Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Bill O'Reilly: The truth about Ferguson (and Al Sharpton)

Splutter.

Many of them justified? Many of them justified? And then he just goes on with his argument?

Sheesh!

A digression, in blue so that you can easily skip it if you want:

In my industry, there's a kind of software we call a "coverage tool." You start it up, and then run your automated tests, and it shows you how much of your production code is exercised by those tests. Generally, code that is tested turns green, and code that is untested turns red.

Some developers use tools like this to tell whether or not they have more automated tests to write. A lot of red code is bad, less red code is better, and they write more tests until there's little enough red code to satisfy some established metric, then check the code in.

Not me, though, and not developers of my ilk. We test-drive--which is to say, we write the automated tests first, before we write the code they exercise, and then we run those tests and watch them fail. Only then, we discipline ourselves, are we permitted to write any production code at all, and only enough production code to make the new tests pass. The slogan is, "Never write a single line of production code that hasn't been demanded into existence by a failing test."

When we use coverage tools, it's in an entirely different context. If I run a coverage tool on code I'm ready to check in and see any red at all, it doesn't mean I have a couple more tests to write before I'm done. It means that, despite my beliefs to the contrary, I'm not actually a test-driven developer yet, I have been dishonestly representing myself as something I'm not, I have some serious and fundamental work to do on my mindset, my discipline, and my professionalism, and I really ought to lose my job.

Now back to the point.

O'Reilly is implying that a situation where a cop commits unjustified fatal shootings is unfortunate, and a situation where he commits fewer is less unfortunate.

That is not the case, and anyone who swallows that without choking has sustained some profound moral corrosion from the Zeitgeist.

Someone who commits even one unjustified fatal shooting is not a cop, he's a murderer. That's what "unjustified" means. He should not simply strive to do better in the future. He should not simply be put on administrative leave. He should not simply be reprimanded. He should not simply be fired. He should be arrested, tried, convicted, and incarcerated at the very least, but preferably punished directly by the family of the victim in whatever way seems right to them.

It frightens me that few enough people understand this these days that a screed like that can even be broadcast on television without making sponsors scatter in fear, and then praised in a forum like this. We truly have lost something important in this country.

This schit gets old. Educate yourself if you care to opine on the man or his show.

O'Reilly is not implying anything. Simply stating fact. �12 million arrests a year, 400 fatal shootings, many of them justified�

Do you honestly believe that you live in a world where any police shooting is not fully investigated?
That unjustified shootings are not prosecuted?

For sure there is bound to be a small fraction of those 400 that are bad cops cover ups.
But in this brave new world of cop cameras, far more have been nailed to the barn door.

More of the Talking Points:
Also on MSNBC another agitator said this:
BERNARD:�There is a war on black boys in this country. In my opinion there is a war on African-American men. It is an absolutely deplorable situation that the United States, which is supposed to be the greatest nation on earth, sits back and allows black boys to be murdered.

O'REILLY:�Black boys being murdered in the context of Ferguson.
Are you kidding me? The truth is that 91 percent of black homicide victims are killed by other blacks -- 91 percent. Yet, that woman tries to mislead folks by accusing American law enforcement of shooting down young black men in the streets.

It's beyond belief -- what is going on in this story is beyond belief.
Yet these people get away with it and in certain places they are even respected. Incredibly Al Sharpton is going to speak at the funeral of Michael Brown on Monday morning.

The slogan the racial agitators are using in Ferguson is "hands up, don't shoot". They apparently believe that Michael Brown was trying to surrender when Officer Wilson shot him dead. Maybe that's true. We'll find out.

But MSNBC put a person on the air who said Mr. Brown was shot in the back.
That turns out to be false, according to an autopsy.

We also hear today that Officer Wilson has an orbital blow out fracture of his eye socket. �The Factor' has not been able to confirm that, and we do not want to try this case on television. We're only reporting the alleged injury to demonstrate that there will be much more to come in this case. That is why there is an investigation, and a grand jury and a trial process.

Having a little trouble with the meaning of the word "implication?" I'm here for you; let me help.

If he were not implying what I contend, he would have written something more like this:

"Out of 12 million arrests a year, there are only 400 fatal shootings, and only a fraction of those turn out to be unjustified. Of course, every unjustified shooting is an inexcusable tragedy; but..."

By not making a point of the outrageousness of any unjustified shooting--by anyone, but especially by a government cop who claims to be a servant and a protector--he is implying that there is no such point to be made.

If he had said, "There are millions of blacks in this country, many of whom are not congenital criminals," do you think he would have gotten anywhere with your "simply stating fact" defense?

His implied thought is appalling enough; but it gets worse twice. First, his sponsors gave him money to finance the dissemination of that implication without abandoning him in droves. Second, people like you and others on this thread applaud and/or defend him for it.


Of course we do--at least, where police shootings are not given nearly the degree of scrutiny that Mundane shootings are. Eventually, if the War On Drugs continues--which it almost certainly will until the entire government collapses under its own weight--government cops will essentially have an explicit or implicit license to kill Mundanes for any reason or no reason, provided the particular Mundanes in question are not of some special value to the government.

That's the direction we've been going for decades, and there's nothing on the horizon except total economic collapse that suggests that any change in direction is coming.

I don't know, of course, but my instinct is to call BS. If he had been able to show any injury at all stemming from the confrontation, the PD would have trotted it out at the very beginning, at the first sign that things might get ugly. They might even have taken him out back and worked him over themselves just so that he'd have a visible injury they could blame on Brown.

Time will tell, but the delay does severe violence to the credibility of the claim.

What in the Hell are you talking about???? You are saying the same thing as Bill, but not as well as he did?

"Out of 12 million arrests a year, there are only 400 fatal shootings, and only a fraction of those turn out to be unjustified. Of course, every unjustified shooting is an inexcusable tragedy; but..."

O'REILLY:�Enough of what, Al? Enough of what? Police efficiency? In 2012, the last stats available from the FBI there were about 12 million arrests in the U.S.A. That averages out to 34,000 arrests per day. In 99.9 percent of those cases, the perpetrator was not killed by police. In fact, just over 400 fatal police shootings a year are recorded in this country, according to the FBI.
So let me restate -- 12 million arrests a year, 400 fatal shootings, many of them justified.
And Al Sharpton has the nerve to insult the American police community, men and women risking their lives to protect us. This charlatan has the gall to do that and NBC News is paying him.
My god -- why is that acceptable?�

It is unfortunate...

Your inability to grasp what he's saying doesn't surprise me a bit. Maybe you should try a little more social interaction with normal folks instead of trying to save those poor, unfortunate, sociopathic "victims" of police brutality at your local Kairos meetings...

Your last paragraph is a doozy...I suppose Al Sharpton better represents your views?

Sharpton couldn't have said it any better....Congratulations???

sharpton looks more and more like a bobble-head doll everyday, something about his proportions are off. As if he's wearing a little boy's suit.

He's prolly sick from swallowing his own schitt...If there were any justice in the world, he would have choked on it years ago.

He looks like he's got AIDS...seriously.

No. A victim implies you've had your rights violated. You don't have a right to attack someone, try to take his gun, and then not get shot in the process, so he's not a victim.

As usual, TRH is 100% factually correct. The crime report will list the dirtbag criminal as suspect. Responding officers will do a casualty report indicating that the dirtbag suspect died after forcing the primary officer to shoot him. The reports are attached and filed as one comprehensive report.

A suspect of a crime cannot be a victim of the same crime. There are mutually exclusive statuses.

TRH ought to start charging for imparting knowledge to those who desperately need it, including me, less often, of course ;-)

O'Reilly is just jealous because Sharpton has lost weight and it's now plainly evident that he's got a bigger fuggin' head than O'Reilly.

The first time O'Reilly saw Sharpton on TV after his weight loss he said, "Look at the size of that fuggers head! It looks like a pregnant fuggin' watermelon, for Pete's sake! People are going to think that he's smarter than me!!,.....I better start talkin' chit about him."

Then,...on the next episode of "The O'Reilly Factor", Bill says,.."Yeah,..Sharpton has a big head,..but it's filled with *chit!* Look at mine! (the camera pans in as Bill wobbles his punkin' head to and fro)

"This big muhfuggah contains *brains*", says Bill.

Yawn.
�Victim� (1) one that is injured, destroyed, or sacrificed under any of various conditions <a~of cancer><a~of the auto crash or accident><a~murder or shooting>

he looks like he either just crawled out of his coffin or is ready to be put into one. seriously, i think that dude is not long for this earth. he's gettin' all ashie looking and that ain't good for a brother.

Context modifies the definition. In this context, it means what I said.