Criminals have a higher moral compass than police officers.
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Everything Else
P.Error — 2 years ago(August 06, 2023 12:03 AM)
The criminal doesn't want to kill the police officer, because he values human life and has a relationship with God.
A police officer will have a gun in your face, but order that if you remotely get close to anything that looks like weapon, but they are "allowed" to wave a gun in your face.
You are not allowed to carry a knife, but they are allowed to have a gun pointed at you. They don't play a fair fight. By their own standards, a police officer aiming a gun at you is grounds to kill them in self-defence, since they would kill you if you did the same.
But criminals don't have aim guns at officers faces, because they are nice moral and don't want to hurt the cop.
If literature has taught us anything, it's that "Good Guys," most often protagonists, often have a no-kill rule.
"Bad Guys," ala antagonists, are killers.
In police situations where there is a killing, whether the suspect is armed or not, the police officers are most often advantageous.
What these means is police officer are natural born killers more than the so-called criminals they stop who advocate for peace and non-violence.
If the police used deadly force when their lives are threatened, the stats of the wins would be roughly 50/50. But they are not. Cops win 98% of these kill battles.
That indicates the person isn't trying to kill them most of the time. They are reaching into their pockets, trying to escape, holding a vape pen, and so on.
The police don't have the same issue. They're allowed to go inside their pockets and such.
There's only one reason a cop should ever open gunfire and that's when the suspect has a gun pointed directly at them.
Kyle Rittenhouse would have been shot dead if he were black by the police. He walked straight for several feet with a rifle before dropping it. He did not kill in self-defence because those two guys were never planning to kill him. People on the left have moral stances against taking the lives of others. They'll knock your teeth out, but they won't kill you. The right, having no moral beliefs or conscience against killing, because they are abominations of the Lord, will take advantage of that vulnerability and kill you.
This is common sense, but we need to get rid of subjective justifications cops could use in their defence like fear of their life, they thought an item was a weapon, the suspect was attacking them. There should be objective criteria: the suspect HAS to be armed, with intent to kill the police officers with the arms. That's it. Anything less than that, is unjust and the police officers should be penalised.
The most evil act one can do is kill someone. It's above rape, theft, carjacking. It's certainly above being argumentative, not complying, running.
Cops kill and the criminals they stop in a lawful stop aren't killers. That makes the cops more evil.
I will side with criminals, always.
Never lose your desire. -
/. — 2 years ago(August 07, 2023 10:01 AM)
Kyle Rittenhouse would have been shot dead if he were black by the police. He walked straight for several feet with a rifle before dropping it. He did not kill in self-defence because those two guys were never planning to kill him. People on the left have moral stances against taking the lives of others. They'll knock your teeth out, but they won't kill you. The right, having no moral beliefs or conscience against killing, because they are abominations of the Lord, will take advantage of that vulnerability and kill you.
My password is password -
Soul_Venom — 2 years ago(August 07, 2023 02:09 PM)
warren you stupid ****
The criminal doesn't want to kill the police officer, because he values human life and has a relationship with God.
You assume 3 things that you have no proof of and are likely wrong. You also assume that all criminals are the same.
You are not allowed to carry a knife, but they are allowed to have a gun pointed at you. They don't play a fair fight. By their own standards, a police officer aiming a gun at you is grounds to kill them in self-defence, since they would kill you if you did the same.
There is no such thing as fair. No on would do the job if they had to offer a criminal an even chance to kill them.You misunderstand the standard itself entirely. Police work for the state enforcing the law. You don't.
But criminals don't have aim guns at officers faces,
because they are nice moral
and don't want to hurt the cop.
don't have aim guns at
because they are nice moral?
and don't want to hurt the cop.?
Ah yes, another dumbass assumption. Usually wrong.
If literature has taught us anything, it's that "Good Guys," most often protagonists, often have a no-kill rule.
"Bad Guys," ala antagonists, are killers.
Sounds like you've read 1 too many Batman comics.
the police officers are most often advantageous.
What these means is police officer are natural born killers more than the so-called criminals they stop who advocate for peace and non-violence.
There are millions of police interactions per year also millions of crimes. Crimes end in violence far more often than police interactions
Cops win 98% of these kill battles.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes
They are reaching into their pockets, trying to escape,
And the guy whos job it is to enforce the law is not require to gamble his life because someone want to act the fool.
There's only one reason a cop should ever open gunfire and that's when the suspect has a gun pointed directly at them.
So when it is already too late? Yeeaaahhhh,… NO! Dumbass!
He did not kill in self-defence because those two guys were never planning to kill him.
Because the only self defense is if someone plans to kill? What if they intend to beat? What if they intend to rob? You are so ****ing stupid it hurts. And how long have you been psychic? You pretend to know the intent of two people you never met and were likely thousands of miles away from at the time.
People on the left have moral stances against taking the lives of others.
Except for the 66 million who's murders they endorsed right? Dumbass ****ing clown shoes asshole.
I'm not even going thru the rest. It just gets dumber. I think you may have done the impossible here. You beat out conman for the dumbest filmboard crown.
Trump is still your President. Charlie Kirk still Wins! -
P.Error — 2 years ago(August 10, 2023 06:20 AM)
No on would do the job if they had to offer a criminal an even chance to kill them
Then they shouldn't do the job. That's the point. Only do the job if the suspects are given an equal chance at battle, or else don't do the job.
So when it is already too late? Yeeaaahhhh,
Yes, when it's too late or 50/50.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes
So you admit that cops kill people for little reason, otherwise the stats would be 50/50.
Sounds like you've read 1 too many Batman comics.
No, good guys don't kill otherwise, they're not good guys. Killing someone is the worse sin anyone could do; it's worth than theft, speeding, rape, domestic abuse. If a cop murders an unarmed man at a traffic stop, they're worse than the suspect they just detained, by default. And they will have eternal consequences for that. If you don't see it this way, then I question your morality. If someone robs your house to steal a pack of cigarettes, and you kill them for that, you are infinitely worse than he is.
Police officers should not have the convenience of being able to kill people with a gun. If you can't be a boxer, don't be a cop. If you're not qualified to be a ninja, you can't be a cop. You don't get to be a fat slob and just kill people who don't listen because you don't know how to fight, and don't want to get bruises and cuts on you nor risk injury. That's part of the job if you get to kill people. Broken bones every day. You don't get to kill people then go home with no bruises. Each time they kill someone, it should be a hospital visit for them.
To be a cop, you've got to be skilled in manners to subdue dangerous criminals; you've got to swing nunchucks like a pro; you've got to be a master at martial arts. You simply can't have the convenience of taking a life without putting up a fight with that person.
And the guy whos job it is to enforce the law is not require to gamble his life because someone want to act the fool.
So you admit the suspect can get killed for merely acting a fool, not necessarily trying to kill the officer.
It's one thing for cops to be at an advantage because they're a highly trained assassin. It's quite another to be at an advantage because they're cheating with a gun and don't do any physical body work.
Ban guns.
Two male cops shoot a woman with a metal pipe, lol. Lmao. Muhammad Ali can take out brute George Foreman without weapons and these pigs couldn't take out a woman with a pole, lmao. Murderers. Pussies.
Never lose your desire. -
Soul_Venom — 2 years ago(August 10, 2023 03:58 PM)
an equal chance at battle
You think rapists and murderers deserve an equal chance? It is official. You are most retarded monkey alive.
So you admit that cops kill people for little reason
Again you are retarded. What I said doesnt mean ANYTHING remotely like that. No, what is meant is that when criminal do heinous and stupid things they deserve the consequences.
good guys don't kill otherwise, they're not good guys.
Bullshit! Damn you are such a ****ing retard! The soldiers who killed the Nazi's were good. Hell, they were called the greatest generation.
If you insist that something is an absolute and then an exception is found then you whole theory is invalid. Your theory is total horseshit. Your entire post is utter horseshit.
they're a highly trained assassin.
No dumbass. They are moderately trained civil servants.
No.
You are wrong.
You are retarded.
You are the dumbest poster on the board.
I am done with you.
Fuck off.
Trump is still your President. Charlie Kirk still Wins! -
P.Error — 2 years ago(August 11, 2023 03:40 AM)
You think rapists and murderers deserve an equal chance?
When police officers kill an unarmed suspect while responding to a call or during a traffic stop, very rarely are the suspects rapists and murderers, lol. Those are serious crimes; the person of interest is typically apprehended at their residence. These are typically petty crimes, where cop makes initial
You never see Ted Bundy or Alex Murdaugh killed during a rouse at the gas station because they failed to comply. These are often traffic stops, discovering warrants, and so on.
However, the answer would be a resounding yes.
No one should be sniped when they're not expecting it, in other words, caught off guard. No one.
The government has a higher standard. Or they SHOULD have a higher standard.
The reason why most suspects don't end up killing the officer first (and when this happens is usually a white guy with a rifle/shotgun), is they have no intent to kill the officers OR they're outmatched in weaponry and men. BOTH of these are sufficient reasons why officers should not kill anyone unless they're seconds away from dying.
Good guys do not kill. If a cop kills a suspect who just robbed a gas station, the cop is now a killer. The suspect is merely a thief.
The soldiers who killed the Nazi's were good.
There's no evil and morally righteous side in a war. Both have the intent to do good from their perspective. The current culture defines what's good for us. All soldiers, no matter which side, to them, have God on their side.
Never lose your desire. -
Cheeky — 2 years ago(August 11, 2023 03:47 AM)
One crazy guy got pissed at Kyle for putting out a dumpster fire that he had pushed over to a gas station to blow it up
What would you have done if he was chasing you and reached for your gun?
The other guy hit him over the head with his skateboard. Stupid thing to do
If we take the time to see with the heart and not with the mind, we shall see that we are surrounded completely by angels ~ Carlos Santana
Schrodinger's Cat walks into a bar, and doesn't. 