Thee University said:

---

BylrFan said:

---

Canon said:

---

BylrFan said:

---

Canon said:

---

robby44 said:

---

---

They told him 29 times to exit the vehicle. He refused. I suppose they could have tried to coax him out with a puppy. Or, alternatively, he could have complied with lawful orders after perhaps the 23rd time he was told?

---

Cool. He committed no crimes. Stop defending bad peace officers.

If an officer asked to search your car without a warrant, would you comply?

---

He drove with no visible tag. He drove for two miles after directed to stop. He refused to comply with orders stemming from those infractions. Don't change the circumstances to try and make your point. That's dishonest. Ask me about these circumstances.

---

this answers all your questions.

there is a tag on the car and if you're ever pulled over, you pull to a safe area (in this case, a gas station that is lit up), not right away. No infractions.

---

The more I watch the videos (particularly his own video) the more convinced I am that this Nazario character knew exactly what he was doing.

He was performing for a huge payday!

---

One of the key tenets of de-escalation is to recognize when a repeated command is not working and to try something else. Escalating is not the correct choice.

Canon said:

---

quash said:

---

Canon said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Canon said:

---

Amy Pagitt said:

---

I drove home every summer and Christmas break from Baylor to Kentucky. I usually left in the wee hours of the morning so it was night-driving for several hours. I was ALWAYS told by my parents to NEVER pull over on the side of the road for ANY reason in the dark, and highway driving frequently means that I could easily drive for a mile or more before getting to an exit and a well-lit gas station. It happened to me once and that's exactly what I did. You think I would have been killed for that? And, if you have a daughter or a child who is a POC, would you tell them to do any different? Honestly?

---

1. Your parents give terrible advice, if they told you to disobey lawful orders. Full stop.

2. There you go again with straw men. He wasn't killed. He wasn't shot. He was pepper sprayed to force him to comply with lawful orders he refused 29 times. You have repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to be dishonest in your posts.

3. Everyone is a POC. Your world view is twisted and bifurcates the world into whites vs everyone else. That's gross. Any good parent will instruct their child to follow lawful orders from the police. Only a very bad parent would advise their children otherwise.

---

Welp everyone. Canon solved racism!

Let's recap:

1. Everyone is colored! Only the RACISTS notice race!

2. And you HAVE TO DO WHAT THE GOVERNMENT SAYS. ALWAYS.

Racism is made up. Black people weren't hung because of their skin color, because the people who hung them ALSO had a skin color! Duh!

I bet you think Emmet Till had it coming and would be alive if he hadn't let that white girl lie about him touching her. Should have known better.

And you should always listen to the cops ALWAYS. Your safety matters less than theirs. https://www.cbsnews.com/video/serial-rapist-ex-cop-sentenced-to-263-years-in-prison/

---

I'd always wondered what a mentally deranged person attempting to recap a rational series of statements would look like. Now I know. Thanks for that.

---

I already know what your backside looks like, try addressing an argument while not running away.

---

Now I know what two mentally deranged people look like doing that. You lot never disappoint.

---

Proud of your backside are ya?

Thee University said:

---

Seriously. Chris Rock got it right in his video below:



Why do so many folks just have to be belligerent, bowed up, combative and dis respective?

---

Disturbing bodycam video shows a 13-year-old boy appearing to drop a handgun and begin raising his hands less than a second before a Chicago police officer shoots and kills him Adam Toledo died.

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

BaylorBears_254 said:

---

My question is, what warranted the right to shoot the guy?

I've had my share of arguments on this forum to realize that the majority of white people, cops included, see blacks more aggressively than whites, no matter what.

i agree, he shouldn't have fled, but they were in no danger.

---

Zero right to shoot the guy, nothing warranted his shooting. Tazer on the other hand would have been ok.

I'm sure the 463 white guys killed by police last year would disagree with your assessment of police points of view. You just will never hear that point of view.

The viewpoint you hear from most white folks when a white guy resisting is killed, unless he is family, is generally "play stupid games, win stupid prize" that isn't my point of view, but it is very common because I've heard it often.

---

Yep. Those peeps stories been canceled

Have you done a ride along?

Where have all of these sad, apologists for blatant crime, mayhem, rioting, looting come from?

What happened to the law abiding folks that knew right from wrong, obeyed the laws and authority?

Waco1947 said:

---

Have you done a ride along?

---

yes

Thee University said:

---

Where have all of these sad, apologists for blatant crime, mayhem, rioting, looting come from?

What happened to the law abiding folks that knew right from wrong, obeyed the laws and authority?

---

Was there ever that time?

How did you conduct your study, and what did you find?

I looked at traffic stops between 2005 and 2014 in Florida, because Florida has such comprehensive public records law. I looked at the incidents that resulted in violence and contacted law enforcement agencies to figure out what generally went down during each of these incidents. What I ended up finding was that the danger narrative about traffic stops that is commonly perpetuated in courts and law enforcement circles isn't supported by empirical research. What I found is that overall, violence against officers during traffic stops was fairly infrequent and the incidents that did happen were generally low-risk and didn't involve weapons.

Using my most conservative estimates, I found that the rate for felonious killing of an officer during routine traffic stops was 1 in every 6.5 million stops. The rate for an assault resulting in serious injury to an officer was 1 in every 361,111 stops. The rate for assault against an officer, whether it results in injury or not, was 1 in every 6,959 stops. The least conservative estimates suggest that the rates are much less: 1 in every 27.6 million stops for a killing, 1 in every 1.53 million stops involving an assault that results in serious injury to an officer, and 1 in every 29,550 stops for an assault against an officer, whether it resulted in officer injury or not.
William Blair - Slate

D. C. Bear said:

---

Don't think I have commented on this thread, but would point out that it starts with an unproven assumption by asking why "so many" flee from police etc. I suspect that "so many" don't flee police etc. we just see the ones that do, and that influences our perception.

---

Good point .

quash said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Don't think I have commented on this thread, but would point out that it starts with an unproven assumption by asking why "so many" flee from police etc. I suspect that "so many" don't flee police etc. we just see the ones that do, and that influences our perception.

---

If we cut back on the ridiculous laws that police have to enforce, that multiply both their contact with citizens and the frustration of those citizens when their freedoms are infringed, we could get criminal justice reform that meant something.

Start by ending the drug war we continue to lose.

---

The hundreds of thousands of deaths in our country from the opioid crisis in recent years should be a pretty good indicator that legalizing all dangerous drugs is probably not a good idea. Just my opinion.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

quash said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Don't think I have commented on this thread, but would point out that it starts with an unproven assumption by asking why "so many" flee from police etc. I suspect that "so many" don't flee police etc. we just see the ones that do, and that influences our perception.

---

If we cut back on the ridiculous laws that police have to enforce, that multiply both their contact with citizens and the frustration of those citizens when their freedoms are infringed, we could get criminal justice reform that meant something.

Start by ending the drug war we continue to lose.

---

The hundreds of thousands of deaths in our country from the opioid crisis in recent years should be a pretty good indicator that legalizing all dangerous drugs is probably not a good idea. Just my opinion.

---

Of the hundreds of thousands mentally ill individuals scratching a pathetic existence on the streets..........a significant percentage were initially brain damaged by heroin. meth or crack use.

But of course lets sound 'cool' and advocate the widespread availability of such narcotics.



Gotta luv the internet .

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

quash said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Don't think I have commented on this thread, but would point out that it starts with an unproven assumption by asking why "so many" flee from police etc. I suspect that "so many" don't flee police etc. we just see the ones that do, and that influences our perception.

---

If we cut back on the ridiculous laws that police have to enforce, that multiply both their contact with citizens and the frustration of those citizens when their freedoms are infringed, we could get criminal justice reform that meant something.

Start by ending the drug war we continue to lose.

---

The hundreds of thousands of deaths in our country from the opioid crisis in recent years should be a pretty good indicator that legalizing all dangerous drugs is probably not a good idea. Just my opinion.

---

A lot of these overdoses are started by addiction to prescription drugs. Once again, strictly an American problem. Stop advertisements of drugs on television altogether.

Decriminalizing small amounts of drugs (not prescription) is a step in the right direction. Invest in treatment, not prisons. Make treatment the sentence. It's worked for Portugal and the Netherlands. Go after the dealers, not the addicts. Penalize pharmaceuticals just as we did for oxycontin.

Canon said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

quash said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Don't think I have commented on this thread, but would point out that it starts with an unproven assumption by asking why "so many" flee from police etc. I suspect that "so many" don't flee police etc. we just see the ones that do, and that influences our perception.

---

If we cut back on the ridiculous laws that police have to enforce, that multiply both their contact with citizens and the frustration of those citizens when their freedoms are infringed, we could get criminal justice reform that meant something.

Start by ending the drug war we continue to lose.

---

The hundreds of thousands of deaths in our country from the opioid crisis in recent years should be a pretty good indicator that legalizing all dangerous drugs is probably not a good idea. Just my opinion.

---

Of the hundreds of thousands mentally ill individuals scratching a pathetic existence on the streets..........a significant percentage were initially brain damaged by heroin. meth or crack use.

But of course lets sound 'cool' and advocate the widespread availability of such narcotics.



Gotta luv the internet .

---

I don't think a discussion should be a nonstarter. From a public policy perspective, the cons are certainly centered around those who would make themselves burdens on society via unchecked addiction. That is unarguably a major problem. However, the pro side removes a very significant (maybe the most significant) nexus around which organized crime and gangs coalesce. With no illegal market to profit from, the need for private enforcement of illegal contracts (drug sales, prostitution, etc) dries up.

Purely from a public policy point of view, it would be valuable to try and calculate the ultimate outcome differences of the two policies. We have several states or cities that may offer us test cases to analyze over the next several years, the best data coming from those that legalized vs simply stopping prosecution of existing laws.

---

Certainly respect your comments.....only time will tell.

However I have worked in the homeless shelters, visited loved ones in mental hospitals, and attended the funerals of too many drug users.

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

quash said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Don't think I have commented on this thread, but would point out that it starts with an unproven assumption by asking why "so many" flee from police etc. I suspect that "so many" don't flee police etc. we just see the ones that do, and that influences our perception.

---

If we cut back on the ridiculous laws that police have to enforce, that multiply both their contact with citizens and the frustration of those citizens when their freedoms are infringed, we could get criminal justice reform that meant something.

Start by ending the drug war we continue to lose.

---

The hundreds of thousands of deaths in our country from the opioid crisis in recent years should be a pretty good indicator that legalizing all dangerous drugs is probably not a good idea. Just my opinion.

---

All those deaths under a restrictive government scheme. Blame the state.

Canon said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Canon said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

quash said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Don't think I have commented on this thread, but would point out that it starts with an unproven assumption by asking why "so many" flee from police etc. I suspect that "so many" don't flee police etc. we just see the ones that do, and that influences our perception.

---

If we cut back on the ridiculous laws that police have to enforce, that multiply both their contact with citizens and the frustration of those citizens when their freedoms are infringed, we could get criminal justice reform that meant something.

Start by ending the drug war we continue to lose.

---

The hundreds of thousands of deaths in our country from the opioid crisis in recent years should be a pretty good indicator that legalizing all dangerous drugs is probably not a good idea. Just my opinion.

---

Of the hundreds of thousands mentally ill individuals scratching a pathetic existence on the streets..........a significant percentage were initially brain damaged by heroin. meth or crack use.

But of course lets sound 'cool' and advocate the widespread availability of such narcotics.



Gotta luv the internet .

---

I don't think a discussion should be a nonstarter. From a public policy perspective, the cons are certainly centered around those who would make themselves burdens on society via unchecked addiction. That is unarguably a major problem. However, the pro side removes a very significant (maybe the most significant) nexus around which organized crime and gangs coalesce. With no illegal market to profit from, the need for private enforcement of illegal contracts (drug sales, prostitution, etc) dries up.

Purely from a public policy point of view, it would be valuable to try and calculate the ultimate outcome differences of the two policies. We have several states or cities that may offer us test cases to analyze over the next several years, the best data coming from those that legalized vs simply stopping prosecution of existing laws.

---

Certainly respect your comments.....only time will tell.

However I have worked in the homeless shelters, visited loved ones in mental hospitals, and attended the funerals of too many drug users.

---

I don't doubt it. Each death like that individually is terrible for those remaining.

I'm just curious if the deaths from illegal sales (including unregulated sales to minors), when added to those from criminal organized violence around illegal drugs, might be higher.

There's no doubt we would be trading one societal ill for another. The question is, will it be a lesser ill and will it allow regulation that ameliorates it, particularly around use by minors?

---

Portugal has shown that freedom + harm reduction lowered deaths, etc. We should try it.

quash said:

---

Portugal has shown that freedom + harm reduction lowered deaths, etc. We should try it.

---

Boy howdy that's a perfect comparison. Portugal & United States.

quash said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

quash said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Don't think I have commented on this thread, but would point out that it starts with an unproven assumption by asking why "so many" flee from police etc. I suspect that "so many" don't flee police etc. we just see the ones that do, and that influences our perception.

---

If we cut back on the ridiculous laws that police have to enforce, that multiply both their contact with citizens and the frustration of those citizens when their freedoms are infringed, we could get criminal justice reform that meant something.

Start by ending the drug war we continue to lose.

---

The hundreds of thousands of deaths in our country from the opioid crisis in recent years should be a pretty good indicator that legalizing all dangerous drugs is probably not a good idea. Just my opinion.

---

All those deaths under a restrictive government scheme. Blame the state.

---

You speak the truth here, my friend. I agree. The most peculiar thing about the opioid crisis, is nobody seems to want to blame the addicts.

Thee University said:

---

quash said:

---

Portugal has shown that freedom + harm reduction lowered deaths, etc. We should try it.

---

Boy howdy that's a perfect comparison. Portugal & United States.

---

Yes, when you can't access America on Earth 2 you do the best you can.

How about addressing the harm reduction aspect? The gut punch to cartels that we've already seen just by states taking action? The states are a good lab experiment, as California has shown that if you over-regulate a product you create a black market.

I like the reduction in prison populations that would follow. The end of seizing cash when cannabis businesses can access banking. Funding of studies, not just on harm reduction but also on what can cannabis really do in healthcare. Right now it is being pitched as damn near a cure-all thanks to federal limits on cannabis-related medical research in the last forty years. Fewer people and pets getting shot because SWAT hasn't had a hostage crisis in five years so they get rolled out to arrest non-violent people with high levels of violence.

Healthier, freer citizens. Less crime. Smaller government.

Nevermind, Portugal isn't America...

Canon said:

---

quash said:

---

Canon said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Canon said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

quash said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Don't think I have commented on this thread, but would point out that it starts with an unproven assumption by asking why "so many" flee from police etc. I suspect that "so many" don't flee police etc. we just see the ones that do, and that influences our perception.

---

If we cut back on the ridiculous laws that police have to enforce, that multiply both their contact with citizens and the frustration of those citizens when their freedoms are infringed, we could get criminal justice reform that meant something.

Start by ending the drug war we continue to lose.

---

The hundreds of thousands of deaths in our country from the opioid crisis in recent years should be a pretty good indicator that legalizing all dangerous drugs is probably not a good idea. Just my opinion.

---

Of the hundreds of thousands mentally ill individuals scratching a pathetic existence on the streets..........a significant percentage were initially brain damaged by heroin. meth or crack use.

But of course lets sound 'cool' and advocate the widespread availability of such narcotics.



Gotta luv the internet .

---

I don't think a discussion should be a nonstarter. From a public policy perspective, the cons are certainly centered around those who would make themselves burdens on society via unchecked addiction. That is unarguably a major problem. However, the pro side removes a very significant (maybe the most significant) nexus around which organized crime and gangs coalesce. With no illegal market to profit from, the need for private enforcement of illegal contracts (drug sales, prostitution, etc) dries up.

Purely from a public policy point of view, it would be valuable to try and calculate the ultimate outcome differences of the two policies. We have several states or cities that may offer us test cases to analyze over the next several years, the best data coming from those that legalized vs simply stopping prosecution of existing laws.

---

Certainly respect your comments.....only time will tell.

However I have worked in the homeless shelters, visited loved ones in mental hospitals, and attended the funerals of too many drug users.

---

I don't doubt it. Each death like that individually is terrible for those remaining.

I'm just curious if the deaths from illegal sales (including unregulated sales to minors), when added to those from criminal organized violence around illegal drugs, might be higher.

There's no doubt we would be trading one societal ill for another. The question is, will it be a lesser ill and will it allow regulation that ameliorates it, particularly around use by minors?

---

Portugal has shown that freedom + harm reduction lowered deaths, etc. We should try it.

---

This would be a cultural shift. It should be slow and allow for time to train the population on how to use those drugs safely.

---

With respect............how does anyone use heroin safely ?

Have had doctors repeatedly tell me even one hit of heroin can result in Type One Bipolar Disorder. That additional hits can result in permanent brain damage. That similar realties exist with meth and crack cocaine use.

Our country doesn't take proper care of its mentally ill now.......why would anyone believe that care would improve with hundreds of thousands of additional addicts competing for the same ( often nonexistent ) hospital space ?

Many folks don't realize.......but in many communities the de facto ' mental heath facility ' is the county jail. The few mental wards available are usually full.

Adding hundreds of thousands of more patients via the legalization of heroin, meth and crack would only expand the nightmare .

Canada2017 said:

---

Canon said:

---

quash said:

---

Canon said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Canon said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

quash said:

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Don't think I have commented on this thread, but would point out that it starts with an unproven assumption by asking why "so many" flee from police etc. I suspect that "so many" don't flee police etc. we just see the ones that do, and that influences our perception.

---

If we cut back on the ridiculous laws that police have to enforce, that multiply both their contact with citizens and the frustration of those citizens when their freedoms are infringed, we could get criminal justice reform that meant something.

Start by ending the drug war we continue to lose.

---

The hundreds of thousands of deaths in our country from the opioid crisis in recent years should be a pretty good indicator that legalizing all dangerous drugs is probably not a good idea. Just my opinion.

---

Of the hundreds of thousands mentally ill individuals scratching a pathetic existence on the streets..........a significant percentage were initially brain damaged by heroin. meth or crack use.

But of course lets sound 'cool' and advocate the widespread availability of such narcotics.



Gotta luv the internet .

---

I don't think a discussion should be a nonstarter. From a public policy perspective, the cons are certainly centered around those who would make themselves burdens on society via unchecked addiction. That is unarguably a major problem. However, the pro side removes a very significant (maybe the most significant) nexus around which organized crime and gangs coalesce. With no illegal market to profit from, the need for private enforcement of illegal contracts (drug sales, prostitution, etc) dries up.

Purely from a public policy point of view, it would be valuable to try and calculate the ultimate outcome differences of the two policies. We have several states or cities that may offer us test cases to analyze over the next several years, the best data coming from those that legalized vs simply stopping prosecution of existing laws.

---

Certainly respect your comments.....only time will tell.

However I have worked in the homeless shelters, visited loved ones in mental hospitals, and attended the funerals of too many drug users.

---

I don't doubt it. Each death like that individually is terrible for those remaining.

I'm just curious if the deaths from illegal sales (including unregulated sales to minors), when added to those from criminal organized violence around illegal drugs, might be higher.

There's no doubt we would be trading one societal ill for another. The question is, will it be a lesser ill and will it allow regulation that ameliorates it, particularly around use by minors?

---

Portugal has shown that freedom + harm reduction lowered deaths, etc. We should try it.

---

This would be a cultural shift. It should be slow and allow for time to train the population on how to use those drugs safely.

---

With respect............how does anyone use heroin safely ?

Have had doctors repeatedly tell me even one hit of heroin can result in Type One Bipolar Disorder. That additional hits can result in permanent brain damage. That similar realties exist with meth and crack cocaine use.

Our country doesn't take proper care of its mentally ill now.......why would anyone believe that care would improve with hundreds of thousands of additional addicts competing for the same ( often nonexistent ) hospital space ?

Many folks don't realize.......but in many communities the de facto ' mental heath facility ' is the county jail. The few mental wards available are usually full.

Adding hundreds of thousands of more patients via the legalization of heroin, meth and crack would only expand the nightmare .

---

Doctors prescribe it for a variety of conditions under the name Diamorphine. But they do it in Europe, so...