jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (64 posts)

ATTN Ferguson and Cleveland: A Lesson From Arizona Cops

  1. wrenchBiscuit profile image87
    wrenchBiscuitposted 21 months ago

    http://s1.hubimg.com/u/12285468_f520.jpg
    Not that I am in love with Arizona, which is known for it's  racist policies concerning Mexican American studies in public schools, as well as racial profiling. However, a gunman who killed one person and wounded 5 others in Mesa Arizona Wednesday morning was apprehended "alive" after being brought down with a Taser.

    I am posting this because it sheds even more light on the murders of Michael Brown and Tamir Rice. The  apologists have been out in force since these brutal and unprovoked  murders. I have heard every lame excuse under the sun about why the cops had no choice but to use deadly force. Yet, let us compare the three suspects.

    •Ryan Giroux,, the suspect in the Arizona case is white . He has already spent more than 6 years in prison for aggravated assault. He killed one person and wounded 5 others. He was taken alive.

    • Michael  Brown was black. He had no prison record. He was on his way to college. He didn't kill anybody. He didn't wound anybody. He didn't even have a weapon. He was murdered for disrespecting a cop who said he feared for his life.

    • Tamir Rice was a 12 year old black child. He had no prison record. He hadn't killed or wounded anyone. He was murdered for playing with a toy gun in a park. The cops also say they feared for their safety.

    Of course if the Arizona shooter had been black, or native, there is a good chance he would also be dead , but that is beside the point. The issue here is that this man had proven himself to be dangerous. He had proven his willingness to kill. Of course a cop would fear for his safety under such circumstances. Yet, in spite of the obvious danger, this man was taken alive! In this case the cops performed the job  they were hired to do, which is to keep the peace; to apprehend and subdue suspects and deliver them to a  court of law, rather than perform as judge, jury, and executioner.

    This tells us that in parts of the United States, an unarmed black teenager, or a black child with no prison record, and who hasn't killed or injured anyone , is considered more dangerous than a convict who served over 6 years for aggravated assault and then killed one person and wounded five others. But of course, these young black people who were murdered were not considered dangerous at all. That is only the official excuse for such heinous crimes against humanity. The truth is very simple: They were black, and in the wrong place at the wrong time; they did not speak, or act the way a black person is supposed to, and in this country that has always been a good enough reason for a black person to be murdered by a representative of the government.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/mesa-shooti … more-shot/

    1. Credence2 profile image86
      Credence2posted 21 months ago in reply to this

      It would been nice if they had taken the trouble to provide a swat team in the case of Tamir Rice, perhaps he may well be alive today. While, it is difficult to make assumptions and correlations as the situations may well be different, it is ironic that this cold blooded killer is subjected to non lethal force while a twelve year old isn't given time to turn his head before the men in blue execute him

      1. wrenchBiscuit profile image87
        wrenchBiscuitposted 21 months ago in reply to this

        Yes, there simply is no excuse or justification. But it is fascinating how shamelessly many have defended the killings of these kids. It only illustrates the great depth of racism and depravity that continues to exist in this country.

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
          Kathryn L Hillposted 21 months ago in reply to this

          Your belief is that those cops were racist and depraved. (and anyone who defends them, including jury and judge, who determined they were defending their own lives, are also racist and depraved.)
          "depraved adjective
          corrupt, perverted, deviant, degenerate, debased, immoral, unprincipled; debauched, dissolute, licentious, lecherous, prurient, indecent, sordid; wicked, sinful, vile, iniquitous, nefarious; warped, twisted, sick." Dictionary.
          ...and your conclusion is that these officers of the law are sick.
          I understand. Thank you for explaining your point of view.

    2. rhamson profile image76
      rhamsonposted 21 months ago in reply to this

      Your post assumes all mitigating facts were available to the law enforcement officials prosecuting the stop or detention of the individuals involved. The bottom line is that when confronted by a cop he does not have all the information. His position is supposed to be respected and his instructions are to be followed as a result of that respect. If he is in the wrong and you are harassed, battered or falsely arrested there will be an appropriate time to file charges and or sue. In the heat of the moment is not a time to expect justice to be determined on the street. What is the worst that could have happened to any of these people had they surrendered and or followed instructions from the police?

      1. wrenchBiscuit profile image87
        wrenchBiscuitposted 21 months ago in reply to this

        http://s2.hubimg.com/u/12288539.jpg

        Your post highlights several important points:

        • When confronted, the Arizona suspect fled. He obviously did not respect "the position" of the authorities and was later subdued with a Taser. However, his lack of respect did not get him killed.

        • You accurately stated: " In the heat of the moment is not a time to expect justice to be determined on the street." You are absolutely right. Even though the Arizona police were confident that the suspect had already killed one, and wounded 5 other people they did not allow their emotions to take control. Even though it is clear that they believed the suspect was a killer, they took the necessary steps to deliver him to justice relatively unharmed. At least he was not dead!

        Finally you say: "What is the worst that could have happened to any of these people had they surrendered and or followed instructions from the police?"

        First of all there is no law that justifies killing a citizen for simply disrespecting a law officer. Your comment indicates that you may be in favor of such a law. In the case of Tamir Rice, the video clearly shows that this child wasn't given time to react one way or another. Most reports indicate that 3 seconds elapsed between the time the cops arrived and the time he was murdered. In the case of Michael Brown, we have the testimony of a rogue cop as to the events th at led up to the shooting. Furthermore according to the Observer,"A federal investigation into the police killing of an unarmed, black 18-year-old in Ferguson, Missouri, lays bare what officials contend are racist, profit-driven law enforcement practices in the small St. Louis suburb." http://www.moultrieobserver.com/news/ju … a6ec3.html

        But what is very apparent here is that  one lone cop didn't try to play Rambo and run after the Arizona shooter. It was a coordinated effort. The  situations in Ferguson and Cleveland could have been handled in a similar professional manner, especially since those suspects had not killed or wounded anyone, and there was less urgency.

        When black people were lynched in the past, similar excuses were used to justify evil. One of the most popular was " They got a fair trial, and they were convicted by a jury in a court of law and sentenced by a judge!" Of course they got a fair trial : from a  racist jury and a racist judge, after which many were tortured, burned alive, and hanged.

        1. rhamson profile image76
          rhamsonposted 21 months ago in reply to this

          In the case of some one running away from police it is not a question of respect but one of ducking the law. In that case he was pursued as not being an immediate threat that would require deadly force. In the case of Michael Brown you have an individual struggling with a police officer for, about or with a weapon. Had Michael Brown gone to the ground and placed his hands out stretched he would now be able to make his argument. Even if he ran away without the confrontation he would still be able to now argue his case.

          As far as the young boy being killed for brandishing a toy gun a whole lot of police procedure and parental guidance is to blame. Had the police not charged onto the scene in the car they might have been able to better assess the situation more clearly and safely from afar. And if the parent had been more vigilant about what their child was doing acting as if he was shooting something in a public park there might have been no tragedy at all. I am for guns rights but allowed none of my children toy guns. There is no such thing as a toy gun. They are not toys and should not be treated as such.

          1. wrenchBiscuit profile image87
            wrenchBiscuitposted 21 months ago in reply to this

            So according to you an armed felon who has already killed one person and wounded five others is less of a threat. Right. You keep avoiding the issue that he was brought down with a Taser. Doesn't that give you even the slightest clue that the police were in a very dangerous situation and could have justifiably responded at anytime with lethal force. This guy had already spent 6 years in prison. Anyone might have reasoned he wasn't planning on going back without a fight.

            How many black people do you know? Are you black yourself? If not, would it bother you if your mother, sister, or daughter dated a black person? Because of your apparent lack of concern for the lives of black children, I am curious.

            1. rhamson profile image76
              rhamsonposted 21 months ago in reply to this

              Perhaps you should give us the whole story when making comparisons. Where did you say the white guy was armed when he was taken down with a taser? If that were true there must have been more to this story.

              As far as knowing any black people I will not boar you with classic defending lines such as some of my best friends are black but I do have a membership in the NAACP and by the way I am white.

          2. Credence2 profile image86
            Credence2posted 21 months ago in reply to this

            I am with WB on this, RH, have you not ever played 'cowboys and Indians' when you were a kid? We all know that what happened in Cleveland to a 12 year old kid would have  never happened in Mayberry. There is more to this than the victim being wholly responsible for his or her own tragic outcome. The way things were handled in Ferguson reveals that there needs to be a sea-change in how law enforcement interacts with the community, far beyond the police chief resigning. It is merely a band aid over a gunshot wound. In Ferguson, the actions of law enforcement and municipal government revealed a contempt for its residents.
            While I respect the work that law enforcement does, I expect the police to use good judgment, being intelligent, courageous and compassionate. If they are not able to live up to serving and protecting these communities where they work, perhaps they need to find work in another profession.

            1. rhamson profile image76
              rhamsonposted 21 months ago in reply to this

              I agree with you that there is abuse in police departments and people of color are more than less the victims of their abusive behavior. But as far as the child being shot I can't agree more that the police responding to that call handled it horrifically. But had the child not been in that park providing enough concern for someone to call it in as "threarltening" or "scaring" there may not have been reason for the police to come flying in guns ablazing. As I said before it does not excuse the police but does explain the confusion. Had the child been white maybe there might have been more care but what kind of neighborhood was the boy playing in and what was the areas reputation?

              1. Credence2 profile image86
                Credence2posted 20 months ago in reply to this

                Well, RH, I commend you for being honest enough to acknowledge that there is a problem instead of dismissing it saying that problems in black communities are corrected, if they simply obey the law and not challenge police on questionable stops. Many of the Anglos posting have yet to accept or acknowledge that there is a difference. It is true that neighborhoods come in all sorts. One thing for sure , cops having an inordinate fear of the residents of a community that they serve wii automatically be ineffective. Irrational fear , not prudence, mind you, clouds judgement. As shown in Ferguson, Anglos cops have a fear of minorities. A little more judgment to supplant the fear might have meant that the little boy could have kept his life. I can't get these folks to see objectively what is right before them and what is obvious to most of us. Is this the institutional racism that had been discussed? thanks for your willingness to engage in frank and open dialogue

                1. rhamson profile image76
                  rhamsonposted 20 months ago in reply to this

                  I try to direct myself towards truth and not position. Had the policeman in Fergusson backed down they still might have been able to find Michael Brown pretty quickly due to his history and notoriety in the neighborhood. In hindsight this might have been a more preferable option. But also in hindsight it might have been better for Brown to stop and lie down on the ground. The question will always be why did he not do this? Was it his right to walk away from the confrontation with the police because of the way he felt a person of his race was being treated? I can't understand other than from his age and maturity why he did not grasp the reaction to his actions. Is the argument he was targeted for his race despite the polices' description of the perpetrator? Was the police man to give up his weapon whether or not a confrontation had occurred? There is just to much testimony truthful and false to determine if this was purely a race driven tragedy. So what are we to learn from this. Since you cannot know a policeman's leanings, racial or not, they are still the best way we have of enforcing the law. The next thing we need to do is get active in elections and become better represented by people who are sensitive to these issues and willing to hire the right people.

                  1. Credence2 profile image86
                    Credence2posted 20 months ago in reply to this

                    I hear you, but I don't think neither Brown nor Rice were of sound mind, one reacting emotionally, the other, Tamir Rice, a mere boy. Surely, there are any number of options, particularely with the 12 year old between shooting them dead, the law officer exposing himself to unjustified risk, and doing nothing. Particularly, in the case of the boy, I expect law officers to use better judgment, properly assessing the situation before going in guns blazing

                    I cannot neither prove or disprove the circumstances surrounding Brown's death. But the way this was handled by the officer on the scene and the police department in Ferguson generally was callous and unprofessional, adding to the resentment by those living in the community. Did they serve and protect? Not this time

          3. wrenchBiscuit profile image87
            wrenchBiscuitposted 20 months ago in reply to this

            Deleted

            1. rhamson profile image76
              rhamsonposted 20 months ago in reply to this

              Your analogies are horrible. If the parent had been more vigilant about her son playing with a toy gun hardly compares to him being abducted from his bedroom or references to going to work to avoid a catastrophe. Home schooling children had nothing to do with the Columbine kids taking weapons from their home and killing public school children. Ridiculous, all of it, and you know it.

              The neighborhood, the child playing with a toy that looked like a weapon and two very stupid cops were what contributed to that tragic episode. The main thing is that we learn from it and change the circumstances that made it happen. If they be incompetence poor parenting or even prejudice or a combination of all of them it is better to figure it out rather than blame one thing and obsess on it. To obsess on it will change nothing.

              1. wrenchBiscuit profile image87
                wrenchBiscuitposted 20 months ago in reply to this

                http://s2.hubimg.com/u/12294761.jpg
                You find my talent for analogy to be "horrible" because I have used it to aptly  illustrate the absurdity of your suggestion that poor parenting contributed to the Tamir Rice tragedy. In a racist country that has persecuted the African and the Indigenous for over 500 years; in a country that still celebrates the memory of tyrants like George Washington,Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, and Columbus, you dare suggest that the parent may have been responsible! If innocent people were not still being murdered I might now be laughing.

                If you want to fix this problem, then a good place to start is by admitting the truth that the United States is one of the most racist countries in the world, and stop making excuses for evil. When the body is infected with a disease we cannot cure ourselves by seeking to appease and reason with that which has corrupted us. Instead, we must identify the corruption and then cut it out.

                1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
                  Kathryn L Hillposted 20 months ago in reply to this

                  Define tyrant.

                2. rhamson profile image76
                  rhamsonposted 20 months ago in reply to this

                  What talent? I said it was horrible and still is. This country was founded on the slave labor of many generations of Africans who worked and served their white owners. Andrew Jackson was a tyrant with the Indians, George Washington had several slaves. Those statements make your analogies ring truer with the poor parenting and stupid cops who shot the boy? Nobody is saying this was anything but a terrible tragedy. But racially motivated? Build your case with intent? How could you possibly know that without knowing the cops who shot that boy? If you have not heard of or read recent events where children have been sent home from school for merely shooting at people with their fingers, both black and white, then you know nothing of the sensitivity it has with the general public. Who were the people and what race were they who called in the incident to have the police rush in there? Once again you claim it was because the boy was black, the cops white. A done deal in your reasoning. I am saying had the parents knowledge of where the boy was, and what he was doing maybe this misunderstanding would never have happened,

    3. Onusonus profile image86
      Onusonusposted 21 months ago in reply to this

      It's been proven time and again that Michael brown attacked Darren Wilson. Yet the liberal media continues to push the false narrative that his hands were up. And now you are perpetuating that same lie. All this has done is caused racial division in the name of a completely bogus story in order for Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson to make more money at what they do best. Race hustling.

      To these guys black lives only matter when it's white versus black. Forget about all the black on black murders that happen every single day.

      As for Arizona, it is well within their constitutional obligation to secure the boarders from foreign invaders that illegally enter this country to suck our welfare system dry bringing with them gang violence and drugs.

      1. wrenchBiscuit profile image87
        wrenchBiscuitposted 21 months ago in reply to this

        http://s2.hubimg.com/u/12289577.jpg
        Thank God for Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson! Today it is fashionable to accuse those who stand against the evil of racism of "race hustling" and "race baiting". As far as black on black violence is concerned, a great majority of that violence is a symptom of poverty and institutionalized racism, which go hand in hand.

        Furthermore, these men are civil rights activists. That's what they do. A brain surgeon  may have the ability to be a heart surgeon, but he chooses to specialize in grey matter, instead of matters of the heart. Most people specialize in one particular field. Why is it that civil rights activists are supposed to be Supermen and solve every ill known to man when no one else can perform such a feat?

        But what I find most fascinating is your comment about Arizona securing the borders. What does that have to do with a guy running around shooting people? And in case your comment was in reference to my opening remarks about M.A.S., most of the so-called Mexican American children attending schools in Arizona are U.S. citizens. Also, let it be known that "Mexican American","Latino", and "Hispanic" are racist terms commonly used as tools of genocide to help erase the Indigenous identity.

        Consequently, being of predominantly native blood, even the so-called illegals from below the border have as much right to be here as anyone else. The wealth of America is stolen wealth in the first place. The colonialists did not invent, or earn this wealth. They were invaders who simply stole it.

        1. Onusonus profile image86
          Onusonusposted 20 months ago in reply to this

          You know Everywhere you look these days, there’s Al Sharpton... it’s strange, even after you wake up screaming, he’s still there.  It’s like one of those Blumhouse movies.  If he’s not in some city calling for protests because a cop killed a thug who was resisting arrest, he’s in some other city calling for protests because another cop killed another thug who was also resisting arrest.  He’s even been meeting with Barack Obama as if the president of the United States were just some hapless loser who can’t find anyone else to talk to. 

          Al Sharpton has dedicated his life to the improvement of the black man Al Sharpton.

          He first flushed himself to fame in 1987, when a 15-year-old black girl named Tawana Brawley concocted a lie about being raped by a group of white men. Reverend Al Sharpton became one of Tawana’s so-called advisors.  He falsely accused a young police officer of participating in the alleged rape, and after the already troubled officer committed suicide, Sharpton accused another man of murdering him to cover up the crime. 
          Sharpton and his cronies organized daily protests using viciously inflammatory language - even though one of Sharpton’s top aides says Sharpton suspected all along Tawana’s story was false. Finally a Grand Jury investigation exposed the girl’s hoax, leaving Sharpton looking almost exactly like a race baiting charlatan.
          Unless you happened to be a leftist or a journalist or some other sort of gullible buffoon.  In that case, Al Sharpton was now a “black leader.”  And sure enough, wherever a tragedy could be misconstrued as a case of racism, black leader Al was there leading blacks to false conclusions and violence.

          There was Crown Heights Brooklyn for instance.  When a black child was accidentally killed by a car driven by a Hassidic Jew there in 1991, a small gang of local blacks responded by murdering  an innocent Jewish man. But that wasn’t good enough for Al. His furious rhetoric helped stir days of anti-Jewish riots in what’s been called one of the worst anti-semitic incidents in American history.

          And Al wasn’t done.  In 1995, he helped incite a vicious name-calling boycott of a Jewish storeowner in Harlem — and inspire protests that only ended when one of the protestors shot four whites in the man’s store and set the place on fire, killing seven workers, most of them Hispanic.

          More recently, Sharpton has accused three white LaCrosse players from Duke University of raping a black girl, which they didn’t; made out that Trayvon Martin was the victim of a racist murder, which he wasn’t; and suggested Michael Brown was a gentle innocent shot dead by an evil cop — wrong again — and he managed to do it all while owing the government 4.5 million dollars in taxes.

          So thank God for Al Sharpton. roll

      2. Don W profile image84
        Don Wposted 20 months ago in reply to this

        Does the fact that some black people murder other black people, mean that nobody can highlight or campaign against the racial bias in law enforcement? Is that what you're suggesting? If so, I think that's a bit silly.

  2. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
    Kathryn L Hillposted 21 months ago

    A swat team was involved so it was less of a life threatening situation than just one or two cops dealing with an unknown potential criminal with a gun or defiant and aggressive behavior. Every situation is different and unique to its particulars. Why do you compare these cops to the others in other parts of the country in completely different situations?
    You are saying that cops are prejudiced against blacks based on their skin color, culture, or whatever. I say, No. Cops fear for their lives and do what they are trained to do according to where they are trained and the situation they find themselves in. And every situation is different and life threatening in more ways than one.

    Maybe cop-training needs to be more finely tuned. I do not attribute the deaths to racism. I believe other problems involving training and awareness are revealed. Racism is not proven by your comparisons here in MY MIND.
    Just mine.
    Thank you for sharing your opinion and showing us horrible truths we don't want to even acknowledge exist.

    Cops go home to their families and can't EVEN talk about their days.

    1. wrenchBiscuit profile image87
      wrenchBiscuitposted 21 months ago in reply to this

      http://s2.hubimg.com/u/12287189.jpg
      You bring up a good point Katherine. You commented, "A swat team was involved so it was less of a life threatening situation than just one or two cops dealing with an unknown potential criminal with a gun or defiant and aggressive behavior."  Thank you for this, because with the help of your insight, I will destroy any possible argument justifying the murders of Michael Brown and Tamir Rice.

      Fact: The situation in Arizona was tense, dangerous, and law enforcement did not have the luxury of time. More people could have died if the police did not act quickly to neutralize the gunman. In spite of this urgency, the authorities took the time to put a strategy in motion and deploy a swat team.

      Fact: In the cases of Michael Brown and Tamir Rice, there was no such urgency. No one had been killed, nor had anyone been wounded or threatened. Surely their lives warranted the same considerations as the life of the killer in Arizona. Ferguson and Cleveland PD, having the luxury of time, and with no imminent threat in either situation, could have even more easily implemented a strategy and deployed officers, or a swat team, in a manner that would have insured the safety of all concerned. But apparently the lives of black children aren't worth the extra time and expense.

      As far as your comment about the baggage cops must carry around: A man who goes to the grocery store and buys a steak for dinner doesn't sit crying and commiserating  at dinner over the poor cow that he is now eating. If the man cared that much about cows he wouldn't be eating them in the first place! I assure you,any cop who purposely, and with malice, kills another human being does not have any trouble sleeping at night. They simply don't care.

  3. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
    Kathryn L Hillposted 21 months ago

    <"But apparently the lives of black children aren't worth the extra time and expense.">
    - why not, do you suppose?
    (besides depravity and racism.
    And where DOES depravity and racism in the hearts of some people come from?
    I've never seen it in my life except in movies, such as Twelve Years a Slave... So, I guess I'm lucky.)

  4. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
    Kathryn L Hillposted 21 months ago

    The truth is, a live cop is more helpful than a dead cop.
    I know you don't agree...
    in the name of anarchy.
    Good luck with that.

  5. wrenchBiscuit profile image87
    wrenchBiscuitposted 21 months ago

    Where do you get these ideas? I have never suggested that anyone is better off dead. In fact the majority of my posts are a negative response toward those who obviously do not value human life. It also appears that you didn't take notice of the fact that in this forum I have given the Mesa Arizona police credit for performing their duties in such a way that minimized the loss of life. Furthermore, "anarchy" doesn't mean "without rule of law", it means "without government".

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 21 months ago in reply to this

      How can you have "rule of law" without government?  As soon as someone makes or enforces laws, it becomes government.

      1. wrenchBiscuit profile image87
        wrenchBiscuitposted 21 months ago in reply to this

        http://s1.hubimg.com/u/12288590.png
        Your statement reveals a lack of understanding. A government is constituted by a ruling body, whether elected or self-appointed. A law is not dependent upon a ruling body to function. For example, in a community where theft and murder is illegal, these crimes would not go unpunished in the absence of a ruling body. To further clarify, when a man has a bowel movement, does he really need a governing body to tell him which hand to use when cleaning up the mess?

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 21 months ago in reply to this

          And without a ruling body, who will enforce the laws?  Anyone that desires to?  Anyone that wishes to make up a law to control their neighbors, and then enforces it? 

          Sorry, that's called anarchy.

          1. wrenchBiscuit profile image87
            wrenchBiscuitposted 21 months ago in reply to this

            Absolutely not. . Anarchy is not chaos. Anarchy is a community working together for the good of all without government intrusion into the affairs men. You have subscribed to a false definition that the ruling class wants the public to believe. Otherwise they would lose control and no longer have dominion over the working class. It should be clear to everyone by now that wars are started and prosecuted by governments. In fact, you cannot name a war in the last 200 years that was not the result of a government action. Even a cursory study of the subject would reveal to you the error of your thinking.

  6. 61
    davidfreeman123posted 20 months ago

    that is not true Michel Brown was armed and atemmted to harm the cop in the car ! But i do feel bad for Tamir Rice . IT WAS A TOY !

  7. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
    Kathryn L Hillposted 20 months ago

    So, if you come upon a twelve year old with a gun, you would not be afraid? ( and it looked to me like the boy rushed at the car as it drove up.) How about when you have seen boys related to gang members, who grew up with the gang culture all around them and absorbed gang mentality from the time they were infants? … and who knows... maybe the cop who shot knew of deaths caused by young gang-culture-raised boys! No reason to be cautious or protective? I do wish he had just been tazered, but there might not have been enough time to do so, had the gun been a real one.

    The gun did not even look like a toy and had its orange identifying tag taken off. I watched that boy take aim at a pedestrian's BACK as he strolled unawares past him in videos. Some one took the video, someone saw what this twelve year old was doing...someone who did not like what he saw in the least and had reason to fear for the safety/lives of others in a public park.
    Review the clip.
    What if these cops had not had guns… I keep pondering how cops deal with criminals in Britain without guns!
    And why do we even need guns in a civilized society?
    - because we are not civilized?
    Would anarchy even work in such an uncivilized society as we apparently still are, wB?
    Did it exist in America before the bad people arrived on the sceene?
    Has it ever worked anywhere on earth?
    Wondering.

    1. wrenchBiscuit profile image87
      wrenchBiscuitposted 20 months ago in reply to this

      http://s2.hubimg.com/u/12292013.jpg
      No, I would not have the depth of fear that would lead me to take a human life; especially the life of a child. You do not understand the mentality of  these individuals who commit murder. It is not fear that drives them, it is power, and a need to realize  and watch the power of life and death  in motion; to be in control. I have known men like this and I have seen them engage in their sadistic pleasures . For instance, many so-called "hunters", who are in reality nothing but cowards with high tech toys, revel in the killing of defenseless animals. They do not shoot the animals because they fear them. Are you afraid of Bambi? No, they are not afraid of Bambi, and many are not hungry or trying to feed their families either, nor are they so interested in "thinning out the herd" to keep a healthy balance in nature. They simply kill for pleasure.

      We must understand  that the Eurocentric educational system does not teach the children about death.  As a result there is much confusion and unhappiness. Everyday, for many years I have thought about death, and every day I prepare myself to die. I accept that it will come, and although I am susceptible to pain and suffering  as any man, I do not suffer the mental anguish of "waiting for the other shoe to drop", or in this case,  "waiting for the bullet to hit the bone". I will welcome my death as an old friend, and I will not greatly mourn the passing of this life, for it is only a drop in the ocean. As a result, I do not walk through this world in fear. The men who kill these young children are soulless, sadistic, cowards, and when this lifetime ends for them, they will only turn to dust, as the Creator has no use for a fruit that has only spoiled and turned rotten.

      The great irony here is that the evil men that many of you defend would not think twice about killing you either, if given the opportunity. Look at the pleasure on the simian's face as he poses with the beautiful creature whose life he has abruptly ended for his own demented pleasure. Such men do not possess the intelligence to understand that the living deer is more magnificent to behold. It is always cause for celebration when the miscreants accidentally shoot each other.

      1. Onusonus profile image86
        Onusonusposted 20 months ago in reply to this

        Do you understand that humans are omnivores? It is in our nature to kill animals in order to survive. And it is a fundamental right for us to do so. You call this evil? Hopefully you never figure out where the meat in the grocery store comes from.

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
          Kathryn L Hillposted 20 months ago in reply to this

          Yeah, but that deer was really special!  I mean what a beautiful deer with beautiful antlers. (I've never seen a white deer.)
          ...and look the way the guy is dressed,
          and the smug look on his face,
          with his shooting equipment arrogantly displayed on the deer's body.
          A picture IS worth a thousand words in this case.

          - it is sad. Life on earth is sad.
          The astral plane is much better.
          (And no one eats meat there.)
          TWISI

          1. Onusonus profile image86
            Onusonusposted 20 months ago in reply to this

            I don't see anything "smug" about his face. All I see is the pride and gratitude that he has after getting such a magnificent catch.
            He gets to feed his family for free, without having to patronize the corporate food industry which pumps your food with artificial enhancers and hormones.   

            Also the fact that the deer is a bright white color is a disadvantage to the rest of the herd. Which is most likely the reason he was easily able to kill it.

            And I'll be willing to bet that this crazy right wing wacko actually gave thanks to his god for granting him the means to provide this bounty for his family's survival. Something people have been doing since the dawn of civilization.

            1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
              Kathryn L Hillposted 20 months ago in reply to this
              1. Onusonus profile image86
                Onusonusposted 20 months ago in reply to this

                You do realize the guy in the picture is wielding a bow and arrows don't you?

                1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
                  Kathryn L Hillposted 20 months ago in reply to this

                  oh.  like a fancy one? That deer just looks so magical. I couldn't have shot it. Do you suppose he at least thanked Great Spirit for the deer? Tell you the truth… the deer does not look dead. Maybe it is this guy's pet. That makes me happier.

                  1. Onusonus profile image86
                    Onusonusposted 20 months ago in reply to this

                    I suppose it could be a fancy bow, but I doubt the arrows are high powered lead ones. I would venture to say it is a strong possibility that he thanked Jesus for the deer.

            2. Credence2 profile image86
              Credence2posted 20 months ago in reply to this

              Killing wildlife for survival is one thing, but I knew of just one group of people that slaughtered thousands of bison leaving their carcasses rotting on the plains.

              Yes, I eat meat, but I am neither wasteful nor sadistic about it. But, again that is just my opinion on the fine points of this discussion. I am not much for hunting as a sport, just a personal preference.

              1. Kathryn L Hill profile image85
                Kathryn L Hillposted 20 months ago in reply to this

                ...so are killing cops racist or sadistic? or badly trained? I hope not all three.

                1. Credence2 profile image86
                  Credence2posted 20 months ago in reply to this

                  I won't say sadistic, but racism can and does operate at a subconcious level, and when we are not conscious of the beast that lurks inside us all, things get out of control. Yes, I cannot see how additional training involving contact with suspects for law officers would hurt.

        2. wrenchBiscuit profile image87
          wrenchBiscuitposted 20 months ago in reply to this

          http://s2.hubimg.com/u/12293327.jpg
          You assume so much but know very little about who you are directing your comments toward. I grew up on a very large farm in the midwest. I have seen first-hand on many occasions what happens to animals at the slaughterhouse. I have seen the look of fear in their eyes and heard them cry out as the throats of the animals before them were unceremoniously sliced; releasing the warm blood that gushed out like a fountain. I assure you, I never took pleasure in such horrific images, nor do I take any pride in the carnivorous aspect of humanity. Some of us have the ability, and the desire to transcend the human condition, while others appear happy to continue wallowing in their own excrement.

          You have attempted here to change the focus by pointing out that humans are omnivores. But that fact has nothing to do with the point I am making. The point is that some people are sadistic and twisted, and that they derive a certain pleasure from torturing and killing other humans and animals. The fact that a man eats meat doesn't automatically qualify him as a sadist. Men of conscience who have hunted throughout the ages for the purpose of survival do not take great pleasure in killing. Their pleasure is in knowing that they and their families will not go hungry and perish. There is a big difference between this kind of hunting and that which many consider today to be a "sport".

          When the cops in the state of Arizona can capture a known killer  alive, we can understand that the cops in the state of Ohio could have captured a 12 year old boy playing with a toy gun alive also, if only they would have taken the time and made the effort to do so. Tamir Rice is dead because the cop that shot him wanted to kill him. I can no more explain why than I can explain why a grown man will travel to Africa, kill a baboon, have it stuffed, and then placed in his living room to show off to his guests. In fact, I know a lawyer who has a collection of African animals stuffed in his living room. But these are sick and demented individuals, and rather than make excuses for them, and the sick racist society that allows them to kill with impunity, we should focus on changing the status quo and getting these miscreants in uniform off the streets.

          1. Onusonus profile image86
            Onusonusposted 20 months ago in reply to this

            Yes, because it is racist to defend yourself against a 6 foot tall, 210 lb, drugged out thug who wants to kill you.

            Do you eat meat?

            1. wrenchBiscuit profile image87
              wrenchBiscuitposted 20 months ago in reply to this

              http://s1.hubimg.com/u/12293924.jpg
              Every white racist who ever murdered a black person has either claimed self-defense, or claimed that the black person had already killed somebody, or was about to. It was also not uncommon in the south, and throughout the United States after the Civil War, for whites to commit crimes wearing makeup, or blackface, and then claim a black person did it. I'm sure these good citizens were at the head of the lynch mob. In other words, I don't believe the "official" story on Ferguson,and I am sure the cop provoked the incident. But rest assured, there is a place set aside for the good officer in hell, along with tens of millions of Americans who thought they could defile the image of God and get away with it. Furthermore, according to news organizations like the HuffingtonPost:

                " ... A damning report released by the Justice Department on Wednesday heavily criticized the operations of the police department and municipal court in Ferguson, Missouri, where Michael Brown, an unarmed black teen, was shot and killed by a white police officer in August. DOJ’s civil rights investigation into the Ferguson criminal justice system found that authorities have routinely violated the rights of black citizens and have used tickets to generate revenue for the city. "

              Concerning your question about whether or not I eat meat. Yes, I eat meat, and I find it to be a disgusting habit; more like an addiction.  But the distinction here between me and the average "American Sportsman" is that I don't kill defenseless animals for pleasure or sport. Neither do I hang grotesque trophies of dead animals on the walls of my house, and brag about what a "good kill" it was. The fact that  I am an omnivore doesn't make me feel any better about eating the flesh of a dead animal, and someday I hope to reach a higher ground. But as I have stated, the eating of meat doesn't automatically qualify someone as a sadist or a murderer. It seems that's the point you are trying to make; that if I eat meat then I am just as bad as the cop who killed a 12 year old kid! I fail to see the connection.

              1. Onusonus profile image86
                Onusonusposted 20 months ago in reply to this

                How sad for you, that you have to endure this life of accepting the murder of innocent wild life to satisfy your desire to live. It reminds me of the sadistic killer whale, or the lions, the foxes, wolves, eagles, Cats, Dogs, and every other carnivorous animal in the world that commits murder to feed its self. How revolting!
                If only they would all switch to a vegan lifestyle.

                There's just one problem; Carnivores keep down the population of grazing animals which allows more vegetation to grow, which makes up what scientists call a food web. It's this whole complicated thing called an ecosystem where everything is needed to eat the things they are designed to eat so the other things don't eat all of the planets resources, and thus preventing them from destroying the planets sustainability of life.

                Now back to Ferguson. There is another important lesson to be learned here. I don't know the specific details of this white guy who was arrested that did not die, was he resisting arrest in the same manner that Michael Brown was? If not then the moral of the story is quite simple; When a police officer is trying to arrest you don't try to take his gun, don't try to fight him, or wrestle him, because you might get shot.

                1. wrenchBiscuit profile image87
                  wrenchBiscuitposted 20 months ago in reply to this

                  http://s2.hubimg.com/u/12295131.jpg
                  I am sorry, but I must disagree. It is you who must be pitied, for you have apparently resigned yourself to the false notion that a man can never rise above the level of a carnivorous animal. In this lifetime, or the next, I hope to be something more than a copulating, urinating, defecating, flesh eating, narcissistic animal. I am well aware of what an ecosystem is. The most obvious purpose of a vulture is to dispose of carrion, but I'm not interested in applying for that position either.

                  I am well aware that in this capitalist oppressive system many in the proletariat  feel that they have a stake in the riches of America. They have been relentlessly indoctrinated and brainwashed with nationalist and patriotic propaganda that forever promises them a piece of the pie. However, the primary goal of the ruling elite is to simply keep the working class obedient. The primary function of a police force in such a society is to enforce the policies of the ruling class and insure their continued supremacy. Your suggestion is right in step with their agenda.

                  Ideally, the police are supposed to be the servant, not the master.  It is the citizen that must come first. It is the citizen that the servant must satisfy, not the other way around. If the policeman must take chances and risk his life in order to give the citizen the benefit of the doubt,  then so be it! Otherwise, let him work at Dunkin Donuts instead.  I am tired of hearing these cowards talk about how they "feared for their safety" and had no choice but to kill an unarmed teenager or child.

                  Every time a fireman responds to an alarm, there is no guarantee that he will ever see his family again. Firemen risk their life everyday all across the United States. They don't stand outside a burning building and say to themselves, " Wow, I know there is a little girl trapped on the second floor but I might get hurt , or even killed if I try to save her!" I have never heard of such a thing, but only the opposite. A raging fire is no less lethal than a loaded gun, and death by fire is far  more horrific and painful than a shot to the head. Apparently, there are a lot of people who have got the notion that policemen are better than firemen, and that their lives are more important. But I strongly disagree. Like I said in other words, if a cop feels the job is too dangerous then he or she should find another line of work.

                  1. wilderness profile image97
                    wildernessposted 20 months ago in reply to this

                    "The most obvious purpose of a vulture is to dispose of carrion, but I'm not interested in applying for that position either."

                    You eat your meat while still alive?  I don't think I could do that.  But take heart - in your billionth reincarnation you may become a being of pure energy, feeding off the photons from a star and hoping they are not alive.

                  2. islandantoinette profile image60
                    islandantoinetteposted 20 months ago in reply to this

                    This is my 2nd attempt to leave to you a heart felt note in here on your wonderful mind, thoughts, beliefs, knowledge and way of life. Hope this goes through, also enjoyed your FB from what I have read!  Being Indian of the Lakota tribe KNOWING the truth of this country, having chosen to live far far away, I commend you for coping with the place - the people etc.  Thank you for fighting for what is righteous and true.  Love Light and Aloha

  8. islandantoinette profile image60
    islandantoinetteposted 20 months ago

    Aloha Yes I am very blessed.  Mother earth watches out and takes care of me.  I was one of those stolen from their tribe by the catholic church at the age of 3  and put into a family of haolies (the white man) we called them. Not sure if it is acceptable to say that here. But the truth is the truth and we do not forget as they always said we would not remember - but we did and do!  Our hair was cut, as we were lined up, we were not allowed to speak our native tongue any longer only English, and indoctrinated in the catholic church and the white mans ways. We could no longer wear our own moccasins that we made by hand.  Yes, the Hawai'ians can truly relate and understand what Indians have gone through, as their land has and CONTINUES to be stolen from them. King Kamehameha the great and Queen Liliuokalani were OVERTHROWN by the American Govt. it was anything but friendly or annexed as their history books write.  Those in Hawai'i do still remember and know the truth, and are STILL waiting for what was promised to them as "Hawai'ian Home lands".  That which was used - rent was never paid and then they used  eminent domain to take the rest of the most profitable land on Waikiki!   In those days we had coloured money as in Britain. Hawai'i was the Sandwich Isles and the Hawai'ians are not Hawai'ians but Kanaka Maoli people. We have always been" Big Island" people. However due to the volcano "Madame Pele" my husbands work place was taken out and the lava will be eventually going to the ocean to our house too. She is taking back her land and rightly so.   So after paying on it for 15 yrs. raising two children in Hawai'i for 35 yrs. all we could do is board it up and walk away.  So I find myself in the belly of the beast here on the mainland the past few months now. Yes back to what you speak of leaving, to experience a full life with no burdens on your back. We do have a very nice house here we rent as we do not believe in buying and selling the  land, (no furnishings as we are simple people), in a quite county area yet close enough to the ocean to go swimming in just 20 minutes.  People here always comment on how I swim SO FAR out way past the break! But I am accustomed to that.  They fear fear itself here I notice, always commenting to me on sharks and the like. I tell them we are friends.  Being one with nature is a part of who we are as indigenous people.  I have a wonderful husband who is also part Indian and Popolo  and even at 60 life goes forward until the next life. The picture of me in the blue is actually me in my adult time. Our face tells who we are. We do not age. Genocide has also  been waged on the Kanaka Maoli actively since 1970. Not a day goes by I do not grieve for Leonard Peltier and his sacrifice on this earth now and for far too many years. He will come back again in the next life stronger and more powerful as so many of our tribal elders who have scratched out a subsistence living in the dirt of the res living in teepees, hogans and huts,  the bitter cold and yet the fire of life. May we continue in spirit forever.

 
working