Who’s to Blame for the Riots? Sermon by John MacArthur

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Ritafee

IAMWHATIAM
Messages
6,360
Reaction score
1,640
Sad to say, I see the masses distracted and divided by propaganda generated by corporate media powers.
Malcolm X warned us about this over 50 years ago. In an address given in Harlem on the heels of the first summer of urban rebellions in the 1960s, he noted that “If you’re not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing.”
 

Ritafee

IAMWHATIAM
Messages
6,360
Reaction score
1,640
Policing Is Irrelevant for Public Safety—Here Are Some Alternatives That Work by Justin Podur

The protesters will be vindicated only if the changes made are the right ones.

Reform programs will only be successful if they start from the premise that the policing institution has lost its social legitimacy.

Once the police are viewed as an illegitimate institution, we are well on our way.

The backlash against abolishing police as “politically unrealistic” in light of public safety has begun at the local level.

The goal has to be to abolish the class of people who have the legal right to end lives.

Do police currently have the right to kill? Absolutely.

The license to kill, above all, must be taken away from police.

It survives because of a mystique based on three notions:
the idea that they are courageous because their job is dangerous
the idea that they keep society safe
the fact that you can call them in an emergency

Criminological data has told us for decades that police are irrelevant for public safety.

Other data tells us a lot about what does influence safety ...

Social problems, including violence, correlate strongly with inequality.

Options for increased equality have been blocked by the wealthy. (2014 study—captured politics)

A real Green New Deal would do more for public safety than any conceivable police reform short of abolition.
 

Mrs.Anteater

Just keep going....
Messages
4,174
Reaction score
2,047
The license to kill, above all, must be taken away from police.
Actually, despite mistakes that had been made in in pursuing the NS murderer of 22 people, I am quite relived that he finally was shot by an officer who had a gun, the death toll would have been much higher if he hadn’t as the killer had a long list of people he had a grudge against. And the line of events in those 12 hours of horror showed that a psychologist trying to talk to him at that point would not have been an option.
 
Messages
26,351
Reaction score
3,690
Did they have to kill him, though? Maybe they could’ve knocked him down/ keep him from running away and shooting more people, gotten the gun out of his hands? I’m not judging. I dont think they are “bad” cops. I wasn’t in their shoes.I’m just wondering if there could have been different tactics.
 

Mrs.Anteater

Just keep going....
Messages
4,174
Reaction score
2,047
Did they have to kill him, though? Maybe they could’ve knocked him down/ keep him from running away and shooting more people, gotten the gun out of his hands? I’m not judging. I dont think they are “bad” cops. I wasn’t in their shoes.I’m just wondering if there could have been different tactics.
Have you read about what actually happened? Read about how he killed the cop who was trying to stop him?
How do you knock someone down who is pointing a gun at you?Correction, who is drawing a gun to shoot you, because he did not hesitate to shoot, so the pointing would have been only the second it takes to aim and shoot.
 

Mrs.Anteater

Just keep going....
Messages
4,174
Reaction score
2,047
Do quakers approve of the death penalty, @Mrs.Anteater?
Quakers are actively working against the death penalty. Are you comparing the cop killing the mass shooter with the death penalty here? That would be comparing apples with jelly beans.
In terms of Quakers, there isn’t any one opinion. There are more “ principles “ than anything. I doubt you would find a Quaker pro death penalty, but there are different attitudes towards joining the military. While most Quakers would and have been active in for example civil emergency/ ambulance services during the war and in peace activities outside of war. Quakers do in general have the attitude that people should be guided by their own calling which could lead someone to join the military. Quaker tend to not judge individuals for their choices, but have processes to assist with them.
But- I am not a Quaker. If you need more information, check out quaker.ca
 

Mendalla

Eastern Lowland Gorilla
Messages
30,561
Reaction score
14,464
Did they have to kill him, though? Maybe they could’ve knocked him down/ keep him from running away and shooting more people, gotten the gun out of his hands? I’m not judging. I dont think they are “bad” cops. I wasn’t in their shoes.I’m just wondering if there could have been different tactics.
Using hand-to-hand against a gun is pretty much suicide unless you're in very close quarters. Remember Sean Connery's line from the Untouchables about bringing a knife to a gunfight? There is some truth in it.

They could (and should) try for a non-lethal shot but the priority, especially if there are non-combatants in range, must be to stop the shooting as quickly as possible. Ideally, no cop should never have to choose between one death and many, but the reality is that it happens and I personally would prefer they try to make sure it's the non-combatants that walk away.
 
Messages
26,351
Reaction score
3,690
Have you read about what actually happened? Read about how he killed the cop who was trying to stop him?
How do you knock someone down who is pointing a gun at you?Correction, who is drawing a gun to shoot you, because he did not hesitate to shoot, so the pointing would have been only the second it takes to aim and shoot.
I don't know. I was asking. Could they have avoided lethal force and just immobilized him and then had him stand trial and be treated psychiatrically? He was monstrous - what he did. Just thinking maybe they didn't need to kill him in order to stop him. I was imagining a different outcome for a second. He's dead, though, and I don't fault them for protecting themselves and the public from him.
 
Last edited:

Mrs.Anteater

Just keep going....
Messages
4,174
Reaction score
2,047
I don't know. I was asking. Could they have avoided lethal force and just immobilized him and then had him stand trial and be treated psychiatrically? He was monstrous - what he did. Just thinking maybe they didn't need to kill him in order to stop him. I was imagining a different outcome for a second. He's dead, though, and I don't fault them for protecting themselves and the public from him.
Well, if you don’t know, here is the answer: No.
We were actually lucky he was killed at that time, because the officer who shot him came across him when he was getting gas at a gas station and the shooter had switched cars and changed clothes - both the police was not aware of. I am still puzzled that the officer actually recognized him, as at that time, they didn’t even suspected him in that area.
 
Last edited:

Northwind

Still knitting. Walking the path to health.
Messages
10,271
Reaction score
4,075
There are times when lethal force is warranted. I imagine (not knowing the details of his last encounter with the officer who shot him) this was one. He'd already killed one officer and many people. The officers involved at the gas station would have good reason to believe he was a threat to them and more people.
 
Messages
26,351
Reaction score
3,690
There are times when lethal force is warranted. I imagine (not knowing the details of his last encounter with the officer who shot him) this was one. He'd already killed one officer and many people. The officers involved at the gas station would have good reason to believe he was a threat to them and more people.
That still doesn't mean lethal force is warranted. Force is certainly warranted at times. I realize also, that a lot of people are happy he's dead. I can understand why but it doesn't mean that's the end of discussion about how that went down. It still doesn't mean lethal force is necessary. Knock the gunman unconscious - ok - but kill him? I don't think I'm ok with that unless it accidentally (really, actually, accidentally) happens in an effort to immobilize without killing. If cops shoot to kill - I don't think that's right.
 
Last edited:
Messages
26,351
Reaction score
3,690
Maybe there are not times when lethal force is warranted. Maybe we have just been conditioned to think really bad guys - and even not as bad guys, as long as they were doing something deemed criminal - deserve to die and it doesn't matter if they get a trial. "The cops got 'em and we can all feel relieved", sort of mentality - when maybe that's the wrong mentality.
 

Ritafee

IAMWHATIAM
Messages
6,360
Reaction score
1,640
Actually, despite mistakes that had been made in in pursuing the NS murderer of 22 people, I am quite relived that he finally was shot by an officer who had a gun, the death toll would have been much higher if he hadn’t as the killer had a long list of people he had a grudge against. And the line of events in those 12 hours of horror showed that a psychologist trying to talk to him at that point would not have been an option.
So one person that already murdered 22 people being shot by 'someone with a gun' ... would it be alright if that someone was anyone other than a police officer? In this case I am thinking it would be considered self defense by any citizen ... but what if the shooter of the 'known' murderer shot the 'murderer' with an illegal weapon ... would that make it illegal?
That would be comparing apples with jelly beans.
Apples are legal ... jelly beans are illegal?
 

Ritafee

IAMWHATIAM
Messages
6,360
Reaction score
1,640
I am still puzzled that the officer actually recognized him, as at that time, they didn’t even suspected him in that area.
At the Irving Big Stop in nearby Enfield, two RCMP officers — one from a Emergency Response Team and a canine officer — recognized the killer from the photo they had seen on their phones while he was filling his stolen car. They warned him and, when he failed to comply with their warnings, repeatedly shot him. He died after they put the cuffs on him, 'a source says'.
 

Ritafee

IAMWHATIAM
Messages
6,360
Reaction score
1,640
Maybe there are not times when lethal force is warranted. Maybe we have just been conditioned to think really bad guys - and even not as bad guys, as long as they were doing something deemed criminal - deserve to die and it doesn't matter if they get a trial. "The cops got 'em and we can all feel relieved", sort of mentality - when maybe that's the wrong mentality.
Time for real answers on the Nova Scotia mass murder? By Paul Wells June 20, 2020

We were actually lucky he was killed at that time,
At this time,

We are faced with a familiar Canadian paradox: everyone says they want something to happen, but it isn’t happening.

The “something” is a rigorous public inquiry into a horrible shooting spree that spanned two days and killed 22 people in Nova Scotia in mid-April. It was the worst mass murder in Canadian history. It was lurid in its weirdness. The gunman, Gabriel Wortman, spent two days driving around in a convincing replica RCMP vehicle, shooting at whim, while the force he was imitating and dodging failed to send out a more comprehensive emergency alert than their Twitter warnings, one that might have saved more lives. In the midst of the carnage, two actual RCMP officers apparently fired their weapons into the walls of a firehall in Onslow for reasons that remain unknown.

New reporting for Maclean’s by Shannon Gormley, Stephen Maher and Paul Palango raises troubling new questions about Wortman’s possible ties to organized crime and, especially, to the RCMP itself. This reporting is attracting a lot of attention and, here and there, vigorous online debate.

This Twitter thread, for instance, asks hard questions about our latest story.

READ MORE: The Nova Scotia killer had ties to criminals and withdrew a huge sum of cash before the shooting

Some people, reading the most recent Maclean’s reporting, have said the RCMP has a lot of questions to answer.

Unfortunately there is no reason to take any answer from the RCMP on faith.

It’s time for a full judicial inquiry ...

Everyone agrees! From Nova Scotia premier Stephen McNeil to the latest embattled RCMP commissioner to three Trudeau-appointed Nova Scotia senators to anguished families of the murdered to, I mean sort of, the Prime Minister.

But so far there is no inquiry.

 

Northwind

Still knitting. Walking the path to health.
Messages
10,271
Reaction score
4,075
Knock the gunman unconscious - ok - but kill him? I don't think I'm ok with that unless it accidentally (really, actually, accidentally) happens in an effort to immobilize without killing. If cops shoot to kill - I don't think that's right.
We don't know the details so we don't know if they actually shot to kill. It would likely be difficult in those circumstances to merely mame. The man had clearly show himself to be dangerous. I imagine the officer(s) involved had a fair amount of adrenaline. They are human and not perfect.
 
Messages
26,351
Reaction score
3,690
It was self defence and public protection. And extremely scary. I get that.

Do we know how many times the gunman was shot? And in what location on his body? And how many officers shot at him?
 
Messages
26,351
Reaction score
3,690
No idea. I doubt it would matter at this point.
Why not? My point being, why should that not be looked at and reported on in all cases where police shoot somebody? We always hear more about the perp's violence but rarely question whether the cops only used as much force as necessary to stop him.
 
Last edited:
Top