Just because I feel like you could benefit from some reflection.

Latest:
adjective
Of most recent date

noun
the most recent news or fashion


Ambush:
noun
A surprise attack by people lying in wait in a concealed position

verb

make a surprise attack on (someone) from a concealed position


Police encounters per year: 53,000,000
2019 Deaths by police per year: 1004
2019 Felonious killings of LEOs: 48

Deaths by Police .00002 %
Felonious deaths of LEOS .0000009

Now keep in mind, that .00002% number is not even taking into account those that were justified. I won't make the assertion that many, if not most, were justified because I'm sure I'd get a lot of pushback. So for the sake of just qualifying the data: at least 600+ had a weapon on them. And 250 were black.

So that .00002% becomes much smaller if we are to look at unjustified use of police force against blacks.

You are questioning the validity of my claim that officers fear for their safety during routine stops. I offer you no more evidence than your own support of BLM. Out of 53 million police contacts per year, 2019 saw a fraction of a percentage go poorly for both blacks and officers. So you've got some big, double standard-stamped nerve asking me for my citation of that claim while you sit behind your keyboard happily calling us out in other threads.

My impression is that you were alarmed by the thought of 50+ officers shot in the past 7 weeks. Noticing your source, I thought it looked like you needed some friendly advice about verifying information.

The myth that police are on one side and the public on the other.

Hey Jane, once again you fail to see how the burden of proof works. I'm sick of your holier than thou attitude. I presented a single source which confirms every one of the things claimed in my OP, which wasn't that much by the way. I wasn't making a political statement, nor was I offering statistics to refute anything. There are no fucking "sides" in this argument. It was a statement of fact. If YOU have a problem with them, and YOU feel something is inaccurate, then its your responsibility to prove me wrong.

How the burden of proof works: before you decide to type your word vomit, you need to actually sit back and do some research of your own. Unless you have information which renders my post inaccurate, then you're showing that you are nothing other than an unrelenting and incorrigible member of this forum who is here to do nothing other than be an obstacle to legitimate discussion. You post deliberately to give a hard time.

Once again, your emotions led you to assume that I was alarmed. I was stating facts, that were given in that source, and that are backed up by factual data. Its not my fault if you didn't verify that on your own before you were blinded by the source itself and the fact that it was me who posted it. That is dishonest. You are being intentionally dishonest and it is getting old. The entire point of my post was to show how there is a possibility that things can get worse before they get better, and I have started that previously in this thread. You fail to read. You fail to comprehend. You get so affected by individual posts/posters or opinions that you can't control yourself.

The importance behind the numbers is that it has a direct link to the order of George Floyd and I was suggesting we might see an increase in tensions moving forward. That has nothing to do with being "alarmed" and if you had an ounce of reading comprehension then you would understand that. But you have repeatedly demonstrated you ignore everything and instead favor either using emotion or seeing emotion. You are not beneficial to these discussions.

The source was used to relay the story itself, period. I went to grad school and spent a great deal of time doing research and learning how to vet data. I don't need you to give me friendly advice regarding verification or anything for that matter.

I love how you decide not to respond to anything else we call you out on. I wouldn't respond except you repeatedly show how incapable you are at certain things and one of our problems is that there are not enough people like you being called out.

To go off topic a bit. I wasn't offended by the article saying "ambushed". I just thought it conveyed a different meaning than what happened. There have been incidents over the years where someone intentionally makes a bogus call to the police and lies in wait for them. This wasn't that. The guy shot without warning but wasn't laying in wait, which is what I think of when I think of the term ambush. I just thought there was a better word for it.

For instance I also don't like using the word "most" when it is a slight majority. Even though that is the definition. When I am writing I use most when it is a large majority, like 75% or more, not 51% or more.

YMMV. Carry on.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

It's comical to see Jane lecture anyone on posting valid source material after she posted two articles that had nothing to do with the point she was claiming to make in the FRT thread.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Fair enough. Unfortunately there are plenty of other people who will take offense to words like this because they either don't really understand the words they're debating, or because they think it gives them standing to refute the overall argument.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Understood. But I don't believe I ever said there are two definitive sides and everyone is split. I have been a proponent of the idea that there are some officers who are terrible. And some people who are fed up with cops. The data supports both of those ideas. And the recent story I posted is further evidence of that. The only sides that exist are the logical and illogical ones. Bad cops and those who support ACAB and the messages sent to this poor girl are on the illogical side. And these two sides colliding are one of the reasons for so much violence and social disruption. Is that a myth?

I read a stat that said 54 officers have been shot since the murder of George Floyd. The timeline is of most importance here. I then posted that I feel this might get worse and judging by the words of others who vehemently oppose police. Their words, not mine. I didn't say it was proof that armageddon is coming. I said I think it might get worse. So how is it that I'm the one disgusting you?

You failed to address my post regarding your claim of paranoia. How is it (according to your logic) that the dangers of being an officer is based in paranoia but the BLM movement is not paranoia? Based on statistics alone, there is a 0.0000x chance of a police contact ending poorly for either party. So please tell me why you believe the paranoia exists for one party, but not the other.

And I don't know how I failed to address your claims of paranoia. I made my position clear: being a LEO is safe and overselling the danger is feeding into the paranoia. The result of this paranoia is the feeling that the police and the public are add odds with each other.

I don't know what you are asking in regards to BLM. But if it makes you feel better, yes, anyone BLM or otherwise, who subscribes to the ideal that the police and the public are natural enemies is wrong.

Do you place the same level of paranoia on those who believe in BLM or those who claim injustice by the police on people of color?

For the record, being vigilant and having a healthy respect for a potentially dangerous situation based on real reports is not paranoia. It is called being prudent. There is a big difference between police taking appropriate extra measures during routine calls because of past incidents, and them approaching every routine stop with 5 officers, guns blazing, and air support. We’re talking about them taking a few extra reasonable precautions. Them wanting to do that is paranoid?

When officers are killed point blank while responding to offer help, it is disingenuous to call other officers who then think twice, “paranoid.” Dont downplay the deaths. We’re not doing it to BLM. It is a real possibility, infinitely more so than in my, or most of our professions on this forum. So Id appreciate it if you didnt sit there and trivialize the deaths of other innocent officers, or downplay it as paranoia.

I feel pretty beaten down by you & slowguy. Too many insults. The insults are so mixed into your arguments that I have to parse sentence by sentence, and it’s demoralizing.

ETA: in addition to being unkind, insults and personal attacks clutter the arguments. They also undermine your credibility because you wouldn’t need insults if you had good arguments. Bottom line, it’s best to stay civil.

Still sticking with that story, huh? Ok ::shrug::

Its hilarious that you take issue with our “insults.” Our demoralizing sentences are with your argument style and ability to follow the topics. I’ll kindly point out that you were the one to use “true colors” and “motherfucker” against me. Slowguy and I are civil, he more than I most of the time. If the things he and I have said demoralize you, perhaps the Lavender Room just isnt the right sandbox for you. I like good arguments, its how Ive learned, and even had some of my opinions changed since Ive been here. But I appreciate good arguments, not baseless and emotionally charged ones. And certainly not repeatedly, thats where patience wears thin and the tone changes.

You responded to me by breaking down my argument with 4 claims that were completely off base due to poor reading comprehension. I refuted every single one and youre response is nowhere, except to tell us we should be nicer.

That is exhibit A of why our patience wears thin. It is countless times now where we spend time and energy defending ourselves against you and you bounce around all over the place and disregard any of the content we wrote, except to say we should be nicer. Thats not how this works.

Another one

https://www.cnn.com/...ashington/index.html

I saw this the other day. So sad. And ironic that it happened as I was getting into this thread. I didn't want to post it. I thought its important and deserves attention, but I didnt want to start an agenda and take away from my true message, however relevant. Its a hot topic and I made that choice. I didnt want to get into, nor do I think a pissing match of which side can post more stories is productive. But they all deserve attention.

Dont know if Im correct in my thinking or not. Its just where my thoughts are.

Turns out the person who murdered this police officer is (per his own facebook page) a BLM Activist, among other not so surprising things.....

https://noqreport.com/...tm_source=whatfinger

Yeeper...PM sent to you