US: Black man shot dead in San Diego just after police arrived

[Publicus]

16 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

When you can drop your condescending disrespectful tone then I will converse with you. I remeber back when you were a decent sort but I have watched you melt down over the past year--it appears you are failing to adapt to Thailand and its making you a very unhappy camper.

 

Cheers

 

I remeber back when you were a decent sort

 

Right.

 

Your sword is accepted thx.

Edited October 3, 2016 by Publicus
Revise text.

[ClutchClark]

6 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

Comprehension problems again Clutch. Rooted in an entirely political approach to the issue of the national police crime wave against certain black Americans, specifically, those confined by society to ghetto neighborhoods or entire sections of cities.

 

My post said one cannot automatically or necessarily disassociate the officers or the department from violations of law. You are attempting to do exactly that. Again, you are saying they are necessarily a priori disassociated from violations of local, state or federal law. Your position is based on politics, politics, politics.

 

It is also necessary to again iterate that the right has no more entitlement of a safe and secure society right on down to the neighborhood and -- especially -- into one's home. Whether one is shot in the back in a park or in one's own living room is a matter of sensationalism but not of result. The right does not own any moral or social high ground or entitlement in these instances or in the racial conflicts that exist between certain police and certain black Americans in certain areas of the United States. 

 

Reading through this reminds me of watching a peacock strut around with his feathers all on display. 

 

Its very pretty but the bird is useless because those feathers make it a lousy flyer and what good is a bird that can't fly? 

 

I don't even understand half of whatever it is you are saying. 

 

I don't understand one bit of the last paragraph. The right has no right to a safe society? Huh? I have a right to a safe society...and I enforce that right to a distance of about 100 yards accurately.

 

I imagine that holds true for quite a few of us on the "Right" and I know a few on the Left as well. 

[Publicus]

5 hours ago, ClutchClark said:

 

Reading through this reminds me of watching a peacock strut around with his feathers all on display. 

 

Its very pretty but the bird is useless because those feathers make it a lousy flyer and what good is a bird that can't fly? 

 

I don't even understand half of whatever it is you are saying. 

 

I don't understand one bit of the last paragraph. I have a right to a safe society...and I enforce that right to a distance of about 100 yards accurately.

 

I imagine that holds true for quite a few of us on the "Right" and I know a few on the Left as well. 

 

The right has no right to a safe society? Huh?

 

You are absolutely right Clutch -- you haven't any comprehension of the content of my post. None whatsoever. Whoooosh.

 

Your comprehension of my posts is fragmented and incoherent. My posts make the point that the right are not the only members of the society who have the right to a secure and safe society in every respect. The right are not the only members of the society who support the police in their nasty job. Yet you're all over the thread with this exclusivist stuff.

 

Further, my posts to the thread point out that the right are not the only element of the population that pay taxes, work for a good living, live in a respectable neighborhood and lifestyle, are educated, professional, and are 'good' citizens. The demands and expectations the right has of society are shared by Americans in the socio-political center and left of center. We indeed want to be safe from riots and people with guns.

 

To say the police need to be improved, to include especially the ever present berserker cops, but to simultaneously criticise anyone who does not absolutely support the police in this case and in this particular instance is inconsistent, irrational, ideological. To believe you and the right only know this case is not only presumptuous, it is wrong. You just do not get that or any of it.

 

So carry on Clutch.

[thaihome]

15 hours ago, ClutchClark said:

 

Again, splaced UNTIL you can tell me that the officers involved in this and other police shootings were officers facing disciplinary issues as described in the article you attached.

 

As I have already indicated, I agree with the CoP that there are a small percentage of officers who have HR issues just like one would expect at any Organization...but you are attempting to connect this minute group directly to these officer involved shootings without any justfication.

 

The El Cajon police officer who shot Alfred Olango dead has been at the center of controversy before. Last year, Richard Gonsalves was sued for sexual harassment after making lewd propositions and texting explicit photos to his subordinate officer. He was demoted to officer from sergeant. Gonsalves was just served with a second suit in August of this year, after the harassment continued. Despite the lawsuits, Gonsalves remained on the force.

http://m.democracynow.org/stories/16666

TH

[ClutchClark]

5 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

The right has no right to a safe society? Huh?

 

You are absolutely right Clutch -- you haven't any comprehension of the content of my post. None whatsoever. Whoooosh.

 

Your comprehension of my posts is fragmented and incoherent. My posts make the point that the right are not the only members of the society who have the right to a secure and safe society in every respect. The right are not the only members of the society who support the police in their nasty job. Yet you're all over the thread with this exclusivist stuff.

 

Further, my posts to the thread point out that the right are not the only element of the population that pay taxes, work for a good living, live in a respectable neighborhood and lifestyle, are educated, professional, and are 'good' citizens. The demands and expectations the right has of society are shared by Americans in the socio-political center and left of center. We indeed want to be safe from riots and people with guns.

 

To say the police need to be improved, to include especially the ever present berserker cops, but to simultaneously criticise anyone who does not absolutely support the police in this case and in this particular instance is inconsistent, irrational, ideological. To believe you and the right only know this case is not only presumptuous, it is wrong. You just do not get that or any of it.

 

So carry on Clutch.

 

Finally a post absent all the superfluous words that I earlier stated I could not understand. 

 

Your post is encouraging. Its great to hear that the Left also wants to be safe from riots and people with guns. All the support of BLM riots by the Left has given me the opposite impression. 

 

Thanks for your first reasonable post on the subject and for not resorting to name calling and insinuations. I honestly appreciate it.

 

Cheers

[ClutchClark]

4 hours ago, thaihome said:

 

The El Cajon police officer who shot Alfred Olango dead has been at the center of controversy before. Last year, Richard Gonsalves was sued for sexual harassment after making lewd propositions and texting explicit photos to his subordinate officer. He was demoted to officer from sergeant. Gonsalves was just served with a second suit in August of this year, after the harassment continued. Despite the lawsuits, Gonsalves remained on the force.

http://m.democracynow.org/stories/16666

TH

 

I do not condone harassment of any fellow officer for any reason and I certainly do not defend Gonsalves for the actions described above. 

 

However, the negative behavior above is in no way evidence of racism or excessive force and those are the suggestions being made in his shooting of Olango and this would be the type of disciplinary action necessary to support such claims.

 

Had he texted Olango a picture of his pecker or goosed Olangos backside then this history you have discovered would most certainly be relevant. 

[Publicus]

12 hours ago, ClutchClark said:

 

 

4 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

Finally a post absent all the superfluous words that I earlier stated I could not understand. 

 

Your post is encouraging. Its great to hear that the Left also wants to be safe from riots and people with guns. All the support of BLM riots by the Left has given me the opposite impression. 

 

Thanks for your first reasonable post on the subject and for not resorting to name calling and insinuations. I honestly appreciate it.

 

Cheers

 

 

Finally a post absent all the superfluous words that I earlier stated I could not understand. 

 

A couple of youse guyz around here are a barrel of laffs.

 

 

All the support of BLM riots by the Left has given me the opposite impression. 

 

Overstated again in yet another instance of being wrong Clutch.

 

Suggest you quit trying to read only between the lines to instead read the actual lines of text that you do see before you. The black stuff on the page instead of what's not there that's completely white. Reading what's there instead of what's not there is so much better Clutch, believe me. Saves all of us a lotta time and trouble. Helps your reading comprehension too...you don't have to post so much to explain yourself nor post so much to express your humble gratitude and thanks for simpler posts.

 

(Thought you weren't going to post to moi any more until I got respectful of your superior knowledge of police, policing, police work, not to mention accepting your scolding and lecturing of any poster you don't like or agree with. I'd been so looking forward to you keeping your promise/threat not to post to moi. Oh well, to be continued...)

[Strange]

13 minutes ago, Publicus said:

Finally a post absent all the superfluous words that I earlier stated I could not understand. 

 

A couple of youse guyz around here are a barrel of laffs.

 

Checking in.... 

 

13 minutes ago, Publicus said:

(Thought you weren't going to post to moi any more until I got respectful of your superior knowledge of police, policing, police work, not to mention accepting your scolding and lecturing of any poster you don't like or agree with. I'd been so looking forward to you keeping your promise/threat not to post to moi. Oh well, to be continued...)

 

"moi" "moi"

 

Seriously, Publicus, this an attempt at humor? No hate, just curious. 

[Jools]

United States cops are murdering swine. They hate black people and will drum up ANY excuse to shoot and kill them. Usually, the excuse is that they "thought" they may have had a weapon. The solution is to disarm the police and let them use their "persuasion" on the citizens they abuse and murder on a routine basis.

[metisdead]

Off topic deflection posts have been removed.  This is not about a case in Cleveland, this is about the case in EL CAJON, California. 

[Strange]

11 minutes ago, Publicus said:

 

If you literally fell into the river it would be a catastrophe. If someone fished you out again it would be a calamity. 

 

I still don't know your view in respect of the topic however.

 

 

Im sure you know, and I'm sure the vast majority of americans feel the same way. There will never be any sympathy from me for anyone that does things like this, and gets shot. The police have a hard time and now with people like you and everyone else that sensationalizes "Black Man Shot" to the point that the not only have to deal with the criminals themselves, they then have to deal with riots on their streets from doing their job AGAINST criminals. 

 

You keep harping on and on and on about chief richard beary and the 2% of 2% of whatever like this is some kind of mass pandemic of systemic racism with the objective of eliminating the black man. You must really believe you are on to something, but unfortunately your not. No one, yourself included, has come up with an alternative that is safer for the public than what usually happens like in the OP. 

 

I agree with the actions of the police in El Cajon so far. 

[Publicus]

24 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

 

 

It appears your earlier post which was absent any of condescension was a "one off".

 

Its interesting how you attempt to apply ignorance to a certain group of Americans based on  pattern of speech...but that condascending attempt on your part appears to be some East Coast accent and I am from the West.  

 

As for my "superior knowledge of police work and policing"...well there is no doubt of this. 

 

Since your posts constantly reduce these discussions to bickering I will sign off with you now. 

 

Cheers

 

Come on now Clutch, this is me you're talking to.

 

While yes, I've never read all of your posts, I've nonetheless never seen you holster your sidearm either. Once you've whipped it out it tends to stay out. 

 

That's true whether it might be argument or bickering or your scolding, lecturing, pronouncements, issuing of orders to other posters, and your general new sheriff in town attitude toward everything and everyone.

 

We don't know about this El Cajones CA PD do we. Nor do we know about these cops who are now officially cops who have committed a homicide.

 

The shooter cops say it's a justifiable homicide and the laws and the courts give 'em every benefit of the doubt. That is pretty potent stuff given the national police crime wave occurring against certain black Americans to include children playing with toy guns and also adult mental cases (as it were). 

 

We don't know if this PD have racist cartoons circulating in the PD offices and buildings, stuff like "Don't worry about Obama cause a black guy never holds a job for longer than a few months" kind of stuff. And 'What do you call an abortion by a black woman? Crime prevention". Racist garbage like that we know as a fact circulates in PD offices.  

 

DoJ are inquiring minds so they too want to know...because they enforce the laws and the Constitution. So hold your horses there quickdraw cause this ain't over by a long shot.