Policing Thread

[AxlisOld]

No, racism is at play because tbe only tjme outrage erupts is when the officer and the shooting victim are of a different race.

[downzy]

So the problem for you is not that black people are being killed by cops at a rate that's 21 times the rate of white people being killed by cops, but the lib whiners who make a fuss about it?

[Len Cnut]

This is a public service announcement sponsored by Mr Ghostface Killah and Mr Jadakiss, to all black males dealing with the police

[bran]

the problem really is the shooting of civilians regardless of race IMO.

[AxlisOld]

No, racism is at play because tbe only tjme outrage erupts is when the officer and the shooting victim are of a different race.

The problem is any time anyone is killed, I don't care what color they are.

What bran said.

Edited October 13, 2014 by AxlisOld

[downzy]

Hey Downzy,

Did ya know only 46% of those killed by white officers were black?

And guess what percentage of those killed by black officers were black? 78%

Bet ya hadn't mentioned that little disparity, did ya?

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/10/racial-disparity-police-killings_n_5965706.html

But the issue is institutional racism, not racism on a personal level. Whether they are killed by a black or a white person is irrelevant. I'm fairly certain those killed by police force could care less what colour the skin colour of those who fired the bullet.

BTW, where have you been? You've been missed in the MLB thread.

The entire premise of this thread, and the rioting in Ferguson, has to do with blacks being killed by cops supposedly only because of race. If a black cop had killed Brown, there'd have been no rioting ... guaranteed. Actually, Brown probably never would have assaulted or gone after the officer if the cop was black.

I think you're missing the point on this one. The issue is the race of those who find themselves dead as a result of police action, not the race of the police committing said action. I'll admit that white police officers killing a black teenager gets more attention due to the long history of white domination, but it still doesn't discount the problem that black people are being killed by police officers (regardless of race) at a rate that far exceeds their white counterparts. The logic you're employing is akin to what I described in an earlier post regarding slavery. Pointing out that black people owned slaves doesn't discount the fact that almost all slaves in the 18th and 19th centuries were black. Alluding to that black people do get killed by black police doesn't discount that the victims of police violence are grossly disproportional against the black populace within the United States.

Again, I find it a tad disturbing that some in this thread have made efforts to discount, rationalize, or mitigate the reality that African Americans are killed at a rate of 21 times that of their white counterparts. How anyone makes sense or finds peace with that is beyond me.

[Satanisk_Slakt]

I don't know about finding peace with it, it's not something I really care about other than that I think it's natural that more blacks are killed by police when they are a bigger threat to the police (statistically) than whites are.

I think you should look in the other end instead. What could be done to prevent cops from getting killed in duty? Regardless of what the race of the person killing a cop is, what can be done to prevent it?

Take a look at this:

http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/year.html

Since year 2000 there have been 2211 police officers killed in duty in America. You want to know how many there have been in Sweden in the same period? 1.

It's insanely high numbers of police officers that has been killed. You think the polices there will be more likely to pull the trigger if they think the other person is being aggressive and threatening when they know that they are likely to end up dead if they don't react fast enough if the other guy has a gun?

Or put it this way: What people are there that kill people cops with no regard of anyone's life or well-being? That's right - gang members. How often do you see a white gang member? That's right - almost never.

Yeah, America might still struggle with some racism in their society, but it's not exactly as if it's as simple as to say look at this statistic, it's outrageous. You have to analyse it somewhat too.

[downzy]

I don't know about finding peace with it, it's not something I really care about other than that I think it's natural that more blacks are killed by police when they are a bigger threat to the police (statistically) than whites are.

I think you should look in the other end instead. What could be done to prevent cops from getting killed in duty? Regardless of what the race of the person killing a cop is, what can be done to prevent it?

Take a look at this:

http://www.nleomf.org/facts/officer-fatalities-data/year.html

Since year 2000 there have been 2211 police officers killed in duty in America. You want to know how many there have been in Sweden in the same period? 1.

It's insanely high numbers of police officers that has been killed. You think the polices there will be more likely to pull the trigger if they think the other person is being aggressive and threatening when they know that they are likely to end up dead if they don't react fast enough if the other guy has a gun?

Or put it this way: What people are there that kill people cops with no regard of anyone's life or well-being? That's right - gang members. How often do you see a white gang member? That's right - almost never.

Yeah, America might still struggle with some racism in their society, but it's not exactly as if it's as simple as to say look at this statistic, it's outrageous. You have to analyse it somewhat too.

Again, the rate is 21 times higher. It may make sense that African-Americans are killed by police by a higher ratio than whites considering crime rates, but 21 times? Sorry, you might think it's "natural," but I don't know how anyone could rationalize that big of a discrepancy.

The rate of police officer death is an issue in the United States, but not one that should somehow exonerate the racial discrepancy of citizen death on the basis of race. Are you comfortable with the suggestion that African-Americans are responsible for police deaths at a rate of 21 times of their white counterparts? If you can find me a statistic like that I would be more inclined to agree with you on that issue.

Also, comparing the United States and Sweden is a bit odd, considering Sweden has 3 percent of the population of the United States with none of the gun culture. Likewise, gangs with white people are quite common in the United States. The Aryan Brotherhood, with 10,000 members, represents 0.1 percent of the prison population but is responsible for 20 percent of murders in the federal system. One of the biggest gangs in North America is the Hells Angels, a predominately white organization.

[Satanisk_Slakt]

I'm not sure how I can reply to this without sounding a bit disrespectful, but I honestly don't care about this enough to get into an argument really.

As for those gangs, same goes there. If you're walking around with a shaved head and tattoos of swastikas or a HA-jacket you know that you'll get in trouble with the police, so it would be natural for them to be more cautious due to that and not behave as aggressive to the police and thereby saving their own lives when the police are involved. Perhaps if a lot of blacks didn't have that ACAB-attitude they would live today?

[downzy]

I'm not sure how I can reply to this without sounding a bit disrespectful, but I honestly don't care about this enough to get into an argument really.

As for those gangs, same goes there. If you're walking around with a shaved head and tattoos of swastikas or a HA-jacket you know that you'll get in trouble with the police, so it would be natural for them to be more cautious due to that and not behave as aggressive to the police and thereby saving their own lives when the police are involved. Perhaps if a lot of blacks didn't have that ACAB-attitude they would live today?

Understand, however, that in many U.S. cities African Americans have been antagonized by police in a way that white populations are not. Stop and frisk procedures that are common in black neighbourhoods are not found in whiter neighbourhoods. So you're comment that black people should adopt a better attitude towards cops is a tad one-sighted, imo.

[AdriftatSea]

I think the word 'racism' has so many ideas attached to it now that it's hard to apply it to any one situation. People have many emotions that flow with it. I rather think with this situation we are looking at the perceived value of human life. What's happening in society, what's been happening in American society since the beginning of America, in addition to racism, (and might I add racism is on the decline from what it once was, on the decline by far from many years ago, so we can't just throw the word 'racism' around and expect people to listen) what's happening in society, this situation as what happened in Ferguson is the value of human life did not equate the same for a black man as it would have a white man.

This is wherein the argument really appears to be, the value of human life. Police, no matter their ethnic background, tend to value the life of lighter skinned people over the life of darker skinned people when it comes to crimes committed. Now do we call this racism? I think not.

When I think of racism, I think of disparity in the work place. Who's out front serving, who's doing the cooking in the back? I think of automatic grants for college because of the color of your skin, I think of things like affirmative action getting you a job because of the color of your skin over a more qualified candidate. I think of preferring one race for another just because of the color of their skin and not based on their aptitude. When I think of racism, I think of different bathrooms, I think of white only water fountains, I think of white only at the front of the bus, I think of white only at the diner counter. I think of segregated schools. I think of not allowing some members of our society entrance to college because of the color of their skin. I think of each race that protests and begs for equality yet sadly, they protest and beg separately. That's what I think of when I think of racism. Racism, that's not what's killing young black men at a much higher rate than young white men.

What I see happening now, what with all the people, young men, with dark skin, being killed at an alarmingly higher rate than their lighter skin counterparts by police that are of all races, that isn't racism to me, that's what I see as their life less valued. This is the problem. Perceived value of life by police. How are we going to fix this? While we have the Paid Whores of Jesse Jackson and Rev Al fleecing their own people and preaching of Racism and causing more separatism, what is anyone doing about the escalating issue of the perceived lessening value of life that the young black man has? And lessening the cause by grouping it with racism, that is becoming a tired old term, is watering down this issue and more young men are getting killed each and every day.

Something's got to be done. I don't know what. But this issue needs to be recognized as something completely separate from racism.

Not meaning any disrespect to you here downzy. I think we are in agreement. I think the word has to be changed though so that people will start to get it. Only when someone gets it can there be a solution on the horizon.

[downzy]

Sorry Adrift, but I'm not finding any consistency within your positions. How do you suggest that valuing the life of one race over another isn't racism? I cannot think of a more basic and flagrant form of racial bias than that. You've outlined what you think racism is and what you think it isn't, but quite honestly, I don't see any difference between your two positions.

Again, your positions seem quite arbitrary (racism is economic advancement through hiring or education biases, but it isn't when a black man's life is taken when a white man's would have likely been spared) while ignoring the less tangible forms in which racism can take. No, we no longer have lynching and the Jim Crow system is no longer in place, but in many ways the lives of African Americans have not improved (more Southern African Americans served as elected legislators five years after the civil war than in 1980; there are now more African Americans in prison than there were slaves at the height of the slave system). I don't want to get into lecture about it (as I've done it numerous times before on here), but as someone who has spent years studying this subject, I have to wholeheartedly disagree with your entire position.

Also, I think you're confusing Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton with individuals like Louis Farrkhan and Malcom X. Jackson and Sharpton generally advocate for inclusion; Farrkhan and the Nation of Islam were often stoking the flames of segregation and keeping blacks separate from whites. The worse you can convict Sharpton and Jackson of are their tendencies to over-react to any and every issue involving race, but to suggest that this promotes separation between the blacks and whites is a very large stretch.

[AxlisOld]

Jackson and Sharpton generally advocate for inclusion

Then why do they do their damnedest to make an issue of something for the sheer fact of separatism and profit?

[downzy]

Jackson and Sharpton generally advocate for inclusion

Then why do they do their damnedest to make an issue of something for the sheer fact of separatism and profit?

Sorry, what?

[AdriftatSea]

Downzy,

Jesse Jackson and Rev Al, look what they did to the La Crosse players some years back. They vilified them. And they did it for money. They will go anywhere they can to make a buck. That's what they do. They flock to anywhere there is a problem and they feast on the misery of others. They get there 'after' the misery, they pass their hat around and take up donations and they are nothing more than a mouth piece. They will say anything and everything they can to vilify someone without the facts, (La Crosse players) just to earn their pay. That's how they pay their bills. They are celebrities, not advocates.

If you want to say this is racism okay, but I think we should call it something else. This is definitely life of the young black male being devalued. How can I not call this racism you ask? Because racism has become one very, very large generic word! That's how. You keep speaking of racism and no one is listening to you or to many other people screaming racism downzy. That's my point! You've got to move with the times.

I hear what you are saying and on oh so many points, I agree. I think you agree with me but you are missing the forest for the trees. You've got to let that word racism go because it encompasses way, way too much! You, we have to start breaking down each and every problem that's happening in this world that falls under the umbrella of racism. Now we have racism, now we have reverse racism. Let's let go of that word racism. It conjures up such bad feelings and no one really cares other than to get pissed off. It means too many things. No one listens and they don't zero in on a solution.

Let's look at this one problem. Young black men are getting shot in the back. Their life has been devalued. Why? Well, we can go back and talk about the power in government black men had right after the civil war but wtf is that going to do for young black men getting shot in the back in the 21st century? I think we should isolate many of the issues that the word racism covers and let's talk about them separately and maybe come up with some solutions. Don't you? We all speak of racism but no one is doing anything to solve the issue's at hand. Racism has been around for hundreds of years and here we are still talking about it. You just said yourself, it's worse now that it was... well if that's the case, we really need to separate out the different aspects of racism and deal with them separately.

Edit: And no, I don't think the young men getting killed at an alarmingly higher rate than lighter skinned men is racism. It is something else. Something more. Their lives have been devalued. Now if you keep calling it racism, how is this going to help? No one will listen. No one will see their face. They will only hear the 'buzz' word racism. People can make a difference and it has to start somewhere. Maybe it can start here! Why not start a dialogue about the devaluing of life of young black men in America? People can make a difference.

Edited October 16, 2014 by AdriftatSea

[AdriftatSea]

I understand you spent your life studying this subject, but Downzy, I spent my life living this subject. My grandfather was the Chief of Police in a small Mississippi town. He raised me. He was horrified at those Philadelphia sheriffs deputies that killed those boy's. He said they were not real police because you only have to own land to be a sheriff's deputy. He was a city policeman. I lived it downzy. I saw freedom marches. My grandfather lead them. I was six years old and walked one with him. I didn't just study it, I lived it. My grandfather told me so many things. He hired the first black policeman on the force. I grew up living this. I have seen more racism first hand than you could ever read about in books. I'm not going to preach about this... but I was there. I was a little girl, but I was there. He would get death threats and my grandmother would take my sisters and I down to our basement to sleep. There would be blue lights everywhere. Death threats from the white people! After he retired, the city council voted to appoint the next chief and never to have another vote because they hated my grandfather and how he believed in civil rights.

Edit: Rev Al and Jackson do promote separatism. And isn't murdering black men at an alarmingly higher rate than white the Lynching of the 21st century? They are certainly taking them out are they not? What would you call it? Why would you say we don't have these things now? Dead is dead.

Edited October 16, 2014 by AdriftatSea

[AdriftatSea]

Complete stretch saying Lynching in the 21st Century, but still, you are downplaying it. That just isn't like you! And the freedom march I was in was 1969. I'm not that old! LOL. I was 6! They still had them in the '70's in Mississippi. They really did. They were incredible.

Edited October 16, 2014 by AdriftatSea

[ColdHeartBreaker]

Let's look at this one problem. Young black men are getting shot in the back. Their life has been devalued. Why? Well, we can go back and talk about the power in government black men had right after the civil war but wtf is that going to do for young black men getting shot in the back in the 21st century? I think we should isolate many of the issues that the word racism covers and let's talk about them separately and maybe come up with some solutions. Don't you? We all speak of racism but no one is doing anything to solve the issue's at hand. Racism has been around for hundreds of years and here we are still talking about it. You just said yourself, it's worse now that it was... well if that's the case, we really need to separate out the different aspects of racism and deal with them separately.

[AdriftatSea]

Let's look at this one problem. Young black men are getting shot in the back. Their life has been devalued. Why? Well, we can go back and talk about the power in government black men had right after the civil war but wtf is that going to do for young black men getting shot in the back in the 21st century? I think we should isolate many of the issues that the word racism covers and let's talk about them separately and maybe come up with some solutions. Don't you? We all speak of racism but no one is doing anything to solve the issue's at hand. Racism has been around for hundreds of years and here we are still talking about it. You just said yourself, it's worse now that it was... well if that's the case, we really need to separate out the different aspects of racism and deal with them separately.

I know, I got entirely too carried away on this. I feel daylight savings time coming to an end. It always does this to me.

[Dazey]

Grand jury finds no grounds to indict the police officer. Ferguson's gonna burn.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/24/justice/ferguson-grand-jury/index.html?c=intl-homepage-t

[AxlisOld]

Grand jury finds no grounds to indict the police officer. Ferguson's gonna burn.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/24/justice/ferguson-grand-jury/index.html?c=intl-homepage-t

Oh yea I heard about that a couple days ago, I was gonna post about it but then I realized I don't give a shit.

[Dazey]

Grand jury finds no grounds to indict the police officer. Ferguson's gonna burn.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/24/justice/ferguson-grand-jury/index.html?c=intl-homepage-t

Oh yea I heard about that a couple days ago, I was gonna post about it but then I realized I don't give a shit.

They only released the verdict live less than an hour ago.

[AxlisOld]

I agree with the kid's family on the idea of body cameras for cops. I think every action of police should be accounted for.

[Dazey]

I agree with the kid's family on the idea of body cameras for cops. I think every action of police should be accounted for.

I agree totally about the body cameras. It would have made a big difference in this case.

Edited November 25, 2014 by Dazey

[Ace Nova]

Grand jury finds no grounds to indict the police officer. Ferguson's gonna burn.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/11/24/justice/ferguson-grand-jury/index.html?c=intl-homepage-t

I doubt it. Most of them are back to their everyday living, doing whatever they do. They made a statement, had their 15 minutes of fame and life goes on.

But that's just a guess, based on past experience (Rodney King, George Zimmerman, etc).

Edited November 25, 2014 by Kasanova King