KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 27, 2010 18:42:05 GMT -5
I'm referring to the article: "COPS ASSAULT FATHER WHILE SON IS NEAR DEATH"
|
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 27, 2010 18:51:26 GMT -5
That story is completely an opinion-based piece, no better than a blog. Here is one such statement in it that proves this:
Apparently is an assumptive statement, not a statement of fact. He has no clue why they were there or for what reason. His first mention of them is that they are "truculent". How does he know? Was the author even there? What was his source?
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Feb 27, 2010 19:03:17 GMT -5
And the author gives no sources. NONE. We have no proof ANYWHERE that James Rourke or the cops in question even exist. Here is another story on the same incident from a more mainstream source: www.publicopiniononline.com/ci_14399217And what would you expect the author to post? He already named the officers individually (who could sue for libel if it were false), named the victim, sourced it from another mainstream news outlet, and named the precise time, date, and police department involved. If you want to do research, what else could you ask for? You have everything you need. Call the police dept on Monday morning and ask if the officers are employed there. Ask if an incident took place with a James Rourke on Jan 28 at 6pm. What else do you need to completely and totally research this? The author did everything but dial the phone for you. No matter what the author had sourced in the story, you would refuse to believe it. And if you were eventually forced into accepting part of it as truth, you would merely dismiss it as an isolated incident and retreat to the comfort of your current beliefs.
|
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 27, 2010 19:15:11 GMT -5
And the author gives no sources. NONE. We have no proof ANYWHERE that James Rourke or the cops in question even exist. Here is another story on the same incident from a more mainstream source: www.publicopiniononline.com/ci_14399217And what would you expect the author to post? He already named the officers individually (who could sue for libel if it were false), named the victim, sourced it from another mainstream news outlet, and named the precise time, date, and police department involved. If you want to do research, what else could you ask for? You have everything you need. Call the police dept on Monday morning and ask if the officers are employed there. Ask if an incident took place with a James Rourke on Jan 28 at 6pm. What else do you need to completely and totally research this? The author did everything but dial the phone for you. No matter what the author had sourced in the story, you would refuse to believe it. And if you were eventually forced into accepting part of it as truth, you would merely dismiss it as an isolated incident and retreat to the comfort of your current beliefs. And yet again you do what you accuse others of doing. Tons of wrong assumptions in that statement Stephen.
|
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 27, 2010 19:17:41 GMT -5
No matter what the author had sourced in the story, you would refuse to believe it. And if you were eventually forced into accepting part of it as truth, you would merely dismiss it as an isolated incident and retreat to the comfort of your current beliefs. FALSE.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Feb 27, 2010 20:57:34 GMT -5
Here is another story on the same incident from a more mainstream source: www.publicopiniononline.com/ci_14399217And what would you expect the author to post? He already named the officers individually (who could sue for libel if it were false), named the victim, sourced it from another mainstream news outlet, and named the precise time, date, and police department involved. If you want to do research, what else could you ask for? You have everything you need. Call the police dept on Monday morning and ask if the officers are employed there. Ask if an incident took place with a James Rourke on Jan 28 at 6pm. What else do you need to completely and totally research this? The author did everything but dial the phone for you. No matter what the author had sourced in the story, you would refuse to believe it. And if you were eventually forced into accepting part of it as truth, you would merely dismiss it as an isolated incident and retreat to the comfort of your current beliefs. And yet again you do what you accuse others of doing. Tons of wrong assumptions in that statement Stephen. The only assumptions in my post were in the last paragraph, and although they were accurately based on past actions I must admit that yes, they were assumptions.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Feb 27, 2010 21:00:13 GMT -5
You may be willing to have your beliefs changed, but in the time that I've known you, I've never seen it occur. However, I have seen you time and time again demand answers only to reject them once offered. So I am guilty of making an assumption, but it was the only conclusion that my history with you allowed me to make.
|
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 27, 2010 21:11:37 GMT -5
You may be willing to have your beliefs changed, but in the time that I've known you, I've never seen it occur. However, I have seen you time and time again demand answers only to reject them once offered. So I am guilty of making an assumption, but it was the only conclusion that my history with you allowed me to make. Well then it's apparent that you have no clue what you are talking about. You are welcome to call my wife and verify the statement that I have not changed my beliefs in the time I've known you. Have I changed them to deny any of the important facets of the faith? No! Jesus Christ is still my Savior and my Lord, and the Holy Spirit of God lives within me and changed my life in a major way. Salvation is by grace through faith alone plus nothing. Those issues are non-negotiable Scriptural truths. So many other things in life are not nearly as important, and are quite subject to change. You say I haven't changed since I've know you? You haven't been listening.... Outside of the major Biblical views I've changed (such as my position on free will vs. predestination, or dispensationalism vs. Covenant theology), I've EVEN since I've known you changed political views. Remember I support G.W. Bush the first time he ran. It's a vote I'd love to have back now and I've told you that on more than one occasion. So will you now apologize or continue to stick your head in the sand and say I'm unwilling to change? Brother, how far are you willing to go to prove these positions?
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Feb 27, 2010 21:20:38 GMT -5
Well then it's apparent that you have no clue what you are talking about. That statement is insulting and has no place in any debate regardless of who is right or wrong. The only change I'm aware of (and the only one that concerns the political arena that we're discussing) is the last one mentioned, but yes, that certainly is a change in your political view and you are correct.
|
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 27, 2010 21:23:25 GMT -5
Well then it's apparent that you have no clue what you are talking about. That statement is insulting and has no place in any debate regardless of who is right or wrong. The only change I'm aware of (and the only one that concerns the political arena that we're discussing) is the last one mentioned, but yes, that certainly is a change in your political view and you are correct. Well your own statements have been highly insulting. My statement was true. If you say I'm unwilling to change my positions you don't know what you are talking about. Point blank.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Feb 27, 2010 22:44:28 GMT -5
Well your own statements have been highly insulting. My statement was true. If you say I'm unwilling to change my positions you don't know what you are talking about. Point blank. Once again you are reverting to emotional responses. Relax. Accusations of how dumb your counterpart is accomplish nothing for you. And yes, I shorted you one. In the 15 years that I've known you, you have changed your view on a political topic once that I am aware of. But on scores of occasions I have seen you demand answers to questions only to refuse them when they are offered. And you have told me numerous times that you would "never" accept a political view like mine, which is a universal statement that refuses to acknowledge any amount of evidence. I still detect a pattern here. If your political views are open for changing, let me know. It would be a pleasant surprise and I would welcome the news.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Mar 5, 2010 10:30:16 GMT -5
POLICE QUOTAS REQUIRE ARRESTS, ASSAULTS, ABDUCTIONS for officers face demotion
A few months ago, Zebulun and Elijah Colbourne were among five New York City teenagers arrested and held overnight in jail in order to fill an official quota. The citation claimed that the teenagers, who had been racing in the sidewalks, were engaged in “tumultuous and violent conduct that caused public alarm.” They were given a summons, handcuffed, and held in a cell before being released the next morning without further action.
“They just wanted to arrest us,” Zebulun told WABC News. “They locked us up for nothing.” Well, not exactly for nothing: The arresting officer was able to tally five summonses toward his monthly quota.
Adil Polanco, a five-year veteran of the NYPD’s 41st Precinct in the Bronx, confirmed to WABC that police are under relentless official pressure to make arrests and issue summonses in order to meet arbitrary quotas.
“We are stopping kids walking upstairs to their house, stopping kids going to the store, young adults … n order to keep the quota,” discloses Officer Polanco. “Our primary job is not to help anybody, our primary job is not to assist anybody, our primary job is to get those numbers and come back with them.”
Like other decent people who become police officers out of a genuine desire to protect the rights and property of individuals — yes, such people do exist — Polanco is severely disillusioned by the reality of his profession.
“I’m not going to keep arresting innocent people, I’m not going to keep searching people for no reason, I’m not going to keep writing people [citations] for no reason, I’m tired of this,” declared a visibly disgusted Polanco.
Audio recordings played during the segment broadcast by WABC confirmed Polanco’s account.
One patrol supervisor told officers that unyielding and ever-increasing arrest and citation quotas would be part of their professional lives “until you decide to quit this job and become a Pizza Hut delivery man”; another supervising officer tells police that “you’re going to be doing a lot more, a lot more” by way of meeting arrest and citation quotas.
New York City Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Browne insists that quotas — however euphemistically described — are “productivity goals” for police officers. He thereby offered a validating illustration of a principle repeatedly noted in this space: The only things that government actually makes are criminals out of innocent people, and corpses out of living human beings.
An unjustified arrest is an act of kidnapping. What Officer Polanco describes and WABC documents is nothing less than the systematic abduction of innocent people under color of state “authority.”
Polanco is neither the first nor only officer to confirm the widely known but officially denied truth that police are subject to arbitrary arrest and citation quotas.
Five years ago Cincinnati police officer Vincent George filed a grievance with the police union against the department’s use of arrest and ticket quotas. Like other Cincinnati police officers who failed or refused to meet those quotas, George suffered immediate professional retaliation in the form of a demotion to overnight desk duty.
A Washington Post story from 2004 described how police in Falls Church, Virginia were required “to write an average of three tickets, or make three arrests, every 12-hour shift, and to accumulate a minimum total of 400 tickets and arrests for year…. Failure to meet the quotas results in an automatic 90-day probationary period with no pay raise and a possible demotion or dismissal if ticket or arrest numbers aren’t immediately raised to acceptable levels. ”
In Illinois, pressure from police officials killed a proposed measure banning the use of arrest and ticket quotas, even though the same officials loudly deny that such quotas are in use.
As the Greater Depression deepens, municipal revenue streams are being choked off and job opportunities are evaporating. Thus police are under ever-increasing pressure to carry out the predatory practice of “taxation by citation” — with the prospect of financial ruin if they fail to produce the required number of “criminals.”
Whatever else can be said about Officer Adil Polanco, his public condemnation of police abduction by quota is an act of authentic heroism.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Mar 6, 2010 23:03:14 GMT -5
UPDATE ON DRUNKEN COP WHO ASSAULTED INNOCENT WOMAN
Anthony Abbate, the 250+ lb. Chicago street cop who savagely beat 115-lb. bartender Karolina Obrycka because he supposedly felt he was “in danger,” was found guilty today of a single count of felonious aggravated battery. He had previously been indicted on fifteen counts, including witness intimidation.
Abbate’s defense for throwing the frail woman to the floor and repeatedly hitting and kicking her was, essentially, “She started it”: He complained that she pushed him in an attempt to move him from behind the bar, a place he didn’t belong in the first place.
Obrycka intervened to remove the intoxicated Abbate when he became foul-mouthed and violent; one witness said she moved to protect a male patron from being beaten by the off-duty cop. None of the putative men in the bar reciprocated the favor by acting to protect her from Abbate’s onslaught.
Incredibly, even after being convicted of a violent felony, Abbate’s dismissal from the police force is not automatic. A wire service account notes: “Police Supt. Jody Weis has previously said he wanted Abbate fired. Now that he’s been convicted of a felony, that’s likely to happen.” (Emphasis added.)
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Mar 6, 2010 23:06:15 GMT -5
More on the story from Karen DeCoster:
An off-duty Chicago police officer convicted of pummeling a female bartender half his size was sentenced Tuesday to two years probation and anger management classes for the videotaped attack that appeared worldwide on the Internet and cable news channels.
His sentence? A home curfew and anger management classes.
The Judge actually said (hold on): “If I believed sentencing Anthony Abbate to prison would stop people from getting drunk and hitting people, I’d give him the maximum sentence.”
Since the same logic could apply to all crimes, can we apply that logic to non-crime crimes like drunk driving and selling/using drugs? Also note that the scumbag claimed “self-defense,” even in light of the video play-by-play of the beating.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Mar 6, 2010 23:07:27 GMT -5
And from Texas, where cops find it necessary to assault a 72-year-old Great Grandmother with deadly weapons...
Fox News has obtained police dashboard video of the tasering of a 72 year old great grandmother in Travis County, TX.
The police claim that after Kathryn Winkfein was stopped for driving 15 miles over the speed limit in a construction zone, she disobeyed an order to sign the speeding ticker, used profane language, and became "violent." They say the officer who taserer her and took her to be booked for resisting arrest was completely justified.
However, Winkfein says that's a lie, and the video appears to back her up.
It shows Constable Richard McCain screaming, "Get over here now!" Winkfein replies, "Give [the ticket] to me and I'll sign it." Instead, the officer reaches out and pushes her, and she starts complaining, "Oh, you're going to shove me? You're going to shove a seventy-two year old woman?"
McCain then tases her. As Winkfein lies on the ground screaming, he orders, "Now put your hands behind your back. Put your hands behind your back or you're going to be tasered again."
Fox's Brian Kilmeade commented after running the video, "Officers insisted they acted by the book."
What book is that?
|
|