This movement has only increased my respect for police, probably not what they were going for haha. To willingly put yourself in potential life or death situations is not something I'd ever be able to do, especially to protect people that turn on them so easily. Still it sucks, because even if the police reform doesn't do anything to hinder them doing their jobs, they might be more prone to hesitate when dealing with criminals who'll prolly feel more impowered, and split-second decisions make or break on this job.

As expected by most but hoped wouldn't happen by all, the establishment gets its way 

Emma Vigeland breaks down the Democratic National Committee's decision to exclude Medicare For All from its platform, amongst a variety of other anti-progressive policy moves

Do you guys think Bill Bar will go prison, if Trump loses the election?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxG_SNYBhus

Hes been caught contradicting himself, under oath, indicating that he lied under oath (amoung other things).

Paraphraseing here:
"I dont tread Trumps tweets" (as a defense, excuse here)
While hes quoted for saying Trumps (tweets) makes it impossible for him to do his job.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdLjtqgOiRw

^ watch this from 4:22 onwards, to 5:15.
Also 7:09 to 7:46.

"Is it wrong to solicit help from foreign governments for election?"
"Depends on what kind of assistance"

This is his answear under oath.
When asked the same answear again, he corrected it to "no".
He knows trump violated that, and wanted to say "it was okay for trump".

Same as he makes up excuses for a president offering protection (pardens) in exchage for vitnesses not testifying against him.
Apparently before he was sworn in, he said it wasnt okay (it was a crime, he would do something about it).
After he said he wouldnt investigate Trump for commuteing Roger Stone, for the same.

"why not?"
"why should I?"

I do not like the person in that first video,why does he bring in a headline from transformative news as solid fact?He also seems so selfobsessed.

If this is all Bill Bar did then i hope he does not need to go to prison,also his answer on help from foreign goverments is correct.

Yep. And if they die because they hesitated in front of a guy with a gun pointed to their face almost nobody would care and would say he did the right thing.

You can be trained to immobilize, shoot tires or whatever but the moment a criminal points a gun to an officer well there is no option left. Unless the new rule is "let the criminal shoot first so you can be sure he shot first. Then you try to immobilize him if the bullet hole in your body allows for it. As last resort you can shoot them but only in the legs. Criminal safety first".

But who cares? It's only the fascist police they got what they deserved.

I agree that some of the assertions regarding when and how an officer should use a firearm are fairly ridiculous.

I also feel as if your implication that individuals here are arguing that dead cops are good is offensive and inflammatory.

While we should not take firearms off the table for officers, we should seriously consider both the threshold for force that officers are currently using and how they get into the situation where they feel they must use force. In both instances, it is not uncommon for deadly force to be utilized in an inappropriate manner, either through that instantaneous decision or through inappropriate actions or escalation by the police prior to that moment.

Although it seems most people here dislike the police and gave much but much more attention to the excesses some of them unfortunately committed during the riots instead of the absurds the "peaceful protesters" were committing, my comment was not guided towards any individual here but for the overall feeling I have that nobody cares when a cop dies. There are exception though as there is a case now in UK where we can see at least right wing media going against the gypsies that killed a cop, but in a few countries like my home country for example, mostly nobody cares.

I believe your outlook is that people dislike the police more than anything else.  Its not that there are cops that do excesses as you call it, its that the system allows cops to do excessive and abusive things with their power and allow them to continue on the job.  Its the fact that other cops protect those cops when they do those excessive things which undermines the trust of the community.  You have this misunderstanding that just because there are a few bad apples people dislike the police.  Instead the system allows those few bad apples to continue to be bad apples until they are caught doing wrong on video evidence and they still walk free as a bird to go to another city and do it all over again.  When a Cop dies, usually that person gets hit with the full extent of the law while if a cops kills a citizen most times the worst they get is paid suspension or fired.  That doesn't mean that same cop cannot just go to the next city and get hired on and continue.

Abuses within a system of governmental power are inherently and fundamentally distinct from inappropriate or violent actions taken by individuals or groups which lack such power. That doesn't mean that they should not both be condemned, but this disparity in treatment is entirely appropriate. People don't protest when an individual kills another individual because there is simply no point or goal within such a protest, unless you can point to some failing within a (typically) governmental structure.