404 page not found: Sabyen91: dudemanbro: Corvus: You need to realize just because some sees something different than you he is not your enemy.

Whatever, you seem to be an apologist for the "authorities" in a lot of this thread. I really am leaving now, so good night.

Really? Corvus is an authoritarian? That is weird to me.

Me too. But like I said, you discounted me earlier. And Holmes came out swinging and never let up. And yet here we are. Who stands where?


You aren't "I sound fat" so I didn't totally discount you.

*blinks in dismay and disgust*

Holmes!?

Corvus: Sabyen91: dudemanbro: Corvus: You need to realize just because some sees something different than you he is not your enemy.

Whatever, you seem to be an apologist for the "authorities" in a lot of this thread. I really am leaving now, so good night.

Really? Corvus is an authoritarian? That is weird to me.

Yeah what I have said this thread:
The police involved in the shooting should be investigated by the federal authorities and be brought to justice.

Police should not use weapons or dogs on peaceful protestors.


Basically what he has done this thread is ignore everything I actually have said and created some BS strawman instead so he can ignore the actual points I did make.

Which are:

Just because your mad at what happened doesn't justify you lying about what happened.

If you start going on about "totalitarianism" and "martial law" people will not take you serious and ignore you as some crazy hippie.

That to him is 'apologist for the "authorities" '

You have a history and it is not totalitarian.

libranoelrose: I still disagree.

The police should not have overwhelming force.

If our society has decided that a protest should occur then the authorities should not have the overwhelming ability to disperse them.



And I would say that ABSOLUTELY authorities should have the ability to disperse them, but they should not use it unless needed. More to the point: If it is a peaceful protest, let it happen. If it turns violent and/or destructive (as many protests in the past have) then they should exercise their ability to disperse it.

If police didn't have the ability to apply overwhelming force, any protest would have the possibility of turning into a hugely destructive, violent riot. I'm not saying it would be likely to happen, merely that it would be possible. And that possibility needs to be guarded against.

Kittypie070: *blinks in dismay and disgust*

Holmes!?

John Holmes?

Nobodyn0se: 404 page not found: And Holmes came out swinging and never let up.

.....

Holmes?


PROBLEM, HOLMES?

libranoelrose: Or they could back the fark off and let their bosses deal with the backlash.

That option has a higher risk of injury and/or death than using tear gas.

Are you willing to accept that higher injury/death rate in order to remove tear gas from the police?

404 page not found: bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com
PROBLEM, HOLMES?



I'm not gay or nothing, but I would so move to Canada and marry that man.

Sabyen91: You aren't "I sound fat" so I didn't totally discount you.

Duuuuude. All right. You're right. But is this thread still kicking my ass?

[probably]

I...I need something.

Kitty? Here, kitty. Where's my kitty?

...what have I got in the likker cabinet...?

I think I need to go to sleep.

demaL-demaL-yeH: No, I'd prefer they act like cops and keep the peace instead.

And if their choice is: A. Keep the peace through deployment of tear gas or B. Keep the peace through the use of a tactic/weapon that is more likely to cause injury or death than tear gas, which one would you choose?

404 page not found: Sabyen91: You aren't "I sound fat" so I didn't totally discount you.

Duuuuude. All right. You're right. But is this thread still kicking my ass?

[probably]

Maybe. I am way too drunk to answer that question, though. :)

Nobodyn0se: libranoelrose: Or they could back the fark off and let their bosses deal with the backlash.

That option has a higher risk of injury and/or death than using tear gas.

Are you willing to accept that higher injury/death rate in order to remove tear gas from the police?

It's like your bro EHRMERHKKEHRBUS said earlier...

WHAT IF THEY START THROWING ROCKS?

demaL-demaL-yeH: You seem to approve of the John Pikes of the world, who use force when none is necessary.
I don't.

1. I have no idea who John Pike is.

2. I would NEVER argue that force is necessary when none is necessary.

I am arguing that sometimes force is necessary, and when it is, the least amount of force should be used. Sometimes, the least amount of force that can/should be used is tear gas. If you take that option away, officers will have to use MORE force when they could have used the lesser force of tear gas.

sh*t even a nutso dumb f*ck like me knows the difference between ordnance and ordinance.

goddamn people

libranoelrose: I'll just say, again, that police do not need to display (or use) excessive force.

I COMPLETELY agree that officers should NEVER use excessive force.

But not all force is excessive. If force is required, and it is not excessive, officers should use the least amount of non-excessive force that they are able to in order to end the situation.

CheetahOlivetti: The moose outside shoulda told ya.

It's gold Jerry. Gold!

Kittypie070: sh*t even a nutso dumb f*ck like me knows the difference between ordnance and ordinance.

goddamn people

Meh, neither is in the 2nd amendment.

Sabyen91: 404 page not found: Sabyen91: You aren't "I sound fat" so I didn't totally discount you.

Duuuuude. All right. You're right. But is this thread still kicking my ass?

[probably]

Maybe. I am way too drunk to answer that question, though. :)

Welcome to my world, buddy.

libranoelrose: I don't want to argue anymore, I'm tired.

Yeah, I'm going to bed too.

Thank you for arguing like a human being, and not a complete jackass. That's a rare quality on fark these days ;)

Nobodyn0se: But not all force is excessive. If force is required, and it is not excessive, officers and/or the populace should use the least amount of non-excessive force that they are able to in order to end the situation.

404 page not found: Sabyen91: 404 page not found: Sabyen91: You aren't "I sound fat" so I didn't totally discount you.

Duuuuude. All right. You're right. But is this thread still kicking my ass?

[probably]

Maybe. I am way too drunk to answer that question, though. :)

Welcome to my world, buddy.

Before I got drunk I liked you so I will like you after. :)

404 page not found: Nobodyn0se: But not all force is excessive. If force is required, and it is not excessive, officers and/or the populace should use the least amount of non-excessive force that they are able to in order to end the situation.

From bed:

Yes, that is better. The same applies to the populace.

Nobodyn0se: 404 page not found: Nobodyn0se: But not all force is excessive. If force is required, and it is not excessive, officers and/or the populace should use the least amount of non-excessive force that they are able to in order to end the situation.

From bed:

Yes, that is better. The same applies to the populace.

Hehe, I can't add...in bed.

Bankers must be protected.

Sabyen91: Before I got drunk I liked you so I will like you after. :)

Post hoc ergo propter hoc. Someday you will wander in to my office requiring my services, for whatever your particular reasons, and I will offer you midazolam [your benzo of choice] because it happens to offer a certain degree of RETROACTIVE amnesia. By luck, I will also happen to be carrying flumazenil [the benzodiazepine-antagonist of choice], just in case you happen to cotton to those types of drugs as Yanks are known to do.

And we'll meet, yet again, here...on FARK™...

...the best part...

FOREVER...

California needs to get cracking!

We need a new supply of rubber bullet pictures.

Eapoe6: Bankers must be protected.

Yawn. You actually think Dems protect bankers and Republicans are the awesome people that want to prosecute them. You are a moron.

404 page not found: Sabyen91: Before I got drunk I liked you so I will like you after. :)

Post hoc ergo propter hoc. Someday you will wander in to my office requiring my services, for whatever your particular reasons, and I will offer you midazolam [your benzo of choice] because it happens to offer a certain degree of RETROACTIVE amnesia. By luck, I will also happen to be carrying flumazenil [the benzodiazepine-antagonist of choice], just in case you happen to cotton to those types of drugs as Yanks are known to do.

And we'll meet, yet again, here...on FARK™...

...the best part...

FOREVER...

Forever!!!! It makes me love Whitesnake.

*stutters incoherently to kitty cat*

/not drunk or stoned

//bedtime for me and Jas

KLF 3 AM Eternal because it IS 3 AM right here where my ass is located

Kittypie070: *stutters incoherently to kitty cat*

/not drunk or stoned

//bedtime for me and Jas

KLF 3 AM Eternal because it IS 3 AM right here where my ass is located

Your unbelievable! Ok, I already made that lame joke.

Nobodyn0se: 404 page not found: Nobodyn0se: But not all force is excessive. If force is required, and it is not excessive, officers and/or the populace should use the least amount of non-excessive force that they are able to in order to end the situation.

From bed:

Yes, that is better. The same applies to the populace.


Your typical populace

Here's a larger representation of 404:

And you know this much is true because if I were a true ITG, I'd post a pic of ACT OF VALOR™

/come get some
//i mean that, show me your lapel

Nobodyn0se: ongbok: But some people decided to keep on arguing the point about it not being a grenade launcher, in fact some are still saying it is being misleading for calling it what it is.

Because it IS misleading to call it a "grenade launcher" without ALSO saying it is loaded with tear gas canisters.

You've been there in person to confirm the type of grenade?

In case you missed it, there's been protests for days in Anaheim after another young man of color was shot and killed by the police.

Yes, Manuel Diaz, who the police describe as a gang member.

Which even if true still doesn't justify the police gunning him down in cold blood while he was unarmed.

Anaheim police have been involved in 7 LEO related shootings this year so far, 5 of which have resulted in the deaths of the suspects, all of which have been declared clean kills by the police.

The shootings have led to civil unrest, protests and riots in which businesses have been damaged which has led to riot police looking like they stepped out of a war zone which has led to this Fark headline which has led to this thread in which people are arguing either for or against increasingly militarized police forces.

Me, I'm agin em.

/Not that anyone was asking for my opinion, just sayin'.

Alphax: Nobodyn0se: ongbok: But some people decided to keep on arguing the point about it not being a grenade launcher, in fact some are still saying it is being misleading for calling it what it is.

Because it IS misleading to call it a "grenade launcher" without ALSO saying it is loaded with tear gas canisters.

You've been there in person to confirm the type of grenade?

Obviously. He killed submitter and saved the human race (offer does not include Palestinians).

red5ish: The Milkor MGL (Multiple Grenade Launcher) is a lightweight 40 mm semi-automatic, 6-shot grenade launcher developed and manufactured in South Africa by Milkor (Pty) Ltd. The MGL was demonstrated as a concept to the South African Defence Force (SADF) in 1981. It's used by, among others, the US Marines, and apparently by the Anaheim Police.

And you know why the Anaheim Police are dressed up in their soldier suits? Because they keep killing civilians and nothing gets done about it. It's not the protesters you have to worry about in Anaheim, it's the cops.


GET SOME CUZ!

libranoelrose: Nobodyn0se: libranoelrose:

I still think that over arming the police force is a bad thing.

I think it depends on what we're "over arming" them with. If we're talking about a small town police force getting armored personnell carriers, I agree. If you are talking about police officers being armed with rubber bullets that they use 8 times a day, I agree. If you are talking about arming police with tazers that they use every time they stop someone for a broken tail light, I agree.

If you're talking about tear gas launchers that they deploy when there is a large collection of people that has the possibility (however small) of turning violent, but is not actually used until violence breaks out, I would disagree.

I still disagree.

The police should not have overwhelming force.

If our society has decided that a protest should occur then the authorities should not have the overwhelming ability to disperse them.

LOL WUT?

You mean 'if a small number of people in society'.

I'm sorry, but people of Anaheim, it's time for the option of last resort. You have to go full Gandhi.