Riley24

Which is why we need to welcome them into our communities, and do everything we can to make them feel welcome. You have an issue with Islam as a whole? There's a term for that, yknow... Of course immigrants want to be around other immigrants. That's why in NYC, where I'm from, there's a Chinatown and Little Italy. And saying that Islam is incompatible with western civilization is stupid. You probably heard that from some alt-right nutjob. There are around 3.3 million practicing Muslims in the United States. So you get up in arms when people make generalizations about cops, but not the millions of Muslims in America? Do you even know anything about Islam? Can you quote a single verse of the Quran without having to google "bad Islam verses"? You don't get it, dude. You can't kill ideology with bombs. We've been doing that for 17 years now, how has that worked for us? We created ISIS through the instability we created in the middle east, and that's a well-known fact. And for Christ's sake, you and some of the dumber Republican politicians always talk about how we should bomb the ISIS headquarters. Don't you think we've been doing that this whole time? Has it worked? Its not that easy. We will NEVER be able to drop enough bombs to end terror. We have to address fundamentalism, and the sociological factors that lead people to it. And how do you propose we screen every Muslim for radical ideology without violating their rights?

Its not about loving the attacker, its about loving your neighbors, and your Muslim friends. Its about loving and welcoming isolated communities (like the one this attacker lived in in Manchester). We can't bomb extremism, we can't put a travel ban on an ideology. You can't bomb "terror", you can only bomb people. And bombing people only breeds more terror. The only productive we can do is address the sociological reasons why people are driven to groups like ISIS. Further isolating Muslim communities is immensely counterproductive, hence why I shared the MLK quote.

I didn't want to spark an entire conversation about the video you shared, there's not enough relevant material there to discuss. And go start a thread about Warren v. District of Columbia if you want to discuss that, because it holds no relevance here.

Is speaking in generalities expressly forbidden? Now that you've said that, I'm gonna keep an eye on everything you post here and make sure you never use generalities. And what I said was absolutely true, there have been many cases of even moderately questionable use of force in response to knife-wielding suspects. Why are you talking so much about that one incident? I quite frankly don't really care. The situation was messy and not preferable in a lot of ways, but I would prefer a messy situation in which no one is killed over a messy situation where someone is killed. The job of the police is to protect the citizenry, officer safety is not the most important thing when looking at those incidents. Their mindset was "lets bring this guy in without killing him", and they did JUST THAT. Very rarely do I see someone monday morning quarterback bodycam videos with perfect endings and try to argue that someone who's alive should be dead. Very peculiar argument you've tried to make.

huh? You're not making any sense. I was referring to the many situations in which the cops say that they "had to use deadly force" or "were forced to use deadly force" in order to stop someone wielding a knife. At no point did I act like they're itching to shoot people, but claiming that they are far quicker to use deadly force than police in the UK is a statistical fact. Yeah, we don't live in a black and white world. There's a spectrum of situations that warrants a spectrum of responses. But is anyone in that situation worse off because a gun wasn't involved? Is British society worse off because those officers didn't unload firearms into that deranged guy? I certainly don't think so. Plus, not having guns forced those officers to do something that US cops definitely rarely do when presented with a threat: retreat.

Here's what I don't get. Patrol officers in the US have guns, officers in the UK do not. Cops in the US have guns because we have a ridiculously well armed populace, and cops in the UK dont have guns because guns are very uncommon. But when it comes to knives, the logic doesn't apply. Both countries have knives, and crazy/dangerous suspects that weild them. Why is it that OUR cops have to use deadly force, while cops in the UK handle those situations without needing to? We should expect more restraint and patience from our cops, instead of just using deadly force simply because they have it.

What do you have planned for your next car(s)?

One of the most despicable law enforcement officials in the country.

Can't wait! Your gardena pack is by far my favorite ELS pack so far, it'll hold a pretty permanent spot in my police spots :)

Live to fight another day

Refer to my updated post. You're aware that police brutality is unacceptable in EVERY case, right? Criminals are still protected by the constitution, no matter how much of a tough guy you are. And I love how it went from 'victims of police brutality' to 'criminals' to 'violent criminals'. You're trying to justify police brutality and its sickening.

I wasn't claiming you were, I was asking if you were. If you make an argument that completely fails to condemn police brutality, its not a far fetched idea to think that you might kind of like seeing cops rough people up. And not everyone that experiences police brutality is a criminal, that's an ugly truth you have to learn to accept. A lot of them aren't. And whats with the 'supposedly'? Police brutality is brutal...that's why its called police brutality. With all due respect, you need to put some more thought into what you're saying, unless you're trying to be inflammatory. Storming into a thread claiming that victims of police brutality 'brought it on themselves' is essentially JUSTIFYING the brutality. It makes police brutality sound like an appropriate response to an uncooperative citizen, something our law enforcement officials are tasked with dealing with every single day. If they can't do the job without brutalizing people, they shouldn't be on the job.

Come on, now. What PNWParksFan was perfectly reasonable and you know it. But blaming police brutality on the victim is a little gross, man. We don't live under an authoritarian regime, police brutality violates the 8th amendment. We have a constitutional right to be treated fairly and humanely. You sound like a Blackshirt when you call victims of police brutality "Idiots, that failed to obey simple instructions." I mean, just think about the term "police brutality" and the fact that you're excusing it. People usually argue that incidents of police brutality aren't actually brutality. But are you actually PRO-police brutality? Think about what you're saying, man.