But isnt that because crime rates are generally higher in these communities? And not just petty crimes, but violent, senseless ones...

Black is not the issue i am pointing out towards since i know a similar problem faces some hispanic communities as well...

Poor also isnt the issue i am referring to, because any ethnic or even majority group has that anywhere in the world, but rather what people choose to do when they are poor. It is not uncommon that people in lower socioeconomic groups are high risk to turn to violent crimes and illegal activities, brought about by lack of education and proper guidance. But many groups, having started out as poor, ignorant and marginalized have also been successful at policing themselves from entering these said activities.

What i am saying is that there are communities that have a gang mentality (not the same as organized crime rings) and view law enforcement as the target enemy. When they look at themselves as the oppressed ( whether true or not ), and justify guns and violence as a means to gain power and control in this set-up, the individuals living in these communities become the victims of their own self-fulfilling ideals.

My questions...
Are these communities actually being actively oppressed without cause? Or did they make the situation for themselves, to begin with?
How should law enforcers defend themselves legitimately in these communities?

Deescalation, keeping safe distance,, etc,, need
to be more of the protocol than shoot first and
ask questions later,,,

repeating for CONTEXT, which is often overlooked in the quest to be 'right'



not as a first line of defense when responding to UNARMED citizens

I have not referred to any specific person, I have referenced a specific SITUATON, of unarmed citizen being gunned down or otherwise killed by police

repeating for CONTEXT, which is often overlooked in the quest to be 'right'



not as a first line of defense when responding to UNARMED citizens

I have not referred to any specific person, I have referenced a specific SITUATON, of unarmed citizen being gunned down or otherwise killed by police

i must have missed something...what situation are you referring to?

the situations mentioned in this thread those of armed suspects...yes?

...and the protesters mentioned in the original post here were throwing glass bottles and bricks at the officers. No guns, but still projectile objects with intent to do morbid damage. The officers did not open-fire at these armed but un-gunned civilians. They first used inert and followed up with tear gas as deterrents, which is a legitimate first and second line of defense.

why are you referring to a situation of innocent civilians being shot unarmed by law officers, when it is not part of the topic? you are injecting an issue that is not part of the topic at hand...it is confusing me...

JAMYLA BOLTON

No protests, no catchy chants, no #BlackLivesMatter...... I am just lil girl, shot dead by thugs while trying to do my homework.

i must have missed something...what situation are you referring to?

the situations mentioned in this thread those of armed suspects...yes?

...and the protesters mentioned in the original post here were throwing glass bottles and bricks at the officers. No guns, but still projectile objects with intent to do morbid damage. The officers did not open-fire at these armed but un-gunned civilians. They first used inert and followed up with tear gas as deterrents, which is a legitimate first and second line of defense.

why are you referring to a situation of innocent civilians being shot unarmed by law officers, when it is not part of the topic? you are injecting an issue that is not part of the topic at hand...it is confusing me...

unfortunately you never know if they are armed or unarmed... do you MS. How could you know if they have a gun hidden under their shirt or in the small of their back... how?..

How does you theory pan out for the two cops who were killed very recently ( Tn. & La.).. you know, the 2 who never got the chance to even get their gun out of the holster before they were murdered... by thugs with illegal or stolen guns.. guns hidden under their shirts..

You are referring to a common tactic by certain posters to use the classic "straw man" argument which shifts the subject to another issue that has nothing to do with the one being discussed. The "straw man" can then be attacked in the hopes that the reader won't notice that the actual response had nothing to so with the issue.

Notice how smoothly the armed drug dealer became a "unarmed citizen" in the argument for the purpose of defaming the police in general.

If you go back in Mingle and read the poster's comments on Ferguson, MO that created the "hands up, don't shoot" lie, you will see how all the lies were treated as evidence and all the evidence was treated as lies.

From Wiki:

"A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent.[1]

The so-called typical "attacking a straw man" argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and then to refute or defeat that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the original proposition.[2][3]

This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged emotional issues where a fiery, entertaining "battle" and the defeat of an "enemy" may be more valued than critical thinking or understanding both sides of the issue."

so, if you dont know if they are armed, thats justification to shoot them? is that what your view is? wow

no , this thread was begun to COMPARE the reaction to this girls death to the reaction to the death of 'thugs'


I am explaining the difference between the crime the justice system addresses (civilian vs civilian) and the deaths the justice system excuses (civilian vs cop)

the latter is protested because cops work WITHIN the justice system which is supposed to represent the SOCIETY

individual criminals are not owing to anyone, arent paid for being criminals, and dont have any expectation to represent anyone but themself

Okay.....whatever...i could be wrong, i could be right on my perception of things...but i just want to point out what i think of each of the 4 statements you just made...

1. Comparing the death of an unsuspecting innocent vs that of one who chooses a life of crime under the circumstances stated has no merit in making an argument for police brutality or unequal treatment by any legal justice system.

2. It is a fact that people who choose a life of crime, are more likely to die because of it, whether by the hand of another criminal, by the hand of law enforcement, or by even by the hand of civilians should the situation warrant it. You live by the sword, you die by the sword. That is a fact and has nothing to do with a corrupt justice system. What is unfortunate here is the unnecessary collateral damage.

3. Police brutality and a screwed criminal justice system that favors law enforcement happens when violence (via actual lethal acts or threatened lethal acts) is against law abiding citizens and/or general public welfare. Citizens engaging in criminal acts and in possession of or using illegal weapons cannot expect the same consideration as citizens who do not engage themselves in these situations.

4. Criminals generally engage in their line of work BECAUSE of the payout. They willingly risk their own lives as well as the lives of others because of the payout that they are looking forward to making. It is about money, not morality. I don't see the point of argument about having to mention police brutality because of income in connection with this. Police corruption and brutality more often happens when they work for the criminals, not against them.

-----
However which way you want to argue your point, whatever it may be...your line of argument does not make a case against police brutality. Your reasoning does however, makes a case for criminal activity.

let's see whose political thread will last the longest...