Policing Thread

[magisme]

http://www.inquisitr.com/1430653/dillon-taylor-shooting-proof-ferguson-protesters-are-having-the-wrong-conversation/

Odd that nobody is talking about this, no protests are going on, president Obama isn't involved.

It's not odd.

I don't know how to say this, and it's not an opinion that I feel particularly strong about, but I think it's kinda...immature and unrealistic thinking to complain about double standards like this one. Double standards suck, they're frustrating, but most of them exist for a reason, even if the reason is outdated at this point. The racial double standards have historical roots and really it doesn't have a place anymore, but unfortunately it does, and complaining about it doesn't do anything.

Thank you. So obvious.

[downzy]

^I agree with you. I think I was kinda "softening" my stance on the issue so as not to come off as extreme or as too biased towards one side.

I actually only just saw your reply to Val about this, somehow I missed it, it's basically everything I wanted to say.

My apologies for getting confused. Guess that's why I try to refrain from posting late into the night.

[pestilence]

The only thing to say is it wont end here

[Apollo]

http://www.inquisitr.com/1430653/dillon-taylor-shooting-proof-ferguson-protesters-are-having-the-wrong-conversation/

Odd that nobody is talking about this, no protests are going on, president Obama isn't involved.

It's not odd.

I don't know how to say this, and it's not an opinion that I feel particularly strong about, but I think it's kinda...immature and unrealistic thinking to complain about double standards like this one. Double standards suck, they're frustrating, but most of them exist for a reason, even if the reason is outdated at this point. The racial double standards have historical roots and really it doesn't have a place anymore, but unfortunately it does, and complaining about it doesn't do anything.

Thank you. So obvious.

What's obvious about it?

Jake - I just wonder why you don't apply your feelings towards the other shooting as well? A large group of people are turning an "incident" that should be about the standards in which a police officer shoots a suspect into a racial situation. Unless it can be proven that this police officer is a racist, then why are people making this a racial incident? Because of things that happened 50 or 100 years ago?

Racism doesn't solely exist because of the evil white rich American - no matter how badly Downzy wants people to believe that. Guys like Sharpton and Jackson and even now Obama just add fuel to the fire by turning anything that involves whites/blacks into a racial issue - even when it shouldn't be. At some point you have to stop falling back on the race card and move forward.

So you think it makes me immature to wonder why people are outraged at a white cop shooting a black dude - even all the way up to Obama..........but the same people who are crying about racism and hate crimes don't care when the situation is reversed and a white kid is shot? So apparently it isn't about equality of the races then. It's about the evil rich white American and the poor black community that is still being treated like slaves.

Does racism still exist? Of course. And in America, it works all ways. This isn't 1940. There are extremes on all sides, in all races. But the majority of people are not racist and they treat people with love and respect and dignity. What seems immature to me is when people try and paint an entire country into a specific bubble that fits their agenda because of their own political ties or because of their own internet information college degree.

[downzy]

http://www.inquisitr.com/1430653/dillon-taylor-shooting-proof-ferguson-protesters-are-having-the-wrong-conversation/

Odd that nobody is talking about this, no protests are going on, president Obama isn't involved.

It's not odd.

I don't know how to say this, and it's not an opinion that I feel particularly strong about, but I think it's kinda...immature and unrealistic thinking to complain about double standards like this one. Double standards suck, they're frustrating, but most of them exist for a reason, even if the reason is outdated at this point. The racial double standards have historical roots and really it doesn't have a place anymore, but unfortunately it does, and complaining about it doesn't do anything.

Thank you. So obvious.

What's obvious about it?

Jake - I just wonder why you don't apply your feelings towards the other shooting as well? A large group of people are turning an "incident" that should be about the standards in which a police officer shoots a suspect into a racial situation. Unless it can be proven that this police officer is a racist, then why are people making this a racial incident? Because of things that happened 50 or 100 years ago?

Racism doesn't solely exist because of the evil white rich American - no matter how badly Downzy wants people to believe that. Guys like Sharpton and Jackson and even now Obama just add fuel to the fire by turning anything that involves whites/blacks into a racial issue - even when it shouldn't be. At some point you have to stop falling back on the race card and move forward.

So you think it makes me immature to wonder why people are outraged at a white cop shooting a black dude - even all the way up to Obama..........but the same people who are crying about racism and hate crimes don't care when the situation is reversed and a white kid is shot? So apparently it isn't about equality of the races then. It's about the evil rich white American and the poor black community that is still being treated like slaves.

Does racism still exist? Of course. And in America, it works all ways. This isn't 1940. There are extremes on all sides, in all races. But the majority of people are not racist and they treat people with love and respect and dignity. What seems immature to me is when people try and paint an entire country into a specific bubble that fits their agenda because of their own political ties or because of their own internet information college degree.

For fucks sake. Really? You think people are making this a racial issue because of problems 50 or a 100 years ago? Nothing to do with the fact that black people, as a percentage of the population, are fatally attacked by police at a much higher rate? http://qz.com/256610/this-chart-shows-that-nationwide-blacks-killed-by-law-enforcement-at-3x-the-rate-of-whites/

People will move on from the race issue when it's no longer an issue. That's like saying we should move on from worrying about the environment because we now limit CFCs output. Nonsense.

Yes, segregation and racism are still prevalent within American society. By every statistic imaginable, African Americans do much worse than their white counterparts. Why? Are we naive or shallow enough to believe that it's just a biological or cultural issue, that black people are biologically or culturally inferior? And that all the problems that plague black communities are their own doing? If that's what you truly believe, then you know fuck all about your own country, its history, and the recent and current polices that have kept racial lines clearly drawn.

You're confusing prejudice with racism. Racism is not simply bias against another race, that's prejudice. Race is a power structure. It's why the concept of white privilege (just like male privilege) is real and generally accepted by anyone who takes the time to study the concept. Certain black people might be prejudicial against certain (or all) white people, but what power do they derive from such prejudice? As a result of their prejudice, do they garner higher incomes, better education, greater access to better jobs, less scrutiny from law enforcement? Answer those questions and then come back and ask if white prejudice against black people returns different results.

What seems immature to me is when people ignore the realities on the ground and the overwhelming evidence that America is still a very racialized country. And as such, shit like what happens in Ferguson happens all over the country. And it happens a lot. But sure, belittle the people who actually spent years studying the issue. I'm sure Sean Hannity has got your back. I'll end how I started: for fucks sakes!

Edited August 28, 2014 by downzy

[Jakey Styley]

http://www.inquisitr.com/1430653/dillon-taylor-shooting-proof-ferguson-protesters-are-having-the-wrong-conversation/

Odd that nobody is talking about this, no protests are going on, president Obama isn't involved.

It's not odd.

I don't know how to say this, and it's not an opinion that I feel particularly strong about, but I think it's kinda...immature and unrealistic thinking to complain about double standards like this one. Double standards suck, they're frustrating, but most of them exist for a reason, even if the reason is outdated at this point. The racial double standards have historical roots and really it doesn't have a place anymore, but unfortunately it does, and complaining about it doesn't do anything.

Thank you. So obvious.

What's obvious about it?

Jake - I just wonder why you don't apply your feelings towards the other shooting as well? A large group of people are turning an "incident" that should be about the standards in which a police officer shoots a suspect into a racial situation. Unless it can be proven that this police officer is a racist, then why are people making this a racial incident? Because of things that happened 50 or 100 years ago?

I'm not entirely sure that this is a situation that race played a part in and there's no way for us to ever know that. You can never really prove that something like this is racially motivated.

Really, if I had to bet, I think I'd say that race didn't play a part in any of the officer's decisions here. But who knows, maybe if the kid was white then the cop may have never even bothered to tell him to get off the street? No way of us knowing, but it's not a stretch, because statistics still show that blacks are targeted differently than whites by cops. That is why people are bringing race into this situation, because race is still an issue on the broader scale.

[downzy]

Let's go through this line by line (or point by point).

Are you ever gonna admit why you hate Caucasian Americans so much?

No, because I don't. Being a Caucasian male (though Canadian, not American) myself makes your point a little absurd. Trust me, there's lots I don't like about myself, but being a white guy isn't one of them.

I haven't read much of this thread, so these are questions that I'd honestly like to know, and I hope you give honest answers:

Do you think the video of Brown stealing cigars, putting his hands on the store owner that was trying to stop him, and threatening the owner with bodily harm was altered by the police?

No.

Do you think the officer was wrong to tell Brown to get out of the middle of the street?

No.

Do you think all the credible eyewitnesses who said Brown twice forced the officer back into his police car were lying?

No.

Do you think the injuries to the officer's face were self inflicted, rather than from Brown reaching through the car window to repeatedly punch him?

No.

Do you think the forensic pathologists were involved in a conspiracy when they concluded all six shots struck Brown while he was facing the officer?

No, but there's some debate on whether one of the bullets on his arm actually was a graze from behind.

The fact you're missing here is that none of the bullets were fired at point-blank range. Meaning the police officer was not under duress when the shots were fired. None of the questions you just asked have any bearing on the situation if Michael Brown was at a safe distance from the officer. Nobody here is arguing that the officer wouldn't have been in his right had he shot Brown during the scuffle. But that doesn't seem to be the case based on the evidence we know so far.

And now I have a more broader question: Rather than complain about the predominantly Caucasian Ferguson police force, as well as other predominantly Caucasian police forces in parts of the US, can you explain why more non-Caucasians don't become police officers? The money is pretty good and it's not like there's no openings. What better way to eliminate inappropriate race-related behavior within a police department than to make it a multi-racial force?

Simple. 20 years ago Ferguson use to be 3/4 white. Cops generally have 20-35 year old careers, hence the population changed faster than the hiring cycle. Also, let's not forget that after growing up being terrorized by the police force, becoming a police officer isn't highly considered among peers.

You said: "And are we so quick to reject and ignore America's history of racial tension that results in many more Michael Browns than Dillon Taylors (in proportion to the general population)?"

Downzy you know I like you, but your tainted politically-driven views on race do nothing but add fuel to the fire by promoting animosity between races in America (BTW - funny how you never talk about racism in Canada). You're constantly trying to convince everyone here that most if not all Caucasian Americans are evil racists.

Promoting animosity among races? So pointing out structural racism and white privilege while challenging less than informed opinions is considered antagonistic? Really? So what's the alternative? Just shut up about the very real problems relating to race within America's borders? Just stand idly by while misinformed individuals perpetuate myths, distortions, or outright lies? That's a good idea. I don't really give a fuck what others choose to believe in so long as it has a basis in reality. Arguing that America is no longer a racialized nation or that race still doesn't have a determinative factor in many peoples lives is not an argument that's based in reality. It's one that's based on ignorance (whether intentional or not), and one that, having been someone who has spent numerous years studying the topic, wishes to rectify. We can argue about causes, severity, and limits of the problem, but the issue of race isn't something that's debatable.

If you want to start a thread about the racism that exists in Canada go right ahead. I don't deny that Canada has its own problems, particularly with our indigenous populations. But this thread is on an event that happened in the U.S. So why the fuck would I bring up Canada?

Finally, on, this point, exactly where do I suggest that all white Americans are evil racists? Don't you think if I truly believed that that I would never visit the U.S. five or six times a year? Come on Linguini, let's not make shit up. The racial lines drawn in America are still present and real. They continue to have profound effects on race relations and the on livelihoods of African American communities. That is my argument. How you extrapolated that I think all white people are racist is beyond me. Sure, many (if not all) white Americans benefit from white privilege, just like men benefit from male privilege, but that doesn't render all white Americans as racists. You do see the difference, right?

Many more Michael Browns that Dillon Taylors?

FACT:
An analysis of 'single offender victimization figures' from the FBI for 2007 finds African Americans committed 433,934 crimes against Caucasians, eight times the 55,685 crimes Caucasians committed against African Americans. Interracial rape is almost exclusively black on white — with 14,000 assaults on Caucasian women by African Americans in 2007. Not one case of a white sexual assault on a black female was found in the FBI study."

Those figures are quite damning to your ridiculous argument that African Americans are frequently the victim of violence by American Caucasians, especially knowing full well that 77.7% of the US population is Caucasian while only 13.2% is African American. The disparity is huge.

First, before I go into why your "facts" are misleading, and in some cases invalid, none of this previous point you have made has anything to do with the topic at hand. Whether more white women get raped by black men than white men rape black women has no bearing on this conversation. Unless, of course, you're trying to say that black men are filthy mongrels and thus deserve the degree of targeting and scrutiny they receive from local and state police departments. And no where do I argue that African Americans aren't the perpetrators of crimes. That's not what's being discussed here. The issue is the overwhelming racial bias that's prevalent in cases of deadly force used by police officers. It is not whether black people are perpetrators of crime. Nobody is arguing that they are not. But the statistics do not lie. You're three times more likely to be killed by a cop if you're black than if you're white. While I think it's premature and unwarranted to assume that the police officer in this particular incident acted on racist impulses, it's also important to acknowledge that in light of the statistic I just mentioned, race is most likely a factor when these situations occur.

Second, go over the numbers you have provide again because I'm not sure you're thinking this through. If the U.S. is 77 percent white and 13 percent black, don't you think the numbers in the aggregate are going to be a slightly skewed? For argument's sake, say there's a 100 people living in the U.S. Assuming all things being equal, if 77 Americans are white, then there's likely going to to be more white victims than black victims, with a population of 13 people. The same logic applies why there's far fewer black victims of whites committing crime. If out of a hundred there are only 13 black people, then chances are there will be far less black victims in the aggregate. Moreover, how many white victims of crimes suffered as the result of white people? I personally don't know, but I've got to figure it's going to be a hell of a lot more than 433k.

Third, your rape numbers are bogus. First, the FBI doesn't break out numbers for interracial rape. The Justice Department does for "rape and sexual assault." And let's examine the language this portion you have copied. First it claims that interracial rape is exclusively black on white. But notice how when it comes to hard statistics, it doesn't use the word rape again, it uses the term sexual assault, which could be anything from rape to a grope. It makes the reader thing that 14k white women are being raped by black men a year when clearly that isn't happen. In the Justice Department's findings, interracial sexual assaults are so rare that there are fewer than ten cases in the sample, which is not nearly a big enough sample to draw firm statistical conclusions. The person who has written your copied quote has simply extrapolated the very small sample size onto a national average. No statistician in their right mind would do that on such a small sample size. But the Justice Department's statistics do reveal one thing, a vast majority of all accounted for rapes are committed by white men. Moreover, one also has to consider the fact that many African Americans are wrongly committed for crimes they did not commit. Take the Innocent Project, run by two Yeshiva University law professors, who have exonerated 200 men between 1992 and 2007. Of the 200 they have exonerated, sixty percent were black men wrongly convicted for raping white women.

Look, you claim that I antagonize, that I provoke race relations (as if the internet posts of some white Canadian is doing much to this affect). But who is the one using out of context data to prove a point? Who is putting words in the mouth of someone he disagrees with? Who uses arguments and data that have nothing to do with the topic to make a point no one was talking about? Stick to baseball my friend, you're a little out of your element here.

Edited August 29, 2014 by downzy

[Not An FSB Agent]

. It's why "African-Americans were overrepresented among police shooting victims in every city the publications investigated. The contrast was particularly noticeable in New York, San Diego and Las Vegas. In each of these cities, the percentage of black people killed by police was at least double that of their share of the city's total population." It's also why the DOJ found in 2008 that "black people were almost three times more likely than white people to be subjected to force or threatened with it by police."

Lets look at the raw data and see why that biased crock of shit stinks, shall we.

You think that blacks are targeted by the police? Guess who commits most of the crime in this country? Yep, blacks. So, statistically yeah, they will have more interaction with law enforcement, e,g;

Blacks make up about 1/3 of the population, but in 2012:

• Blacks committed 50% of the murders in the country
• Blacks committed 55% of the robberies in the country

So, you have 1/3 of the population committing over 1/2 of the violent crime. If you were a cop, who would you look at... sorry to burst the bubble on that anti-America degree you got from some Canadian university... you should've went for gender studies; it is about as relevant.

Source: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/tables/43tabledatadecoverviewpdf

Edited August 29, 2014 by Not An FSB Agent

[downzy]

You being a Canadian makes my point anything but absurd, as it's not Caucasions around the world that you've been labeling as racists .... just American Caucasians, whether they be cops or civilians. Where was your outrage when a Caucasian Canadian cop shot a Syrian teenager armed only with a knife 9 times on an empty Toronto streetcar? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Sammy_Yatim

Oh that's right, only Caucasian American cops are trigger happy.

Actually, I expressed my outrage about the death of Sammy Yatim in this very thread.

Groghan, on 20 Aug 2014 - 1:55 PM, said:

Downzy, how are the police in Canada?

Not much better.

Yean, there's a good example of Canadian police making a clusterfuck of an already bad situation. Thankfully the police officer responsible for Sammy's death is facing charges of second degree murder and attempt to murder (which seems like a contradiction).

I'm not great with using multi-quotes so let me explain who said what. Groghan asked if how are the Canadian police. I said, not much better. Coma16 posted the video of the murder of Sammy Yatim, and then I agreed that there was a fine example of cops acting like thugs in Canada.

Point blank rage is generally defined as within 3 feet. Just because Brown may have been more than 3 feet away you claim he could not have been under duress? Are you kidding me? Brown standing still could have probably reached the officer if he were 3 feet away.

From the N.Y Times: "The bullets did not appear to have been shot from very close range because no gunpowder was present on his body." We'll know more as the investigation concludes, but as of right now, the preliminary findings suggest that Brown was not close to the officer when the bullets were fired.

But let me get this straight. The cop had been shoved back into his car twice. He had been beaten in the face while sitting in his own cruiser.

He was punched once in the face.

He had to fight off Brown from taking his holstered gun while sitting in his own cruiser (which BTW I had neglected to mention in my earlier post) with evidence of a shot being fired inside the cruiser during the struggle. And Brown was at the very least facing the officer at the time of the shooting, despite standard police instructions to turn around and face the other way. And you actually have the audacity to say the officer wasn't under duress?

Yes, myself and many others have the "audacity" to suggest that the officer wasn't under duress at the the very moment he shot his gun. There are several eyewitness accounts that suggest Brown and his friend Johnson were fleeing at the time Brown was shot. Again, re-read what I said in my previous post. Had Brown been shot during the physical altercation with the police officer nobody here would take issue with Brown's death. But according to both the preliminary findings and the several eye witness accounts, that's not what happened. Police are not suppose to fire upon fleeing individuals unless they believe that person to be an imminent threat to someone close at hand.

[downzy]

. It's why "African-Americans were overrepresented among police shooting victims in every city the publications investigated. The contrast was particularly noticeable in New York, San Diego and Las Vegas. In each of these cities, the percentage of black people killed by police was at least double that of their share of the city's total population." It's also why the DOJ found in 2008 that "black people were almost three times more likely than white people to be subjected to force or threatened with it by police."

Lets look at the raw data and see why that biased crock of shit stinks, shall we.

You think that blacks are targeted by the police? Guess who commits most of the crime in this country? Yep, blacks. So, statistically yeah, they will have more interaction with law enforcement, e,g;

Blacks make up about 1/3 of the population, but in 2012:

• Blacks committed 50% of the murders in the country
• Blacks committed 55% of the robberies in the country

So, you have 1/3 of the population committing over 1/2 of the violent crime. If you were a cop, who would you look at... sorry to burst the bubble on that anti-America degree you got from some Canadian university... you should've went for gender studies; it is about as relevant.

Source: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/tables/43tabledatadecoverviewpdf

FYI, that Canadian University I attended is ranked in the top 20 universities in the world. Sorry, where did you get your degrees on American politics/studies again?

As for your crime states, again, first, nice cherry picking (since those are the only two categories in which African Americans commit crimes at a great rate than whites), and second, they have no bearing on the topic of police brutality on African Americans. Trying to justify the action of officers who use deadly force because African Americans commit more murders than whites is absurd.

Furthermore, do we then allow police officers to impugn an entire race because of murder rates? Should any and all black men forfeit their fourth and fifth amendment rights until murder rates for African American fall in line? Do we simply say to the family of those who were fatally shot that the trigger happy police officer was justified because "your kind" don't know how to behave. Because that's what I'm getting from your post Not.

[downzy]

This is the kind of structural/institutional racism that I talk about:

These seven charts explain how Ferguson—and many other US cities—wring revenue from black people and the poor

http://qz.com/257042/these-seven-charts-explain-how-ferguson-and-many-other-us-cities-wring-revenue-from-black-people-and-the-poor/

In its violent crackdowns on demonstrations since a white police officer shot 18-year-old Michael Brown in early August, Ferguson police revealed a fresh proclivity for abusing its citizens. However, the city’s finances suggest the St. Louis suburb’s criminal justice system has been stealthily exploiting residents—particularly those who are black or poor—for years.
Ferguson’s economy steadily withered over the last decade, as did its population. Yet even as the number of adult residents fell 11% between 2010 and 2013, fines collected by the city’s court system surged 85%, hitting $2.6 million last year.

That revenue stream has become an increasingly critical part of the city’s budget:

Of course, it may be that residents are simply breaking laws more frequently. But the share of arrests for petty offenses suggests something else at play.
In fact, arresting people for minor violations is exactly the point, as Brendan Roediger, professor at the Saint Louis University School of Law and supervisor of a local civil advocacy clinic, told Governing magazine. “They don’t want to actually incarcerate people because it costs money, so they fine them,” Roediger said, adding that Ferguson’s court sometimes hears as many as 300 cases per hour.

If that estimate is right, this means the court is processing charges at a rate of 12 seconds per case—which sounds improbable. However, a report by ArchCity Defenders, a non-profit lawyer group, sheds some light on how that might be possible.

According to the report, the Ferguson Municipal Court often starts hearing cases a half-hour before the official scheduled start time, and locks the doors five minutes after the court officially opens. Those who miss their hearing can then be charged with failing to appear, while missing court flat-out will likely result in an arrest warrant.

Though those arrested for warrant violations have a right to counsel, Ferguson and two other municipalities seldom offer any or inform defendants of this right, the ArchCity Defenders report says. If they are sentenced to probation, they often are required to pay fines that can be up to triple their monthly income. While Missouri Law requires a hearing to determine a defendant’s ability to pay, this rarely occurs, according to the report.

This practice explains why Ferguson Municipal Court issued 24,532 warrants and heard 12,018 cases in 2013. That averages out to 1.5 cases and three warrants per every household in Ferguson.

But the Ferguson police aren’t arresting just anyone for petty violations. For instance, police data reveal that officers systematically target black residents.

Though blacks make up only two-thirds of Ferguson’s population, nearly nine-tenths of vehicle stops in Ferguson involve black drivers. Those drivers are almost twice as likely as white drivers to be searched and twice as likely to be arrested. That’s despite the fact that searches of black drivers result in discovery of contraband 22% of the time, while white drivers searched by police are found to have contraband 34% of the time.

Ferguson is hardly the only area of St. Louis County embracing this cycle of petty-offense extortion:

In fact, all around the US, cash-strapped municipalities have adopted what Human Rights Watch calls the “offender-funded business model” (pdf). Courts charge fees for everything from public defenders to “insurance policies” for community service, as this recent report (pdf) from John Jay College of Criminal Justice details. And as late-fee interest charges build up, that revenue just keeps growing.

Edited August 29, 2014 by downzy

[shades]

FYI, that Canadian University I attended is ranked in the top 20 universities in the world. Sorry, where did you get your degrees on American politics/studies again?

and there we have it, all other argument has been closed and ruled insignificant.

Moderators feel free to lock this thread

[downzy]

FYI, that Canadian University I attended is ranked in the top 20 universities in the world. Sorry, where did you get your degrees on American politics/studies again?

and there we have it, all other argument has been closed and ruled insignificant.

Moderators feel free to lock this thread

No, which is why I continued. But if someone is going to belittle my education, then I'm going to ask about their background.

At the very least, it's a better response than threatening violence towards those you disagree with.

Lock the thread? Why?

Edited August 29, 2014 by downzy

[shades]

FYI, that Canadian University I attended is ranked in the top 20 universities in the world. Sorry, where did you get your degrees on American politics/studies again?

and there we have it, all other argument has been closed and ruled insignificant.

Moderators feel free to lock this thread

No, which is why I continued. But if someone is going to belittle my education, then I'm going to ask about their background.

At the very least, it's a better response than threatening violence towards those you disagree with.

Lock the thread? Why?

Do you have any idea how annoying you are?

seriously.

And I'm not threatening someone who disagrees with me.

I was pointing out that your bravado in calling people ignorant goes no further than in a forum sitting in the confines of wherever it is you sit behind your screen.

You would not say that to me in person, and you know it. So don't say it on line, pretty simple act of respect.

I don't expect or care if you or anyone else agrees with me. But you're condescending dude, in every post, knock it off.

On topic you think that this police officer just shot this kid because he has some sort of hate for black people. what kind of presumption is that?

Shooting a human being is a very traumatic event, it changes your life forever. I happen to believe that this cop, like in most instances believed he had no choice.

Anyone that is capable of punching a cop in the face and possibly reaching for his weapon which is still not known is a danger to society and needs to be apprehended, punished and hopefully rehabilitated before he is allowed to walk among us, IMO.

And if he flees, or I flee, or anyone flees before that happens after being told to stop, in a controlled society, just might be shot.

He was shot facing the cop, and your version is that he was walking toward the cop surrendering with his hands in the air and the cop just opened up and executed him.

Some don't buy your version and tend to side with the guy wearing the badge, risking his life on a daily basis over that of a proven thug, who brazenly robbed a defenseless store owner and bullied him on the way out in broad daylight. Anyone that acts like that in all likelyhood lives his entire life like that.

let it play out, the bigger problem is the reaction of the neighborhood and their disgust with law enforcement. Only 3% or something like that show up to vote in that community. I'd say try that route first before you burn and loot while whining racism.

Edited August 29, 2014 by shades

[downzy]

And I'm not threatening someone who disagrees with me.

I was pointing out that your bravado in calling people ignorant goes no further than in a forum sitting in the confines of wherever it is you sit behind your screen.

You would not say that to me in person, and you know it. So don't say it on line, pretty simple act of respect.

I don't expect or care if you or anyone else agrees with me. But you're condescending dude, in every post, knock it off.

Actually, my online persona and my real life persona are not much different. I've called numerous people ignorant as a result of them saying really ignorant things. Granted, most of those people I called ignorant didn't resort to violence, so that perhaps explains why few call you as such in person. But for the sake clarity, yes, I would call you ignorant to your face. I find guys who talk up a big game are just that, talk.

On topic you think that this police officer just shot this kid because he has some sort of hate for black people. what kind of presumption is that?

Show me where I said that this police officer is racist, or acted on racist impulses. In fact, I've said numerous times in this thread that such a presumption is premature at this point.

Shooting a human being is a very dramatic event, it changes your life forever. I happen to believe that this cop, like in most instances believed he had no choice.

Well, if the eye-witness accounts prove to be true, then he did have a choice. A police officer always has a choice if his safety (or the safety of the public) is in danger. An unarmed fleeing suspect is not a danger to the officer or the public at large. So yes, he clearly had a choice.

Anyone that is capable of punching a cop in the face and possibly reaching for his weapon which is still not known is a danger to society and needs to be apprehended, punished and hopefully rehabilitated before he is allowed to walk among us, IMO.

And we're in agreement here. I just don't think that same person deserves to be shot.

And if he flees, or I flee, or anyone flees before that happens after being told to stop, in a controlled society, just might be shot.

No, that's not standard police procedure.

He was shot facing the cop, and your version is that he was walking toward the cop surrendering with his hands in the air and the cop just opened up and executed him.

That's not my version. It's the account told be several eye witnesses.

Some don't buy your version and tend to side with the guy wearing the badge, risking his life on a daily basis over that of a proven thug, who brazenly robbed a defenseless store owner and bullied him on the way out in broad daylight. Anyone that acts like that in all likelyhood lives his entire life like that.

Except police officers aren't always completely honest in these situations either. Personally, it doesn't affect me one way or the other whether the cop was justified or not. But I'm having a hard time reconciling what the police officer is saying with the accounts given by eye witnesses and what the initial forensic findings (ie. that Brown was not shot at a close range).

let it play out, the bigger problem is the reaction of the neighborhood and their disgust with law enforcement. Only 3% or something like that show up to vote in that community. I'd say try that route first before you burn and loot while whining racism.

That's a much bigger conversation than the one we're having here. The riots are indefensible and do little to solve the problem. They harden the beliefs of those who think fatal policing directed towards African Americans is warranted. I wouldn't say that it's the bigger problem, as I'm fairly certain that if the reverse were true, if whites were subjected to the same harsh policing tactics as blacks you would see similar protests. The riots are an unfortunate and counter-productive reaction to a much larger problem. Those who participate in them should be brought to justice. But to simply dismiss their connection to the larger hostilities does little to counter why they happen in the first place.

And as for voting, you're right that the black community does not do enough to engage through the political process. There are justifiable reasons for that (from apathy to voter suppression), but I'm willing to bet that we won't be seeing the same level of electoral indifference come the next election cycle.

[Not An FSB Agent]

FYI, that Canadian University I attended is ranked in the top 20 universities in the world. Sorry, where did you get your degrees on American politics/studies again?

My degree is in a hard science from one of the top research universities in the US. However, I have read extensively on world politics-- especially the 20th Century-- and attended graduate seminars on the subject... for the hell of it.

As for your crime states, again, first, nice cherry picking (since those are the only two categories in which African Americans commit crimes at a great rate than whites)

I didn't cherry pick shit! We were discussing violent crime in the US. Murder and robbery kind of define violent crime- sans sex crimes

they have no bearing on the topic of police brutality on African Americans.

Agreed, but there are going to be instances of brutality by sheer association. the cops can't brutalize someone that is not in their presence.

Trying to justify the action of officers who use deadly force because African Americans commit more murders than whites is absurd.

It is also absurd to construct a straw man argument in an attempt to validate that argument. Who claimed "officers... use deadly force because African Americans commit more murders than whites"

Furthermore, do we then allow police officers to impugn an entire race because of murder rates?

Loaded question- I don't answer those.

Should any and all black men forfeit their fourth and fifth amendment rights until murder rates for African American fall in line?

More loaded question fallacies

Do we simply say to the family of those who were fatally shot that the trigger happy police officer was justified because "your kind" don't know how to behave.

And more loaded questions

Because that's what I'm getting from your post Not.

You can get anything you want from my post, but that is not what I wrote, or implied.

EDIT: for PHP tags

Edited August 29, 2014 by Not An FSB Agent

[downzy]

As for your crime states, again, first, nice cherry picking (since those are the only two categories in which African Americans commit crimes at a great rate than whites)

I didn't cherry pick shit! We were discussing violent crime in the US. Murder and robbery kind of define violent crime- sans sex crimes

True, but the numbers still don't add up. If we are to assume that fatalities as a result of police action are solely associated with murders (which, btw, they're not), then why are African Americans still three times more likely to be killed by police officers than white Americans? If, as a proportion of the population, African Americans are three times more likely to be killed by police than whites, then shouldn't African Americans be committing three times the number of violent crimes?

You may view my subsequent questions on 4th and 5th amendment rights as loaded questions, but all I see is someone ducking the obvious. No one would argue that there shouldn't be a greater police presence in areas where crime rates are higher. If certain areas happen to be predominantly black, then greater a police presence is justified. But police presence and unlawful use of force, search and seizure, and other aggressive police tactics is quite different than a police presence.

Edited August 29, 2014 by downzy

[downzy]

A man was sitting in a public place waiting to pick his kids up from school. He wasn’t breaking any laws. A shop owner asked him to move—which the shop owner had no right to do—and the man got up and moved. He was then stopped by a cop who asked him his name. He refused to give his name. “I know my rights,” the man said to the cop. And he did know his rights: he was under no obligation to identify himself to her. “Minnesota does not currently have a ‘stop and identify’ statute in place” that would give police the right to arrest someone for [not] identifying himself,” RawStory points out. The cop, unfortunately, didn’t know his rights.

The City Pages explains what happened after the arrest. “The man was charged with trespassing, disorderly conduct, and obstructing the legal process,” they write, “but those charges were later dropped. On Twitter, the St. Paul PD’s public information officers said no formal complaint has been filed in connection with the incident.” A police administrator who sees that video, which Lollie’s attorney brought to court, should not require a formal complaint from the victim to discipline the officers involved and acknowledge that they engaged in inept policing!

Yet the police department–which held on to Lollie’s phone, with the video on it, for 6 months–is defending the officers.

[magisme]

Wow.

[MB.]

Oh that's really sad. I really don't understand why. The second policeman is exactly why mobile phones are actually really handy nowadays.

Those poor kids, waiting for their dad.

Edited August 30, 2014 by MB.

[Not An FSB Agent]

He was taken to jail for being a dumb ass. Had he shut his mouth, and went about his business, nothing would've happened, but instead he had to prove that he was not in the wrong. Guess what? He was in the wrong. He was in a location he wasn't supposed to be, and he wasn't smart enough to realize that the cop didn't give a shit about his excuse.

EDIT: Then, the dumb ass resisted arrest when to told to put his hands behind his back.

Edited August 30, 2014 by Not An FSB Agent

[magisme]

[MB.]

He was in a location where he could be. Just read it again. It annoys me that some people never question the authorities. Even the police makes mistakes, like this time. He was just trying to explain the situation to them and they were not willing to listen. That they weren't willing to listen to him, annoys me most of all. He was just panicking, cause he was thinking of his children, wo would be there all alone. The reason he resisted slightly.

[Not An FSB Agent]

After this, I am done with it, but do you think that if he had shut up and went on about his business, he still would've been arrested, anyway? Because that is what I implied from your response.

[magisme]

After this, I am done with it, but do you think that if he had shut up and went on about his business, he still would've been arrested, anyway? Because that is what I implied from your response.

When you want to talk to me about political issues from here on out, just imagine my response would be a facepalm and don't bother.