dagblog - Comments for "Cops Lives Matter Most of All...?"

'We' lost this argument, a

Richard Day — Sun, 09 Aug 2015 01:59:12 +0000

In reply to Cops Lives Matter Most of All...?

'We' lost this argument, a long time ago.

And then the Supremes just went ahead and confirmed all those unconfirmed bastards.ha

I have lost faith.

But there is or are loopholes, so to speak.

The states still have rights with regard to regulation.

So now, we must work within our own states?

That is all I got.

I recall the dumbest in high

NCD — Tue, 04 Aug 2015 05:30:19 +0000

In reply to The ACLU has a lawsuit

Not gin? Did anybody check the cop car for alcohol?

I recall the dumbest in high school became cops.

Seems cops haven't changed.

Just their training, demeanor, supervision and the new industry of lawyers and guys like Lewinski who make a living off the execution of citizens.

The ACLU has a lawsuit

rmrd0000 — Tue, 04 Aug 2015 02:57:44 +0000

In reply to Cops Lives Matter Most of All...?

The ACLU has a lawsuit against a sheriff in Kenton County, Kentucky who shackled an 8-year old Latino male and 9-year old black female with ADHD. The two were "misbehaving". We need better trained police. The incident happened last fall.

http://www.kentucky.com/2015/08/03/3972258/lawsuit-kenton-county-deputy-...

In other police news, Sam DeBose the man shot in the head by a UC police officer told the officer that the contents in a bottle labeled "Gin" was actually air freshener. The coroner's preliminary analysis of the contents of the bottle showed that there was no ethanol. The contents were consistent with compound found in perfumes and air fresheners.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/aug/03/samuel-dubose-fragrance-a...

Totally disgusting and

Doctor Cleveland — Tue, 04 Aug 2015 01:30:16 +0000

In reply to Cops Lives Matter Most of All...?

Totally disgusting and unacceptable. And a bad sign of how deeply the dysfunctional "Compliance Policing" approach has sunk into training.

Thanks Oxy.

NCD — Mon, 03 Aug 2015 21:46:59 +0000

In reply to NCD, thanks for posting this.

Thanks Oxy.

I read through a small portion of the 1000+ NYT comments.

One person made the apt observation that if Dr. Inattentional Blindness never testified to support the conviction of a cop, he is not an unbiased scientific consultant suitable to put before a jury.

Granted, such biased paid off 'experts' are probably the norm in courts.

Asking him that point on the witness stand though might seriously deflate the impact of his testimony. (or would such a question be over ruled by the judge as irrelevant 'Counsel question out of order the witness is not on trial')

Yes, he is a Very Serious

NCD — Mon, 03 Aug 2015 21:40:36 +0000

In reply to Juries fall for this. Often.

Yes, he is a Very Serious Person defending a uniformed officer of the law, none of whom ever lie.

And if his testimony is to a Grand Jury, it is normally never made public.

Juries fall for this. Often.

Michael Maiello — Mon, 03 Aug 2015 21:22:22 +0000

In reply to Cops Lives Matter Most of All...?

Juries fall for this. Often. That is a huge part of the problem here.

NCD, thanks for posting this.

Oxy Mora — Mon, 03 Aug 2015 19:35:10 +0000

In reply to I notice this article at the

NCD, thanks for posting this.

I notice this article at the

NCD — Mon, 03 Aug 2015 02:44:09 +0000

In reply to Cops Lives Matter Most of All...?

I notice this article has almost disappeared from the NYT website. Too powerful?

Even though it was listed #1 in the US section 'most emailed'. Some have noticed it.

It is at the very bottom of the NYT 'US' section as of Sunday evening August 2. It apparently was on the front page of the print edition today.

And forget about seeing anything about this guy or 'Inattentional Blindness' on corporate TV News. Any of them. It will never be on your TV News.

You have to be an avid reader to even notice articles like this, and stuff like this is why I subscribe to the NYT (even though the paper provides a sinecure for David Brooks - he will never discuss inattentional blindness either).

One other comment by Citixen, NYC, at the article was interesting:

.....A society that requires police to shoot first and ask questions later, is a society asking for an adversarial relationship with law enforcement and, by extension, the law itself when the entire system gears itself toward protecting officers from prosecution.

There is no better way to alienate citizens from their own government than to insist that such behavior is consistent with constitutional norms. And if that isn't an argument to label the NRA an organization undermining the constitution and the very fabric of the nation itself, I don't know what is.

Note the very powerful logic and concluding thesis of the statement.

I agree with it.

We are seeing the results predicted by the poster across America today.

It is a statistic. Apparently

NCD — Sun, 02 Aug 2015 19:08:53 +0000

In reply to More guns per person, almost

Thanks. It is a statistic. Apparently it includes 1 year olds as well as guys with closets full of guns. We are just ahead of Serbia. I don't know if the NRA or Dr. Lewinsky offer their advice or services there.