10-07-2016, 02:04 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-07-2016, 03:08 PM by Eric the Green.)
(10-07-2016, 01:54 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:I don't quite see that. More despotic in your view means that the government would not have deliberately attacked a group that was stockpiling weapons, but not attacking anyone themselves. But individual ownership of guns does not protect against police who shoot unarmed civilians or otherwise violate our rights. Those who shoot at police are severely dealt with, and usually killed. Those killed are usually shot because a policeman thought (s)he had a weapon and might be firing it at them.(10-07-2016, 11:56 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:(10-06-2016, 07:49 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:(10-06-2016, 01:02 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Warren Dew, to think that arming citizens is the way to protect the people from the state and its police is foolish nonsense.
As Bob Butler 54 pointed out, shooting back at Waco and Ruby Ridge caused the federal government to back off. There's every evidence that the cop killings in Manhattan and Dallas are causing local police to back off nationwide. When there are millions of citizens with guns, it only takes a couple using them for the government to get the message.
I agree that the government backed off after Waco and Ruby Ridge, as they should have. But that's why they backed off-- because they should have. The gun nuts had no chance against the government, as was the case. The government was trying to disarm the Waco nuts, by force, simply because they were armed. That is the wrong approach, as I have said. As long as there is a large contingent of Americans who fanatically want arms, they can't be outlawed by force without bloodbaths that are not worth the price. That does not mean that citizens armed with guns can stop or defeat the government. The government will win, as it did.
As long as the government backs off as it should, it doesn't really matter if the government wins the immediate battle. The big picture is still that the government is deterred from becoming more despotic.
Quote:Quote:The cops are backing off because of the "Ferguson Effect," according to every report we have all heard. That was not a few mad terrorists with guns shooting police, as happened in Dallas. That was the people rising up and demonstrating. The Dallas terrorist has inspired no-one.
The executions of officers Ramos and Liu in New York probably had more of an effect than the Dallas assassinations, but we'll just have to agree to disagree if you think police are more worried about riots than they are about being shot and killed.
The "worry" is not the point. Police do not respond to being shot at by backing off. They protect their own quite fiercely. The fact is that the Ferguson Effect is what is causing more caution among police. Whether being killed is more worrisome or not, that is just the fact. That is what is cited.
Dallas "assassinations'? There's only one I know about. And I am not even that familiar with the New York case. It is not cited in many reports about police responses, as far as I can tell.
I'm more concerned that even with a progressive NY mayor, the Eric Garner case and the case of the man who filmed it is the most gross injustice I have heard of.
A story just published today is an example of how the "Ferguson Effect" and not the Dallas or NY police killings are cited:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morn...onal_pop_b
A Chicago police officer who was savagely beaten at a car accident scene this week did not draw her gun on her attacker — even though she feared for her life — because she was afraid of the media attention that would come if she shot him, the city’s police chief said Thursday.
Chicago Police Department Superintendent Eddie Johnson said the officer, a 17-year veteran of the force, knew she should shoot the attacker but hesitated because “she didn’t want her family or the department to go through the scrutiny the next day on the national news,” the Chicago Tribune reported.
Johnson’s remarks, which came at an awards ceremony for police and firefighters, underscore a point law enforcement officers and some political leaders have pressed repeatedly as crime has risen in Chicago and other major cities: that police are reluctant to use force or act aggressively because they worry about negative media attention that will follow.
The issue has become known as the Ferguson effect, named after the St. Louis suburb where a police officer shot and killed an unarmed black teenager in August 2014. The shooting set off protests and riots that summer and eventually gave way to a fevered national debate over race and policing. Many law enforcement officers have said that the intense focus on policing in the time since has put them on the defensive and hindered their work.