Deadly force by US police compounds global disdain

[The manic]

The 2nd amendment needs amending to take into account the fact that people are no longer carrying slow loading flintlock and weak, inaccurate muskets.

[MaeJoMTB]

"The world is prepared to admire "the American dream" and appreciates the many benefits and opportunities shared by the US, but we are also seeing a country that has never truly embraced the equality espoused by its founding fathers."

Most of the world hates America as it is today.

From all I see it is a deeply repressive society, where the freedoms of the individual count for nothing.

Don't know where the 'admiration' is coming from.

Edited June 8, 2015 by MaeJoMTB

[chuckd]

There are around 20,000 gun laws on the books in the US.

None of them are capable of removing the guns from the hands of criminals.

Criminals do not, by nature, follow laws in general and gun laws, specifically.

Gun laws only restrict lawful gun owners.

[MaxYakov]

"The world is prepared to admire "the American dream" and appreciates the many benefits and opportunities shared by the US, but we are also seeing a country that has never truly embraced the equality espoused by its founding fathers."

Most of the world hates America as it is today.

From all I see it is a deeply repressive society, where the freedoms of the individual count for nothing.

Don't know where the 'admiration' is coming from.

"The world is prepared to admire "the American dream" and appreciates the many benefits and opportunities shared by the US, but we are also seeing a country that has never truly embraced the equality espoused by its founding fathers."

What would you know about what the founding espoused about equality, for example, slavery?

Maybe the admiration is coming from their watching the U.S. give away its wealth and sovereignty to foreign nationals as a welfare-to-the-World state. Maybe they are admiring the level of national suicide and political stupidity it takes to do so.

Are you a U.S. citizen and/or have lived and worked in the U.S.?

Edited June 8, 2015 by MaxYakov

[Publicus]

Yeah, that's right NS, it's all just a conspiracy...

U.S. Police Kill More Civilians in March than UK Police Killed in 100 Years

http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2015/04/07/u-s-police-kill-more-civilians-in-march-than-uk-police-killed-in-100-years/

Police killed more than twice as many people as reported by US government

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/04/police-killed-people-fbi-data-justifiable-homicides

Police in the US Kill Citizens at Over 70 Times the Rate of Other First-World Nations

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/police-kill-citizens-70-times-rate-first-world-nations/

There is more violence because the criminals are more violent.

Side effect of a heavily armed nation.

And of course the governments are too lilly livered to introduce the banning of guns as it would effect their voting base. Don't see them growing any gonads in the foreseeable future either.

2013 was the last time Congress voted on reforms to gun laws, rules, regulations and more than 70% of all Americans surveyed by pollsters supported the bill before the Senate.

Despite 54 Senators voting for better gun laws, the bill failed because 60 votes are required of the 100 member body.

The direct result is a continued increase in the body count of Americans and lots of champagne flowing in the dens of the National Rifle Association which has a certain number of expat members in other parts of the world too.

The vast majority of Americans support gun law reform and always have supported gun law reform. The NRA opposes any gun reform laws in the absolute because it says the Second Amendment exempts gun owners from the laws they don't approve of.

[CMNightRider]

Yeah, that's right NS, it's all just a conspiracy...

U.S. Police Kill More Civilians in March than UK Police Killed in 100 Years

http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2015/04/07/u-s-police-kill-more-civilians-in-march-than-uk-police-killed-in-100-years/

Police killed more than twice as many people as reported by US government

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/04/police-killed-people-fbi-data-justifiable-homicides

Police in the US Kill Citizens at Over 70 Times the Rate of Other First-World Nations

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/police-kill-citizens-70-times-rate-first-world-nations/

There is more violence because the criminals are more violent.

Side effect of a heavily armed nation.

And of course the governments are too lilly livered to introduce the banning of guns as it would effect their voting base. Don't see them growing any gonads in the foreseeable future either.

2013 was the last time Congress voted on reforms to gun laws, rules, regulations and more than 70% of all Americans surveyed by pollsters supported the bill before the Senate.

Despite 54 Senators voting for better gun laws, the bill failed because 60 votes are required of the 100 member body.

The direct result is a continued increase in the body count of Americans and lots of champagne flowing in the dens of the National Rifle Association which has a certain number of expat members in other parts of the world too.

The vast majority of Americans support gun law reform and always have supported gun law reform. The NRA opposes any gun reform laws in the absolute because it says the Second Amendment exempts gun owners from the laws they don't approve of.

If one really believes "the vast majority of Americans support more gun law reform and always have supported more gun law reform," they probably still believe in Santa, the Easter bunny, and the tooth fairy.

This article has nothing to do with the NRA. This is just another moronic leftist news article written by some liberal communist leaning, anti-gun, and anti-law enforcement hater.

The anti-American posters will always be quick to point their fingers at the U.S. but the Americans who agree with these moronic leftist news articles should be ashamed of themselves.

[Publicus]

And of course the governments are too lilly livered to introduce the banning of guns as it would effect their voting base. Don't see them growing any gonads in the foreseeable future either.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms is enshrined in the US Constitution. The government has nothing to do with it.

In order to change that Constitution it takes:

Either a 2/3 vote of both the House and Senate of the US Congress or a call by 2/3 of the states for a constitutional convention. (38 of 50 states.)

If either of these 2/3 majorities are reached and they want to change the Constitution, the change has to be ratified by the legislatures of 2/3 of the states within a limited time frame.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms is specified to be a right of the people against the government. That's what an individual right is.

With 100 million adult gun owners in the US, don't hold your breath.

Right wing mythology, ideology, astrology, lunar worship, all of which support certain US police departments using certain citizens as regular and frequent target practice free of charge to them.

The Second Amendment was written because the Founders chose not to have a standing army, instead to establish a militia for each state to deal specifically with foreign enemies or invasions of the very young United States. After George Washington, the US did not have a commanding general or a large federal Army until Ulysses S. Grant in the Civil War, and only temporarily, from 1861 until 1866.

The large WW One army was raised mostly out of the blue and the US did not again have a large standing army until just before WW2. The present military framework was established in 1947.

The stuff about citizens with guns and more guns to protect themselves against the government in Washington is a recent malady of the paranoid far right who since 1947 increasingly sensed totalitarians under every bed. Until around 1990 the totalitarians used to be the commies but since then the increasingly extremist and armed to the teeth Second Amendment absolutist right have instead turned against the US Government and the Democratic party to boot.

[impulse]

The right of the people to keep and bear arms is enshrined in the US Constitution. The government has nothing to do with it.

In order to change that Constitution it takes:

Either a 2/3 vote of both the House and Senate of the US Congress or a call by 2/3 of the states for a constitutional convention. (38 of 50 states.)

If either of these 2/3 majorities are reached and they want to change the Constitution, the change has to be ratified by the legislatures of 2/3 of the states within a limited time frame.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms is specified to be a right of the people against the government. That's what an individual right is.

2/3 majority, or 5 old farts in robes deciding that's not really what they meant back then. What they really meant was...(fill in the blank, your guess is as good as mine)

Edited June 8, 2015 by impulse

[MaeJoMTB]

Not sure how gun laws discussions are relevant to this thread.

The US police get all the guns they need to shoot American citizens, and no gun laws will stop that.

[chuckd]

Right wing mythology, ideology, astrology, lunar worship, all of which support certain US police departments using certain citizens as regular and frequent target practice free of charge to them.

The Second Amendment was written because the Founders chose not to have a standing army, instead to establish a militia for each state to deal specifically with foreign enemies or invasions of the very young United States. After George Washington, the US did not have a commanding general or a large federal Army until Ulysses S. Grant in the Civil War, and only temporarily, from 1861 until 1866.

The large WW One army was raised mostly out of the blue and the US did not again have a large standing army until just before WW2. The present military framework was established in 1947.

The stuff about citizens with guns and more guns to protect themselves against the government in Washington is a recent malady of the paranoid far right who since 1947 increasingly sensed totalitarians under every bed. Until around 1990 the totalitarians used to be the commies but since then the increasingly extremist and armed to the teeth Second Amendment absolutist right have instead turned against the US Government and the Democratic party to boot.

You have been known to quote SCOTUS in support of some of you arguments.

What does SCOTUS say about an individual's right to bear arms?

[impulse]

Not sure how gun laws discussions are relevant to this thread.

The US police get all the guns they need to shoot American citizens, and no gun laws will stop that.

A reasonable hypothesis would be that the cops wouldn't be quite so jumpy if fewer people they have to deal with were armed.

I'm not sure the hypothesis would stand rigorous scrutiny, but it is worth discussing.

[Publicus]

And of course the governments are too lilly livered to introduce the banning of guns as it would effect their voting base. Don't see them growing any gonads in the foreseeable future either.

2013 was the last time Congress voted on reforms to gun laws, rules, regulations and more than 70% of all Americans surveyed by pollsters supported the bill before the Senate.

Despite 54 Senators voting for better gun laws, the bill failed because 60 votes are required of the 100 member body.

The direct result is a continued increase in the body count of Americans and lots of champagne flowing in the dens of the National Rifle Association which has a certain number of expat members in other parts of the world too.

The vast majority of Americans support gun law reform and always have supported gun law reform. The NRA opposes any gun reform laws in the absolute because it says the Second Amendment exempts gun owners from the laws they don't approve of.

If one really believes "the vast majority of Americans support more gun law reform and always have supported more gun law reform," they probably still believe in Santa, the Easter bunny, and the tooth fairy.

This article has nothing to do with the NRA. This is just another moronic leftist news article written by some liberal communist leaning, anti-gun, and anti-law enforcement hater.

The anti-American posters will always be quick to point their fingers at the U.S. but the Americans who agree with these moronic leftist news articles should be ashamed of themselves.

Well it was back in 2013 that the issue last came up in Congress and I knew a lot of Americans supported the bill, but my memory was a little short when I posted "more than 70%" of Americans support better and comprehensive gun laws.

The actual percentage is 90%.

Same as say they support a radical increase of solar and wind power.

90 percent of Americans want expanded background checks on guns. Why isn’t this a political slam dunk?

Nine in 10 Americans support expanding background checks on gun purchases in a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, an extraordinary level of agreement on a political issue and a finding that's been duplicated in nearly every major public poll.

Surveys show broad support spans gun owners and non-gun owners alike, Democrats and Republicans, and even among members of the National Rifle Association, whose leadership is leading efforts to spike the measure from pending legislation.

How rare is it that a policy proposal that has support from 90 percent of the public doesn't become law? A search of the Washington Post's polling archives and surveys by other organizations finds that Americans almost never voice this level of consensus on issues, and when they do, they often get what they want

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/04/03/90-percent-of-americans-want-expanded-background-checks-on-guns-why-isnt-this-a-political-slam-dunk/

Only the most extreme extremists continue to say nobody but Santa Claus supports gun control or accepts climate change. It's always good to have Santa on our side and against the extreme flying far out right.

[Publicus]

Right wing mythology, ideology, astrology, lunar worship, all of which support certain US police departments using certain citizens as regular and frequent target practice free of charge to them.

The Second Amendment was written because the Founders chose not to have a standing army, instead to establish a militia for each state to deal specifically with foreign enemies or invasions of the very young United States. After George Washington, the US did not have a commanding general or a large federal Army until Ulysses S. Grant in the Civil War, and only temporarily, from 1861 until 1866.

The large WW One army was raised mostly out of the blue and the US did not again have a large standing army until just before WW2. The present military framework was established in 1947.

The stuff about citizens with guns and more guns to protect themselves against the government in Washington is a recent malady of the paranoid far right who since 1947 increasingly sensed totalitarians under every bed. Until around 1990 the totalitarians used to be the commies but since then the increasingly extremist and armed to the teeth Second Amendment absolutist right have instead turned against the US Government and the Democratic party to boot.

You have been known to quote SCOTUS in support of some of you arguments.

What does SCOTUS say about an individual's right to bear arms?

Getting solicitous in our old age I see, and rather forward besides. Try myself to resist being patronizing but then I'm a couple of years younger even if only a few of 'em.

Yes, as with anyone else, I quote SCOTUS in support of some of my arguments....yes, of course I do that...sometimes, in some instances, concerning some issues, yes.

I see you like this particular issue and the SCOTUS in this particular instance, so quote away on this one, thx. And I'll continue to quote SCOTUS on certain issues, yes. A poster right above pretty much addressed the five conservative Republican majority of the justices on this issue, which does the trick for me thx.

So the suggestion in the post is a reach that is less than cute and much less than clever, however, its torturous tenacity is respectfully recognized.

[slipperylobster]

"The world is prepared to admire "the American dream" and appreciates the many benefits and opportunities shared by the US, but we are also seeing a country that has never truly embraced the equality espoused by its founding fathers."

Most of the world hates America as it is today.

From all I see it is a deeply repressive society, where the freedoms of the individual count for nothing.

Don't know where the 'admiration' is coming from.

No..

Most of the world does not hate Americans. They want to go there and work.

Ask the billions of Chinese, Indians, Africans.

You are sadly....mistaken.

The ones who hate Americans the most are, surprisingly, the farangs I run into here in Thailand. They even speak english (sort of). I suppose it is springs from envy. Perhaps the envy revolves more around the fact that the USD is strong, and the girls understand our English so much better. Also, find us much more attractive. Not to mention our stronger sexual performance, length of manhood and exciting demeanor.

You guys should get help...for youe inferiority complex. Best you can come up with are news articles from the USA that you use as propaganda.

Edited June 8, 2015 by slipperylobster

[Publicus]

"The world is prepared to admire "the American dream" and appreciates the many benefits and opportunities shared by the US, but we are also seeing a country that has never truly embraced the equality espoused by its founding fathers."

Most of the world hates America as it is today.

From all I see it is a deeply repressive society, where the freedoms of the individual count for nothing.

Don't know where the 'admiration' is coming from.

No..

Most of the world does not hate Americans. They want to go there and work.

Ask the billions of Chinese, Indians, Africans.

You are sadly....mistaken.

The ones who hate Americans the most are, surprisingly, the farangs I run into here in Thailand. They even speak english (sort of). I suppose it is springs from envy. Perhaps the envy revolves more around the fact that the USD is strong, and the girls understand our English so much better. Also, find us much more attractive. Not to mention our stronger sexual performance, length of manhood and exciting demeanor.

You guys should get help...for youe inferiority complex. Best you can come up with are news articles from the USA that you use as propaganda.

In general, while I strongly disagree with some people's politics, it's clear the post came from deep inside while more than enough of it went to down under.

[CMNightRider]

And of course the governments are too lilly livered to introduce the banning of guns as it would effect their voting base. Don't see them growing any gonads in the foreseeable future either.

2013 was the last time Congress voted on reforms to gun laws, rules, regulations and more than 70% of all Americans surveyed by pollsters supported the bill before the Senate.

Despite 54 Senators voting for better gun laws, the bill failed because 60 votes are required of the 100 member body.

The direct result is a continued increase in the body count of Americans and lots of champagne flowing in the dens of the National Rifle Association which has a certain number of expat members in other parts of the world too.

The vast majority of Americans support gun law reform and always have supported gun law reform. The NRA opposes any gun reform laws in the absolute because it says the Second Amendment exempts gun owners from the laws they don't approve of.

If one really believes "the vast majority of Americans support more gun law reform and always have supported more gun law reform," they probably still believe in Santa, the Easter bunny, and the tooth fairy.

This article has nothing to do with the NRA. This is just another moronic leftist news article written by some liberal communist leaning, anti-gun, and anti-law enforcement hater.

The anti-American posters will always be quick to point their fingers at the U.S. but the Americans who agree with these moronic leftist news articles should be ashamed of themselves.

Well it was back in 2013 that the issue last came up in Congress and I knew a lot of Americans supported the bill, but my memory was a little short when I posted "more than 70%" of Americans support better and comprehensive gun laws.

The actual percentage is 90%.

Same as say they support a radical increase of solar and wind power.

90 percent of Americans want expanded background checks on guns. Why isn’t this a political slam dunk?

Nine in 10 Americans support expanding background checks on gun purchases in a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, an extraordinary level of agreement on a political issue and a finding that's been duplicated in nearly every major public poll.

Surveys show broad support spans gun owners and non-gun owners alike, Democrats and Republicans, and even among members of the National Rifle Association, whose leadership is leading efforts to spike the measure from pending legislation.

How rare is it that a policy proposal that has support from 90 percent of the public doesn't become law? A search of the Washington Post's polling archives and surveys by other organizations finds that Americans almost never voice this level of consensus on issues, and when they do, they often get what they want

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/04/03/90-percent-of-americans-want-expanded-background-checks-on-guns-why-isnt-this-a-political-slam-dunk/

Only the most extreme extremists continue to say nobody but Santa Claus supports gun control or accepts climate change. It's always good to have Santa on our side and against the extreme flying far out right.

The statement, "90 percent of Americans want expanded background checks on guns" is a myth but you already know that. Can you imagine 9 out of 10 people agreeing on anything? Of course not.

The only thing "extreme" here, seems to be your hysterical rants about more gun control laws. Gee, if you don't like guns, just don't purchase one. Since you don't like police as well, call a crackhead instead of the police the next time you need help.

Where did you get the idea of "Santa Claus supports gun control?" Also, this topic is not about "climate control" or the "NRA."

[sdanielmcev]

And of course the governments are too lilly livered to introduce the banning of guns as it would effect their voting base. Don't see them growing any gonads in the foreseeable future either.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms is enshrined in the US Constitution. The government has nothing to do with it.

In order to change that Constitution it takes:

Either a 2/3 vote of both the House and Senate of the US Congress or a call by 2/3 of the states for a constitutional convention. (38 of 50 states.)

If either of these 2/3 majorities are reached and they want to change the Constitution, the change has to be ratified by the legislatures of 2/3 of the states within a limited time frame.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms is specified to be a right of the people against the government. That's what an individual right is.

With 100 million adult gun owners in the US, don't hold your breath.

Right wing mythology, ideology, astrology, lunar worship, all of which support certain US police departments using certain citizens as regular and frequent target practice free of charge to them.

The Second Amendment was written because the Founders chose not to have a standing army, instead to establish a militia for each state to deal specifically with foreign enemies or invasions of the very young United States. After George Washington, the US did not have a commanding general or a large federal Army until Ulysses S. Grant in the Civil War, and only temporarily, from 1861 until 1866.

The large WW One army was raised mostly out of the blue and the US did not again have a large standing army until just before WW2. The present military framework was established in 1947.

The stuff about citizens with guns and more guns to protect themselves against the government in Washington is a recent malady of the paranoid far right who since 1947 increasingly sensed totalitarians under every bed. Until around 1990 the totalitarians used to be the commies but since then the increasingly extremist and armed to the teeth Second Amendment absolutist right have instead turned against the US Government and the Democratic party to boot.

Nope. Not even close. Left wing mythology. You are stating opinion, not fact. And, in the opinion of your oft quoted Supreme Court, that is not their interpretation of the 2nd amendment. Probably why you didn't bring it up?

Since the Supreme Court has been brought up, how about Miranda rights? That is not and never should have been a police officers' responsibility. Another left-wing/liberal hamstring.

And, this is not about the NRA.

[Publicus]

2013 was the last time Congress voted on reforms to gun laws, rules, regulations and more than 70% of all Americans surveyed by pollsters supported the bill before the Senate.

Despite 54 Senators voting for better gun laws, the bill failed because 60 votes are required of the 100 member body.

The direct result is a continued increase in the body count of Americans and lots of champagne flowing in the dens of the National Rifle Association which has a certain number of expat members in other parts of the world too.

The vast majority of Americans support gun law reform and always have supported gun law reform. The NRA opposes any gun reform laws in the absolute because it says the Second Amendment exempts gun owners from the laws they don't approve of.

If one really believes "the vast majority of Americans support more gun law reform and always have supported more gun law reform," they probably still believe in Santa, the Easter bunny, and the tooth fairy.

This article has nothing to do with the NRA. This is just another moronic leftist news article written by some liberal communist leaning, anti-gun, and anti-law enforcement hater.

The anti-American posters will always be quick to point their fingers at the U.S. but the Americans who agree with these moronic leftist news articles should be ashamed of themselves.

Well it was back in 2013 that the issue last came up in Congress and I knew a lot of Americans supported the bill, but my memory was a little short when I posted "more than 70%" of Americans support better and comprehensive gun laws.

The actual percentage is 90%.

Same as say they support a radical increase of solar and wind power.

90 percent of Americans want expanded background checks on guns. Why isn’t this a political slam dunk?

Nine in 10 Americans support expanding background checks on gun purchases in a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, an extraordinary level of agreement on a political issue and a finding that's been duplicated in nearly every major public poll.

Surveys show broad support spans gun owners and non-gun owners alike, Democrats and Republicans, and even among members of the National Rifle Association, whose leadership is leading efforts to spike the measure from pending legislation.

How rare is it that a policy proposal that has support from 90 percent of the public doesn't become law? A search of the Washington Post's polling archives and surveys by other organizations finds that Americans almost never voice this level of consensus on issues, and when they do, they often get what they want

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/04/03/90-percent-of-americans-want-expanded-background-checks-on-guns-why-isnt-this-a-political-slam-dunk/

Only the most extreme extremists continue to say nobody but Santa Claus supports gun control or accepts climate change. It's always good to have Santa on our side and against the extreme flying far out right.

The statement, "90 percent of Americans want expanded background checks on guns" is a myth but you already know that. Can you imagine 9 out of 10 people agreeing on anything? Of course not.

The only thing "extreme" here, seems to be your hysterical rants about more gun control laws. Gee, if you don't like guns, just don't purchase one. Since you don't like police as well, call a crackhead instead of the police the next time you need help.

Where did you get the idea of "Santa Claus supports gun control?" Also, this topic is not about "climate control" or the "NRA."

The post indicates an unfortunate and extremist state of hysterical denial of all the public opinion surveys at the time and going forward to the present, not to mention the positive vote of the 54 US Senators in 2013 who advocate and support better gun laws but who still could not implement any.

I'm not a gun worshiper but I have stated regularly at these threads I own a gun, one handgun, in the United States and I've been a (single) gun owner for many many years. I would never join the National Rifle Association however as it is controlled by the marginal fringe trigger happy lunar right, to include certain expats. I strongly suspect a lot of cops belong to the NRA but the NRA will not disclose the number of right wing police among its 4-5 million members.

Anyone who tries to cite the 100 million gun owners in the US as supporting their position and their position only is making sweeping overstatements that are extreme and unsupportable...wildly so One hundred million Americans don't support anything about the crackpot right...there are maybe 20 million of lunar probes out there on the green cheese right and no more than that (bad enough but not so terrible), not 100 million.

I have never had any problem securing or enjoying the everyday or special protection of the police in my experience in the United States nor would I expect the police to discriminate in their professional law enforcement duties to find out whether a given citizen such as myself deserves their protective civil service. Conversely, those on the interstellar right need to stop presuming people who disagree with their fanatical gun worship need to beg the police back home to do their job of protecting and serving us.

I've never had a problem getting or enjoying police protection and there aren't any white people I know, or know of in the US, to include the many middle class black Americans, who have to worry whether they meet some kind of right wing extremist litmus test of police protection whether it may be regular and usual or extraordinary.

I share the view of Chief Richard Beary, president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police who recently stated that 98% of the time the police do the right thing. The thread thus is about the two percent and the 20 million other far out Americans I reference.

Edited June 8, 2015 by Publicus

[Publicus]

And of course the governments are too lilly livered to introduce the banning of guns as it would effect their voting base. Don't see them growing any gonads in the foreseeable future either.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms is enshrined in the US Constitution. The government has nothing to do with it.

In order to change that Constitution it takes:

Either a 2/3 vote of both the House and Senate of the US Congress or a call by 2/3 of the states for a constitutional convention. (38 of 50 states.)

If either of these 2/3 majorities are reached and they want to change the Constitution, the change has to be ratified by the legislatures of 2/3 of the states within a limited time frame.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms is specified to be a right of the people against the government. That's what an individual right is.

With 100 million adult gun owners in the US, don't hold your breath.

Any claim that these 100 million Americans support one single point of view among many points of view would be making an unsupportable and unsustainable statement that is necessarily unrealistic. The claim is extreme and one-dimensional.

Try to contain future statements in this respect to actual realities and to the facts on the ground here on planet Earth, thx.

[HeijoshinCool]

The writer is reporting news and you are mistaken in saying that the people of the U.S. don't give a damn what the writer thinks. I am a person of the U.S. and I care what he thinks and what is going on in the mean streets of American cities - and so do you - give a damn - as you got so upset by reading what this writer wrote.

I get upset any time someone without a clue takes it upon himself to pontificate with presumption and prejudices.

Now look at Tywai's post above for my answer about what you said. I support the police in their very dangerous jobs.

.

It's not often I disagree with you NS, but here we part ways. I do have a clue what police work requires. What the video linked below, and far too many like it, shows, isn't it.

When I started police work in the early 80's, cops were very different. There were bad apples back then, but nowhere near what we have today.

Cops today are overly aggressive, even when the situation does not call for it. They spew foul language at bystanders. We would have been suspended for using a single curse word to a suspect.

We didn't have Tasers, and the guys I worked with, with a few exceptions, wouldn't have wanted to use them. We were expected to talk down the potentially violent, and when that didn't work, grapple. We took pride in that. Shooting a person was a last resort.

Much of the problem today is caused by hiring the wrong people. Many are combat veterans. While most are good cops, there are some very unstable, emotionally immature people being given control over the life and death of everyday citizens. Many current cops are undereducated, and lack a good problem solving thought process. Many can not be challenged to any degree, they lose Face.In my day, we apologized when we stopped the wrong person.

Is America more violent than 30 years ago? Of course. But incidents like the one on this video are a regular, even weekly, example of not a more violent offender, but a more violent police officer.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/06/03/1390285/-Shocking-new-video-shows-unarmed-Utah-man-was-listening-to-headphones-when-killed-by-police

Not certain where you are talking about. Not the U.S. I grew up in. Do something wrong, cop was as likely to smack you around as take you to the station. Now they seem to be more handcuffed (no pun intended) into being polite(?) to violent criminals. Maybe it's their frustration at not being able to do their jobs. BTW, I'm from the Chicago area.

.

So you are equating "smacking people around," with shooting innocent people in the back, and killing them, because of a total lack of value for human life?

Where I'm from, and started my law enforcement career, there was a difference: one is called a minor abuse of power, the other, sociopathy.

[sdanielmcev]

The writer is reporting news and you are mistaken in saying that the people of the U.S. don't give a damn what the writer thinks. I am a person of the U.S. and I care what he thinks and what is going on in the mean streets of American cities - and so do you - give a damn - as you got so upset by reading what this writer wrote.

I get upset any time someone without a clue takes it upon himself to pontificate with presumption and prejudices.

Now look at Tywai's post above for my answer about what you said. I support the police in their very dangerous jobs.

.

It's not often I disagree with you NS, but here we part ways. I do have a clue what police work requires. What the video linked below, and far too many like it, shows, isn't it.

When I started police work in the early 80's, cops were very different. There were bad apples back then, but nowhere near what we have today.

Cops today are overly aggressive, even when the situation does not call for it. They spew foul language at bystanders. We would have been suspended for using a single curse word to a suspect.

We didn't have Tasers, and the guys I worked with, with a few exceptions, wouldn't have wanted to use them. We were expected to talk down the potentially violent, and when that didn't work, grapple. We took pride in that. Shooting a person was a last resort.

Much of the problem today is caused by hiring the wrong people. Many are combat veterans. While most are good cops, there are some very unstable, emotionally immature people being given control over the life and death of everyday citizens. Many current cops are undereducated, and lack a good problem solving thought process. Many can not be challenged to any degree, they lose Face.In my day, we apologized when we stopped the wrong person.

Is America more violent than 30 years ago? Of course. But incidents like the one on this video are a regular, even weekly, example of not a more violent offender, but a more violent police officer.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/06/03/1390285/-Shocking-new-video-shows-unarmed-Utah-man-was-listening-to-headphones-when-killed-by-police

Not certain where you are talking about. Not the U.S. I grew up in. Do something wrong, cop was as likely to smack you around as take you to the station. Now they seem to be more handcuffed (no pun intended) into being polite(?) to violent criminals. Maybe it's their frustration at not being able to do their jobs. BTW, I'm from the Chicago area.

.

So you are equating "smacking people around," with shooting innocent people in the back, and killing them, because of a total lack of value for human life?

Where I'm from, and started my law enforcement career, there was a difference: one is called a minor abuse of power, the other, sociopathy.

Of course I didn't say that, and if you are a former police officer, you should know not to take people out of context. I was explaining my experience to yours.

[CMNightRider]

Well it was back in 2013 that the issue last came up in Congress and I knew a lot of Americans supported the bill, but my memory was a little short when I posted "more than 70%" of Americans support better and comprehensive gun laws.

The actual percentage is 90%.

Same as say they support a radical increase of solar and wind power.

90 percent of Americans want expanded background checks on guns. Why isn’t this a political slam dunk?

Nine in 10 Americans support expanding background checks on gun purchases in a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, an extraordinary level of agreement on a political issue and a finding that's been duplicated in nearly every major public poll.

Surveys show broad support spans gun owners and non-gun owners alike, Democrats and Republicans, and even among members of the National Rifle Association, whose leadership is leading efforts to spike the measure from pending legislation.

How rare is it that a policy proposal that has support from 90 percent of the public doesn't become law? A search of the Washington Post's polling archives and surveys by other organizations finds that Americans almost never voice this level of consensus on issues, and when they do, they often get what they want

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/04/03/90-percent-of-americans-want-expanded-background-checks-on-guns-why-isnt-this-a-political-slam-dunk/

Only the most extreme extremists continue to say nobody but Santa Claus supports gun control or accepts climate change. It's always good to have Santa on our side and against the extreme flying far out right.

The statement, "90 percent of Americans want expanded background checks on guns" is a myth but you already know that. Can you imagine 9 out of 10 people agreeing on anything? Of course not.

The only thing "extreme" here, seems to be your hysterical rants about more gun control laws. Gee, if you don't like guns, just don't purchase one. Since you don't like police as well, call a crackhead instead of the police the next time you need help.

Where did you get the idea of "Santa Claus supports gun control?" Also, this topic is not about "climate control" or the "NRA."

The post indicates an unfortunate and extremist state of hysterical denial of all the public opinion surveys at the time and going forward to the present, not to mention the positive vote of the 54 US Senators in 2013 who advocate and support better gun laws but who still could not implement any.

I'm not a gun worshiper but I have stated regularly at these threads I own a gun, one handgun, in the United States and I've been a (single) gun owner for many many years. I would never join the National Rifle Association however as it is controlled by the marginal fringe trigger happy lunar right, to include certain expats. I strongly suspect a lot of cops belong to the NRA but the NRA will not disclose the number of right wing police among its 4-5 million members.

Anyone who tries to cite the 100 million gun owners in the US as supporting their position and their position only is making sweeping overstatements that are extreme and unsupportable...wildly so One hundred million Americans don't support anything about the crackpot right...there are maybe 20 million of lunar probes out there on the green cheese right and no more than that (bad enough but not so terrible), not 100 million.

I have never had any problem securing or enjoying the everyday or special protection of the police in my experience in the United States nor would I expect the police to discriminate in their professional law enforcement duties to find out whether a given citizen such as myself deserves their protective civil service. Conversely, those on the interstellar right need to stop presuming people who disagree with their fanatical gun worship need to beg the police back home to do their job of protecting and serving us.

I've never had a problem getting or enjoying police protection and there aren't any white people I know, or know of in the US, to include the many middle class black Americans, who have to worry whether they meet some kind of right wing extremist litmus test of police protection whether it may be regular and usual or extraordinary.

I share the view of Chief Richard Beary, president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police who recently stated that 98% of the time the police do the right thing. The thread thus is about the two percent and the 20 million other far out Americans I reference.

Huh? My "post indicates an unfortunate and extremist state of hysterical denial of all public opinion surveys"??? I believe that would be projection on your part. Questioning a survey where 90% of Americans agree with anti-gun nuts wouldn't indicate being in a state of hysterical denial of all public surveys, lol.

I'm not certain why you keep bringing up the NRA. The person who wrote this moronic article never mentioned the NRA. Also, you never fail to mention "gun-worshipers." This may come as a shock to you but trying to find a "gun-worshiper" is right up there with locating a Leprechaun.

This article suggests police in America are running around killing innocent people. I have read some really stupid and ludicrous opinions posted on Thai Visa but this one should receive some sort of award or honorable mention for being the most ludicrous.

Edited June 9, 2015 by CMNightRider

[CMNightRider]

And look at how they imprison their own people. The stats are shocking

Especially California Home of the free my Arse.

In America, habitual criminals end up being recipients of correctional services. What is so shocking about that, lol. I would be curious to know what they do with criminals where you come from. Maybe sometime when you aren't hearing voices or hallucinating, you can share what your country does with criminals.

[Publicus]

This likely fits in with the OP so check out the whacko cop in this video as he decides to do an unassisted somersault in the middle of his wild uncontrolled run to nowhere, scattering a bunch of well mannered middle class black teens at a pool party.

After the tightly wound cop got back on his feet and arrived to nowhere, he proceeded to pull his gun on an unarmed 15 year old girl in a two piece swimsuit as she kept asking permission to call her mother, a request which surely must be a direct threat to the lives of police everywhere.

After which the cop could be heard biching about the weight of the body equipment he has to bear while running down everyone in sight coming out of an ordinary pool party where no laws were broken, no guns reported, no gangs present and where no violations of any law occurred.

The fact is, the kids in this video are mild mannered obedient middle class kids who are being rounded up while black.

Texas Cop Pulls Gun On Black Teens At Pool Party, Police Have Eric Casebolt Suspended Over Video

https://youtu.be/R46-XTqXkzE

[LomSak27]

If the US threw in its support for the current Military Government of Thailand, the Nation Opp/Ed writers would be doing handstands with a sparkler up their arse. They couldn't care less about Deadly Force, as they have about 2010 in the past and mass graves in the south last month.

[sdanielmcev]

I knew one of mindless, knee-jerk ('It's on CNN! It's gotta be true!'), self hating liberal racists would bring up what happened in McKinney, Texas. Of course, what you see in that video is a minor slice of what actually happened, but that would be facts. And liberals, as above, prove their deceit every day.

[MaeJoMTB]

I knew one of mindless, knee-jerk ('It's on CNN! It's gotta be true!'), self hating liberal racists would bring up what happened in McKinney, Texas. Of course, what you see in that video is a minor slice of what actually happened, but that would be facts. And liberals, as above, prove their deceit every day.

Teenage afternoon birthday party at a pool with semi naked teenage boys and girls, just how dangerous do you imagine the 'off video' action could have been?

[Publicus]

It's all over the news all over the world.

"self hating liberal racists"

Dr. Freud I presume

Believe me, it's not myself I hate

[Scott]

Off-topic, inflammatory posts and replies removed. There is an entire thread running about the police/pool party situation. Feel free to post your comments about that situation in that thread.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/831546-video-of-us-officer-who-drew-gun-on-black-teens-raises-tension/

[thaibeachlovers]

Not sure how gun laws discussions are relevant to this thread.

The US police get all the guns they need to shoot American citizens, and no gun laws will stop that.

A reasonable hypothesis would be that the cops wouldn't be quite so jumpy if fewer people they have to deal with were armed.

I'm not sure the hypothesis would stand rigorous scrutiny, but it is worth discussing.

As the people the cops have to worry about are criminals and use illegal guns, that argument has little to recommend it.