[QUOTE]The state Senate on Tuesday gave final approval to a measure dubbed "Blue Lives Matter," which makes it a hate crime to attack a police officer, a firefighter or emergency medical personnel — adding them to individuals protected by the law because of race, religion, sexual orientation or national origin.
House Bill 14 passed the Senate on a 33-5 vote, but not before objections touching on raw areas of race and division by members including the chamber's two African-American members, Sens. Gerald Neal, of Louisville, and Reginald Thomas, of Lexington, both Democrats.
Both objected that the bill was a reaction to the "Black Lives Matter" movement sparked by police shootings of unarmed black men. The bill represents an effort to chill or diminish that movement, they said.
"I think we have to be honest," Thomas said. "We have this bill to chill and handcuff protests by racial minorities."[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]"Right below the surface is our history," Neal said, in voting against the bill. "It's the issue of race. It's unresolved."
Thomas, in voting no, agreed.
"This issue is very much a race issue," Thomas said. "As a state, we still have a ways to go."
Sen. Morgan McGarvey, a Louisville Democrat, said the measure appears to grow out of a need to recognize police and other emergency workers for the dangerous work they do. But he said he doesn't believe they need to be added to groups covered by the state law involving hate crimes — noting that many others do important and sometimes dangerous work.
"Hate crimes are who you are, not what you do," said McGarvey, who also voted against the bill.
But other members of the Senate spoke forcefully in support of the measure, including two members who invoked the memory of Brenda Cowan, a Lexington firefighter and emergency medical technician who was shot and killed in 2004 as she attempted to aid a woman critically wounded in a domestic attack.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Sen. Danny Carroll, a Republican and former police detective from Paducah who introduced the bill in the Senate, acknowledged it did not add significant sanctions to the law.
"This bill may not have a lot of substance," he said. "There is a message to it. It's a message of what we will tolerate as a society. As a society, we will not tolerate attacks on these people because of the profession they are in."[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2017/03/07/blue-lives-matter-bill-passes-but-not-before-objections-touching-race-and-division/98861272/"]Source[/URL]
The "wonderful" politicians in Frankfort are really putting my tax money, and their time to good use. Best part is the fact that they admit that its nothing more than a dumb feel good law. Also, in Kentucky there have been like 20 murders total (shootings, stabbings, ect) of police officers... since 2000. So it isn't like there was any problem in the first place that warranted this.
[QUOTE=Durandal;51929871]So it isn't like there was any problem in the first place that warranted this.[/QUOTE]
I just want it immortalized that this poster thinks the murder of 20 police officers in 17 years in one state is no problem.
Good gravy. What a gracious public to serve.
i dunno i think it's pretty scummy to attack emergency personnel regardless of your personal misgivings with an entire group
an EMT or a firefighter sure aren't fucking shooting people that's for sure
[QUOTE=Sonador;51929894]I just want it immortalized that this poster thinks the murder of 20 police officers in 17 years in one state is no problem.
Good gravy. What a gracious public to serve.[/QUOTE]
This statistic means absolutely nothing without statistics on the murder rate in that state, the amount of police officers vs normal citizens, and how everything compares to other states.
[QUOTE=geel9;51929903]This statistic means absolutely nothing without statistics on the murder rate in that state, the amount of police officers vs normal citizens, and how everything compares to other states.[/QUOTE]
Murdering a police officer is not okay in any context.
[QUOTE=Sonador;51929894]I just want it immortalized that this poster thinks the murder of 20 police officers in 17 years in one state is no problem.
Good gravy. What a gracious public to serve.[/QUOTE]
Do you think adding this law on top of the fact that its already a capital offense will remedy this? No it wont because most the deaths where caused by common criminals shooting cops because they are criminals not because they are misguided idiots who think the cops are their enemy.
[QUOTE=Sonador;51929905]Murdering a police officer is not okay in any context.[/QUOTE]
A: In no way did he say or imply that.
B: You're the one who made the deal about it being a large number, don't try to dance away from arguing numbers afterwards.
[QUOTE=Durandal;51929910]Do you think adding this law on top of the fact that its already a capital offense will remedy this? No it wont because most the deaths where caused by common criminals shooting cops because they are criminals not because they are misguided idiots.[/QUOTE]
While that may be the case, this law aims to address the recent outbreak of politically motivated police killings, for example the recent attacks in Texas, namely Dallas.
Regardless of the scope, however, making it clear that murdering a police officer is not tolerable is a good thing.
[QUOTE=Sonador;51929894]I just want it immortalized that this poster thinks the murder of 20 police officers in 17 years in one state is no problem.
Good gravy. What a gracious public to serve.[/QUOTE]
hi yeah Chicago here we're at 23 police deaths in the line of duty since the start of 2017, you can read more statistics [url=https://www.odmp.org/agency/657-chicago-police-department-illinois]here[/url] and [url=heyjackass.com]here[/url]
20 deaths in [b]17 years[/b] in an entire state (save for nigh uninhabited masses like wyoming) is a miracle. Praising the fact that it's 'only' that much shouldn't be attacked with some holier than thou "NO DEATHS ARE ACCEPTABLE" bullshit, and totally opens up a dialogue about how them acting like they're in a hotzone for anti-police activity is pretty disingenuous to how relatively safe their situation is compared to many other regions.
I don't want to pull a 'but we have it worse' given chicago's a well known outlier, but they have it [i]good[/i] compared to most of the country and this bill was nothing but a feelgood wank belittling what merit BLM stands for just so they can slap an extra (and fucking irrelevant) charge on top of all the other things that make it illegal to attack a police officer or emergency worker that already exist, on top of the reasons it's illegal to attack anybody in the first place
Police are already counted as 'race' in a number of statistics given they stand out as a single entity among other entities (see that second link), but in that same vein, 'self defense' is also listed in those racial breakdowns. They seem included primarily as victims in the interactions, which makes more sense to note due to the fact police interact with everybody and altercations break out in certain patterns.
[QUOTE=Paramud;51929912]A: In no way did he say or imply that.
B: You're the one who made the deal about it being a large number, don't try to dance away from arguing numbers afterwards.[/QUOTE]
He absolutely did, and even if the numbers were different, it does not make murdering police officers okay.
If you are opposing this bill, you are stating that the murder of a police officer is neither especially heinous nor important.
[QUOTE=Sonador;51929924]He absolutely did, and even if the numbers were different, it does not make murdering police officers okay.
If you are opposing this bill, you are stating that the murder of a police officer is neither especially heinous nor important.[/QUOTE]
No, he didn't. You jumped on an interpretation of what you thought he said instead of asking him to clarify what he meant.
[QUOTE=dai;51929923]hi yeah Chicago here we're at 23 police deaths in the line of duty since the start of 2017, 20 deaths in [b]17 years[/b] in the entire state is worth praise[/QUOTE]
Hopefully Illinois will follow suit, then. Good to know there's merit to my claim that the murder of police officers is actually an issue.
[QUOTE=Sonador;51929919]While that may be the case, this law aims to address the recent outbreak of politically motivated police killings, for example the recent attacks in Texas, namely Dallas.[/quote]
[url=http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/causes.html]"Recent Outbreak," not so much.[/url]
[quote]Regardless of the scope, however, making it clear that murdering a police officer is not tolerable is a good thing.[/QUOTE]
It's already clear. It's already a worse crime than murdering a civilian. This bill is literally just a slap in the face of the BLM group. It's fucking inane and childish.
[QUOTE=Sonador;51929924]He absolutely did, and even if the numbers were different, it does not make murdering police officers okay.
If you are opposing this bill, you are stating that the murder of a police officer is neither especially heinous nor important.[/QUOTE]
How? Its already a capital offense that can net you the death penalty in Kentucky. How does allowing it to be a hate crime make it any clearer that its not okay to kill cops in Kentucky?
[QUOTE=Paramud;51929932][url=http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/causes.html]"Recent Outbreak," not so much.[/url]
It's already clear. It's already a worse crime than murdering a civilian. This bill is literally just a slap in the face of the BLM group. It's fucking inane and childish.[/QUOTE]
Who mentioned BLM, out of curiosity? I hope you don't mean to imply that law protecting police officers from crime is less important than an organization ostensibly attempting to affect the same?
How the hell did we go from the tentative assertion that black lives are worth something to declaring assault of police officers a hate crime? This screams of trying to sweep racial issues under the rug.
"Blue lives" is not a race and were never jeopardized, and anyone who parrots "blue lives matter" or "all lives matter" is purposely trying to dilute the issue of police brutality & racism. I wish it were just a state senate pipe dream but there are grass roots for bootlicking somehow which is the saddest part of this story.
[QUOTE=Sonador;51929924]He absolutely did, and even if the numbers were different, it does not make murdering police officers okay.
If you are opposing this bill, you are stating that the murder of a police officer is neither especially heinous nor important.[/QUOTE]
"Police officer" is not an inherent, inalienable class (sex, race, etc.), nor is it a mode of expression (like religion is). Rather, it's a voluntary profession. I don't see how it should be included with protected classes as the legislation puts it.
[QUOTE=Sonador;51929936]Who mentioned BLM, out of curiosity? I hope you don't mean to imply that law protecting police officers from crime is less important than an organization ostensibly attempting to affect the same?[/QUOTE]
Perhaps you should read the article.
[quote]Both objected that the bill was a reaction to the "Black Lives Matter" movement sparked by police shootings of unarmed black men. The bill represents an effort to chill or diminish that movement, they said.[/quote]
[QUOTE=Durandal;51929933]How? Its already a capital offense that can net you the death penalty in Kentucky. How does allowing it to be a hate crime make it any clearer that its not okay to kill cops in Kentucky?[/QUOTE]
By making it clear that if you kill them with malice aforethought as part of a hate crime, you will be punished for killing them with malice aforethought as a hate crime?
I've already stated the law isn't aiming to punish your average criminal who kills a cop, it's aiming to punish high profile, politically motivated cop killings as a hate crime.
[QUOTE=Sonador;51929936]Who mentioned BLM, out of curiosity? I hope you don't mean to imply that law protecting police officers from crime is less important than an organization ostensibly attempting to affect the same?[/QUOTE]
how are you this completely without context in a thread about the counter-BLM reactionary 'blue lives matter' shit
[QUOTE=Scarabix;51929937]How the hell did we go from the tentative assertion that black lives are worth something to declaring assault of police officers a hate crime? This screams of trying to sweep racial issues under the rug.
"Blue lives" is not a race and were never jeopardized, and anyone who parrots "blue lives matter" or "all lives matter" is purposely trying to dilute the issue of police brutality & racism. I wish it were just a state senate pipe dream but there are grass roots for bootlicking somehow which is the saddest part of this story.[/QUOTE]
I get why "all live matter" is kind of redundant, but you can't seriously deny the anti-police sentiment which is prevalent in some parts of the US.
[QUOTE=Sonador;51929936]Who mentioned BLM, out of curiosity? I hope you don't mean to imply that law protecting police officers from crime is less important than an organization ostensibly attempting to affect the same?[/QUOTE]
Its called the "Blue Lives Matter" bill. Named after a counter protest movement to Black Lives Matter. It doesn't even protect them from crime though, you can already get capital punishment for killing police officers and first responders. I ask again. How does this bill actually protect officers if you can already receive the harshest punishment for any given crime for committing a police killing?
[QUOTE=Paramud;51929940]Perhaps you should read the article.[/QUOTE]
I did, and observed the objections had no bearing on the actual intent of the law?
[editline]8th March 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=dai;51929942]how are you this completely without context in a thread about the counter-BLM reactionary 'blue lives matter' shit[/QUOTE]
You get both or neither, really. If one's illegitimate, so is the other. You make progress in the argument by shedding the political nonsense and looking into the intent of the law itself: If you kill a cop as a hate crime, you get punished for it as a hate crime.
How can you be against a bill that further discourages the murder of police officers, regardless of context?
[QUOTE=Sonador;51929945]I did, and observed the objections had no bearing on the actual intent of the law?[/QUOTE]
Please, explain how it has no bearing. As well, explain how Geel9 was saying that it's okay to kill police officers.
[QUOTE=Durandal;51929944]I ask again. How does this bill actually protect officers if you can already receive the harshest punishment for any given crime for committing a police killing?[/QUOTE]
By recognizing the legitimacy of the threat of a politicized movement to murder police officers as a twisted sense of progressivism, and making it clear that it is a crime and will not be tolerated?
[editline]8th March 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Paramud;51929951]Please, explain how it has no bearing. As well, explain how Geel9 was saying that it's okay to kill police officers.[/QUOTE]
It has no bearing in that, despite the name, the bill is aimed to clearly communicate that murdering police officers as a hate crime will be punished as a hate crime. It specifically makes the case that no matter what banner you carry, killing cops is not legitimate.
The latter was addressed in the post itself, if you read it.
[QUOTE=Sonador;51929945]How can you be against a bill that further discourages the murder of police officers, regardless of context?[/QUOTE]
Would you be perfectly fine with a bill that discourages the murder of police, on the basis of reinforcing Christian values onto a morally bankrupt society? Would you be perfectly fine with a bill that discourages the murder of police, on the basis that the working class should be content with being ruled by the iron fist of the aristocracy? Would you be perfectly fine with a bill that discourages the murder of police, on the basis of "fuck these kids and their protests?"
Context is [b]very[/b] fucking important.
[QUOTE=Paramud;51929958]Would you be perfectly fine with a bill that discourages the murder of police, on the basis of reinforcing Christian values onto a morally bankrupt society? Would you be perfectly fine with a bill that discourages the murder of police, on the basis that the working class should be content with being ruled by the iron fist of the aristocracy? Would you be perfectly fine with a bill that discourages the murder of police, on the basis of "fuck these kids and their protests?"
Context is [b]very[/b] fucking important.[/QUOTE]
Perhaps you should read the law instead of reading the name.
This bill seems redundant. Murder is illegal, and killing cops is already super illegal with much harsher punishments.
[QUOTE=Apache249;51929943]I get why "all live matter" is kind of redundant, but you can't seriously deny the anti-police sentiment which is prevalent in some parts of the US.[/QUOTE]
Right but they're not technically in jeopardy, are they? There IS mediation that needs to happen between the public and law enforcement in certain areas; I would argue that most of the people riled up with the police are making their revendications rather clear : no justice no peace means just what it means. I get that each officer is a human in its own merit but when you have solidarity among police corps aiming to protect policemen that bludgeon or kill civilians on duty, it's very hard to convince the victims & relatives that not all officers are pigs.
Maybe instead of adding insult to injury, steps could first be taken to have justice brought where needs be. BLM is not domestic terrorism, they're the ones who are actually jeopardized.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
