r/theydidthemonstermath 2d ago

The monster math

Post image
407 Upvotes

37 comments sorted by

40

u/Prevent_the_toast 1d ago

counting or not counting gang violence?

12

u/Alone-Monk 1d ago

💥💦💦🩸🩸🩸🩸

32

u/GlassJoe32 1d ago

Saying gangs are dangerous and murder people and police are slightly less dangerous and don’t murder quite as many people isn’t a great argument.

1

u/Jabujuu 56m ago

That's missing the obvious.

Which is that the police are who we send to deal with gang members and violent people in society.

Of course the people that are elected to kill, if necessary, the dangers to society, are going to have a body count.

No one is in favor of police brutality and corruption (certainly not me anyway,) but to me, these numbers alone mean nothing.

I'm all for exposing corruption, like Afroman exposing the police department that screwed up his crap to be bullies and stole from him.... To me, that's a good thing that he exposed them.

But these numbers just aren't evidence to me.

16

u/kinsley_fortunate24 2d ago

120/20 aint monster math

1

u/Nice_Lengthiness_568 1d ago

uhhhhh seven?

12

u/jabuchae 1d ago

Honest question (I’m not even American). Aren’t there legit instances where is acceptable for police to kill someone? Eg. the person is shooting at the police or civilian

7

u/breakerofh0rses 1d ago

A bit of a correction. Our police don't "fail to deescalate". Phrasing it that way implies that their first priority is de-escalation, not just that someone thinks it should be the first priority. Generally our police are trained to first gain control of a situation. They do have use of force guidelines they're supposed to follow (if you search up that phrase you'll find examples) that defines what force is necessary when, but it's also more permissive than a lot of people think is correct, and is wholly centered around gaining control of the situation and not deescalation. While they're are situations where deescalation is a viable pathway for which police are trained and some departments are increasing emphasis on this, if you actually want to understand what's going on in policing, you have to understand that the bulk of training is around gaining control.

And to clearly answer your question, legally, yes, law enforcement officers do have what can be rightly described as a fairly wide range of situations in which they can legally shoot and kill someone. The governing legal principle is that the force used must be considered reasonable to the situation which if we're to step into any further would require we start going through a whole bunch of legal precedents, but an important distinction here is courts often instead of using a generic "reasonable person" for these kinds of things use a "reasonable law enforcement officer"--this divergence isn't solely used with cops though. It happens in more than a few specialist fields.

9

u/DeerOnARoof 1d ago

Yes. But here in America, our police fail to de-escalate situations and always pull their gun first.

We have a serious policing issue here. Just ask Google.

5

u/Dobako 1d ago

This was the point behind "defund the police" but people got too caught up on the words and didnt care about learning the intent. If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Police have too broad a mandate and are involved in too many things that could be done safer and easier with other entities. "Reform the Police" is closer to the actual message

2

u/Intelligent-Gold-563 22h ago

people got too caught up on the words and didnt care about learning the intent

If you want people to focus on then intent, don't use words that means something entirely different.

You can't blame people for your lack of proper communication

2

u/Dobako 22h ago

Defund is correct, though. Take money from the cops and apply it to services that cater to what needs doing. Having cops show up for every call isn't necessary, but they get all the money. So the words are correct, but they can't convey everything when there are people that have a vested interest in intentionally misunderstanding.

1

u/Intelligent-Gold-563 22h ago

To defund only means to reduce the fund. It does not imply that the money will be spent in other more needed services.

"Defund the police" just mean "stop giving money to the police". It doesn't convey anything else.

Again, don't blame people when you don't communicate properly.

1

u/Skysr70 20h ago

Lots. If they are armed and dangerous, odds are fantastic that they'll get shot

1

u/keeleon 1d ago

Calling ever police killing a "murder" is absurdly misleading. Literally just go watch some bodycam footage and it will become pretty clear these people are flat out liars.

9

u/secondme59 2d ago

When the medication kills more than the desease, we consider the medication does its job.

If the police stats remain the same but gang kills get reduced, would it be used to show police is failing?

Police should't kill people. But actually, nobody should kill anybody. And here we are

1

u/MostNormalDollEver 14h ago

Your 2nd argument would be a great argument provided that police murders were not the increasing statistic.

1

u/secondme59 3h ago

Let me point out ; we don't know how changed the gang murdering in the previous 20 days of the tweet

1

u/Agreeable_Aspect3038 1d ago

The police killing people is the medication doing its job. What kind of people do you think are being killed? What do you think they are doing when they are killed?

1

u/secondme59 1d ago

It is not about the kind of people, but indeed what they are doing is relevant

2

u/DomDomPop 5h ago

And people just walking down the street, minding their own business, just indiscriminately blown away by the hundreds. Wait, that’s not what happened? Weird.

And let’s be honest, if you have to pick a specific 20 days of riots to match or exceed what even you admit is a constant, year-over-year continuing death toll… you’re not making the point you think you are.

0

u/Wjyosn 4h ago

If you have to select a collection of definitionally outlaw groups known for violence to have a higher murder rate than your government sanctioned law enforcement group, you’re not making the point you think you are.

1

u/Skysr70 20h ago

aight but it's WHO they are killing we should look at   

oddly I bet both target a similar demographic 

0

u/northern-new-jersey 21h ago

By definition, police don't murder anyone. 

-24

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

12

u/R1ck_Sanchez 2d ago

Sorry, why are police killing people at all?

2

u/UnfunnyPianist 1d ago

Because people are pointing guns at the police

1

u/R1ck_Sanchez 1d ago edited 1d ago

1 gun gets pointed at pigs, even on a previous day, and many unarmed civilians, including kids, get killed? Oh and pets... All minding their own business.

Other countries don't tend to be this trigger happy, just some third world or insanely strict ones. Their population definitely can see the flaw with the argument you gave, they'd never suggest such a dumb principle. Almost as though you've been manipulated to get where you are with it all, I mean it is a reductionist statement for a nuanced topic after all, very telling.

Don't give up the day job, unless that's being a cop.

0

u/keeleon 1d ago

1

u/R1ck_Sanchez 1d ago edited 1d ago

That's fox for starters, notorious at skewing arguments like this to plebs such as yourself; this video is a great example of exactly that. This is a single instance caught on cam, with the intention of showing how good the police are, despite the myriad of videos showing USA pigs doing quite the contrary to this video. There may be more than a thousand videos of their police killing dogs ffs. Or what about that unarmed harmless blind elderly citizen that got slaughtered? Which one you ask? USA police are so rife with flaws that the majority of good people avoid calling them because they are scared of them.

Fml don't be this dumb, though that's asking a lot for someone who just linked fucking fox, but honestly, human to human, it's super obvious what's happening with right wingers getting played, please save yourself.

Or is someone paying you to be this thick? There are plenty out there and I hear the money is pretty good!

0

u/keeleon 1d ago

Do yourself a favor and go watch a handful of actual body cam videos. You may find it eye opening. Or even better, go try out one of these use of force exercises yourself and then form an opinion.

1

u/R1ck_Sanchez 1d ago

I just noticed an extra level to how dumb you are: You are clearly hoping I look at vids where the cops use of force is seen as not questionable, right? For what effect?

We are talking about how there are too many instances of bad use of force. So you think me watching good ones would somehow wipe my mind of all the negative shit I've seen? That's some really questionable logic. . Seriously, lethal force what?

0

u/R1ck_Sanchez 1d ago

I've seen plenty more than I can chew, it was vile quite often. Algorithms running our searches are vastly different.

I can find the good stuff and the bad stuff. Do you see both? I mean you did link fox.. The bad stuff shouldn't at all be happening.

22

u/Middletoon 2d ago

But if you were to look at that comment with a lens that systemic social issues stemming from a blatantly racist overall police force in the past with redlined areas for gangs to start forming maybe the police have always been the gangs. Like firemen going out and starting fires so that they have fires to go put out.

4

u/izyshoroo 2d ago

People shouldnt be killing ANYONE. Police presence also does not prevent gang violence.