[Godstud]

They seem to have surveyed over 1700 people.

How is that a small sample size? It's two separate studies. It was done in one specific area. It was done from one specific area. I don't know why I have to explain obvious things to you. They were both done over 30 years ago.

You simply asserted, without any support, that police brutality is the exception and not the norm.

This is simply fact, or people would be encountering it daily. Everyone. Everywhere. They do not, despite you searching and finding an article. YOU made the assertion that all police are violent and brutal. I was responding to that idiotic comment.

Except there is actually evidence for a racial discrepancy when it comes to approval if law enforcement and their use of force, as per my claim.

Irrelevant, as it's not ONLY based on that, and there are other factors involved. This is just a "cop-out". It's like calling all white people racist, simply because a few are.

[Pants-of-dog]

How is that a small sample size? It's two separate studies. It was done in one specific area. It was done from one specific area. I don't know why I have to explain obvious things to you. They were both done over 30 years ago.

Since you are not supporting your claim that this study can be dismissed because of small sample size, I will continue using it as part of an argument that self defence is reasonable.

This is simply fact, or people would be encountering it daily. Everyone. Everywhere. They do not, despite you searching and finding an article. YOU made the assertion that all police are violent and brutal. I was responding to that idiotic comment.

So you still refuse to provide any support for your claim that police brutality is anomalous.

And you have shifted the goalposts from “it happens” to “it happens every day” to “it happens every day to everyone everywhere”.

So you accept that police brutality happens every day. I will immediately concede that it does not happen to everyone. White people deal with it a lot less. So do neurotypical people.

But when we look at young Indigenous men on the prairies, it could easily happen every day.

Just like it could easily happen to a dumb tourist in Belize.

Irrelevant, as it's not ONLY based on that, and there are other factors involved. This is just a "cop-out". It's like calling all white people racist, simply because a few are.

Yes, my claim (that white people believe that cops are generally not overreacting with too much force) is based solely on the surveyed beliefs of white people when asked that question.

[Godstud]

I will continue using it as part of an argument that self defence is reasonable.

Self defense argument against police? No. That's not reasonable unless you are fucking bonkers.

So you still refuse to provide any support for your claim that police brutality is anomalous.

Police brutality is the exception. That's simply fact. That you don't believe it shows how delusional you are, as you defy reality.

White people deal with it a lot less.

False. Criminals deal with it. You always want to bring race into it, when it's simply criminals having to deal with the police.

But when we look at young Indigenous men on the prairies, it could easily happen every day.

False. Hyperbole. What you believe could happen is irrelevant as we've already established that you're deluded into thinking most police officers are violent and brutal.

Just like it could easily happen to a dumb tourist in Belize.

Criminals get into trouble. Fact. That the criminal is a tourist, really isn't relevant. Ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it.

[Puffer Fish]

Sigh.

Newspapers often get stories wrong. Appearances often fail to withstand scrutiny. No system is perfect, but unless you plan on moving to a cave, you dance with what ya got...

Or to put it slightly differently, threads like this are a waste of time.

One of the main points of this thread is that justice is not always obvious. How a certain type of situation should be handled.

Laws and preconceived beliefs do not always exist to cover specific situations.

So sometimes problems do not get decided until the specific situation right after they happen. That means society does not actually run according to rules. This is a big common misconception many people have.

Sure, there are many situations where the law applies in a simple and obvious way, but a story like this is not one of them.

And where things are complicated, there is the potential for injustice. Or at least decisions that are not altogether logical. Government is not perfect, they can routinely get things wrong.

[late]

One of the main points of this thread is that justice is not always obvious.


And where things are complicated, there is the potential for injustice. Or at least decisions that are not altogether logical. Government is not perfect, they can routinely get things wrong.

Yes, Capt Obvious

Change can be disruptive, and capitalism is the greatest engine of change since killer asteroids...

That's why Progressives exist, there is always a need for reform. Doubly so in America which has enormous amounts of change, and a government designed to resist changing. It's a recipe for disaster.

[Pants-of-dog]

@Godstud

None of that is an argument, or even a decent rebuttal.

Now, when it comes to cops alone with women at night, cops probably feel like they can do whatever they want, including getting away with rape.

What is the woman going to do? Call the cops?

[Godstud]

Now, when it comes to cops alone with women at night, cops probably feel like they can do whatever they want, including getting away with rape.

That's about the stupidest shit you've ever said(aside from what you've said earlier about police).

I don't need to make a rebuttal to delusional ramblings. You obviously hate police so much that any sort of rational conversation on this subject is beyond your abilities. Good day.

[Pants-of-dog]

After doing some reading from a quick Google search, I can sincerely say that I honestly and fervently wish that I had been wrong.

This part made me stop and take a break:

A 2014 study led by Stinson analyzed the arrests of nearly 400 officers, employed across 43 states and Washington, D.C., for sex-related crimes between 2005 and 2007—just three years. Beyond uncovering 118 cases of rape, the study found that nearly three-quarters of all the cases involved victims who were younger than 18.

“These findings seem to indicate scenarios in which adults allowed police both access and the opportunity to victimize children under their care,” the study states. “That is, caregivers may be prone to ‘let their guard down’ in the presence of police in a manner that evokes the infamous scandals involving Catholic priests and the wide-scale sexual abuse of minors.”

Just last week, a New Jersey police officer was arrested on accusations that he’d sexually assaulted a teenaged relative multiple times between May 2019 and April 2021, starting when she was just 14. Last month, a Massachusetts cop was convicted for sexually assaulting a child younger than 14. In April, an Oklahoma man pleaded guilty to sexually abusing a child. At the time of the abuse in 2019, he, too, was a police officer.

Cops so often abuse 14-year-olds, in particular, Stinson said, that he’ll sometimes hear one of his research assistants mutter under their breath, “Oh my god, another 14-year-old.”

https://www.vice.com/en/article/m7e77y/ ... ult-people

[Puffer Fish]

Cops so often abuse 14-year-olds, in particular, Stinson said, that he’ll sometimes hear one of his research assistants mutter under their breath, “Oh my god, another 14-year-old.”

I'm guessing 14 is like the "sweet spot". Old enough to start being attractive in a sexual way but young and small enough not to easily be able to defend themselves.

Pants-of-dog, what you brought up may be an important issue, but it's off topic in this thread.

[Pants-of-dog]

I think that evidence showing how cops are more likely to be rapists is relevant to a story about a woman and a cop alone at night and a sudden violent altercation taking place.

[wat0n]

More likely to be rapists than whom?

The text you cited already filters sexual assault cases, and that's over a 10+ year period.

How do cops compare with some darlings of progressives like, say, school teachers with regards to sexual assault of minors?

[Pants-of-dog]

Normally, I would tell people to Google it, but this stuff is so horrendous that I suggest you do not.

[Godstud]

Female school teachers are more likely to rape children than any police officer, @Pants-of-dog(See below). You point fingers at the wrong people, and some anecdotal evidence from some comment from a research guy isn't evidence of anything.

Just because you can find things in the news does not mean that it happens everywhere all the time.

6 Female Teachers Arrested For Sexual Misconduct With Students In US
Six female teachers in the United States have been arrested in just two days for sexual misconduct.
https://www.ndtv.com/feature/6-female-t ... us-3951950

31-year-old woman pregnant by 13-year-old won't see jail time
https://cbsaustin.com/news/nation-world ... phile-rape

[Pants-of-dog]

@Godstud

Whataboutism.

[Puffer Fish]

I think that evidence showing how cops are more likely to be rapists is relevant to a story about a woman and a cop alone at night and a sudden violent altercation taking place.

Okay, maybe that's a fair theory.
So let's imagine he tries to rape her, she shoots him.

Why didn't she claim rape? Why is she claiming it was accidental?

And do you think a woman in such a situation is more likely to tell the truth, or think about which story is most likely to result in the least amount of prison time.
I guess it is possible he may have tried to rape her, but she was pretty sure no one would believe her, so she just told a story about it being accidental. That is unlikely, but is a possibility.

I'm going with my gut feeling though that is telling me she was having a short-term little sexual affair with him, and for some reason she was afraid her rich long-term partner would find out. So she felt she had to kill her black chocolate love toy. Otherwise her source of money would be cut off.

Maybe that police officer threatened to tell her husband, or maybe he tried to blackmail her for money. Or wanted to force her to have some sort of uncomfortable sex with him, and she couldn't say no because she knew he could tell her partner.

All this is just imagination though, just theory. Police will never know what actually happened on that pier.

[Pants-of-dog]

@Puffer Fish

She probably did not go with the rape story because people have an illogical belief that cops do not rape, so the cops would not believe her.

[Godstud]

@Pants-of-dog Complete stupidity! You are making up a fantasy scenario to push your stupid ideological narrative. You're just making up shit as you go along to justify the murder that this woman committed, and to imply that there was some wrongdoing on the part of the police officer because you have an extreme bias against police officers, because of your ideology.

[ingliz]

@Godstud

You are just as bad; she's been charged with manslaughter after negligently discharging a firearm into the policeman's head, not murder.

[Godstud]

I never said what kind of "murder". @ingliz You do know that manslaughter is considered 3rd degree murder, right?

Why are you arguing semantics? Nothing else to argue about?

[ingliz]

You do know that manslaughter is considered 3rd-degree murder, right?

Not in Belize.

"For murder, you must have the specific intention to kill."

— The Supreme Court of Belize

Why are you arguing semantics?

Because you seemingly have forgotten that words have meaning.