[ SECRET POST #2811 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2811 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.

__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.

__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 056 secrets from Secret Submission Post #402.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Like, I don't want to come at you too harsh here, but you're literally justifying police officers shooting people and asking us to feel sympathy for cops who do so. Like, that's literally the textual meaning of what you're saying here, right? I'm not turning this into a strawman or anything.

So here's the thing, in that case: Of course every police officer is a human being, and their jobs are difficult, and they're often in circumstances of real danger. But none of that justifies shooting someone who's unarmed, and we should be able to talk about that, and especially we should be able to talk about the systemic issues which lead to things like that and which lead to the widespread perception that cops who do so get off lightly. There's no way in which the humanity of the police officers or their assumed well-meaningness minimizes any of those things - either the wrong of what's happened, or the importance of getting it right.

[(Anonymous)]

That's... not what I said at all? Excuse me? What?

I mean the public's immediate reaction to news of shootings with no further information and immediate assumption that the police were in the wrong just because the person was unarmed, because "lol police are corrupt," and the strawmanning going on would be mitigated. If people realized there are two sides at all, which a lot of people don't bother to think about, it would lessen the confusion and hate and immediate jumping to conclusions by a lot

I am not literally justifying police officers shooting people. WTF @ you.

[(Anonymous)]

Ah, I'm sorry for misreading you then.

In my defense, you said nothing at all about jumping to conclusions. You said that peoples' attitude of "evil cops shooting innocent unarmed people omg" should be mitigated. I don't think it's an unreasonable assumption to think that you're talking about controversies concerning police shootings in general, given that's what you said, but I withdraw my remarks.

[(Anonymous)]

Thanks.

By "evil cops shooting innocent unarmed people omg" what I meant the was the outrage and overreaction and strawmanning, not that shooting people was fine. I tried to get the immediate blindly taking sides across with that, but I guess it didn't work as well as I intended.

[(Anonymous)]

I'd feel more comfortable condemning police officers if the US didn't have such lax guns laws to be completely honest.

I have no doubt that part the reason there's WAY more civilian shootings by police in the US is because an American civilian is MUCH more likely to be armed.

[(Anonymous)]

I agree with that too. With so many guns in the US it's totally reasonable in a lot of circumstances to believe that someone might have a gun.

[(Anonymous)]

Nah, the problem is that most police officers have no damn idea how to use their own weapons. Not just their guns, but all the weapons on their belt. You know that a soldier in a live fire zone has more restrictions on when they use their weapons than cops? And that is when facing confirmed hostiles too. Cops need stronger controls on what they carry, and better authorization procedures on when to use it.

[(Anonymous)]

Switzerland.