, this case isn't so much about race, but about a larger question of the general role of over-policing for minor traffic offenses.


Yes.


Not racially motivated, but it's possible, if not likely, that the officer wouldn't have gone straight to lethal force if the girl was white.  There's no way to know that, though, so that's not my claim.

I agree
I disagree, I think that if he actually thought Floyd would die he would have done things much differently.
I disagree. I think the disregard for Floyd's safety was due to his own arrogance and ego.


I agree.
I agree that it wasn't motivated by race. However, I disagree that this was a minor traffic offense. Wright had a warrant for carrying a pistol without a permit and not complying with law enforcement. Which in turn violated the terms of his bail for aggravated robbery at gun point. So it wasn't over minor traffic offenses. He needed to be off the streets.

On an off note. How can you want more firearm laws when it seems like you don't even want to enforce the firearm laws Daunte Wright was breaking?


Maybe I'm misunderstanding your answer. Are you saying he actually wanted to kill Ma'Khia Bryant? Or that he intended to kill her?
Of course it's possible. But just like with god. You have to prove it was racially motivated, not prove it wasn't racially motivated. So until that evidence is presented and proven to be true, race shouldn't be involved. The officer a had few seconds to make a life or death decision. I've asked you several times and I'll ask again. In this case and the Daunte Wright case, with 2 seconds to make a decision what would you have done in each case?

pondwater, I don't understand why you even care if the shootings are racially motivated.  The argument you are making - in both the cases of Wright and Bryant - is that the shootings were necessary and appropriate from an objective viewpoint.  So what would it even matter to you what the officer's motivation was?

Here we go again. Why do you even post if you refuse to have a discussion about the topic of the thread you're posting in? Now it's about "why I care". Are you going to bring up the the Kavanaugh confirmation thread next? Basically anything to avoid what we're actually talking about, lmfao.

Maybe why don't you tell me if you think shooting Wright and Bryant was appropriate for the situation. If not, what were the alternatives "in those situations". If you were those officers what would you do?

Shooting Wright was uncalled for; this claim is supported by the statement of the officer herself, who said that she did not mean to draw her gun (and, therefore, did not believe that lethal force was warranted at that time).  Based on the video, shooting Bryant looks like it was justified.

Your continued focus on whether the shootings were "racially motivated" is a waste of time if we can't even agree on whether the shootings would be justified if we stipulate no racial animus.  This is currently the case for Wright, so it's pointless to discuss that shooting with you (in the context of racism).

And just to clear something else up:


The video of Bryant was arguably that of an attempted murder in progress that was stopped by the police.
The video of Floyd was that of a murder in progress committed by the police.

When you saw the video of Floyd being murdered, you reached for excuse after excuse to exonerate Chauvin, accepting his guilt only after the jury verdict.
When you saw the video of Bryant pulling a knife, you immediately and definitively categorized her actions as attempted murder, and instantly condoned a lethal police response.

This is systemic racism at work.  Any video that vindicates police action against black Americans is definitive and must be quickly acknowledged as conclusive; any video that condemns police action against black Americans must be second-guessed and questioned.

The former is pending investigation. And the latter was sent to trial and found guilty. The legal system at work, what's your point?

Why do you keep perpetuating this lie? Hell Spider, why did we even let Chauvin have a trial? Should we have just lynched Chauvin in the streets without due process? Or should we examine facts like what the exact cause of death of Floyd, whether Chauvin was actually following his training, did Chauvin have an intent to kill Floyd, etc.

No, it's the judicial system at work. That's why we have trials. Because until the trial is over, a presumption of innocence is maintained. All the rest is just media fueled political propaganda and personal opinions.

You fully support the WOKE mob when they waive presumption of innocence, violently riot, burn down cities, and destroy millions of dollars of property. But you refuse to even acknowledge when they are wrong. You just try to bypass the whole conversation with misdirection and deflection. Hell, I think Don Lemon is an extreme leftist and even he acknowledged that the Bryant case was pretty much justified. That makes you even more of an extreme radical leftist than him. Congratulations, you are the WOKE MOB and the exact definition of a liberal internet boogeyman hiding in the shadows waiting to pounce when it fits your retarded agenda.