Thread: Dear American police Board: Hell / Ship of Fools.
To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=005599
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
I give up. I can no longer find any ways to support you in these cases.
I've tried before, you might remember. In one or two instances I argued that a particular high-profile case might not be an appropriate emblem for what police are doing to black Americans, because in those individual cases there was evidence that backed you up. Ferguson was one. Remember? There was some decent evidence that the guy might have gone for your gun.
But every time you're in the clear for one of these cases, another policeman pushes the boundary a little bit further. Let's shoot a kid with a toy gun the second we get out of the car? Okay, that seems to be okay so let's push it a bit further. Let's throw someone into a van and crack his spine? Ooh, tricky, there'll be a trial for that one.
We're getting things on video now. Sometimes multiple camera angles. We're getting people shot while restrained, down on the ground. We're getting cooperative people without criminal records shot just so we can bypass the arguments about whether the black guy somehow "deserved" it.
I just can't follow you down the path any longer. I can't support supposed professionals who exhibit total panic in any kind of confrontation. I can't support supposed professionals in a country where people are legally armed (and where suggestions keep arising that victims of mass shootings should have been armed) who freak out at the presence of a gun and seem unable to think about whether or not the gun is actually being used.
Too many of you lack the skills you're supposed to have, and the institutions of the legal system have been protecting you from the consequences of your failure. You've been enabled.
I don't want to keep enabling you. I'm out.
[ 07. July 2016, 23:19: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
My thoughts exactly only said better.
Tell a man to produce his registration and then shoot him for reaching in his pocket?
Pin a man down with two police on top of him and then shoot him at close range?
Did they have no training at all?
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on
:
Orfeo, your thoughts should appear in a box prominently displayed on the front page of every newspaper in the country.
I'd vote for a constitutional amendment disarming police.
Posted by Piglet (# 11803) on
:
Well said, Orfeo. ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
It's about time.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Only now I have to rail against the murder of police officers. For fuck's sake.
THIS is someone's idea of a solution? A civil war?
[ 08. July 2016, 04:17: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Watching TV news. So far, it seems that, of the nationwide protests, Dallas, TX is the only one that got violent. 11 cops shot, 4 of them killed. Snipers--possibly 2 of them--still on the loose. It's horrible that it happened. I don't know anything about the snipers. But, if they're African-American, they may have decided they'd had enough.
I do not support what they did, and I don't support what the cops in the recent killings did. But I don't think we're at civil war, yet. Please don't call that down on us.
I'm thinking/hoping this is more like the extensive unrest of the '60s and '70s. I hope so, because we got through that. May be wishful thinking.
We could be near a tipping point. If things go badly, much worse stuff could be set loose--guns, militias, hate groups, scared people, disturbed people who want to make a name for themselves, anyone who wants to settle an injustice or grudge, etc. Add in the presidential campaign, the clash of world views, a messed up Congress...
![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif)
Is there a way to tip in a better direction? I don't know.
ETA: a couple of people in custody, now--one suspect, and one person of interest.
[ 08. July 2016, 04:48: Message edited by: Golden Key ]
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
They but eat the fruit of the tree they planted.*
And this will fuel their fear and resistance to change; more deaths will occur.
*Don't be stupid, I am not saying the killings of the police have been justified.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
double post to say I did not know about the Dallas shootings when I posted, saw the reference in cliffdweller's x-post.
Doesn't make what I posted wrong, just that I might have written it differently.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Is there a way to tip in a better direction?
Yes. There needs to be a fundamental change in the way police treat people, especially people of colour.
They need to be held to the same level of accountability as civilians, actually a higher level, but the same would be a massive improvement.
The situation would not have occurred if time after time they did not treat people they are tasked to protect with disregard.
No plasters, the beast needs major surgery.
Posted by Al Eluia (# 864) on
:
It wouldn't surprise me if the shooters in Dallas are hoping to start a race war. But that's total speculation at this point.
This makes me sick on many levels. For one, I work for a police agency (in a civilian position) and I get tired of the assertion that all cops are bad, though I get the anger, and share it, when police shoot someone without justification. Like many people I grieve for the police who were shot in Dallas. For another, I think we still have a long way to go in this country on the racial justice front. Killings, in particular of black men, by police on the flimsiest of pretexts have to stop. I'm afraid the killings in Dallas are just going to intensify the backlash against groups like Black Lives Matter.
It would also help if police departments had meaningful community oversight of police practices, especially use of force, but in too many instances that is not the case.
[ 08. July 2016, 05:10: Message edited by: Al Eluia ]
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
They but eat the fruit of the tree they planted.*
And this will fuel their fear and resistance to change; more deaths will occur.
*Don't be stupid, I am not saying the killings of the police have been justified.
No, you're just saying that there's a collective "they" so that the cop who dies is just eating from the same fruit as every cop who made the other "they" hate "them".
This thread is about me saying that reform has to be collective. And I'm fine with some form of collective consequences as well. Death is not a collective consequence.
And if you didn't know about Dallas... well, what you're saying isn't any better if you had previous attacks on police in mind.
[ 08. July 2016, 06:31: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
lB--
Do you think your half-formed apology is sufficient? I don't.
Posted by Chesterbelloc (# 3128) on
:
Neither should anyone, GK. lil B's post was pretty despicable in any context. But to defend it after hearing of the Dallas shootings is putting the saving of face over common decency.
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
My understanding is that sniping is difficult, is it likely the shooters are ex-military or ex-police themselves ?
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
My understanding is that sniping is difficult, is it likely the shooters are ex-military or ex-police themselves ?
It's even more difficult if you don't have a gun.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
Looks like some people are looking for a civil war.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Posted by Al Eluia (# 864) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
It's even more difficult if you don't have a gun. [/QB]
Good point.
A quick Internet search reveals there are a number of private companies in the US that provide sniper or "precision rifle" training. I'm really curious who these people are who shot at the officers in Dallas. My money is on their having nothing to do with the movement against police violence but being opportunists who wanted to take out police for some twisted reason of their own.
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
BBC are also reporting they shot protestors.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
BBC are also reporting they shot protestors.
There's certainly a degree of confusion over the targeting at the moment. I've seen one witness report portraying it as police stepping in front of protesters to protect the protesters. On the other hand, some of the discussion about the suspect that is still holed up in a parking garage has suggested an intent to target law enforcement.
As is usual with these things, it'll take a while to be certain about what went on and the motives. Right this second I think they're still focusing on trying to ensure there are no more deaths. It's not a finished situation.
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on
:
I fear that there may be further civil unrest. That streamed video footing was dreadful in what it revealed. So was the sniping.
[ 08. July 2016, 07:55: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
A fifth officer has died. Evidently, one civilian was shot; not sure of their condition. The cops have been negotiating (and exchanging fire) with one suspect for hours, and he said "this is the end", and that there are bombs all over downtown Dallas. I hope he's lying.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
I'm not sure what I have to apologise for.
The policemen murdered did not deserve to be murdered.
Their murderers are despicable and in no way justified. And they, the snipers, are responsible for their own actions.
It remains that the police, general, created the atmosphere in which this occurred.
Is this clear enough? Am I still a beast? If I am, I don't fucking care. I feel no less anger at the snipers than I do at the police who kill innocent/undeserving of death civilians. It is the same rage.
This is not an apology, it isn't meant to be in any way. It is a clarification.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
It remains that the police, general, created the atmosphere in which this occurred.
Which is not what your previous statement conveyed. "Created the atmosphere" is not, in my view, equivalent to "eating the fruit of the tree they planted".
Not when "they" who planted and "they" who ate aren't automatically the same people. And it's not the "police, general" who are dead. It's police officers with names. And families. Who aren't the same individual police officers who "kill innocent/undeserving of death civilians"
It's interesting, really. You've simultaneously managed to do the same kind of "let's lump them all together into an amorphous mass" that we're constantly saying ought not happen to Muslims, and also a bit of the victim-blaming that we object to when people start debating whether raped women created their own misfortune.
But hey, it's all fine, right? It's COPS. Authority figures. Punching upwards in stereotypes and victim blaming is FINE. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
[ 08. July 2016, 11:17: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Al Eluia:
I'm afraid the killings in Dallas are just going to intensify the backlash against groups like Black Lives Matter.
Ya think?
One thing is for certain this morning, nobody gives a shit about the dead pedophile, violent felon in Baton Rouge or the guy in MN who may or may not have been properly trained to concealed carry.
A measure of responsibility lies with the girlfriend who streamed what's-his-names death in a video designed to inflame and nothing else. There is nothing useful in it. The events leading to the shooting aren't recorded. What you have is a dying man, a clearly panicked cop, and a woman more concerned with videoing than attempting to help her boyfriend or attend to her 4 year old child, who can be heard attempting to comfort the mother!
![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
BLM mentality on full display...
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
It's always good to get lessons in responsibility from romanlion.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
It's always good to get lessons in responsibility from romanlion.
No it isn't. Kill me now.
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on
:
I’m expecting this to turn out to something far more complicated. I am the only one suspecting that the perpetrators of this attack are likely going to turn out to be white?
Posted by jbohn (# 8753) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:
Ya think?
One thing is for certain this morning, nobody gives a shit about the dead pedophile, violent felon in Baton Rouge or the guy in MN who may or may not have been properly trained to concealed carry.
A measure of responsibility lies with the girlfriend who streamed what's-his-names death in a video designed to inflame and nothing else. There is nothing useful in it. The events leading to the shooting aren't recorded. What you have is a dying man, a clearly panicked cop, and a woman more concerned with videoing than attempting to help her boyfriend or attend to her 4 year old child, who can be heard attempting to comfort the mother!
BLM mentality on full display...
Romanlion, allow me to say this - fuck you. With whatever is handy. Your bigotry is showing.
BTW, ever been held at gunpoint by a cop? I have. I don't think doing anything except trying to not get shot was on that lady's mind. Trust me on this.
--------
For the non-mouthbreathers (warning: strong language to follow):
This. Is. Fucked. Up.
Philando Castile died all of 20 minutes from our house if traffic is heavy.
I spent part of last evening at a very emotional demonstration outside the Governor's mansion. While there were folks who were very upset (and have a damned good reason to be), the crowd was peaceful, diverse, and united. I pray it stays that way. This shit has fucking well got to stop. That could just as easily be one of my friends, my co-workers, or my beloved niece. This. Shit. Has. Got. To. Stop.
I don't care if you're black, white, Asian, Hispanic, or anyone else. I don't care if you're a liberal Democrat or a conservative Republican (or whatever you support politically speaking). Christian, Muslim, Jew, Ba'hai, Buhddist, whatever you believe, wherever you're from - we have got to stop this. Enough is enough. When did our police become an occupying army? When did "Protect and Serve" become an empty slogan? And how do we fix it?
Before someone says it - I KNOW not all police are the problem. There comes a time, however, when not acting to stop injustice becomes actively participating in its commission. That time has come.
--------
As regards Dallas - I'm saddened. But I'm not shocked. People are just plain fed up.
I'm crying for the country, the state, and the area I love.
Posted by Prester John (# 5502) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
I’m expecting this to turn out to something far more complicated. I am the only one suspecting that the perpetrators of this attack are likely going to turn out to be white?
The Dallas Police Chief just gave a press conference stating that there was only one perpetrator and he wanted to kill police officers and white people.
Posted by passer (# 13329) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
I’m expecting this to turn out to something far more complicated. I am the only one suspecting that the perpetrators of this attack are likely going to turn out to be white?
Well, I was wondering about that, as I've not seen anything yet which says they were black, and sure as eggs is eggs, that's usually the first "detail" which news reports on this sort of thing in the US mention. However, a bit early to say yet.
Posted by Josephine (# 3899) on
:
It was written into our country's founding documents that black folks aren't fully human. And we're still struggling with the consequences of that. Slavery was replaced with Jim Crow. Jim Crow was replaced with redlinig, the school-to-prison pipeline, and the war on drugs (which was just a loosely disguised war on blacks).
It can't shock any human being that injustice on this scale erupts into violence from time to time. It would be shocking if that never happened.
My heart breaks for the black community, and for the community of police officers and their families. They didn't create this system. They're all victims of it.
Whether any individual officer is culpable for any individual killing doesn't really matter. The killing of black people by cops and "good guys with guns" (and the killings of cops by people who see them as an unjust occupying force) will continue until we, as a nation, as a culture, come to our senses and repent. Like the people of Ninevah, we need to fast in sackcloth and ashes, and perhaps God will have mercy on us.
But as long as white people call the cops in a panic to report a black man buying a toy gun in Walmart, or a black child playing with a toy gun in a park ...
as long as a black teen walking through a white neighborhood draws the unfriendly attention of the neighborhood watch ...
as long as we tell black people that if they'd just do what the police say they wouldn't get shot, when that is manifestly not true ...
as long as our retirement plans grow from the profits of private prisons and prison transport companies ...
as long as the AI designed by white men identifies black men as gorillas ...
as long as white teachers and principals think it's okay for police to handle the childish misbehavior by black children ...
The wages of sin is death.
To regard another human being as less than an icon of Christ is a sin akin to blasphemy. Christ took on human nature in the Incarnation. He shares our human nature in very much the same way that he shares the divine nature with the Father and the Spirit. That means that when he told us, "whatever you do to the least of these, you do to me," that's analogous to "when you see me, you have seen the Father who sent me."
May God have mercy on our nation, and on each of us.
We're living that truth.
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on
:
Re Dallas police shootings, still waiting for the NRA response.
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on
:
Thank you for this, Josephine!
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
Re Dallas police shootings, still waiting for the NRA response.
"If the people in the street had been armed this would not have happened"
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:
A whole load of bullshit
Just go back under whichever slime covered rock you've been cowering under.
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
Amen, Josephine.
Posted by jbohn (# 8753) on
:
Josephine -
Posted by BroJames (# 9636) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:
…a woman more concerned with videoing than attempting to help her boyfriend or attend to her 4 year old child, who can be heard attempting to comfort the mother!
And how do you suppose she was supposed to attempt to help her boyfriend or comfort her child in the face of repeated instructions from the armed officer who had just shot her boyfriend to "keep your hands where they are"?
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
So much of all this has been exacerbated by guns. Texas loves their guns, the NRA loves Texas, and now it's in Texas that we are seeing an example of a bad guy with a gun and about a hundred "good guys" with guns, well trained in gun use, unable to bring him down. Good positioning will always win over numbers when it domes to guns. Probably all those officers died with guns in their hands.
Maybe now a few more people will see that the recent mass shootings in public would not necessarily been stopped if everyone had been armed. Maybe men will see that having a concealed weapon makes you in more danger, not less, and guns in the home are 20 times more likely to result in a family member's death than "protection."
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
I haven't seen the video, but I have heard part of it as the woman narrates what happened.
I think, given the history of police approaches to black people, videoing was only sensible. It waas collecting evidence, not doing some selfie rubbish for social media, for heaven's sake.
And, after the description of the harm done by the shots, the other thing which shocked me was her repeated use of 'sir'. I know Americans use it more than we do, but this sounded to me only a breath away from 'boss', that she had to emphasise that she was their inferior, had to appease the dominant person. And I realise that when she, as stated above, had to work to make sure she stayed alive (and in possession of her video), use of as many 'sirs' as she could muster was essential. It says something about the relative status of police and black people that is totally wrong.
I know that some people are incredibly rude to our police (I'm not sure how many of the elite are as rude as they are portrayed in TV drama, of course), but I also know that our police can be very polite, even when they have some reasonable doubts about what one is up to. The 'sirs' and 'madams' tend to flow in the other way, while we use terms like 'officer' to them. (Though I don't know how our police speak to the black drivers they stop, including the Archbishop of York, back when he was only a bishop.)
But the poor guys who thought they were just enabling a peaceful demo, and their families. While the perpetrators of the black deaths don't get hit.
I heard someone on the radio claiming that the American police do not shoot more black people than whites, but the black people are shot at a greater rate than white people. He said it twice. I didn't understand it either time.
[ 08. July 2016, 15:00: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
I heard someone on the radio claiming that the American police do not shoot more black people than whites, but the black people are shot at a greater rate than white people. He said it twice. I didn't understand it either time.
This could mean one of two things.
1. Say for purposes of demonstration that 80% of the population is white and 20% is black. Say that cops shoot 100 people a year, but 70 of them are white and 30 are black. They shoot more white people, but the ratio of blacks to whites shot is greater than the ratio of blacks to whites in the population.
2. Given the same national demographic, suppose they interact with 80 white people and 20 black people every day. Of those, they shoot the white person 10% of the time, but the black person 25% of the time. Then they are shooting more white people than black (8 to 5), but the rate at which they shoot black people is clearly higher.
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on
:
There are considerably more white people than black people, but the likelihood is the same? So, they're targeted (much) more frequently.
[ETA: Crossposted with the Ship's Thieving Rodent]
[ 08. July 2016, 15:14: Message edited by: Wesley J ]
Posted by Pearl B4 Swine (# 11451) on
:
Just heard that "the suspect" has been blown up & killed, naturally, by a robot toting an explosive device. That's the way to handle naughty people.. blow em up. Just like they (& we) do it in the mid.East.
If they could send in a bomb on the bot, WHY couldn't they send in a pacifying gas of some kind to immobilize the guy?
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
It remains that the police, general, created the atmosphere in which this occurred.
Which is not what your previous statement conveyed. "Created the atmosphere" is not, in my view, equivalent to "eating the fruit of the tree they planted".
Granted, not the clearest thing I have written but it does not contradict what I wrote after.
It is not blaming British people who died from Luftwaffe bombing to say Britain helped foster the conditions in which WWII occurred.
Nor is it blaming those police who died to say that the police in general have done the same.
In general, not in total. There is a difference.
I'm curious, though. Are you calling me a liar here?
Or just nitpricking my wording?
Another question. What do you mean by reform needs to be "collective"?
My first impression is not favourable, but I would rather know more before I castigate you for ignorance.
quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:
quote:
Originally posted by Al Eluia:
[qb] I'm afraid the killings in Dallas are just going to intensify the backlash against groups like Black Lives Matter.
Ya think?
Someone needs to because you, obviously, don't.
Posted by Ariston (# 10894) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
I think, given the history of police approaches to black people, videoing was only sensible. It waas collecting evidence, not doing some selfie rubbish for social media, for heaven's sake.
And, after the description of the harm done by the shots, the other thing which shocked me was her repeated use of 'sir'. I know Americans use it more than we do, but this sounded to me only a breath away from 'boss', that she had to emphasise that she was their inferior, had to appease the dominant person. And I realise that when she, as stated above, had to work to make sure she stayed alive (and in possession of her video), use of as many 'sirs' as she could muster was essential. It says something about the relative status of police and black people that is totally wrong.
1. When you're pulled over by the police, "yes, sir," and "no, ma'am" are what you do. Even I was taught that one. Never, ever give the person with the gun and the power any excuse to abuse either. Ever.
2. They were pulled over for a broken taillight. Seriously. Broken taillight. Can't make that up. The classic Jim Crow driving while black ticket. It's the stuff of "good people live here, you best be moving along if you know what's good for ya, don't want trouble now," a shorthand for all sorts of tolerated abuse of the law. That it actually happened is a kind of very sick joke.
3. So when you get pulled over for the sick joke of traffic stops, OF COURSE you film. Of course you record. Even had nobody been shot, there likely would have been a complaint. You want evidence. You want witnesses. And what they witnessed...
Posted by Callan (# 525) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pearl B4 Swine:
Just heard that "the suspect" has been blown up & killed, naturally, by a robot toting an explosive device. That's the way to handle naughty people.. blow em up. Just like they (& we) do it in the mid.East.
If they could send in a bomb on the bot, WHY couldn't they send in a pacifying gas of some kind to immobilize the guy?
Because the stuff that knocks you out instantaneously only exists on the telly and you really don't want a guy with an automatic rifle emptying his mag whilst you wait for the effects of RL pacifying gas to kick in.
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on
:
Can we thank God - and I mean it - for the fact that no suicide bombings by 'the oppressed' (whoever, real and imagined, they ever are) have occurred in the US yet, with regard to all this?
Heaven forbid! I hope and pray that the Christian legacy at least in the black community is alive enough and vivid and valid, such as to prevent this from happening. I shudder at the thought.
I wonder what others think?
Posted by Pearl B4 Swine (# 11451) on
:
Good enough, Callan. Thank you. I listen to too many Old Time Radio detective and crime shows.
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ariston:
2. They were pulled over for a broken taillight. Seriously. Broken taillight. Can't make that up. The classic Jim Crow driving while black ticket. It's the stuff of "good people live here, you best be moving along if you know what's good for ya, don't want trouble now," a shorthand for all sorts of tolerated abuse of the law. That it actually happened is a kind of very sick joke.
I don't know. My (white) son has been pulled over at different times for broken taillight, broken windshield wiper, and loud muffler.
I've been pulled over for "circling the block too many times," in the city and for driving too slow on the empty streets of a residential neighborhood (I have a bit of a phobia about hitting a child, I crawl through such areas.)
I don't find anything odd in pulling over someone with a broken tail light. It's standard to address the officer as sir and it's standard for the officer to ask the driver to produce his license and registration. What's not standard is shooting him when he reaches for them.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
It is not blaming British people who died from Luftwaffe bombing to say Britain helped foster the conditions in which WWII occurred.
Yeah, but try writing that with "they" like you did originally and see what happens. "They" died. "They" helped foster the conditions in which WWII occurred. Reads rather differently, doesn't it?
What I mean by collective reform is that the police as a whole need to be reformed. That's a use of "they" I'll accept. I'll accept the collective responsibility of police to make the situation better.
What I won't accept is you throwing around collective "they" when talking about the death of very specific individual police officers in the same breath as talking about how "they" created the environment. Why? Because it's a bloody dangerous equating of two things that are not equal. A systemic cause is not equable with a consequence for an individual.
If I did that with specific black victims of police shootings you'd be outraged. We spend plenty of time being outraged when people equate the specific actions of specific Muslims with the beliefs of a billion people.
I've been over this theme of blurring the lines between the individual and the system any number of times before. I didn't expect to be going over it again in quite this context, but here we are. Police mistreatment of black people in America is systemic. But the system didn't die today. Individual police officers did.
Conceptually, what you said isn't a million miles away from Westboro Baptist saying that the reason a soldier died is because America accepts homosexuality. America "created the environment" for the soldier's death, or for whatever other misfortune they attribute to America's behaviour. You're not as loony as they are, but you still did the same thing, of linking a systemic-level issue with an individual outcome in a way that is at best bloody insensitive.
[ 08. July 2016, 16:55: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posted by Callan (# 525) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pearl B4 Swine:
Good enough, Callan. Thank you. I listen to too many Old Time Radio detective and crime shows.
In a mad world anyone who asks: "was it really necessary to blow him up?" is one of the good guys, IMO.
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
I don't find anything odd in pulling over someone with a broken tail light. It's standard to address the officer as sir and it's standard for the officer to ask the driver to produce his license and registration. What's not standard is shooting him when he reaches for them.
I don't think anyone is questioning the pulling over or the request for license and registration. But a broken tail light is hardly a capital offense with the police acting as judge, jury, and executioner.
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
It turns out there may have been just one shooter at the Dallas demo, a military veteran.
[ 08. July 2016, 17:49: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
I don't know. My (white) son has been pulled over at different times for broken taillight, broken windshield wiper, and loud muffler.
The police will often use such a thing as an excuse in hopes to find outstanding warrants or probable cause for an arrest. They have done for every group, but it is much more likely to happen if one is not white.
The problem with American police goes beyond racism, but people of colour are disproportionately targeted.
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
It is not blaming British people who died from Luftwaffe bombing to say Britain helped foster the conditions in which WWII occurred.
Yeah, but try writing that with "they" like you did originally and see what happens. "They" died. "They" helped foster the conditions in which WWII occurred. Reads rather differently, doesn't it?
I posted in extreme anger and didn't take the time to write as effectively as possible.
I've since clarified what I meant and admitted I could have been more clear in the beginning, so get the fuck over it.
quote:
What I mean by collective reform is that the police as a whole need to be reformed.
OK, that is reasonable and not what I though you meant. See what can happen if you ask for clarification rather than assume? Eliminates a lot of acrimony.
You compare me to Westboro? If you pay that little attention to what I post, why the fuck do you care how any of my words read?
[ 08. July 2016, 17:52: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
It's standard to address the officer as sir and it's standard for the officer to ask the driver to produce his license and registration. What's not standard is shooting him when he reaches for them.
We know that he informed the cop that he had a weapon, and the cop clearly implores that he told him not to reach, to get his hands off of it.
Basic concealed carry training teaches you that when dealing with cops while carrying the number one priority is allowing the officer to secure your weapon. That is an inherently dangerous situation, and there is plenty of time to produce your ID after meeting firearm safety priorities.
His girlfriend actually says that he told the officer he had a gun and was reaching for his wallet. That is exactly the wrong combination of behaviors in that situation.
It was a tragic circumstance, and unfortunately has contributed to an even larger tragedy.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
I heard someone on the radio claiming that the American police do not shoot more black people than whites, but the black people are shot at a greater rate than white people. He said it twice. I didn't understand it either time.
This could mean one of two things.
1. Say for purposes of demonstration that 80% of the population is white and 20% is black. Say that cops shoot 100 people a year, but 70 of them are white and 30 are black. They shoot more white people, but the ratio of blacks to whites shot is greater than the ratio of blacks to whites in the population.
2. Given the same national demographic, suppose they interact with 80 white people and 20 black people every day. Of those, they shoot the white person 10% of the time, but the black person 25% of the time. Then they are shooting more white people than black (8 to 5), but the rate at which they shoot black people is clearly higher.
Thank you for the explanation - I think 2 fits. But the speaker was implying that the claims of black people being disproportionately shot was wrong. Your explanation would support it.
Meanwhile, I am now looking back to the one time I have been stopped (not the time I was already stopped, which was a very civilised affair) and redrawing it in the light of what people have been taught in the States.
Two female teachers, late twenties, school catchment area. I was driving my friend home from a visit for tea. As is quite usual over here, I did not have my documents with me. In fact, all I had was my keys, no bag, nothing. We passed a petrol station where a police car was parked and the officers appeared to be eating chips (I processed this information later, which it became significant.) Round the corner, flashing lights behind, so I drew to a stop, trying to remember whether it was advised to get out of the car or not. I decided to remain seated, and wound down the window. One of the little lads came up, while the other looked around at the lights and the tyres. "Is anything wrong, officer?" "We needed to check if the vehicle is stolen." "I can assure you it hasn't been reported stolen, as it is mine." "Can you prove your identity." I explained the situation.
By this time it was apparent that the two officers hadn't the slightest idea what to do next. I offered to drive to the station to discuss the matter there. This was not acceptable. I offered to go to one of the houses with children's toys in the garden to be identified by parents. (By this time I was getting silly.) They insisted that I needed to show them something to prove my identity. (This was not true.)
In the end, my colleague showed them her credit card from her bag, and they took no notes about it, but let us go. I think I should have gone straight to the station afterwards and discussed the issue there. I think they thought we were younger, and had some non-official ideas in mind.
But what would have happened if we were male, black and in the States I shudder to think.
The 'sir' thing wouldn't fit with the British idea that the police are our servants, but drawn from among us, and therefore equals. We use 'sir' to superiors. I'm going to have to discuss this with my ex-police neighbour. Of course, an armed force does change the dynamics somewhat. Not sure how I would approach one of the armed ones around London.
[ 08. July 2016, 18:44: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posted by jbohn (# 8753) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:
the cop clearly implores that he told him not to reach, to get his hands off of it.
Yes - we hear the cop screaming/crying/carrying on for his microphone. This is known in the field, I am told, as covering one's ass. We also hear his colleagues coming to console him ("You'll get through this") - leaving a man bleeding to death in the car.
Unfortunately, SAPD doesn't have body cameras, so we'll never get the full, start-to-finish video of the stop that would be most useful.
quote:
Basic concealed carry training teaches you that when dealing with cops while carrying the number one priority is allowing the officer to secure your weapon. That is an inherently dangerous situation, and there is plenty of time to produce your ID after meeting firearm safety priorities
His girlfriend actually says that he told the officer he had a gun and was reaching for his wallet. That is exactly the wrong combination of behaviors in that situation..
Unless of course one has been, within seconds, been told by a scared man pointing a gun at oneself to both produce one's paperwork and keep one's hands in the air. I don't recall that portion of my carry training from any of the classes I've taken. I'll look for it in my renewal course.
[Nitpick - MN doesn't have "concealed" carry - carry permits here are valid whether the firearm is concealed or not.]
Again I ask, have you ever had a scared cop pointing a gun at you?
quote:
It was a tragic circumstance, and unfortunately has contributed to an even larger tragedy.
Finally, something I can agree with.
That said, it was a tragic circumstance brought on by a police officer making a questionable traffic stop (photos from the scene seem to indicate two working taillights), and doing so with the mindset that the people in the car are an existential threat to him. That's the mindset that needs changing in this country. There is no "war on cops". Not even with the tragedy in Dallas. Many (most?) cops go through a whole career without even unholstering their weapon, let alone killing someone. Especially in a pretty white, relatively middle-class suburb such as Falcon Heights, MN or Saint Anthony, MN.
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on
:
We use "sir" in the US to show respect. It doesn't necessarily indicate hierarchy; people in authority such as cops use it to address random members of the public and homeless people. Not necessarily in tones of respect, of course, but it gives them a mode of address to use that is generally accepted and closes off one avenue of accusations of disrespect.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
That's right. It's not hierarchical at all, at least when you're speaking to a stranger or mere acquaintance. I'd address anyone from my grad school professor to a drunk man in a gutter using the term. It's polite and intended to prevent or defuse hostility.
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
The 'sir' thing wouldn't fit with the British idea that the police are our servants, but drawn from among us, and therefore equals. We use 'sir' to superiors.
There are probably pond (and on this side of the pond, regional) differences at play here. But over here, there can also be cultural differences at play.
As a child in the American South in the 1960s, I was taught to address all adults as "sir" or "ma'am." That included parents and grandparents, teachers, the grocer, the mail man, the lunch room lady, etc. I was also taught that upon becoming an adult, I should still address all other adults as "sir" or "ma'am" unless we were friends.
And to be clear, addressing someone as "sir" or "ma'am" meant that when answering the person in question, you answered "yes sir/yes ma'am" or "no sir/no ma'am" instead of just "yes" or "no." ("Yeah wasn't even remotely an option.) Or you used phrases such as "excuse me, ma'am." You didn't pepper everything you said with "sir" or "ma'am."
Many a Southerner will tell you that the moment at which they first felt old came in their 20s, the first time someone said "yes sir" or "no ma'am" to them.
But like I said, there are cultural layers. I remember coming home from school one day and expressing a little confusion that one of my teachers, a black women, had said "please don't call me ma'am." My mother explained to 12-year-old me how "sir" and "ma'am" could carry heavy connotations of servitude for blacks, especially when talking to a white person. (I've learned over the years that this is a common but far from universal feeling among black Southerners.) She also reminded me that since the purpose of using "sir" or "ma'am" was to be polite and respectful, it would be very impolite and disrespectful to call someone "ma'am" if I knew she did not like to be called that.
Then there are authority figures. We were all taught to be respectful to police offices. But I've known many black parents who have drummed into their kids heads that they must use "sir" or "ma'am" when talking to a police officer, that they could not afford to do anything that suggested any lack of respect.
Like I said, there can be layers at play here, but generally speaking, calling someone "sir" or "ma'am" doesn't necessarily suggest superiority.
/Tangent
ETA: Cross-posted with RuthW and Lamb Chopped, who managed to be much more concise than I did.
[ 08. July 2016, 19:42: Message edited by: Nick Tamen ]
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
Sir & Ma'am: Adding onto Nick's explanation.
I was raised in that neither North nor South state, West Virginia and taught to say Sir or Ma'am to adults, but the North doesn't inforce it with the same emphasis as the South. When I worked for awhile in Georgia, I was often told "You Yankees don't teach your children manners," based almost solely on the fact that they don't pepper their speech with enough of those words. Meanwhile the teens in the South seemed rather surly to me with the forced ma'am from kids who knew my name. In the North we're usually taught to use the person's name if we know it. So, I would never have said, "No, Sir" to my friends father, rather than, "No, Mr. Wilson." With police it is preferable to say, "Yes, Officer Jones," "No Officer Jones."
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
I'm finding all this discussion really interesting and helpful.
There was the tone of voice with which she said 'sir' in the recording, as well. It jarred to my ears. And the jar was the need she felt to use the word in the way she used it, pleading. Which clearly was a result of the appalling situation she found herself in, but no-one should need to speak to a police officer that way.
It's a pity the police had to blow the shooter up - it would be really helpful to find out what drives these people, so that the precursor stages could be avoided. I wonder if he had PTSD from his time in Afghanistan.
[ 08. July 2016, 21:14: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on
:
"Had to" ? I wonder what else you could put on a robot, smoke bombs, tear gas, tazer, tranquilliser dart ...
[ 08. July 2016, 21:22: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
They're talking about that on MSNBC right now to a law enforcement expert who says the swat team had negotiators trying their best for the better part of an hour, and the shooter's anger just seemed to be escalating. The fear was that he would be killing more people.
Posted by Crœsos (# 238) on
:
There have been examples of police using robots to deliver tear gas or other chemical agent to force suspects to surrender. That usually involved a confined space like an apartment, not a relatively open one like a parking garage.
My question is whether the Dallas Police routinely stock weaponized explosives, if not the where did they get it, and what are their rules for using explosive weapons against suspects?
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
They would have the explosives and robots for bomb disposal.
It would not surprise me to learn they had practiced this scenario, though likely in response to terrorists.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
I'm wondering, was the existence of the robot part of the negotiations? "Give yourself up or we're going to take you out with a bomb-carrying robot." That could have potentially ended the situation without killing the suspect.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
Leading one to wonder, if it is NOT the case, whether bringing the suspect out alive even figured into the cops' calculations. Which is to say, do Black Lives Matter to them?
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Leading one to wonder, if it is NOT the case, whether bringing the suspect out alive even figured into the cops' calculations. Which is to say, do Black Lives Matter to them?
I can't say if Black Lives matter to them, but if the MSNBC report Twilight cites is accurate, the fact that swat team negotiators tried to talk him out for over an hour would certainly seem that bringing him out alive was part of their calculations, even though 5 of their own had already been killed.
I think the question of whether tear-gas or other non-lethal methods might have been used at that point is a good one. At the same time, though, I think the implication that the cops didn't care to capture him alive is, at the very least, premature at this point.
We have a huge problem with policing in the US, that must be addressed-- and soon. The events of this week demonstrate most clearly that the problem cuts both ways, with victims on both sides of the badge.
[ 09. July 2016, 00:10: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
I can't say if Black Lives matter to them, but if the MSNBC report Twilight cites is accurate, the fact that swat team negotiators tried to talk him out for over an hour would certainly seem that bringing him out alive was part of their calculations, even though 5 of their own had already been killed.
I just want to know if they did EVERYTHING in their power to bring him out alive, including saying they could take him out remotely, or did they say, "Oh fuck it, just kill him"? One hour is far from the longest one of these negotiation situations has played out.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
We have a huge problem with policing in the US, that must be addressed-- and soon. The events of this week demonstrate most clearly that the problem cuts both ways, with victims on both sides of the badge.
History doesn't hold much promise.
[ 09. July 2016, 00:33: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
No, it sure as h**l doesn't, especially when it comes to Americans and our guns.
Posted by Josephine (# 3899) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
We have a huge problem with policing in the US, that must be addressed-- and soon. The events of this week demonstrate most clearly that the problem cuts both ways, with victims on both sides of the badge.
The Boston PD and, I'm told, some others (maybe Philadelphia?) are working hard to replace automatic use of force with restraint and de-escalation, and it's making a difference.
We need more of that, and sooner. But it's a start.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
A major problem in the US is a lack of uniform standards and training. Individual municipalities changing is good, but will not solve the problem unless most do it.
And training needs to be constant. Years on the job are a poor way to gain training when mistakes cost lives.
Posted by AmyBo (# 15040) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
I don't find anything odd in pulling over someone with a broken tail light. It's standard to address the officer as sir and it's standard for the officer to ask the driver to produce his license and registration. What's not standard is shooting him when he reaches for them.
I don't think anyone is questioning the pulling over or the request for license and registration. But a broken tail light is hardly a capital offense with the police acting as judge, jury, and executioner.
It wasn't even about the tail light. The police scanner audio was placed online here: http://www.kare11.com/news/police-scanner-audio-1/267042738
Philando Castile was killed for being black.
Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
A major problem in the US is a lack of uniform standards and training.
And the militarization of the ways cops deal with people. Unnecessary violence is common, people tazered multiple times after obeying instructions to lie on the ground, people who are weaponless calmly asking why they are being questioned body slammed and injured "for officer safety" when there is no way the officer could really think he was in personal danger.
Power unchecked gets bolder. Police power has been essentially unchecked and growing bolder for years. I've got elderly white friends with personal horror stories.
Its cultural somehow. Mother Jones has a recent article of the abusiveness of prison guards. Beyond inhumane. article written by a guy who was a prisonner for a year in Iran, says USA prisons are worse!
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
A major problem in the US is a lack of uniform standards and training. Individual municipalities changing is good, but will not solve the problem unless most do it.
And training needs to be constant. Years on the job are a poor way to gain training when mistakes cost lives.
The training appears to major along the lines if it's black and moves shoot it. A refinement of this excludes the words "and moves." I wonder whether the wearing of a "uniform" alongside the very real dangers of the role prompts a form of aggression greater than the norm. Then there are the fruitcakes who apply just for the violence ...
From the other side of the Atlantic we have to accept that we have problems too. A recent series of investigations and enquiries revealed whole scale corruption in the UK Police Force meaning that public confidence in them is at the lowest ebb ever.
I've personally observed the Police winding up other people. I'm not sure to what end but can hazard a guess or two. It's no coincidence for example that street arrests late at night is on the decrease -- Street Pastors are great and do a lot of good work.
I'm not alone in coming to the conclusion that one (unplanned) element of their impact is that their are independent witnesses to activities that, in the past, would bring heavy handed policing just for a bit of fun. If the Police got the worst of it, there was always the cells
My own interaction with the Police tends to support the wider cynicism. I've found them rude, aggressive and prone not to believe anything you say. Whenever I am stopped or spoken to (and I hasten to add that I don't have any criminal or road convictions of any kind), I tend to switch my mobile on to record the conversation. They don't like it but can never prove that there's a law against it.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
What about a truth and reconciliation commission? Might it be a step in the right direction?
That's an article from Yes! magazine, by a Black woman who's a longtime activist. (NOTE: I think this was reposted from a couple of years ago, despite the date, because of the dates of the comments.) There's mention of some previous T&RCs in the US.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
Dear American people:
Please stop shooting each other.
Thank you.
The police are just people. It seems very clear that allowing anyone at all to have guns means that some people are going to use them wrongly. The police just have more situations where this is liable to happen.
In truth, I don't think the US police are any worse than any other. I don't think the US people are any worse. The problem is they have access to very lethal weapons, and an expectation and normalisation of using them.
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
In truth, I don't think the US police are any worse than any other. I don't think the US people are any worse. The problem is they have access to very lethal weapons, and an expectation and normalisation of using them.
Absolutely right. It keeps coming back to that. As wrong as the police were in these two most recent incidents, if the victims hadn't had guns in their pockets they would be alive now. That's not victim blaming that's just a fact. They didn't deserve to die because they were carrying guns but that's what happened because the police saw GUN! and panicked.
This woman didn't mean to kill her daughters in the midst of a depression induced rage, but the gun was so handy.
This man didn't mean to kill his son, but he had a gun in his hand when he went to pull a shell out of his shirt.
The more guns we have around the more gun deaths will happen and we'll keep blaming every other thing but the guns.
Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by AmyBo:
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
I don't think anyone is questioning the pulling over or the request for license and registration.
It wasn't even about the tail light. The police scanner audio was placed online here: http://www.kare11.com/news/police-scanner-audio-1/267042738
Philando Castile was killed for being black.
The linked article says the woman was taken into custody. That is very common when someone films an officer being abusive - police retaliate. The filmer lands in jail on some pretext, is soon released but for months or years after that keeps getting (falsely) charged with one crime after another.
I was surprised they didn't seize her camera and "accidentally" destroy or delete the images until I read she was streaming it to facebook, not just recording to post later.
Recording a police officer doing damage takes guts.
I just read of a new device that will remotely prevent other people's cameras from working. Don't know if such a thing is on the market yet.
Here's one article on the subject.
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
A major problem in the US is a lack of uniform standards and training.
And the militarization of the ways cops deal with people. Unnecessary violence is common, people tazered multiple times after obeying instructions to lie on the ground, people who are weaponless calmly asking why they are being questioned body slammed and injured "for officer safety" when there is no way the officer could really think he was in personal danger.[/URL]
Yes. I was thinking about this this morning. My husband-- not the snappiest of dressers-- is off for a job interview. I gave him the standard advice: "dress for the job you want." That advice is given not just so the interviewer will see you as someone who will fill that role well, but also so that YOU will see yourself that way and present yourself in the interview in confidently in that role.
20 years ago, police wore uniforms and carried simple revolvers that presented them as public servants. They walked a neighborhood beat where they got to know the families of the community, where they were greeted by small children who felt safe knowing that "Officer Bob" was on the job (at least in middle-class white suburbs). That influenced the way the community viewed the police but also I think viewed the way police viewed themselves-- as members of a community who were there to "serve and protect".
But in the last 20 years, we've had an explicit "broken window" policing strategy. We've had 15 years of right-wing fear-mongering ("there's a terrorist around every corner-- and they all have dark skin"). And we've started outfitting our police with military weaponry. We are outfitting them for a particular job-- but not the job of a community member there to "serve and protect" but the outfit of a soldier at war. That's gotta influence them on a subconscious level. When you are walking into every routine traffic stop not as a community servant but as a warrior you're going to see every person on the other side of the badge not as a neighbor but as the enemy and as a potential threat.
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on
:
20 years ago cops were not walking beats where I live. My whole 53-year-old life I've never lived anywhere where cops did anything but drive around.
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
20 years ago cops were not walking beats where I live. My whole 53-year-old life I've never lived anywhere where cops did anything but drive around.
Well, true. I was probably writing more from folklore than reality. And there's evidence that race-based police brutality is not some new thing (Rodney King, anyone?) but simply more easily seen now due to cell phone cameras.
But I still think the militarization thing is a factor as well, even if it's only exasperating something that has always been there. And it appears to be an accurate description of the different ways that white communities relate to their police force vs. black communities.
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
20 years ago cops were not walking beats where I live. My whole 53-year-old life I've never lived anywhere where cops did anything but drive around.
Same here—well, except I have lived where police sometimes ride horses. But police walking beats, or everyday people knowing local police officers by name, is not something I've ever experienced in my 50+ years.
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on
:
I grew up in a fairly small town. The police did use cars, but we knew them and they knew us -- the daughter of the Police Chief was a classmate of mine; two officers shared my school bus route (one week one of them would drive the bus while the other was on duty with the police and the next week they reversed positions, possibly the one driving the bus was on duty at night). Also, since we lived in a lily white town -- no Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Jews, etc. -- there were no racial tensions. (But I do feel it was my loss not knowing a more diverse group of people as a child.)
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
"I'm a black ex-cop, and this is the real truth about race and policing" (Vox). Good article. NOTE: some disturbing stories.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
I read that. Very powerful.
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
I read that. Very powerful.
heartbreaking.
![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif)
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
A major problem in the US is a lack of uniform standards and training.
Yeah, and you know what? I've read 3 separate articles in the last day all saying that Dallas is considered to have some of the best training and standards in the country. The number of police shootings dropping every year. The number of complaints about excessive police force dropping every year. A police chief who sacked a police officer for misconduct and openly praised the officer who reported it.
Which makes Micah Johnson a colossal idiot as well as a murderer. Attacking people who are genuinely trying to be part of the solution.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
A major problem in the US is a lack of uniform standards and training.
Yeah, and you know what? I've read 3 separate articles in the last day all saying that Dallas is considered to have some of the best training and standards in the country. The number of police shootings dropping every year. The number of complaints about excessive police force dropping every year. A police chief who sacked a police officer for misconduct and openly praised the officer who reported it.
Which makes Micah Johnson a colossal idiot as well as a murderer. Attacking people who are genuinely trying to be part of the solution.
Because of the way they are reported and recorded, statistics on police shootings are difficult. However, even accepting this as accurate doesn't change the reality that black people are disproportionately targeted, incarcerated and shot. It does not change that police officers appear to be acquitted of crimes that civilians are likely to go to prison for. It does not change that many police organisations, especially unions, operate with the mantra of "police can do no wrong".
Johnson's actions were counter-productive to solving policing problems. His reported words, though, reference the shootings by police in the US, not Dallas. So Dallas' progress is irrelevant to his apparent motive.
An article in The Atlantic supports your conclusion that the Dallas police are making progress. I would point out though, that 6 years of progress doesn't erase decades of malfeasance.
And that the changes have received resistance from police unions and officers themselves, enforcing the point that change needs to be broader than any one city.
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Which makes Micah Johnson a colossal idiot as well as a murderer. Attacking people who are genuinely trying to be part of the solution.
I say he's another crazy young man with a gun who felt impotent and decided to try to take some kind of power. Usually they're white, but obviously not always. It's not like guys like him stop and think coherently about the people they're choosing to kill.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
A major problem in the US is a lack of uniform standards and training.
Yeah, and you know what? I've read 3 separate articles in the last day all saying that Dallas is considered to have some of the best training and standards in the country. The number of police shootings dropping every year. The number of complaints about excessive police force dropping every year. A police chief who sacked a police officer for misconduct and openly praised the officer who reported it.
Which makes Micah Johnson a colossal idiot as well as a murderer. Attacking people who are genuinely trying to be part of the solution.
Because of the way they are reported and recorded, statistics on police shootings are difficult. However, even accepting this as accurate doesn't change the reality that black people are disproportionately targeted, incarcerated and shot. It does not change that police officers appear to be acquitted of crimes that civilians are likely to go to prison for. It does not change that many police organisations, especially unions, operate with the mantra of "police can do no wrong".
Johnson's actions were counter-productive to solving policing problems. His reported words, though, reference the shootings by police in the US, not Dallas. So Dallas' progress is irrelevant to his apparent motive.
An article in The Atlantic supports your conclusion that the Dallas police are making progress. I would point out though, that 6 years of progress doesn't erase decades of malfeasance.
And that the changes have received resistance from police unions and officers themselves, enforcing the point that change needs to be broader than any one city.
Well fuck you too.
Seriously, what a way to throw excrement in someone's face.
It doesn't change those things. Well then, fuck, why bother putting any effort into reducing those things? Dallas police might as well sit back, relax and go for the record.
Words cannot quite express the disgust I feel for you in this moment, so I won't say any more.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
orfeo,
You are reading what you want into what I am saying.
I did not say Dallas' efforts are worthless, but that they are not going to solve the problem by themselves.
In theory, change could happen city by city, and each city which makes the effort is laudable. But in practice this isn't likely to happen fast enough.
The US needs national standards to comprehensively address the problems. The US needs a paradigm shift in police-public relations.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
Sorry David O. Brown. It doesn't matter that you've greatly increased the amount of training your officers require. It doesn't matter that you've made the number of adverse police incidents in your jurisdiction plummet. It doesn't matter that your approach was described as a "model" for better policing in America well before your officers were gunned down this week. Apparently nothing's changed.
Well, except for the fact that a considerable number of members of the Dallas community are still alive. But it seems you could have saved yourself all that effort. You've not made a difference.
Sorry about that.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
orfeo,
I did not say Dallas' efforts are worthless, but that they are not going to solve the problem by themselves.
Well then, you must really think I'm some kind of colossal moron if you apparently believe you have to point out to me that an improvement in Dallas doesn't miraculously transform the entire nation.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
It's ironic, really. The last couple of days on Facebook I've been seeing and successfully sharing stuff about how the statement "All Lives Matter", while technically true, is an incredibly unhelpful response to "Black Lives Matter" that minimises and trivialises the impact of policing on blacks in America.
And yet your response to "Dallas Is Better" is to minimise the importance of that by insisting on a general observation that, while technically true, seeks to minimise and trivialise the importance of the betterment of policing in Dallas.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
The US needs national standards to comprehensively address the problems. The US needs a paradigm shift in police-public relations.
That would probably need to involve both the president and Congress cooperating, which (currently) is very unlikely, unless the Christmas Carol ghosts do their work on every member of Congress. There'd be a lot of shouting about states' rights. And probably a Supreme Court case or three. That's before even considering the police unions.
And, as Justice Ginsberg (aka the Notorious RBG! ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
) recently pointed out, the next president will probably have a chance to fill several Supreme slots, presumably because they're getting ready to retire. So the next pres can "stack the court" with like-minded people. If, all goodness forbid, Trump is elected...
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on
:
A paradigmatic shift in our notions of what the police are supposed to be doing sounds like a great idea. I'm not sold on the idea of national standards, though. National standards haven't done much for our educational system.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
The Bahamian gov't has issued a travel advisory for their Black young men going to the US. I was wondering how long it would take for someone to do that.
Also, some American conservative pundits and politicians are starting to say, "Yes, Virginia, African-Americans really are treated badly, and have been for a long time, and that needs to change". Even Newt Gingrich. Hope they mean it.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
And yet your response to "Dallas Is Better" is to minimise the importance of that by insisting on a general observation that, while technically true, seeks to minimise and trivialise the importance of the betterment of policing in Dallas.
I am not minimising the effort of the Dallas police. Just stating that it is not enough, by itself, to change the national problem.
If someone saves a starving child, it is a wonderful act, but it does not end starvation by itself.
And, even if they exhibited not a trace of bias, and not one single case of brutality, questionable arrest, etc.; it will take years for their reputation to be rehabilitated. As Dallas Police Chief David O. Brown said: quote:
trust is hard to earn and easy to lose
You appear to be seeking to view my words in the worst possible way.
BTW, I do not think you are actually an idiot, but I do think you are doing an incredible job of acting the part.
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
A paradigmatic shift in our notions of what the police are supposed to be doing sounds like a great idea. I'm not sold on the idea of national standards, though. National standards haven't done much for our educational system.
Possibly because the standards set are rubbish? Before I'm accused of hating on American teachers, I am asking, not accusing. A national standard is not a bankrupt concept simply because the implementation is faulty.
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on
:
Setting national standards for things like teaching and policing, things that involve a lot of individuals working in a variety of conditions, may not be a great idea in a heterogeneous country of well over 300 million people. Or maybe we're just not very good at it.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Setting national standards for things like teaching and policing, things that involve a lot of individuals working in a variety of conditions, may not be a great idea in a heterogeneous country of well over 300 million people. Or maybe we're just not very good at it.
Just limiting comment to the police, the evidence is that you're just not very good at it at the moment. Would an attempt at a federal plan make any difference? This of course assumes that such a plan would be constitutional. I know how it could be done here, but am not sure about in the US.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
There'd be a lot of push-back.
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
BTW, I do not think you are actually an idiot, but I do think you are doing an incredible job of acting the part.
The feeling is mutual.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Setting national standards for things like teaching and policing, things that involve a lot of individuals working in a variety of conditions, may not be a great idea in a heterogeneous country of well over 300 million people. Or maybe we're just not very good at it.
IIRC, there are actually national guidelines, but they are fairly basic, they need to be more comprehensive. At least one of the presidential candidates agrees with me. Creating better ones would require evaluating any real regional differences. I am not saying there aren't any, but I will say I believe they are not as ubiquitous as commonly portrayed. Regional variation makes for an interesting and vibrant country, but not everything need be different.
As GK, says, there will be pushback. Change is not something people accept easily.
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Setting national standards for things like teaching and policing, things that involve a lot of individuals working in a variety of conditions, may not be a great idea in a heterogeneous country of well over 300 million people. Or maybe we're just not very good at it.
I would have to agree that nat'l teaching standards have been far, far less than successful and have led to a lot of unfortunate unintended consequences. But the thing is, local control of schools hasn't exactly been a success either. Local control of schools has led to huge disparities in educational quality based on race and income. It has very much contributed to income inequality and loss of social-economic mobility. It has created ridiculous housing bubbles (especially here in Calif.) by driving up prices in good school districts-- with all sorts of problematic economic results.
You have to take that into consideration as well before you jump to the conclusion that national standards-- whether for education or for policing-- is a de facto bad idea. We can think of places where national standards have been a good idea-- e.g. meat inspection and consumer protection. There's a bit of confirmation bias going on-- we don't notice the places where nat'l standards work, precisely because they work, and when things work it's not newsworthy and escapes our notice. We only notice when nat'l standards don't work.
Whether nat'l standards for policing will work or not work very much depends on what those nat'l standards are, how they are derived, and how they are implemented. But we can't dismiss the suggestion of nat'l standards simply because they are national.
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
Standards for teachers being set by people who have never spent a day in a classroom since they graduated (or flunked out, it would seem) are antithetical to good teaching.
The national standards we have now are basically "the students you teach this year must score higher on this artificial test designed by a firm whose primary purpose in life is to suck taxpayer money into the pockets of rich fatcats than did the students you taught last year -- an entirely different group of students."
It's asinine.
[ 10. July 2016, 22:34: Message edited by: mousethief ]
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Standards for teachers being set by people who have never spent a day in a classroom since they graduated (or flunked out, it would seem) are antithetical to good teaching.
The national standards we have now are basically "the students you teach this year must score higher on this artificial test designed by a firm whose primary purpose in life is to suck taxpayer money into the pockets of rich fatcats than did the students you taught last year -- an entirely different group of students."
It's asinine.
Absolutely agree. The point being that what makes them unworkable is not that they're national standards but that they were devised by people with so little knowledge or experience of teaching. They would be just as bad if they were local. In fact, many local school districts are full of similarly asinine policies and procedures. Yes, Kansas I'm looking at you
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Plus Americans really don't like to be told to do what to do. Laws and rules are supposed to protect and help Us (of whatever group), and rein in Them (of other groups).
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Absolutely agree. The point being that what makes them unworkable is not that they're national standards but that they were devised by people with so little knowledge or experience of teaching. They would be just as bad if they were local. In fact, many local school districts are full of similarly asinine policies and procedures. Yes, Kansas I'm looking at you
Agree.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
When the first National Curriculum was introduced under Thatcher, the then Education Secretary, Kenneth Baker, said of the Primary Science part of it that a Y6 pupil should understand gravity.
I don't think things have improved greatly since. Not only do they not understand teaching or child development, they do not understand the subjects they pontificate about.
My sister was involved in the input of mathematical understanding in the current changes, and was, as were others who knew what they were talking about, ignored.
Please note that in quoting the item which I feel sums up the attitude to the national testing regimes, I have been generous enough to avoid any puns about the seriousness of the matter.
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
In terms of standards there are a series of questions to be asked, and this doesn't just apply to policing though obviously that's the example relevant here.
1. Is there a need to improve policing?
Well, at the moment it looks like there are some deficiencies in the way policing happens in the US (and elsewhere). So, yes I would say there needs to be improvements - and they need to be quite visible as there are issues of restoring eroded public trust.
2. Is there a need for a national standard?
This is trickier. There are quite significant local differences in what police need to do - the details of the police role in a small rural community would be very different to an inner city area. On the other hand, there are also areas of similarity where standards could be national. If you have armed police then it's not unreasonable that there are standards in proficiency in the use of those weapons - a standard level of marksmanship (with regular assessments to ensure that that level is maintained) for example. Would there be sufficient similarity in reasons why an officer might need to draw their weapon that this could be standardised across the nation?
3. If you decide you need standards (whether national or local), who sets them?
Standards set by people without the relevant experience and knowledge, especially those set by politicians seeking to be seen to be doing something, are generally counter-productive. On the other hand. But, if you have policing standards set by police officers (or, retired officers) and there is an issue of public trust then even if those standards are good they may not be seen to be good. It's a catch-22 - you need standards to help regain public trust, but until you have the public trust there isn't going to be trust in the standards.
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
Very thoughtful and well said, Alan. Agree completely with all of the above.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
National standards do not mean that the entire training for every different type of law enforcement needs be be the same.
It means the base level of training. Most American police training is insufficient. There is also an attitude problem. US police are too aggressive and feel too much the need to be the alpha in every situation. And this is unacceptable when all of them carry weapons. If this occurred in the US, the man would be dead.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
As per a lot of what is being said above, there is a big difference between standardized training and standardized practices/ outcome expectation. It is resonable to expect all teachers to have studied child development and education theory, it is also reasonable to require police to take training in de-escalation techniques. How they apply that information is going to vary from situation to situtation, of course, but it's reasonable to expect them to have the information in the first place.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Like *this* is really going to help anything.
Kansas Cop Fired After Threatening 5-Year-Old Girl On Facebook “Hold her close tonight,” the officer wrote on the girl’s mother’s Facebook page. “It’ll be the last time.” (HuffPost)
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Like *this* is really going to help anything.
Kansas Cop Fired After Threatening 5-Year-Old Girl On Facebook “Hold her close tonight,” the officer wrote on the girl’s mother’s Facebook page. “It’ll be the last time.” (HuffPost)
ETA: There's a criminal investigation. I hope they also go back and check every interaction he ever had with the public, and every arrest.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
Why isn't the bastard behind bars?
Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Why isn't the bastard behind bars?
[NSFW link redacted]Same reason this bastard isn't, I guess...
At least the cop has been fired.
Hostly furry hat on
Romanlion, I was having a perfectly nice day, and you do something shitty like posting an obviously nsfw image without any warning, or attempt at a two-click separation.
That gets you Admin attention.
DT
HH
Hostly furry hat off
[ 12. July 2016, 15:32: Message edited by: Doc Tor ]
Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on
:
I apologize.
I wrongly judged the content and won't make that error again.
Hell, I'm at work! ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
Just heard on the news that three police officers have been shot and killed in Baton Rouge--the same city where one of the recent killings *by* police took place.
Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Just heard on the news that three police officers have been shot and killed in Baton Rouge--the same city where one of the recent killings *by* police took place.
No one here gives a shit, but the next time some asshole with dark pigmentation gets shot by a white cop the thread will jump pages in the first hour.
Silence is the response to the OP until then. The ones thinking "fuck 'em" just don't have the balls to post it.
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on
:
BBC feed. Situation sounds confused but there is no hint so far of a "revenge killing" motive.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Just heard on the news that three police officers have been shot and killed in Baton Rouge--the same city where one of the recent killings *by* police took place.
No one here gives a shit, but the next time some asshole with dark pigmentation gets shot by a white cop the thread will jump pages in the first hour.
Silence is the response to the OP until then. The ones thinking "fuck 'em" just don't have the balls to post it.
You're never slow to post that kind of trash. Gosh, you are lower than a snakes belly.
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Just heard on the news that three police officers have been shot and killed in Baton Rouge--the same city where one of the recent killings *by* police took place.
No one here gives a shit, but the next time some asshole with dark pigmentation gets shot by a white cop the thread will jump pages in the first hour.
Silence is the response to the OP until then. The ones thinking "fuck 'em" just don't have the balls to post it.
It's because it's no surprise that there are bad people out there, some even bad enough to kill police. OTOH we're shocked when the police, our designated good guys, shoot a man point blank when they have him down, flat on his back and seemingly over-powered.
I don't have a higher opinion of Alton Sterling than you do. He got a fourteen year-old girl pregnant. He assaulted women. He fathered five children by women he failed to live with and help and he owed $25,000 in back child support. Finally he was threatening people with a gun that he, as a convicted felon, had no legal right to carry. The police knew Sterling and had reason to fear him. His actions that day precipitated this whole nationwide mess.
None of that changes the fact that what the police appeared to do on that video was completely wrong. It's not their job to be judge, jury and executioner and if they are allowed to get away with that sort of action, we are all in a lot of trouble. That makes what they did a whole lot more shocking than the fall-out that has happened since.
Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Just heard on the news that three police officers have been shot and killed in Baton Rouge--the same city where one of the recent killings *by* police took place.
No one here gives a shit, but the next time some asshole with dark pigmentation gets shot by a white cop the thread will jump pages in the first hour.
Silence is the response to the OP until then. The ones thinking "fuck 'em" just don't have the balls to post it.
You're never slow to post that kind of trash. Gosh, you are lower than a snakes belly.
Too bad I'm not a guy named Alton Sterling who was fucking and impregnating a 14 year old at age 20, violent felon with a gun who resisted arrest and got shot by the police.
Then you would consider me some kind of martyr...as opposed to Tyshawn Lee, whom I'm sure you've never heard of.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
What Twilight said.
Plus a lot of us are probably sad, discouraged, suffering from Bad Thing Fatigue, grieving, angry, anxious, and overwhelmed. I am.
And worried about how all of this will affect the political conventions, both in terms of safety and decisions.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
What Twilight said.
Plus a lot of us are probably sad, discouraged, suffering from Bad Thing Fatigue, grieving, angry, anxious, and overwhelmed. I am.
And worried about how all of this will affect the political conventions, both in terms of safety and decisions.
'cept romanlion (spit) still rejoicing in the bad news that gives succour to his prejudice.
Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
What Twilight said.
Plus a lot of us are probably sad, discouraged, suffering from Bad Thing Fatigue, grieving, angry, anxious, and overwhelmed. I am.
And worried about how all of this will affect the political conventions, both in terms of safety and decisions.
'cept romanlion (spit) still rejoicing in the bad news that gives succour to his prejudice.
Prejudice? Against the lie of BLM?
Guilty as charged...
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
It's not their job to be judge, jury and executioner and if they are allowed to get away with that sort of action, we are all in a lot of trouble.
You'd think that idea would be common sense, wouldn't you?
Posted by saysay (# 6645) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:
Prejudice? Against the lie of BLM?
And what lie would that be? That black lives matter?...
Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
It's not their job to be judge, jury and executioner and if they are allowed to get away with that sort of action, we are all in a lot of trouble.
You'd think that idea would be common sense, wouldn't you?
Their job is to protect the public and get home at night.
If they give you instructions you should follow them.
You'd think that idea would be common sense, wouldn't you?
Particularly if you knew you were a felon in possession of a gun. But hey, they probably disrespected him in some way...
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
As cliffdweller pointed out, pages and pages ago, what if you follow instructions and get shot for following them?
But why am I talking to you? I don't think you really give a shit about the situation at all, you just get off on rubbing ground glass into already raw subjects.
[ 17. July 2016, 22:58: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
As cliffdweller pointed out, pages and pages ago, what if you follow instructions and get shot for following them?
Where is the evidence that this is what happened?
The video(s) shot in the latest two examples show nothing but the aftermath. Where is the video showing either of these two guys following instructions and being shot?
ETA:Unless you are taking the statements of the dope smoking mother with the child in the car as "evidence".
[ 17. July 2016, 23:25: Message edited by: romanlion ]
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
It's not their job to be judge, jury and executioner and if they are allowed to get away with that sort of action, we are all in a lot of trouble.
You'd think that idea would be common sense, wouldn't you?
One of the many things I don't understand: the bad cops, among the larger mass of cops, know their actions are more on the radar these days. Even if they absolutely believe that black people are the worst kind of evil, you'd think that--in *their own* self interest--they'd hold back a bit on mistreating African Americans (and others), at least for now. Are they so far gone that they can't see they're making things worse for themselves and other cops?
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
It's not their job to be judge, jury and executioner and if they are allowed to get away with that sort of action, we are all in a lot of trouble.
You'd think that idea would be common sense, wouldn't you?
One of the many things I don't understand: the bad cops, among the larger mass of cops, know their actions are more on the radar these days. Even if they absolutely believe that black people are the worst kind of evil, you'd think that--in *their own* self interest--they'd hold back a bit on mistreating African Americans (and others), at least for now.
Yeah, cause they're all out there just hating blacks and chomping at the bit for a chance to shoot one.
Seems like they would know when to chill for a minute...
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
Your Member Status tag of shitstain is accurate, but only in the same way as it is accurate to call Hitler a bad person.
You are posting merely to stir shit up and offend posters. I doubt you give one shit about police.
You are easily the most worthless waste of carbon currently on the Ship.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
romanlion--
Was the girlfriend high at the time? She didn't seem like it, IMHO.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
romanlion--
I specified the *bad* cops, and further specified that they're only one part of a larger mass of cops. I.e., not all cops are bad.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
GK,
He is not interested in real discussion. He just wants to post inflammatory rhetoric.
Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
I doubt you give one shit about police.
Yeah, except for the ones I count as family.
Fuck the rest. Kill 'em all. Black haters each and every.
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
romanlion--
Was the girlfriend high at the time? She didn't seem like it, IMHO.
Considering she would post video of herself smoking weed with her child in the back seat, it's hard to imagine that she wasn't...or hadn't been recently.
Either way her judgement is not what I would call solid.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
It's not their job to be judge, jury and executioner and if they are allowed to get away with that sort of action, we are all in a lot of trouble.
You'd think that idea would be common sense, wouldn't you?
One of the many things I don't understand: the bad cops, among the larger mass of cops, know their actions are more on the radar these days. Even if they absolutely believe that black people are the worst kind of evil, you'd think that--in *their own* self interest--they'd hold back a bit on mistreating African Americans (and others), at least for now. Are they so far gone that they can't see they're making things worse for themselves and other cops?
You'd think that, too, and you'd think that the fact that highly placed members of various police forces are ( finally) stepping forward to say, "CHILL" would provoke reflection, too.
Romancub, my Godbrother is a cop, my stepsister-in-law was a cop(RIP), I was confirmed with the son of a Peninsula police chief, a very good friend of both my parents, and my local prescinct contains several people from my graduating class. Hardly makes me special, I'd wager most Americans anywhere have friends and relatives that are cops.
The onus for deescalation is on people in authority. All the cop- fielding advice in the world won't help if people live in fear of arbitrary attack.
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
Wow, what a mess. I don't even know where to start parsing this.
I have to say that I'm rather glad to live in the country where every police caused death is treated like a potential-if-not-actual serious crime rather than a regrettable-but-inevitable accident. But the idea that some are taking potshots at people in uniform... well, that's just horrific.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:
Then you would consider me some kind of martyr...as opposed to Tyshawn Lee, whom I'm sure you've never heard of.
The name didn't ring a bell, so I skimmed a little info. I usually don't remember the names of crime victims, nor the details of their stories. But this story does sound vaguely familiar.
Tyshawn's murder was horrible, especially because he was a kid. It's good that you care.
The case that hit me hardest was the murder of Kitty Genovese, decades ago, when I was a kid. It turns out to be more complicated than was originally reported, and various people put a lot of spin on it. But it was a horrible thing. Her brother recently put out a film about his journey to find out what really happened. Haven't seen it, but heard an extensive piece on NPR about it. The story still haunts me a bit, after all these years.
Posted by Liopleurodon (# 4836) on
:
A dead black guy's past is rifled through in great detail, and any indication that he wasn't a saint taken as evidence that he deserved to die and/or was probably stupid enough to pull a gun on a cop. So much "eh, he was kinda a scumbag... the world's no worse off without him" stuff. Whether or not someone was a lousy, deadbeat dad, that's not a capital crime - let alone one that is punishable by execution without trial.
Something I read about the Brock Turner rape case rings true here: the victims have a past and the perps have a future. We see the same thing in the case of black people shot by police. It's all "well, he used to smoke weed and shoplift" or "see this photo where he looks kinda threatening" whereas the cop? Glittering career in front of him. Family man. You wouldn't want to ruin his future, would you?
In all honesty, I think people aren't commenting so much about the murder of police officers because there's more widespread understanding that that is a bad thing. Nobody has to make the case that it's wrong.
[ 18. July 2016, 11:06: Message edited by: Liopleurodon ]
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Liopleurodon:
In all honesty, I think people aren't commenting so much about the murder of police officers because there's more widespread understanding that that is a bad thing. Nobody has to make the case that it's wrong.
Exactly.
[ 18. July 2016, 14:32: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Liopleurodon:
A dead black guy's past is rifled through in great detail, and any indication that he wasn't a saint taken as evidence that he deserved to die and/or was probably stupid enough to pull a gun on a cop. So much "eh, he was kinda a scumbag... the world's no worse off without him" stuff. Whether or not someone was a lousy, deadbeat dad, that's not a capital crime - let alone one that is punishable by execution without trial.
Something I read about the Brock Turner rape case rings true here: the victims have a past and the perps have a future. We see the same thing in the case of black people shot by police. It's all "well, he used to smoke weed and shoplift" or "see this photo where he looks kinda threatening" whereas the cop? Glittering career in front of him. Family man. You wouldn't want to ruin his future, would you?
Comparing an unconscious rape victim and a gun wielding man in the act of a crime doesn't seem quite fair to me.
Actually I've seen quite a few pictures of Alton Sterling with his children and the words "Father of Five," above it as though he was the devoted family man from a fifties sit-com.
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Comparing an unconscious rape victim and a gun wielding man in the act of a crime doesn't seem quite fair to me.
A man tasered and pinned to the ground by two police officers is not exactly what most people would think of as "a gun wielding man in the act of a crime". By that point any "gun wielding" and crime would be well and truly in the past tense. But "a man who had been reported waving a gun around at some point prior to the arrival of the police" doesn't have the rhetorical ring to it, nor does changing the "act of a crime" to "flogging dodgy CDs".
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Comparing an unconscious rape victim and a gun wielding man in the act of a crime doesn't seem quite fair to me.
A man tasered and pinned to the ground by two police officers is not exactly what most people would think of as "a gun wielding man in the act of a crime". By that point any "gun wielding" and crime would be well and truly in the past tense. But "a man who had been reported waving a gun around at some point prior to the arrival of the police" doesn't have the rhetorical ring to it, nor does changing the "act of a crime" to "flogging dodgy CDs".
The press seemed to prefer the
Father of five selling CD's story for the first week or so. That's what left me wondering why the police would even show up for selling CD's. After a while I became curious and dug a little deeper to find out the call had been about a man threatening people with a gun and that the police were familiar with the suspect because he had a long rap sheet and was known to be violent.
That information makes the policeman's actions and his fear of the man a little easier to understand. It's still just as wrong but easier to understand.
What I don't understand is the number of people who aren't interested in the truth at all but rather in painting every scenario as if it was a 1940's Hollywood movie where the characters are either evil in every way or innocent lambs. In this case the press wrote a story of brutal, racist police and an innocent family man working hard to provide for his children. They did a fine job of fueling a national outrage.
The trouble is that wasn't strictly true. As it looks so far, the real story is simply about police over reacting and killing a man unnecessarily. We shouldn't have to be shown a false story about the victim being a devoted family man who was only selling CD's for that to be wrong. We shouldn't act like children who can't understand that there are nuances and two sides to every story.
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
Another side of the story.
Posted by Crœsos (# 238) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Actually I've seen quite a few pictures of Alton Sterling with his children and the words "Father of Five," above it as though he was the devoted family man from a fifties sit-com.
If "could have starred in a sit-com in the 1950s" is the standard you're going to apply, it's unsurprising no black people seem to be able to meet it.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
The only parts of the story that matter are the actions of the participants. It does not matter who a person is or what they have done. All that matters is what they are doing at the moment they are shot. If the situation is under control, and it clearly is in both videos, there is no justification for shooting.
Posted by Moo (# 107) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
All that matters is what they are doing at the moment they are shot. If the situation is under control, and it clearly is in both videos, there is no justification for shooting.
If he was, in fact, reaching for a gun in the waistband of his trousers, then he situation was not under control.
Moo
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
If. If he was and if he did not properly inform the officer.
The man lying on the ground and shot would have had to have demonstrated telekinesis to be a threat.
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Actually I've seen quite a few pictures of Alton Sterling with his children and the words "Father of Five," above it as though he was the devoted family man from a fifties sit-com.
If "could have starred in a sit-com in the 1950s" is the standard you're going to apply, it's unsurprising no black people seem to be able to meet it.
Yes, if I had called it a standard and said "could have starred in." You might almost have had point.
The pictures and the "father of five," business called those shows and their stereotypes to my mind. That was all.
Maybe you are incapable of looking at a photo of a man and his family and thinking "Father Knows Best," unless that man is white. Yes, the man in this picture is black and very few blacks were on TV at that time, but there are lots of tropes from that period that apply to people of all colors.
Just as some people like Liopleurodon read "he was a convicted felon," and think "deserves to die," while I, who wrote those words, only thought "reason for him not being able to legally carry a gun."
In other words, I think in your eagerness to accuse others you're only revealing yourselves.
Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
The only parts of the story that matter are the actions of the participants. It does not matter who a person is or what they have done. All that matters is what they are doing at the moment they are shot. If the situation is under control, and it clearly is in both videos, there is no justification for shooting.
It clearly is not under control in either video.
Sterling is resisting arrest, with his right arm free and out of view under the car and a pistol in his right pocket. The officer reacted to the presence of a gun, and a known violent felon.
Castille is near death when that video starts, but a gun is visible in his lap. There is no way to judge the events leading up to the shooting but the officer reacted to the presence of a gun, and a subject matching the description of an armed robbery suspect.
Posted by Moo (# 107) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
If. If he was and if he did not properly inform the officer.
The man lying on the ground and shot would have had to have demonstrated telekinesis to be a threat.
Are you saying that he was incapable of reaching for the gun, if there was one? Was he handcuffed?
Moo
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:
Sterling is resisting arrest, with his right arm free and out of view under the car and a pistol in his right pocket. The officer reacted to the presence of a gun, and a known violent felon.
So, first fuck you. Fuck you up the arse, through to the top of your head with a razor-wire wrapped, molten hot rusty farm implement.* I watched the video. At the very best, those bastards are incompetent.
quote:
Castille is near death when that video starts, but a gun is visible in his lap. There is no way to judge the events leading up to the shooting but the officer reacted to the presence of a gun, and a subject matching the description of an armed robbery suspect.
Matching the description of a robbery suspect. Most of that description would be black male, I bet. That is all the description police generally need to treat all black people as suspect.
The darker you are, the more likely you are to be harassed, have your rights violated or killed. Only an idiot believes otherwise.
*For the cognitively impaired, that is hyperbole.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
If. If he was and if he did not properly inform the officer.
The man lying on the ground and shot would have had to have demonstrated telekinesis to be a threat.
Are you saying that he was incapable of reaching for the gun, if there was one? Was he handcuffed?
Moo
I'm saying that the officers had control. If they thought they did not they were not competent to do their job.
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
I'm saying that the officers had control. If they thought they did not they were not competent to do their job.
I gather that the claim made by those defending the officers' actions in this case is that Alton Sterling's right arm was not restrained at the time, and that it was making motions towards his gun.
If this claim is correct, then the statement "the officers had control" isn't accurate.
And if that's true, then we should ask questions about the takedown that the two officers performed on Mr. Sterling: 1. Was it necessary? 2. Was it effective? Two officers and a taser were apparently unable to subdue one man - is this bad training or bad equipment?
Posted by Crœsos (# 238) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Actually I've seen quite a few pictures of Alton Sterling with his children and the words "Father of Five," above it as though he was the devoted family man from a fifties sit-com.
If "could have starred in a sit-com in the 1950s" is the standard you're going to apply, it's unsurprising no black people seem to be able to meet it.
Maybe you are incapable of looking at a photo of a man and his family and thinking "Father Knows Best," unless that man is white.
That's right. I have trouble picturing someone as part of the all-white cast of a Segregation*-era comedy unless that person is white. What's interesting to me is why such an obviously racially-constructed art form is considered to be the touchstone of good fatherhood, even to this day.
--------------------
*That's a bit unfair. The "Springfield" portrayed in Father Knows Best is somewhere in the Midwest, so it was probably a sundown town rather than a segregated community in the strictest sense of the term.
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
Montrell Jackson is my idea of a good father and a real hero. If you need to sanctify someone, why not him?
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
I'm saying that the officers had control. If they thought they did not they were not competent to do their job.
I gather that the claim made by those defending the officers' actions in this case is that Alton Sterling's right arm was not restrained at the time, and that it was making motions towards his gun.
If this claim is correct, then the statement "the officers had control" isn't accurate.
They should have had control.
quote:
And if that's true, then we should ask questions about the takedown that the two officers performed on Mr. Sterling: 1. Was it necessary?
Need more info, but it does not seem that way.
quote:
2. Was it effective?
Obviously not.
quote:
Two officers and a taser were apparently unable to subdue one man - is this bad training or bad equipment?
Definitely bad training. American police do not do deescalation very well.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
AIUI, people have varying reactions to being tased. Some don't go down on the first try. Don't know what happened in this case.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
This is the tack that the police need more than this idiot.
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on
:
lB--
The approach in that first link is great. Someone should do that in Oakland, Calif., across the bay from here. They've had all sorts of problems with the police for a long time. Recently, they went through 3 interim chiefs in one week!
Here in SF, there are also ongoing problems. Years ago, some cops made a "training video", with a lot of offensive, humorous depictions of various sorts of people. It was leaked. IIRC, they got in some trouble, but not enough. Then they made *another* video! Recently, some cops have sent prejudiced texts around.
Posted by Crœsos (# 238) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Montrell Jackson is my idea of a good father and a real hero. If you need to sanctify someone, why not him?
Good question. Why not cite him as an example of a good father instead of choosing a notoriously "Whites Only" example for the purposes of denigrating Alton Sterling's parenting skills? I don't particularly need to "sanctify" anyone, that was your decision, and apparently "Montrell Jackson" wasn't the example that you felt best illustrated your point.
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
See, you never understood what my point was in the first place. It was that even though Alton Sterling wasn't the greatest guy in the world he still deserved to be treated properly by the police and to have his day in court. The other man actually was the police so he would have made no sense in my post at all.
We then veered off into how the press depicted Sterling. Some people thought he had been dragged through the mud from the first. I pointed out that for days he was only shown in family photos and described as "Father of five selling CD's," completely omitting his past felonies and dead beat dad status.
I still think that comparing his earliest image in the press to that of the wholesome family men in fifties sit-coms was not far off. The fact that he is black and they were usually white has nothing to do with the stereotype of the fathers in those shows as all wise, loving, and devoted to their families. One can be those things in any color. I knew men in the fifties who were black and just as devoted to their children, faithful to their wives, law-abiding and hard working as Robert Young in "Father Knows Best." Their skin color didn't keep them from fitting the ideal of the day.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
Words fail
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on
:
The accompanying video doesn't seem available to UK residents. But a warning that if the video does autoplay, the article is headed "Video Shows Unarmed Man With Hands Up Shot by Police" and may indeed show an unarmed man with his hands up being shot by the police.
How your workplace and sensibilities view this prospect is something I leave to your discretion.
lB - more care, please.
DT
HH
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
There are ways to view it from anywhere, aplogies for not considering that most people will not be doing this. But that aside, it does not show the man actually getting shot.
This link should work anywhere.
Both links show what preceded the shooting and an interview with the victim in hospital. The second link (in this post) has more of that interview.
[ 21. July 2016, 19:24: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
For those who can't see it:
quote:
One video from the scene showed 47-year-old Charles Kinsey, who is an employee of an assisted living facility, had lain on his back with his hands in the air while speaking with officers, who had drawn their guns.
"I'm like this right here, and when he shot me, it was so surprising," Kinsey told WSVN-TV in Miami. "It was like a mosquito bite, and when it hit me, I'm like, 'I still got my hands in the air,' and I said, 'No, I just got shot!' And I'm saying, 'Sir, why did you shoot me?' and his words to me, he said, 'I don't know.'"
It goes on to say no footage of the actual shooting has emerged, which I take to mean the video cuts off before the fact.
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
For those who can't see it:
quote:
One video from the scene showed 47-year-old Charles Kinsey, who is an employee of an assisted living facility, had lain on his back with his hands in the air while speaking with officers, who had drawn their guns.
"I'm like this right here, and when he shot me, it was so surprising," Kinsey told WSVN-TV in Miami. "It was like a mosquito bite, and when it hit me, I'm like, 'I still got my hands in the air,' and I said, 'No, I just got shot!' And I'm saying, 'Sir, why did you shoot me?' and his words to me, he said, 'I don't know.'"
It goes on to say no footage of the actual shooting has emerged, which I take to mean the video cuts off before the fact.
Given that the first link shows footage after he was shot*, it may be that it just has not been released.
*No blood in that bit either.
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on
:
Okay. That's fine. It's my job to check every link, and, given this is Hell, it can be a bit of a crap shoot at times.
DT
HH
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
Fortunately, no one was shot in this incident (American Version) and the initial handling of the abuse was inadequate, however the Police chief appears now to be taking proper steps. He is acknowledging the wrong doing and racist remarks and, miracle of miracles, the police union is acknowledging the wrongdoing of the officers. Granted the stakes are lower so the admission is easier, but this is a massively more positive approach.
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on
:
More residents of the Blue Nation are speaking out against this shit. Part of me is " It's about time" and part is " whatever, just keep speaking."
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0