I wish you’d said this earlier, I’m all laughed out now. Still, if that’s the criterion… have you considered euthanasia? Perhaps you could find a amenable cop to play chicken with.
I would not have believed that it would be possible to cram so much dumb and nasty into so little space, but Smapti, you have proved me wrong.
Wouldn’t it?
Many professionals would categorize “suicidal intentions” as an indication of mental illness in and of itself.
So what you’re saying is that you support suicide for everyone except the people who want it.
No. It’s wrong to kill people because they’re mentally ill, even if they behave erratically. It hurts society because they are members of the society who might, with treatment, become contributing and fulfilled people.
Not for mentally sound people who are experiencing a debilitating and incurable illness.
No, I’m not saying this. Not even close. No idea where you got this from.
I didn’t say we should kill people because they’re mentally ill. I said we should kill people because they try to murder police officers. The intent is less significant than the action.
You said society would be better off not suffering mentally ill people that lunge at the police to live. This is a monstrous sentiment, with a monstrous history. Mentally ill people, even those who act erratically, should be treated and not killed.
Not that the guy in question even lunged at the police – he just stepped towards them.
Why?
I’m not the one who introduced the word “lunged” to the conversation.
Because it’s morally wrong to kill out-of-hand those who are not responsible for their actions. Which is the same reason it has been morally wrong when many governments in history did it.
You used the word to justify why it was okay to kill the guy in question.
Morality doesn’t enter into the equation. A police officer who is being attacked has the right to defend himself without asking his assailant to fill out a psych questionnaire first.
Police officers also have a responsibility to put themselves in the ideal and safest position possible, for everyone involved, when approaching a dangerous situation. They could have put themselves in a better position, reducing risk to themselves, bystanders, as well as the suspect.
We know this because we’ve seen the Australian and UK cops put themselves in better positions with regards to an armed, deranged man in public.
And since cops in those countries usually don’t carry guns–am I correct here?–that rule is all the more vital there.
[QUOTE=Smapti;17392758 You’ll keep in mind that the fundamental freedoms spoken of in the Constitution are “life, liberty, and property”, in that order. [/QUOTE]
The phrase “life, liberty, and property” do not appear in the US Constitution. The idea that those are natural rights comes from John Locke and inspired Thomas Jefferson’s use of a similar phase in the Declaration of Independance where he replaced “property” with “the pursit of happiness”.
The motivating factor of Smapti’s opinions seems to be fear. Dude, unclench a little bit. You live in what is most likely the safest time in human history in one of the safest nations on the face of the planet.
What unhinged you, Smapti? You didn’t used to be so obviously authoritarian (and a liberal authoritarian at that…weird). But at least since Ferguson and apparently before (as this thread predates the Brown incident by quite a lot).
I’ll admit that I have a bit of an oppositional defiant personality, but you go WAY over the edge in the “kneel and kiss” direction.
And in which a large number of people are actively working to make it less safe based on vague notions about “freedom” and “privacy”.
I’ve stayed the same. It’s far too much of the rest of the left that has come unhinged in supporting traitors like Snowden and Manning, seeing racism hidden in eery single interaction between an authority figure and a non-white person, and undermining the government that protects all the freedoms and social advances we’ve made over the past hundred years. This kind of kneejerk “question authority at all costs” mindset undermines liberalism, keeps right-minded voters away from the ballot box, and enables Republican terrorists to seize control of our government and push their omnicidal agenda.
Some of these interactions actually are racist. Do you deny that some are?
Of course he does! They never happened to HIM!
I have not posted at all in this thread. Just popped in to confirm that Smapti is a fucking unhinged idiot.
That is all.
Sometimes, but not always. There have been several incidents in which mentally ill people have been shot & killed by Australian police, one of the most infamous being Roni Levi: http://www.sl.nsw.gov.au/events/exhibitions/2010/onehundred/100-objects/Exhibit-096.htm. IIRC a few years ago an officer shot and killed a mentally ill man when she accidentally drew and fired her handgun rather than her taser.
Police shootings are still rare enough here that they make major news headlines around the nation when they occur.
Discussion/Opinion piece on how Australian police need more training on how to deal with mentally ill people: http://theconversation.com/tyler-cassidy-inquest-police-and-community-need-better-mental-health-training-4459.
The ones that are being cried the loudest about aren’t.
you forgot hateful