Amerika, zemlja velika

[iDemo]

aman nije u vojnickoj tradiciji niti obicaj na ratistu (posto se slicno vise puta ponavlja) da pucas u coveka bez oruzja koji ne pruza nikakav otpor

ne znas ti sta je stres, ne??? 

[iDemo]

Osim toga - nisu to samo policajci po Amerikama - ima i po drugim #normalnijim zemljama policije koja je u stanju da puca u nenaoruzanu osobu u samoodbrani - tipa - ono - maloletna deca mashu kuhinjskim nozem, mentalno obolela osoba koja agresivno™ vice na sluzbenike policije  i taj rad...

[ToniAdams]

moguce da je taj stres i to, to onda objasnjava izvestaj po kom je lik navodno uleteo u kola da uzme utoku. sto kaze nas narod, u stresu su velike oci.

[Krošek]

jel mora da se ponavlja ova prica svaki put? ono, odvratne umobolne scene, da se izrigas, a na to "nema kodeks", "ima raznih", "ima i u drugim zemljama", pa u kurac s tim vise

[askeladden]

Goglam BBC news,po njima godisnje pogine oko 50 policajaca a FBI cak nema statistiku o broju zrtava policije.Prema BBC istrazivanju cifra ide do 1000.Brate,ovaj snimak pokazuje takvu kurcobolju za ljudski zivot. Pet debelih nit su musko nit su zensko kreatura uperi pistolj u tebe i trazi ti dokumenta,ti da izvadis jbnu vozacku i odjednom O Sveti Petre,otkud ja ovde?

[Prokleto Djubre]

Ma svako ko analizira zasto panduri pucaju u ljude i razmislja o motivima radi upravo ono sto oni zele. Koga boli kurac da li je izrazena kultura oruzja u zemlji, da li imaju stres i da li se plase. Roknuo si coveka, ides u zatvor. Malog crnju niko ne pita da li je on imao stres odrastajuci u najcrnjem siromastvu pa se zato okrenuo kriminalu. Mali crnja kad ga uhvate ode pa odlezi to sto je zasrao, a cesto i ono sto nije jer nema sindikalnog advokata.

[askeladden]

Nema tu nekih motiva.Oni su u ratu sa civilima i to je to.Kao sto kukaju da se u Koloradu delegalizuje marihuana jer stopa kriminala pada i samim tim privatni zatvori i policajci ostaju bez posla.Na svim klipovima ubistava civila ima uvek nekoliko policajaca,tako da nema price o kukoljui usamljenim manijacima.Setimo se nereda u LA devedesetih..Ima jedan klip iz Svedske gde pandurka prebije pijanca.Prvo pusti psa na njega,doduse sa korpom,al ti gledaj dal monstrum ima korpu il nema,plus urla kao divlja i sta time dobija osim da nivo stresa kod zrtve ide preko svake granice.Bori se ili bezi preuzima rukovodjenje  i covek sve manje moze da reaguje smisleno ili shvati sta mu se govori.Na kraju ga je ispendrecila,doduse kulturno po ramenu i butini i bez cokula,al opet.Mogla je pozvati kolege i staviti mu lisice bez drame i nasilja..U Americi bi ga verovatno upucali ili ako je bas srecan,sprzili strujom pa ako ima srcanu bolest,ili epilepsiju jbga,ko radi taj i gresi.

[Radoye]

aman nije u vojnickoj tradiciji niti obicaj na ratistu (posto se slicno vise puta ponavlja) da pucas u coveka bez oruzja koji ne pruza nikakav otpor

 

Bogami jeste u tradiciji americke vojne obuke nakon WW2 i Koreje, koja se putem ex-military instruktora preliva i u policijsku obuku, da se puca na sve sto mrda i da se pitanja postavljaju kasnije:

 

S.L.A. Marshall did a study on the firing rates of soldiers in World War II. He found that the ratio of rounds fired vs. hits was low; he also noted that few soldiers were aiming to hit their targets. This was a problem for the US military and its allies during World War II. New training implements were developed and hit rates improved. The changes were small, but effective. First, instead of shooting at bull's-eye type tagets, the United States Army switched to silhouette targets that mimic an average human. Training also switched from 300 yard slow fire testing to rapid fire testing with different time and distances intervals from 20 to 300 yards. With these two changes, hitting targets became a reaction that was almost automatic.

 

But what about the consequences of a mistake? After all, that dark object in the suspect’s hands could be a wallet, not a gun. The occasional training scenario may even make that point. But officers are taught that the risks of mistake are less—far less—than the risks of hesitation. A common phrase among cops pretty much sums it up: “Better to be judged by twelve than carried by six.”

[ToniAdams]

jel i laziranje izvestaja u istoj tradiciji posle koreje?

[Weenie Pooh]

aman nije u vojnickoj tradiciji niti obicaj na ratistu (posto se slicno vise puta ponavlja) da pucas u coveka bez oruzja koji ne pruza nikakav otpor

 

Naravno da nije, ali je u imaginarnoj tradiciji naloženih kretena koji jedva čekaju da dobiju oružje i licence to kill. Igraju se rata sa civilnim stanovništvom, jebiga.

[askeladden]

Policajka koja je pucala je instruktor obuke za nove policajce.Opravdanja su tipa posao je rukom u kola iako je prozor bio zatvoren pa do nasli smo pcp u kolima.Sprinkle crack on him Johnson fazon.

[Radoye]

jel i laziranje izvestaja u istoj tradiciji posle koreje?

 

To je u tradiciji od pre Koreje, i za razliku od ovog treninga da se po automatizmu puca na sve sto mrda nije cisto americki specijalitet.

[Eraserhead]

Ovo ne treba da bude razlog za rant na policajce. Ako izuzmemo cinjenicu da velika vecina radi svoj posao dobro verujem da ova policajka i mnogi drugi koji su bili u njenoj poziciji ranije nisu srecni sto su ubili nekoga i da je i njima sjeban zivot. Po meni su i oni zrtve raznih NRA i ostalih promotera kulture oruzja. To cak vise nije ni rasni problem u smislu "beli policajci ubijeni crnci".  Sincoj je kod mene u Sarlotu ubijen crnac, ali ga je takodje ubio crni policajac. Protesti su automatski izbili. Ovo je rasni problem na jednom dubljem nivou koji se tice toga da crne porodice u proseku imaju nizi income i da su toj deci uslovi odrastanja daleko tezi.

[3opge]

Uzivajte u clanku jednog autenticnog fashiste iz danasnjeg WSJ:

 

 

The United States Must Be the World’s Policeman

Only America has the material and moral greatness to stop the slide into chaos and foster peace.

 

By ANDERS FOGH RASMUSSEN

Sept. 20, 2016 7:04 p.m. ET

89 COMMENTS

Barely had I been seated before Vladimir Putin told me that NATO—the organization that I then headed—no longer had any purpose and should be disbanded. “After the end of the Cold War, we dissolved the Warsaw Pact,” he said. “Similarly, you should dissolve NATO. That is a relic from the Cold War.”

During my visit to Moscow in December 2009, I sensed that President Putin was challenging the world order that the U.S. created so successfully after World War II. Beginning in 2014, he invaded Ukraine and launched a military action in Syria.

From my former positions as prime minister of Denmark and secretary-general of NATO, I know how important American leadership is. We desperately need a U.S. president who is able and willing to lead the free world and counter autocrats like President Putin. A president who will lead from the front, not from behind.

 

The world needs such a policeman if freedom and prosperity are to prevail against the forces of oppression, and the only capable, reliable and desirable candidate for the position is the United States. The presidential elections thus come at a pivotal point in history.

The Middle East is torn by war. In North Africa, Libya has collapsed and become a breeding ground for terrorists. In Eastern Europe, a resurgent Russia has brutally attacked and grabbed land by force from Ukraine. China is flexing its muscles against its neighbors—and the rogue state of North Korea is threatening a nuclear attack.

In this world of interconnections, it has become a cliché to talk about the “global village.“ But right now, the village is burning, and the neighbors are fighting in the light of the flames. Just as we need a policeman to restore order; we need a firefighter to put out the flames of conflict, and a kind of mayor, smart and sensible, to lead the rebuilding.

This is not simply about means. It is also about morality. Just as only America has the material greatness to stop the slide into chaos, only America has the moral greatness to do it—not for the sake of power, but for the sake of peace.Only America can play all these roles, because of all world powers, America alone has the credibility to shape sustainable solutions to these challenges. Russia is obsessed with rebuilding the empire the Soviet Union lost. China is still primarily a regional actor. Europe is weak, divided and leaderless. The old powers of Britain and France are simply too small and exhausted to play the global role they once did.

Yet the U.S. will only be able to shape the solutions the world needs if its leaders act with conviction. When America retrenches and retreats—if the world even thinks that American restraint reflects a lack of willingness to engage in preventing and resolving conflicts—it leaves a vacuum that will be filled by crooked autocrats across the world.

The Obama administration’s reluctance to lead the world has had serious consequences, and none is graver than the behavior of Mr. Putin. While Europe and the U.S. slept, he launched a ruthless military operation in support of the Assad regime in Syria and tried to present Russia as a global power challenging the U.S. in importance. In Europe, he is trying to carve out a sphere of influence and establish Russia as a regional power capable of diminishing American influence.

 

These are only a few examples of what is now at stake as autocrats, terrorists and rogue states challenge America’s leadership of the international rules-based order—which was created after World War II and which secured for the world an unprecedented period of peace, progress and prosperity.

The next president must acknowledge this inheritance. American isolationism will not make the U.S. and other freedom-loving countries safer and more prosperous, it will make them less so and unleash a plague of dictators and other oppressors. Above all, American isolationism will threaten the future of the rules-based international world order that has brought freedom and prosperity to so many people.

Mr. Rasmussen, a former prime minister of Denmark and a former secretary-general of NATO, is the author of “The Will to Lead—America’s Indispensable Role in the Global Fight For Freedom,” out this month from HarperCollins/Broadside Books.

Edited September 21, 2016 by 3opge

[Weenie Pooh]

Ovo ne treba da bude razlog za rant na policajce.