Sheriff .... that's not my responsibility

GURPS

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Now there's this stunning denial of responsibility, in which Israel explains to a local news reporter why he is refusing to resign: "I gave him a gun. I gave him a badge. I gave him the training. If he didn't have the heart to go in, that's not my responsibility."

Confidence in police is below its 2004 peak, even if it's rebounded from a post-Ferguson low in 2014. There are many reasons for that, including a seemingly endless stream of cases in which police shoot unarmed suspects and face few if any legal consequences. Add to that now a high-profile cop categorically declaring that his ass is covered merely by giving the requisite training to his staff, rather than overseeing a properly functioning department.

The Parkland shooting is quickly moving from a story about the need for more restrictions on weapons and owners to one about how officials failed to execute their duties. Israel's craven responses will only feed that narrative, which might at least have the salutary effect of raising public consciousness and holding police accountable.



Broward Co. Sheriff Israel: 'Not My Responsibility' That His Employee Failed to Confront Parkland Shooter


:shrug:

No, No Duty to Protect
 
T

transporter

Well-Known Member
GURPS said:
The Parkland shooting is quickly moving from a story about the need for more restrictions on weapons and owners to one about how officials failed to execute their duties. Israel's craven responses will only feed that narrative, which might at least have the salutary effect of raising public consciousness and holding police accountable.
Click to expand...

Nope...YOU and the gun lobby are trying desperately to change to topic...and failing miserably.
 
This_person

This_person

Well-Known Member
GURPS said:
Now there's this stunning denial of responsibility, in which Israel explains to a local news reporter why he is refusing to resign: "I gave him a gun. I gave him a badge. I gave him the training. If he didn't have the heart to go in, that's not my responsibility."

Confidence in police is below its 2004 peak, even if it's rebounded from a post-Ferguson low in 2014. There are many reasons for that, including a seemingly endless stream of cases in which police shoot unarmed suspects and face few if any legal consequences. Add to that now a high-profile cop categorically declaring that his ass is covered merely by giving the requisite training to his staff, rather than overseeing a properly functioning department.

The Parkland shooting is quickly moving from a story about the need for more restrictions on weapons and owners to one about how officials failed to execute their duties. Israel's craven responses will only feed that narrative, which might at least have the salutary effect of raising public consciousness and holding police accountable.



Broward Co. Sheriff Israel: 'Not My Responsibility' That His Employee Failed to Confront Parkland Shooter


:shrug:

No, No Duty to Protect
Click to expand...

TheBuckStopsSticker.jpg
 
Toxick

Toxick

Splat
GURPS said:
explain what NEW LAWS would have PREVENTED This or any other SHOOTING
Click to expand...



When (not if) they ban all guns from civilians, the only remaining weapons will be in the hands of trained professionals.

Thank God!!!


At that point if (not when) someone wishes to do violence, they'll be forced to use non-firearm weapons, which, frankly, are easier to survive than being blasted by a gun, and easier for the authorities to subdue. Furthermore, the police - although armed with guns - will be less likely to draw those firearms when confronted with such attackers subduing them manually - or resorting to the firearm if the assailant is using a knife or a stick or something. Should it come to that, they should be able to easily end the threat.




Either way - when we get rid of the guns, all shootings will stop almost immediately.


It's worked, literally everywhere.
 
b23hqb

b23hqb

Well-Known Member
PREMO Member
Toxick said:
When (not if) they ban all guns from civilians, the only remaining weapons will be in the hands of trained professionals.

Thank God!!!


At that point if (not when) someone wishes to do violence, they'll be forced to use non-firearm weapons, which, frankly, are easier to survive than being blasted by a gun, and easier for the authorities to subdue. Furthermore, the police - although armed with guns - will be less likely to draw those firearms when confronted with such attackers subduing them manually - or resorting to the firearm if the assailant is using a knife or a stick or something. Should it come to that, they should be able to easily end the threat.




Either way - when we get rid of the guns, all shootings will stop almost immediately.


It's worked, literally everywhere.
Click to expand...

Did I detect just a trace of :sarcasm:, maybe, Herr Toxic?
 
Gilligan

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
Toxick said:
When (not if) they ban all guns from civilians, the only remaining weapons will be in the hands of trained professionals.

Thank God!!!


At that point if (not when) someone wishes to do violence, they'll be forced to use non-firearm weapons, which, frankly, are easier to survive than being blasted by a gun, and easier for the authorities to subdue. Furthermore, the police - although armed with guns - will be less likely to draw those firearms when confronted with such attackers subduing them manually - or resorting to the firearm if the assailant is using a knife or a stick or something. Should it come to that, they should be able to easily end the threat.




Either way - when we get rid of the guns, all shootings will stop almost immediately.


It's worked, literally everywhere.
Click to expand...

That's easily the most cogent and insightful post I've yet seen to support a total ban on firearms. :coffee:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top