I agree with that, but it is human nature. A very real problem exists that cops are people. Just regular people with a badge and a job that has them do some pretty awful things.

So, language like "perp" begins to creep in.

On the upside, I have noticed that when a cop pulls over a driver that has not been doing anything wrong, and then lets them go about their business, they feel pretty bad about it. They don't feel bad when they pull in an actual criminal, but they do when the grab someone innocent.

I don't know if there is a right answer to this one. People on the side of cops change because of human nature. I am not saying it is right, but it is the way the world works.

Cops get beat up and shot all the time for trying to be nice and lenient. Get a clue.

The problem of being exposed to Cop talk is that I start to use words like "perp" myself. Yet, I am not a cop.

However, when I am on a ride along and I don't have a gun or a vest on, believe you me, I certainly feel pretty vulnerable when I see some of the 'perps', and I am 6'2, 220 lbs with Martial Arts training.

So here is the problem, the bias sets in pretty fast.

I agree. However, many civilians watching some of the tapes draw inappropriate conclusions regarding the outcomes.

They pass judgments on the officers without the proper context.

I don't know if the need for a criminal court is always needed, but I understand the need for an investigation. I think the problem lies in identifying when a shoot is justified or not. I can say now that knowing what I know it is *NOT* apparent to a civilian what would be a justified shoot or not. Yes, I realize that sounds strange and hypocritical. Basically, it boils down to Psychology which is not my strongest subject. From what I remember it is realted to the concepts found in the book "Influence" on how in certain situations our brains don't operate the same way as they do in low stress situations. Sometimes people get shot while fleeing - but the impulse to shoot takes 2-3 seconds to enable, and once it has begun, the officer will probably end up shooting, even if the perp has turned to flee in the time that the decision was made to shoot.

I am grossly misrepresenting the phenomenon in the above, but what I am trying to say is that what we as civilians deem as an appropriate/inappropriate shooting is not always apparent.

I don't deny that there are bad cops - I know about a few former ones. Fortunately they got weeded out, but it took longer than one would want.

I agreed that there is a disconnect between civilians and cops - and I sit right down that line.

I am in a strange sort of spot, understanding the concern of the cops and of civilians, and I will admit, I don't have a good solution to this problem.

"

But I'm sure to you everyone is a "perp".

I am not a cop, but I am dating one. Having done ride alongs I understand the other side of this. It really sucks when a you are not sure a perp has a gun or not - and sometime they do - and sometimes cops get shot.

When a suspect does not obey orders, and could potentially be going for a weapon, Cops get scared. Abuse of authority? Perhaps. Reasonable justifiable fear? YES.

Some cop shootings are justified, some are not. Cops are people. People get scared. Somehow people seem to think that Cops have this mythical "spidey sense" and they can just know what is actually going on and judge the situations accordingly. They don't. They also, unfortunately spend a great deal of time if working on patrol dealing with lots of people who are belligerent and dangerous.

Unfortunately, this makes them jaded.

Are there bad cops? Yes. Just as there are good and bad people. Cops are people. People make mistakes.

Having said all that, if my GF was involved in a shooting, I would much rather it be her who pulled the trigger. Not the perp.

Dude, it is a rush. I am using a pirated version of Ubuntu and MythTV! I downloaded the ISO and just installed it! I never paid a cent for it!

Argument from authority:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

Another scientist by the name of Richard Dawkins wrote a book called "The Selfish Gene". The entire premise of that book would disagree with your above conclusion, furthermore your "medical advancement" argument violates the burden of proof.

Try reading it in the greek, you will find the translation is substantially different than your interpretation.

Apparently, somehow, I replied to myself instead of you...

Except it is not inconsistent with Jesus's teachings. It is only inconsistent with the view that the modern church wishes to convey. See: Luke 16:17 Where Jesus specifically mentions the old testament, (At the time of Jesus, the new testament did not exist!)

See Genesis 19:24-26, which is explictly mentioned by Jesus in Luke 17:32.

Jesus also approves of the beatings of slaves as found in Deut and Lev as shown in Luke: 12:47-48

The letters also agree with this view as seen in Timothy 3:16 and Peter 1:20-21.

Furthermore, Jesus is to return and kill everyone on earth with the exception of 144,000 virgin male jews. (See all of Revelations, and Rev 7:4)

I highly recommend you pursue a sort of "self seminary" sort of study on the bible, because you need to understand more of it and how it was written. You must understand that Jesus was an apocalyptic Jew. Much of what is taught in church is inconsistent with the bible itself. However, most people don't acually take the time to do either seminary or "self seminary".

Actually, if you sit down and read the Old Testament you will find that this actually is the case as God slaughters tribe after tribe of non-Israelites, and the Israelites themselves.

I have no desire to crack open my copy of the KJV and prove this with quotes, but a simple google search will suffice to prove this matter. Look for each of God's explicit killings in the bible, there are times that he is indeed amused by suffering.

Where would the U.S. get the money for a shooting war? From China? I think the economics here just went recursive....

The US Mint needs to do what the Canadian Mint did. Back when the Loonie came out, they stopped making $1 bills. I admit I hated it at the time, but it saved taxpayers loads of money as there was no alternative to the loonie as the dollar bills began to degrade. The same thing happened when the Toonie came out and replaced the $2 bill as well.

Just making coins but continuing to make paper bills of the same value is dumb.

Your post reminds me of the joke in Back to the Future where Doc comments that the DeLorean from the future has failed due to "Cheap Japanese Junk". To which McFly responds: "Doc, all the best stuff is made in Japan in the future!"

Japan used to be associated with cheap plastic junk (sound familiar?) but look at what started to happen in the 70's and finally the 80's. China will go the same route. In about 10-20 years considerably higher quality products will be available from China. It is already starting to happen.

Yes, clearly I am a noob. I apologize for my high slashdot UID.