The WOKE Thread (Merged from WTF?)

[pawnman]

28 minutes ago, Buddy Spike said:

No, it is not why they were "totally legitimate."  The dude was a known agitator who approached police and ignored verbal commands to get back (after curfew).  Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.  I guess it does have that in common with the BLM protests.  100% of those "victims" would be alive today had they complied peacefully.

 

So...you're OK with the idea that saying things to police, unarmed, is met with enough force to put you in the hospital? 

Because I'm not ok with that.  "Known agitator"? Maybe after the thin blue line folks did what they always do and dig up all the dirt on the victim that they can.  I'd bet my next paycheck the cops who assaulted an elderly man on video had no idea who he was.

One has to wonder why the military is capable of showing more concern for ROE in more dangerous situations than police are able to show for fellow Americans. 

Edited February 13, 2021 by pawnman

[FLEA]

1 hour ago, pawnman said:

So...you're OK with the idea that saying things to police, unarmed, is met with enough force to put you in the hospital? 

Because I'm not ok with that.  "Known agitator"? Maybe after the thin blue line folks did what they always do and dig up all the dirt on the victim that they can.  I'd bet my next paycheck the cops who assaulted an elderly man on video had no idea who he was.

One has to wonder why the military is capable of showing more concern for ROE in more dangerous situations than police are able to show for fellow Americans. 

Uhhhh ok? You are comparing apples.to oranges right now. What grounds or data do you have to make any of the above assumptions? Is flying a plane more dangerous than entering a domestic violence scene (definitely no). Did those at Haditha exercise good ROE judgement? (no) Do law enforcement officers have the same legal and moral obligations to risk their life as uniformed military members (also no). 

Honestly man, if you're not an expert on how the law enforcement community calculates, and mitigates risk, and how they apply a completely different use of force spectrum, you probably should just refrain from comment. I know enough about the career field to know they are completely incomparable. 

 

[Buddy Spike]

3 hours ago, pawnman said:

So...you're OK with the idea that saying things to police, unarmed, is met with enough force to put you in the hospital? 

Because I'm not ok with that.  "Known agitator"? Maybe after the thin blue line folks did what they always do and dig up all the dirt on the victim that they can.  I'd bet my next paycheck the cops who assaulted an elderly man on video had no idea who he was.

One has to wonder why the military is capable of showing more concern for ROE in more dangerous situations than police are able to show for fellow Americans. 

 

I'm saying that approaching police there for crowd control while they're yelling loud verbal commands to get back, refusing that order, and putting your hands on them is grounds for exactly what happened.  Ask, tell, make. He had plenty of opportunities to walk away.

The guy was ANTIFA.  If he was too elderly and frail to do what he did, he should've stayed home watching Judge Judy like any other 75 year old should be doing.

 

Edited February 13, 2021 by Buddy Spike

[arg]

1 hour ago, FLEA said:

 Is flying a plane more dangerous than entering a domestic violence scene (definitely no).

 

 

You haven't seen the planes I flew on have you.😃

[di1630]

So...you're OK with the idea that saying things to police, unarmed, is met with enough force to put you in the hospital? 
Because I'm not ok with that.  "Known agitator"? Maybe after the thin blue line folks did what they always do and dig up all the dirt on the victim that they can.  I'd bet my next paycheck the cops who assaulted an elderly man on video had no idea who he was.

That old guy probably figured using his age as and excuse he could disobey orders, start touching the police (you libtards would be screaming assault if tables were turned).

Police didn’t use excessive force...he couldn’t handle a small shove and it’s plausible he over acted and self-injured himself in the process.

Stay at home old man!! Didn’t his leftist friends tell him if the police weren’t going to get him, the virus would.

Root cause....stupidity.




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[jice]

5 hours ago, FLEA said:

 

Honestly man, if you're not an expert on how the law enforcement community calculates, and mitigates risk, and how they apply a completely different use of force spectrum, you probably should just refrain from comment. I know enough about the career field to know they are completely incomparable. 

 

Very interested in this. I’m not an expert, and from the cheap seats it is definitely striking that the standard in court as I understand Graham (not an expert or lawyer) is narrowly constrained to the moment force was used. There seems to be lots of room for failures leading up to that moment, which is troubling when we’re talking about American citizens. What do you recommend I read? What insight would you be willing to share?  
 

I’m not willing to go as far as to say that an officer must be right IN FACT when using deadly force, else face murder charges, but  as [I understand] it stands right now they can be very very wrong and not pay for their mistake in the same way that an armed citizen would.  Help me understand what I don’t know. 

[Buddy Spike]

10 hours ago, jice said:

Very interested in this. I’m not an expert, and from the cheap seats it is definitely striking that the standard in court as I understand Graham (not an expert or lawyer) is narrowly constrained to the moment force was used. There seems to be lots of room for failures leading up to that moment, which is troubling when we’re talking about American citizens. What do you recommend I read? What insight would you be willing to share?  
 

I’m not willing to go as far as to say that an officer must be right IN FACT when using deadly force, else face murder charges, but  as [I understand] it stands right now they can be very very wrong and not pay for their mistake in the same way that an armed citizen would.  Help me understand what I don’t know. 

What state do you live in that the use of deadly force laws are different for law enforcement?

[pawnman]

14 hours ago, di1630 said:

That old guy probably figured using his age as and excuse he could disobey orders, start touching the police (you libtards would be screaming assault if tables were turned).

Police didn’t use excessive force...he couldn’t handle a small shove and it’s plausible he over acted and self-injured himself in the process.

Stay at home old man!! Didn’t his leftist friends tell him if the police weren’t going to get him, the virus would.

Root cause....stupidity.




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Oh, good.  Now I'm a libtard for believing police should be held accountable for their actions.

Edited February 14, 2021 by pawnman

[pawnman]

38 minutes ago, Buddy Spike said:

What state do you live in that the use of deadly force laws are different for law enforcement?

Seen a lot of practical examples in a lot of states.  Couldn't tell you what the law as written says in every state.  I can tell you it is very rare for police to be put on trial, and even more rare for a conviction. And even if they are fired from one police department, they get hired at a neighboring police department a couple months later.

[Buddy Spike]

14 minutes ago, pawnman said:

Seen a lot of practical examples in a lot of states.  Couldn't tell you what the law as written says in every state.  I can tell you it is very rare for police to be put on trial, and even more rare for a conviction. And even if they are fired from one police department, they get hired at a neighboring police department a couple months later.

I can't speak for other states, but in my state (Louisiana) there is only one justifiable homicide law.  And it applies to everyone.

Obviously law enforcement use of force is not a binary issue and there's plenty of case law you can go through if you want to get smart on it (Graham v Connor was mentioned above, but also Tennessee v Garner, Color of Law, etc.). 

[pawnman]

22 minutes ago, Buddy Spike said:

I can't speak for other states, but in my state (Louisiana) there is only one justifiable homicide law.  And it applies to everyone.

Obviously law enforcement use of force is not a binary issue and there's plenty of case law you can go through if you want to get smart on it (Graham v Connor was mentioned above, but also Tennessee v Garner, Color of Law, etc.). 

When was the last time an officer was convicted of killing someone?

[Buddy Spike]

1 minute ago, pawnman said:

When was the last time an officer was convicted of killing someone?

First of all, that assumes most shootings are not justified, which is false.

Second, the fact that you don't know it doesn't make it so.  Derrick Stafford (Shooting of Jeremy Mardis) and Michael Slager (Walter Scott shooting) immediately come to mind.  The latter involving a lot more gray area.  

[FLEA]

6 minutes ago, pawnman said:

When was the last time an officer was convicted of killing someone?

35 officers between 2005 and 2020 were found guilty of manslaughter or higher for a duty involved shooting. 

[brabus]

2 minutes ago, pawnman said:

When was the last time an officer was convicted of killing someone?

Oct 2019 from what I found in a .69 sec google search. 
 

My general thought (not directed at Pawnman): Police do need to be held accountable, but they should be helped with better/more consistent training and their leadership needs to have their backs. I don’t mean cover up crimes, but stop throwing them under the bus the second some zero-context video hits the news. Let’s gather the facts before demonizing an officer; stop letting the media get away with ramming unchecked narratives down the public’s throats.

To this specific incident: The video sure doesn’t look good, but what’s the context, what happened in the preceding minutes or hours to this situation? Had the guy been getting in the police’s faces, touching them, ignoring commands for a long time? Had he threatened them verbally? Had they given him numerous warnings to disperse/get back?

Many of us have been in numerous situations killing people where some fucking dipshit who wasn’t there starts their virtuous armchair quarterbacking - how about said dipshit has the full picture before questioning or accusing those present in the moment. Again, the 10 sec clip doesn’t look great, but I will not judge this officer or any others until the full picture is determined. I wasn’t there, we’re any of you spear chuckers?

[FLEA]

12 hours ago, jice said:

Very interested in this. I’m not an expert, and from the cheap seats it is definitely striking that the standard in court as I understand Graham (not an expert or lawyer) is narrowly constrained to the moment force was used. There seems to be lots of room for failures leading up to that moment, which is troubling when we’re talking about American citizens. What do you recommend I read? What insight would you be willing to share?  
 

I’m not willing to go as far as to say that an officer must be right IN FACT when using deadly force, else face murder charges, but  as [I understand] it stands right now they can be very very wrong and not pay for their mistake in the same way that an armed citizen would.  Help me understand what I don’t know. 

I honestly wish I had something to reference to you. But I dont. I had special insight because I was married to a cop. I spent a lot of time at her place of work, doing ride-alongs, hanging out with her friends etc...

On the risk, its completely incomparable. There are so many moving parts. For example, the fact that LE accepts risk daily for years without reprieve and military only accepts it in short duration for deployments. LE doesn't choose the time and place of their encounters but the US military doctrinally only operates with initiative. LE normally works autonomous as a single unit where as in the military the minimum maneuver unit is 3 in the USMC and 4 in the USA, and operations outside the wire are always supported by a robust network of ISR, air support and logistics. Doctrinely the US military strives for a 3-to-1 force ratio, LE hopes to have 2-to-1. Etc... LE routinely accepts "unknown" risk, doctrinally the US DoD does not do that. The biggest evidence though that discredits the comparison is the very recognition by the US DoD that apprehending a target is a much higher risk than killing them, hence we prefer to drone strike targets if at all possible because its lower risk.

As far as obligations: LE officers are not like military. They are civilians first and foremost and they can quit their job any time they want. They do not have robust survivor benefits and they don't fall under any special laws. They therefore can quit at any moment and they can't be ordered to assume a risk with a known detriment, like entering an active shooter situation in a grade school, alone. However, it is completely legal for me to order 20 enlisted to take a hill even if I have good reason to believe that 15 of them will die doing so. If anyone of them refuses that order, they are now deserters and are criminally liable. To compensate that we have robust survivor benefits for their dependents and family. 

I suggest reading some of the classical ethics behind UOF. Double-effect doctrine is something all officers should be familiar with in the military and it outlines how Western society justifies homicide in any instance. (Whether its a police involved shooting, war, self-defense, whatever have you.) 

[FLEA]

https://www.vulture.com/2021/02/gina-carano-fired-from-the-mandalorian-lucasfilm-star-wars.html#:~:text=12%2C 2021-,Gina Carano Fired From The,'Abhorrent' Social-Media Posts&text=The Mandalorian actress and MMA,went viral on social media.

 

I've been following this story in my feed and honestly, the biggest hypocrisy here, is by attempting to silence Gina Carano for her relatively benign post, they actually upheld the core point of her post. While I'm not a fan of the "compare everything to Hitler" cliche, nothing in her post attempts to glorify Hitler, or deflect blame onto Hitler's victims. In fact, she ends the post with a pretty honest question, "explain to me how this is different?" And rather than offering a rational explanation, people decided to silence her. 

Whats further infuriating, is it somehow became socially acceptable in the last decade for democrats to call Republicans Hitler, but pointing out that this division is what Hitler would have wanted is somehow wrong. 

[pawnman]

2 hours ago, brabus said:

Oct 2019 from what I found in a .69 sec google search. 
 

My general thought (not directed at Pawnman): Police do need to be held accountable, but they should be helped with better/more consistent training and their leadership needs to have their backs. I don’t mean cover up crimes, but stop throwing them under the bus the second some zero-context video hits the news. Let’s gather the facts before demonizing an officer; stop letting the media get away with ramming unchecked narratives down the public’s throats.

To this specific incident: The video sure doesn’t look good, but what’s the context, what happened in the preceding minutes or hours to this situation? Had the guy been getting in the police’s faces, touching them, ignoring commands for a long time? Had he threatened them verbally? Had they given him numerous warnings to disperse/get back?

Many of us have been in numerous situations killing people where some fucking dipshit who wasn’t there starts their virtuous armchair quarterbacking - how about said dipshit has the full picture before questioning or accusing those present in the moment. Again, the 10 sec clip doesn’t look great, but I will not judge this officer or any others until the full picture is determined. I wasn’t there, we’re any of you spear chuckers?

I've not seen many cops thrown under the bus.  Usually the opposite.

[FLEA]

1 minute ago, pawnman said:

I've not seen many cops thrown under the bus.  Usually the opposite.

Uh, are you serious? Any time a mayor decries an officer in her district, that would be the same as the President calling you a disgrace before your command finished their investigation. 

[brabus]

12 minutes ago, pawnman said:

I've not seen many cops thrown under the bus.  Usually the opposite.

Happens a ton. I have several friends who have quit because that specific problem (spineless leadership) was overpowering. They know many who have done the same. The analogy I can think of us relative to us is being in a wing where every debrief is preceded by the wing/cc saying you are a shit pilot and fucked this sortie away royally and will be held accountable via Q3, qual pulling, etc. Now commence tapes that show you actually executed the TTP quite well...doesn’t matter, the whole base already thinks you’re the world’s worst pilot. Tomorrow it happens to one of your bros. Still want to be a pilot in that wing?

Edited February 14, 2021 by brabus

[Homestar]

De-escalation training should be mandatory for all cities to obtain insurance. It protects all parties involved and when force is applied it can be reasonably assumed to have been the last resort. 
 

LEOs encounter way too much risk everyday to do otherwise. 

[pawnman]

4 hours ago, FLEA said:

Uh, are you serious? Any time a mayor decries an officer in her district, that would be the same as the President calling you a disgrace before your command finished their investigation. 

I'd feel worse for them if there were a consequence beyond "go sit at home and collect a paycheck for a month, then come back to work"

[SurelySerious]

6 minutes ago, pawnman said:

I'd feel worse for them if there were a consequence beyond "go sit at home and collect a paycheck for a month, then come back to work"

You must be a big fan of innocent until proven guilty. 

[pawnman]

10 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

You must be a big fan of innocent until proven guilty. 

I'm also a fan of equality under the law.

[SocialD]

We have quite a few part timers on base that are full time LEO'S.  In the last 5 years or so, quite a few of them have left their LEO gigs for full time spots at the base.  Almost every one of them says the same thing...you're one edited cell phone clip away from fired or worse.  None of them felt like their bosses had their backs if anything hit the media.  They all seem to think it's just not worth the risk anymore.  I respect the hell out of them, but I don't envy the ones that remain.  

Edited February 14, 2021 by SocialD

[Buddy Spike]

1 hour ago, pawnman said:

I'd feel worse for them if there were a consequence beyond "go sit at home and collect a paycheck for a month, then come back to work"

If they're cleared of wrongdoing, why would there be additional consequences? Just because?