"Write a Check for $11,000. She Was 26, She Had Limited Value." [Seattle Police] Officer Jokes with Police Union Leader About Killing of Pedestrian by Fellow Cop
"Write a Check for $11,000. She Was 26, She Had Limited Value." [Seattle Police] Officer Jokes with Police Union Leader About Killing of Pedestrian by Fellow Cop
By Erica C. Barnett In a conversation with Mike Solan, the head of the Seattle Police Officers’ Guild, Seattle Police…
In a conversation with Mike Solan, the head of the Seattle Police Officers’ Guild, Seattle Police Department officer and SPOG vice president Daniel Auderer minimized the killing of 23-year-old student Jaahnavi Kandula by police officer Kevin Dave and joked that she had “limited value” as a “regular person” who was only 26 years old.
...
In fact, as we reported exclusively, Dave was driving 74 miles an hour in a 25 mile per hour zone and struck Kandula while she was attempting to cross the street in a marked and well-lighted crosswalk.
You're viewing part of a thread.
Well if the cops are keeping their guns, then the citizens certainly shall retain that right as well. It is our right anyway, and I'm glad we have that freedom.
Y'all are just going to have to get over your hysterical idea that "getting rid of the guns" is a realistic option. It's just a simple-minded fantasy due to the fact that our rights are iron-clad, and the millions of unregistered guns in private hands would never be relinquished whether they were banned or not.
I'm not afraid of gun violence, because I can read and understand statistics well enough to comprehend that it's not a danger significant enough to worry about. It's not even in the top 10 most common causes of death in the USA. I enjoy a life of general contentment and peace in the USA, doing pretty much whatever the fuck I want on a daily basis, and it is pretty wonderful.
Police have guns in other countries and dont go around shooting people that arent criminals and for no reason. Seems the problem isnt so much the guns but the types or people that are becoming police and the way they are trained. You think there cant be any change because you wont see its affect immediately. It will take time. But it can happen.
Also saying its not even the top 10 cause of death is a bit dumb. So even thought it will help reduce death its not worth dealing with because more people die of other things. Sure.
Also saying its not even the top 10 cause of death is a bit dumb.
No it's not dumb at all, it's quite relevant to the context in which I used that information, which is not the context in which you are framing it. You're making up a fake argument by using my words out of context in other words.
I said that because it's my reason for not being worried about it. It's not a danger worth being worried about because it is statistically unlikely to happen to most people.
Separate from that, I stated support for our 2A rights and verbally shat upon the idea of gun bans, because it is not logistically possible to remove them from society in the USA.
It's funny how you quoted me there and claimed i took what you said out of context and reframed it, but did the exact same thing to me by not including any of the context. Bit hypocritical...
You dont need to be worried about being shot to accept that school shootings, mass shootings, or any shootings that are done unjustly as a direct result of lax gun laws are a problem. Sure, YOU might not get shot, but it is happening in places it shouldn't be, so you should be concerned about it.
Is it that easy for you to ignore all the death? all the kids that die in schools? all the families that suffer tragedy? Just because "hur dur mA riGhTs!" The constitution was written in 1791. It was written within the context of the time, but i guess that's another thing you are happy to take out of context because it suits you, huh?
The right to bear arms allowed you to carry a fucking flintlock pistol. You aren't shooting up a fucking school with a musket when you have to load each round individually between shots.
If the founding fathers had the type of weaponry you could get today that ammendment would look VERY different.
You can pretend all you want. And i know you will.
But go ahead and tell me ive taken you out of context when you a clearly happy to do the same whenever it suits you.
Is it that easy for you to ignore all the death? all the kids that die in schools? all the families that suffer tragedy?
Yes, actually it is pretty easy to ignore all that. It's a tiny drop in the bucket compared to the overall population. Far less than the number of people dying in accidents, which is the #4 leading cause of death in the USA. But if you watch the news, that's all they focus on because it gets eyes on their content. The boring reality that the vast majority of us experience, living in safety without encountering violence, is not able to capture anyone's attention to drive ad revenue. Usually whenever there's a newsworthy shooting, the investigations lead to mountains of red flags that the perpetrator had shown prior and the police and community around them just let it go until tragedy struck. So I wonder why those people failed their community, more than I wonder about the "evil guns" that caused it.
And back to your lame Constitution-time argument, it's worth noting that there were fully-automatic machine guns and semi-automatic rifles in use by the military at the time the Constitution was written. They were fully aware of the technology of repeating small arms, and intended for the bearing of such arms to be the right of the common man.
More people die from accidents that no one aaw coming than from firearms, so we better not do anything about firearms... thats you. That's what you sound like.
As for the automatic weapons
Heres the first link i found, and it explicitly states it wasn't used for war and doesn't match the modern definition of a machine gun https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puckle_gun
Everything else seems to be nothing like a modern machine gun.
Pretend thry had the same types of weaponry we had all you want but you are chatting absolute shit.
Nope, everything I said was accurate and you're wrong and dumb. Haha, gotem
Good one....
Police have guns in other countries and dont go around shooting people that arent criminals and for no reason.
- Yes they fuck they do.
- Being labeled "criminal" is not justification for shooting somoene.
-
Sure, but that's like comparing dropping a needle and dropping a grand piano on someone's head. Its not a problem in most other countries where only the police have guns. Its... you know... rare... And taken seriously...
-
Oh! So we agree, police shouldnt be able to be judge judy and executioner when they suspect some poor black guy just casually sitting in his car?
The thing is that they dont need to label you anything to shoot you in the states, they just do it anyway. Until they are up against someone shooting up a school, then they just stand there and let the public deal with it...
-
Don't german police have to account for wssentially every bullet fired? While US cops are imitating die-hard?