I have never killed someone and if I had, I'm pretty certain it would F me up for a long time.

[trumad]

And that even goes if I did it in self defense.

I just read a story on DU on how cops fist bumped each other for putting 80 rounds into another human being and of course killed him.

Fist bump?

That kind of shit disturbs the heck out of me.

[merrily]

1. "Adultery is like murder. The first time is the hardest."

The person quoted is my sister. The topic under discussion at the time was, obviously, adultery, but you can flip the sentence.

Besides, government has ways of training people to kill. One of the ways is to de-humanize the perceived enemy. After you've trained them to kill, though, re-training them to respect every life does not always work.

And, you have to remember that some people are drawn into law enforcement for the wrong reasons to begin with.

[trumad]

2. Good post

I was in the Airborne Infantry... 6 years in and never fired a shot at the enemy and I'm grateful for that. Honestly I don't remember them counseling us on the possibility of killing someone and the effects.

[ProfessorGAC]

3. Son Of A Friend

Went to Iraq a few years back. He had major drinking and assimilation issues when he came back.

When he came to terms with it, you know what? He said it wasn't seeing his buddies blown up. It was his remembering the people he killed.

They train soldiers to kill. They don't train them on how to live with it later.

[Thor_MN]

28. I read that they now use human silhouette targets rather than a circular "Bullseye"

for target practice as it makes it more likely that the person will shoot at a human.

I have no practical knowledge of this, just something that I read somewhere.

[merrily]

38. I know a little more about the military than the police.

I've known people and family members who were in the military. I've never been close enough to anyone in law enforcement to hear them speak candidly about being trained to kill. Not that I am an expert on killing by either group. Far from it. Military members I've known don't like talking about it, even to family.

[IronGate]

66. They've used the human silhoutte for years and years,

this isn't something new.

[Thor_MN]

87. New depends on frame of reference.

I don't recall when I read it, I'd have to guess sometime in the last 20-30 years... So yeah, new.

[IronGate]

89. Maybe new info for you,

but not for LE, they've been using these silhouettes for more than 3 decades or longer

[Thor_MN]

91. If you paid attention, you would have noticed the post I replied to

said that "government has ways of training people to kill."

Silhouette targets are a method. No implications of WHEN the technique was adopted, it's about WHY it was adopted.

You are excused for your implied insults, have a nice day.

[IronGate]

92. Implied insults?

If that's what you think I was doing, then I apologize, that wasn't my intention.
You have a nice day also.

[spin]

85. Silhouette targets are commonly used by police for target practice and qualification ...

I used to shoot at the now closed Tampa Police Pistol & Rifle Club in northwest Hillsborough County. On that range civilian target shooters were limited to bullseye targets while the police could use silhouette targets. The reason the range limited the use of silhouette targets was indeed that the management felt these targets allowed a civilian to practice killing a human.

However silhouette targets are often allowed on other ranges. I use bullseye targets for target practice and since I have a concealed weapons permit and often carry, I use silhouette targets for self defense practice.

It's fair to argue that silhouette targets do help a person practice to accurately shoot another person. However it is also fair to point out that shooting another person in legitimate self defense is not illegal or wrong. If a person attacks you and has the ability and the intention of seriously injuring or killing you, you have the right to use lethal force to stop him.

[ProfessorGAC]

97. They Have Been Doing That For Years and Years

When i was 10 (a long time ago) we visited the FBI building in DC. We saw them doing machine gun drills. They even gave me some of the spent cartridges as a souvenir and i got the target. It was a sillouhette of a man with holes in it.

I'm 58 now, so this is not a recent change.

[Thor_MN]

105. I really don't care WHEN they started doing this

The point is WHY they started doing this and that is to condition people to shooting at another person.

The most accurate marksmen in the world are totally useless in battle if they will not aim at another human being.

I fail to see how so many people are so totally missing the point and are focusing on time frames. Maybe if I had left the word NOW out of my post.

[ProfessorGAC]

109. Settle Down

I didn't say it was ok. You made it seem in your post like this was something new. It isn't. That's all i'm saying.

[Thor_MN]

110. Yes, you did say it was OK. You stated that it was nothing new, so SOP.

Hell, it was so OK that even a 10 year old boy gets the target and some casings as a souvenir. A fun wholesome time for the whole family, bring the kids and grandparents. That's what you were saying.

How did I make it seem it was something new, by using the word "now"?

Exactly what sort of time frame do you assign to now? Now as opposed to 1980? 1950? 1900? Who cares?

So rather than consider what it means, training people to shoot other people, desensitizing them to taking a life, you chose to focus on a three letter word and debate time frames.

[ProfessorGAC]

111. Never Said An Such Thing

Sorry but you're wrong. I never said it was ok. Just said it was an old practice.

Go ahead and extrapolate if wish. You will be extrapolating into error.

[Thor_MN]

123. I am not wrong, you didn't say that it was a negative thing.

You know what you meant. Anybody reading without that knowledge would read it differently.

I think the key point is that you DIDN'T say that it was not OK.

I agree you did not overtly state that it was, but by saying only that it has been done for a long time, that you gave a message of acceptance. Try reading your words from an objective point of view.

[Shankapotomus]

4. Celebrating human tragedy

whether someone was a violent threat or not, should not be tolerated anywhere. There is no joy in people's lives ending whether in a crime situation or even on the battlefield. People who celebrate that shit are fucking weird and sick.

[randome]

5. A thought experiment: could you kill Rush Limbaugh?

If you knew you would get away with it? I think I could.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[Katashi_itto]

7. Not an issue at all for me.

[randome]

8. A quick sword thrust, in and out and done?

Yeah. I don't consider my personal scruples and morality to be carved in rock. Different situations call for different mindsets. I think always and never are not kind words.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[Katashi_itto]

11. Lol! He would be so lucky for something so merciful as a simple sword strike.

Yes different situation require different responses.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

16. you sure talk big on the internet. who are you trying to impress?

your self?

[Katashi_itto]

18. Lol!! Aww someones trying to be snarky. So cute :)

[Tuesday Afternoon]

22. ^

[Katashi_itto]

26. Well if we are doing music videos i like this

[JTFrog]

76. All class in this thread aren't you?

I guess some folks just can't hide their volatile hatred. So you say killing would be nothing for you and follow up with a "fuck you" video to a female DUer?

So glad that the admins are paying attention and have this shit under control.

[Dustlawyer]

56. Love that song! Brings back my years as a DJ putting myself through school.

[Katashi_itto]

84. It is an awesome song!

[linuxman]

17. I hear the police are hiring.

You sound like one cool-cucumber




This is too much. OP makes a thread about their disbelief in cops shooting someone, then posters line up to mentally masturbate over who they'd kill/how they'd kill them.


We got some badasses up in here.

[Katashi_itto]

20. Not able to read very well I see. I wasnt talking about killer cops.

But if you get your jollies over two people discussing something completely different bully for you

[F4lconF16]

29. The post wasn't just about killer cops.

It was about killing in general, and the tragedy that any human death is. To come into the thread and talk about how easily you could kill someone, even someone who deserves it, is wrong. I think your cavalier attitude towards causing the death of another is sickening.

Edit: This in particular is disturbing:

"Lol! He would be so lucky for something so merciful as a simple sword strike".

Laughing about hurting someone. True colors indeed.

[Katashi_itto]

31. Yes, I am just broken up you think so poorly of me....sob!

After all, your opinion is what keeps the earth rotating on it's axis.

Oh my what shall I do...!

Think I will have breakfast.

[yuiyoshida]

63. Think its time to chill and just have A BOBA TEA!!

[Katashi_itto]

99. I love Bubble teas :)

[yuiyoshida]

106. Me too!!

My favorite flavor is TARO


And that SONG IS STUCK in my head!!

[stevenleser]

115. That looks very very good. I will have to try it!!!!

Thank you!

Domo Arigatou

[yuiyoshida]

116. I am sure in New York you can find Boba Teas!

[stevenleser]

119. Oh yes, I have had Boba tea before, but I haven't had Taro!

[hifiguy]

121. The Fung Bros belong on the real teevee machine.

They are freaking hysterical.

[snooper2]

114. "any human death" Um, some humans are rabid scum, you know that right?

Want some videos of some sick motherfuckers doing some sick shit that deserve to be put down like dogs?

[F4lconF16]

122. Oh definitely!

After all, it's okay to murder people and enjoy it if you dehumanize them first!

[Rose Siding]

33. You're still talking about murdering someone

And with a little smiley face.

Not cool at all.

[Katashi_itto]

36. :)

[randome]

21. My apologies if I've hijacked this thread. I'll keep my responses to a minimum.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

[Katashi_itto]

27. I agree, besides the terminal outrage brigade has arrived.

To much bother to engage them on a sat morning. I have kendo practice this afternoon and would like to be in a good mood.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

23. weekend keyboard warriors

impress themselves.

[merrily]

45. Golly, you are doing yourself and DU so proud.

[Katashi_itto]

100. Hyperventilate much?

[merrily]

101. Nope. Never.

[Katashi_itto]

102. Being in denial can sometimes be a good thing.

[Throd]

83. Shit, why not decapitate him and post a video of it on the internet?

Show the world how the "real" progressives roll.

[JonLP24]

113. People like Katashi scare the hell out of me

From what is implied it seems to be no problem killing him but there has to be at-least a little pain involved.

I was almost choked completely to death by a forearm to the throat. I'm easily aware of the danger of this kind of thinking as it can easily be acceptable to kill me and even torture and I don't hurt, scam, or tell lies about people. However, truth is sometimes something that nobody knows is true (if that makes any sense)

[Tuesday Afternoon]

15. if you have NEVER killed someone then you have NEVER killed someone

but, if you had killed someone "pretty Certain" is a term that one might apply as to what they PRESUME MIGHT be their feelings.

I take it you and Katashi Itto have some crystal ball you are gazing into, or what exactly ARE the two of you TRYING to say?

Holy fuck me rolling.

Do you even care HOW you sound to other people on here?

[randome]

19. I know myself pretty well. I have never killed and I would strongly resist killing anyone.

But in this thought experiment, I could live with myself if I could kill Rush Limbaugh with the certainty of getting away with it.

I also indulge in other thought experiments. What would be my reaction if one or both of my daughters were killed or, worse, were horribly injured? I'm prepared for that, too, as unsettling as the idea is. Sometimes the more unsettling an idea is, the more I confront it to understand my potential reaction.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[Tuesday Afternoon]

25. potential

you haz it.

for realz.

[randome]

32. Which is why my first post stated "I think I could."

Geeze. Give it a rest, already. The more you try to chase off those with whom you might disagree, the more I feel obligated to stay.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[heaven05]

53. the 'moral highgrounders'

cannot or will not understand. I'll be staying right here with you in regard to this individual and any sanctioned, state or otherwise, murderer/killer.

[merrily]

46. Dude, take some will intended advice. The more you post this shit, the worse

you are making yourself sound. Just stop.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

13. how do you know? you killed anyone lately?

[Katashi_itto]

37. Not lately.

But it's like bicycle riding.

Serving in Afghanistan was always an educational place I thought.

[merrily]

47. Great reason for humans to get the fuck out of the war business at long last.

[Katashi_itto]

48. Absolutely agree. It's not a skill set anyone should have.

[merrily]

49. Nor a proclivity for recidivisim. Never forgetting how to ride a bike tends to result in more

than just that one first bike ride.

[Katashi_itto]

51. Well I think its for people who naturally are prone to that.

Why I like martial arts so much, it enforces self-discipline.

[merrily]

54. I don't know about that. I think people can become prone to something.

See my post upthread about murder and adultery being hardest the first time.

Moreover, war can fuck up somebody's mind. People get addicted to drugs and alcohol and go nuts, and any one of those can cause someone who has already killed to kill again.

[NCTraveler]

117. Police Academy's all over the country are looking for recruits just like you. nt.

[rpannier]

10. I could

Not sure I would for fear of one of two reactions:
1. I'd enjoy it so much, I'd start hunting down Hannity, O' Reilly, Savage/Weiner....
2. I'd be paranoid that people would find out and evetually go crazy

[randome]

14. I get your point of view, too.

I'm certain that I, personally, could handle it, even 'forget' it to a large extent but that ability can be as much of a shortcoming as an advantage in other areas.

There's nothing wrong with remorse, either.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[merrily]

50. You couldn't because you are just not that kind of person. Neither is randome.

I almost never agree with him or her, but I doubt he or she--or you--could kill anyone in cold blood and rejoice.

[pintobean]

30. Jury results

On Sat Sep 13, 2014, 09:15 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

A thought experiment: could you kill Rush Limbaugh?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5529232

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

thought experiment? bullshit. this is not the type of posts we need on this board.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Sep 13, 2014, 09:28 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I agree that it's inappropo but I don't think a hide is the best solution. I recommend pointing out to the poster that he's effectively making a death threat and asking him to self-delete or revise the post.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Post is along same thinking of OP of thread.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[merrily]

55. Apparently, someone besides me got tempted to alert, but had more faith in the jury system

than I did and therefore went ahead and alerted, while I did not.

[merrily]

39. I usually alert only on bigotry, but your post tempts me.

Sadly, I think a jury would find it appropriate to leave talk of murdering someone visible on DU. Too bad.


Terms of Service

By registering a Democratic Underground account, you agree to abide by these terms. A single violation of any of these terms could result in your posting privileges being revoked without warning.

The Democratic Underground Administrators have a great deal of confidence in our system of citizen jurors and software tools, but we are well aware that trolls are constantly on the lookout for new ways to cause trouble and therefore on rare occasions it may necessary for us to revoke a member's posting privileges for reasons that are not covered by these Terms of Service. Because of this necessity, we retain the right to revoke any member's posting privileges at any time for any reason.
Don't be a wingnut (right-wing or extreme-fringe).

Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office. Teabaggers, Neo-cons, Dittoheads, Paulites, Freepers, Birthers, and right-wingers in general are not welcome here. Neither are certain extreme-fringe left-wingers, including advocates of violent political/social change, hard-line communists, terrorist-apologists, America-haters, kooks, crackpots, LaRouchies, and the like.
Vote for Democrats.

Winning elections is important — therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where were a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.
No bigoted hate speech.

Do not post bigotry based on someone's race or ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion or lack thereof, disability, or other comparable personal characteristic. To be clear: This includes any post which states opposition to full equal rights for gays and lesbians; it also includes any post asserting disloyalty by Jewish Americans, claiming nefarious influence by Jews/Zionists/Israel, advocating the destruction of the state of Israel, or arguing that Holocaust deniers are just misunderstood. In determining what constitutes bigotry, please be aware that we cannot know what is in anyone's heart, and we will give members the benefit of the doubt, when — and only when — such doubt exists.
Don't go overboard with the crazy talk.

Democratic Underground is not intended to be a platform for kooks and crackpots peddling paranoid fantasies with little or no basis in fact. To accommodate our more imaginative members we tolerate some limited discussion of so-called "conspiracy theories" under the following circumstances: First, those discussions are not permitted in our heavily-trafficked Main forums; and second, those discussions cannot stray too far into Crazyland (eg: chemtrails, black helicopters, 9/11 death rays or holograms, the "New World Order," the Bilderbergers, the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, alien abduction, Bigfoot, and the like). In addition, please be aware that many conspiracy theories have roots in racism and anti-semitism, and Democratic Underground has zero tolerance for bigoted hate speech. In short, you take your chances.
Don't willfully and habitually infringe on others' copyrights.

To simplify compliance and enforcement of copyrights here on Democratic Underground, we ask that excerpts from other sources posted on Democratic Underground be limited to a maximum of four paragraphs, and we ask that the source of the content be clearly identified. Those who make a good-faith effort to respect the rights of copyright holders are unlikely to have any problems. But individuals who willfully and habitually infringe on others' copyrights risk being in violation of our Terms of Service.
Don't threaten anyone (including yourself).

Do not post anything which could be construed as a threat toward any person, on DU or elsewhere. Do not post messages threatening to harm yourself. (If you are having a personal crisis, call a crisis hotline for help. DU members are not qualified to give you the help you need.)
Respect people's privacy.

Do not post or link to any private/personal information about any person, even if it is publicly available elsewhere on the Internet.
Don't post "shock content" or porn.

Do not post or link to extreme images of violence, gore, bodily functions, pain, or human suffering for no purpose other than to shock and disgust. Do not post or link to pornography.
No spammers.

Do not spam Democratic Underground with commercial advertising or promotions.
Don't do anything illegal.

Do not post messages which violate any U.S. laws (eg. linking to illegally-shared files, attempting to organize hacking or DOS attacks, libel/slander, etc.). Organizing civil disobedience with a legitimate political purpose is permitted.
Don't post malicious code or mess with the software.

Do not attempt to intentionally interfere with or exploit the operation of the Democratic Underground website or discussion forums (eg. by "post bombing" or using any other flooding techniques, by attempting to circumvent any restrictions placed on your account by the forum software, etc.) Do not post messages that contain software viruses, Trojan horses, worms, or any malware or computer code designed to disrupt, damage, or limit the functioning of any software or hardware.
Don't do anything else which is similarly disruptive.

Just because it isn't listed here, doesn't mean it's ok. If you post anything which is obviously disruptive, malicious, or repugnant to this community, its members, or its values, you risk being in violation of these Terms of Service.
One more thing: Don't push your luck.

The DU Community Standards state: "It is the responsibility of all DU members to participate in a manner that promotes a positive atmosphere and encourages good discussions among a diverse community of people holding a broad range of center-to-left viewpoints." Members who demonstrate a pattern of disruptive behavior over time and end up getting too many of their posts hidden by the jury (measured by raw number or percentage) may be found to be in violation of our Terms of Service. If you seem to be ruining this website for a large proportion of our visitors, if we think the community as a whole would be better off without you here, if you are constantly wasting the DU Administrators' time, if you seem to oppose the mission of DU, or if the DU Administrators just don't like you, we will revoke your posting privileges. Remember: DU is supposed to be fun — don't make it suck.

[randome]

42. The phrase "I think I could." was not written with invisible ink.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[merrily]

43. And your point is?

Did someone imply you confessed to having actually murdered Limbaugh? If so, I missed that.

[FarPoint]

57. Another option....

Confine Rush in a cell like living quarters, play 24/7 audio of Mike Malloy, Tom Hartman, Stephanie Miller....he can have no computer, a TV that only plays selected programs like a few from MSNBC, Oprah, and PBS Bill Moyer and Democracy Now. He can have a DVD player and the complete set of Queer as Folk.

That would work for me.

[weaselbit]

59. Inappropriate discussion

Inappropriate discussion. We are not them.

[treestar]

79. No, he's full of hot air

not worth it.

Make the question harder - Osama bin Laden, say.

[Throd]

82. Killing someone for having a different political worldview?

[randome]

90. No, for causing damage and misery in the world.

But, again, it's just a thought experiment. And for those who assume I would delight in such a thing, I did not say that and would not do so.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]

[spin]

86. No! The only time I would ever consider shooting or killing another person is if...

he was attacking me with the intention of seriously injuring or killing me and had the ability to do so.

I may disagree with what a person says or believes but I support his right to express his opinions. Our nation does allow free speech and guarantees that right in the Bill or Rights.

Of course there are reasonable limits to free speech.

Exceptions to free speech in the United States are limitations on the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech and expression as recognized by the United States Supreme Court. These exceptions have been created over time, based on certain types of speech and expression, and under different contexts. While freedom of speech in the United States is a constitutional right, these exceptions make that right a limited one.

Restrictions that are based on people's reactions to words include both instances of a complete exception, and cases of diminished protection. Speech that involves incitement, false statements of fact, obscenity, child pornography, threats, and speech owned by others are all completely exempt from First Amendment protections. Commercial advertising receives diminished, but not eliminated, protection.

Along with communicative restrictions, less protection is afforded for uninhibited speech when the government acts as subsidizer or speaker, is an employer, controls education, or regulates the following: the mail, airwaves, legal bar, military, prisons, and immigration.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions

[Oktober]

103. Really? You would stab someone to death for political speech?

What the hell is wrong with you? Seek counseling.

[randome]

107. I never said I would stab anyone. And I never said I would kill someone over free speech.

Nor would I take delight in killing anyone. I already outlined my theoretical motives for taking out Limbaugh. It. Was. A. Thought. Experiment.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"Everybody is just on their feet screaming 'Kill Kill Kill'! This is hockey Conservative values!"[/center][/font][hr]

[Oktober]

108. Would you conduct a 'thought experiment' on the merits of rape or torture as well?

Last edited Sun Sep 14, 2014, 01:49 PM - Edit history (1)

No one asked about your delight. It doesn't really matter if you would suffer some sort of internal angst after you killed someone (provided you could get away with it of course).

Given the opportunity, you would stab a human being who posed no physical danger to you. Checked... Noted...

edit: I don't think you understand what a thought experiment is

[JonLP24]

112. Hell no

because it leads to the slippery slope that could to it being acceptable to kill me.

I hate that way of thinking. Even with the problem w/ sociopaths, they cause chaos, even in prison they'll cause chaos. Nothing can be really done but I still can't bring myself to the solution of murder because its a slippery slope. Not only that, ending a life. It is something I feel I have no right to make that choice for people.

[NCTraveler]

118. Not only could I not kill him...

but I don't want him killed at all. Only a truly sick fuck would.

[NickB79]

6. From personal experience, just pointing a gun at someone in self defense can F you up for years

It is not a situation I'd wish upon my worst enemy.

[Reter]

9. I don't know about the story you are referring to

But if I was a Navy SEAL and 5 Al Quida members were shooting at me and my buddy and we managed to neutralize them, a high five and a smile might happen. Sorta like "We got them ans managed to survive!"

[merrily]

40. Are you a Navy Seal and what makes cops and Navy Seals the same?

For that matter, what makes the people that cops kill and Al Q'aeeda the same?

[freshwest]

95. I can see that in a war zone, but don't like it. But which war would they be fighting here?

[gollygee]

12. Yeah I wondered about that too

I understand that police officers might occasionally have to kill someone, but it seems like they wouldn't be happy about it afterward - like that would be a potential in their job that they didn't like, and that there would be difficult feelings to work through afterward.

[99Forever]

24. Agreed.

The taking of another human being's life is something I have difficulty even considering, let alone celebrating.

[Strat54]

34. Awww s#$@... I stumbled upon the wrong blog..

I must have typed www.gunhumperlittlesnotfuck.com instead of democraticunderground.com

[randome]

35. This thread has become all kinds of crazy and I'm partly responsible for that!

So here's a squirrel to hopefully lighten everyone's mood.


Figaro!

(Quietly exits DU, reminding oneself to think before posting. And giving thanks to the jurors who didn't hide me.)

[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[In_The_Wind]

75. Great lookin' squirrel.

just sayin'

[99Forever]

58. Please explain this response.

It's seems at the very best, odd and borders on trollish, unless I'm misunderstanding what your point is. Thanks.

[Rose Siding]

64. Just guessing....

But I'll bet that post is in reference to the sick sub-thread discussing the murder of people with whom one disagrees.

[99Forever]

65. I must have missed that one.

Thankfully.

[merrily]

69. You missed a whole subthread on murder, but not a little fake link mentioning guns?

How does that even happen?

[99Forever]

70. This isn't my life.

Sorry if that somehow offends you.

[merrily]

71. Aw, how fake. Noticing a fake link while missing an entire subthread has zero

to do with what is or is not your life. And observing a behavior does not so much as imply that I am offended by the behavior.

[99Forever]

73. What the hell is your problem?

And why should I care what you think about me or what I do?

Bye bye.

[merrily]

74. I am the one with a problem because I did not simply accept your snotty post to me?

Never fails.

[99Forever]

80. You jumped on me for no gawddamn reason.

I didn't say a freakin' word to you.

Welcome to ignored. I have no time for stupid internet games.

[merrily]

81. Jumped? LOL! From you, ignore is a compliment.

[SammyWinstonJack]

62. eh?

[Strat54]

67. What is to explain?

The thread was hijacked by a bunch of big talking little turds with action hero delusions about how THEY would be the "Good guy with the gun" and everything would be OK because THEY would feel justified.

In fact...
The canned Talking Point responses above my initial comment seem to reveal that these are professional NRA trolls.

I said what I meant to say. What part do you need me to explain?

George Zimmerman is not going to be stopped until he kills somebody else. If it is a woman or a minority or an LGBT person or even someone who votes liberal, the right-wing will ride to his defense again because they already have so much invested in the legend of the little racist fuck.

The jurors of that Florida district will have even more blood on their hands because they gave the white guy with the politically connected ex-judge father the benefit of the doubt. Black or White, they were all too willing to believe that a young black man was a thug and a threat just by being a young black man. And they were all too willing to believe that the white guy must've had some legitimate reason to kill him. Now Georgie is making them all proud of their unbelievably idiotic decision.

Instead, though... We wind up with a discussion of who's tiny little wiener stands up tallest when they fondle their gun.

I bet most of the little wannabe Badasses that replied "I could handle the aftermath..." would piss their pants at first sight of Zimmerman, cause they KNOW he killed a man and got away with it.

[trumad]

96. Great post

Stepped away from DU yesterday afternoon and returned this morning to revisit my thread. A bit stunned at what it turned into.

There's some big talking trolls around here.

[Eleanors38]

72. Strat, visit the Gungeon & tell me who uses the hateful language. nt

[Strat54]

77. Oh no. I don't think I need to visit "Gun Enthusiast Heaven".

I get plenty of the pro-gun propaganda just from the corporate media. I've seen how anything critical of gun owners is immediately labeled "Hate Speech". It's like a page out of an Ann Coulter book.

I've been hunting. I have friends and family members who own guns. None of them harbor "Action Hero" fantasies. None of them describe in great detail how they would "kill the bad guy" and how it would make them feel empowered. That's all some kind of sick fantasy.

You go enjoy the Gungeon Elanor.

[Eleanors38]

78. Thought so. nt

[caraher]

41. There's a lot of research on this

Except for a few percent of the population, it is indeed traumatic. And you don't really want to be one of the people for whom it isn't traumatic...

The rule should be that anyone who *wants* to carry a gun, can't. (Yes, I know it's a completely unworkable rule...)

[bullwinkle428]

52. I don't think there's any question that even in a situation where

I killed someone from a purely self-defense standpoint (direct threat to my life or someone close to me), I'd probably be dealing with some kind of PTSD or nightmares, at least on an on-and-off basis, for the rest of my life.

I'm sure that disqualifies me from becoming part of the Internet Tough Guy brigade, but I prefer to deal in reality.

[heaven05]

61. this is the state sanctioned

murderers/killers M.O. now. Not shocking, not surprising. Period.

[LittleBlue]

68. Depends who it is

If it's some guy who attacked me, I don't think I would feel much regret.

Why should I feel anything for him?

[spin]

88. There is an excellent chance that killing another person in legitimate self defense ...

will cause significant psychological problems.

Often police officers who kill another person even when absolutely necessary undergo counseling.

Law Enforcement Traumatic Stress: Clinical Syndromes and Intervention Strategies

Laurence Miller, Ph.D.

***snip***

Police officers generally carry out their sworn duties and responsibilities with dedication and
valor, but some stresses are too much to take, and every officer has his or her breaking point. For
some, it may come in the form of a particular traumatic experience, such as a gruesome accident
or homicide, a vicious crime against a child, a close personal brush with death, the death or
serious injury of a partner, the shooting of a perpetrator or innocent civilian, or an especially
grisly or large-scale crime; in some cases, the traumatic critical incident can precipitate the
development of a full-scale posttraumatic stress disorder, or PTSD (Miller, 1994, 1998c).
Symptoms may include numbed responsiveness, impaired memory alternating with intrusive,
disturbing images of the incident, irritability, hypervigilance, impaired concentration, sleep
disturbance, anxiety, depression, phobic avoidance, social withdrawal, and substance abuse.

***snip***

In the United States, two-thirds of officers involved in shootings suffer moderate or severe
problems and about 70 percent leave the force within seven years of the incident. Police are
admitted to hospitals at significantly higher rates than the general population and rank third
among occupations in premature death rates (Sewell et al, 1988). Interestingly, however, despite
the popular notion of rampantly disturbed police marriages, there is no evidence for a
disproportionately high divorce rate among officers (Borum & Philpot, 1993).
http://www.aaets.org/article87.htm

[logosoco]

93. I cry like a baby when I hit an animal on the road.

But a family member was on trail and got the death penalty. I did not step up in his defense. About 12 years ago, he took a little girl, the daughter of an old acquaintance, and attempted to rape her and killed her by hitting her in the head with a rock. I met this person when they were two, they had been to my house many times, spent the night on several occasions, spent time and is genetically related to my own children (he is my nephew by marriage).
The family of the girl wanted the death penalty. To me, he died the moment he killed that child. He has a child of his own.
I did not step up. When he dies, the only one I will cry for is his mother.

This has caused much heartache and conflict in my life. But not so much as this little girls family.

That is as close as I could come to killing anyone. It makes me feel bad, I am against the death penalty. But I can't fight for this person.

I feel awful knowing that I know someone who killed someone, so I do NOT get the "glee" these cops would have for shooting someone. Was this person in the act of killing others?

[Orsino]

94. The kind of shit we do to people to turn them into killers can be sickening enough. n/t

[HereSince1628]

98. I think I've contributed to innumerable deaths.

And I mean innumerable because I can't put a number on them...

You really can't be a participating American without having contributed to such things at least indirectly.

And indirectly contributing to killing is pretty easy, because it looks a lot like living everyday life.

In my life, it rarely looked as clear as the days during Vietnam when I supported electronic surveillance that targeted 'the enemy' for Arc Lights. Non-combatants sitting in air-conditioned rooms triangulating on radio signals is pretty removed from mud and blood, but it's deadly.

Most of my killing has looked like being a well adjusted citizen getting along in an asymmetrical economy, wherein access to an OK life for some people leads to early death for others.

[ileus]

104. To them (if it happened) the perp was just another subject of the state.

[hifiguy]

120. You have a conscience.

A lot of people who are or want to be cops don't. Police departments are largely made up of the last people in the world who should ever be in any position of authority over another person and should never be carrying guns.