POLICE ARE TERRORISTS!!! Oh boy, Oh boy...Please Enjoy!!!

We all need to relax and just watch some Eddie Griffin on youtube

We Need More Police

reply to post by truthseeker84


That right there was absolutley hilarious....thanks for posting that, I gotta watch me some more of this guy!!!

reply to post by rcwj1975

So you compare racial riots and racial officers from the 50's and 60's to me?

No, and this was never implied or stated. Personally, I don’t know you and if you will turn on anyone, but history shows LEO’s have, and will, turn on the people.

And in your wisdom of knowing me so well call me a liar because your to stupid to have an open mind that not all of us are the same?

This is far from a cohesive thought and doesn’t deserve a response. However, I feel pity for you (holiday season and all) so I’ll take it upon myself to direct you towards the path of logic and reasonable thinking. You are lying to ATS members, and you’re refusing to address the issue being raised, and let us not forget the issue is derived from several of your posts, but I simply chose one to quote.

Your claim: Law enforcement and military will not turn on the people and have yet to do so.

Facts (history): Law enforcement and military have turned on their own people.

Address the facts, friend, and stop relying on fallacious arguments and ramblings as doing so only makes you appear as a doughnut loving flat-foot (the kind on “The Simpsons” comes to mind.)

So then its safe for me to say you rape children right? Your a child molester because anyone on ats with a name like EMPIRE and who talks like you loves to rape kids and fondel children.

See above. Address the facts and stop relying on fallacies to support your ignorance.

See how stupid that sounds for me to assume and automatically put you into a group because of what???? You people really need help...

See above, friend. You're making the claim that cops and soldiers won't do X, when history shows they do. For constantly doing this and promoting it as truth, you are a liar and the truth is not in you.

[edit on 31-12-2009 by EMPIRE]

Originally posted by rcwj1975

Originally posted by ziggystrange
Have you ever broken the law in performing your Police duties?
Have you ever broken the law and gotten away with it?
Have you ever abused your power as a Police officer, regardless of why?
If you have, does that make you a criminal?

Yes, Yes (not as a cop though), Yes...and what it makes me is HUMAN!!! That is why I look at incidents and people I deal with, with an open mind and understanding. Unlike most of you who hate on LEO's....

rcwj1975 this is a perfect example of why I like your posts. I do not know you in person you really might not be how you make yourself out to be on ATS, but that is the same with anyone. But this is an example of an honest person. It takes some balls (for lack of a better term at this moment) to stand up and admit that.

I would wager that many on ATS would make themselves out to be perfect angels never admitting the wrongs they do. I would wager that many would never say that they are or have stolen things from the office they work in, or spent extra time on break when they should have been working, or are out in a company vehicle using it to go places that are not on schedule. True not everything is a crime but neither is cheating on your spouse, but each is wrong in its own way. All are morally wrong because in the end you are taking something from someone else.

The point is you stepped out and said you have done wrong because you are human. Many people forget others are human and judge them in ways they forget their own wrongs (this goes the same for many who claim to be Christians as well, this coming from a Christian). Really we all make mistakes and must learn from them. I hope (and it seems you have) you learned from each of yours and continue to learn from any others you make.

At this point I have only watched up to the point where they claim a “brother” was screaming. I guess they believe he was being mistreated because we all know everyone always goes quietly with the police unless they are being mistreated.

I was saddened to see the dog get killed in the first clip though. It seems from the audio that someone made the mistake of firing which of course would cause someone else to mistakenly fire as well. All understandable though given the situation and the vibe in the air. The guy that got killed was stupid flat out. It seemed as if he was doing the suicide by cop to me the way he was acting and his demands would (especially if he had been armed) have put his girlfriend (I’ll use a nicer term) in harm’s way. I hope though the dog died instantly and did not suffer even for a few seconds.

The saddest thing is that so many people are still blaming the police in cases like this when they need to look at all angles. Yes the guy was unarmed, but he did not make that known until it was too late. He came to that spot wanting to die and be seen as a martyr. Some people as bad as it sounds need to die because their survival just makes things worse for the rest of us. I believe this guy was one of those people.

Raist


Edit: grammar

[edit on 12/31/09 by Raist]

reply to post by EMPIRE


And you like many others are trying to compare riots/protesting to the orignal topic of martial law. Yeah cops dispurse riots, cops stop protestors, this is no secret and I am not trying to deny any of that. But if you read what was originally asked of me: would you turn on the people under martial law? and then I was asked about the majority of LEO's and Military and if they would turn on the people under the orders of MARTIAL LAW...and my answer still stands, NO they wouldn't.

Martial law is a whole lot different than breaking up a protest or riot don't you think?

reply to post by rcwj1975

And you like many others are trying to compare riots/protesting to the orignal topic of martial law.

You’ve once again shown your superb selective reading skills. In addition, why are you comparing riots and protesting when I specifically spoke of peaceful protests? This is not a hypothetical or rhetorical question but one that deserves a response. If you were familiar with the civil rights era and what I referenced, you’ll see the connections to martial law as the orders usually came from up top. Do I have to give you an in depth explanation of this?

Yeah cops dispurse riots, cops stop protestors, this is no secret and I am not trying to deny any of that.

I have said nothing of dispersing riots or stopping protesters. However, I specifically spoke of LEO’s using dogs, high pressured hoses, batons, etc on peaceful protesters and demonstrators. Again, you need to address history/facts, and cease misconstruing what has clearly been stated.

But if you read what was originally asked of me: would you turn on the people under martial law? and then I was asked about the majority of LEO's and Military and if they would turn on the people under the orders of MARTIAL LAW...and my answer still stands, NO they wouldn't.

Refer to my opening paragraph in this response, and yes, history shows they would turn, and the social climate currently experienced shows they will turn.

Martial law is a whole lot different than breaking up a protest or riot don't you think?

Refer to previous responses, specifically, those that call on you to cease relying on fallacies to prove a non-existent premise.

just finished watching the first part of the video.

The guy said he had a gun and was willing to use it if they tried to arrest him, or sick the dogs on him. (mistake number one)

he said he was on the run for murder, and admitted it on camera. (mistake number two, not only are you admitting to murder, your giving them an excuse to use deadly force!)

If i was a cop, and was going through that situation with a possible shootout happening because of the threats he was giving them if they tried to arrest him/sick the dogs on him, i would have my sidearm on the ready.

its a sad thing that it happened to play out that way, but i don't see any negligence on the police's side. if anything, people should know that they lie to get their job done.

For the girl on the bus flipping off the cop. isn't freedom of expression or speech supposed to be legal? since when is flipping off a cop illegal? i don't think they had a right to go on the bus or wherever just to terrorize someone for exercising their rights!

Ill leave more thoughts as soon as im done with the video...

Flagged because its edumecational.


[edit on 12/31/2009 by ugie1028]

Originally posted by EMPIRE
You’ve once again shown your superb selective reading skills. In addition, why are you comparing riots and protesting when I specifically spoke of peaceful protests? This is not a hypothetical or rhetorical question but one that deserves a response. If you were familiar with the civil rights era and what I referenced, you’ll see the connections to martial law as the orders usually came from up top. Do I have to give you an in depth explanation of this?

You spoke about a topic NOT related to the original question of IF (under THESE circumstances) would cops turn on people. Like usual the cop haters do not want to talk about the topic at hand..MARTIAL LAW...they instead want to bring up riots and protests as THEIR bases for saying...LOOK SEE YOU GUYS WILL TURN...when thats not the case. Being ordered to go shut down a protest is NOT the same as being ordered to confine ALL citizens of the U.S., shut down cities, etc...What is it about police haters that makes them NOT stay on track and have to find anything (regardless of how off topic) to use as their tool to complain?

I have said nothing of dispersing riots or stopping protesters. However, I specifically spoke of LEO’s using dogs, high pressured hoses, batons, etc on peaceful protesters and demonstrators. Again, you need to address history/facts, and cease misconstruing what has clearly been stated.

Again like most cop haters your asking me in 2009 to comment on actions of those from 1960???????????????? Yeah they were ordered to break up the PEACEFUL protest and? How does that jive with possible martial law in 2010 if ever?

Refer to my opening paragraph in this response, and yes, history shows they would turn, and the social climate currently experienced shows they will turn.

Yet again your comparing black to red. They are two seperate issues no matter how you want to approach it.

Refer to previous responses, specifically, those that call on you to cease relying on fallacies to prove a non-existent premise.

But that was the topic in which my original answer ( NO COPS AND MILITARY WOULDN'T PARTICIPATE) was based on...the idea of martial law...but AGAIN, you and many others dont wanna talk about that, you want to bring in OTHER situations that you think compare to martial law...Had I orginally been asked about protests/riots THEN THEN THEN you could bring up the past and present actions of officers at GUESS WHAT...protests and riots!

[edit on 12/31/2009 by rcwj1975]

I think its funny that people are having the exact same conversation I already had with this so called police officer.

Getting him to use logic has already proven impossible.

Protesters have the right to peaceably assemble as stated by the supreme law of the land, the US Constitution.

So them dispersing people or whatever he is calling it is already a form of martial law. And really it just proves him wrong yet again on many different levels.

reply to post by watcher73


LOL...I sure hope your not proud of having been a Marine, because if you ARE, explain how YOU are any different than me? Considering we both took the same oath and worked for the same government. You come on here to badmouth those wearing a badge, yet you wore a uniform that the world views as a large terrorist oranization...either your just or you get your kicks trying to make yourself look like your the only person alive with all the right answers.

Originally posted by ugie1028
The guy said he had a gun and was willing to use it if they tried to arrest him, or sick the dogs on him. (mistake number one)

Like I said in my other post, I have a different perspective for a reason and not some senseless speculation.

Maybe he is just somebody that wanted to protect his kids, as much as the OP even claimed he would keep a gun even though he would turn in his badge.

I tell an office my kids are missing. Why should they treat that any bit different than the guy in the first clip? Maybe he just wanted to make sure his kids are still alive.

I'm not making thing up just for an excuse. I want to know if my kids are still alive.

Maybe he is just depressed because his attempts to try to be with his kids have been so obfuscated into a situation like this. I'm sure you didn't even consider the simplicity of this and you needed an excuse to make him out a terrorist to justify why he was shot and why a child no longer has a father.

he said he was on the run for murder, and admitted it on camera. (mistake number two, not only are you admitting to murder, your giving them an excuse to use deadly force!)

Since when did the U.S. Court legal system suddenly forget about innocent until PROVEN guilty. You know how corrupt our legal system would be if anybody could just walk into court and say 'I'm guilty!'

Oh wait...

We already known.

If i was a cop, and was going through that situation with a possible shootout happening because of the threats he was giving them if they tried to arrest him/sick the dogs on him, i would have my sidearm on the ready.

You should give up that sidearm unless you can't imagine anybody else with the same right.

its a sad thing that it happened to play out that way, but i don't see any negligence on the police's side. if anything, people should know that they lie to get their job done.

Have you ever seen Gran Torino? www.imdb.com...

The first clip had an eerie reminder me of that movie... how it ended.

Didn't Clint Eastwood also think he was a murderer? Hmm.

Justice?

On this I see two sides one claiming all cops and military will take up arms against the American public and some including rcwj1975 who seem to be saying (and I might be wrong here) that no cops or military will turn against the public.

Really though are we seeing the human side of this? Certainly there are some who would take up arms against the public out of greed, fear, or just the need to make others feel pain. I am not saying rcwj1975 that you or even any in your department would do this but certainly there are some out there that would. There would even be citizens who would chose to join a force just to have that power over others and protection for themselves and their families.

I am not saying those in the video are terrorists or even doing anything wrong (at least at this point the amount I have watched). I know some people who, while not cops would certainly turn on others just to place themselves in a higher position than someone else (many are in management others are not). It is not a cop thing or a civilian thing it is a human thing. There are corrupt people everywhere. These people will do what they can to protect their own interests. And while they may or may not be cops or military at the time they turned on the public they would be considered that later on. Maybe if it comes to that the government will create a mercenary or contractor group that will do the policing of the public.

Certainly though we cannot say none will every turn on the public as some will. A majority may walk away from the job but they will easily find others to replace them. Neither side may like what I have to say but that is my opinion and I still have the right to state it

Raist


[edit on 12/31/09 by Raist]

See... typos... disability. I'm hurting.

Not fixing. Leaving as typed.

reply to post by Raist


Very well said as always!! I never said ALL would walk away. I KNOW there are some who will follow the government agenda under ANY circumstance. And glad you mentioned it (I was getting there..lol), that those who are now civilians WILL join the forces in that dire time because they see it as a way to gain the power and also as a way they believe it will help them survive something that major.

Star for you...

Originally posted by Raist
It is not a cop thing or a civilian thing it is a human thing. There are corrupt people everywhere. These people will do what they can to protect their own interests.

Keep that thought in mind.

Maybe if it comes to that the government will create a mercenary or contractor group that will do the policing of the public.

If the attempts to allow our military to do actual service in the communities within the U.S. instead of only overseas is seen any bit as martial law... then there is something wrong with the person who promotes that idea as martial law... and it's probably exactly for the reason you stated above they would promote it as such FUD... to protect their own (interests).

[edit on 31-12-2009 by dzonatas]

Originally posted by dzonatas
Originally posted by ugie1028
The guy said he had a gun and was willing to use it if they tried to arrest him, or sick the dogs on him. (mistake number one)

Like I said in my other post, I have a different perspective for a reason and not some senseless speculation.

Maybe he is just somebody that wanted to protect his kids, as much as the OP even claimed he would keep a gun even though he would turn in his badge.

I tell an office my kids are missing. Why should they treat that any bit different than the guy in the first clip? Maybe he just wanted to make sure his kids are still alive.

I'm not making thing up just for an excuse. I want to know if my kids are still alive.

Maybe he is just depressed because his attempts to try to be with his kids have been so obfuscated into a situation like this. I'm sure you didn't even consider the simplicity of this and you needed an excuse to make him out a terrorist to justify why he was shot and why a child no longer has a father.

Great, then you might halfway understand maybe what took place. I am not saying it took place or not just another look at it, an outside look if you may.

You are on here telling about a story of a custody battle turned kidnapping. We have you view of the story we do not have the other view. And like I have heard many police, lawyers, and even judges say “There are three sides to every story, each person has their side and then there is the truth”. Take that for what it is worth but certainly few of us ever reveal everything about ourselves. We do not do this because it gives others a weapon against us and you make yourself vulnerable. Putting all of your chips on the table is certainly dangerous.

What has taken place between you and the police is just that. We do not know all the facts and really I don’t see anyone asking for those facts. But everything you just stated here could be turned and used against you in the same manner. Meaning maybe someone else is trying to protect their family.


Again I am not saying you are or not a good choice of a parent. I am saying I, and as far as I know, no one on ATS knows you personally and knows the truth of your story.


Being as such you cannot claim all police are bad people. To do so is asinine.

Raist


[edit on 12/31/09 by Raist]

[edit on 12/31/09 by Raist]

[edit on 12/31/09 by Raist]

[edit on 12/31/09 by Raist]

reply to post by dzonatas


As humans the majority of use are out to protect our own interests.

There is nothing wrong with protecting your own I would not say there is. But we also need to realize that protecting our own also means protecting those within the community as well. Which is why I cannot understand some who refuse to report criminals to the police. I have read posts on here where people said they would not report and would even move away from the criminals. Someone even said some rapper guy stated just that, that he would move rather than report someone even a murderer living next to him. I cannot fathom that sort of mentality.

You cannot protect your own without protecting your community, it is just impossible to do. Eventually the bad things will come at a more personal level and you will be affected. So many turn their eyes from the serious wrongs that take place and are taking care of their own, but only on the most personal of levels. Sadly I believe we have created our own road to very bad things in the future by ending the whole community family sort of viewing.

Raist

Originally posted by rcwj1975
reply to post by watcher73

 

LOL...I sure hope your not proud of having been a Marine, because if you ARE, explain how YOU are any different than me? Considering we both took the same oath and worked for the same government. You come on here to badmouth those wearing a badge, yet you wore a uniform that the world views as a large terrorist oranization...either your just

or you get your kicks trying to make yourself look like your the only person alive with all the right answers.

Im not. But way to miss the entire point yet again and focus on something inconsequential.

You still studying up on those two cases? Or are you ready to apologize yet "officer"?

reply to post by dzonatas


based on the video that i saw, he was threatening the cops to use deadly force if they made a move on him. it could of ended up differently, but he chose to be difficult with them. they gave him a choice, to give up, and told him they couldn't help with talking to his girl friend. he even admitted to being the father of the unborn child. who in their right state of mind would place a pregnant female in the middle of a possible shootout?

IMO he should of just given up, and stayed silent.

He said he knew his rights right?

"You have the RIGHT to remain silent. anything you say can and will be use against you in the court of law. you have a right to an attorney, and if you cannot afford one, the state will provide one for you." (please excuse me if im off a little.)

Imagine if he survived this and it went to court. do you think a jury would convict those cops? they told him to surrender, he refused. they sent the dogs in, and well.... you saw how it ended.

Please watch this video if you have not already.