Michael Brown shooting III

Continued from here.

Posted By:Agatha

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandFan (Post 10685283) I think the idea of "aggressive" is a bit of an equivocation and straw man (though not necessarily on your part). If "aggressive" police work means violating fundamental rights or departmental policies then the question is moot. If you are going to defend aggression then shouldn't it be your burden to provide evidence of the success of aggression? How is this not an invalid argument from consequences (sure torture is bad but if we stop torturing people [insert bad consequence]. How is this argument not an appeal to fear (cops won't protect you if you don't let them treat you in a way that you don't want to be treated)?

As to 1, your point is unclear from the link.
2,3,and 4 all seem fundamentally similar- you wish me to demonstrate that diminished aggressiveness on the part of LEOs will result in a poorer quality of life for a plurality of residents. You have that backwards, you are ( I think ) suggesting that the police change the way they are policing- the burden ( if you would have me submit to a change without fighting it ) is therefore on you to show that the change will not result in increased crime and a diminished quality of life for me.

Or, you can, ( as many have- most often from a very safe distance ) diminish the ability of the police to provide the level of protection that they are able to at the expense of ( or at least - giving no consideration to ) those who will bear the direct consequence of increased crime if the changes that would make you sleep better at night don't quite pan out.

You live on a hill, and wish to blow the dam. It is ludicrous to accuse the man living in the valley who suggests leaving the dam alone of " arguing from fear "

via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1Jh0M4b