While this is somewhat true, the distinction between evil and ill are rather fuzzy. After all, evil comes from the mind, so what is truly the difference between people who are evil because their brain is wired to be evil, and someone who is evil because their brain is wired in such a way that it is defined as metal illness, said illness in turn causing them to commit evil acts? It's all rather ill defined (no pun intended, honest).
While this is somewhat true, the distinction between evil and ill are rather fuzzy. After all, evil comes from the mind, so what is truly the difference between people who are evil because their brain is wired to be evil, and someone who is evil because their brain is wired in such a way that it is defined as metal illness, said illness in turn causing them to commit evil acts? It's all rather ill defined (no pun intended, honest).
There's some truth in that, but if we are to say that evil people are mentally ill, that is often equated to mean that the mentally ill are evil. There is a massive stigma against them already, blaming the latest violent crime on mental illness does not improve things.
While this is somewhat true, the distinction between evil and ill are rather fuzzy. After all, evil comes from the mind, so what is truly the difference between people who are evil because their brain is wired to be evil, and someone who is evil because their brain is wired in such a way that it is defined as metal illness, said illness in turn causing them to commit evil acts? It's all rather ill defined (no pun intended, honest).
You're merely making a case for none of our actions being our own. The philosophy that our brains are the product of biological and environmental programming with no original works coming from within that weren't caused by a combination of those two.
Adherring to such a philosophy of that degree of evolutionary predestination renders all action and life meaningless, robotic even. It's something that can be addressed intellectually but cannot ever really have an impact on responsibility for one's actions. I, for one, believe in responsibility for actions and am not about to hand-wave them off for some wishy washy pre-determinism nonsense that would render all things someone else's fault.
Society places a vital distinction between someone who is capable of rational thought coming to the conclusion of doing evil as compared to individuals who are not mentally sound enough to legally sign a contract and it be upheld in a court of law.
Cogency is important to us. Crimes of passion are often less evil to our taste than premeditated crimes, for example. So there is a difference in whether or not this is a man who committed a premeditated crime or someone plagued with sickness that the world failed.
the only thing i can fault the guy on is by just killing any 2 officers, and not hunting down the pieces of shit that killed Gardner and Brown specifically.
Not only are people siding with the guy, apparently the real problem is that he didn't kill enough cops.
Yea, let's just say my "People not to shed a single tear for if they catch a meteor to the head" list is growing at a prodigious rate from reading this thread.
While this is somewhat true, the distinction between evil and ill are rather fuzzy. After all, evil comes from the mind, so what is truly the difference between people who are evil because their brain is wired to be evil, and someone who is evil because their brain is wired in such a way that it is defined as metal illness, said illness in turn causing them to commit evil acts? It's all rather ill defined (no pun intended, honest).
There's some truth in that, but if we are to say that evil people are mentally ill, that is often equated to mean that the mentally ill are evil. There is a massive stigma against them already, blaming the latest violent crime on mental illness does not improve things.
I unfortunately see average people with a neurodevelopmental disorder like Autism get lumped in with folks with violent tendencies. You don't often hear of someone with say Aspergers going on a killing spree. But say a narcissist like Elliot Rogers gets to the point were they feel that mass murder is an option. Like, it seems more common for folks with a personality disorder to become violent. Not that my observations are scientific of course. Its just that when you read some of these killers histories they legit sound like sociopaths.
All i was saying was that if he has to kill people, which he can be forgiven for feeling cornered considering recent events, it would be better to actually attack the people who actually did something, and not lumping all cops together as unarmed-kid-killers. All i'm saying is better a convicted killer face the punishment for what the convicted killer did rather than an innocent police officer. How about reading the first part of my post?
>i think this is a horrible way to deal with the recent event
If i thought it was a good idea, why would i say it was a horrible idea? Way to take my quote out of context. In light of recent events, the guy deserves a bit of sympathy. That doesn't mean i condone his actions.
But again, i'd LOVE to hear what you think people facing police violence should do in response to an ever-more-threatening police force that kills more of their fathers and sons every day. I'm SURE you have the perfect solution.
I didn't take your quote out of context, you literally just said again that "...if he has to kill people, which he can be forgiven for".
How about no, he doesn't have to kill people, nor can it be forgiven. "better a convicted killer face the punishment"? What convicted killer? Oh, my bad, I see you meant the cops that were convicted by the kangaroo courts of public opinion that holds up criminals and robbers as shining examples of the pinnacles of humanity.
Seriously, you don't get to say things like "guy deserves sympathy" and "what else can they do", saying the killing should be forgiven for, and lamenting that the killer should've killed some other cops instead, basically falling over yourself agreeing with what the guy did, and then try to claim you actually don't by saying "oh, but it's a terrible idea and I don't condone his actions".
Which family member of this guy did the cops kill? Oh right, no one. The only one that tried was the guy himself, when he tried to kill his girlfriend, not to mention the rest of his own family was estranged and fearful of him already.
Obviously the police's fault.
People facing actual unjust police violence should get a hold of the closest competent lawyer for a big payday, getting busted by cops when you're committing a crime does not count as unjust police violence. Not to say there aren't problems with police brutality, but if you want to talk specifically about police and the African American community, I'd say people in that community need to find a way to stop themselves from killing each other first, where "outrageous" ideas like going to college and getting an education is considered betraying your race, and being actually successful in life means "you're not black enough". Don't think those are real? Feel free to take a trip over here to Detroit, I'll give you a ride through the 'hoods and let you make your own judgement.
the only thing i can fault the guy on is by just killing any 2 officers, and not hunting down the pieces of shit that killed Gardner and Brown specifically.
Not only are people siding with the guy, apparently the real problem is that he didn't kill enough cops.
Yea, let's just say my "People not to shed a single tear for if they catch a meteor to the head" list is growing at a prodigious rate from reading this thread.
All i was saying was that if he has to kill people, which he can be forgiven for feeling cornered considering recent events, it would be better to actually attack the people who actually did something, and not lumping all cops together as unarmed-kid-killers. All i'm saying is better a convicted killer face the punishment for what the convicted killer did rather than an innocent police officer. How about reading the first part of my post?
>i think this is a horrible way to deal with the recent event
If i thought it was a good idea, why would i say it was a horrible idea? Way to take my quote out of context. In light of recent events, the guy deserves a bit of sympathy. That doesn't mean i condone his actions.
But again, i'd LOVE to hear what you think people facing police violence should do in response to an ever-more-threatening police force that kills more of their fathers and sons every day. I'm SURE you have the perfect solution.
How about nonviolent protest? You know, the type of protest that has historically proven highly effective in actually resolving social inequality and institutionalized violence?
And no, this guy cannot be forgiven for thinking that the action called for is double murder suicide. I really can't believe I had to type that. Do you know what is never called for? Double murder suicide. There is literally no situation I can think of where double murder suicide is the appropriate response.
Because lets be absolutely clear on this. This was not a case of self defense or defense of one's own. These police officers did not pose a threat at this time and in this place. This was fully premeditated and unjustified murder.
What I find...incomprehensible is that for the past 8 years I've seen and heard our "Tea Party" conservatives go red in the face claiming their right to open carry and defend their home arsenal as a necessary deterrent towards the abuse of power by the government.
Only to have these same people run to the defense of overzealous, poorly trained militarized police because of course brandishing a realistic toy gun should come with the expectation of fatal retaliation, and that turning our home soil into a war zone is an appropriate response to civilian unrest.
To say nothing of the idea that the same violent revolution in the face of government oppression that they claim to advocate is treated as criminal lunacy.
I fully agree with all of this, which is why I said "perhaps a case can actually be made . . . if you really wanted to" while the rest of my post actually argued against that this was indicative of mental illness. It is very easy for people to claim that only the mentally ill could be driven to willfully end the life of another human being, but, as I alluded in the post you quoted, reality and history does not at all suggest such. My whole point with that post was to demonstrate that humanity has a long history of a propensity for violence for a wide variety of reasons that mental illness has nothing to do with.
Barring that a case can be made (Because I really disagree that based on those variables, any case can be made), I agree on the point. I'm just really edgy about the domestic violence/mental illness bit, and I worry that someone would take that proposition seriously. The last paragraph offers more context, but I'm not going to put it past someone to miss the point and decide that being a member of the police=> ^Risk of Domestic Violence=>^Risk of Mental Illness. Especially when these conversations often use the mental illness card as an excuse to derail any discussion of motivation, or of say, gun control. Some people really do want to, and they're uninformed enough to do it.
In all honesty, I'm not really sure how I feel about these two officers being murdered as they were, but what I do know, is that if something doesn't change, if police don't start being held accountable for their actions on a more consistent basis, if they keep getting away with what many people consider to be gross miscarriages of justice, there will come a point where people will en mass take matters into their own hands, and it won't be because of "mental illness" but because they were made to feel that they had no other option. And that kind of violent revolution against the government was the very foundation upon which America was created.
I wouldn't put it this way, but I can definitely understand and sympathise as to why you would. I just don't think this example is so much retribution, as a violent person acting out. The report's indicate he shot and injured his ex-grilfriend prior to this, so I'm feeling less righteous vengeance and more dude just wanted to shoot someone from this. I'm personally not impressed by the police's reaction, which is of course, cowardly, defensive, and reactionary. It's lovely how they react to two of their dead to condemn protesting their brutality. Hoping for empathy is a stretch I guess, couldn't feel that way about the dead that started the protests. Why does this remind me of something? What we can expect from them it seems. I don't see things changing through violence however, because the police are the authority, the enforcement of the law. They're not going to back down, they're not going to respond to pressure, they're going to use their fancy toys to abuse the citizenry, and cry about their dead ignoring the dead that started it. Who hired these fucks?
Are the police always right? Of course not. But the amount of times when people flip their shit over things in inversely proportional to the amount of times the cops actually do anything wrong. Which is to say, not often. You want to talk about doing something wrong? Lets talk about the cop who shot and killed Akai Gurley.......Oh wait, there is no reason to be outraged over that. The officer responsible is being put on trial for at least manslaughter (since the shooting was an accident), the NYPD is more strictly enforcing its policy so that there is ALWAYS a veteren officer on patrol sweeps, and I would bet money the NYPD will pay through the nose for compensation. So justice really has been served in that case. Too bad no one cares because they would rather complain about the death of a thug who assault police and a man who should have known to just let himself be arrested considering it was his 30th time for the same offense (and btw, if you want to be mad at anyone, be mad at the medics who stood there and did nothing while he was screaming).
Sorry, but every time this "F**K Tha Po-Lice" attitude crops up, it makes me angry. My dad is a retired fire chief for the county fire department, and my brother is a current volunteer and is going to school to become a professional. So because of that, they-and by extension me- have always been close to the local police department, and many close family friends are police officers from as far away as San Antonio, TX. Every last one of the people I hear complain about the police are college students (which considering my dislike of anyone under the age of 35, just further makes it worse) who dont like that they are being arrested for drunked and disorderly conduct or because they want to do whatever the hell they want, screw the rules. There was a quote that I saw somewhere that sums up exactly how I feel, made on facebook by one of the family friends: Its a picture of a cop with his back half-turned to the camera and looking down at the ground, and it says "They will second guess every good act you do" across to top and "And believe every bad act without a shred of evidence" across the bottom. Never have truer words been said. There will ALWAYS be corrupt and killer cops, but they make up less than 1% of the police, hell, I would aruge they make up less than 1/2% of police. But you can bet your ass that when they catch even a wiff of blood in the water, even if its 100% justified, the sharks known as the media will be all over that shit and forget about the cops who do good, that is to say, 99.5% of police. And yet, if you try to say "All african americans are criminal thugs" you would rightly be called racist, but say "All cops are corrupt/killers" and WAY too many people will agree with you. The more this shitshow rolls on, the more and more I find myself thinking that the words of F-8 ("Fate") in Need For Speed: Rivals are true, and his actions justified since its implied that the population of Redview County is acting with the same rightous indignation as everything going on now.
Also, I call bullshit on your claim that "we are transitioning as a country." What we have here is the vultures of the media and race-baiters getting into a frenzy because they found a fresh corspe that they could sell controversy on, consequences be damned. So just like with Martin last year, they will keep this going to stoke anger, salivat over their corpse, and when people get bored, they will move on to their next corpse and start all over again with a different demographic, and then we will have to wait decades for the anger to finally die back down again. I will just keep sitting here and thank my lucky stars that I live in Kansas, and like the rest of the Midwest, we STILL respect our police and wont be angered over them killing criminals (while I didnt actually see it, I hear that the response to the anti-police protest from the college students in my town were responded to in a rather.....nasty way by the general population of my town. No violence, but much angry words). I swear, its the 1970's all over again, and just like then I am FIRMLY on the side of the Military (got called "Warmonger" for supporting Iraq. Told them to kiss my ass) and Police.
And just in case you need the context, its Street-racers have invaded Redview County, and are highly organized, driving exotic and super sports cars, and armed with illegal/stolen aftermarket parts such as EMP landmines and experimental turbos, and they are led by a street-racer who goes by the Internet handle "Zephyr". In order to keep up, the RCPD has reinforced its police fleets with their own exotic and super sports cars, experimental "anti-pursuit" technology like EMP guns and vehicle dropped spike strips, and a blank check from the county government to end the street-racing epidemic. You can choose to play as "Zephyr", the leader of the racers, or "F-8", an officer with the RCPD.
Opening:
"You may call us thugs, but deep down you know you need us. We are the Law. You cant catch devils with angels."
First Patrol:
"...People accuse us of using excessive force because we put people in the wall every now and then. But we aren't looking for a fair fight. We have to win every single time we turn our lights on or else the public losses faith that we can defend them. The bottom line is that fear commands respect. And if you endanger the ungrateful masses we protect, we'll come at you with everything we've got."
Gloves Come Off:
"Perception is reality. Law and Order only exist as long the public believes it. Today, they believe it less than yesterday. They see racers defying the laws without consequence. And When the laws no longer have teeth-when they become 'polite suggestions'-society breaks down. The public accuses us of intimidation, but the truth is that show of force is preferable to use of force. And when show of force isn't enough to maintain order, sometimes you have to settle for the real thing."
Excessive Force:
*After a Racer, revealed to be Zephyr in the Racer Campaign, forces a police officer to crash, injuring him* "Newtons third law says that for every action, there must be an equal and opposite reaction. Force must always be met with force. And EXCESSIVE force must be meet accordingly. The Racers have shown they are willing to cross the line in their quest to disrupt society. We must be willing to do the same to protect it. To teach our enemies that it is they who are in danger."
VRT Called In:
*After RCPD is shut down under investigation of a "Culture of Intimidation" and the FBI takes over. F-8 is still serving under limited duty* "I am not you. I am the dirt under your nails. I am the sin you deny at confession. The public ask us to defend them, sanctioning whatever violence it takes. They use words like "Necessary Force" to shield themselves from the fact that they have sent us to beat, maim, and kill those who would do the same to them. Deep down, they know they need us, because EVERYONE wants security, but only a few are willing to accept the price."
Go Rogue:
*After a frustrated and angry F-8 finishes his first patrol under limited duty* "We tried to play by the rules. And Where did that leave us? Chained up on the side of the road like dogs, forced to watch as the Racers mock us. We used to rely on strength of unity, a brotherhood bound by honor, believing that in a just universe, Justice would prevail. So we must play by a new set of rules. Our enemies operate outside the law, so too must we."
*F-8 Steals a racers car from the impound lot and uses it to cause as much destruction and chaos to the racers as possible under a false Racer handle, eventually overwhelming the FBI and forcing a full reinstatement of the RCPD*
I can assure you that I am not a college student. And I can also assure you that I am not a law-breaking ne'er do well. Not only do I obey law, but I often go out of my way to observe it. And I can assure you that I don't drink or do drugs, either. My family was ripped apart by alchohol and drug use, and I have absolutely no desire to indulge in those things myself. While I don't know why you would bring these things up, I can tell you that you aren't going to be able to discredit me on that basis.
What I am doing is looking at this situation as rationally and objectively as I can. And from an objective, rational point of view, a plainclothes officer used a method of restraint deemed unfit for use by the NYPD and killed a man who was not behaving violently. Furthermore, in the midst of several high-profile cases regarding abuse of power by other departments, the prosecutor failed to even convince a jury to prosecute the officer, despite the facts above and the fact that the coroner in the case deemed his death to be due in large part to the prohibited maneuver.
Furthermore, my suspicion that we are in a transitional period has nothing to do with anyone's death, it is based on several cities and states nationwide repealing the prohibition on marijuana, and people are becoming more aware of both the ridiculous number of people in prison and the militarization of the police that followed the war on drugs. That being said, however, it could be argued that most-if not all-of these recent deaths are a direct result of said militarization. When the police view you as an enemy by default, then of course there are going to be more incidents of police misconduct and brutality. When officers of the law are given a choice between preserving a law that people are working to change and following the will of the people, more often than not they're going to start cracking heads. It happened during the civil rights movement, it happened during the Occupy movement, and I fully expect that it's going to continue happening now, into the foreseeable future.
And on another note entirely, I find it distressing that you seem to think there's no reason to be outraged over someone being killed just because they were later prosecuted. Is is not just OK that Akai Gurley was killed, any more than it is just OK that these two officers were killed just because the person that did it killed himself. Furthermore, the changes that they are claiming are going to happen are undermined by their continued mishandling of the Eric Garner case (and other incidents related to it). You do not get a free pass on one issue just because you handled a completely different issue well, especially if you keep fucking up on the first one.
When a black kid with a toy gun is shot dead because of a paranoid police officer, it's fuelled, in part, by this kind of rubbish. Just a depressing cycle.
Though from the comments I've read that he made leading up to this, I would say it had little to nothing to do with mental illness, and a lot to do with the fact that he felt as if his life was already over and no longer worth living, that he had no hope, no future, and out of frustration and desperation, decided to retaliate by doing this before ending his own life.
Dabre said that her son struggled with mental illness his entire life and said he refused the family?s repeated attempts at help.
He tried to kill himself when he was 13 and had to be institutionalized in the years leading up to the bloody Saturday massacre that left two of New York?s Finest dead.
ITT: Outrage, counter-moral outrage, skepticism, and snark in response to all of it.
It's easy to dismiss this guy just as crazy, but I find that "crazy" doesn't always cut it.
Some people see controversy and acts like these as an excuse to escalate the situation.
Some of them want to get mad not because it threatens them so much as it presents opportunity (like the rioting and looting).
Well that in turn, trains the police to be more aggressive with perceived threats because THEY sure as shit don't want to be shot up (whether they're crooked or not).
We need a solution; one that aims to avoid further escalation.
You'd think so, but no, it very much is something they don't have to [http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-police-statistics-20141217-story.html] and many don't care to [http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eugene-robinson-its-a-crime-that-we-dont-know-how-many-people-police-shoot-to-death/2014/12/01/adedcb00-7998-11e4-b821-503cc7efed9e_story.html] keep track of.
Until America gets its gun laws sorted out, I can't say how sad I am about cop killings, school shootings or any other gun related violence 'cos you've made your beds and refused to change them. You can't bang on about how sad all this is and still say "we need guns, it's in our constitution".
You want guns, you get cops killings and school shootings. Sorry, it's just the way it is and no "cooling off period" will stop that.
By you, I mean America. You are what the majority says you are, perception is everything.
The majority of Americans want guns to easily available, so America wants guns.
Is it just generalizations? Yes but I disn't think I needed to clarify or throw out percentages on pro vs anti gun law. Don't know why I thought that, seems you have to clarify everything to the most insignificant degree.
*looks at profile, sees UK flag* "Perception is everything." I can properly say that the entirety of the UK are tea-sipping queen worshippers, going by your logic. I so love to make a grand sweeping generalization about an entire nation, and totally not using this thread as an excuse to sling shit under the auspice of "perception". That's about as not insulting as the phrase "I'm not racist/sexist, but...". Bullshit through and through.
What happened to these officers is indeed tragic, but perhaps more so is the deaths of civilians at police hands, (which many tend to shrug off if its not them, with the attitude that said persons must have been guilty, right). Its the latter and the powers that be not wanting to ever punish their shiny badged treasured officers when they are wrong. They say to serve and protect, but for many people the reality of dealing with police can be the opposite, depending on where you live and perhaps how you may look.
Now, the guy that killed them is also dead, but the core problem still remains. A bit off the farm he might have been, but I think the guy obviously felt that nothing was being done and police were getting another government stamped pass. The idea of a war between police and civilians is a dark one that no one wants to see, but if the likes of the supreme court etc, fail to punish officers correctly for their ill actions, then it could be said that they have compromised their very justice system they claim to dearly hold aloft.
Perhaps its the fear of putting officers in jail with real hard criminals, when they can't build special police prisons to house them, that really scares those who failed the people once again.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
