Play Stupid Games, Win Stupid Prizes

[Lewkowski]

https://www.buzzfeed.com/skbaer/penn...bOp#.lidMD4Md4

"Gregory Longenecker, 51, of Reading, was found dead under the rear of the bulldozer that a state trooper and a Pennsylvania Game Commission employee were using to search for him in "thick underbrush" Monday morning, according to a police statement."

Don't run. The automatic assumption if you are running is that you are a violent felon, the underlying charge may be bull shit war on drugs but by running you immediately force the officers to assume you are a dangerous and hardened criminal.

Honestly our public school system needs to do a much better job of educating the populace about the consequences of running from the law. Maybe a 60 minute video at the start of the quarter of 100 suspects who ended up dying due to fleeing from the police? Bonus points if death was caught on camera.

[Aimless]

Honestly, your pigs need to remember they aren't dogs.

[RandBlade]

How does running equal violent felon?

Standing and fighting equals violent felon.
Running equals coward trying to get away.

[Aimless]

Given American cops' penchant for killing innocent people I don't think it's reasonable to call people who run from cops cowards. More accurate to call twitchy cops cowards.

[Loki]

Did I miss the part of the Constitution that says "everything written thus far doesn't apply to anyone who runs from the cops"?

[Lewkowski]

Did I miss the part of the Constitution that says "everything written thus far doesn't apply to anyone who runs from the cops"?

Running = active present danger to society. Innocents have been killed by criminals who run. I mean technically speaking the constitution doesn't *specifically* state we should treat an active shooter any differently than a random person so you are on rather shaky ground here.

[RandBlade]

Running Having guns = active present danger to society. Innocents have been killed by criminals who run have guns. I mean technically speaking the constitution doesn't *specifically* state we should treat an active shooter any differently than a random person so you are on rather shaky ground here.

So anyone with a gun should be shot?

[Loki]

Really, Lewk? You might want to read up on what "running" entails.

[Aimless]

Innocents have been killed by dudes so I vote we kill all dudes*

* for those who don't understand context, I'm not actually advocating killing all dudes.

[Steely Glint]

They might... push past someone who falls over and hits their head on the curb? Collide into two workmen carrying a large sheet of glass?

I dunno, man I like to think of myself as an expert on running and I have to say it's pretty safe.

Even for Lewk this is strange.

[Steely Glint]

Is it this guy? Is that what set him off?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-putney-bridge

[Lewkowski]

One example:

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/...nder-dead.html

[Enoch the Red]

One example:

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/...nder-dead.html

Erm, actually you might be arguing for the opposite here. In fact, many metropolitan police departments actually have policies in place to not allow for high speed pursuits of suspects in situations where bystanders might be present/put in danger.

[LittleFuzzy]

Erm, actually you might be arguing for the opposite here. In fact, many metropolitan police departments actually have policies in place to not allow for high speed pursuits of suspects in situations where bystanders might be present/put in danger.

No, he's not. Because he strongly disagrees with those policies. He thinks the bystanders should be put in danger by police so it can be blamed on the person running. Worst case scenario as far as Lewk is concerned is that he gets to see felony-murder added to the list of charges against the person. It's win-win to him. Lewk doesn't care about preserving life. He cares about "getting the BAD GUY." Keeping lower-class people "deterred" is at the very top of his hierarchy of desires, nothing else matters more than that. Because he's insulated and is convinced he and his are never going to be at risk of being the collateral damage.

[Lewkowski]

Erm, actually you might be arguing for the opposite here. In fact, many metropolitan police departments actually have policies in place to not allow for high speed pursuits of suspects in situations where bystanders might be present/put in danger.

That's a delicate balance because by allowing people to get away simply due to potential harm to others in the area it only creates an incentive to flee. Personally I think police departments should do what makes sense and not have hard and fast rules on it however that needs to be paired with mandatory prison sentences for anyone who flees even if the underlying crime doesn't return a guilty verdict.

[Timbuk2]

mandatory prison sentences for anyone who flees even if the underlying crime doesn't return a guilty verdict.

Locking up people for not committing crimes now.

Oh wait. There's always thought crime. I mean the person running might be thinking about toothpaste. Running with toothpaste is a capital offence, so running while thinking about toothpaste should at least be a mandatory custodial sentence.

[RandBlade]

That's a delicate balance because by allowing people to get away simply due to potential harm to others in the area it only creates an incentive to flee. Personally I think police departments should do what makes sense and not have hard and fast rules on it however that needs to be paired with mandatory prison sentences for anyone who flees even if the underlying crime doesn't return a guilty verdict.

You've still not demonstrated how people attempting to flee is a dangerous thing.

[Lewkowski]

You've still not demonstrated how people attempting to flee is a dangerous thing.

The criminal (who could be a murderer, after all they are fleeing for some reason) could strike again. It isn't like criminals who have successfully fled go on to lead quiet lives. I've never seen a single person who fled from the authorities as anything other than a shit bag. They are guilty and they know it and so they flee, putting other people's lives at risk and preventing the justice system from operating.

[Loki]

Yes, Lewk, a fleeing truck and a fleeing man is the same.

[Timbuk2]

Running is bad. Running with toothpaste is really bad.

Am I doing this right?

[Aimless]

Running is bad. Running with toothpaste is really bad.

Am I doing this right?

Yep, it's the additional mass that makes the latter more dangerous.

[Loki]

That's pretty much the case for black men already.

[Loki]

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...d86f0082f.html

If only the cops shot all of the students, we wouldn't have to worry about whether they committed any crime. Right, Lewk?

[Loki]

Shooting someone is guaranteed to be a risk to the public. The criminal might or might not be. Most criminals don't go around shooting people. If they are, then you make a greater effort to apprehend them immediately.

[Aimless]

Well, not a human life, no.

[Steely Glint]

Thread title accurately reflects what happens when lewk starts a 'cleaver' thread to 'own the libs' then makes a fool of himself with a cavalcade of illogical nonsense.

[RandBlade]

Shoot them all, let God sort them out.

[Loki]

Unless fleeing is an emotional response and thus unaffected by incentives. Weird how American cops shoot people regularly, and yet people keep on fleeing from them. It's almost as if people don't want to be apprehended by people who regularly mistreat them or worse.

[Aimless]

Your reasoning makes no sense. Please re-examine your post and the data.

[Lewkowski]

Your reasoning makes no sense. Please re-examine your post and the data.

Oh what part do you have an issue with? I'll break it down into itty bitty steps.

1. Instead of using population figures we look at the most violent of offenses and the rate in which they occur. Using percentage of population is an absolute stupid way of looking at things because you would then come to the conclusion that the police force is very sexist towards males. Instead of population % you should look at who is doing the crime. Men murder more often than women so it makes sense that men are more likely to be shot by police.

2. Now the data doesn't point to blacks killing more than whites, in fact the data is about 50/50 if you only look at black and white offenders for homicides. So based on that we would expect blacks and white to have similar levels of getting shot by cops if police were fully color blind.

3. Now we look at data that shows the race of the people shot by police.

266 Black people killed by police.
574 White people killed by police.

Conclusion: Based on murder rate, black people are actually shot by police less often than white people. The whole "Police hate blacks and kill them" narrative is bull shit.

Which step do you have an issue with?