Weaponry; Discussion of Rights and Responsibilities

[Rogerbh]

I seem to recall the Brits used gunfire when provoked by a crowd with rocks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Massacre

[Dr Pepper]

Originally Posted by Rogerbh

I seem to recall the Brits used gunfire when provoked by a crowd with rocks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Massacre

Well if you don't have any rocks to throw back....

[Rogerbh]

Yeah, but it kinda taught the Americans to get guns.

[bowlinggreen]

Originally Posted by rotobott

I suppose if people were not allowed to have guns the police wouldn't be allowed to shoot them.

I remember back in the troubles when the Irish were using plastic forks, a megaphone would usually be enough

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dz-Kb1wvy8s

With freedom comes responsibility, and the freedom to own dangerous things carries with it a certain amount of danger.

Those who insist on acting like irresponsible little children with dangerous things will probably come to harm one day.

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

What is the logical train of thought behind this, "We don't trust you, therefore we are going to behave badly and you'd better not do anything about it in the interests of social justice"?

train of thought is "Whether you shoot me or not is not contingent on whether I comply or not so why do I comply?" They know going in that whether they shoot them or not its of no consequence to them in their life is not worth two pennies to them.

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

That's not going to work. Not unless you want our black neighborhoods to start looking like Somalia.

And having a population that doesn't trust you is going to work any better?

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

I'll bet whoever called the cops on the guy in the first place was black, given the neighborhood.

I wouldn't argue this at all but also wouldn't put any importance on this. I don't see race of the caller as a factor.

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

I could maybe see the lack of trust if this was in Mississippi, but not Minnesota.

myth. Large urban populations seem to be magnets of police misconduct. Chicago is in pain 20 million dollars up to this point this year and 662 million between the years of 2004 and 2016 in police misconduct settlements and judgments just because. Minnesota over the last couple years have had a couple of high-profile possible police misconduct issues which is why the family of Blevins reacted the way they did it's not even the first time that has happened.

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

Some cops want them, some cops don't. If they are implemented, they should be activated from a central station at the start of shift and stay on, and the cops certainly should not be able to edit the footage.

Bad cops hate cameras, because it denies them the capability of handing out their evil ideas of "justice" in secret.

The police unions are going to be the main ones fighting to keep the cameras under their control if they can't get rid of them. if they could show the footage and when they can release it cameras maybe a bad cops best friend. they would be able to shape the narrative to their whims and anybody that would go against him with always here "Well you know the camera doesn't lie"

[Rogerbh]

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

That's weird, in California they have a database of gun owners and that's a standard part of the call-in data? How big-brother-ish.

Something must be very wrong in your state.

I did ask a local cop I knew when they had changed that - as the prior times I got tickets, the officers never acted like that - and was told it hadn't changed.

However, I saw what I saw, the officer definitely was acting like I was an armed threat - and the fact that I had over forty registered assault weapons under my name is the only reason I could come up with as to why he would act that way.

[Dr Pepper]

Originally Posted by Rogerbh

Yeah, but it kinda taught the Americans to get guns.

Well the Brits do have form-they did it to your lot, they did it to the Irish, they did it in India....and the Israelis seem to do it on a weekly basis....

[bowlinggreen]

Originally Posted by diamelsx

train of thought is "Whether you shoot me or not is not contingent on whether I comply or not so why do I comply?" They know going in that whether they shoot them or not its of no consequence to them in their life is not worth two pennies to them.

That's dysfunctional thinking. Maybe to some cops a life is worth nothing, but to many that is simply not the case. And shooting people, even when it is justified, is a huge headache for the officer involved.

In the first video you can see the cop warning the black guy, if he had thrown his hands up on the spot and surrendered I very much doubt he would have been shot. These sorts of encounters happen frequently, only when a bad guy actually gets shot (rare) instead of arrested (almost all the time) do the activists start screaming.

We've come a ways from the days when a cop would yell "Freeze, boy!" while simultaneously emptying his gun into a hapless black man.

Originally Posted by diamelsx

myth. Large urban populations seem to be magnets of police misconduct. Chicago is in pain 20 million dollars up to this point this year and 662 million between the years of 2004 and 2016 in police misconduct settlements and judgments just because. Minnesota over the last couple years have had a couple of high-profile possible police misconduct issues which is why the family of Blevins reacted the way they did it's not even the first time that has happened.

I'd still be more scared being black in the south than black in the north. Still, you do have a point, big cities tend to be more inhuman in all respects, and that includes the various branches of government.

Originally Posted by diamelsx

The police unions are going to be the main ones fighting to keep the cameras under their control if they can't get rid of them. if they could show the footage and when they can release it cameras maybe a bad cops best friend. they would be able to shape the narrative to their whims and anybody that would go against him with always here "Well you know the camera doesn't lie"

We don't want that. Video should be encrypted and inaccessible until it can be downloaded from the body cam onto a secure tamperproof server, and it should be viewed by a disinterested third party agency first.

Originally Posted by Rogerbh

I did ask a local cop I knew when they had changed that - as the prior times I got tickets, the officers never acted like that - and was told it hadn't changed.

However, I saw what I saw, the officer definitely was acting like I was an armed threat - and the fact that I had over forty registered assault weapons under my name is the only reason I could come up with as to why he would act that way.

Why the hell do you have over 40 assault weapons?

[Rogerbh]

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

Why the hell do you have over 40 assault weapons?

When I was younger I wanted to have an example of every rifle (including variants) that existed. I gave up when I realized there were hundreds if not thousands of them.

I do believe I must have some sort of asterisk next to my name on police records. When I accidentally set off my silent alarm, six police officers arrived at my house. Surprised the crap out of me.

And yeah, I have more now. Maybe because I don't drink or do drugs.

[bowlinggreen]

Originally Posted by Rogerbh

When I was younger I wanted to have an example of every rifle (including variants) that existed. I gave up when I realized there were hundreds if not thousands of them.

I do believe I must have some sort of asterisk next to my name on police records. When I accidentally set off my silent alarm, six police officers arrived at my house. Surprised the crap out of me.

And yeah, I have more now. Maybe because I don't drink or do drugs.

So you collect such things then. That's a lot of those sorts of guns to have, though. I'm not sure what I would do with even one. Play militia?

It certainly sounds like you are flagged. Better hope some dirty cop never points a group of burglarizing gangbangers at your house in return for a cut of the proceeds.