Two Nypd Officers Murdered Execution Style

I agree that it's about a lot more than the cops.

In that specific case:

The police were violating their procedure to do that "vertical inspection", their procedure banned it at the time specifically because that practice caused trouble, but didn't make anybody safer - if you act like an occupying army and sneak around stairwells with drawn guns, yeah, people will die - it doesn't mean it's a very dangerous place, it means the cops are making it dangerous - even if someone reacted violently, it's pretty understandable to react violent to violent armed people playing SWAT. Having a reaction other than instantly cowering when police start screaming and waving weapons around is NOT unhealthy or abnormal or unacceptable, it's totally normal and reasonable and understandable. the cop in that situation shot the guy, and immediately started texting his union rep - it was not a dangerous situation, there were not a bunch of armed people about to run out, there was just a guy and his girlfriend, who the cop accidentally shot - but if you examine it rationally and reasonably, the difference between manslaughter and murder here should be rendering aid, versus texting your union rep about how to cover your ass.

There is something very wrong, and something that transcends race, and yeah, there are dangerous places in the US, but not dangerous in the way cops or their apologists pretend. And that something often, despite it's being a problem for all races, also mixes with vile racism, and that causes much worse situations.

In this case, "execute" is a word that heavily inflames and racializes things because of it's many implications, and implies a totally different type of conflict than there is. I'm not blaming OP, I just saying you've got to really watch the language you're fed by american media. Even the word "assassinate" involves a lot of very strong and totally inapplicable implications in this situation. There's no reason not to say murder.

Murder is a bad thing, murder is bad enough. Always wanting to raise the stakes and accuse everyone of the maximum in every situation has not only the effect of punishing people unjustly (yeah, they did bad - there are different kinds of bad, and very important distinctions - if bad was bad, we would have one word for it), it also has the effect of desensitizing people - terrorism and execution and assassination everywhere, when those things don't really actually exist everywhere, gives people incorrect impression and makes them maladjusted for life in civilized society, because the media is constantly lying to them that they're not living in a civilized society, and trying to make everyone irrationally hysterical over everything (hysteria gets views, views make money). Hyperbolic language also lends itself to accusing people who bring reason to the discussion of being "soft on X", when in fact that's a whole different discussion that may have legitimate merits, and at the very least deserves more than to be used to silence people arguing for the correct use of words.

Oh, hyperbole and the perceived need to make everything as bad as possible also lets really bad people go free - consider the zimmerman or anthony trials, for example: both overcharged as a result of media and local frenzy (though, in my opinion, for opposite reasons on the prosecutor's part). Zimmerman was clearly guilty of manslaughter and maybe a host of other things, but the prosecutor pushed for the worst crime possible, even though the evidence didn't support it (I believe that trial was clearly thrown, but that's neither here nor there), and so acquittal was the only option. Anthony was clearly guilty of child endangerment and abuse and mistreatment of a corpse and negligence of about every type and about a million other very serious crimes - but the persecutor pushed on with a charge (murder 1? I forget) that they simply did not have the evidence for - thankfully, instead of effectively lowering the bar for evidence, she got off - but on the bad side, she got off. Both these situations are disasters, if we just said "hey, they did this, and it was wrong" instead of screaming about MURDER MURDER MURDER, then not only would our justice system and it's ability to meet out justice be better preserved, but these horrible people would be in prison, albeit for the crimes we can prove the committed, not the worst words we could think of to throw at them.



Not in the mood for proof-reading, you're all smart, you'll figure it out.

 

Well I'm sure they do.

I already laid out why that's power-grabbing jack-booted horseshit, though.

Fisherman are in situations of unpredictable danger. Being a police officer is not a particularly dangerous job, they cause others considerably more danger than they risk from others - these are not my opinions, these statements are verifiable fact.

This mentality among police is part of the occupying army mentality that has become a standard part of police culture in this country. They have a fetish and fervor for and about constantly being in grave danger, when the simple facts say that they are the grave danger.

Unfortunately, when people who have not noticed and/or don't understand this problem see people (like me, in this topic) pointing out that, ehh, cops are not actually the ones we need to worry about, they sometimes assume that people are trying to justify violence towards them - yet again, this is not the case, I don't support any violence, but that doesn't mean I'm incapable of fairly setting my point of view aside, and looking at this situation from different angles.




This is as good an example as any: there was one crazy murderous fuck who went and shot some cops, and the cops act like.... literally..... an army on patrol in a hostile city, with crazy warnings about not going anywhere alone or dealing with "confrontational" people - next, they'll have to shoot confrontational people from their two-car convoys, because of all the horrible danger everywhere, right?

 

Two police officers, one Asian American the other a Hispanic American were killed by Ismaaiyl Brinsley an African American, and we seem to have become embroiled in a debate over the term being used to describe the act. Why? Should this act not be seen as a HATE crime, and maybe it would be more productive to discuss how to put an end to all the senseless reprisal based killings AND property destruction.

 

the problem with police and citizens is that "everyone wants authority"..

 

The police should avoid high crime rate areas until the criminals eliminate enough of their own kind and it becomes a low crime rate area.

 

unfortunately innocent people live in those areas too.

 

Why on earth would you want police in a low-crime area? Without them it could be a no-crime area.

It's inherently a dangerous job, if it is being done properly. The whole point is to enter into danger in an attempt to negate it's effects on the innocent.

You display exactly the mindset that has turned many police into cowardly thugs with no comprehension of what their job is supposed to be all about.

 

Where did I say I want the police `IN' a low crime rate area? I only said they should avoid being in high crime rate areas.

Yes, I agree it is inherently a dangerous job, made even more so when they are branded by the media, politicians and persons like you who without first hand knowledge of all the facts are so quick to accuse and convict them.

They have a job to do, should be viewed by the public as having the authority to demand obedience in a non-threatening way if/when approached, which if you have done nothing wrong should result in no more than a brief peaceful encounter. Currently with the national media and politicians seeming to support a view of the police targeting innocent people, and minorities in general, it should come as no surprise that the police should need to exercise greater caution which can often lead to erring on the side of caution. If asked to raise your hands, forget about the need to scratch your ass for a while.

The police know exactly what their job is, and more than most members of our society frequently are put into life threatening positions requiring quick decisions.

 

Maybe police departments should require their officers be members of the community, and of the same race/gender as the suspect they may deal with? But in the case of the two NYPD officers it was simply the fact that they were uniformed police officers which resulted in their being targeted, not their race.

 

I don't disagree with lots of what you said, but....


Nope, not a dangerous job, really.

http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/causes.html

Cops are very nearly as likely to die in a car crash (note that that is distinct from being struck by a car - this is when they wreck their vehicles) as of being shot. (other interesting numbers there, too)

Meanwhile, cops kill a fuzzy number (they actively obfuscate this number and don't report to the FBI's statistics, which has been listed as a confounding factor in every article or stat I've seen on this), but one thing that is certain is that they kill many more people yearly, than police die by violence (on duty), yearly.

As an american citizen, the numbers say that I am much more likely to be killed by a cop, than to kill a cop.

That tells us that on average, it is more dangerous to not be a cop, than to be a cop, in america.

(yes, if we consider that more people are not cops, it makes one less likely to be shot by a cop than otherwise - and it also makes cops wildly more likely, individually, to kill, and thus, more dangerous)



It seems apparent to me that any substantially higher number of homicides by police than upon police is an indication of very serious problems - police are supposed to be there to protect, and protecting does involve personal risk. Simply killing all the risk without trying to handle it any other way isn't what their job is (or, isn't what their job should be). If police killed a whole lot of people, but police officers died at a 1-1 ratio (and/or we saw more serious examination of police wrongdoing, not to mention a lack of wrongdoing on the part of those who sometimes end up justifiably killing police, like using a legal gun to shoot unidentified police who are sneaking around or breaking into their property or domicile at night), that would actually not raise a lot of warnings with me, that would just tell me we have a violent society and the police have to deal with it - but if you have way more police shootings, it seems that the police are one of the more serious violent and dangerous elements in society.

This is not a condemnation of any particular cop or anything, it's just that on average, we obviously have a huge problem. Of course it's a tragedy that these people were murdered, of course they didn't have it coming or deserve it just for being cops - but we do need to keep things in perspective, and remember that it is the job they signed up for, it's not as dangerous as it used to be (or, as I've been contending, should be, see above, part of the job is about absorbing danger, etc), and I think that we need to be careful to avoid distortion of the actual risk to police or concern that any particular event should elicit. (ie. we all still fly after 9/11 - most of us would probably rather do it without the new gropers they've added, because we understand the very low risk of mishaps, even if they are tragic when they happen).

Being part of a violent culture doesn't mean that those individuals had it coming, but it does mean that, on average, the average cop has a lot more coming than the average joe - live by the sword, die by the sword.

 

1. Probably would depend on where you happen to be a cop.

2. Probably true as they sometimes have to try and apprehend criminals fleeing crimes.

3. Are you suggesting too few police are being killed?

4. As an American, regardless of ANY numbers you're referring to, the chances of my being killed by a cop or killing a cop are equal... ZERO. Perhaps you live your life differently than me? I would hope criminals recognize that cops are meant to be dangerous, and non-criminals would recognize that doing their job sometimes may seem to be an imposition upon them and just allow the police to perform their duties peacefully.

5. Again, would you find it more acceptable if the police casualties were more equal in number to casualties they produce? I would hope that none of them were killed in the performance of their jobs.

6. "The average cop has a lot more coming than the average Joe" Really? "Live by the sword, die by the sword" Cops live by the law, not by the sword, unless they must. And once more you seem to be implying that cops have it coming, therefore it is fitting that they be killed.

One of my friends when a teenager was a State policeman, later to become the head of the State police in that State and then a Federal cop. He apprehended many major criminals and never killed anyone. Two of my schoolmates also became local cops, and are now retired, also never having shot anyone. I have no animosity towards cops, but admittedly like the members of any society, there are good and bad persons who are cops as well as those who are not. In general there are probably far fewer bad cops than there are bad members of society who are not cops.

 

Support the NYPD.

 

um no. The problem isn't a lack of or too much of a police presence.high crime areas are always areas where poverty exists, where schools are bad, the birth rate is high and there is little in the way of extracurricular activities for idle youth.

leaving a decaying neighborhood with no police presence so the residents can "eliminate their own kind" will do nothing to solve the root problem of why the crime rate is high in the first place. jesus.

 

Oh hell, the police looooove to hang out around my neighborhood, where they know they won't get shot at and they can spend all day writing expensive tickets for minor infractions, like an expired license plate sticker. I hate those assholes. The only time I ever asked them to look into something for me, they said they didn't have time to make it a priority. Yeah, I know they don't have time, because they're too busy making big money off people like me who never bother anybody.

 

NYPD is now investigating threats made against them on social media.

The department's intelligence division continues to monitor social media for threats made to the NYPD. Officials have not released details about any potentially credible threats.
But the troubling messages aren't just coming from New York.
NYPD commissioner: Cops were targeted

A Memphis, Tennessee, man has been questioned after allegedly posting threats against the NYPD, CNN affiliate WREG reported.
"Good job. Kill em all I'm on the way to NY now #shootthepolice 2 more going down tomorrow," an Instagram post read.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/22/us/new-york-police-officers-killed/

 

Not according to her statement.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/21/justice/maryland-shooting-nypd-case/

"Speaking to police detectives from her hospital bed Sunday night, Thompson -- a member of the Air Force reserves -- told them Brinsley didn't say he wanted to kill police or mentioned anything about officers when they fought Saturday morning.
"The argument on Saturday morning was about them and their relationship," Baltimore County police spokeswoman Elise Armacost told WJZ."


Sounds like a he was a guy having severe mental probs. A lot more going on in the cats brain than avenging Brown and gardener.

It bothers me when people inflate things. Be careful about what you post before researching the info thats out there.

 

Nice of you to drop by and try to bat clean-up, 3 days later, but that's the info that was out there when the story was breaking.

 

So many of these incidents are a 2 step process...


Step one... Get a gun and kill a bunch of people.

Step two... Run around the corner and shoot yourself.




Why don't they just skip step one, go directly to step two, save people from having to deal with all this crap.

 

They are miserable and misery loves company.

 

The commentators who are now blaming the mayor for these killings because he allowed peaceful protests are absolutely ridiculous. Do they really think that a violent crack-down on a protest against police brutality would result in better attitudes towards police than allowing people to protest?