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

[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?

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.

I disagree. If we can send billions of dollars to foreign countries every year, I'm sure we can equip our police with what they need to do their jobs to the BEST of their abilities.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

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?

IF?

Lets see some evidence that supports your claim.

Show us how having more than one cop in a patrol car reduces police brutality claims thereby reducing lawsuits.

All you do is talk. Start supporting your claims with actual evidence.

 

[jc456]

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.

seems you've been on one all day

 

[ChrisL]

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.

I have been reasonable. It's you who isn't being reasonable, sorry to say. Now, if we can afford to send billions of dollars to other countries, we can certainly afford to equip our police with everything they need to do their jobs effectively with minimal civilian casualties.

 

[jc456]

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.

I disagree. If we can send billions of dollars to foreign countries every year, I'm sure we can equip our police with what they need to do their jobs to the BEST of their abilities.

based off of what? I asked you for a problem statement and still haven't seen one. Go ask the people in chicago about the need for one cop vs, two. They'd like to get one. And yet here you are discussing nonsense.

What's the problem statement?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

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.

Most likely? But not certain. In other words, just a guess.

Lets raise taxes and put two cops in every car 'cause it might help.

 

[ChrisL]

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?

IF?

Lets see some evidence that supports your claim.

Show us how having more than one cop in a patrol car reduces police brutality claims thereby reducing lawsuits.

All you do is talk. Start supporting your claims with actual evidence.

Well, for one thing, there would be two officers to restrain a suspect instead of just one. Instead of having to beat, tase or shoot a suspect, it would be much easier for them to restrain someone without having to resort to those things.

 

[jc456]

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.

I have been reasonable. It's you who isn't being reasonable, sorry to say. Now, if we can afford to send billions of dollars to other countries, we can certainly afford to equip our police with everything they need to do their jobs effectively with minimal civilian casualties.

Federal money is not what funds local police so, can't have that. It would be the same as bringing in the national and federal armies. Doh!!!!

 

[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.

Most likely? But not certain. In other words, just a guess.

Lets raise taxes and put two cops in every car 'cause it might help.

I'm sure it would help. How wouldn't it? Why does it make you so angry?

 

[ChrisL]

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.

I have been reasonable. It's you who isn't being reasonable, sorry to say. Now, if we can afford to send billions of dollars to other countries, we can certainly afford to equip our police with everything they need to do their jobs effectively with minimal civilian casualties.

Federal money is not what funds local police so, can't have that. It would be the same as bringing in the national and federal armies. Doh!!!!

Well, maybe we should rethink the way we do things. Saving lives is worth it. I never claimed to have ALL the answers. This is my suggestion, and so far, I have seen really nothing major that would make me think it wouldn't work to help save lives of officers as well as citizens.

 

[jc456]

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.

Most likely? But not certain. In other words, just a guess.

Lets raise taxes and put two cops in every car 'cause it might help.

and BTW, there are now no longer enough cops to answer the 911 calls so people die? it won't work, can't work will never work.

 

[jc456]

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?

IF?

Lets see some evidence that supports your claim.

Show us how having more than one cop in a patrol car reduces police brutality claims thereby reducing lawsuits.

All you do is talk. Start supporting your claims with actual evidence.

Well, for one thing, there would be two officers to restrain a suspect instead of just one. Instead of having to beat, tase or shoot a suspect, it would be much easier for them to restrain someone without having to resort to those things.

Again, do you have a study that supports that two cops can quietly restrain one suspect? Just one study

 

[ChrisL]

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?

IF?

Lets see some evidence that supports your claim.

Show us how having more than one cop in a patrol car reduces police brutality claims thereby reducing lawsuits.

All you do is talk. Start supporting your claims with actual evidence.

How wouldn't it help? Two people are better than one.

 

[ChrisL]

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?

IF?

Lets see some evidence that supports your claim.

Show us how having more than one cop in a patrol car reduces police brutality claims thereby reducing lawsuits.

All you do is talk. Start supporting your claims with actual evidence.

Well, for one thing, there would be two officers to restrain a suspect instead of just one. Instead of having to beat, tase or shoot a suspect, it would be much easier for them to restrain someone without having to resort to those things.

Again, do you have a study that supports that two cops can quietly restrain one suspect? Just one study

Why would you doubt that? It is common sense that two men are going to be able to handle a person better than one man??? Hello?

 

[Uncensored2008]

dude he's one of you !

I think dannyboy is a leftist like you.

He seems to love totalitarianism.

 

[ChrisL]

Seriously, I don't what you people are getting so worked up over. You people have some serious problems, I think.

 

[jc456]

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.

I have been reasonable. It's you who isn't being reasonable, sorry to say. Now, if we can afford to send billions of dollars to other countries, we can certainly afford to equip our police with everything they need to do their jobs effectively with minimal civilian casualties.

Federal money is not what funds local police so, can't have that. It would be the same as bringing in the national and federal armies. Doh!!!!

Well, maybe we should rethink the way we do things. Saving lives is worth it. I never claimed to have ALL the answers. This is my suggestion, and so far, I have seen really nothing major that would make me think it wouldn't work to help save lives of officers as well as citizens.

sure you think you do, you won't let go ideas you've been told already won't work, why they won't work and yet you keep posting them. over and over and over, like maybe if you post it once more everyone will agree. That isn't a very bright path to take. And proven to be useless.

 

[ChrisL]

dude he's one of you !

I think dannyboy is a leftist like you.

He seems to love totalitarianism.

I think he's just batshit crazy. Lol. Probably posting from the local mental institution on his recreation time.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So 3 weeks of training and they're on the road? Where is this? Thats absurdly irresponsible. But then again...liberals would do it in the name of diversity.

Yeah, I mean a cop so poorly trained would probably shoot kids during traffic stops....

 

[jc456]

Seriously, I don't what you people are getting so worked up over. You people have some serious problems, I think.

ahem, maybe ....... wait for it.....YOU!!!!!!

17 year old brat sponsored by ChrisL.