PDA

View Full Version : So we all just gonna ignore the Ferguson violence?



giggawatt
11-26-2014, 11:32 AM
It's spread to other cities around the country. Rioters have been blocking highways.

No matter what side you take, this is just absolutely disgraceful.

Absinthe Anecdote
11-26-2014, 11:52 AM
It's spread to other cities around the country. Rioters have been blocking highways.

No matter what side you take, this is just absolutely disgraceful.

I've been a little too busy complaining about people who complain about PT to notice.

Let me go check the news.

Rusty Jones
11-26-2014, 11:52 AM
It's spread to other cities around the country. Rioters have been blocking highways.

No matter what side you take, this is just absolutely disgraceful.

Standing up to "the man" is how this very nation came into existence in the first place.

Like Assata Shakur once said, "Nobody in the world, nobody in history, has ever gotten their freedom by appealing to the moral sense of the people who were oppressing them."

Blocking highways, by the way, is not part of "rioting."

sandsjames
11-26-2014, 12:18 PM
Can't be bothered anymore. Any time a rich white woman or a poor black man dies it garners national attention, for whatever reason. I've got better things to do with my time.

Absinthe Anecdote
11-26-2014, 12:26 PM
I blame country music and rap music for all this.

If everyone listened to jazz and euro-trance music, they'd be cool like me.

Rusty Jones
11-26-2014, 12:32 PM
Can't be bothered anymore. Any time a rich white woman or a poor black man dies it garners national attention, for whatever reason. I've got better things to do with my time.

What irks me is how no one in the black community is taking notice of this, but there only seems to be an uproar when black men are the victims of an injustice... but what about the women? Many stories have popped up on Cop Block and other sources about unarmed black women, some of whom were pregnant, being shot or even beaten to death by police officers who then go on to keep their jobs. No protests, no riots, no outrage at all... when, all other factors being equal, black women are easily the most vulnerable people in America.

Absinthe Anecdote
11-26-2014, 01:11 PM
What is Cop Block?

Rusty Jones
11-26-2014, 01:15 PM
What is Cop Block?

www.copblock.org

Check them out on facebook too. It's a website (and facebook fan page) with updates every few hours on instances of police brutality that goes unpunished - many of the ones they post, end with innocent people being killed by police.

Mata Leao
11-26-2014, 01:24 PM
I support the police, but I am not naive. I know there are very bad cops and very good cops.
This wasn't a racial thing but it has been made out to be because of the obvious. This incident should have started a different conversation. I don't know exactly what that conversation should be, however.

Just to put another spin on this, there was a black cop who shot an unarmed white (young) man here after the Furguson shooting. I never saw it on the national news.

Absinthe Anecdote
11-26-2014, 01:33 PM
I support the police, but I am not naive. I know there are very bad cops and very good cops.
This wasn't a racial thing but it has been made out to be because of the obvious. This incident should have started a different conversation. I don't know exactly what that conversation should be, however.

Just to put another spin on this, there was a black cop who shot an unarmed white (young) man here after the Furguson shooting. I never saw it on the national news.

If you don't know what the conversation should be, how are you so sure it isn't racial?

From what I am hearing in the black community, law abiding black citizens are tired of being treated like thugs each time they encounter the police.

Perhaps the conversation should start there.

efmbman
11-26-2014, 01:35 PM
1) It was very irresponsible for the announcement to be made at such a late hour. Controlling a mob is difficult in daylight, but waiting until the hours of darkness was a stupid move.

2) I was surprised at the decision. I do believe that the cop was justified in shooting Brown. However, I find it difficult to believe he was forced to empty his gun in doing so. That was overkill, and should have resulted in manslaughter charges. I am not privileged to see all the evidence, but that is my opinion. Having said that, I don't think a different outcome would have resulted in no riots or violence. The announcement was, for a small yet very visible group, simply an excuse to get a jump on Black Friday shopping. I do not view the protesters in the same group as the rioters.

3) This should serve as yet another example of how one should not rely on any government agency to "come to the rescue". The probability of riots and violence was high, and everyone knew it for months leading up to this. Still, businesses burned to the ground and property was destroyed. The police are not required to protect you. Very few people know this.

Rusty Jones
11-26-2014, 01:43 PM
The police are not required to protect you. Very few people know this.

We should disband all police departments then. If they're not required to required to protect you, then why are they even there?

Mata Leao
11-26-2014, 01:50 PM
If you don't know what the conversation should be, how are you so sure it isn't racial?

From what I am hearing in the black community, law abiding black citizens are tired of being treated like thugs each time they encounter the police.

Perhaps the conversation should start there.

Since I wasn't there I can only go by what is reported. From that, it is my belief the same situation and outcome would occur regardless of race. Unfortunately Brown isn't here to tell his side and I'm sure the cop would have hoped for a different outcome.

efmbman
11-26-2014, 01:54 PM
We should disband all police departments then. If they're not required to required to protect you, then why are they even there?

An excellent question... one that was ignored when the ruling was made back in 1981. It seems to be a "have it both ways" situation. The police very rarely endorse someone taking the law into their own hands, but at the same time do not have a specific duty to provide police services to individuals.

Absinthe Anecdote
11-26-2014, 02:01 PM
Frankly, I think the police intentionally let that town burn the first night. You won't hear that from official sources, but it is a common strategy in dealing with civil unrest.

Let the rioters do some damage so the wider public sees it as justified when the police do move in with force. It also allows some of the momentum of the rioters to dissipate.

If the rioters were confronted directly with overwhelming force last night, there would be even more people on the streets today.

Believe me, crowd control and riot procedures are studied and taught in US law enforcement agencies.

That was a calculated non-response last night. Same as the LA riots of 1994, the police pulled back for a while to let the riot lose some momentum.

socal1200r
11-26-2014, 02:28 PM
One less thug from the gene pool...what's the problem?

Absinthe Anecdote
11-26-2014, 02:40 PM
Since I wasn't there I can only go by what is reported. From that, it is my belief the same situation and outcome would occur regardless of race. Unfortunately Brown isn't here to tell his side and I'm sure the cop would have hoped for a different outcome.

Huh?

What actually happened in this shooting is really irrelevant.

The reason people are rioting and protesting are because of a wider perception of blacks being treated unfairly by police, and the courts.

What actually happened to Michael Brown is irrelevant at this point, it was just a spark that ignited unrest over a bigger issue.

Rusty Jones
11-26-2014, 02:50 PM
One less thug from the gene pool...what's the problem?

You know, I was discussing this with my wife last night. You go on facebook, and your local news channel's page posts an article with a mugshot of a black person who got arrested. Look at the comments, and you see shit like this.

In all honestly, I think that this is how they'd REALLY like to talk about black people IN GENERAL... but they can't. The opportunity, of course, presents itself when a black person makes the news and is being charged with a crime. Of course, now the fools making the comments are able to let it all out... what they think of black people, they can say it about the person in the article.

And THAT, I believe, is what socal is doing.

Absinthe Anecdote
11-26-2014, 03:14 PM
You know, I was discussing this with my wife last night. You go on facebook, and your local news channel's page posts an article with a mugshot of a black person who got arrested. Look at the comments, and you see shit like this.

In all honestly, I think that this is how they'd REALLY like to talk about black people IN GENERAL... but they can't. The opportunity, of course, presents itself when a black person makes the news and is being charged with a crime. Of course, now the fools making the comments are able to let it all out... what they think of black people, they can say it about the person in the article.

And THAT, I believe, is what socal is doing.

I'm curious, what do black dudes say about whites in private?

Not baiting you, sincere question.

It has been a very long time since I was around white dudes that said racist shit. Back in the 1980s I'd hear it, but that was when I was an AF cop. Intel guys didn't say stuff like that.

I don't know if that was due to the age level of the type of people I was around back then, but I think so.

Maybe education level has something to do with it too. Intel troops are generally better educated than AF cops.

Rusty Jones
11-26-2014, 03:38 PM
I'm curious, what do black dudes say about whites in private?

Not baiting you, sincere question.

It has been a very long time since I was around white dudes that said racist shit. Back in the 1980s I'd hear it, but that was when I was an AF cop. Intel guys didn't say stuff like that.

I don't know if that was due to the age level of the type of people I was around back then, but I think so.

Maybe education level has something to do with it too. Intel troops are generally better educated than AF cops.



What you see is what you get. In the social sense, a black person probably has little to nothing to lose by speaking ill of whites, if that's how they personally feel. It's different with whites, but that's slowly but surely changing - afterall, whites can now protect themselves from any loss they may incur simply by using terms like "race card" and "race baiting."

However, what likely isn't spoken of around whites are internal issues within the black community - mostly out of worry that inclusion of whites in such discussions will invite external judgement. I personally don't mind, and I'll discuss those issues here. Also, the things I discuss here as far as privilege goes; same thing.

The problem is, let's be honest, I don't think that whites are generally comfortable talking about race... and when many do, they're speaking passive aggressively (eg, "Where's Al Sharpton," etc). I think that that makes many blacks keep such conversations within their own circle; but at the same time, I'm under the believe that nothing can change unless that discussion comes out of the circle.

That's basically it.

Though, I'll be honest with you... when I was driving taxis, I was often mistaken for Middle Eastern and I can recall a few times when I heard people saying racist things about blacks. I never said anything either, because I really wanted to let them continue so that I could really listen in on what they were saying.

The worst situation, believe it or not, involved a black person. I picked up a group of people who were visiting from Germany - it was two white men and a black woman. I was taking them downtown, and I drove through the intersection of Church St and Brambleton - and one of the white guys noticed the BP station where their were black people standing in line at the window buying gas. He said, in a humorous tone, "Uh oh! What's happening?" The black woman, with her thick German accent, said "Look at all those n***ers!"

TJMAC77SP
11-26-2014, 03:50 PM
I have been puzzled that no thread on the Brown shooting has appeared on the MTF until now. We go on ad nauseam about the most mundane topics but this one gets ignored. Probably due in part to the predictable posts that would appear.

As usual in these situations both sides think they are right (or at least strongly profess that stance) and equally typical have oversimplified the problem.

The cops and those that support them simply point to the 'thuggish' black man and his aggression.

The black community cites the ever present attitude and behavior of the cops in their neighborhoods.

Two positions, both with some merit so if you sit in one of those camps, you must be right and the other 'guy' must be totally wrong.

Those that support the cops must come to realize that there is an attitude which prevails when dealing with the residents of the poorer neighborhoods. While in a large part it is completely understandable you have to come to understand that it only adds to the problem and actually adds to the burden of the police. I have heard comments about the need for communication from many in law enforcement in the aftermath of this and I hope as the St Louis County DA stated that it doesn't just fade away.

Unfortunately the attitude from the black community is that the communication needs to only be improved from the police side of the equation. There is no talk of addressing a cultural mindset that says nothing about one of it's members challenging the police in every situation. I haven't heard a single person who supports Michael Brown state anything at all (other than to minimize or refute) about HIS behavior on that day or on a broader scale the behavior in these poorer neighborhoods.

I watched Nightline broadcast from a barbershop in St Louis last night as they aired the interview with Officer Wilson. They dismissed everything he said completely out of hand and said he was lying. The alternative you are left with is that they believed the witness testimony (the witnesses that didn't corroborate Wilson's testimony that is) which has been in most cases has been refuted by forensic evidence. The shooting in the back. Standing over Brown shooting him in the head. No altercation or shots at the vehicle, etc. They didn't like his attitude, didn't like that he didn't express remorse. This in the face of the fact that he did express remorse. Would it have been better for him to break down in tears or rage at the camera. I feel pretty confident that he has done both since August but as a professional knows that doesn't get the job done.

No one seems to be willing to discuss why officials knew they needed to prepare for riots in the wake of the announcement. Why is it that rioting and looting are expected (and usually occur) as an aftermath of these situations? Is anyone in the black community embarrassed by this? If so, where is their voice. I have heard it explained as being the work of some small number of agitators. Anyone who watched the coverage from Ferguson two nights ago knows this is just simply a lie. Why is their not outrage (expressed outrage) at this despicable behavior?

It isn't simply a function of being poor. I just don't believe that. I think a lot of work needs to be done but unfortunately the first step is for all parties to acknowledge this and acknowledge the part their particular community (police and black) plays in the problem.

About 8 years ago the local Charlotte newspaper ran a story about suspensions in Charlotte schools and they detailed the racial demographics of the students suspended. Black students, particularly males were overrepresented. The article went on to include input from a 'diversity counselor' who described how teachers need to be aware of the cultural background of their student when dealing with matters of discipline. The example she gave is of an 8 year old boy who back talks a teacher (the example she gave was more crude but I can't remember the exact words). She then said the teacher should know that this boy just learns this in his neighborhood. He has to react this way to any challenge. The intimation being that this behavior should be viewed as acceptable in the light of these 'facts'. Aside from the complete absurdity of the notion itself why, if this is true, is this the nature of this boy's neighborhood. I grew up fairly poor (I was a ward of the state from the age of three so was in foster homes. Very few foster parents are well off). This wasn't a fact (this attitude) in any neighborhood I ever lived in. Being poor is never a valid reason for bad behavior.

If the parties involved want to have meaningful, honest and complete discussions there might be progress. If not, we will see stories like this time and again.

Picture this scenario (as described by Officer Wilson). Cop tells two males they shouldn't walk in the middle of the road (which by anyone's thinking should make sense). The two males get on the sidewalk. They both keep living, the cop goes to lunch.

TJMAC77SP
11-26-2014, 03:52 PM
I'm curious, what do black dudes say about whites in private?

Not baiting you, sincere question.

It has been a very long time since I was around white dudes that said racist shit. Back in the 1980s I'd hear it, but that was when I was an AF cop. Intel guys didn't say stuff like that.

I don't know if that was due to the age level of the type of people I was around back then, but I think so.

Maybe education level has something to do with it too. Intel troops are generally better educated than AF cops.

You could be right about the education and age factors. As a cop I too witnessed racial bullshit (admittedly pretty minor stuff) from whites and blacks during those times. I found though that both got pretty marginalized (to include within their own groups) though.

TJMAC77SP
11-26-2014, 03:59 PM
What you see is what you get. In the social sense, a black person probably has little to nothing to lose by speaking ill of whites, if that's how they personally feel. It's different with whites, but that's slowly but surely changing - afterall, whites can now protect themselves from any loss they may incur simply by using terms like "race card" and "race baiting."

However, what likely isn't spoken of around whites are internal issues within the black community - mostly out of worry that inclusion of whites in such discussions will invite external judgement. I personally don't mind, and I'll discuss those issues here. Also, the things I discuss here as far as privilege goes; same thing.

The problem is, let's be honest, I don't think that whites are generally comfortable talking about race... and when many do, they're speaking passive aggressively (eg, "Where's Al Sharpton," etc). I think that that makes many blacks keep such conversations within their own circle; but at the same time, I'm under the believe that nothing can change unless that discussion comes out of the circle.

That's basically it.

Though, I'll be honest with you... when I was driving taxis, I was often mistaken for Middle Eastern and I can recall a few times when I heard people saying racist things about blacks. I never said anything either, because I really wanted to let them continue so that I could really listen in on what they were saying.

The worst situation, believe it or not, involved a black person. I picked up a group of people who were visiting from Germany - it was two white men and a black woman. I was taking them downtown, and I drove through the intersection of Church St and Brambleton - and one of the white guys noticed the BP station where their were black people standing in line at the window buying gas. He said, in a humorous tone, "Uh oh! What's happening?" The black woman, with her thick German accent, said "Look at all those n***ers!"

Rusty,

It does need to come out of the circle. While there will be admittedly a small portion of whites who will exploit anything a black person says about the black community for the most part it will be seen in a positive light just as a cop acknowledging work that needs to be done on their side.

I have to say though that nothing will ever convince me that Sharpton brings anything positive to any situation involving the black community. If mere publicity is viewed as a positive then I can understand the thinking (I don't agree with that however) but the truth is that he does nothing to help anymore than David Duke would in a situation like this. It doesn't help anything even if 100% of the black population agrees with him (and I sincerely don't believe that). MLK was and is admired by whites and blacks (and were he alive I am sure he would be at the head of a huge march in Ferguson). Why the difference? It is a rhetorical question because quite frankly the black community is going to have to censure Sharpton themselves. Nothing negative any white person says about him, regardless of how true, is going to help.

Rainmaker
11-26-2014, 04:46 PM
Rainmaker doesn't want to be falsley smeared again for "having enmity for another part of humanity". So, He'll try and take race and the agent provocateur out of it, in order to temper the message for you sensitive types.

Now, Poverty is the greatest scourge on the face of the planet. If these bums that are destroying their own neighborhood, had jobs worth taking (because, they paid more than sitting on your ass), it would solve a lot of these issues. There is Dignity in work.

instead of burning down their own formerly halfway functional town (which will never recover now) They should be exercising the right to peaceably assemble to protest the masters of the .gov plantation sending jobs overseas and bringing in formerly illegal labor to bring down wages here and keep them continually dependent and disfunctional.

The disgraceful shit is counter productive and can only result in further contempt from the rest of the citizenry of the country.

TJMAC77SP
11-26-2014, 05:11 PM
1) It was very irresponsible for the announcement to be made at such a late hour. Controlling a mob is difficult in daylight, but waiting until the hours of darkness was a stupid move.

2) I was surprised at the decision. I do believe that the cop was justified in shooting Brown. However, I find it difficult to believe he was forced to empty his gun in doing so. That was overkill, and should have resulted in manslaughter charges. I am not privileged to see all the evidence, but that is my opinion. Having said that, I don't think a different outcome would have resulted in no riots or violence. The announcement was, for a small yet very visible group, simply an excuse to get a jump on Black Friday shopping. I do not view the protesters in the same group as the rioters.

3) This should serve as yet another example of how one should not rely on any government agency to "come to the rescue". The probability of riots and violence was high, and everyone knew it for months leading up to this. Still, businesses burned to the ground and property was destroyed. The police are not required to protect you. Very few people know this.

I overlooked this in my first reading this morning. A few comments:

1. I agree. When they announced the decision would be released at 8:00pm I wondered what that was about. I don't think it was some conspiracy but it was a bad decision. It's hard to even excuse this as hindsight.

2. The number of rounds does not equate to manslaughter. One bullet fired could lead to that charge. Listen to Wilson's interview. He spells out why the number of rounds and the timeline. I plan to get into the GJ evidence over the next few days. Should be interesting reading. The looting and burning was not conducted by a 'small group' there were dozens and dozens on camera looting and burning. In every case they came out of the crowd of protestors. I did hear reporting that there were some protestors trying to get a reign on the violence but unfortunately the cry of "Burn this bitch down" was a bit too hard to resist.

3. I spent over 25 years as a cop and I always believed and still do that an integral part of my duty was to protect citizens. I am not sure how you come to your assertion. Can you explain?

Rainmaker
11-26-2014, 05:17 PM
I overlooked this in my first reading this morning. A few comments:

1. I agree. When they announced the decision would be released at 8:00pm I wondered what that was about. I don't think it was some conspiracy but it was a bad decision. It's hard to even excuse this as hindsight.

2. The number of rounds does not equate to manslaughter. One bullet fired could lead to that charge. Listen to Wilson's interview. He spells out why the number of rounds and the timeline. I plan to get into the GJ evidence over the next few days. Should be interesting reading. The looting and burning was not conducted by a 'small group' there were dozens and dozens on camera looting and burning. In every case they came out of the crowd of protestors. I did hear reporting that there were some protestors trying to get a reign on the violence but unfortunately the cry of "Burn this bitch down" was a bit too hard to resist.

3. I spent over 25 years as a cop and I always believed and still do that an integral part of my duty was to protect citizens. I am not sure how you come to your assertion. Can you explain?

8:00 pm. Just in time for Prime time. If you think that's purely coincidental, then Rainmaker's got some Ocean front property in Arizona to show ya.

efmbman
11-26-2014, 05:20 PM
3. I spent over 25 years as a cop and I always believed and still do that an integral part of my duty was to protect citizens. I am not sure how you come to your assertion. Can you explain?

Warren v. District of Columbia - the Wiki can give the quick and dirty version. There are links to scholarly articles from there.

Measure Man
11-26-2014, 05:46 PM
1) It was very irresponsible for the announcement to be made at such a late hour. Controlling a mob is difficult in daylight, but waiting until the hours of darkness was a stupid move.

I thought that at first, too....but, then I thought this was probably better than doing it during the business/school day when more innocent people were out and about.

TJMAC77SP
11-26-2014, 06:09 PM
8:00 pm. Just in time for Prime time. If you think that's purely coincidental, then Rainmaker's got some Ocean front property in Arizona to show ya.

So what (besides a bad decision) do you think the 'real' reason for the timing was?

Rainmaker
11-26-2014, 06:18 PM
I thought that at first, too....but, then I thought this was probably better than doing it during the business/school day when more innocent people were out and about.

They were just following the Cloward-Piven strategy, incite a race riot, + 8:00 pm was chosen time so that the Divider in Chief could interrupt Monday Night Football, while appearing Presidential, as the voice of reason urging calm. and delivering the Mass psychological effect.

Anderson Cooper was practically wetting his panties waiting for the chaos to ensue. Funny how the presstitutes on CNN kept saying how the grand jury "failed" to indict. So much for the media calling for due process and the rule of law.

Now, they are crying that jury only had 3 blacks on it, which was about right since, ST. Louis county is 70% white. The MSM would have us believe Ferguson was some 3rd world inner city slum before this thug robbed a stab and jab and got his fat ass shot. it wasn't (But, will be forever more)

Fortunately it fizzled out, as all but, the most brain dead of the sheeple are starting to see through this BS.

Rainmaker headed to the Bugout location to deep fry a bird and watch Football. Happy Thanksgiving Men...

TJMAC77SP
11-26-2014, 06:25 PM
Warren v. District of Columbia - the Wiki can give the quick and dirty version. There are links to scholarly articles from there.

Interesting but I would argue that there is a difference between the liability of a government (in this case the police) to an individual and to the public at large.

Bottom line is it is a matter of money. The case you cited limits the liability of the police to a particular person. In the absence of that liability I can foresee every victim of a crime suing the police for damages.

It is a bit of splitting hairs but I believe that the public duty doctrine does in fact obligate the police to protect the public.

I suppose your statement is true if you view your use of the word 'you' in the second person singular vs the third person plural.

Stalwart
11-26-2014, 07:44 PM
So what (besides a bad decision) do you think the 'real' reason for the timing was?

Could be that the Prosecutor knew he would be on nation-wide TV, and there is a much larger audience at 2000 than at 1400. Why would he want the larger audience? Maybe an aspiration for higher office, maybe just to bolster his home-town recognition come reelection time ... maybe just taking his 15 minutes for all it is worth.

TJMAC77SP
11-26-2014, 10:19 PM
Could be that the Prosecutor knew he would be on nation-wide TV, and there is a much larger audience at 2000 than at 1400. Why would he want the larger audience? Maybe an aspiration for higher office, maybe just to bolster his home-town recognition come reelection time ... maybe just taking his 15 minutes for all it is worth.

I suppose any of that could be true. There is no evidence to support that but none to refute it. Either since we are speaking of internal motivations I suppose we will never know. Of course if he has ambitions for a higher office he is taking his sweet time about it since he has served in his current position since 1991.

garhkal
11-26-2014, 11:06 PM
It's spread to other cities around the country. Rioters have been blocking highways.

No matter what side you take, this is just absolutely disgraceful.

I'd like to know why it is the national guard/police seem to be just LETTING it happen? Did the politicians/Governors/DOJ tell them to "Not shoot the looters and arsonists, cause it will inflame the violence'? If so, why even have them out on the streets, just standing there?



Blocking highways, by the way, is not part of "rioting."

Its not part of the rioting, but how is it even legal?


What irks me is how no one in the black community is taking notice of this, but there only seems to be an uproar when black men are the victims of an injustice... but what about the women? Many stories have popped up on Cop Block and other sources about unarmed black women, some of whom were pregnant, being shot or even beaten to death by police officers who then go on to keep their jobs. No protests, no riots, no outrage at all... when, all other factors being equal, black women are easily the most vulnerable people in America.

Also, why do we not see this level of outrage at all the black on black crime, like in Chicago?


If you don't know what the conversation should be, how are you so sure it isn't racial?

From what I am hearing in the black community, law abiding black citizens are tired of being treated like thugs each time they encounter the police.

Perhaps the conversation should start there.

And maybe they should stop acting like thugs.



The police are not required to protect you. Very few people know this.We should disband all police departments then. If they're not required to required to protect you, then why are they even there?

Good question RJ. If the police are NOT required to protect people, why have so many of them? Why have so many different levels (city, district, state, county etc)?


Frankly, I think the police intentionally let that town burn the first night. You won't hear that from official sources, but it is a common strategy in dealing with civil unrest.

Let the rioters do some damage so the wider public sees it as justified when the police do move in with force. It also allows some of the momentum of the rioters to dissipate.

If the rioters were confronted directly with overwhelming force last night, there would be even more people on the streets today.

Believe me, crowd control and riot procedures are studied and taught in US law enforcement agencies.

That was a calculated non-response last night. Same as the LA riots of 1994, the police pulled back for a while to let the riot lose some momentum.

If that's true, then can those who lost property SUE the cops for letting it happen?



Unfortunately the attitude from the black community is that the communication needs to only be improved from the police side of the equation. There is no talk of addressing a cultural mindset that says nothing about one of it's members challenging the police in every situation. I haven't heard a single person who supports Michael Brown state anything at all (other than to minimize or refute) about HIS behavior on that day or on a broader scale the behavior in these poorer neighborhoods.

What always gets me is a lot of these "inner city areas" complain how the cops don't do enough to protect them, but when the cops ARE there trying to solve crimes, they consistently hit a wall of "Didn't see nuthin, don't know nuthin". Communication and cooperation goes BOTH ways!



No one seems to be willing to discuss why officials knew they needed to prepare for riots in the wake of the announcement. Why is it that rioting and looting are expected (and usually occur) as an aftermath of these situations? Is anyone in the black community embarrassed by this? If so, where is their voice. I have heard it explained as being the work of some small number of agitators. Anyone who watched the coverage from Ferguson two nights ago knows this is just simply a lie. Why is their not outrage (expressed outrage) at this despicable behavior?

I'd like to know that too? You rarely if ever see these sorts of riots, demonstrations etc after a hispanic, asian or other "race's person" gets 'wrongfully killed' by cops. You never see this sort of violence from those communities after large scale disasters. It only seems to ever come from the one demographic of society. BLACK.
Yet when people point that out we get labeled racist, or profiling etc.

To me, if you don't want to be seen as fitting a stereotype, don't act like the stereotype.

The intimation being that this behavior should be viewed as acceptable in the light of these 'facts'. Aside from the complete absurdity of the notion itself why, if this is true, is this the nature of this boy's neighborhood.

It is strange how people do feel that 'how you were raised' should give one a pass when it comes to how you should act.


I grew up fairly poor (I was a ward of the state from the age of three so was in foster homes. Very few foster parents are well off). This wasn't a fact (this attitude) in any neighborhood I ever lived in. Being poor is never a valid reason for bad behavior.

Man that sucks. But thanks for sharing. I too was brought up poor, with my mother living in a Council estate/housing, receiving support and such, but i was raised to respect elders, superiors/those over me, not to expect things to be given to me, but to earn them. I messed up, i got spanked. Rarely did i mess up cause of it.
But maybe its cause i am white, and not black. So my 'mentality' is different.

Capt Alfredo
11-27-2014, 01:22 AM
Macro problem superimposed on micro situation. Seems like most on both sides of this issue are looking at an idealized version of both the policeman and the victim/criminal (depending on your bias). By the facts presented, this particular incident seems an unlikely exemplar for protesting and riots. That doesn't absolve the greater systemic problems that present themselves in both communities.

efmbman
11-27-2014, 02:26 PM
If that's true, then can those who lost property SUE the cops for letting it happen?

No, they can't. That's the main point of the Warren v District of Columbia decision reference earlier.

Absinthe Anecdote
11-27-2014, 02:56 PM
No, they can't. That's the main point of the Warren v District of Columbia decision reference earlier.

The police routinely make decisions not to engage people in the act of committing crimes.

Most of the time they can justify it as a tactical decision.

Sometimes it makes sense, sometimes not.

I think that limiting their liability in such cases is reasonable.

CORNELIUSSEON
11-28-2014, 10:16 PM
Ultimately, the blame falls on the Police Force that failed to issue their personnel non-lethal weapons that could have prevented the death in the first place. Likewise, if the Cop found the guy to be scary, he should have called for backup. Even if the backup couldn't arrive in time, knowing that a Supervisor was on the way would have injected a little caution into the situation.

TJMAC77SP
11-28-2014, 10:33 PM
Ultimately, the blame falls on the Police Force that failed to issue their personnel non-lethal weapons that could have prevented the death in the first place. Likewise, if the Cop found the guy to be scary, he should have called for backup. Even if the backup couldn't arrive in time, knowing that a Supervisor was on the way would have injected a little caution into the situation.

Ultimately you should actually read at least some of the evidence of the incident.

Juggs
11-29-2014, 01:15 AM
www.copblock.org

Check them out on facebook too. It's a website (and facebook fan page) with updates every few hours on instances of police brutality that goes unpunished - many of the ones they post, end with innocent people being killed by police.


Most of the folks that run cob block have records a mile long involving thing from possession of controlled substances to lewd acts with minors. Yea I trust those clowns.

Juggs
11-29-2014, 01:18 AM
Ultimately, the blame falls on the Police Force that failed to issue their personnel non-lethal weapons that could have prevented the death in the first place. Likewise, if the Cop found the guy to be scary, he should have called for backup. Even if the backup couldn't arrive in time, knowing that a Supervisor was on the way would have injected a little caution into the situation.

The blame lands on the clown that attacked a cop. That's where the buck stops.

TJMAC77SP
11-29-2014, 01:35 AM
Most of the folks that run cob block have records a mile long involving thing from possession of controlled substances to lewd acts with minors. Yea I trust those clowns.

I don't have any information on the criminal records of Ademo Freeman or any of his fellow staff members (other than his overturned conviction for wiretapping in relation to activities for his website). I will say though that CopBlock (ya gotta love the sense of humor used in creating the name) does bring to light some legitimate cop misconduct. Unfortunately the flavor left is that this is a common occurrence rather than the exception. Let's face it, cops acting professionally is boring and doesn't make good video footage.

Juggs
11-29-2014, 01:42 AM
I don't have any information on the criminal records of Ademo Freeman or any of his fellow staff members (other than his overturned conviction for wiretapping in relation to activities for his website). I will say though that CopBlock (ya gotta love the sense of humor used in creating the name) does bring to light some legitimate cop misconduct. Unfortunately the flavor left is that this is a common occurrence rather than the exception. Let's face it, cops acting professionally is boring and doesn't make good video footage.

I have read many of the cop block folks histories and many of the appear to be dead beats that are they can't break the law so now they just chase down cops trying to find the cop doing anything wrong.

You're correct though, they certainly won't share type of run ins with cops that are pleasant, which most of them are for me.

I just make it a habit of not breaking the law. Then I don't have to worry about it.

TJMAC77SP
11-29-2014, 02:31 AM
I have read many of the cop block folks histories and many of the appear to be dead beats that are they can't break the law so now they just chase down cops trying to find the cop doing anything wrong.

You're correct though, they certainly won't share type of run ins with cops that are pleasant, which most of them are for me.

I just make it a habit of not breaking the law. Then I don't have to worry about it.

We had a discussion along these lines when resident-douchebag PYB was vomiting all over the MTF. I believe the number of annual police encounters was around 2 million and the small number of incidents involving abuse amounted to some miniscule percentage (like in the thousandths of a percentage).

I think we all inherently dislike anyone who exercises authority so whenever there is a chance to take a shot at such a person it is like chum in a school of sharks (I think there is another name for that but don't feel like Googling it).

BTW: For anyone interested PYB's epic case against the CBP (Border Patrol) was completely dismissed.

CORNELIUSSEON
12-08-2014, 03:57 AM
I don't need to read about the "Evidence", the Video shows what happened. The Choke Hold has been against NYPD policy for at least 20 years, which explains why he is currently Relieved From Duty, and faces the NYPD version of a Court Martial, and a Federal Investigation that will look into the Civil Rights Violations that he faces. If he had just called for his Supervisor to back him up, he wouldn't be facing the charges he is currently facing. In any event, he won't be a cop anymore because he thinks the NYPD Policy is less important than he is.

TJMAC77SP
12-08-2014, 05:04 AM
I don't need to read about the "Evidence", the Video shows what happened. The Choke Hold has been against NYPD policy for at least 20 years, which explains why he is currently Relieved From Duty, and faces the NYPD version of a Court Martial, and a Federal Investigation that will look into the Civil Rights Violations that he faces. If he had just called for his Supervisor to back him up, he wouldn't be facing the charges he is currently facing. In any event, he won't be a cop anymore because he thinks the NYPD Policy is less important than he is.

While I am not surprised in the least that you are not interested in reading or listening to any evidence there is evidence nonetheless. He will face a departmental hearing which I don't think of as a 'court martial' but whatever you think. Not sure of what that point was.

As for calling "for his Supervisor to back him up", there evidently was a sergeant on scene during the incident. Funny how the video which has been broadcast doesn't show that. Oh, she is a black female.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/04/peter-king-eric-garner-racism_n_6269152.html

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/12/05/garners-daughter-says-dads-death-not-a-racial-issue-don-lemon-baffled-163309

Finally, did you know that the patrolman's union backs him up totally. A union can't be wrong can they?

Rainmaker
12-08-2014, 03:49 PM
If a pack of smokes didn't cost $15 bucks in NYC this never would've happened. This is the type of stuff you get when the government is too big. It's a lot like the harassment that goes on with traffic tickets. It becomes a self-licking ice cream cone that Police Departments use to fund themselves. Ultimately it just creates more ill will with the public than it's worth.

Rusty Jones
12-08-2014, 03:57 PM
If a pack of smokes didn't cost $15 bucks in NYC this never would've happened. This is the type of stuff you get when the government is too big. It's a lot like the harassment that goes on with traffic tickets. It becomes a self-licking ice cream cone that Police Departments use to fund themselves. Ultimately it just creates more ill will with the public than it's worth.

Advocacy for smaller government is not for the American people. It's for the protection of crony capitalism.

TJMAC77SP
12-08-2014, 04:17 PM
Advocacy for smaller government is not for the American people. It's for the protection of crony capitalism.

From the seats that advocate for bigger government I am sure that is exactly what it looks like.

Truth is there is some truth in the arguments of both sides. Trouble is that neither side admits to the motivation for their positions.

Absinthe Anecdote
12-08-2014, 04:51 PM
Advocacy for smaller government is not for the American people. It's for the protection of crony capitalism.

Please don't try to tell us a socialist model eliminates or even minimizes cronyism.

It doesn't, it makes it worse.

I was in the early research stages of starting two hotdog carts in Baltimore, but I abandoned the project after I found where my permits and licenses would allow me to operate the the carts.

The city planning officer that looked over my application package brought out a map and went over locations with me. You couldn't encroach on anyone's turf.

The prime spots around the inner harbor are city owned, and vendors on the fringes of good areas are entrenched and protected.

No room for new vendors to compete. They probably did me a favor by discouraging me anyway.

Lots of violence in the hotdog cart business, and it would have been a pain to keep good people running them.

My idea was to get them permitted and licensed, then up and running. Then sell them to someone else. Sort of like flipping, but it was just too much risk.

It would be damn naive to think a big socialist government wouldn't have cronies.

Shit, you get more powerful cronies under that model, and more of them too.

Rusty Jones
12-08-2014, 05:06 PM
Please don't try to tell us a socialist model eliminates or even minimizes cronyism.

It doesn't, it makes it worse.

I was in the early research stages of starting two hotdog carts in Baltimore, but I abandoned the project after I found where my permits and licenses would allow me to operate the the carts.

The city planning officer that looked over my application package brought out a map and went over locations with me. You couldn't encroach on anyone's turf.

The prime spots around the inner harbor are city owned, and vendors on the fringes of good areas are entrenched and protected.

No room for new vendors to compete. They probably did me a favor by discouraging me anyway.

Lots of violence in the hotdog cart business, and it would have been a pain to keep good people running them.

My idea was to get them permitted and licensed, then up and running. Then sell them to someone else. Sort of like flipping, but it was just too much risk.

It would be damn naive to think a big socialist government wouldn't have cronies.

Shit, you get more powerful cronies under that model, and more of them too.

Do you have examples of this going in socialist countries?

TJMAC77SP
12-08-2014, 05:32 PM
Do you have examples of this going in socialist countries?

Were you suggesting that the proponents of big government are socialist?

In any case I am not sure if that would be an apples to apples comparison. The US culture is one thing and the culture in another is just that, another.

CORNELIUSSEON
12-08-2014, 05:43 PM
Having been a Union Rep on the civilian job I took after leaving the Regular Army for the Guard, I know that Union Reps learn early that it is part of their job to defend the membership publicly, while ripping them a new one privately, if they do something really stupid. Any Union Rep who did otherwise would lose his next election. If the Sergeant was on the scene, and did nothing to prevent the use of the Choke Hold, then She is under investigation for "Failure to Properly Supervise", as is the other Patrolmen for not stopping the Patrolman who committed the Homicide, which is what the Coroner have ruled the death.

Absinthe Anecdote
12-08-2014, 07:02 PM
Do you have examples of this going in socialist countries?

Nope, just in an American city ran by liberal democrats who are at the left side of our political spectrum.

I did have the opportunity to go into Poland shortly after they ditched a socialist model in which the government owned the means of production.

It was drab, bleak and virtually no private enterprise going on. There was wealth and privilege though; however, it was in the hands of communists party officials and their cronies.

Today Poland has a lot of regular people making money and a better life.

Socialism breeds complete corruption if we look at history.

TJMAC77SP
12-08-2014, 07:15 PM
Having been a Union Rep on the civilian job I took after leaving the Regular Army for the Guard, I know that Union Reps learn early that it is part of their job to defend the membership publicly, while ripping them a new one privately, if they do something really stupid. Any Union Rep who did otherwise would lose his next election. If the Sergeant was on the scene, and did nothing to prevent the use of the Choke Hold, then She is under investigation for "Failure to Properly Supervise", as is the other Patrolmen for not stopping the Patrolman who committed the Homicide, which is what the Coroner have ruled the death.

So a union's primary job is to support the employee regardless of any egregious infraction? I have always known that but it is good to see it in print from a union guy.

So the sergeant is under investigation? Well everyone is under an IA investigation (which is protocol) but you are saying that she is facing departmental charges? Have they been formally brought against her?

You seem to be hung up on the coroner's ruling (for very transparent reasons). What would the death be ruled as had the cop shot Garner?

Rusty Jones
12-08-2014, 07:31 PM
Nope, just in an American city ran by liberal democrats who are at the left side of our political spectrum.

I did have the opportunity to go into Poland shortly after they ditched a socialist model in which the government owned the means of production.

It was drab, bleak and virtually no private enterprise going on. There was wealth and privilege though; however, it was in the hands of communists party officials and their cronies.

Today Poland has a lot of regular people making money and a better life.

Socialism breeds complete corruption if we look at history.

Poland's "socialism" wasn't the same as the kind the currently exists in Scandinavia or Germany. You're talking about the brand of socialism (Marxist-Leninist) that existed in a former Warsaw Pact country, imposed upon them by the Soviet Union.

Measure Man
12-08-2014, 07:32 PM
Having been a Union Rep on the civilian job I took after leaving the Regular Army for the Guard, I know that Union Reps learn early that it is part of their job to defend the membership publicly, while ripping them a new one privately, if they do something really stupid. Any Union Rep who did otherwise would lose his next election. If the Sergeant was on the scene, and did nothing to prevent the use of the Choke Hold, then She is under investigation for "Failure to Properly Supervise", as is the other Patrolmen for not stopping the Patrolman who committed the Homicide, which is what the Coroner have ruled the death.


So a union's primary job is to support the employee regardless of any egregious infraction? I have always know that but it is good to see it in print from a union guy.

The union officials I am familiar with...it is their job to represent the employee, much like a defense lawyer's job is to represent their client. So, the union official will generally attempt to present the most advantageous position for the employee.

I have never heard of a union official ripping an employee a new one privately...that is not their job. That is the supervisor's job.


So the sergeant is under investigation? Well everyone is under an IA investigation (which is protocol) but you are saying that she is facing departmental charges? Have they been formally brought against her?

You seem to be hung up on the coroner's ruling (for very transparent reasons). What would the death be ruled as had the cop shot Garner?

Still a homicide?

TJMAC77SP
12-08-2014, 07:54 PM
The union officials I am familiar with...it is their job to represent the employee, much like a defense lawyer's job is to represent their client. So, the union official will generally attempt to present the most advantageous position for the employee.

I have never heard of a union official ripping an employee a new one privately...that is not their job. That is the supervisor's job.

Union reps are not legal reps and are not (supposed to be) in an adversarial role. Of course real life is different isn't it?


Still a homicide?

Yes it would. I haven't seen the report but I doubt it was classified as a criminal homicide. In fact there is a huge uproar on why it was ruled that way given the other aggravating factors. I think the coroner was just doing what they do, looking at the mechanics of the death.

I admit that I usually try to find support for a cop whose actions have been questioned. Party because I was one for so many years but also because I know, particularly now, how absolutely moronic some reactions are to situations which various groups rush in and simplify a fairly complex incident to some neat sound bites which fit one agenda or another.

I have said this earlier and repeat it now....a discussion is due but it must be a two sided discussion where not only the end result is examined but the acts and attitudes that led to that end result. Change one and nothing changes.

One a side but related note, I relish the idea of every cop in this country wearing a body camera. I will make a prediction here and now that many will come to regret that greatly. There will be an initial negative reaction from the cops but eventually they will come around (I witnessed this first hand with dash cameras in cop cars) it will be John Q Public who will rue the day. Of course some will have to do it quietly or risk exposing their hypocrisy.

Every traffic stop for a violation will result in a citation issued. No more 'discretion'. IA will be randomly reviewing video footage.

The claims of overuse of force will quickly plummet as the violence of perpetrators is revealed.

I foresee "Asshat of the Week' releases from the police department. Of course they will label it a little more politically correct. Maricopa County, AZ will most likely lead the way on that effort.

Of course there is no blanket statement which is totally accurate. Some misconduct will be uncovered but the mere fact that they are wearing a camera will eliminate a lot of that.

All in all I look forward to seeing the results.

Absinthe Anecdote
12-08-2014, 08:46 PM
Poland's "socialism" wasn't the same as the kind the currently exists in Scandinavia or Germany. You're talking about the brand of socialism (Marxist-Leninist) that existed in a former Warsaw Pact country, imposed upon them by the Soviet Union.

Ah, it is the Ikea brand of socialism that you yearn for. You want to be one of those aging hippies that eats fondue, and putts around DuPont Circle in their Smart cars. I'm thinking those cats would snub the hell out of you.

Still, want a free market economy blended with a welfare state, right?

Rainmaker
12-08-2014, 09:25 PM
Advocacy for smaller government is not for the American people. It's for the protection of crony capitalism.

Did you hear what I just said Rusty?? $15 a Pack??!!!! The rent's too damn high!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHEitsYJnmw