2 NYPD Officers "Executed" by man claiming revenge for Garner and Brown

Recommended Videos

thehorror2

New member
Jan 25, 2010
354
0
0
The only way more killings will stop violence is if both "sides" if you want to call them that kill off EVERYONE. Because if everyone is dead, no one else can die.
 

kyp275

New member
Mar 27, 2012
190
0
0
came into this thread expecting deflections and mental gymnastics to place blame on everything but the killer, am not disappointed.


ObsidianJones said:
Which leads me to my final point; I almost think this is some kind of set up. I can't see how a minority would think anything would be better by a senseless two murders of innocent cop. If they attacked minorities 'without cause' before, you better believe every action now will be justified with the names of Ramos and Liu, the two officers killed. Every cop now will say they are not going to be another Ramos and Liu.
why thank you, we were just missing the part where ppl literally start accusing the police of killing the officers.
 

Parasondox

New member
Jun 15, 2013
3,229
0
0
Albetta said:
Paradox SuXcess said:
Albetta said:
This is 100% the fault of the police. If they had just accepted wrongdoing and given their officer a fair trial for Garner's death, this wouldn't have happened.
So two wrongs make a right? Really? 100%? You are going to mark and judge an entire group by the actions of a small few? and I am talking about both sides here. NO ONE deserves to be killed and NO ONE should be killed through revenge and thinking, "Well they did it to us, so we can do it back to them". That's not how problems are sorted.

There should be a fair trial yes but not with more blood being spilt.
I didn't even imply that this was a good thing. It's obviously only going to make things worse, but the central problem here is and always has been police conduct, and nothing can change that.
And I absolutely understand that the police have been extremely poor in the past few months and showed no consideration but 100% blame isn't warranted. Heck, the blame should go to the arseholes out there who thinks grabbing a gun and extracting revenge in a "us vs them", is justifiable and needed. They think violence is the only answer but it really isn't.
 
Sep 24, 2008
2,461
0
0
A few things about this that bothers me greatly.

First, of course, is the unneeded and unwarranted loss of life. I'm a bit of an idealist, but no life should be taken or cut short in my mind. Even if it's someone that I have grief with on principle, I do mourn the loss of life. This? This is just tragic. In every meaning of the word. My heart goes out to those affected.

Which brings me to my second point. That means my heart goes out to everyone. Because everyone's affected by this. The Police already had a Us vs Them policy. From the multitude of brutalities and gross injustices committed against the public, and the cavalier attitude of "Who is going to do something about it"... The modern day police have been showing themselves to be the biggest thugs there are. And the worst kind of thugs, State Supported Thugs. Again, this does NOT justify senseless killing of police officers, but a horrible thing happens in the mind of someone who thinks themselves untouchable. They snap and go on an uber defensive.

New York City Mayor De Blasio scorned at the hospital by police [http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/nypd-cops-turn-backs-de-blasio-hospital-article-1.2052215]

Police Union asked the Mayor not to attend the Funeral [http://www.newsday.com/news/new-york/nypd-union-asks-nyc-mayor-bill-de-blasio-not-to-attend-fallen-officers-funerals-1.9709927]

Why this hatred? Because after the extensive evidence and lack of professionalism (not to mention human decency) in the death of Eric Garner, Mayor De Blasio made these following comments

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio called Garner's death "a terrible tragedy that no family should have to endure," and said he would continue to work to decrease the use of excessive force among officers.

"This is a subject that is never far from my family?s minds ? or our hearts," he said. "And Eric Garner?s death put a spotlight on police-community relations and civil rights ? some of most critical issues our nation faces today."source [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/03/eric-garner_n_6263656.html]
So simply saying there's a problem with how the police handle things, that there should be no things as acceptable losses or grievous mistakes that end with a human life loss... is enough to say you don't stand with the police officers. This is the police mentality. It's fine that if a few civilians get roughed up, killed, or whatever, but you better stand by us regardless or we'll turn on you too.

If you think I'm being hyperbolic, then you didn't read the links. It's exactly what's happening.

Which leads me to my final point; It almost feels like a complete set up. I know the murders happened, I know the shooter killed himself. I don't dispute the actual actions, the tragedy that they are. But I just can't see how any minority living in this life for as long as he did would think anything would be better by a senseless two murders of innocent cop. If they attacked minorities 'without cause' before, you better believe every action now will be justified with the names of Ramos and Liu, the two officers killed. Every cop now will say they are not going to be another Ramos and Liu.
 

Lilani

Sometimes known as CaitieLou
May 27, 2009
6,581
0
0
Albetta said:
This is 100% the fault of the police. If they had just accepted wrongdoing and given their officer a fair trial for Garner's death, this wouldn't have happened.
Cold-blooded murder is never a rational reaction to anything. This man didn't kill two police officers because of police conduct, he killed two police officers because he is in some way unhinged or unable to deal with anger rationally.
 

Albetta

New member
Jul 16, 2009
129
0
0
Lilani said:
Albetta said:
This is 100% the fault of the police. If they had just accepted wrongdoing and given their officer a fair trial for Garner's death, this wouldn't have happened.
Cold-blooded murder is never a rational reaction to anything. This man didn't kill two police officers because of police conduct, he killed two police officers because he is in some way unhinged or unable to deal with anger rationally.
Im not going to reply to the same comment again so do me a favor and look a couple comments up.
 

Lilani

Sometimes known as CaitieLou
May 27, 2009
6,581
0
0
Albetta said:
Lilani said:
Albetta said:
This is 100% the fault of the police. If they had just accepted wrongdoing and given their officer a fair trial for Garner's death, this wouldn't have happened.
Cold-blooded murder is never a rational reaction to anything. This man didn't kill two police officers because of police conduct, he killed two police officers because he is in some way unhinged or unable to deal with anger rationally.
Im not going to reply to the same comment again so do me a favor and look a couple comments up.
That comment doesn't adequately respond to what I'm saying. I'm not accusing you of saying it's a "good thing," I'm saying this man committing murder had nothing to do with police conduct. Plenty of people are mad about what police have been doing, and much of that anger is justified. But if someone outright shoots a couple of officers over it, that says less about police conduct and more about that individual's mental health.

If this man hadn't been angered by police conduct, he likely would have been just as angered by something else in the future and committed murder for that.
 

kyp275

New member
Mar 27, 2012
190
0
0
Lilani said:
Albetta said:
Lilani said:
Albetta said:
This is 100% the fault of the police. If they had just accepted wrongdoing and given their officer a fair trial for Garner's death, this wouldn't have happened.
Cold-blooded murder is never a rational reaction to anything. This man didn't kill two police officers because of police conduct, he killed two police officers because he is in some way unhinged or unable to deal with anger rationally.
Im not going to reply to the same comment again so do me a favor and look a couple comments up.
That comment doesn't adequately respond to what I'm saying. I'm not accusing you of saying it's a "good thing," I'm saying this man committing murder had nothing to do with police conduct. Plenty of people are mad about what police have been doing, and much of that anger is justified. But if someone outright shoots a couple of officers over it, that says less about police conduct and more about that individual's mental health.

If this man hadn't been angered by police conduct, he likely would have been just as angered by something else in the future and committed murder for that.

shhh, lay off on the logic, don't derail the police hate train! it's obvious that it's all the police's fault, I mean, why else would the guy tried to kill his ex girlfriend first before the officers!?

well, actually....

nope, tinfoil giving me nothing, but it's still the police's fault!!!

/sarcasm
 

Albetta

New member
Jul 16, 2009
129
0
0
Lilani said:
If this man hadn't been angered by police conduct, he likely would have been just as angered by something else in the future and committed murder for that.
But he didn't. He killed police officers because he wanted revenge for their killing of an unarmed man. That is what happened.
 

Lilani

Sometimes known as CaitieLou
May 27, 2009
6,581
0
0
Albetta said:
Lilani said:
If this man hadn't been angered by police conduct, he likely would have been just as angered by something else in the future and committed murder for that.
But he didn't. He killed police officers because he wanted revenge for their killing of an unarmed man. That is what happened.
So you think that revenge murder is a completely rational reaction to a situation?
 

Albetta

New member
Jul 16, 2009
129
0
0
Lilani said:
Albetta said:
Lilani said:
If this man hadn't been angered by police conduct, he likely would have been just as angered by something else in the future and committed murder for that.
But he didn't. He killed police officers because he wanted revenge for their killing of an unarmed man. That is what happened.
So you think that revenge murder is a completely rational reaction to a situation?
For christ's sake, I already said it isn't. Why are you so desperate to force that view point into my argument?
 

StriderShinryu

New member
Dec 8, 2009
4,987
0
0
Paradox SuXcess said:
Albetta said:
This is 100% the fault of the police. If they had just accepted wrongdoing and given their officer a fair trial for Garner's death, this wouldn't have happened.
So two wrongs make a right? Really? 100%? You are going to mark and judge an entire group by the actions of a small few? and I am talking about both sides here. NO ONE deserves to be killed and NO ONE should be killed through revenge and thinking, "Well they did it to us, so we can do it back to them". That's not how problems are sorted.

There should be a fair trial yes but not with more blood being spilt.
The statement also completely muddies the water on what happened with the lack of indictment in both the Garner and Brown cases. It wasn't the police who were tasked with finding the associated officers potentially at fault. Could you argue that it's a problem with the system itself? Sure. Could you argue that it's an issue with the individual officers? Absolutely. It's a large and complex issue with many fault points, but it's not the fault of "the police" that the officers who killed those unarmed black men weren't indicted.
 

kyp275

New member
Mar 27, 2012
190
0
0
Albetta said:
Lilani said:
If this man hadn't been angered by police conduct, he likely would have been just as angered by something else in the future and committed murder for that.
But he didn't. He killed police officers because he wanted revenge for their killing of an unarmed man. That is what happened.
so, which part of that have to do with killing his ex?
 

Albetta

New member
Jul 16, 2009
129
0
0
kyp275 said:
Albetta said:
Lilani said:
If this man hadn't been angered by police conduct, he likely would have been just as angered by something else in the future and committed murder for that.
But he didn't. He killed police officers because he wanted revenge for their killing of an unarmed man. That is what happened.
so, which part of that have to do with killing his ex?
As far as we know, possibly nothing at all.
 

Lilani

Sometimes known as CaitieLou
May 27, 2009
6,581
0
0
Albetta said:
Lilani said:
Albetta said:
Lilani said:
If this man hadn't been angered by police conduct, he likely would have been just as angered by something else in the future and committed murder for that.
But he didn't. He killed police officers because he wanted revenge for their killing of an unarmed man. That is what happened.
So you think that revenge murder is a completely rational reaction to a situation?
For christ's sake, I already said it isn't. Why are you so desperate to force that view point into my argument?
Because it rather debunks the idea that nothing else could have possibly caused him to commit murder. It's impossible to say this murder was 100% caused by police actions when the person we're talking about could have just as easily been driven to that point by getting cheated on, or getting fired from work, or getting harassed by somebody on the street, or anything that makes him that angry.
 

kyp275

New member
Mar 27, 2012
190
0
0
Albetta said:
kyp275 said:
Albetta said:
Lilani said:
If this man hadn't been angered by police conduct, he likely would have been just as angered by something else in the future and committed murder for that.
But he didn't. He killed police officers because he wanted revenge for their killing of an unarmed man. That is what happened.
so, which part of that have to do with killing his ex?
As far as we know, possibly nothing at all.
so how is it 100% the police's fault? what, did he just go "welp, imma go kill some police.... but before that. imma go kill my ex first because lulz!"?
 

BOOM headshot65

New member
Jul 7, 2011
939
0
0
http://pix11.com/2014/12/20/video-nypd-officers-turn-away-from-mayor-de-blasio-as-he-enters-police-presser/

Video of NYPD cops turning their backs, literally, on Mayor De Blasio as he walks into a conference regarding the killing of the officers. And I say good on them.

I had a big post for this, but it my internet ate it, so I will just sum it up quickly:

De Blasio? Sharpton? Jackson? The Media? I blame EVERY. LAST. ONE. OF. THEM!! For the death of these officers. They Fanned the flames, stoked the hatred, and threw officers under the bus to score political brownie points and then have the utter GAUL to act upset when the officers they have spent the past months saying they are all evil. And yet, police keep showing up day after day to do their jobs, protecting the ungrateful masses and being called evil by the politicians that should be backing them and protesters that are more concerned about criminals than police. They continue to stand as that Thin Blue Line even with all the shit that put up with and that to me speaks volumes about the character of those who become police. "New York's Finest" indeed.







And Finally
 

Albetta

New member
Jul 16, 2009
129
0
0
Lilani said:
Albetta said:
Lilani said:
Albetta said:
Lilani said:
If this man hadn't been angered by police conduct, he likely would have been just as angered by something else in the future and committed murder for that.
But he didn't. He killed police officers because he wanted revenge for their killing of an unarmed man. That is what happened.
So you think that revenge murder is a completely rational reaction to a situation?
For christ's sake, I already said it isn't. Why are you so desperate to force that view point into my argument?
Because it rather debunks the idea that nothing else could have possibly caused him to commit murder. It's impossible to say this murder was 100% caused by police actions when the person we're talking about could have just as easily been driven to that point by getting cheated on, or getting fired from work, or getting harassed by somebody on the street, or anything that makes him that angry.
Oooohhhh ok. That makes perfect sense. The man posted a picture on social media ranting and raving about police actions, and you're response is. "....nah must have been about something else."

And of course James Earl Ray's killing of Martin Luther King had NOTHING to do with racism. That guy was just a deranged lunatic who would have killed anyone for the smallest provocation.

My point is that tragedies such as this are an inevitability in a society inherently unjust and uninterested in the equality of all of it's citizens. If you can't recognize that, then you need to self reflect on your privilege.
 

chozo_hybrid

What is a man? A miserable little pile of secrets.
Jul 15, 2009
3,479
14
43
This was a completely uncalled for attack, there was no justification for taking the lives of these two officers. Nor any of the lives lost that have led to these tensions in the US. I look at this from an outsiders perspective, so I apologize if I do not have all the facts, but hasn't this shit gone on long enough? Why isn't there better gun control etc to help prevent these sorts of things from happening. I mean that for the police as well, here in NZ as far as I am aware, officers cannot carry firearms with them (there are certain exceptions) to prevent incidents, they are locked up in the police car and they have to be certain they need them before grabbing them. I believed it helps prevent innocent people being hurt, as we don't have many shootings often at all.

We still have them happen, but it is rare, and the police respond pretty well to them. Having the guns nearby in their vehicle means they have to be sure they need them, they won't just pull them out on a shoplifter to intimidate them with the threat of death and end up shooting when someone makes a sudden move.

We need to hear more about the good things police do as well in media in general, because so many of them all over the world risk their lives to help others on a daily basis. Too many people paint all police ass nasty people when that has to be a small amount of them. We call it bad when we do this about religions, cultures and races etc, so maybe we should consider it here too.

thaluikhain said:
What he did was totally wrong, of course, but that is not to say that he must have been mentally ill. People commit terrible crimes all the time without being mentally ill.
Yeah. I like to see a history or some kind of evidence before that sort of thing is thrown around. It's not a good light for media to shed on people that deal with mental illness in general, they have enough crap to put up with as it is on a daily basis.