"The entire basis of your argument is that we should refrain from using certain words because it evokes "a great deal of consternation..."? What is that? Suppression of free speech? Have you something to hide? Because it further tarnishes the image of LEOs?"

EYE-rie,

Please produce evidence to support your claim? Please show where I have stated that someone should refrain from using certain words....Please show where I have tried to hide something and/or suppress anyone's words or ideas?

Maybe your reading comprehension is fine...BUT, I think you should stop agonizng over that bifocal purchase and go ahead and get them...

As I have stated (and you have not), I don't care if the officer is innocent or guilty...the evidence will bare it out...let's just give him a fair shake...

I've called Eye Express and explained to them your issues with interpretation and visualizing and they said they can help....their number is in the book...

it'd be a drive for you though...
Kel

Kel,

I am slightly bemused that you, a police officer, have to resort to such unsophisticated personal stabs in a pathetic attempt to discredit, when it is quite obvious that you lack the ability and self-dignity to formulate a coherent argument, and participate in an open discussion.

Quote:

---

Remember, we were discussing "public opinion" and when you started using the words, "unjustified force" I pointed out that here in America, that that is a civil rights violation (and that uttering such words causes a great deal of consternation, in the general public, LEO, the press, etc etc)...

---

Here you directly imply precisely that... if I use the words "unjustified force", that is tantamount to a civil rights violation and that it causes a great deal of consternation. And therefore, implying that I should refrain from using those words.

To which I have rebutted your argument, by stating my opinion is neither factual evidence nor allegation of said violation.

BTW, see my post #15965570 where I said:

Quote:

---

As to whether his actions were justifiable, appropriate and warranted, is a matter for IA.

---

So, which part of that did you not understand me as expressly stating he should have a "fair shake"?

I'm no longer interested in continuing this conversation with you as you seemingly cannot provide the level of intellectual challenge or debate that I would want to participate in.

So on that note... insult me all you like... just don't expect a response. I have no interest in stooping to your level.

BTW, great image to project to the general public - this is how low, YOU, an LEO, would stoop to in a public forum to beat down the debate.

E,

I never IMPLIED anything. That is your way of trying to discredit my statements or your paranoia is showing and you really believe that I was implying something.

Whether you like it or not (or agree with it or not), my statement reference the perception of the words, "unjustified force" is correct and dead on (at least here in the states).

I am sorry you don't agree with it.

Further, on 2 different posts I made an easy out for both us writing that we are from different cultures, with possibly a different understanding of words and ideas. It could have ended there and I would even have accepted a slight verbal rebuke and let it drop (after all it WAS your turn and fair is fair).

But, I firmly believe your arrogance and hubris would not allow you to end a discussion that was obviously beginning to digress.

Again, I don't care what the general public's (YOU) opinion of me is. I volunteered and served in the Gulf War as a firefighter, graduated top academic in my police academy, have a 4 year degreee and been a law abiding citizen and police officer for close to 18 years. I have a 2 month old son that I purposely waited til I was older in life to have so I could be a good father. I attend church (not as much as I should, I will admit). I always try and remember that my job is to help people and treat them (and that means not only the victim's of crime but also the supects too) the way I would want to be treated (admittedly something ALL police officers do not always do). I don't judge anyone and think everyone should be able to, "do their own thing" (as long as "their thing" does not hurt or injure others).

There is nothing exceptional about the record of my life, but, I am proud of my accomplishments.

I don't need to impress you (or anyone else for that matter).

Kel

Again, we shall have to agree to disagree.

eyrie,

Looking at both of your responses objectively, side by side, I have to say that you appear quite irritated with kels neutrality. That's just an observation.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I will say that as many video dashcam and jail survelillance incidents that I have reviewed, I have been guilty of jumping to conclusions that were later proven to be inaccurate. This experience (something that I am sure kel is familiar with) tends to foster a "wait until all the facts are in" perspective that some people misinterpret.