Trump tries to smear Martin Gugino, Catholic Peace Activist

[neophyte]

That is the most insulting thing about police officers I have heard yet.

The simile referred to their argument, not the police. “What the heck did you expect?” is a perfectly valid and reasonable response to someone who acts surprised at the easily foreseeable results of his own poor decisions.

On one hand these clowns are screaming that the police are institutional racists, thugs who can’t be trusted. On the other hand they create tense situations and intentionally provoke the police who arrive in response, then blame everyone but themselves for what happens. They can’t have it both ways. They’re acting like a pack of juvenile delinquents.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Not true. The police were under orders to clear the square, and they were confronted with a man who accosted them

…correction: who stubbornly stood in their way. He did not “accost” them.

and who was obviously doing something overtly hostile: photographing them; or using a scanner.

Photographing the police is not illegal. The scanner nonsense is just more Trump made-up stuff. Don’t fall for it.

Police rarely have the luxury of doing what posters here do all the time, namely, endlessly debating,

In this case they did have the luxury of safely arresting the man or letting him be. If they were under orders to push anyone who stands in their way to the ground, someone needs to look into who gave those orders.

 

[Sarcelle]

It’s funny that police brutality and thuggish behavior is so ingrained and accepted that the victims are often blamed.

It doesn’t have to be that way.

Why should my tax money be spent on people whose job it is to be a bully?

And yes, I said people. Cops are human and they have the capacity to make moral decisions, unlike tigers.

 

[Sarcelle]

On one hand these clowns are screaming that the police are institutional racists, thugs who can’t be trusted.

If cops insist on behaving like thugs, then they will be treated as thugs.

These “clowns” as you call them are being proven right by the behavior of these cops.

 

[VonDerTann]

You’re fighting just to fight. He DID accost them: he strode up to them and took deliberate acts with what was his phone, at a time when liberal protesters are doxxinf and otherwise photographing the police for no good reason. Further, you’re actually arguing that they could have arrested him - in other words, he did nothing wrong, but should have been arrested. That’s completely contradictory.

Finally, the whole “they could have arrested him!” Is precisely the sort of after the fact, Monday morning quarterbacking I’m referring to being done inappropriately. You’ve made my point for me.

 

[blackforest]

Natural consequences.

Shoving a guy on the sidewalk enabling a near-fatal head injury is not “natural.” It’s a choice that an officer made. And police officers aren’t tigers or any other animal. They’re human beings with God-given free will obligated to take responsibility for their moral - and immoral - choices.

Some of the rhetoric in this thread reminds me telling rape victims that they “had it coming.”

 

[blackforest]

Three things:

1. A cell phone is not a deadly weapon.
2. Citizens have a legal right to film or otherwise record the police. It doesn’t matter whether you think the reason is “good.”
3. Any officer who “fears for his life” when he sees an elderly man with a cell phone is unfit for law enforcement.

 

[godisgood77]

To be fair… Trump didn’t try to smear, he 100% smeared him. There should be concrete penalties for this garbage…

Trump era = post truth

 

[VonDerTann]

Would you like an antifa supporter running up to you taking your picture from less than a foot away?

Further, the additional concern was that he was attempting to scan or even jam the police communications. Antifa loves to eavesdrop on police communications, precisely as the linked video above demonstrates.

Once again, people are engaging in more endless debates about “how a split-second encounter could have been done SO much better.” That’s not fair to police, particularly after police have been repeatedly spit on; assaulted; had rocks and bottles thrown at them, etc., over the last 2 weeks.

What I’d rather see is a bit of love & respect for the Las Vegas cop shot last week at a so-called “peaceful protest” who will need to be on a ventilator for the rest of his life…

 

[StudentMI]

What I’d rather see is a bit of love & respect for the Las Vegas cop shot last week at a so-called “peaceful protest” who will need to be on a ventilator for the rest of his life…

Some lives matter more than others, it would seem.

 

[VonDerTann]

Sadly you are correct.

 

[blackforest]

Would you like an antifa supporter running up to you taking your picture from less than a foot away?

If the protester is unarmed and exercising a legal right, I would have to allow it . . . without shoving and severely injuring them. It doesn’t matter whether I “like” it.

Further, the additional concern was that he was attempting to scan or even jam the police communications.

There is as yet no solid evidence to back this claim.

Once again, people are engaging in more endless debates about “how a split-second encounter could have been done SO much better.” That’s not fair to police, particularly after police have been repeatedly spit on; assaulted; had rocks and bottles thrown at them, etc., over the last 2 weeks.

None of this justifies Gugino’s treatment. You’re defending abuse.

What I’d rather see is a bit of love & respect for the Las Vegas cop shot last week at a so-called “peaceful protest” who will need to be on a ventilator for the rest of his life…

Start a thread about it . . . rather than dragging the whataboutism into this conversation.

 

[VonDerTann]

You are doing, over and over again, what neither you nor anyone else should have any right to do: endlessly debate what should have happened THEN based on what you believe, NOW.

The cops didn’t know what he had - only that he had strode up to them; confronted them; and was grabbing toward one of their gun belts and had an electronic device in his hand.that he was using for some unknown purposes. IMHO the police had every right to defend themselves.- failing to do so has gotten cops killed.

(And still not ONE WORD of support for the Vegas cop, other than “stop talking about this here!”).

 

[Ridgerunner]

I know this much. One should never reach out to touch a cop in a confrontational situation or even in a non-confrontational situation. And one should NEVER reach anywhere near the cop’s weapon like this guy did.

We don’t know what the apparently electronic device was. Might have been a cell phone. Might have been an electronic weapon. Eventually, I guess we’ll know.

I wouldn’t reach for a non-cop like this guy did, and would figure I was asking to get pushed back AT LEAST if I did it. In some jurisdictions, that would be an assault even if there was no contact. I can’t tell whether the guy actually touched the cop or not. But he sure did reach for the cop with that device. Even “peace activists” don’t get to assault others, let alone police.

 

[blackforest]

You are doing, over and over again, what neither you nor anyone else should have any right to do: endlessly debate what should have happened THEN based on what you believe, NOW.

Yes. This is how issues of justice and moral theology are discussed, particularly in a large forum of predominantly Catholic users. We have plenty of threads doing exactly the same, including whether or not the American Revolution was justified.

If you can defend the police abuse, as you proceed to do in your very next paragraph, then we can certainly challenge you on it.

The cops didn’t know what he had - only that he had strode up to them; confronted them; and was grabbing toward one of their gun belts and had an electronic device in his hand.that he was using for some unknown purposes. IMHO the police had every right to defend themselves.- failing to do so has gotten cops killed.

Bologna. He had that phone out long enough for them to see what it was. Cell phones are not deadly weapons.

I suspect they just didn’t like the transparency of being recorded.

Stop defending abusers.

(And still not ONE WORD of support for the Vegas cop, other than “stop talking about this here!”).

Whataboutism, no matter how emotionally compelling the case, is a deflection tactic. Again, start your own thread about it. I haven’t researched the case, but you might find a good amount of support for it there.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

You’re fighting just to fight.

I would say you are fighting just to defend Trump, if I were to presume to know your motives, but I do not presume that much. You shouldn’t either.

He DID accost them: he strode up to them and took deliberate acts with what was his phone…

Did those acts threaten violence? No, they did not.

at a time when liberal protesters are doxxinf and otherwise photographing the police for no good reason.

Was he doxxing the police? Do people need a reason that satisfies you to photograph the police?

Further, you’re actually arguing that they could have arrested him - in other words, he did nothing wrong, but should have been arrested.

I did not say he did nothing wrong - just nothing wrong that justifies that level of force. And I did not say that he should be arrested - just that he could have been arrested.

Finally, the whole “they could have arrested him!” Is precisely the sort of after the fact, Monday morning quarterbacking…

No one should be put in a position of power like that if they have not been trained in when arrest is more appropriate that doing violence to protesters.

 

[neophyte]

Shoving a guy on the sidewalk enabling a near-fatal head injury is not “natural.” It’s a choice that an officer made.

You seem to be in a fantasy world where it happened completely out of the blue. Only a juvenile delinquent honestly thinks that he can accost police during a crowd-control operation and wave his hands around their gun belts and not have anything bad happen to him.

Some of the rhetoric in this thread reminds me telling rape victims that they “had it coming.”

So when I refer to tigers in my simile about the reasoning used by some in this thread, it’s a horrible insult to the police, but when you refer to rapists it’s not? That’s rank hypocrisy. You can’t have it both ways.

 

[VonDerTann]

This is all just Monday morning quarterbacking - which is bad enough. Now you’re opining about the police’s training, surely without knowledge of what & how they were trained.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I would say you are fighting just to defend Trump, i

I would say you are fighting to defeat Trump.

 

[neophyte]

If it was an inanimate object (say someone’s car or something) that was in the path of police and blocking the way, would police simply ram into it, not caring if they damaged or destroyed it, simply because they had orders to clear the area?

A barricade intentionally set up by the people who were refusing to disperse? Absolutely! Shove that thing out of the way!