Also when it comes to holding protestors responsible for their actions, it isn’t the other liberal protestors or liberal organizations that decide what is to be done with them. If whenever a protester was accused of misbehavior, they would be brought before a BLM tribunal which would invariably determine that their actions are justified, resulting in no punishment. Then I would agree that in that case BLM does need to accept responsibility.
I’m sure this means… something.
No. I have no reason to think any of those things happened. You know why? Because it’s YouTube and people moved on right after they posted their dumb fucking comments.
What about the presumption of innocence?
I’ve become recently interested in understand why my fellow liberals have decided to take the express bus to crazy town on issues where they previously insisted on facts and evidence before drawing conclusions.
Oh, FFS. How many more times do I have to say that this was irrational response to what was probably a stressful situation in her life? Which does not automatically mean she’s a danger to society.
We have to stop freaking the fuck out. It’s bad for us (libs). It makes us look irrational.
How in God’s name do you go from " SL thinks we should condemn police officers who tolerate bad cops and cover for them" to “SL believes that it’s the fault of the police if someone breaks into his home”?
Seriously, that doesn’t even make sense. Please explain.
Nancy Pelosi is not a senator. She’s the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and her district does not include any part of the city in which those officers were ambushed.
Now you’re just, well, I don’t know what you’re doing. What are you doing?
Do you really not know that Nancy Pelosi isn’t a Senator?
He is saying that Democrats in general do not care about law and order, so it’s broken down so much in this area that the staunch, godly enforcers of law and order are being murdered with impunity, thanks to the stupid hippie ideals of Democrats.
That’s… not how social media works.
People don’t just forget everything that they saw when they go to the next video.
We learned this in 2016.
Okay. Lets have a quick trial.
Did she accuse McDonald’s employees of trying to poison her?
Prosecution: Here’s the video of her doing so, we rest.
Defense:I have no idea, all the stuff that you seem to be saying as a distraction from the point that was made.
By driving it? Seriously. It was stated that this was an example of cop persecution complex, and you took exception to that. All of this is based on your defense of her, your insistence that what she was doing was not acting as though she was being persecuted for being a cop.
As many times as it takes for you to remind yourself that she also has a badge and a gun.
No, it’s the badge and the gun that do that.
Sure get on that. You seem to be freaking out quite a bit here because she was said to be indulging in a persecution complex.
One of which I note, once again, you refuse to even address.
In fact, this is stupid, and I’d just delete this if I hadn’t spend time on it already.
If you do not directly address the issue of it being an example of cop persecution complex, the only claim that was made when you chose to take exception to it, then I’m not going to respond anymore, because you have driven this bus well past crazy town and off the cliffs or absurdity.
Thanks for the translation!
“The National Registry of Exonerations spent more than six years examining the cases of 2,400 innocent people who were exonerated from 1989 to 2019, finding that 54 percent were sent to prison because of intentional or negligent mistakes by police, prosecutors and other law enforcement officials.”
Maybe a new thread for the McDs cop?
A new burger should suffice.
Has anyone pointed out that Trump wants to defund entire cities, including their police?
But it could be that urban redneck does understand what “defund the police” means but he doesn’t like it anyway.
I’d be interested in reviewing any evidence there is that shows that he understands what it means.
The LA county sheriff? IMO it’s far more likely he was lying. He’s a liar.
But her stressful situation is being a police officer.
If she has irrational responses to being in stressful situations, that means she’s very likely to react irrationally on the job.
And that means that she shouldn’t be on that job; at least, unless and until she’s been successfully treated for that problem.
You can argue that she ought to get paid medical leave and paid-for treatment, instead of being fired. But to argue that somebody’s response to stress is to think irrationally that people are trying to kill them, and simultaneously argue that that same person ought to be doing a stressful job in which part of the job is deciding whether to shoot people, does not make a whole lot of sense.
I agree their are bad officers and often entire departments that are bad. I remember once talking to a former mayor and she told me how she replaced her chief of police and the new one reformed the department.
The thing is if the police need to make changes their are civil ways to get this done. Citizens need to work with their elected representatives.Again, these cities, counties, and states are run by democrats. Why cant the democrats prove that they can run police departments who 1. do their job and protect citizens and 2. protect the rights of the innocent?
You dont just go around ambushing and shooting police then standing outside their hospital cheering and hoping they die!
You’re right. We don’t.
“…standing outside their hospital cheering and hoping they die!”
Didnt happen, fake news.