Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Oppressive police deserve no safety or privacy. Ever.

Posted 2 years ago on Dec. 23, 2011, 12:04 p.m. EST by FawkesNews (1290)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

If you abuse the families of your fellow citizens, your family deserves no sanctuary from retaliation. Ever. Let the fear of retribution govern the actions of the police. Let fear, shame and ostracism, deny the children of oppressors, the chance to repeat the sins of their fathers.

159 Comments

159 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

Put any police person that breaks or abuses the law in prison and never allow them to work in any kind of public service position again. Make part of their sentence volunteer work with people that have it real bad so they can see "taking orders" is no excuse. Leave the families of corrupt officers out of things unless they commit similar offenses.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

How?

[-] 2 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

Demand accountability. We've ignored abuses far too long. Write letters, protest, run for office...do anything and everything you can.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Is that the complete listing of "everything you can"? It seems a bit obsolete and under powered.

[-] 2 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

I've had the idea of rounding up a group of like-minded citizens with some free time and decent video/surveillance equipment to help patrol the streets for police abuse in my city. I'm thinking as long as we steer physically clear of them, they can't charge us with obstructing. If anyone has a more thorough legal background than I, perhaps they can chime in as to what kind of problems we'd likely run into.

[-] 2 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Now you speak my language. I posted months ago in favor of a triangulated approach to filming police abuses, long before most of these abuses transpired. Your idea is infallible in my eyes. In the eyes of the abusers, it is horrific and they are attempting to make the filming of police illegal. Fear driven responses to an exposure problem is proof that video works.

[-] 1 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

Very true. It seems like there is too much protection for police abusing their position of power with very poor protection for their victims. We need police and I support the good ones. It's certainly unfair to them to have their entire profession degraded by tolerance for bad apples. Let's weed them out the best we can and restore honor to the very concept of law enforcement.

[-] 2 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Thank you. My hope, is that discussions are taking place within the police community and the results of these discussions will empower the better of the police to rein in the lessor of them. In fact, I call that "responsibility". To idly stand by while coworkers abuse the rights of citizens, is tantamount to aiding and abetting. The police need to police the police. Until they are able to prove they can do that, they are all suspect.

[-] 1 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

Thank you. I couldn't agree more.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

In addition, I believe it to be the responsibility of all those who know police to open the door to discussions regarding these ever so vital topics whenever possible. Thank you.

[-] 1 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

Good point!

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Thank you, and may you find a good cop with a mind, to match their listening capacity.

[-] 1 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

You're welcome. I hope you have such luck as well.

[-] 1 points by happyfeet (1) 2 years ago

The police aren't their to serve and protect us (99%) They are to protect the economic interest's of the 1% against us.

[-] 1 points by norcal45gpw (10) from Stockton, CA 2 years ago

happyfeet You hit the nail on the head!

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Obviously so. What can be done to remove the impunity from them? What can be done to make them think first? Will their own children question them before they act against the citizenry?

[-] 1 points by HarryPairatestes2 (380) from Barrow, AK 2 years ago

Why don't you do the same thing and try to capture crimes taking place in order to notify the police with evidence.

[-] 2 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

Tried that. I can only speak for our local police, but they aren't very interested in real crimes...only small, easy, manufactured crimes that can give them good looking overall statistics. For instance, last time I saw a crime (5 young men ripping the stereo out of my neighbors car), I ran after them alone, unarmed and barefoot. I was relieved to find a squad car around the corner to report the crime. About a half hour later he rolled out and came by later to tell me they got away. I could have told him that as we watched them run away down the street in the first place.

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

Uhm. all cops who are charged with a crime are restricted from duty. And some get community service... I don't get what you about on that.

[-] 1 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

The problem is that bad cops are not often prosecuted within the current corrupt system. It does happen, but hardly to an effective level. We just need it to be clear to all in the law enforcement profession that there is zero tolerance for deviance for the law. These people, while still only human, have to be the role models and protectors of society. In my personal opinion, more education, training and job screening is needed.

[-] -1 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

The cops are role models. How do you know a dirty cop from a clean one?? You can't find out until someone says something or they slip up. Once that happens, they are off the force, and in prison. There's no other way of finding the corrupt. They get training all the time. They learn things all the time also. It's not like being a doctor. Job screening, perhaps. Usually, as an officer rises in rank, more investigation is done.

[-] 1 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

Cops are mostly held responsible within their own departments which is completely ineffective. As well, there is the common practice of suspension with pay waiting for a blunder to blow over. Sending you home from school is the way we handle naughty children, not how we should handle someone that holds a citizen's livelihood in their hands (or puts it in the sights of their gun). I'm not disagreeing that they don't get continuous training, there just needs to be focus in other areas (rather than treating the police force like a military force). As for job screening, to be more specific I was referring to my county where an officer can be hired despite a questionable psychological profile. No offense to those out there with questionable mentalities, but the police force is not the place for you. You are there to serve and protect civilians and in that duty there can be zero tolerance for unnecessary risk.

[-] 2 points by aahpat (1407) 2 years ago

Two Wrongs Do Not Make A Right!

You are threatening terrorist retribution toward innocent civilians. And you are threatening innocent people just based on their association with a government official. This is terrorism.

When libertarians threaten Second Amendment actions against government officials they disagree with I denounce it as the terrorism, insurrection and threats of assassination. This is as bad. Maybe worse because at least the libertarians and tea party whack jobs only threaten political leaders and the law enforcement who are doing what they are sworn to do. You are intentionally victimizing family of police. Family who may or may not like what the officer does. Family who may have a good cop in their family who is not one of the creep cops.

You have no right, under the OWS banner, to use terrorism against non-combatants.

[-] -1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Terrorism? Threatening? How accusatory can you be. I merely champion those who remove impunity from those who act as if it were their right. You support violent police and believe they should be protected? Police are sworn to protect the citizens, not abuse them. Do you need help understanding this concept.

[-] 2 points by aahpat (1407) 2 years ago

Don't try that dodge with me. I did not defend violent police and you can see that if you actually read what I wrote rather than reading into what I write what you want to read.

You need to learn to read your own writing FOR COMPREHENSION.

You wrote: "If you abuse the families of your fellow citizens, your family deserves no sanctuary from retaliation."

This is a threat "retaliation" against innocent family members of police officers. Your words!

For one thing Occupy Wall Street, to my knowledge, is not a violent group so your threats are totally inappropriate to this forum and movement.

For another thing this type of overt threat against the government can be used by the government as an excuse and pretext to treat the Occupy Wall Street movement as no different or better than the Ku Klux Klan or Aryan Nations. Both groups threaten the government just like you have.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

"law enforcement who are doing what they are sworn to do." Which law enforcement agency is sworn to beat and mace peaceful, unarmed, non-violent protesters?
My words? If you deal drugs and you get caught and go to prison, your family suffers as a result. That is your fault. Accountability extends much further than you are willing to accept. Occupy is 100% non-violent. Beating upon them is a crime. Though currently unpunished, it is a crime. If your family suffers a s result of a crime you commit, it is your responsibility. A very simple concept. Please do not defend the police who commit crimes.

[-] 1 points by aahpat (1407) 2 years ago

I have never written one word defending police who commit crimes. I also would never write defending you in the crimes that you are committing.

Your simple concept is uncivilized, inhumane and crazy.

[-] 0 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

I commit no crime. You defend the families of those who do.

[-] 2 points by ahatkills (54) 2 years ago

Being a police man is a job. There are increasingly less jobs out there. It's no surprise to me that some of them are bound to follow orders. They want to keep their jobs, you can't blame people for that.

Some are also threatened. This scenario reminds me of The Boston Massacre.

[-] 0 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Great analogy, the Boston Massacre. Revolution follows. If your income is dependent upon your ability to abuse your fellow citizen, then you need another skill. I blame those who justify violence against the peaceful and unarmed as a source of income.

[-] 2 points by cherman (3) 2 years ago

Fawkesnews-- I like your post- all of the worlds citizens, must be held accountable if they assault , another human- no one is above the law - not - you not me- not OWS and especially not the paid mercenary's of a police state.- --------------------------------------------------- this is the law, that everyone one earth is to follow- and if any government doesn't respect that law- it will be brought down and replaced with one that will. universal declaration of human rights (UN) pdf english http://www.wunrn.com/reference/pdf/univ_dec_hum_right.pdf


mp3 english 12 minutes http://www.multiupload.com/M9I27RWFH8


in over 100 launguages http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Pages/SearchByLang.aspx


universal declaration of human rights movie 4 minutes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTlrSYbCbHE-


universal declaration of human rights 20 minutes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epVZrYbDVis


[-] 2 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Thank you for noticing and also for bringing to light that exact document. I must study it further. Enforcing it is the dilemma of the future since the previous enforcement techniques are clearly failing.

[-] 1 points by cherman (3) 2 years ago

If all the world wide movements, including ows would use this as their vision- They would win freedom for all humanity. That document was signed by all the worlds country's- it is legal- and its is the most dangerous thing ever written- the pen is mightier then the sward.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

I am in full agreement, but only question your ideas regarding the enforcing of that document. How? The world court has a line out the door of war criminals awaiting trial. Unfortunately the criminals are busy governing the world right now.

[-] 2 points by rascal (42) 2 years ago

"This photo is a picture of a man who is strapped to a chair naked inside a jail for hours with a hood over his face. That evokes thoughts of being tortured," says Cleveland-based lawyer Nick DiCello who represents the Christie family.

The photo, which was obtained by FOX 13's investigative unit, was taken in the final hours of Christie's life.

The District 21 Medical Examiner ruled his death was a homicide because he had been restrained and sprayed with pepper sprayed by law enforcement officers. But to this day, nobody has ever been charged with a crime, and the Lee County State Attorney cleared the sheriff's office of any wrong doing.

He later died at the hospital. His heart failed from the shock of the pepper spray.

[-] 1 points by BlueRose (1437) 2 years ago

Wow. Cops don't realize how fragile humans really are. They are not medical doctors, so many people die from heart problems, diabetes in police custody. Not to mention from getting tazed, shot, and beaten to death.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

If I am not mistaken, what I read here is that those responsible for the death of this man are not responsible for the death of this man? Am I correct? If so, what sort of justice is available to this man?

[-] 1 points by rascal (42) 2 years ago

what sort of justice is available to this man?

"He's dead, Jim."

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

If true, should the perpetrators of his death be allowed to go home to teach their children the ideology that killed him? The children will be as infected as the perpetrators and will later propagate more of the same.

[-] 2 points by rascal (42) 2 years ago

should the perpetrators of his death be allowed to go home to teach their children the ideology that killed him?

Through their Benevolent Assoc., their offspring will be guaranteed scholarships and pre-approved pensions. Others will be deemed unclean.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

You are hysterical and I appreciate it. It took me a second, but I am laughing. If I am not mistaken, you meant that as usual, the highly unqualified and inept, will attempt to rise to superiority through the bloodlines of royal nepotistic mediocrity?

[-] 0 points by rascal (42) 2 years ago

the highly unqualified and inept......rise to superiority through the bloodlines of royal nepotistic mediocrity

By virtue of government schools and edited history we shall overcome!

Thanks and appreciated your posting of this topic and have found some of the contributed comments um... interesting.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Or... If it is deemed "icky" by the official twitterfed hierarchy and elite, then it must be erased from history and replaced with much more practical and less complicated versions of what is worth knowing.

This is too much fun. Thanks.

[-] 1 points by Restorefreedomtoall1776 (272) from Bayonne, NJ 2 years ago

Since they have violated a Sacred Trust to protect American citizens, they deserve no better. They would do well to consider a future in which their 1% Masters have vanished from the scene, leaving them friendless and alone to face several hundred million angry citizens.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

I could not agree more. When the 1% actually disregards the very protection they currently have, there will be no safe sanctuary for the families of those who are guilty of oppression for profit. Thank you.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (26871) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

This is why we are here this is why you are needed.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/inside-job-documentary/

Share, circulate, educate, inspire.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

I've seen it. I share it. I educate with it. I insist upon it. Thanks.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (26871) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

You are more than welcome. As an educational Documentary this one pretty much says it all. I'm seeing if I can push it viral.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

It requires quite a conversation as a prelude, but has always yielded excellent results in my experience.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (26871) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

What I like is it is presented in cause and effect and names key players and their rolls, before, during and after. Very easy for anyone to watch and understand.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Yes. Incredible piece of film. I like the "matter of fact" approach to the whole series of events. It's almost as if there were thousands of people awaiting the decimation of the worlds banking, never divulging their own role. A crime that everyone in the industry seemed aware of, is basically a conspiracy. More like piracy, but I digress. Thanks.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (26871) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

It definitely supplies a starting point, for those looking to see who need's to be fired, and why.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Fired? I was thinking more along the lines of "prosecuted" for treason. Too bad that is not a crime anymore.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (26871) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Fired is the start and a good one, does not mean that charges are not being filed. But fired is most appropriate to begin the process instead of trying to start recall proceedings or impeachment, depending on who has stepped out of line to their oath of office.

This is why we are here this is why you are needed.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/inside-job-documentary/

Share, circulate, educate, inspire.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Why has no one turned state witness yet? Is my question. It seems there are enough criminals that were denied the larger payouts and must feel disenfranchised by the very dirtbags that entrusted.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (26871) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

I believe there would be plenty of volunteers to be State witness's if the charges ever began being filed against the fraudulent. But we have to get the Justice department off of it's ass and get them to work.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

You are most likely, absolutely right, about state witnesses. Is there even a justice system left? I bet if the personal information of those responsible were disseminated, there would simply be justice. No need for a corrupt justice system when justice is running free.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (26871) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Hence I advertise the Documentary: Inside Job as it does name some names and so gives us more than a starting point. We the public also need to voice our disgust of the inaction of the Justice system and demand that it get to work prosecuting the economic criminals and by dropping Corporate entities as individuals.

This is why we are here this is why you are needed.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/inside-job-documentary/

Share, circulate, educate, inspire.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

"Inside job" provides a starting point for research into what sort of agenda has been applied to the worlds banking. It almost pinpoints the very core of the problems, but leaves the viewer to study. I love it and share it with many. Once corporate person hood is removed there will be much more justice, even in the justice system.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (26871) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

In the meantime we educate and inspire the demands for justice to begin proper action.

[-] 1 points by Rico (3027) 2 years ago

Yes, let us return to the passing of sin from the father to the son. Let the names of sinners be forever stricken from the annals of history. Let them be stoned in public places, and let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Anyone? ... Anyone? ... Mr Bueller?

Your post is nothing but your own fears and suspicions fermented into hatred and projected onto not only those who you perceive as having committed crimes, but their innocent families as well. If we were to look at your family history and find a distant relative committed a crime, do we get to punish you for their crime ?

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

I will go right now and get myself stoned in public. Does that help you? You psychological evaluations fall upon unsympathetic ears.

[-] 1 points by Rico (3027) 2 years ago

Getting yourself stoned in public is no doubt one of your favorite pastimes.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

It sure beats, hung, drawn and quartered..... Do you really want a serious response from me or are you simply reacting with so little control over your emotions for what you read here, that all you intend is insults?

[-] 1 points by Rico (3027) 2 years ago

There is no rational response to your original post, and it deserves nothing but insult.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

So your postings are banter and I thank you.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Hey, way to be a complete and total jack off.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Upset? Lacking vocabulary?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

You don't deserve any more of a vocabulary then what you are receiving.

There are bad apples in any job. You do not go after their families. Period. You are nothing more than a gang banger at that point. I doubt that you have any connection whatsoever to OWS and you are here to stir up shit. That makes you a complete and total douche bag.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Your frantic confusion aside. There is far too leniency allocated those "Bad Apples" and your approach will yield an orchard filled with Bad Apple Trees. You assumptions about anon and OWS are lacking, to say the least. On top of it all you add insults. There must be a way for you to communicate without allowing your prejudices to interfere. I am cheering for you to learn them.

[-] 1 points by ScrewyL (809) 2 years ago

Fawkes, don't waste your time with Friday.

[-] 1 points by teenager (11) 2 years ago

Every member of ows is there own leader- we report to no one- everything is on the table- Personally if a cop beats up on one of my group. we would go to his house at 2am and beat the shit out of the bastard in front of his wife. clearly you don't know what you are dealing with.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Wow,. you have some very large balls if you speak the truth.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 2 years ago

Quit your crying, you twisted freak. You are a paid for troll. Nothing more and nothing less.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Paid? Where do I pick up the check?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

OK - try this one on -
You are in a peaceful OWS demonstration
The man next to you pulls out a pistol and points it at a cop
Another cop pulls out a SHOTGUN and fires it at the pistol holder, wounding YOU

The BAD cop is RARE - and deserves HELL
but do you have the guts to admit most cops are NOT bad ?

guilt by association is dishonorable - and dishonors OWS
we MUST be better than that

[-] 1 points by norcal45gpw (10) from Stockton, CA 2 years ago

"The BAD cop is RARE" I call Bullshit. I have family that are LEO's and I have worked for a while as one. I could talk for hours about all the corruption, coverups and lying that goes on. I left the agency (and work in another field now) because of this. Oh, and is is very well known that "whistleblowing" will leave you and your family in a very vulnerable spot.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

The bad cop and the idiot with the pistol are no different. Both are outnumbered by sane individuals within their respective ranks. Both are representative of desperation and ignorance. Neither is representative of the crowd they are in. Yet the very existence of each, is a clear indication of the lack of unity between citizenry and government.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

Obviously - my obvious point was missed -
if you have a target - hit it - not the bystanders.
Good cops deserve our support. Is that clear enough?

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Good cops need to earn support. Is that clear enough?

[-] 1 points by Pahlavi (3) from Tehran, Tehran 2 years ago

if a good see's a bad cop break the law and does nothing- then he is guilty of the same crime-- if the good cop covers up the crime of the bad cop.

[-] 1 points by Confusedoldguy (260) 2 years ago

OWS is already perceived by the public as a bunch of cop-hating anarchists. If you keep posting threats like this, and if the admins of this site continue to allow it, this movement is done. And should be.

[-] 1 points by Pahlavi (3) from Tehran, Tehran 2 years ago

If people demand that people stand up for injustice- even if its done by cops then the corruption ends.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Thank you. The more people who oppose injustice the less who will feel entitled to participate.

[-] 0 points by alouis (1511) from New York, NY 2 years ago

America's Police Brutality Pandemic

http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts224.html by Paul Craig Roberts

DIGG THIS

Bush's "war on terror" quickly became Bush's war on Iraqi civilians. So far over one million Iraqi civilians have lost their lives because of Bush's invasion, and four million have been displaced. Iraq's infrastructure is in ruins. Disease is rampart. Normal life has disappeared.

Self-righteous Americans justify these monstrous crimes as necessary to ensure their own safety from terrorist attack. Yet, Americans are in far greater danger from their own police forces than they are from foreign terrorists. Ironically, Bush's "war on terror" has made Americans less safe at home by diminishing US civil liberty and turning an epidemic of US police brutality into a pandemic.

The only terrorist most Americans will ever encounter is a policeman with a badge, nightstick, mace and Taser. A Google search for "police brutality videos" turns up 2,210,000 entries. Some entries are foreign and some are probably duplications, but the number is so large that a person could do nothing but watch police brutality videos for the rest of his life. A search on "You Tube" alone turned up 2,280 police brutality videos. PrisonPlanet has a selection of the most outrageous recent cases.

Police brutality has crossed the line from using excessive force against a resisting Rodney King to unprovoked gratuitous violence against persons offering no resistance, such as the elderly, women, students, and elected officials. Americans are not safe anywhere from police. Police attack Americans in university libraries, in public meetings, and in their own homes.

Last week we had the case of the University of Florida student who was repeatedly Tasered without cause for asking Senator Kerry some good questions in the question and answer period following Kerry's speech. Two days after the Florida student was gratuitously brutalized, Senate Republicans defeated Vermont Democrat Patrick Leahy's bill to restore habeas corpus protection.

A UCLA student was Tasered by police without cause for studying in the university library without having his student ID on his person. Following police orders to leave, the student was walking toward the door when police grabbed him and repeatedly Tasered him.

On September 19, 2007 a young woman was repeatedly Tasered without cause by a large brutal cop in a parking lot outside a night club in Warren Ohio.

On September 14, 2007, Roseland, Indiana, city council member David Snyder was ejected from a council meeting by dictatorial council chairman Charlie Shields. Snyder had protested being limited to one minute to speak. Police goon Jack Tiller escorted Snyder out, and as Snyder exited the building, Tiller, following behind, pushed Snyder to the ground and without cause began beating Snyder in the head with a nightstick. Snyder was hospitalized.

Local TV news stations throughout the US offer an endless stream of police brutality videos, which are then posted on the stations' web sites, often with an opportunity for citizens to express their opinion of the incidents.

There are many disturbing aspects to police brutality cases.

One disturbing aspect is that the police always arrest the people that they have gratuitously brutalized. There was no justification whatsoever to arrest councilman Snyder, or the UCLA student, or the University of Florida student. The cops committed assault against innocent citizens. The cops should have been arrested for their criminal acts. Instead, the cops cover up their own crimes by arresting their victims on false charges that are invented to justify the unprovoked police violence against citizens.

Another disturbing aspect is that no one tells the police to stop the brutality. "Free" Americans are so intimidated by police that on February 19 of this year male customers in a Chicago bar stood aside while a drunk cop weighing 251 pounds beat a 115 pound barmaid, knocking her to the floor with his fists and repeatedly kicking her, for obeying the bar rules and not serving him more drinks.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts224.html

[-] 1 points by Confusedoldguy (260) 2 years ago

I don't trust those videos any more than I trust the one that made the rounds about the UC Davis incident. The edited version makes the cops looks as bad as the ones you mention on youtube. The unedited version reveals that the students had intentionally surrounded the cops, and were chanting (about protesters arrested earlier), "if you free them, we will let you go." Let you go? Seriously? You don't think it matters that the protesters, in their own words, were holding the cops hostage until they got what they wanted?

I realize there are bad cops who do outrageous things, and I expect them to be punished. But the hatred you spew for the whole group, holding them "guilty by association" while probably complaining about people who do the same to OWS, just destroys your credibility and the reputation of this movement.

[-] 0 points by alouis (1511) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Cops who stand by while "bad cops" brutalize demonstrators, plant drugs on innocent citizens, "testerlie" in court, stand watch while their partners commit sexual assaults, these apparently are your "good cops."

[-] 0 points by Confusedoldguy (260) 2 years ago

The old saying is, "liberals want conservatives to shut up, and conservatives want liberals to keep talking." If you keep taking with your generalized, anti-cop, "the crooks are always victims" crap, you will drive people away.

So by all means, respond to me again, and keep talking.

[-] 1 points by alouis (1511) from New York, NY 2 years ago

New York NY police are investigating why it took 9 hours to do BAC test on cop who critically injured his partner in a suspected alcohol-related accident. [1] bit.ly/u7ISKJ

Paul Craig Roberts is a principled conservative.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts224.html

In NYC we've recently had a spate of public incidents of police misconduct ranging from planting drugs on innocent citizens to ticket fixing and an organized public demonstration by police in support of ticket fixing. gun running, calling an entire ethnic community animals on facebook, and others.

NYPD misconduct costs the NYC taxpayer around one billion dollars! That's because some of these incidents (probably just a small portion of them) get redressed in courts of law.

http://www.activistpost.com/2010/10/police-misconduct-costs-nyc-taxpayers.html

Police Misconduct Costs NYC Taxpayers Nearly $1B to Settle Claims

Activist Post

The increasing militarization of police has had profound social ramifications across the United States, as citizens increasingly feel threatened by those sworn to protect them. Beyond the social fallout, a recent Associated Press investigation skims the surface of the financial impact of police excesses over the previous decade.

In typical Associated Press misdirection, a video accompanies the article, which literally has nothing to do with what is written around it. The original title of the article is ambiguous, "AP Investigation: Nearly $1B in NYC Police Payouts." If one were only to watch the video, one would assume that the $1B somehow has been paid out in counterterrorism operations, as the video focuses on a "dirty bomb" patrol boat protecting the UN building. Strange. However, the article itself does possess a few kernels of truth.

According to the AP investigation into the NYPD: Nearly $1 billion has been paid over the past decade to resolve claims against the nation's largest police department . . . the total spending outstrips that of other U.S. cities, though some smaller cities and departments also shell out tens of millions of dollars a year in payouts. These payouts often are due to provable wrongdoing by individuals, yet ultimately fall on the taxpayer according to the report, as "officers themselves don't usually bear personal responsibility." It is precisely this lack of personal responsibility which contributes to the overall impact on society. There are countless examples of police who have been repeatedly cited for brutality and other ethics violations being protected by the "thin blue line" of the supposed police honor code that too often protects their fraternity above protecting the public.

The AP investigation deflects the payouts as being "less than the cost of insurance," but misses the point that this growing problem threatens to destabilize an already weakened trust in police that has more to do with failed police training and testing requirements than it does the legal system or a "litigious" atmosphere where, "Some law firms have made it their business to sue the city."

The public has been hoodwinked to believe that an increasing number of violent encounters over non-violent offenses is due to the "heat of the moment" or some type of combat lingo more appropriate to foreign war-time environments. What would people think if firemen responded to a house fire and instead of putting out the fire, came in with gasoline? They would rightly think poor training, or psychopathic behavior. It's a simplistic analogy, but accurate when one considers the AP's own example of police raining 50 bullets on a car carrying an unarmed man and his two friends following a bachelor party. The justification? The car didn't stop as ordered, and police "thought the men were armed." That's it? Proper hiring and training practices -- physical, emotional, intellectual, and cultural -- never would have permitted this to happen. Police are supposed to be trained using standard "containment" exercises for both vehicles and domiciles specifically to identify who is armed and who is not. This particular lapse cost the city (taxpayers) $7 million.

A recent failed containment of psychopathic proportions just occurred in Phoenix, Arizona that perfectly illustrates both poor training and poor hiring practices. Officer Richard Chrisman (cited previously for "disciplinary problems") and his partner responded to a domestic dispute. Not minutes into the encounter, an unarmed man and his dog were both killed, after Chrisman allegedly shouted, "I don't need no warrant mother------." Phoenix must now wait and see how their tax dollars will be applied to this barbarity.

Now that police are being equipped with the lastest military gear, even better training is required to temper their new lethality. As the economy continues to implode, and citizens wish to peaceably assemble and demonstrate their distaste for a wide range of political and economic policies, more high-tension police encounters are inevitable. This goes far beyond the highlight case of NYC. An entire YouTube channel is dedicated to Cops Out of Control, with video evidence of horrendous abuse.

Citizens everywhere should engage their local police to tell them that they unequivocally support their courageous duty to public service, but will hold them personally accountable for any sign of brutality or misconduct. For those who wish to be active, Citizen Review Boards are gaining support. If it really is "a few bad apples" as they like to say, then it shouldn't be too difficult to identify and remove them.

The National Police Misconduct Feed is a great source to track daily reports, statistics, settlements, and pending cases.

[-] 1 points by Confusedoldguy (260) 2 years ago

So no comment on the UC Davis protesters holding the cops hostage until their demands we met? Yeah, I thought so. Didn't fit in your paradigm of the cops always being wrong, and the law-breakers always being innocent victims of brutality.

I don't deny that there are cops who ought to be punished, so your multiple-page posts are not changing anything. Are you supporting the idea that the families of "oppressive cops" (guess who gets to define the word "oppressive?") should be targeted for retaliation? That's what my first post referred to. Stay on topic.

[-] 1 points by alouis (1511) from New York, NY 2 years ago

The cops are always wrong when it comes to violence against non violent protesters. Especially protesters who are quite literally trying to save the world.

(edit)

I posted a comment objecting to the call for "revenge" against police officers families. I think such a post is harming OWS.

[-] 1 points by Confusedoldguy (260) 2 years ago

Those are both reasonable positions. Thanks for clarifying.

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 2 years ago

Oppressive citizens deserve no safety or privacy. Wait this is a dictator like idea.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Allowing violence to inhabit the very infrastructure of the government that is meant to protect the people is a good start towards dictatorial rule.

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 2 years ago

Are you talking about a state or country level?

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Both.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

You have described well the U.S. foreign policy. Domestically the handling of internal affairs is much different.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

I mean you can believe everything you wrote up there, that is your right. Just realize that a statement like that does not represent the 99% whatsoever and is just another reason why Occupy has continued to loose support among mainstream America.

[-] 0 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Who believes what is written there is inconsequential. There are no protections in place for the citizen. Wanton abuse of power has encountered an obstacle that it does not understand. Your alternative is..?

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 2 years ago

All I am saying is that the vast majority of Americans would disagree with you when you said "If you abuse the families of your fellow citizens, your family deserves no sanctuary from retaliation. " Most probably even find it to be pretty disgusting.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Americans are not well versed in the historical context of crimes perpetuated through generations of despotic rule. Louis XI was an innocent repeating what he was taught. The Romanov family was executed so as to prevent despotic retaliation. What is good for the people, often is not initially pretty.

[-] 0 points by Doc4the99 (591) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

the police are just other lowly cogs in the system...

it's the billionaire (mayor) who deserves to burn

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Of course, but the most powerful machines will collapse with the failure of just one cog or even one little O-ring. Foolish of the mighty to depend so dearly upon the lowly for their very lives. As for a mayor, is he/she not just another geared wheel covered in lube?

[-] 0 points by blackbloc (-19) 2 years ago

well said.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Thanks. Personal responsibility does not apply to police, yet they expect it of so many.

[-] 0 points by blackbloc (-19) 2 years ago

cops are punks sometimes i feel like these people never met a cop.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Low education is not your friend. It is though, the reality among police.

[-] 0 points by Muppetmaster (62) 2 years ago

Please do not call 911. EVER.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Do I seem like the kind of Guy to do such things?

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 2 years ago

Well, you know, if we privatized our police department we would not have to hold them to this higher standard. They would be as you and I, possessed of a forgivable fallibility; right?

Why do you hold them to a higher standard? Do you even know?

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

I hold them to a higher standard? The very oaths they took to become a police officer hold them to a higher standard. Simply because more and more police are incapable of comprehending, or respecting those oaths, does not promote privatization. Removing or lessening the severity of the oaths taken by police may create your desired result.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 2 years ago

WHY do "we" hold them to a higher standard? Would such a standard be possible if all were civilians? What is the impetus, the true effect, on the subliminal level, of a prescribed oath as public declaration?

What if we just eliminated the police and policed our own neighborhoods as self-empowered civilians? What if we eliminated the jails and returned to corporal punishment and true "justice"?

What purpose do these serve; what is the purpose, and the measure, of their service?

It's not more and more violence; it's less and less - 50 years ago they were tossing people off the rooftops in NY; fact. And we called that "justice."

At any one time, there are what, a half million people in NYC engaged in criminal activity on all levels? And you want us to handcuff THEM?

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Back to that oath. It comes with the responsibility of upholding it. If today's' police officers are not educated enough to understand that oath, they will never be able to enforce it. Whether or not police brutality has been increased, or has decreased, is irrelevant when considering today's potential for violence within the police. Ideologically. Comparing the brutality of the past with the present in an effort to underscore brutality is reflective of an inability to foresee a future without it. Just letting you know.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 2 years ago

What you see as brutality others will see as justice. In America we attempt to insulate ourselves but it is integral to the human condition.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Brutality and Justice are not strangers. Justice though, has never brutalized the peaceful, non-violent and innocent. Brutality on the other hand, does so regularly, dressed in a shabby, feeble disguise of Justice.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 2 years ago

Stop, you sound like a spoiled child. There is also a human element to policing which involves adrenalin, anger, and fear, and no amount of equipment or training can remove it. There is a political element, a polity that must be fed and satiated.

If you can't bear the wrath of the law, which is historically brutal for reason; do not break the law.

Get out of the park... and stop whining.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

The real criminals are in the banks and the government, not the parks and public spaces. When the police learn to enforce the laws they were sworn to uphold, they will learn that they have been arresting the wrong people. P.S. If you cannot bear the wrath of the laws, then pay exorbitant money to instill politicians, who will change the laws to suit your need, because the police are only educated enough to follow orders, however ridiculous, amoral or corrupt. That is what you meant right.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 2 years ago

The police are not independent agents; they act at the behest of the polity. And the polity measures it's response to align favorably with the majority vote. You fire at the police when you should be aiming at city hall. But I don't see anybody here doing that, so what is this?

Your hatred boileth over... and the people are not blind.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

You meant policy, right? As in protocol? Police are the interface with the people. When they allow themselves to be utilized for injustice, it is only they who can take responsibility. Most expect adults to know right from wrong. Brutalizing fellow citizens is wrong.

Hatred?

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 2 years ago

No, no, I meant "polity." In NYC this means the Bloomberg political machine specifically. All of their actions respecting OWS are at the behest of the Bloomberg administration. This is true of every municipality in the Nation.

Brutalization is not necessarily wrong; we are all human - "we are, and of a right ought to be," human. And there is no justice in the criminal justice system for the victim; if there's any dehumanization here, it is respecting the victim. And this is true of Occupy, too.

By the way, non-citizens are not entitled to any protection whatsoever, other than that which is humanely afforded as polite and profitable "policy."

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

I beg your pardon. I thought polity was a misspelling. Apparently it is a term describing political infrastructure. Wow. Either way, when a man follows the orders of another man, the guilt of wrongdoing is shared between the two.Brutalization is wrong. All humans know that. Why do you not?

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 2 years ago

Why do I not? For any number of reasons: one, we have non-citizens here trying to incite, not in their own country, but in mine; two, I have not seen anything here that even remotely resembles brutality: I have not seen a single individual clubbed, brutally beaten, kicked, or stomped into the hard cold bloody pavement; I have not seen anyone moved down by gun fire, and I don't know of so much as a single victim of torture, etc. Three, the angst that you generate here is self-serving and will likely only amplify the violence against officers, and you know that.

Our criminal justice system is broken; there is no "justice" in a system that fails to serve the victim or the victim's family, and ours does not; more, we are now in the process of legitimizing low-level crime because criminality is so prevalent that we are financially incapable of incarcerating all. What I would prefer is a return to corporal punishment: turn those who choose to victimize over to the victim or the victim's family and let then exact justice, at the time-tested emotionally compensatory rate of up to four times... let a person who commits a wanton and heinous crime, die a death, of four times...

More: your demand for increased civility is a call for the legitimization of crime as an extension of a demand for growth; population density requires an increase in civility, and I don't want your population density.

You want to talk about brutality, look at the English. And they were not alone; brutality was integral to life... the Native American's exquisitely fine tuned ability to inflict pain as art was so repugnant that it managed to violate the sensibilities - incense - even the English; imagine that.

You want to see brutality look at our "Panic of '73."

I'm tired of the spin; I'm tired of your rhetoric.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Clearly you are mistaken, several times.

OWS ocuppied wall street. Wall street is in NYC. NY is home to the very bankers that are strip mining the world of its economies, So clearly a great many NYC law abiding citizens have been complacent and apathetic enough to allow crime to formulate, govern and contiunue to this day. It is time to stop criminals from buying political power. In America and abroad.

Thank You for military service, and I hope you were referring cold blooded muder or detainment, to those who intend to do harm to American citizens, as opposed to what I fear you meant, which is, you are willing to oppress American citizens, in order to protect the criminals who have usurped its government. For those willing to steal, lie and prey upon upon Americans I share your value of Military Tribunals, during a "clearly defined" act of war.

Your allegations and insults have, in my opinion, denegrated your capacity for understanding, I hope you overcome their control over you.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 2 years ago

Clearly I am mistaken? Reread the above posting; review my words, and then attempt to apply some level of reason and intellect.

I have seen nothing in our American media respecting the interaction of our police and occupiers that even remotely resembles "brutality." Your hatred boileth over; it is infectious, and it will cost the lives of our OFFICERS. You are thereby and therefore implicit in the crimes of others, so who is corrupt here?

I AM one of those American citizens that you fear for; I am your "oppressed," and I am telling you that your hatred is misdirected.

And PS: A soldier may fight for honor, or he may fight for duty, or perhaps he fights for both... but either way he fights to stay alive and that means one of two things when confronted with someone he believes intends some future harm - he either leaves them bloody and dying or he indefinitely detains them.

This is a war with no beginning, without end... and our enemy does not wear the traditional red cochineal coat that we have become so accustomed to seeing; he does not so clearly label himself a murder, he is not identifiable. And until such a time as lines are clearly drawn in the sand, as in "polarized," (20 more years?) we will continue to suspend habeas and maintain Guantanamo. And if you don't like it, then waddle your little red coat across the border where it belongs and leave us alone. And take your Arabs and their Spring with you; it's merely "polarization."

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Are you joking? One, we have non-citizens here in our own government actually involved in usurping our government in order to benefit another nation.. Those inciting anything are only able to do so, because of the complacency of the apathetic. Two, If you honestly expect me to believe you when you say such lies, you are expecting me to believe that you have never heard of Guantanamo, abu Ghraib, or any of the bloodied faces on you tube lately. Three, The angst you think I generate is actually living in your community. I generated none of that. Of course our criminal justice system is broken. The victims family is left with the option of, accepting wrongdoing, or retaliating against those who have wronged them without the benefiet of the law. Yes, criminality is prevalent, it has infected our very government and there is no doubt that there is plenty of room, not in the prisons, but on the gallows floor for all of them. No lack of space there. While you may enjoy a return to corporal punishment, it is not the victims family that is neccessarily suited to administering justice, it is the very community the perpetrators live within. Strung up and labeled a lackey of the oppressor, has a much better effect than to die four deaths. Whether brutality "was" integral to life it need not be today. Justifying the past does not justify the future. Whether you are tired of "my" rhetoric or not, it is a national and global sentiment. You may benefiet from learning it.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 2 years ago

It is NOT a national and global sentiment - it is the sentiment of the few. Here in NY where crime is most prevalent, very few law abiding citizens favor compassion for the criminal that maliciously preys on others.

I DO favor a return of corporal punishment to be administered, where so desired, by either the victim or the victim's family with full impunity.

I've served in the military and I can tell you that when facing someone you believe harbors a possible intent to do future harm, there are but two choices - cold bloodily murder or detain. I would prefer to detain. But I do NOT believe that any of these people are entitled to any protection other than that afforded by the Geneva Convention. A Guantanamo is of absolute necessity at time of war, so is the suspension of habeas - it actually saves lives; promise of a US trial at the expense of NY tax payers will COST lives.

I was under the impression you were Canadian; if not, I apologize, but if you are then you need to STFU and get out of our politics. That' what my ancestors told you at the time of the Rev and that's what I'm telling you now.

"Strung up and labeled a lackey of the oppressor"? That's your opinion of our police? So tell me asshole, what's your criminal record? Is it as I suspect, a decade, two decades, three decades long? Go fuck yourself.

I'm not justifying the past, either. I am saying that we have harbored the exact same desires for tens of thousands of years. And nothing will ever change that.

[-] 1 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

Sounds like a great idea. Maybe all the police should be illegal immigrants that can work for big corporations/government under the table. That way there is no paperwork trail if something goes wrong (like an innocent civilian getting killed). In fact, maybe we should be sure to hire only people unfit to stand trial so the police can't ever be held accountable.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Damn your'e funny. Thanks.

[-] 1 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

Humor seemed the only rational retort here!

[-] 2 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

I see it as the single most powerful weapon of the species. Thank you.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 2 years ago

I think you're getting it; cycle it a couple more times...

[-] 1 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

Ok, Ok...I was being a little to liberal worrying about innocent civilians getting killed in the process of trampling freedom and pissing on the Constitution/Bill of rights. The woes of idealism...

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 2 years ago

Yes, you were. Because what the police officer represents is the law in fact; he is the "arm" of law, more precisely, the giant crushing hand of the law. As such, he is strictly an agent, a vehicle... but you still have not answered the question of why we hold them to a higher standard; answer the question...

This is a country of 70 million, legally-armed, "innocent" civilians... please keep that in mind as you ponder.

[-] 1 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

Denial.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by alouis (1511) from New York, NY 2 years ago

This post really does not belong here. We should not be talking about retaliation against families.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

I agree with you more than you know. We should be talking about how to adhere justice to those who repeatedly beat the unarmed, non-violent and peaceful.

[-] 0 points by alouis (1511) from New York, NY 2 years ago

There is an old saying: "Those who speak don't know, those who know don't speak." What am I getting at? Think.

I go way back, having been beaten by cops and thrown down a precinct house staircase while handcuffed to another prisoner in the aftermath of an anti Vietnam War, anti racism demonstration. I know what cops are. I knew a sixteen year old girl impregnated by a married cop and her family decided to shut up because they couldn't imagine that they could make an issue and not get retaliation from the whole precinct. I knew a woman who was subject to panic attacks. She had one in a public place. the cops came, not an ambulance. They took her to a municipal hospital but on the way they pulled down her panties and fondled her. I know cops. The issue is whether OW be implicated in threats against cops and their families, and people who visit this website implicated too. Anon is great. But you know how to hide your tracks online. Most of us don't. Get it?

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Justice is becoming swifter than injustice these days. All of those awful instances you have described took place in a time when justice had been bound and gagged by the very people sworn to protect her. She is free now, and whoever dare to challenge her truth, soon finds themselves under scrutiny they never could have predicted, let alone understood. P.S. Yes I do get it. Anon and LulzSec are but in their infancy and are growing exponentially. There would be no need for them had corruption not attempted to govern.

[-] 0 points by nth (21) 2 years ago

Damn Right!!!

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Thanks. As draconian as it may be, at this point in time, any check and balance is good for the people.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Thank you for the links, but a few hours I do not have now. I intend to view it later.

[-] -1 points by HarryPairatestes2 (380) from Barrow, AK 2 years ago

Who decides what is "abuse"?

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

You have raised an important point, but I must counter with fact that jury trials have been replaced with multiple camera angles and zillions of viewers on you tube. Justice is evolving with technology. If the accused perpetrators of violence, are unable to produce evidence to the contrary, then they must succumb to the fact that they may very well be guilty. Does that help?

[-] 0 points by HarryPairatestes2 (380) from Barrow, AK 2 years ago

Not really. Are you saying public opinion will be the deciding factor? If you decide an act is not abuse but I believe it is, do I get to act on my belief against the officer?

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

I am saying that public opinion is currently the most powerful deciding factor. What you decide to do about your actions is entirely up to you, so long as you do it under your very own flag, not the flag of a non-violent cause.

[-] 0 points by HarryPairatestes2 (380) from Barrow, AK 2 years ago

So if you are accused of a crime of violence you want public opinion to be the deciding factor on your guilt or innocence?

Should public opinion be the deciding factor on the Casey Anthony case, for example?

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

If my ignorance led me to believe, that I had the right to abuse people practicing non-violence, and I were to mace some children or beat up women and my actions were disseminated across the internet, then yes I too would insist upon a trial of public opinion. That is what you meant right?

[-] 0 points by HarryPairatestes2 (380) from Barrow, AK 2 years ago

No, not what I mean. If you were accused of a crime of violence would you want your guilt or innocence to be determined solely by public opinion? I gave one example, Casey Anthony. Should she have been tried by a jury or only by public opinion?

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Casey Anthony was actually tried by both a jury and the television viewers. As for those who perpetrate violence upon another with no just cause, are subject to justice. Justice may not be a slave to oppression. Summed up, Do not cause violence or harm to another. Is that helpful?

[-] 0 points by HarryPairatestes2 (380) from Barrow, AK 2 years ago

"Casey Anthony was actually tried by both a jury and the television viewers."

She was found not guilty by a jury and guilty according to popular opinion. So what is the end result? Do you throw out the jury verdict and execute her because of public opinion?

[-] -1 points by HarryPairatestes2 (380) from Barrow, AK 2 years ago

You are arguing in circles.

" As for those who perpetrate violence upon another with no just cause, are subject to justice". But you never explained what is just cause and who determines if there is just cause. If it is public opinion that determines what is just cause, why limit it to violence? Just get rid of the jury system and every complaint a person has, be it civil or criminal, will be determined by public opinion. Put it to a vote online.

[-] 2 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Circles? Casey Anthony? Your attempts to detract are faltering. Let me re-phrase myself. Do not cause violence or harm to another. Is that helpful? Online voting can be the viewers on youtube, but you knew that. You now are in support of the court of public opinion. Thank you.

[-] -1 points by HarryPairatestes2 (380) from Barrow, AK 2 years ago

Is violence ever justified when done by the police?

[-] 2 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Violence has many legitimate justifications. None, are against the unarmed, peaceful and non-violent.