Page 2 of 2

Re: Crime, Criminal

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2016 1:46 pm
by notmartha
I don't want to go too far off topic (crime/criminal) here. I'll post a new thread on abortion/aborticide soon.

It seems we do not agree on the meaning of "murder". There is a thread HERE addressing this term.

From what I've read, it sounds like you've been through a lot. It is only natural that insomnia would be a long lasting side effect of the trauma you've experienced. I do hope you are blessed with a good night's sleep. My God has helped me through many restless nights, and I hope He helps you too.

Re: Crime, Criminal

Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2016 3:04 pm
by Firestarter
I´m sure we disagree on Christianity and the Bible, but I think we have similar views on murder/killing (please keep in mind that English is not my language). I have said to Christians that there is no God in Taoism or Buddhism (my preferred religions).
That I can find no rest is a state of mind, but actually (if my “neighbours” do not make too much noise at night) I sleep fairly well.
I hope you do not bother to explain every possible word or you could go on and on…
But I do agree that abortion is an interesting subject.

Re: Crime, Criminal

Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2016 12:47 pm
by notmartha
The double meanings of language

Justification (aka justifiable) becomes a term with double meaning. For the police, it is part of the mantra of defending the safety and security of society against criminals. For more and more of civil society, however, it is becoming a term to describe what the police do to explain an act of murder that they have committed. Under justification, the need to defend society against those the police identify as a threat becomes a truth that is irrefutable because assumed. Irrefutability and truth constitute the primary elements of police separation from civil society. Their self-generated power to identify, to impose an identity, and to act without fear of accountability (that is, with impunity) emerges from that separation. It provides a legitimacy in advance. It is in the gap imposed by self-justification and categorization that a suggestion of a real desire to kill a person appears, precisely in order to both manifest and confirm the truth of those justifications.

Nothing exemplified this better than a recent incident in San Francisco, in the wake of the police chief’s resignation, and city dedication to “reforming” police procedures. A shirtless black man was standing in midtown and “acting strange.” The police order him to show his hands, which he refuses, and a “standoff” begins. During this two hour “standoff,” this man spent much of the [time] lying face down” on the sidewalk “as officers flooded into the area.” This was even shown on the evening news. He’s face down on the ground, his hands stretched out in front of him (i.e. in sight), so that anyone can come up to him from behind and handcuff him. Yet the police stay 30 feet away shooting beanbag rounds at him, and claiming he has a gun. They do not want to touch him. Instead, they use him for target practice. Specialists are brought in “to try to persuade him to surrender,” as if he could assume a more surrendering position. The police evidently have a different meaning for that term, since they eventually charge him and violently handcuff him. He is carried off on a stretcher. Apparently he was “dangerous” (and therefore criminal) because he had refused to obey an order. The article quotes the chief as praising his officers for having “created a situation where this gentleman could walk away with his life.” (SF Chronicle, July 6, 2016, p.A10) In other words, he is expecting gratitude for the graciousness of the police. One is reminded of the anger of slaveholders in the South that their slaves did not show proper “gratitude” for their condition (CF. Sadiya Hartman, “Scenes of Subjection”).

On the other hand, the suitability of Jeff Motz (Damon’s killer) for police duty was not in question, though he had a long history of “excessive force” complaints. In light of that departmental approval, the suggested desire to kill on the police part means that the terms “safety” and “security” become empty and rhetorical – for civil society, though not for the police.

This distinction is also evident in the difference between the “use of force” and “excessive force.” “Excessive” force refers to those incidents for which civil society finds the justifications for the use of force to be unconvincing. It is the specific “use of force” it criticizes, in response to which the police create the alternate term across their cultural separation from society’s questioning. Because the category “excessive force” exists, the police “use of force” remains normalized, and thus legitimized for civil society as well as for the police. Insofar as the police valorize violence through that distinction, civil society is deprived of the ability to contest the “use of force” as such.

Ultimately, to call this “law enforcement” is to play with words, to be highly euphemistic. It is to speak words that relate to public desires, while the police demonstrate a desire for violence beyond the law. Clearly, in order to act violently in a society that wishes only to eliminate violence, the police must impose a countermanding definition. Thus, the violence to eliminate violence is not called “violence.” This definitional presumption, however, represents an absolute and irreconcilable antithesis between civil society and police culture. One side may assert its use of language is truthful, but for the other, that claim is false on the face of it.

This represents a real inversion of law as well as ethics between the two cultures. When a cop commits murder, police spokespeople assert that the public must look at the whole picture. Critics should “stop the negative, anti-police sentiment by highlighting the quality work done by every one of our members on a daily basis” (says the president of the Portland Police Assoc.). In civil society, it works the opposite. No matter how good or socially minded a person is, if they commit a crime, they will be charged, convicted and imprisoned. Though their entire life might have been spent in humanitarian service, one crime will suffice to end their liberty. Police crimes are discounted against a rhetorical social context, while in civil society, criminal actions are never left unaccountable.
Excerpted from The “Fundamentalism” in Police Operations, July 15, 2016, by Steve Martinot ... perations/

Re: Crime, Criminal

Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2016 2:00 pm
by Firestarter
This reminds me of about a year ago when I complained to some homeless people about the police and showed scars on my legs from the police dogs. These homeless weren’t terribly impressed. One of them told about the time when some cop kept pulling on his arm; after he had warned this policeman three times he hit him. Some minutes later a group of some 10 policemen threw him on the ground, after which they smashed his face on the pavement repeatedly, because of which he lost 2 teeth.
Firestarter wrote:If I'm correct that everybody has a conscience, all of these "criminals" must suffer terribly.
If I am correct that these criminals must feel guilty over harassing innocent people, this could show in the amount of suicides. This would explain the following list of the top 11 profession with the highest suicide rates in the USA: Medical doctors, Dentists, Police officers, Veterinarians, Financial services, Real estate agents, Electricians, Lawyers, Farmers, Pharmacists, and Chemists.
Doctors (including psychiatrists) feel guilty for harming their patients/victims. Only the 7th place of electricians I cannot explain. While I could understand that farmers feel guilty about tormenting their kettle; here they specifically talk about farmers that grow crops: ... ide-rates/
Interestingly for black males police officers have the highest suicide rates (they must feel really guilty for harassing their black brothers).
Strangely the state propaganda doesn’t follow my explanation of guilt for this list…

Re: Crime, Criminal

Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2016 4:09 pm
by editor
Following your line of thinking, I can see why police, doctors, financial services workers (particularly collection agents), and lawyers would all be on that list.

None of the others make sense, especially real estate agents. I've known a lot of them. They are, on the whole, lazy and incompetent, at least the ones I've run across. None of them could muster the initiative to kill themselves.

I know a veterinarian who actually cares about animals. He's on call all the time, and works harder than anyone I know. He's too busy for suicide.

I guess pharmacists could begin to feel guilty about all the poison they're peddling. Okay, I'll buy that one.

Farmers-- now that's a strange one. I'm not sure I believe it. Not that farmers are peaceful, by any means. Read The Sovereign Individual, by James Dale Davidson and Lord William Rees-Mogg (seriously, read it), and you'll get some insight about farmers that probably never occurred to you. When man was primarily a hunter-gatherer, it was usually in his best interest to flee instead of fight. Only when he began farming, did he invest enough effort into a stationary location to be interested in defending it.

Re: Crime, Criminal

Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2016 4:42 pm
by Firestarter
editor wrote:Following your line of thinking, I can see why police, doctors, financial services workers (particularly collection agents), and lawyers would all be on that list.

None of the others make sense, especially real estate agents. I've known a lot of them. They are, on the whole, lazy and incompetent, at least the ones I've run across. None of them could muster the initiative to kill themselves.

I know a veterinarian who actually cares about animals. He's on call all the time, and works harder than anyone I know. He's too busy for suicide.
I get the idea that you think that this is MY list: this is the list I've found on the internet of the jobs with the highest suicide rates (I was looking for psychiatrists as the profession with the highest suicide rates by the way)... The state propaganda explains this list among others by claims that these are the jobs with the most stress. I don't think by the way that doctors, are objectively the most guilty (lawyers are far worse), but that they subjectively feel the most guilty.
"I know a veterinarian who actually cares about animals"; I've been to the veterinarian with a number of pet cats - all of them were terrified. Humans are too "smart" to be afraid of the doctor. A veterinarian that cares for animals, is about as rare as a farmer that cares for his kettle.
Real estate agents are continously trying to get as much money as possible for the houses they sell and are prepared to lie (like second hand car salesmen). This would make someone like me feel guilty.

Police dog attacks man for minutes, for no bicycle light

Posted: Sun Aug 14, 2016 2:54 pm
by Firestarter
I´ve found a horrific video of a policeman that orders his dog to tear on the arm of some victim that was riding on his bike without lights (in the dark). A clear example of a (criminal) cop committing a violent felony against a victim that has only violated a minor traffic law.
This video speaks louder than words:

During the video the cop repeatedly screams at the man that he must “stop resisting”, while his arm is being shewed for minutes by the K9 he answers “I´m not resisting”. After the cop finally takes the dog of the man, his blood is rushing out.
The victim is scarred for life, the story tells that he´s suffering from mental health problems, so by now probably his torture is continuing in some psychiatric hospital, where his brain will be permanently damaged.
I think a strong case can be made that this police man is a psychopath; if I understand correctly the police man was so proud with how he handled this dangerous man, that he himself uploaded the video: ... 3lpkwio.99

I´ve read in the comments on this story by James Bacon that this same cop “accidently” shot and killed a woman in the Citizen's Police academy.

Re: Crime, Criminal

Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2016 12:28 pm
by notmartha
Firestarter wrote:I´ve read in the comments on this story by James Bacon that this same cop “accidently” shot and killed a woman in the Citizen's Police academy.
This may be true, but as usual they protect the criminal by not releasing his name. ... -1.2744982 ... in-florida

Re: Crime, Criminal

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 3:14 pm
by Firestarter
I don’t know how people find information like this, but there’s more on the cop that had his dog chew on the arm of the unfortunate man for minutes, for riding his bike without a light and also on the victim.
The cop’s name has been confirmed as Lee Coel, that was also the officer that shot a woman “accidentely” during a citizen academy role playing: ... ory-abuse/
The cop was hired by the Punta Gorda police department, after he had to resign from the Miramar police department for using excessive force.

The victim of the attack has sued the Punta Gorda police department: ... cle-light/
Apparently the K9 has been suspended from the police force, while the cop is still on active duty.

Re: Crime, Criminal

Posted: Wed Dec 21, 2016 11:01 am
by Firestarter
Here’s another video from August 2015 in San Diego.
A naked man is strolling in a canyon (I’m sure he isn’t armed) and at the request of the police walks over to them. After they once tell him to “turn around” (because they want to admire his ass?) he refuses by saying a couple of times “No”. Then the police order the dog to attack (for a few seconds).
While these brave cops put this extremely dangerous man in handcuffs, they order the K9 to attack again – the dog bites his right leg for another 44 seconds. The victim was in hospital for 2 weeks.
The man has lost (a big part of) his right leg forever. He got a $385,000 settlement: ... 22445.html

Here’s the direct link to the video; you can also see an earlier snippet from 1991, when a black homeless man was attacked by the LAPD that sent their dog on him: