Shooting at Dallas Protest - 5 police killed

[Skizzo]

Won't comment too much on this, but wanted to say that I'm glad there's a fairly healthy discussion on the incident. I appreciate all the thoughts given out to the officers and their families.

We got briefed a little more on this today, albeit without too much extra info I could pass along.

All I hope is that this won't cause any retaliatory attacks by white people on black officers, or even just in general from any angry police towards anyone in the community.

 

[Grinner]

Oh it's a different scenario is it?

Cop shoots man in Minnesota after he tells him he is legally armed.

Cop (hypothetically) shoots man in Dallas after he tells him he is legally armed.

You're right. Totally different situation. Damned geography!

You don't see a difference between a cop involved in a traffic stop and another being shot at in a hysterical crowd situation? It's no wonder the other poster doesn't want to engage you if you can't argue reasonably.

 

[Grinner]

Won't comment too much on this, but wanted to say that I'm glad there's a fairly healthy discussion on the incident. I appreciate all the thoughts given out to the officers and their families.

We got briefed a little more on this today, albeit without too much extra info I could pass along.

All I hope is that this won't cause any retaliatory attacks by white people on black officers, or even just in general from any angry police towards anyone in the community.

Why on earth would white people want to attack black officers? I'm genuinely confused by that statement.

 

[Carolina Red]

You don't see a difference between a cop involved in a traffic stop and another being shot at in a hysterical crowd situation? It's no wonder the other poster doesn't want to engage you if you can't argue reasonably.

The poster has said he'd excuse a cop for shooting someone who is legally turning over an unloaded, over the shoulder slung weapon that he is legally entitled to carry to a police officer.

You're right. I'm totally unreasonable. Forgive me for not equating a man with an unloaded gun slung across his back with a man with a loaded one shooting at someone.

Did any of you even watch the footage of him turning the weapon over to the officer?

It is one thing to think America should have gun law reform. It is another to say you'd excuse a man being shot in order to make a political point.

 

[Carolina Red]

Why on earth would white people want to attack black officers? I'm genuinely confused by that statement.

Why did a black man want to attack white ones?

 

[Carolina Red]

The names of the officers killed have been released.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/08/us/dallas-shooting-victims/index.html

Brent Thompson
Thompson, 43, a nearly seven-year veteran of the transit force, got married in the last two weeks, Spiller said. His spouse was a fellow transit officer. Thompson also served as a police training officer in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Patrick Zamarripa
Zamarripa was a U.S. Navy veteran who was deployed to Bahrain as part of the Iraq War effort, military records show.
He was the father of two children and greatly loved by his own father, Rick Zamarripa.
"He was very giving," Rick Zanmarripa told CNN. "He would give you his last dollar if he had it in his pocket and you needed it. He would bend over backward to help anybody out. He was very patient and he would try to help anybody out the best he could.

Michael Krol
Michael Krol's lifelong dream was to be a police officer, his uncle, Jim Ehlke, told CNN affiliate WDIV.
"He got into law enforcement and worked really hard to be a police officer. He spent some time at the correctional facility. It wasn't quite what he was looking for, so he worked pretty hard to find a job and got one in Dallas," Ehlke said.
Krol worked with the Wayne County Sheriff's Office from 2003 to 2007.

Lorne Ahrens
Dallas Officer Lorne Ahrens was a great co-worker, said Sgt. Anthony Gunn of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.
"I had the honor of working with Lorne at LASD's Lennox Station in the early 1990s and at Lancaster Station in the late 1990's," Gunn told CNN. "I was a young deputy and he was a law enforcement technician, assigned to input and dispatch calls for service at both stations.
"He was the kind of guy that it made you happy when you got to work and saw he would be working the shift with you. You could count on him to do the right thing, the right way. He was a dedicated professional. He was well-grounded, seeing the world the way it really, is but not letting the evil in the world discourage him from doing good."

Michael Smith
Dallas police Officer Michael Smith was among the dead, according to CNN affiliate KFDM and local media reports. Smith joined the department in 1989, his sister told CNN affiliate KFDM.

 

[11101]

If anyone even considers this as reason for retaliation/remorse/justification then they're not fit to serve & protect their community anyway.

Agreed, but that will be scant consolation for the family members if it happens.

 

[Organic Potatoes]

He is the one who is fueling this fire. There will be race wars in the United States, and very soon. Trump's speeches about minorities has fueled the fire in those who think non whites and immigrants do not belong in their societies.

That's just not true. These things have been simmering without Trump, even though we had the facade of putting racism behind us several decades back.

And, I hate to state the obvious, but the US is not the only Western nation dealing with these far-right nationalist movements...

 

[Walrus]

And, I hate to state the obvious, but the US is not the only Western nation dealing with these far-right nationalist movements...

This is worth remembering. I suspect if you took all the racist idiots in the UK and gave them the right to carry massive guns around we would be seeing similar stories.

 

[Synco]

Sarah Palin thinks BLM is a farce, who would have thought...
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/08/politics/sarah-palin-black-lives-matter/index.html

I can imagine an upcoming right-wing propaganda offensive claiming that minorities speaking up against inequality and discrimination are "dividing the country" and "putting themselves before others". If it isn't in full swing already, I'm not that familiar with US politics.

 

[TwoSheds]

We have a hell of a lot of things wrong in this country, but our Constitution is not one of them.

True. But your judicial interpretation of "the right to bear arms" is patently both ludicrous and motivated by corruption.

One thing I have wondered though, does anyone know which law it is that governs how much money your political candidates can spend on a campaign and what standards of conduct they must maintain during it? That's one of the only things that's so far saved Britain from the mass renunciation of good sense seen in the states, is that campaign funds are strictly limited and have strict rules governing how they can be spent. Notably of course, not on TV adverts slandering the other candidates. Brexit is a clear example of what happens when you allow politicians to lie about the other side.

 

[Organic Potatoes]

True. But your judicial interpretation of "the right to bear arms" is patently both ludicrous and motivated by corruption.

One thing I have wondered though, does anyone know which law it is that governs how much money your political candidates can spend on a campaign and what standards of conduct they must maintain during it? That's one of the only things that's so far saved Britain from the mass renunciation of good sense seen in the states, is that campaign funds are strictly limited and have strict rules governing how they can be spent. Notably of course, not on TV adverts slandering the other candidates. Brexit is a clear example of what happens when you allow politicians to lie about the other side.

Citizens United ruling ---> SuperPACs ---> 583c(?). Colbert did great work exposing the absurdity of it back when he was on Comedy Central.

But to explain it better would take us way off topic...

 

[JustAFan]

Why on earth would white people want to attack black officers? I'm genuinely confused by that statement.

There's always one or two nut jobs out there.

 

[JustAFan]

I know all this sir. My question is, if this is truly a democray, then a President who was elected by the people should be able to nominate a judge for the supreme court and expect a vote on it as well. I do understand the implication of delaying the appointment of the supreme court judge, but is that truly demoracy?

There have been other nominations in the past that did not get past the confirmation hearings, no vote held. They should at least hold the hearings.

 

[fellaini's barber]

I've been wanting to ask...have any of these killings been done by black cops? Why is it always the white cops? Are they the only ones who get into these situations? Why aren't black cops shooting unarmed blacks or armed blacks reaching for their license too?

 

[VorZakone]

I've been wanting to ask...have any of these killings been done by black cops? Why is it always the white cops? Are they the only ones who get into these situations? Why aren't black cops shooting unarmed blacks or armed blacks reaching for their license too?

I would guess there are far more white cops than black cops.

 

[Carolina Red]

I've been wanting to ask...have any of these killings been done by black cops?

Yes. Just google "black cop shoots (insert description here)"

 

[Carolina Red]

I would guess there are far more white cops than black cops.

Yes. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...-gap-in-americas-police-departments.html?_r=0

 

[Kentonio]

We have a hell of a lot of things wrong in this country, but our Constitution is not one of them.

Your consitution has been pretty successful, but its main flaw is down to the power of the Supreme Court to interprete it. The last decade showed just how politically motivated that intepretation can be.

 

[Carolina Red]

Your consitution has been pretty successful, but its main flaw is down to the power of the Supreme Court to interprete it. The last decade showed just how politically motivated that intepretation can be.

SCOTUS power of Judicial Review is not in the Constitution, as it was asserted in the 1803 case Marbury v. Madison

 

[Kentonio]

SCOTUS power of Judicial Review is not in the Constitution, as it was asserted in the 1803 case Marbury v. Madison

Well despite its flaws, without the Supreme Court the constitution would be even less useful given how difficult the damn thing is to change. The second amendment is the perfect example of this, it was created to ensure the people were able to form militia because the founders were determined America would not have a standing army. In that time it made perfect sense, now it's an anachronism that in a modern society results in 30,000 deaths a year. But you can't change it because half the country thinks a document written centuries ago by a group of rich slave owners is sacred.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

The US Constitution is unconstitutional.

 

[JustAFan]

 

[TheNewEra]

Said on page 2 it wasn't terrorism, based on what happened early on, its a sad day but gun laws will never be revised.

I don't personally understand how things get to be this way, how someone just gets up one morning and goes out on a shooting spree. It happens too often.

Is it a cultural thing in the States? or just 1 person having mental health issues on the day and not seeking help? Surely boost mental health care or something (I Know this guy who did the shootings wasn't having any issues by the looks of things).

In Europe you don't see guns that often, and if you have any problems worst case the person takes their own lives, or seeks some kind of therapy to talk about the issue and work through it.

A man with a gun isn't going to fix the worlds issues about BLM, change and progress is slow, hatred and racism lessens with every generation.

Something certainly needs to change but it's a can of worms.

 

[Carolina Red]

Well despite its flaws, without the Supreme Court the constitution would be even less useful given how difficult the damn thing is to change. The second amendment is the perfect example of this, it was created to ensure the people were able to form militia because the founders were determined America would not have a standing army. In that time it made perfect sense, now it's an anachronism that in a modern society results in 30,000 deaths a year. But you can't change it because half the country thinks a document written centuries ago by a group of rich slave owners is sacred.

That it is hard to amend the Constitution is why our government (the Constitution) has stood the tests of time.

Framers wanted it easy to consider changes to the document, but wanted to make sure an overwhelming portion of the country agreed to any major change in its government.

I would much rather have a more cautious approach to sweeping changes that effect the rest of the nation's history than the opposite.

 

[Kentonio]

That it is hard to amend the Constitution is why our government (the Constitution) has stood the tests of time.

Strange, ours changes fairly frequently, yet our form of government is older than yours.

 

[DenisIrwin]

We have a hell of a lot of things wrong in this country, but our Constitution is not one of them.

Is that the one that came into force in 1789 and been amended 27 times?

 

[Carolina Red]

@Kentonio And where are you from?

 

[Carolina Red]

Is that the one that came into force in 1789 and been amended 27 times?

No, it's the other one.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

No, it's the other one.

Are you fine with the way it came into existence? The framers basically wiped their asses with the then existing Article of Federation.

 

[Kentonio]

@Kentonio And where are you from?

The U.K. originally old chap.

 

[Carolina Red]

Are you fine with the way it came into existence? The framers basically wiped their asses with the then existing Article of Federation.

Yes. Although I disagree with your description of events.

The Articles of Confederation had clearly failed. The Convention was called to amend the Articles and in the process the realized it needed so many changes that it would basically mean a new document, so they made one.

 

[Carolina Red]

The U.K. originally old chap.

Yeah that's what I thought.

How's allowing major government changes by simple majority working out right now?

Also, you don't have a written Constitution.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

Yes. Although I disagree with your description of events.

The Articles of Confederation had clearly failed. The Convention was called to amend the Articles and in the process the realized it needed so many changes that it would basically mean a new document, so they made one.

They exceeded the authority given by the states and circumvent the existing constitution.

Interesting also is that it was passed by a very convenient 9/13 states, which is not three-fourth of the states required for any amendment in that very document.

 

[Kentonio]

Yeah that's what I thought.

How's allowing major government changes by simple majority working out right now?

And you don't have a written Constitution.

Our government form isn't intended to allow major changes by a simple majority, which is why many of us are very pissed off right now.

As for our 'constitution', it's not as simple as being unwritten. It's actually based on a huge body of written documentation, it's just not as black and white as yours. Which I'm generally grateful for. When we had a school full of kids get shot, we banned most guns. When you did, your gun sellers had a bonanza sales week.

 

[Carolina Red]

Our government form isn't intended to allow major changes by a simple majority, which is why many of us are very pissed off right now.

As for our 'constitution', it's not as simple as being unwritten. It's actually based on a huge body of written documentation, it's just not as black and white as yours. Which I'm generally grateful for. When we had a school full of kids get shot, we banned most guns. When you did, your gun sellers had a bonanza sales week.

Ours isn't designed to allow changes by a simple majority either... How quaint.

Whose government did we base our "right to keep and bear arms" on?

Should we strike down the 1st Amendment and ban Muslims because the people who attacked us on 9/11 claimed to be Muslims?

The civil liberties and civil rights found in the Bill of Rights were not created by the Framers. They were recognized to naturally exist and were therefore protected by the Framers. As our government did not create them, it doesn't very well have the right to take them away, does it?

 

[Carolina Red]

They exceeded the authority given by the states and circumvent the existing constitution.

Interesting also is that it was passed by a very convenient 9/13 states, which is not three-fourth of the states required for any amendment in that very document.

When the first 9 ratified, it only went into effect for those 9. It had no effect in the other 4 until they ratified it themselves, which they did with the addition of the Bill of Rights.

 

[InfiniteBoredom]

When the first 9 ratified, it only went into effect for those 9. It had no effect in the other 4 until they ratified it themselves, which they did with the addition of the Bill of Rights.

And what were the consequences for those who wouldn't ratify? Didn't NY City threatened to secede from the state of NY at large if they don't ratify?

Don't get me wrong, it's what it is, and I think it was the right thing to do. But, same with Roe v. Wade, which is textbook judicial activism, it shows that sometimes you need to do what's necessary, rules be damned. Hence the consternation with the 2nd in the wake of tragedies like this one.

 

[Carolina Red]

Interesting story on the Dallas police chief...
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/09/us/dallas-police-chief-david-brown-profile/index.html

Came from a rough part of Dallas, got himself into college, decided to make a difference and get into the police force.

Lost his own son in a police shooting after his son shot and killed a police officer while high on drugs just weeks after he became Dallas police chief.

Became a leader in new policing techniques focusing on de-escalation that has made the Dallas PD into one of the best in the country.

 

[Carolina Red]

And what were the consequences for those who wouldn't ratify? Didn't NY City threatened to secede from the state of NY at large if they don't ratify?

Don't get me wrong, it's what it is, and I think it was the right thing to do. But, same with Roe v. Wade, which is textbook judicial activism, it shows that sometimes you need to do what's necessary, rules be damned. Hence the consternation with the 2nd in the wake of tragedies like this one.

If you "rules be damned" one part of the Bill of Rights, then you jeopardize the entire Bill of Rights.

The fact that the Constitition is hard to amend is to protect against the kind of thought that you just had.