4 ms·

And people like these guys weren't pointing guns at other people or breaking the law? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff#April_12_confrontations_and_

by rmxt 11y ago

And people like these guys weren't pointing guns at other people or breaking the law? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff#April_12_confrontations_and_suspension_of_roundup https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff#April_12_confro... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Springs_Planned_Parenthood_shooting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Springs_Planned_Paren... I'm certainly not suggesting that we encourage violent responses from law enforcement. (I'm relieved injury and harm were minimized in both of the above instances.) But, it's disingenuous to think that all demographics get an equally fair shake/generous response from law enforcement when they are holding (or believed to be holding) a gun.

13thLetter 11y ago
"But, it's disingenuous to think that all demographics get an equally fair shake/generous response from law enforcement when they are holding (or believed to be holding) a gun." Maybe they do and maybe they don't, but that particular argument doesn't work at all. There's a huge difference between a protest (even with armed protesters) in broad daylight surrounded by cops and news media, and a split-second confrontation between a police officer and a suspect in the middle of the night. You cannot boil down both situations to "a person may have a gun." (To be clear, that's not to make any moral judgements about the people involved in those two different situations, or what cops should or should not do. Just saying they are different, and it's dangerously simplistic to line them up next to each other and believe you've proved anything.)
- rmxt 11y ago
  My main point is that it's not as simple as: not("breaking law" or "pointing guns at other people") == not("get shot") which is what you were snarkily making it out to be. There are whole fields of study devoted to the issues at hand, neither you nor I will convince each other or make an airtight case in a single post regarding the full spectrum of input into all armed encounters with police that result in the output of either dying, or being arrested without incident, or anything in between.

by rmxt 11y ago

13thLetter 11y ago

"But, it's disingenuous to think that all demographics get an equally fair shake/generous response from law enforcement when they are holding (or believed to be holding) a gun." Maybe they do and maybe they don't, but that particular argument doesn't work at all. There's a huge difference between a protest (even with armed protesters) in broad daylight surrounded by cops and news media, and a split-second confrontation between a police officer and a suspect in the middle of the night. You cannot boil down both situations to "a person may have a gun." (To be clear, that's not to make any moral judgements about the people involved in those two different situations, or what cops should or should not do. Just saying they are different, and it's dangerously simplistic to line them up next to each other and believe you've proved anything.)

rmxt 11y ago
My main point is that it's not as simple as: not("breaking law" or "pointing guns at other people") == not("get shot") which is what you were snarkily making it out to be. There are whole fields of study devoted to the issues at hand, neither you nor I will convince each other or make an airtight case in a single post regarding the full spectrum of input into all armed encounters with police that result in the output of either dying, or being arrested without incident, or anything in between.