Here's Another Interesting Case Concerning the First Amendment

[HillsideDesolate]

in 100% of EVERY police contact, you KNOW that the police officer can and sometimes DOES simply want to just cuff you and take you in. you don't have to be charged with a crime.

Naw, too much paperwork.

 

[joegrizzy]

These stats makes no sense.

So, as a thought experiment. Police show up at 10 hostage situations where the victim is to be shot. They shoot and kill 9 perps, but the 10th perp kills LEO. So, from that, you take that the population is 9x more likely to be shot by police than the other way around? There isn't any other salient point there?

yeah because the 9 perps are citizens who have the threat of the hostage takers AND the police. to be noted, undoubtedly some of the 1,140 were indeed hostages taken by others and killed by police.

and it should be noted, this is just objective death i'm talking about and for reference:

doctors, nurses, and medical staff kill over 300,000 each year, so the ~1,100 from police is literally nothing either way.

 

[trekrok]

yeah because the 9 perps are citizens who have the threat of the hostage takers AND the police.

and it should be noted, this is just objective death i'm talking about and for reference:

doctors, nurses, and medical staff kill over 300,000 each year, so the ~1,100 from police is literally nothing either way.

You don't think those numbers might be skewed because the 9 had a gun to a hostage's head? So when we analyze things we just ignore the situation entirely and just count bodies?

 

[TedKennedy]

You don't think those numbers might be skewed because the 9 had a gun to a hostage's head? So when we analyze things we just ignore the situation entirely and just count bodies?

Sounds like anti-gunner statistics methodology, doesn't it?

 

[HillsideDesolate]

doctors, nurses, and medical staff kill over 300,000 each year, so the ~1,100 from police is literally nothing either way.

That is just what can be quantified as "at fault" HAI, HAPI, Falls, drug interaction, surgical events etc, the actual number is higher. For example 100,000 lives were saves over 18 months simply by reminding hospital staff to "wash your hands."
https://www.ihi.org/communities/blogs/100000-lives-campaign-ten-years-later

 

[joegrizzy]

You don't think those numbers might be skewed because the 9 had a gun to a hostage's head? So when we analyze things we just ignore the situation entirely and just count bodies?

from a purely objective standpoint, yes.

again, you are ignoring the 9 people that had a gun to their head *and* all the police guns pointed at them that hopefully didn't kill them too.

since it's your context, was the hostage taken *because* the police were called? like we can do this all day, hence the objectivity part.

 

[OK Corgi Rancher]

I swear... It's like a train wreck into a dumpster fire. But I read it anyway, trying to make sense of what happened.

I do know this... I think I'll run around and act a fool and try to get a cop's attention so he/she will just shoot me. After reading only a small bit of this that would be a relief. FFS.... But I know it's my own damn fault.

 

[joegrizzy]

i mean this thread was about the legality of livestreaming while having an interaction with police and that possibly creating an unsafe situation for said police.

i brought up how many people, while livestreaming, have been literally assaulted and killed by police, thus it being an unsafe situation *for the streamer*. if anything, livestreaming is of a risk *for the streamer* than the police that might illegally and/or incorrectly assault or kill them.

that's an extremely relevant and on topic discussion.

like hell just read this ONE case (this happens literally all the time, like i said several streamers have been swatted multiple times):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Wichita_swatting

 

[trekrok]

from a purely objective standpoint, yes.

again, you are ignoring the 9 people that had a gun to their head *and* all the police guns pointed at them that hopefully didn't kill them too.

since it's your context, was the hostage taken *because* the police were called? like we can do this all day, hence the objectivity part.

Ignoring context makes no sense.

I'll bet with a little research you would discover that firemen put out FAR more fires than the average citizen. Could it be because they are sent to burning houses every day? Possibly.

 

[joegrizzy]

Ignoring context makes no sense.

I'll bet with a little research you would discover that firemen put out FAR more fires than the average citizen. Could it be because they are sent to burning houses every day? Possibly.

i would say putting out fires is a firefighters job.

killing people isn't a police officers. in most cases where a police officer shoots someone, it would be legal for a citizen. like your hostage situation, would anyone convict the guy who shoots someone holding someone hostage?

it doesn't ignore context of 73 dead cops against 1,140 dead citizens and if we need more laws for safety of officers, even in situation with ZERO real world evidence to suggest it's needed (still haven't provided an example of someone livestreaming leading to violence against police, meanwhile i've addressed hundreds of swatting cases during livestreaming, all of them erroneous and all targeting people completely innocent), versus more laws for the safety of people AGAINST police.