Cops are people too


prisonchaplain
 Share

Recommended Posts

It's a terrible thing when an unarmed civilian gets killed by a policeman.  When the officer is white and the civilian is black some will inevitably ask if racism was a factor.  Sometimes, questions become assumptions, and hurt turns to rage.

 

Then a chaplain gets murdered . . .  http://www.christianpost.com/news/nypd-officers-shot-and-killed-victim-revealed-as-christian-chaplain-in-training-president-of-chaplain-task-force-says-officer-viewed-job-as-ministry-131529/

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really sure what "mentally ill" means in this context. No one is perfect, physically or mentally, so it can justly be argued that everyone is "mentally ill" to some degree, small or great, just as it could be argued that everyone is "physically ill" (meaning imperfect) in some ways.

 

Perhaps this person's "mental illness" is a result of his evil choices rather than a cause of them. It's not obvious to me that "mental illness" excuses or even explains why this person committed such an unspeakable act. But I think the blood on his hands is shared by those who willingly fanned the flames of hatred and bigotry for their own sociopolitical reasons.

Edited by Vort
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

 But I think the blood on his hands is shared by those who willingly fanned the flames of hatred and bigotry for their own sociopolitical reasons.

 

This is my point exactly...that you are wrong about this assumption. When that guy shot a lot of people at the Batman premiere, no one questioned whether or not he was really mentally ill, or what that mean.  This shooter had a history of violence against women, and a crime record.  He did what he did for his own reasons, it is not a reflection on the Black Lives Matter movement.

 

This article states the case better than I can:

 

"Both my grandfather and father were police officers, so I appreciate what a difficult and dangerous profession law enforcement is. We need to value and celebrate the many officers dedicated to protecting the public and nourishing our justice system. It’s a job most of us don’t have the courage to do...Police are not under attack, institutionalized racism is. Trying to remove sexually abusive priests is not an attack on Catholicism, nor is removing ineffective teachers an attack on education. Bad apples, bad training, and bad officials who blindly protect them, are the enemy. And any institution worth saving should want to eliminate them, too."

http://time.com/3643462/kareem-abdul-jabbar-nypd-shootings-police/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The assailant may have had mental health issues.  He may have been a gang-member seeking revenge, too.  Further, this possibly unstable cop-hater may have been egged on by authorities who encouraged the worst police conspiracy theories.

 

http://www.city-journal.org/2014/eon1221mh.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is so tragic. Apparently the shooter was mentally ill:

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/12/22/3606322/nypd-shooter-mental-health/

So was Jared Loughner; but you know what? It didn't matter. Conservatives were still regaled with hair-raising tales of how a Sarah Palin-sponsored campaign flyer depicting incumbents in bull's eyes was just the sort of "eliminationist rhetoric" that causes these things to happen.

In this case, you've got honest-to-gosh leftists flat-out saying "let's kill cops" (or, in Mayor DeBlazio's case, openly praising demonstrators as they say it). The NYPD union demands DeBlazio walk back his support, he refuses and doubles down instead; and a week later--wonder of wonders!--some moonbat takes 'em at their word and actually kills some cops. And suddenly the media's all "yesh, yesh; terrible thing the way that happened, and we have (harrumph!) quite a problem with mental illness in this country, doncha know?"

"Tragic", to me, implies "unavoidable" or at least "unintended". To the contrary, the conditions that led to these police shootings were created deliberately; and their consequences could have been (and in fact were) foreseen. DeBlazio owns this the way Tom Ford owns the murder of the Smith brothers at Carthage; and that's why a police officer retorted "No, we aren't" to DeBlazio's face when offered a consoling "we're all in this together" the other day; and that's why dozens of officers turned their backs on him en masse at the hospital.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is my point exactly...that you are wrong about this assumption. When that guy shot a lot of people at the Batman premiere, no one questioned whether or not he was really mentally ill, or what that mean.  This shooter had a history of violence against women, and a crime record.  He did what he did for his own reasons, it is not a reflection on the Black Lives Matter movement.

 

This article states the case better than I can:

 

"Both my grandfather and father were police officers, so I appreciate what a difficult and dangerous profession law enforcement is. We need to value and celebrate the many officers dedicated to protecting the public and nourishing our justice system. It’s a job most of us don’t have the courage to do...Police are not under attack, institutionalized racism is. Trying to remove sexually abusive priests is not an attack on Catholicism, nor is removing ineffective teachers an attack on education. Bad apples, bad training, and bad officials who blindly protect them, are the enemy. And any institution worth saving should want to eliminate them, too."

http://time.com/3643462/kareem-abdul-jabbar-nypd-shootings-police/

Except didn't he state on Facebook he was going out to kill cops because of the other deaths? That is a reflection on Black Lives Matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

Just-a-guy....I was thinking of the Merriam Webster definition of tragic: causing strong feelings of sadness usually because someone has died in a way that seems very shocking, unfair, etc.

 

Backroads, he also shot his girlfriend.  What I mean is that everyone I know in the BlackLivesMatter movement (and I talk to them daily on FB) condemns what he did.  That's not what we are about.  (article below)

 

Pam, yes it was evil.  I agree with you there.

 

What I'm trying to say is that this evil mentally ill man with a history of violence does NOT represent the Black Lives Matter Movement and more than some Catholic priests who molest boys represent the whole Catholic church.

 

I found a list of Mormons doing tragic, evil things:

http://www.famousmormons.net/infamous.html

 

They don't represent all Mormons--do they?

 

I saw this on Facebook:  

Muslim shooter = entire religion guilty

Black shooter= entire race guilty

White shooter= mentally troubled lone wolf

 

#BlackLIvesMatter Condemns NYPD Cop Killings: "Not Our Vision of Justice"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/21/nypd-cop-killings-blacklivesmatter_n_6362400.html

Edited by LiterateParakeet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That speaks well of the group to condemn the shooting. But how many of the movement spoke against the social media posts before the shooting? People tend to love the very threats imagined they hate in reality.

Of course individuals can't be expected to perfectly represent a group. We get it.

But these movements do have unforseen consequences that can inspire evil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why these discussions keep going in circles is that many blacks believe that many whites--especially those in law enforcement--are racist.  They fear they won't get a fair shake.  So, when this kind of incident happens, they highlight to the nth degree, hoping that next time, the officer will hesitate.  In the mean time, many middle and upper middle class folks (including whites) believe that cops have a terrible job, that they are mostly honorable public servants doing a thankless job, and that every time they get accused of crossing a line they will be less likely to step in and take necessary risks.  Low income minority neighborhoods (especially black ones) do not trust or cooperate with police.  Upper class neighborhoods hire off-duty police to do extra patrols in their neighborhoods.  Which ones are safer?

 

LP is right that this mentally troubled killer does not represent the BLM movement.  If so, then can we not say that the rare police killings of unarmed black young men (roughly 150 a year, with perhaps 30 being deeply questionable) are aberrations, totally unrepresentative of law enforcement???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LP is right that this mentally troubled killer does not represent the BLM movement.  If so, then can we not say that the rare police killings of unarmed black young men (roughly 150 a year, with perhaps 30 being deeply questionable) are aberrations, totally unrepresentative of law enforcement???

Perhaps. But she is unarguably wrong when she claims that the race-baiters and those who fan the flames of hatred are not culpable for the blood of the murdered officers.

 

I think the blood on his hands is shared by those who willingly fanned the flames of hatred and bigotry for their own sociopolitical reasons.

 

This is my point exactly...that you are wrong about this assumption.

No, I am not wrong. But I am appalled that anyone would disagree with my rather obvious assessment.

Edited by Vort
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

Backroads, I'm not clear what you mean about the social media posts before the shooting.  BLM is a nation wide movement, The shooter was just some guy...I can't imagine that he had a huge audience for his social media posts.  I didn't hear anything about him until afterwords.  I really don't think he was part of the BLM, he's just an angry, unstable man who was angry with the police.  As PC said, many black people don't trust police.  That's nothing new.  

 

PC,  You said, "If so, then can we not say that the rare police killings of unarmed black young men (roughly 150 a year, with perhaps 30 being deeply questionable) are aberrations, totally unrepresentative of law enforcement???"

 

I wouldn't call 30 deeply questionable killings rare...but I do agree that they are not representative of all law enforcement.  I have a family member who is a retired police officer.  Through my work, I have met many police officers that seem like good people.  I don't blame the whole police force for the acts of a few.  It's like the quote I shared above said I value and celebrate the many officers dedicated to protecting the public.  I certainly wouldn't want that job, and I am grateful for those who do it well.  I don't want any of them, even the bad ones to be killed.

 

But as you know, I have worked in corrections, and I have seen first hand what "power" can do to people.  I bet Slamjet could tell some stories too.  You've heard of the Stanford Prison experiment, right?  We can't excuse the officers that do wrong just because they are officers.  

 

"Despite what these police organizations and their allies allege, there isn’t an anti-police movement in this country, or at least, none of any significance. The people demonstrating for Eric Garner and Michael Brown aren’t against police, they are for better policing. They want departments to treat their communities with respect, and they want accountability for officers who kill their neighbors without justification. When criminals kill law-abiding citizens, they’re punished. When criminals kill cops, they’re punished. But when cops kill citizens, the system breaks down and no one is held accountable. That is what people are protesting."

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/12/ismaaiyl_brinsley_murdered_two_police_officers_in_brooklyn_police_departments.2.html

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

Vort, we have one thing in common...we both find the other unarguably wrong.  I am likewise appalled that you would disagree with my rather obvious statements and the articles I shared to back up my point of view.  But this isn't the first time we have disagreed, and likely won't be the last.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem in believing that the shooter had a history of mental illness. Having said that, for the law it is a matter of whether he knew what he was doing when he shot the two police officers in question, ironically both victims were minorities themselves which in my view, makes this case an anti-cop hate crime rather than a racist crime. Of course, I agree that the trigger was the Michael Brown's case (as well as the Eric Garner's case), some portions of the media, and some irresponsible people with reckless behavior.

 

Based on my limited understanding of the case and of course, I have zero knowledge about his medical records, I will safely assume he knew right from wrong at the moment of the executions and he was quite aware of what he was doing. Just before the shooting took place, he had time to go to Instagram, post a picture of a gun and stated "I'm putting wings on pigs today. They take (sic) one of ours, let's take 2 of theirs."

 

Ultimately, it was Ismaaiyl Abdullah Brinsley's choice for what took place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I understand, his post had many a like. Someone should have said such a plan is unacceptable. No, it's not people's job to babysit others, but if you claim to be part of a movement that does somewhat make you your brothers' keeper before bad things happen.

in my own case, I look to the courts. I believe what the experts say of these men's deaths. I have no evidence otherwise and that makes it hard for me to accept they were innocent victims.

I believe police brutality is wrong but I also believe that possible consequences should be foreseen and considered. Willfully breaking the law and disobeying officers carry risk more basic than any set of conduct expectations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in my own case, I look to the courts. I believe what the experts say of these men's deaths. I have no evidence otherwise and that makes it hard for me to accept they were innocent victims.

 

 

Are you speaking of the two cops that were killed not being innocent victims?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you speaking of the two cops that were killed not being innocent victims?

No. Eric Garner and Michael Brown. LP was speaking of the Black Lives Matter which claims different death situations than what I understand. I do not believe they were innocent deaths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the biggest problem right now is that the murder of 2 cops is regarded as more evil or worse than the murder of any other 2 people.

 

It's evil no matter who the victims are.  Period.  And we can talk all day long about the factors that led to it, but ultimately only one person made the decision to pull the trigger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the biggest problem right now is that the murder of 2 cops is regarded as more evil or worse than the murder of any other 2 people.

 

It's evil no matter who the victims are.  Period.  And we can talk all day long about the factors that led to it, but ultimately only one person made the decision to pull the trigger.

You and LP are right on this. Our decisions are ultimately up to us.

But cultures that condone violence and crime cannot exist without some duty to change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The big picture problem is how law enforcement can win the trust of the communities they serve.  Most of us on this forum already trust those that serve us.  Some have suggested what is now called "Affirmative Employment"--intentionally recruiting officers that are black, in this case.  Many here hate the idea, and for most of my life, in most circumstances, I opposed such measures.  Nevertheless, such an approach may be part of the answer.  Beyond that, both the civilian and law enforcement communities will need to abandon those who profit from agitating the discord, and find ways to build trust.  Otherwise, we'll be cycling through these stories every 2-3 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Police departments in this country are experiencing a very serious PR problem.  Part of it comes from media sensationalism but the cops themselves are contributing to it, too.  There's definitely an "us vs them" attitude within many police departments and the stereotypes of cops turning a blind eye to internal corruption or even things as simple as not reacting when another police officer breaks traffic laws.  I once knew a guy who was the chief of police for a local jurisdiction who frequently drove way too fast in his own personal vehicle when off duty, and if he ever got pulled over all he had to do was show his badge and, in some cases, the officer that pulled him over would apologize for doing so.

 

These are not trivial matters.  When one group is held to a different standard of compliance with the law, resentment is the obvious result.  

 

Also not helping is the militarization of local police forces.  Whatever your opinion on the Michael Brown case is, it should be chilling to see local police forces equipped like soldiers.  This only reinforces the issues I mentioned above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The big picture problem is how law enforcement can win the trust of the communities they serve.  Most of us on this forum already trust those that serve us. 

 

I used to . . .but not anymore.  A local county police force recently acquired a grenade launcher from military surplus!!

 

A blooming grenade launcher!  When the cops stop accepting and trying to acquire military grade equipment used in war-zones, then my trust will start coming back.  When cops are getting grenade launchers, mraps, ak-47s, flak jackets and are able to execute no-knock warrents in the middle of the night, sorry my trust in their ability to use such powers for good are gone.

 

It is a huge problem, from the laws that are passed that put cops in bad situations (I can't think of an incident that requires a no-knock raid at 1am) to the judges who sign the raids, to the cops who execute it, to the ex-military individuals who come home with PTSD from one war-zone and then transfer those skill sets to the police force with a training of a "warzone" mindset, to the weapons they get.

 

I'd say yeah it's a huge problem.  IMO cops should not have access to any weaponry that a regular private citizen can not get access to.  When junk like this happens:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/10/06/meet-59-year-old-david-hooks-the-latest-drug-raid-fatality/

the cops aren't my friends.

 

Basically, robber breaks into a man's home, cops arrest the robber, robber claims man has drugs, a few days later cops execute a no-knock raid and kill the man (who was trying to defend his home-considering the probability of being robbed again after the first time goes up, not unreasonable).  Cops get off free.

 

And as John Oliver recently pointed out, a cop can pull you over and if you tell them how much money you have on you, they can legally size it under asset forfeiture laws and declare that your money is drug money and you then have to prove the money innocent to get it back.  Cops using that money for their own literal slush fund is not right.

 

So yeah, that's an us vs. them mentality.

Edited by yjacket
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to . . .but not anymore.  A local county police force recently acquired a grenade launcher from military surplus!!

 

A blooming grenade launcher!  When the cops stop accepting and trying to acquire military grade equipment used in war-zones, then my trust will start coming back.  When cops are getting grenade launchers, mraps, ak-47s, flak jackets and are able to execute no-knock warrents in the middle of the night, sorry my trust in their ability to use such powers for good are gone.

 

See, this is serious.  One of the ways our liberty is protected is that our civilian law enforcement and our military are kept entirely separate.  Why?  Because they have entirely separate roles.

 

What is the purpose of a soldier?  Simplest answer:  To kill the enemy.  Period.  Yes, we have peacetime uses for our military and yes, not all military personnel actually engage in combat, but the basic purpose of a solider is to kill  the enemy.

 

On the other hand, the basic purpose of a police officer is to enforce the law.  Cops aren't there to kill the enemy, because there is no enemy.  A suspect is considered innocent until he is proven guilty in a court of law.

 

It's been said that if you equip a cop like a soldier, he's going to start acting like a soldier.  That thought is terrifying.

 

If watching that officer on the APC pointing that automatic weapon at the crowd in Ferguson, MO doesn't make this point for me, I don't know what will.

 

ferguson_police_2.jpg

 

Does this guy look like a cop or a soldier?

Edited by unixknight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share