'Murica! (238 Viewers)

s4tch

Senior Member
Mar 23, 2015
33,722
Then a death be a death, and stop the outrage of how a fellon died?
oh come on, they didn't even know he was a felon and it's not a policeman's duty to simply execute people on the street. felon or not, nobody should die this way. it undermines the trust of people in the police and the juridical system, and understandably so. nobody wants to live in a country where you can be shot, strangled or beat to death without a trial, just because some police officers thought you're a piece of shit.

the outrage and the reactions already got way out of hand, people losing their jobs due to corona and the general sjw culture didn't help too much either in controlling the masses' temper, but what those officers did is simply unacceptable, no two ways about it.
 

GordoDeCentral

Diez
Moderator
Apr 14, 2005
70,836
oh come on, they didn't even know he was a felon and it's not a policeman's duty to simply execute people on the street. felon or not, nobody should die this way. it undermines the trust of people in the police and the juridical system, and understandably so. nobody wants to live in a country where you can be shot, strangled or beat to death without a trial, just because some police officers thought you're a piece of shit.

the outrage and the reactions already got way out of hand, people losing their jobs due to corona and the general sjw culture didn't help too much either in controlling the masses' temper, but what those officers did is simply unacceptable, no two ways about it.
Please read the exchange, it was an answer to swag saying that criminals are criminals implying outrage over a certain crime compared to others is not justified.
 

GordoDeCentral

Diez
Moderator
Apr 14, 2005
70,836
One individual is killed by the police, the other one is assaulted by a criminal. Police is not supposed to kill people to maintain safety in my opinion. How can they be the same?
"The debate is a judicial system based on rehabilitation is a joke more apt for sociology classrooms."

This has nothing to do with Floyd, i brought up that example to answer swags contention.
 

s4tch

Senior Member
Mar 23, 2015
33,722
Please read the exchange, it was an answer to swag saying that criminals are criminals implying outrage over a certain crime compared to others is not justified.
i did, but i still don't get your point. let's not suppose that inexplicable, brutal crimes by criminals and similarly brutal crimes by police officers on supposed felons (or on anyone for that matter) are comparable in any ways.

police officers should remain spotless, and refrain from any unnecessary brutality, period. the outrage is justified, even though the extent of it and especially the looting has nothing to do with the original cause. and no, i don't get the "black lives matter" association either until the racial motif isn't proven. but as i said, officers should be spotless, otherwise people start to treat them like criminals (see those stupid defunding movements that officers brought onto themselves - an other terrible solution for a certainly existing issue).
 

GordoDeCentral

Diez
Moderator
Apr 14, 2005
70,836
i did, but i still don't get your point. let's not suppose that inexplicable, brutal crimes by criminals and similarly brutal crimes by police officers on supposed felons (or on anyone for that matter) are comparable in any ways.

police officers should remain spotless, and refrain from any unnecessary brutality, period. the outrage is justified, even though the extent of it and especially the looting has nothing to do with the original cause. and no, i don't get the "black lives matter" association either until the racial motif isn't proven. but as i said, officers should be spotless, otherwise people start to treat them like criminals (see those stupid defunding movements that officers brought onto themselves - an other terrible solution for a certainly existing issue).
No you didn't get my point, both the floyd incident and the video i posted warrant outrage, me questioning the floyd outrage was to show the blatant inconsistency in saying criminals are criminals.
 

Ronn

Senior Member
May 3, 2012
20,899
Not only did you get what i am debating wrong(retributive vs rehabilitative), you also misunderstood the point of the example, i am actually the one arguing that not all murders are equal.
What are you talking about? You’re not presenting any argument to support your statement. Your debate is very clear. It’s just that your example has nothing to do with it.
a death by the police is certainly different than a death by someone else. That statement is false no matter what.
 

GordoDeCentral

Diez
Moderator
Apr 14, 2005
70,836
What are you talking about? You’re not presenting any argument to support your statement. Your debate is very clear. It’s just that your example has nothing to do with it.
a death by the police is certainly different than a death by someone else. That statement is false no matter what.
Ok please tell me what is it I'm debating here
 

swag

L'autista
Administrator
Sep 23, 2003
84,776
Then a death be a death, and stop the outrage of how a fellon died?

The debate is a judicial system based on rehabilitation is a joke more apt for sociology classrooms.

Ok, but seriously...

I'm not sure the debate is about a judicial system based on rehabilitation. Yes, you see some people trying to hijack the narrative that all people are good people and no one will ever need to have to defend themselves from psychopaths, the drug-addled, the desperate, and the mentally ill with lethal force. But good luck getting anybody in Chicago agreeing to that, for example.

IMO, some people, like me, are in favor of more pre-habilitation rather than rehabilitation. The US's disastrous system of ER and trauma centers for basic medical care is another example of this: where prevention and general better health management not only leads to better lives and outcomes, it's also often a helluva lot cheaper than waiting for the ER doc to intervene as the health care of last resort. Likewise, trying to clean-up the mess with a punitive-only system with armed cops after the fact is often too late, too costly, and comes at the tail end of a lot of innocent (and not-so-innocent) victims in society leading up to that point.

America loves the cure, not the prevention. That's part of the problem. We celebrate firefighters jumping with babies through burning windows, but we yawn at the guy installing and testing smoke alarms. It's no wonder so many Americans have hang-ups about wearing masks in an epidemic... can't be bothered with prevention when I might face a little discomfort or inconvenience. Just give me a pill when I catch COVID-19.

There will always be criminals, sociopaths, etc. But cops should not be the magic service butler every time to cover for a failed civic social net. And in our gun culture, every intervention involving armed people is going to result in violent escalations ... which is fundamentally what many of the protests are about. White, black or purple, there's no reason for unarmed people winding up dead over a $20 check forgery, for selling illegal cigarettes, etc. That's just nuts and, well, barbaric.

Cops should be used for the situations where armed responses are the last resort, when you have a situation where life or death protocols might come in. That should not be the response to the first cry for help.
 

Ronn

Senior Member
May 3, 2012
20,899
Nothing, i posted a video saying"Not fit to walk amongst us, good luck rehabilitating this filth", so when confronted that this is just another crime, I challenged it by asking should we also see Floyd's death as just another death? The point from the get go was about judicial philosophy.
I understand. That’s why I responded that you cannot treat Floyd’s death as just another death no matter what. I’m lost how this is a counter to Swag’s post.

- - - Updated - - -

Anyway
"The dispute before the Court is not whether [Department of Homeland Security] may rescind DACA. All parties agree that it may. The dispute is instead primarily about the procedure the agency followed in doing so," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority.
 
Last edited:

Post Ironic

Senior Member
Feb 9, 2013
42,253
Then a death be a death, and stop the outrage of how a fellon died?

The debate is a judicial system based on rehabilitation is a joke more apt for sociology classrooms.
Care to back that last bit up? Most developed countries that use elements of “rehabilitative Justice” instead of stricter American style retributive with mandatory minimums, have far lesser rates of recidivism. And while there are arguments on just how much rehabilitative Justice lowers recidivism, the vast majority of studies show it does in fact lower the rates.

https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.3.081806.112833

A prison system that lets people out with zero money, close to zero prospects for employment, a shitty welfare system, poor social services and community support, etc... No need to wonder why like 75% have reoffended within 5 years in America.... Of course there are people who can’t be rehabilitated, but they generally make up the minority of criminals. Supporting people becoming productive members of society while serving time, and helping them find gainful employment after is obviously beneficial
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 5, Guests: 210)