One didn’t respond because the post you identified was posted by a different person than the poster you identified. And one post you identified as condemning the tasering actually explicitly condemned the shooting and didn’t mention the tasering at all. 20% is generous.
I’m not claiming that no one is bashing the police, I’m saying that maybe your ability to identify the bashers is below average.
No offense, but maybe if there’s more than one way to read a post, a guy with a 20% comprehension rate shouldn’t jump to conclusions. For example:
You have confused *implying *with *inferring * and *explaining *with excusing. If explaining behavior is the same as excusing it, then a lot of high school history teachers have a lot of explaining to do about their attitudes toward the Holocaust. And speaking of the Holocaust, sometimes riots *are *justifiable.
[Today’s item comes from the Philippines:
](http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_PHILIPPINES_US_VIOLENT_PROTEST?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-10-19-08-40-42)Associated Press video (WARNING: VERY GRAPHIC!)
Perhaps so. Or perhaps you are being overly generous with those who are “just asking questions”
I blame Hillary.
Regards,
Shodan
She hasn’t been sworn in yet, so please stick to blaming Obama for the time being.
No, no - credit where it is due.
Obama is responsible for the anti-US feeling that led to the riots, Trump is responsible because he won’t let the rioters immigrate to the US, BLM is responsible because they aren’t protesting in the Philippines, the Tea Party is responsible because of their rhetoric, and Hillary is responsible because - er, uhm -
Bengazi! That’s why!
Answer that one, smart guy!
Regards,
Shodan
No U.
It is entirely possible that they learned it from watching our police force use their cars as weapons, our media has a fairly wide swath With as many people defending cops who try to run people over as there are, they probably figured it would be fine, maybe even glorified.
Nah - they just hacked into the server and read it from her emails.
Regards,
Shodan
Let’s get going on Deborah Danner.
Why can’t police use devices like this gun that shoots a net? (0:30 or so)
Mississippi woman jailed for 96 days for a crime that did not even happen.
Think it couldn’t happen to you?
Woman arrested after traffic violation, held for 96 days without getting a lawyer, seeing a Judge or getting a bail hearing.
Bolding mine. The didn’t look at the evidence before charging her. They did not look at the evidence before charging her. THEY DID NOT EVEN LOOK AT THE FUCKING EVIDENCE BEFORE DEPRIVING HER OF HER FREEDOM. To me, this is horrifying. The local district attorney’s should be disbarred, charged and jailed. They should do at least as many days as Jauch did. At least, they would get to talk to their lawyers.
Bullshit. Utter bullshit.
Think about for a minute. What would being locked up on a bullshit charge do to you? Forget for a moment the dangerous aspect of jail itself. You are imprisoned for 96 days. You cannot see your friends and family. You cannot work. How are you gonna provide for your family? Pay bills? Make car payments? Make house payments or rent?
Is thisthe same Jessica Jauch?
Regards,
Shodan
Oh my god, that’s disgusting. Apparently everything they did to her was legal, including holding her for 96 days without actually looking at the evidence, because they got a grand jury to indict. I think this is a clear case of “the law is an ass.”
Looks like the same case.
Something’s wrong with the law if holding someone for 96 days without evidence and representation is legal and doesn’t result in a big ol’ settlement.
Now that Shodan mentions it, I DO remember the happy pre-Obama days when then entire Middle East was in a love fest with Bush II! Oh, I will never forget that tender kiss between Begin and Qadaffi. 
No, that just shows that everything’s working fine and dandy, thankyouverymuch. The underlying principle of the law, and the principle that seems to animate a considerable number of Americans, seems to be that police and prosecutors should be protected from even the dumbest or the most disgusting decisions that they could possibly make, even if no reasonable person would argue that their actions were acceptable.
The Philippines are going through some weird shit right now. Their president is turning his back on the US and pivoting to China. Their President is actively encouraging vigilantiism and telling the cops to kill people who resist arrest and his approval ratings are going through the roof as a result. They’ve had like 3000 killings (either vigilatnes killing alleged drug dealers or cops killing drug dealers/drug users who allegedly resist arrest) and his popularity seems to go up with every killing. Something like 600,000 Filipinos have surrendered themselves to the police to avoid getting killed.
Its some weird shit.
I don’t know that would work as well if the elk had opposable thumbs. But I agree, we need more and better non-lethal alternatives for the police.