Memphis Cops Kill Motorist After Traffic Stop

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can there just be an understanding that you should never resist arrest? Regardless of race, gender, criminal record - just do not resist arrest.

Are you asking this in full awareness that the outcomes of that perspective are nonetheless very different for some groups of people than others?

Citation please? Show me the video or story of a white male/female resisting arrest violently and repeatedly and the outcome of their final arrest. I’ll wait….

You'll wait? Fabulous. Which is [IT], "never" or "violently and repeatedly?" (I'll wait, now. )



(corrected for typo, TIA)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can there just be an understanding that you should never resist arrest? Regardless of race, gender, criminal record - just do not resist arrest.

So that’s your excuse for summary executions?

Not relevant. Stop resisting.

Relevant. Stop with the knee-jerk defense of dirty cops. Unless you’re one yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other day I was watching a Carol Burnett show skit from the 1970s about police brutality toward college students protesting the Vietnam War.

And then in the 1980s, we have rappers who sang about police brutality. Ice T summed it up. "Our wars won't end until all wars cease." Ice T the poet.

I am afraid it's true.

I see more clearly now in my early 50s, this isn't something that will ever change.

There will always be violent men. My 8th grade teacher used to tell the boys they would end up dead or in jail. One of those boys is now an electrician with a beautiful family with two college aged daughters. He didn't go to college but learned a trade, how to be an electrician.

There is a certain controlling personality type who will choose law enforcement as a career. No amount of empathy training or de-escalation training is going to change their behavior. They must be held accountable for their actions with the threat of prison. But most of these boys and men aren't afraid of the police, the law, or threat of prison. So here we are.

The problem are guns. Police are a symptom. Cops would not be on edge all time, wouldn’t have an us vs them attitude, and wouldn’t be militarized if there were no guns. For starters, cops wouldn’t even need to carry guns if there were never 300+ million guns on the streets in the US. That’d at least reduce the risk of deadly police shootings and mass shootings by a lot.

I grew up in a small town with zero gun crime and the cops still had an us vs them attitude. Especially with poor people. American policing is the problem.

Your small town is not insulated from the rest of the US, which has tons of guns. The psychology of us vs them and militarization of police forces is everywhere across the country because we have guns everywhere. Dismantle the primary reasons for police needing guns and standard police training practices that assume individuals are armed and cops do not need to carry guns, and they also can stop brainwashing them into an us vs them attitude like the gestapo. In fact, we should have the same police patrolling neighborhoods on foot for years so that they get to learn residents names. Proactive policing is much better than reactive policing where cops only show up when and where called. Once they become integrated members of communities, they’re less likely to view the people they police as subjects that they need to dominate. But guns are entirely the reason we have a police force style and training of the police force like we have today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can there just be an understanding that you should never resist arrest? Regardless of race, gender, criminal record - just do not resist arrest.

So that’s your excuse for summary executions?

Not relevant. Stop resisting.

This was not a “summary execution.” The police did not intend to kill this man. They may have been recklessly indifferent but his death was not purposeful.

They didn’t intend to kill him. They were just softening him up before taking him out for tea and cookies. The poor man had the nerve to die.

[Anonymous]

Look how British cops handle a guy with a knife completely without guns:

You can bet cops would have wasted this guy in 20 milliseconds in the US.

[Anonymous]

Another brilliant example of how to deescalate and how to create space until proper equipment can arrive to take care of the situation in a nonlethal manner:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can there just be an understanding that you should never resist arrest? Regardless of race, gender, criminal record - just do not resist arrest.

Are you asking this in full awareness that the outcomes of that perspective are nonetheless very different for some groups of people than others?

Citation please? Show me the video or story of a white male/female resisting arrest violently and repeatedly and the outcome of their final arrest. I’ll wait….

Physical scuffle, wrestled to the ground, suspect threatened with point blank taser but never used, ended up under officer essentially uninjured, officer neaver reached for gun
https://twitter.com/ramseyboltin/status/1299851359659925507

Want more? Here's a link with more links:

Violent White Folks Who Were Taken Into Custody With Loving Care By Police
https://newsone.com/playlist/white-arrested-with-by-police/item/10/

[Anonymous]

(embedded)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can there just be an understanding that you should never resist arrest? Regardless of race, gender, criminal record - just do not resist arrest.

So that’s your excuse for summary executions?

Not relevant. Stop resisting.

This was not a “summary execution.” The police did not intend to kill this man. They may have been recklessly indifferent but his death was not purposeful.

They didn’t intend to kill him. They were just softening him up before taking him out for tea and cookies. The poor man had the nerve to die.

Puerile emotionalism sarcasm doesn’t change the facts. They intended to subdue him. They didn’t just shoot him in the back of the head.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The other day I was watching a Carol Burnett show skit from the 1970s about police brutality toward college students protesting the Vietnam War.

And then in the 1980s, we have rappers who sang about police brutality. Ice T summed it up. "Our wars won't end until all wars cease." Ice T the poet.

I am afraid it's true.

I see more clearly now in my early 50s, this isn't something that will ever change.

There will always be violent men. My 8th grade teacher used to tell the boys they would end up dead or in jail. One of those boys is now an electrician with a beautiful family with two college aged daughters. He didn't go to college but learned a trade, how to be an electrician.

There is a certain controlling personality type who will choose law enforcement as a career. No amount of empathy training or de-escalation training is going to change their behavior. They must be held accountable for their actions with the threat of prison. But most of these boys and men aren't afraid of the police, the law, or threat of prison. So here we are.

Can I have some of what you’re smoking?


The problem are guns. Police are a symptom. Cops would not be on edge all time, wouldn’t have an us vs them attitude, and wouldn’t be militarized if there were no guns. For starters, cops wouldn’t even need to carry guns if there were never 300+ million guns on the streets in the US. That’d at least reduce the risk of deadly police shootings and mass shootings by a lot.

I grew up in a small town with zero gun crime and the cops still had an us vs them attitude. Especially with poor people. American policing is the problem.

Your small town is not insulated from the rest of the US, which has tons of guns. The psychology of us vs them and militarization of police forces is everywhere across the country because we have guns everywhere. Dismantle the primary reasons for police needing guns and standard police training practices that assume individuals are armed and cops do not need to carry guns, and they also can stop brainwashing them into an us vs them attitude like the gestapo. In fact, we should have the same police patrolling neighborhoods on foot for years so that they get to learn residents names. Proactive policing is much better than reactive policing where cops only show up when and where called. Once they become integrated members of communities, they’re less likely to view the people they police as subjects that they need to dominate. But guns are entirely the reason we have a police force style and training of the police force like we have today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Look how British cops handle a guy with a knife completely without guns:

You can bet cops would have wasted this guy in 20 milliseconds in the US.

How is the relevant? No guns were used in this instance

[Anonymous]

I think we need to stop feeding the dirty cop defending troll. This individual has shown up on other threads. Maybe it's a young child with a LE parent?

[Anonymous]

Why did they have such a hard time putting tyre in custody, they had 5 cops? How could they not restrain him from resisting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can there just be an understanding that you should never resist arrest? Regardless of race, gender, criminal record - just do not resist arrest.

So that’s your excuse for summary executions?

Not relevant. Stop resisting.

This was not a “summary execution.” The police did not intend to kill this man. They may have been recklessly indifferent but his death was not purposeful.

They didn’t intend to kill him. They were just softening him up before taking him out for tea and cookies. The poor man had the nerve to die.

Puerile emotionalism sarcasm doesn’t change the facts. They intended to subdue him. They didn’t just shoot him in the back of the head.

You don’t understand “Intent to kill” definition.

They formed intent to kill when they intentionally beat him enough to die.

If you shoot at somebody with the intent to kill them and miss them but kill somebody else, you are charged with “intent to kill”.

If you intentionally beat someone to death … even if your intent was not necessarily to kill, you formed intent to kill by doing something intentionally that killed them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why did they have such a hard time putting tyre in custody, they had 5 cops? How could they not restrain him from resisting?

They should do toxicology on the cops.