Take control of your brain health with Staying Sharp! Try it today.

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
660
Views

Re: War on Cops? Hardly!

660 Views
Message 11 of 154

@Centristsin2010wrote:

@rk9152wrote:

@Centristsin2010wrote:

@rk9152wrote:

@Centristsin2010wrote:

@rk9152wrote:
 

cent - what offensive charges by scout are substantiated by one questionable shooting?  What's offensive is suggesting there's been only one questionable shooting. When did scout say that? 


Image result for follow me into the rabbit hole


Typical - can't deal with the logic offered so post a silly picture.


Typical, there was absolutely ZERO logic offered, yet you claim there was.....just another rabbit hole....and NOTHING about the topic.  Holes everywhere.....


No - you jumped in to defend something scout said without understanding it and clung to your false position. Now, is that a rabbit hole or intellectual dishonesty or the word your special status prevents me from using, I don't know - pick one.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
660
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
662
Views

Re: War on Cops? Hardly!

662 Views
Message 12 of 154

@TxGrandpa2wrote:

 

Further, anyone disagreeing with you is a fascist? 


Some may well be...

Some are adversely affected by various sorts of irrational biases.

Still others - like trump - have characters comprised entirely of moral turpitude and ethical bankruptcy.

Russian bots love all trump supporters...

 

44>dolt45
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
662
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
665
Views

Re: War on Cops? Hardly!

665 Views
Message 13 of 154

Once again: There is no ‘war on cops.’ And those who claim otherwise are playing a dangerous game.

 

Here’s Fox News earlier this week, shamelessly exploiting a tragedy to gin up outrage.

 

(see link for video)

 

They certainly aren’t the only ones. Here are some more examples of media outlets and politicians spreading the hysteria:

 

As I’ve noted here before, we’re seeing similar rhetoric from politicians, particularly from GOP presidential hopefuls, including Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and Scott Walker.

 

All of this fact-free fearmongering is having an effect. A Rasmussen poll taken last week found that 58 percent of respondents now believe there is now a “war on police.” Just 27 percent disagreed.

So let’s go through the numbers. Again. So far, 2015 is on pace to see 35 felonious killings of police officers. If that pace holds, this year would end with the second lowest number of murdered cops in decades. Here’s a graph depicting annual killings of cops with firearms from Mark A. Perry at the American Enterprise Institute:

 

PerryAEI

 

But these are just the raw numbers. If we look at the rate of killings of cops, the trend is more pronounced. There are two ways examine the rate of police killings. The first is to look at the rate of killings of cops per 100K cops on the street. This figure is somewhat difficult to calculate because there are widely varying estimates of how many cops are on the street. It depends on how you define “police officer,” who is doing the estimating, and various other factors. But if you use consistent sources, the number of police has generally gone up, while the number of officers killed has generally gone down. So your graph looks something like this one, from Dan Wang:

 

FKPer100KCops

 

 

The other way you could measure the rate of killings of police officers is to look at the number with respect to the overall population. Here’s another graph from Perry that plots those figures:

 

police1

 

As you can see, by this measure 2015 is shaping to be the safest year ever, after 2013

 

View image on Twitter
 So when police advocates say that 2014 saw an 80+ percent increase in homicides of cops over 2013, remember a few things: First, 2013 wasn’t just an all-time low, it was an all-time low by a significant margin. Second, the 2013 figure was so low that even a small increase will look large when expressed as a percentage. Third, the figure for the following year, 2014, (51 officers killed) was essentially consistent with the average for the previous five years (50 killed), and still lower than any five-year average going back to 1960. (See this graph, also from Wang.) Fourth, again, 2015 is on pace (35 killings) to be lower than any year but 2013. Another common response from police organizations and their advocates is that the reduction in fatalities is due to better medical care and improvements in protective gear such as bulletproof vests. Both things are undoubtedly true. But assaults on police officers are in decline as well. That is, not only are fewer people killing police officers, fewer people are trying to harm them. These graphs from Stoughton show the raw numbers of assaults on police:
AssaultGraph

 

 

 

WeaponGraph

 

As you can see, at best you could argue that assaults on police with firearms are about even with where they’ve been for most of the last decade, save for a dip in 2009 and 2010. But these too are raw figures. When we look at the rate of assault on cops, from either the perspective of total cops or total population, the downward trend once again becomes more pronounced. From Daniel Bier, here are two graphs looking at the assault rates on police officers.

20150320_assaultandinjuryrates1

 

Any murder of a police officer is a tragedy. (As is any murder of a non-police officer.) But media outlets, politicians, and police advocates do real damage when they push this false narrative about a rising threat to law enforcement. First, this sort of propaganda weights the public debate and discourse. When there’s a fictional “war on cops” blaring in the background, it becomes much more difficult to have an honest discussion about police cameras, police militarization, use of lethal force policies, police discipline, police transparency, training, police accountability, and a host of other issues. Of course, that’s precisely the point.

 

 

But there’s also a much more pernicious effect of exaggerating the threats faced by law enforcement. When cops are constantly told that they’re under constant fire, or that every interaction with a citizen could be their last, or that they’re fortunate each time they come home from the job in one piece, it’s absolute poison for police-community relations. That kind of reminder on a regular basis would put anyone on edge. We’re putting police officers in a perpetually combative mindset that psychologically isolates them from the communities they serve. Incessantly telling cops that they’re under fire can condition them to see the people with whom they interact not as citizens with rights, but as potential threats. That not only means more animosity, anger and confrontation, it can also be a barrier to building relationships with people in the community — the sorts of relationships that help police officers solve crimes and keep communities safe.

 

It also just makes for a miserable work life. If you’ve been trained to think your job is getting progressively more dangerous, and that a significant percentage of the people you encounter on a daily basis want to do you harm, you’re going to be less tolerant of dissent. You’re going to constantly be on-guard, on-edge, and jumpy. That isn’t a state of mind that’s conducive to de-escalation, that opts for persuasion over brute force, or seeks out peaceful conflict resolution. It’s a state of mind ruled by the limbic system, not the frontal lobe. And yes, it’s a state of mind that makes an officer more likely to reach for his gun. Again, this isn’t a comment on cops. It’s a comment on human beings in general.

 

An over-emphasis on and obsession with a “war on cops” would be dangerous and counterproductive even if it were true. But by every imaginable measure, it just isn’t true. When this false narrative comes from police organizations and their supporters, it’s at least somewhat understandable. When it comes from politicians, it’s grandstanding and demagoguery. When it comes from media organizations, it’s journalistic malpractice. And it’s almost certainly getting people killed.

 

One last point: I’ve seen some police officials and their advocates respond to these statistics by pointing out that even if assaults and killings of cops are down, anti-police rhetoric is increasing. Therefore, they say, they’re justified in proclaiming that there’s a war on the police. This is nonsense.

 

Police agencies are government agencies. They’re government agencies in whom we entrust the power to detain, arrest, and kill. Yes, it’s true that some people are demanding more of those agencies. It’s true that personal technology is enabling people to create an independent video narrative of their interactions with police. It’s true that those videos have sometimes revealed police misconduct and brutality, and that police officers, like all people, sometimes mis-remember, misstate, and outright lie when recounting contentious, traumatic, high-stakes incidents. And it’s true that because of all of this, the public as a whole today finds police officers as a whole less trustworthy than in the past. It’s also true that some activists, pundits, and politicians are demanding more accountability, transparency, and training for police.

 

None of these things are indicative of a “war.” On the contrary, all of this new skepticism, criticism, forced transparency, and mistrust of the police is — again — coming even as violence against police officers is reaching historic lows. This is how a democracy is supposed to work. It’s something worth celebrating.

 

Instead, police groups and their advocates are claiming that the mere act of criticizing a government entity is akin to declaring war on it, and that therefore, police critics are culpable every time a police officer is murdered. (And given the way they ignore and abuse statistics, those critics are also apparently culpable for a lot of murders that never happened.) They’re essentially saying that exercising constitutional rights and participating in democracy are in and of themselves acts of violence. And in many cases, this is coming from the very people that the government empowers to use actual violence.

 

That is something worth worrying about. 

 

Once again: There is no ‘war on cops.’ And those who claim otherwise are playing a dangerous game.

 

The "War on Cops" is a fraudulent mantra and is just another example of fear mongering by Fox and those who drink from the fountain of Fake News.  They falsely blame Obama yet in 2013 the US had the lowest number of police homicides on record.  And who was the President at the time?  Did the laughable, "Fair and Balanced" network give any credit to Obama for ending the War on Cops?  Of course not.....they, and those who carry the lie into 2018 are frauds.


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
665
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
668
Views

Re: War on Cops? Hardly!

668 Views
Message 14 of 154

@Centristsin2010wrote:


The fascists here consider posting a link to a database and then lying about the frequency of topic posting about unnecessary police killings as "cop hating" proving once again, that common sense is relative.  I'm just amazed how frequently fascists think they know how others feel.


Of course attempt to hang a derogatory label on those who one disagrees with.  The lie is in omitting information gleaned from the databases.  In this case it is just posting the numbers of those killed by police and expecting the average reader to research the database for circumstances.

 

How many would be expected to go through that database for more information...therefore it would be taken that cops are rogue killers.  Therefore lying by omission.

 

Another point is why would anyone continue to glean these numbers from the database and keep a running tally if they didn't have some animosity towards law enforcement?  An

 

Further, anyone disagreeing with you is a fascist? 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
668
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
672
Views

Re: War on Cops? Hardly!

672 Views
Message 15 of 154

@ChasKy53wrote:

@rk9152wrote:

@ChasKy53wrote:

@rk9152wrote:

 Yes, of a few obsessive police haters. I would hardly call defending the brave men and women of the various police forces "childish".


 


Care to name the "police haters"?   Defending the actions of the police when a killing is not warranted is the childish part. It's also childish to accuse others of being police haters when they point out how many are killed by the police in America, point out killings where the victims were unarmed and running away, or where circumstances show clearly that the killing was unnecessary.


Sure - anyone who brings up the Post "victims" list. And those who find every instance no matter how obscure relevant to death by police where there is a question without awaiting the official findings certainly qualify.


So you can't actually point out any "police haters".


The fascists here consider posting a link to a database and then lying about the frequency of topic posting about unnecessary police killings as "cop hating" proving once again, that common sense is relative.  I'm just amazed how frequently fascists think they know how others feel.


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
672
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
670
Views

Re: War on Cops? Hardly!

670 Views
Message 16 of 154
TX posted..

And who is the one here who keeps attempting to show cops in a bad light by keeping a tally of those shot by them and without giving the background information?

==========================

We all know who that is.
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
670
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
659
Views

Re: War on Cops? Hardly!

659 Views
Message 17 of 154

@rk9152wrote:

@ChasKy53wrote:

@rk9152wrote:

 Yes, of a few obsessive police haters. I would hardly call defending the brave men and women of the various police forces "childish".


 


Care to name the "police haters"?   Defending the actions of the police when a killing is not warranted is the childish part. It's also childish to accuse others of being police haters when they point out how many are killed by the police in America, point out killings where the victims were unarmed and running away, or where circumstances show clearly that the killing was unnecessary.


Sure - anyone who brings up the Post "victims" list. And those who find every instance no matter how obscure relevant to death by police where there is a question without awaiting the official findings certainly qualify.


So you can't actually point out any "police haters".


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
659
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
659
Views

Re: War on Cops? Hardly!

659 Views
Message 18 of 154

@Centristsin2010wrote:

 

No, I requested you stay on topic.  But trolls prefer to disrupt topics, don't they?

 

 


Have you considered your own posts, especially the cutesy cartoons and graphics you COPY off the internet which might be copyrighted?  So who resorts to trolling by inserting extraneous comments about a person's personal life?

 

And who is the one here who keeps attempting to show cops in a bad light by keeping a tally of those shot by them and without giving the background information?

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
659
Views
Gold Conversationalist
2
Kudos
677
Views

Re: War on Cops? Hardly!

677 Views
Message 19 of 154

Centrist........So that's the BEST you can do??   Another cutesy cartoon rather than address the rebuttal I made to you?  You'd rather IGNORE it and go on wallowing in your own denial??  You can go "off topic" but if someone replies to your "off topic comment" that is now a violation of the rules??  Hahahaha!!    You've run out of legitimate responses because you HAVE NONE!!   I think that's called CHECK MATE!!!  YOU'VE BEEN SOUNDLY BEATEN, LADY!!!

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
677
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
679
Views

Re: War on Cops? Hardly!

679 Views
Message 20 of 154

@curtb124223wrote:

Centrist......You commented to this post--->  "If you can not do the time do not do the crime.  That's exactly how many intelligent people think about trump, his family and all his men.  Thank you, Kid for the reminder.  Maybe you should send him a postcard to remind him.

 

And YOU talk about "changing the subject?"   Hahahahahaha.....

 

No, I requested you stay on topic.  But trolls prefer to disrupt topics, don't they?

 

Image result for dont feed the trolls


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
679
Views