testtest

Dishonest media reporting

T

trader

Professional
Anyone else getting real tired of fake reporting by police agencies? From the article two quotes stand out

Police say two cars exchanged gunfire around 4:45 Sunday morning

Police believe two vehicles were traveling on Union Hills Drive when they exchanged gunfire.

Really? Police believe two cars shot at each other? It's this cowardice in factual reporting, such as what the persons inside the cars descriptions are, that lead to such nonsense. We'll believe police again when they stop this utter stupidity.

www.abc15.com

Teen hurt in shooting near 7th Street and Union Hills Drive in north Phoenix

A teen is hurt after two cars exchanged gunfire early Sunday morning near 7th Street and Union Hills Drive in north Phoenix.
www.abc15.com www.abc15.com
 
trader said:
my pickups have never fired a shot at another automobile. Clearly the desert has affected vehicles, likely due to the heat, and now they too are arming themselves.
Click to expand...
Mine lost weight due to the heat.
468551985_10227639403396019_1915370024297248049_n.jpg
 
that is one of my points last2 - the headlines clearly state the cars were exchanging gunfire, not (as is obvious to anyone) the occupants inside the cars. Cars don't shoot at anything - it's a dodge from police lately not to identify the perpetrators - just like the headlines that a car ran over people in various parts of the world this week. Cars are operated (so far anyway) by people. The people ran over others using their cars. People shot at others from within the cars.
 
trader said:
that is one of my points last2 - the headlines clearly state the cars were exchanging gunfire, not (as is obvious to anyone) the occupants inside the cars. Cars don't shoot at anything - it's a dodge from police lately not to identify the perpetrators - just like the headlines that a car ran over people in various parts of the world this week. Cars are operated (so far anyway) by people. The people ran over others using their cars. People shot at others from within the cars.People shoot people
Click to expand...
Yep. Agreed. Cars don't shoot people. But to be fair, I didn't see a headline that said that.. and l understand why cops would want to be vague until they're done investigating and have all suspects picked up.

People shoot people.

It's not the car's fault. It's not the gun's fault.

People shoot people.
 
Pitdogg2 said:
Really you like police states like North Korea or east Germany??
NO FN THANK YOU!
How about police agencies actually do some policing and newspapers actually do some real reporting.
Click to expand...
nooo, i do not support "police states" how do you derive that from my posting..??

to have cameras all over the neighborhoods, is a good way to go after the criminals as thier acts are caught on camera, and it keeps an eye on any of the cops too that create problems.

this also cuts down on false reporting, as things will be captured on still photos or videos.

you really read wrong things in many posts, don't you.>???

conspiracy theorist much...are you,,????
 
Bassbob said:
F that. This isn't Russia. Or England.
Click to expand...
so, you would want crimes committed in our streets, with no "witnesses" such as cameras..???

how many people actually get involved and talk to the police when a crime happens..??

not too many, at least not in many neighborhoods, due to reprisals.

we need law enforcement but they cannot be everywhere, every time...cameras can "capture" criminals in the act, and the video evidence can be used against them in court.

the old saying, "if you ain't doing nothing wrong, you got no worries"

i'd be against city, state, federal, cameras aimed inside my property..for that, i can have my own..
 
Last edited:
Old_Me said:
so, you would want crimes committed in our streets, with no "witnesses" such as cameras..???

how many people actually get involved and talk to the police when a crime happens..??

not too many, at least not in many neighborhoods, due to reprisals.

we need law enforcement but they cannot be everywhere, every time...cameras can "capture" criminals in the act, and the video evidence can be used against them in court.

the old saying, "if you ain't doing nothing wrong, you got no worries"

i'd be against city, state, federal, cameras aimed inside my property..for that, i can have my own..
Click to expand...
You seem to have an issue with constitutional protections.

What about the old saying, " He who gives up freedom for security deserves neither".
 
Old_Me said:
to have cameras all over the neighborhoods, is a good way to go after the criminals as thier acts are caught on camera, and it keeps an eye on any of the cops too that create problems.

this also cuts down on false reporting, as things will be captured on still photos or videos.
Click to expand...


It's part of the inherent balance between Freedom and " Safety " .

With the excuse of reducing crime , it is a valuable tool for authoritarian governments to monitor and control political opponents and disadents .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top