17 yo boy shot by police because he wasn't resisting arrest.

[jc456]

No they can't Cowgirl!
If they could afford to have two LEO's every patrol car they would. They don't b/c they can't!
Get that through your brain! The ONLY time and place there are two LEO's in a patrol car is for officer safety b/c they are patrolling extremely dangerous neighborhoods.
Dear God you're stupid.

That's not true since some communities are doing just that.

where do you supposed they do that? Chicago, New York, inner city neighborhoods? How many state police do you see patrolling the highway are two to a car? Just name one location. That is the OP you know?

WHAT is the OP? Do you know what you are talking about? I made a suggestion. If you are angry about my suggestion . . . I think that you have some unresolved issues.

I do, answers to the questions I asked you. Why are you avoiding them? got something to hide do ya? Still haven't stated how to pay for two cops in a car, haven't answer how two cops are better than one, never provided one study that confirms your train of thought would work. So right now you are a big 'O' (oh) for

Why would I "hide?" Are you for real?

Now, I posted many links in this thread for you to read. Did you read any of them? My links show that indeed some communities have two officers per car. The money wasted on law suits that would be saved could help pay. No? Right now, it seems that police departments throughout the US are being sued on a pretty regular basis for what are considered "unlawful" shootings. Now, two officers per car would cut down on that.

AND I HAVE ANSWERED THIS MULTIPLE TIMES. How are you going to pay for two cops per car? How are you going to get enough cops to respond to 911 calls? How are you going to train an infinite number of scenarios. YOU'VE ANSWERED NOTHING!!!!!

 

[ChrisL]

I already explained that in the beginning of this thread. They need to learn how to de-escalate situations and not escalate them. I think that is an important thing to learn how to do for an officer, and that would take a bit of training.

well how do you train for that? Do you know? Why is the mental institutions can't figure it out and how long have they been treating humans with issues? just admit you're in over your head, we all already know that. you are just repeating yourself and saying nothing. NOTHING.

And BTW, the training today is to defend yourself once you're in a position that is life threatening. See because life threatening is indeterminable and can't be trained fully

I am saying plenty. Two officers per car, better training. Even the police officials agree that officers need more training, as my link showed.

you have nothing. NOTHING. I already explained it to you. you haven't given one answer to how to achieve what you proposed. If it isn't doable, then it is worthless. My dog might as well take a crap on the paper you put it on.

But you don't know if it is doable or not. Lol. You just don't like it for some reason. I don't know why.

Sure I do, it isn't being done and the police have already stated why it isn't done. Not enough cars to answer 911 calls, so your answer is to let someone else die that may be a very respectable important piece of society maybe someone who saves you one day, and you're willing to let that person die to have two cops doing nothing all night in a car. Yeah you got it together don't ya?

Well then, I would say we need to spend more money on our police.

 

[jc456]

The brat did not get killed b/c he didn't have his paperwork.
He got killed b/c he attacked a cop.
And you fucking well know it.
Typical LIB dummy non-logic.

The desire for an authoritarian police state is a leftist position.

I assume you are backing Comrade Bernie Sanders.

The kid got killed because an out of control cop was able to offer two responses, talk or emptying a mag in someone. The cop has no ability to contain or control another person and jumps directly to deadly force with no other measure taken.

Sorry, a competent person would have smacked the kid with a nightstick, not killed him.

The REAL reason that the cop killed him is that departments would rather deal with killings by cops than with charges of brutality. If the cop hit the kid, he would be in trouble for police brutality, so better to just kill the kid.

In a rational world, that is fucked up thinking.

well perhaps you should go outside in the real world once in a while!! So you're ok with an unlicensed driver driving at night? Keep them by your house ok?

Why do you keep making accusations? Why don't you all calm down and try to have a reasonable and logical discussion instead of just insulting people that you disagree with? This behavior makes YOU look like the "thug."

logical doesn't work with someone who doesn't want to discuss honestly a discussion point. you have been one belligerent ass all day on here. You, you, you, well 'f' off to you. answer some friggin questions or drop out of the thread. It's an easy decision.

I'm sorry, but you are the one being belligerent. I floated out some ideas to help keep our officers and our citizens safer, and you just don't like it for some reason. You haven't said why. You haven't come up with an argument of how this would not work.

and you've ignored every reply. So as stated by more than just me, they are unrealistic. Now, what else is there?

 

[ChrisL]

That's not true since some communities are doing just that.

where do you supposed they do that? Chicago, New York, inner city neighborhoods? How many state police do you see patrolling the highway are two to a car? Just name one location. That is the OP you know?

WHAT is the OP? Do you know what you are talking about? I made a suggestion. If you are angry about my suggestion . . . I think that you have some unresolved issues.

I do, answers to the questions I asked you. Why are you avoiding them? got something to hide do ya? Still haven't stated how to pay for two cops in a car, haven't answer how two cops are better than one, never provided one study that confirms your train of thought would work. So right now you are a big 'O' (oh) for

Why would I "hide?" Are you for real?

Now, I posted many links in this thread for you to read. Did you read any of them? My links show that indeed some communities have two officers per car. The money wasted on law suits that would be saved could help pay. No? Right now, it seems that police departments throughout the US are being sued on a pretty regular basis for what are considered "unlawful" shootings. Now, two officers per car would cut down on that.

AND I HAVE ANSWERED THIS MULTIPLE TIMES. How are you going to pay for two cops per car? How are you going to get enough cops to respond to 911 calls? How are you going to train an infinite number of scenarios. YOU'VE ANSWERED NOTHING!!!!!

Give them what they need. That's my answer.

 

[ChrisL]

The desire for an authoritarian police state is a leftist position.

I assume you are backing Comrade Bernie Sanders.

The kid got killed because an out of control cop was able to offer two responses, talk or emptying a mag in someone. The cop has no ability to contain or control another person and jumps directly to deadly force with no other measure taken.

Sorry, a competent person would have smacked the kid with a nightstick, not killed him.

The REAL reason that the cop killed him is that departments would rather deal with killings by cops than with charges of brutality. If the cop hit the kid, he would be in trouble for police brutality, so better to just kill the kid.

In a rational world, that is fucked up thinking.

well perhaps you should go outside in the real world once in a while!! So you're ok with an unlicensed driver driving at night? Keep them by your house ok?

Why do you keep making accusations? Why don't you all calm down and try to have a reasonable and logical discussion instead of just insulting people that you disagree with? This behavior makes YOU look like the "thug."

logical doesn't work with someone who doesn't want to discuss honestly a discussion point. you have been one belligerent ass all day on here. You, you, you, well 'f' off to you. answer some friggin questions or drop out of the thread. It's an easy decision.

I'm sorry, but you are the one being belligerent. I floated out some ideas to help keep our officers and our citizens safer, and you just don't like it for some reason. You haven't said why. You haven't come up with an argument of how this would not work.

and you've ignored every reply. So as stated by more than just me, they are unrealistic. Now, what else is there?

Actually, I have not ignored them at all. I think I've addressed all of your concerns. Now, what is your solution?

 

[jc456]

The brat did not get killed b/c he didn't have his paperwork.
He got killed b/c he attacked a cop.
And you fucking well know it.
Typical LIB dummy non-logic.

The desire for an authoritarian police state is a leftist position.

I assume you are backing Comrade Bernie Sanders.

The kid got killed because an out of control cop was able to offer two responses, talk or emptying a mag in someone. The cop has no ability to contain or control another person and jumps directly to deadly force with no other measure taken.

Sorry, a competent person would have smacked the kid with a nightstick, not killed him.

The REAL reason that the cop killed him is that departments would rather deal with killings by cops than with charges of brutality. If the cop hit the kid, he would be in trouble for police brutality, so better to just kill the kid.

In a rational world, that is fucked up thinking.

well perhaps you should go outside in the real world once in a while!! So you're ok with an unlicensed driver driving at night? Keep them by your house ok?

Why do you keep making accusations? Why don't you all calm down and try to have a reasonable and logical discussion instead of just insulting people that you disagree with? This behavior makes YOU look like the "thug."

logical doesn't work with someone who doesn't want to discuss honestly a discussion point. you have been one belligerent ass all day on here. You, you, you, well 'f' off to you. answer some friggin questions or drop out of the thread. It's an easy decision.

What questions do you have?

and more belligerent behavior, see this is typical lib shite. You're useless as a debater, it's your way or the highway mentality.

 

[jc456]

where do you supposed they do that? Chicago, New York, inner city neighborhoods? How many state police do you see patrolling the highway are two to a car? Just name one location. That is the OP you know?

WHAT is the OP? Do you know what you are talking about? I made a suggestion. If you are angry about my suggestion . . . I think that you have some unresolved issues.

I do, answers to the questions I asked you. Why are you avoiding them? got something to hide do ya? Still haven't stated how to pay for two cops in a car, haven't answer how two cops are better than one, never provided one study that confirms your train of thought would work. So right now you are a big 'O' (oh) for

Why would I "hide?" Are you for real?

Now, I posted many links in this thread for you to read. Did you read any of them? My links show that indeed some communities have two officers per car. The money wasted on law suits that would be saved could help pay. No? Right now, it seems that police departments throughout the US are being sued on a pretty regular basis for what are considered "unlawful" shootings. Now, two officers per car would cut down on that.

AND I HAVE ANSWERED THIS MULTIPLE TIMES. How are you going to pay for two cops per car? How are you going to get enough cops to respond to 911 calls? How are you going to train an infinite number of scenarios. YOU'VE ANSWERED NOTHING!!!!!

Give them what they need. That's my answer.

give who what?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

where do you supposed they do that? Chicago, New York, inner city neighborhoods? How many state police do you see patrolling the highway are two to a car? Just name one location. That is the OP you know?

WHAT is the OP? Do you know what you are talking about? I made a suggestion. If you are angry about my suggestion . . . I think that you have some unresolved issues.

I do, answers to the questions I asked you. Why are you avoiding them? got something to hide do ya? Still haven't stated how to pay for two cops in a car, haven't answer how two cops are better than one, never provided one study that confirms your train of thought would work. So right now you are a big 'O' (oh) for

Why would I "hide?" Are you for real?

Now, I posted many links in this thread for you to read. Did you read any of them? My links show that indeed some communities have two officers per car. The money wasted on law suits that would be saved could help pay. No? Right now, it seems that police departments throughout the US are being sued on a pretty regular basis for what are considered "unlawful" shootings. Now, two officers per car would cut down on that.

Money wasted on lawsuits that may never even occur?

You're assuming that unless you have two officers in a car you will be sued and you won't be sued if there is at least two officers.

It's an assumption that is based purely on an opinion.

No. Lol. That is not what I'm assuming at all. I'm saying that having two officers per car would increase safety and therefore, in some instances, there would be no need for them to shoot a suspect. Two fully grown men could easily physically restrain a suspect, rather than just one.

You said it would also save money wasted on lawsuits, in several posts.

 

[ChrisL]

That's not true since some communities are doing just that.

where do you supposed they do that? Chicago, New York, inner city neighborhoods? How many state police do you see patrolling the highway are two to a car? Just name one location. That is the OP you know?

WHAT is the OP? Do you know what you are talking about? I made a suggestion. If you are angry about my suggestion . . . I think that you have some unresolved issues.

I do, answers to the questions I asked you. Why are you avoiding them? got something to hide do ya? Still haven't stated how to pay for two cops in a car, haven't answer how two cops are better than one, never provided one study that confirms your train of thought would work. So right now you are a big 'O' (oh) for

Why would I "hide?" Are you for real?

Now, I posted many links in this thread for you to read. Did you read any of them? My links show that indeed some communities have two officers per car. The money wasted on law suits that would be saved could help pay. No? Right now, it seems that police departments throughout the US are being sued on a pretty regular basis for what are considered "unlawful" shootings. Now, two officers per car would cut down on that.

AND I HAVE ANSWERED THIS MULTIPLE TIMES. How are you going to pay for two cops per car? How are you going to get enough cops to respond to 911 calls? How are you going to train an infinite number of scenarios. YOU'VE ANSWERED NOTHING!!!!!

What are you so angry about?

 

[jc456]

well perhaps you should go outside in the real world once in a while!! So you're ok with an unlicensed driver driving at night? Keep them by your house ok?

Why do you keep making accusations? Why don't you all calm down and try to have a reasonable and logical discussion instead of just insulting people that you disagree with? This behavior makes YOU look like the "thug."

logical doesn't work with someone who doesn't want to discuss honestly a discussion point. you have been one belligerent ass all day on here. You, you, you, well 'f' off to you. answer some friggin questions or drop out of the thread. It's an easy decision.

I'm sorry, but you are the one being belligerent. I floated out some ideas to help keep our officers and our citizens safer, and you just don't like it for some reason. You haven't said why. You haven't come up with an argument of how this would not work.

and you've ignored every reply. So as stated by more than just me, they are unrealistic. Now, what else is there?

Actually, I have not ignored them at all. I think I've addressed all of your concerns. Now, what is your solution?

there isn't one because you have never stated what the problem is you're trying to solve. What is the problem statement?

 

[ChrisL]

WHAT is the OP? Do you know what you are talking about? I made a suggestion. If you are angry about my suggestion . . . I think that you have some unresolved issues.

I do, answers to the questions I asked you. Why are you avoiding them? got something to hide do ya? Still haven't stated how to pay for two cops in a car, haven't answer how two cops are better than one, never provided one study that confirms your train of thought would work. So right now you are a big 'O' (oh) for

Why would I "hide?" Are you for real?

Now, I posted many links in this thread for you to read. Did you read any of them? My links show that indeed some communities have two officers per car. The money wasted on law suits that would be saved could help pay. No? Right now, it seems that police departments throughout the US are being sued on a pretty regular basis for what are considered "unlawful" shootings. Now, two officers per car would cut down on that.

Money wasted on lawsuits that may never even occur?

You're assuming that unless you have two officers in a car you will be sued and you won't be sued if there is at least two officers.

It's an assumption that is based purely on an opinion.

No. Lol. That is not what I'm assuming at all. I'm saying that having two officers per car would increase safety and therefore, in some instances, there would be no need for them to shoot a suspect. Two fully grown men could easily physically restrain a suspect, rather than just one.

You said it would also save money wasted on lawsuits, in several posts.

Yes, if there were less "police brutality" cases, then money would be saved, most definitely. Court costs are very expensive. We pay for those too, you know?

 

[jc456]

well perhaps you should go outside in the real world once in a while!! So you're ok with an unlicensed driver driving at night? Keep them by your house ok?

Why do you keep making accusations? Why don't you all calm down and try to have a reasonable and logical discussion instead of just insulting people that you disagree with? This behavior makes YOU look like the "thug."

logical doesn't work with someone who doesn't want to discuss honestly a discussion point. you have been one belligerent ass all day on here. You, you, you, well 'f' off to you. answer some friggin questions or drop out of the thread. It's an easy decision.

I'm sorry, but you are the one being belligerent. I floated out some ideas to help keep our officers and our citizens safer, and you just don't like it for some reason. You haven't said why. You haven't come up with an argument of how this would not work.

and you've ignored every reply. So as stated by more than just me, they are unrealistic. Now, what else is there?

Actually, I have not ignored them at all. I think I've addressed all of your concerns. Now, what is your solution?

so which post of yours has the answers?

 

[ChrisL]

Why do you keep making accusations? Why don't you all calm down and try to have a reasonable and logical discussion instead of just insulting people that you disagree with? This behavior makes YOU look like the "thug."

logical doesn't work with someone who doesn't want to discuss honestly a discussion point. you have been one belligerent ass all day on here. You, you, you, well 'f' off to you. answer some friggin questions or drop out of the thread. It's an easy decision.

I'm sorry, but you are the one being belligerent. I floated out some ideas to help keep our officers and our citizens safer, and you just don't like it for some reason. You haven't said why. You haven't come up with an argument of how this would not work.

and you've ignored every reply. So as stated by more than just me, they are unrealistic. Now, what else is there?

Actually, I have not ignored them at all. I think I've addressed all of your concerns. Now, what is your solution?

there isn't one because you have never stated what the problem is you're trying to solve. What is the problem statement?

Shootings of police and citizens of course. I think I did state that. Lol. Having 2 officers per car would more than likely cut back on those incidents. The police would have backup immediately available instead of having to wait. An extra pair of hands and eyes as well. Couldn't hurt, that's for sure.

 

[jc456]

where do you supposed they do that? Chicago, New York, inner city neighborhoods? How many state police do you see patrolling the highway are two to a car? Just name one location. That is the OP you know?

WHAT is the OP? Do you know what you are talking about? I made a suggestion. If you are angry about my suggestion . . . I think that you have some unresolved issues.

I do, answers to the questions I asked you. Why are you avoiding them? got something to hide do ya? Still haven't stated how to pay for two cops in a car, haven't answer how two cops are better than one, never provided one study that confirms your train of thought would work. So right now you are a big 'O' (oh) for

Why would I "hide?" Are you for real?

Now, I posted many links in this thread for you to read. Did you read any of them? My links show that indeed some communities have two officers per car. The money wasted on law suits that would be saved could help pay. No? Right now, it seems that police departments throughout the US are being sued on a pretty regular basis for what are considered "unlawful" shootings. Now, two officers per car would cut down on that.

AND I HAVE ANSWERED THIS MULTIPLE TIMES. How are you going to pay for two cops per car? How are you going to get enough cops to respond to 911 calls? How are you going to train an infinite number of scenarios. YOU'VE ANSWERED NOTHING!!!!!

What are you so angry about?

me angry? ha, I'm not the one responding to everyone! seems it is you with the chip on your shoulder dude!

 

[ChrisL]

Why do you keep making accusations? Why don't you all calm down and try to have a reasonable and logical discussion instead of just insulting people that you disagree with? This behavior makes YOU look like the "thug."

logical doesn't work with someone who doesn't want to discuss honestly a discussion point. you have been one belligerent ass all day on here. You, you, you, well 'f' off to you. answer some friggin questions or drop out of the thread. It's an easy decision.

I'm sorry, but you are the one being belligerent. I floated out some ideas to help keep our officers and our citizens safer, and you just don't like it for some reason. You haven't said why. You haven't come up with an argument of how this would not work.

and you've ignored every reply. So as stated by more than just me, they are unrealistic. Now, what else is there?

Actually, I have not ignored them at all. I think I've addressed all of your concerns. Now, what is your solution?

so which post of yours has the answers?

This is funny. I have answered your questions. You are the one not answering my question. What is YOUR solution since you seem to hate mine so much.

 

[jc456]

logical doesn't work with someone who doesn't want to discuss honestly a discussion point. you have been one belligerent ass all day on here. You, you, you, well 'f' off to you. answer some friggin questions or drop out of the thread. It's an easy decision.

I'm sorry, but you are the one being belligerent. I floated out some ideas to help keep our officers and our citizens safer, and you just don't like it for some reason. You haven't said why. You haven't come up with an argument of how this would not work.

and you've ignored every reply. So as stated by more than just me, they are unrealistic. Now, what else is there?

Actually, I have not ignored them at all. I think I've addressed all of your concerns. Now, what is your solution?

there isn't one because you have never stated what the problem is you're trying to solve. What is the problem statement?

Shootings of police and citizens of course. I think I did state that. Lol. Having 2 officers per car would more than likely cut back on those incidents. The police would have backup immediately available instead of having to wait. An extra pair of hands and eyes as well. Couldn't hurt, that's for sure.

based on what for the hundredth time, where's your study to make that statement? dude you're just a knee slappin fool.

 

[ChrisL]

WHAT is the OP? Do you know what you are talking about? I made a suggestion. If you are angry about my suggestion . . . I think that you have some unresolved issues.

I do, answers to the questions I asked you. Why are you avoiding them? got something to hide do ya? Still haven't stated how to pay for two cops in a car, haven't answer how two cops are better than one, never provided one study that confirms your train of thought would work. So right now you are a big 'O' (oh) for

Why would I "hide?" Are you for real?

Now, I posted many links in this thread for you to read. Did you read any of them? My links show that indeed some communities have two officers per car. The money wasted on law suits that would be saved could help pay. No? Right now, it seems that police departments throughout the US are being sued on a pretty regular basis for what are considered "unlawful" shootings. Now, two officers per car would cut down on that.

AND I HAVE ANSWERED THIS MULTIPLE TIMES. How are you going to pay for two cops per car? How are you going to get enough cops to respond to 911 calls? How are you going to train an infinite number of scenarios. YOU'VE ANSWERED NOTHING!!!!!

What are you so angry about?

me angry? ha, I'm not the one responding to everyone! seems it is you with the chip on your shoulder dude!

Am I not supposed to respond to people's posts that are addressed to me on a message board?

 

[jc456]

logical doesn't work with someone who doesn't want to discuss honestly a discussion point. you have been one belligerent ass all day on here. You, you, you, well 'f' off to you. answer some friggin questions or drop out of the thread. It's an easy decision.

I'm sorry, but you are the one being belligerent. I floated out some ideas to help keep our officers and our citizens safer, and you just don't like it for some reason. You haven't said why. You haven't come up with an argument of how this would not work.

and you've ignored every reply. So as stated by more than just me, they are unrealistic. Now, what else is there?

Actually, I have not ignored them at all. I think I've addressed all of your concerns. Now, what is your solution?

so which post of yours has the answers?

This is funny. I have answered your questions. You are the one not answering my question. What is YOUR solution since you seem to hate mine so much.

Oh sure I answered them, i told you every solution is invalid without a study. So the ball is back in your court. And to that you never stated how to fund two cops in a car.

 

[ChrisL]

I'm sorry, but you are the one being belligerent. I floated out some ideas to help keep our officers and our citizens safer, and you just don't like it for some reason. You haven't said why. You haven't come up with an argument of how this would not work.

and you've ignored every reply. So as stated by more than just me, they are unrealistic. Now, what else is there?

Actually, I have not ignored them at all. I think I've addressed all of your concerns. Now, what is your solution?

there isn't one because you have never stated what the problem is you're trying to solve. What is the problem statement?

Shootings of police and citizens of course. I think I did state that. Lol. Having 2 officers per car would more than likely cut back on those incidents. The police would have backup immediately available instead of having to wait. An extra pair of hands and eyes as well. Couldn't hurt, that's for sure.

based on what for the hundredth time, where's your study to make that statement? dude you're just a knee slappin fool.

I think maybe you need a nappy or something.

 

[jc456]

I do, answers to the questions I asked you. Why are you avoiding them? got something to hide do ya? Still haven't stated how to pay for two cops in a car, haven't answer how two cops are better than one, never provided one study that confirms your train of thought would work. So right now you are a big 'O' (oh) for

Why would I "hide?" Are you for real?

Now, I posted many links in this thread for you to read. Did you read any of them? My links show that indeed some communities have two officers per car. The money wasted on law suits that would be saved could help pay. No? Right now, it seems that police departments throughout the US are being sued on a pretty regular basis for what are considered "unlawful" shootings. Now, two officers per car would cut down on that.

AND I HAVE ANSWERED THIS MULTIPLE TIMES. How are you going to pay for two cops per car? How are you going to get enough cops to respond to 911 calls? How are you going to train an infinite number of scenarios. YOU'VE ANSWERED NOTHING!!!!!

What are you so angry about?

me angry? ha, I'm not the one responding to everyone! seems it is you with the chip on your shoulder dude!

Am I not supposed to respond to people's posts that are addressed to me on a message board?

why not discuss reasonably and debate? You've been told why your ideas won't work. yet you keep posting them like no one answered you. That's belligerent friend.