>>23096535

That's because they conditioned people into not doing for themselves and their communities, just call the cops. See someone beating someone? Call the cops! When seconds count, cops are only minutes away!

The more calls they respond to, the more funding they get. That's why they insist they must respond to every call, including calls about people not breaking a law. When 8 cops show up for someone performing a constitutionally protected activity claiming you have to give up your 4th amendment right because they "got a call" even though they admit there's no crime, cops are the problem.

>>23096561

You sure do cry a lot over people telling the truth about cops.

>>23096580

If you're crying about it now, just wait for what's coming kek

>>23096589

>>23096608

Sonya Massey felt safe around the cops she let into her home. That is until one of them told her to remove the pot of boiling water she had on her stove, then drew his weapon when she did. When she asked why, he said he thought she was going to throw it on him. She rebuked him in the name of Jesus, to which he told her she better not or he'd shoot her in the fucking face. She had put down the pot, but he continued to scream at her to put it down, so she picked it back up from the counter to throw it on the floor. He shot her in the face and killed her.

The wicked flee when no one pursues. Cops are afraid of acorns and their own shadows because THEY are wicked, not the people.

>>23096653

She did what he told her to do, it was his FEAR that killed her.

You sound like a good little subject of your masters. Why should we be afraid of them?

>>23096665

We the Peoples lives and liberty are not "nothing". Notice you're ignoring she did what he told her to do.

>>23096682

He told her to go in the kitchen and take the pot off the stove, when she did what he told her to do he got spooked.

Why the fuck should we explain what we're going to do to them? They are our SERVANTS, not our masters.

>>23096699

I've watched it a lot, you're full of shit. He murdered her and it absolutely was in no way justified.

>>23096700

Fucking domestic terrorists that should be treated like domestic terrorists.

>>23096711

Notice in response to me calling our your projections, you project more.

>>23096720

Then you believe fear and cowardice trump liberty and life.

>>23096725

So do I, I'm just not a fucking coward.

>>23096736

I already mentioned that one and posted a clip. Sonya Massey is a good example when you're not an idiot.

Question, if he was afraid for his life from the pot of water, forcing him to shoot her "in the fucking face", why was he advancing on her?

>>23096767

She was in sight, he told her to put the pot on the floor, then you use dropping down as an excuse? He could have backed up, away from the "threat" he told her to pickup, rather than kill her.

"Sketching out" is not an excuse to kill her, but she wasn't. She sensed evil and rebuked it, something a lot of Christians would do.

>>23096785

Risked their lives my ass. The cop murdered an innocent woman because he's a coward. She doesn't have to explain why a van is parked there, and she didn't need to give them ID.

So your freedom is subservient to their fear?

>>23096789

If a cop shoots over religious language then he/she is a coward. It's literally freedom of speech, not a true threat under the law.

>>23096804

She could have asked them to leave (although there are plenty of videos on youtube of people doing that and cops refusing) but instead she was cooperative. She did not rebuke him until after the cop jumped back from her taking the pot off the stove and telling her it was because he thought she was going to throw it on him. She rebuked him for that, which is perfectly legitimate Christian speech.

>>23096828

You need to watch the full video again.

>>23096817

>Context is important

She rebuked him for his behavior, it was in context. You should watch the full video.

>>23096837

>if you wanna get shot and killed over it, you're free to do so.

Is that what you would have been saying when we fought for independence?

>>23096878

Is liberty worth getting shot over?

She didn't break any law. She didn't make any threat. She exercised free speech in her own home to rebuke him for his behavior while following his orders, and she was killed for it.

>>23096913

They're mocking the symbolism.

>>23096934

KMAO, did the cop have a kid with him? If a crackhead is holding a pot of boiling water and saying things I don't understand (she wasn't) then I'm going to back-up, not move in while screaming at them confusing them.

>>23096950

If someone rebuked me I would back off because I would take it as them being scared of me. In any case, I certainly wouldn't advance on them in their home.

>>23096963

I didn't ignore it. My answer still stands. You're ignoring that he told her to get the pot of water so there's not a fire, and the other cop jumped back when she did. She asked why and the cop said he thought she was going to throw it on him. THAT is why she rebuked them. He projected evil onto her.

>>23096977

Uh huh.

>>23096994

>>23097003

I didn't say he's not allowed to say that, but she's also allowed to rebuke him. She didn't act retarded, she rebuked him for projecting evil intent onto her, which is her right. At all times all the cop had to do was backup, but he chose to advance on her.

No, the cops are idiots, and people like me have had enough.

>>23097027

Do you always blame the victim for not being a coward, especially in their own home?

>>23097027

Do you always blame the victim for not being a coward, especially in their own home?

>>23097039

Oops double post.

>>23097049

Yet you don't believe the cop that shot her should have just backed off instead of advancing and shooting her, exactly as he announced he would? Interesting.

It seems you just want to justify the cop.

>>23097072

So? If he was in fear for his life he should have backed up, not advanced. Unless you believe his perceived authority in her home trumps her liberty and rights in her home.

>>23097072

I should add, she wasn't out of site. YOU keep claiming that.

>>23097081

*sight

>>23097090

The situation was they were in her home, and she made no threat. They imagined a threat because they're cowards.

No she was not out of site, and he told her he was gonna shoot her before that.

He belongs in prison.

>>23097121

She had put the pot down, she picked it back up because he kept telling her to put it down, she picked it backup off the counter to put it on the floor. All he had to do is backup, and he had no right to advance on her for going out of site, which again she did not do. She did drop down, but he could see her, advanced, and shot her in the face as he said he would.

>>23097130

She put the pot on the counter, it was on the counter when she "ducked down", she picked it back up because he was telling her to drop it so she was confused and was going to drop it on the floor.

Even if she dropped out of sight, it's her home, she has the right to move out of sight.

>>23097130

So let me ask you a hypothetical question… I consent to allow a cop into my home to speak about another matter. I take off my jacket revealing I have a pistol on my hip, and I rest my hand on it like cops always do in public. What should the cop do?

>>23097165

Wrong.

>>23097182

>There is no argument, you're factually wrong. There is no law requiring me to "mention immediately you conceal carry". IF the cops have a problem with my being armed, they can leave. They have no lawful right to disarm me (and can be considered a threat if they were to try) and by law since it's a consensual encounter they must leave my home when ordered.

Police cowardice doesn't mean shit to my rights.

>>23097196

Oops the shouldn't be there.

There is no argument, you're factually wrong. There is no law requiring me to "mention immediately you conceal carry". IF the cops have a problem with my being armed, they can leave. They have no lawful right to disarm me (and can be considered a threat if they were to try) and by law since it's a consensual encounter they must leave my home when ordered.

Police cowardice doesn't mean shit to my rights.

>>23097199

Not all states, and that is an infringement of our rights.

>>23097209

It's a suggestion of cowardice. We have the right to be armed, cops aren't the only ones who get to be armed. If a cop is in my home, it is my RIGHT to be armed.

>>23097221

There's no reason they need to know. I wouldn't tell random people I'm armed, I wouldn't tell them either.

Do you answer to your maid? Do they tell you what you're allowed to do in your own home?

>>23097225

They're servants, they are BENEATH the people. Their cowardice aka "safety" doesn't trump peoples rights, especially in their own home.

>>23097233

There are, and cops are about to face some.

>>23097239

You got me, I only saw the first line before scrolling and was already getting vids to link kek

>>23097244

I don't hold them as authorities, they're servants. Even the president is a servant of the people, from the homeless to the billionaire (or trillionaires whatever).

Jesus said the greatest among us is our servant. That doesn't mean one who beats and rules over his masters while claiming to be a servant, it means a true servant.

>>23097268

When they are on the job, they are BENEATH the people they are paid to serve. If they don't like that, they shouldn't take a job as a public SERVANT.