Another idiot dies by cop failing to follow commands and grabbing for the taser

Author: TWS1405

Posts

Total: 57
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@AleutianTexan
This is a general value question, but do you think citizens have a duty and/or right to stand up, violently or otherwise, against tyrannical or unjust governments?
Red herring. Start another thread to discuss the duties of citizens when government fails to live up to its standards. 

PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@TWS1405_2
Nope, gave full context. Not sure if you are mentally retarded or just trolling right now. Show the context if they are out of context with the words surrounding them. Give Fuller quotes and let's see if the context changes
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
Well said. Thanks for watching the video (unlike Double_R, who refuses to) and providing your input.
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
FACT: I never said or claimed cops were “robots” and that citizens were in “full control” of the traffic stop. I’ve always remained consistent on the fact and reality of human behavior in interpersonal communications between citizen and another with a position of authority can go many different ways based on the interaction and how one treats the other. Even a citizens in a good mood can flip a 180 if they feel threatened or ridiculed by the officer. Either one can make a difference, good or bad. None of the quotes you cited = me stating cops are “robots” and citizens were in “full control” of the contact between them. It is to you who is retarded and an intellectual coward with zero integrity to admit when you’re so clearly wrong here. 
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@TWS1405_2
FACT: I never said or claimed cops were “robots” and that citizens were in “full control” of the traffic stop.
I literally quoted you
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
And I still never said (i.e., used the term) “robots” or that citizens had “full control” (that exact phrase). 
You’re still wrong. Retarded clown with 0 integrity and full on intellectual cowardice. 
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@TWS1405_2
Correct you never used the term. Are you too low IQ to know how analogies work?
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Analogies don’t apply to very specific (and repeated) claims, dumbass intellectual coward. 

When you claim someone said/accused/implied X, you have to PROVE they actually said X. Using ignorant inferences (red herrings) ≠ proof of your stupidity, you daft intellectual coward. 
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 1,035
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@TWS1405
These idiots actually believe they have a right to question cops doing their job
It's called the 1st and 4th Amendments.

Now, I don't go around yelling at cops. But this police state we have is out of hand.
AleutianTexan
AleutianTexan's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 115
0
3
7
AleutianTexan's avatar
AleutianTexan
0
3
7
-->
@TWS1405_2
I'll start the thread, but it's not a red herring. It's important. Your argument is you can't question the police. This means that you support every authoritarian regime that uses police to silence political dissidence and commit human rights violations. That's directly important to this issue.
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@AleutianTexan
Your argument is you can't question the police. This means that you support every authoritarian
Strawman. I never said you can’t ever question police actions, because you can after the fact; and I made that perfectly clear. There is a time and place for questioning police, and it’s not during the initial contact but after. 

AleutianTexan
AleutianTexan's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 115
0
3
7
AleutianTexan's avatar
AleutianTexan
0
3
7
-->
@TWS1405_2
So, you think that the institutions are always trustworthy and fix every issue? Like, there's no reason to ever fight the institution writ large?
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@AleutianTexan
WTF! How do you go from your disproven claim to claiming what I think about the institutions? Talk about shifting the goal posts (ie - non sequitur)! 🤦‍♂️
AleutianTexan
AleutianTexan's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 115
0
3
7
AleutianTexan's avatar
AleutianTexan
0
3
7
-->
@TWS1405_2
Police are the force that defends institutions and their goals. This means that if you have an authoritarian regime that arrests political dissidents with no trial, I don't understand how following the polices orders is good if you don't get a chance to fight back. If you are defending American institutions only, then I'm clarifying that.
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@AleutianTexan
Clearly your are ignorant of the FACT that there are several agencies right now refusing to enforce laws unconstitutionally passed by some state legislatures regarding their draconian gun control measure. 

Not all law enforcement agencies blindly follow the state in enforcing the law(s). Same goes for some DA offices too (hint: plea). 

And clarify what American institution (or institutions) you keep referring to. 
AleutianTexan
AleutianTexan's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 115
0
3
7
AleutianTexan's avatar
AleutianTexan
0
3
7
-->
@TWS1405_2
No, I understand police act autonomously. The beating of Tyre Nichols proves that police act as autonomous agents regardless of legislative decision. That is a whole separate issue in of itself.

However, you seem to be pro 2A, so let's use that as an example. If the police were arresting you for owning a gun because legislators passed a law banning all guns and judges had been putting people in prison for owning guns, should you resist the police?

When I say institutions, I mean the many levels and departments of government.
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@AleutianTexan
What governments? 
Local? (Municipal)
State?
Federal? 
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@AleutianTexan
I am pro 2A. And no, I wouldn’t resist. Complaints come after the arrest. Lawsuits filed in federal court for an unconstitutional law. 
AleutianTexan
AleutianTexan's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 115
0
3
7
AleutianTexan's avatar
AleutianTexan
0
3
7
-->
@TWS1405_2
That's fair. From what I understand, you would fight through legal processes one hundred percent and accept democracy/institutions verdict even if they label you wrong and that's all I was trying to figure out. 

In regard to what institutions, it doesn't matter. My question isn't in regard to specific policy, but if you think it's ever justified to resist the state. You say no if I'm understanding you right
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@AleutianTexan
The only time I’d accept a final decision is if and when the Supreme Court says so. Even then, they’re only human too and oft err. 
AleutianTexan
AleutianTexan's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 115
0
3
7
AleutianTexan's avatar
AleutianTexan
0
3
7
-->
@TWS1405_2
So, would you rebel against a Supreme Court decision you don't like?
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@AleutianTexan
You being so bride on purpose or are you really that dense? Go back and read what I posted, ffs 🤦!
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@AleutianTexan
Obtuse. Not bride. Damn autocorrect. 

39 days later

Archie
Archie's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3
0
0
1
Archie's avatar
Archie
0
0
1
Jeez, whatever happened to all the Irish cops on the force? Let me tell ya, them are the guys who knew how to handle crime on the streets. They was always out there busting heads. They didn't waste no time bringing the crinimals  into court to be let go. They'd grab a guy, they'd tell him, "hey, you don't do that no more!" Then they'd crack him on the skull so he wouldn't forget! A crack on the head is worth a thousand words!
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,696
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@TWS1405_2
@AleutianTexan
(TWS1405_2) Cops do not answer to civilians like that. You need to first listen and don’t question. You don’t know the traffic laws, they do. Therefore, you won’t know if you did something wrong until you are told. Sometimes cops tell you after you give them your license and registration. Sometimes it’s the first thing they tell you. Either way, it is not to you to question their decisions and/or authority. 
Sentences like the bolded are capable of raising fury in my exhausted heart. Before I explain further a pertinent question was asked:

(AleutianTexan) This is a general value question, but do you think citizens have a duty and/or right to stand up, violently or otherwise, against tyrannical or unjust governments?
Yes

It would be one thing to claim that at the time of detainment or arrest it is not appropriate to challenge the claims of the state (and anyone acting under color of law is acting as the state), but there is no later time either; none of any practical significance.

There is no justice for cops if the don't understand the law, if they arrest you wrongly. The most that is even legally possible is forcing the hiring government to pay out money, money they stole from the people.

There are three great sources of injustice in modern government:
1.) The laws themselves violate rights
2.) The laws are so complicated that they cannot be known or predicted, "ignorance is no excuse" is something that should be inscribed on a bullet of vengeance, to be delivered to the speaker's brain unless he can recite the full US code at will.
3.) When cops or prosecutors try to enforce non-existent laws or apply laws arbitrarily there is no penalty on them.

Government bureaucrats certainly do not know the law better than their victims. I have personally backed a county official into a corner where he admitted (on tape) that everyone breaks the law and he only cared about me breaking the law because he didn't like my schedule.

There are countless videos of 1st and 2nd amendment auditors to prove this. Cops don't know the law, lawyers don't know the law, judges don't know the law. All they know is the game they play with each other because "the law" is often an incoherent enormous pile of text which is physically beyond the capacity of any individual to know.

It seems obvious in hindsight, but when they were happily writing constitutions about two hundred years ago; they never stopped to ask themselves "If we create a body of authority whose only job is to pass laws, what will they do when there are no more problems that can be solved by a new law?"

The answer is that they will just keep passing new laws pretending they're solving problems and they will never get rid of old ones. Why would they? Every law is another weapon to be used against uppity citizens as needed.

The solution is simple. In the tradition of free market motivation of personal interest: Reward cops, prosecutors, judges who get it right, and penalize those who get it wrong.

For example give the jury an option to return "not guilty" OR "obviously not guilty", if it is obvious everyone who participated in the illegal arrest and indictment pays.

Pays how? Money. Almost every criminal code has associated fines. They pay those fines to the person whose life they were royally fucking up.

If you arrest someone and hold them for 48 hours and "decline to charge" you pay.

You issue a citation incorrectly? You pay.

Trial by jury is always a right, but if you're found guilty: You pay.

I guarantee you that the frivolous arrests will fall and cops will learn the law.
DavidAZ
DavidAZ's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 345
1
2
8
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
1
2
8
In my life, I have never been hassled by a police officer on any stop I've had.  I've had at least twice been pulled over for criminal speed, (going over 20 mph than posted speed limit, which is supposed to get you at least a night in jail), and have gotten off with just regular speeding tickets.  Typically, people who tell me that they have been harassed by the police have a chip on their shoulder about authority.  You never grew up to be able to listen to someone who has power over you to stop and question you.  Those people still throw temper tantrums about "nobody's telling me what to do".

Just do what the officer asks and be kind to them like you would to anybody else.
TWS1405_2
TWS1405_2's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 2,186
3
3
7
TWS1405_2's avatar
TWS1405_2
3
3
7
-->
@DavidAZ
well said