Reasons why Ferguson and Eric Garner has to do with race. List below
In reality no legitimate evidence has come to light to prove or even support that either do. However, in terms of feeding the news cycle, lining the pockets of and getting publicity for race baiters as well as perpetuating certain agendas, exploiting these situations under the guise of race is turning out to be a veritable gold mine.
I actually mostly agree.
I don't believe the actions of either officer had to do with race.
However, I think the hard feelings and anger were fueled both by those with agendas and actual racism. There were plenty of both. I saw horrible, horrible things said about both of the deceased and those things often were race based. It just added to the powder-keg and high-lighted that there really is still a big problem.
And it works both ways. The things said about the cops (and cop) in Ferguson were horrible and were absolutely race based. Adding to the powder keg and highlighting that there is a big problem.
This country has too many making a living by fomenting racism to think that somehow stopping cops from it is going to solve anything. It will take far more than that, like a general re-evaluation by the man in the street.
I agree with both of you. There is plenty of racism on display, but the only thing it has to do with the stories is that they are being opportunistically exploited to promote it. Both sides have done it, without merit from the muse, although I feel it is disproportionate. Mostly it appears to be those who feel they have nothing to lose jumping on the bandwagon to see where it is going in hope of some gain. There is also a large contingent just feeding off creating, exploiting and perhaps even enjoying the conflict and discord.
@wilderness: The way cops handle and deal with people need to change. Tell me why a young boy of 18 got shot 7 times!!! Tell me why a man on the street got put into an illegal chokehold and taken down by more than 3 cops when he had his hands up and keep telling them he can't breathe.
In both those situations it was cold blooded murder by cops. I don't think the cops planned/wanted to kill these men but they did and they did it brutally using excessive force and cruelty. Justice must be made and reform must be in order.
By the way its clear that black lives are not important to the majority of America. Its sad but its true. People dying and others are not being honest and acknowledging the real issues!!!! SMH keep drinking the kool-aid
1. "Young boy" and 18 don't go together. A male of 18 years old is considered an adult - a man, not a "young boy".
2. Presumably he was shot 7 times because he kept coming..
3. I have no knowledge of the chokehold incident, but will say that a person that can't breathe can't talk, either. Is that just more of the typical exaggeration or is something else happening?
4. It may be clear to you that black lives are not important (most black racists will agree with that) but others will disagree. Including me.
1. 18, eighteen, for a couple months. He was born in May he died in August (3 months into "adulthood" I don''t believe you are an adult until you are 25 that's when your brain is fully developed. By the way EIGHTEEN IS STILL A TEENAGER (EIGHT-TEEN). Way to villianize a murder victim
2. Wilson fired a total of twelve rounds, Brown was hit by seven. So making sure someone unarmed is down and dead is justice. Ok I got it!!! Thanks for clearing that up for me. It logical to cry self defense when you are a train cop with a loaded gun and a unarmed teenager (who judging from his pictures was probably overweight and out of shape)
3. Research that and come back to me!
Overall it saddens me that you are trying to justify the murder of a young boy who is BLACK. Racism is ingrained in our culture. Instead of being defensive maybe you can at least try to Iisten to what protestors/blacks are saying
By the way I leave you with this picture
This picture only serves to make question whether those that were apprehended actually followed the lawful instructions of the police, and those who died resisted and failed to comply with a lawful order.
@Nyima Damchoe: Why would they want to follow the lawful instructions of the police after they murdered a whole bunch of people? The only reason I can think of is that they were too afraid to kill themselves or be killed so they went with police..........
What is really sad is that you have to spin the story violently to gain any sympathy for it.
The man (man, not child, regardless of being a teen) attacked a policeman. He was a thief, and ignored lawful orders of the police. He returned to attack again. How you decide to spin the age (and adulthood) has nothing to do with the law - it is your opinion and your spin, nothing more. Justice is not served on the streets, but in the court (something you should know). Safety is served on the streets, by cops that are NOT the givers of justice.
And yes, overall it saddens me greatly to see you turn a good cop, taking proper action against an attacker, into a racist monster. There was nothing racist about the Ferguson incident, at least until one race gathered to burn the town in "protest". And No, I'm not interested in listening to what such idiots have to say any more than I'm interested in hearing someone spin the incident for all they're worth in an effort to promote racial hatred.
@wilderness: What is really sad is that you have to spin the story violently to gain any sympathy for it. ..... I guess the same goes for you too !!!
The witnesses stories are mixed, some say the teen attacked him, some witnesses say the TEEN didn't. Justice was served in the streets in this case not in the courts. Trust and believe it is something I KNOW. In no way was justice even given a chance to be left to court. His fate (aka "justice") was decided for him, sadly
By the way I never said the cop was RACIST, you did, and maybe its something you truly believe in. The system is racist and you are clearly in complete denial (are you guilty about something?).
Overall, it saddens me that certain people turn a teen into a violent attacker and spin an incident to deny systematic racism doesn't exist. And No, I'm not interested in listening to what such idiots have to say any more than I'm interested in hearing someone spin the incident for all they're worth in an effort to promote delusion and a racist system that creates benefits some and punish others.
By this picture, one would think there were only 16 incidents in the whole country. What it does NOT show is what happens to people who resist arrest regardless of race. Also, some of those killers, like the Joker, wanted to be apprehended to get more famous.
BUT because of people like you who puff and distort and fuel hatred, it's open season on cops. An officer was shot in Baltimore last night right after a street protest. I bad you are kind of glad. Aren't you?
1) Because he attacked a police officer, injured him, attempted to take his firearm causing it to discharge, disobeyed a lawful order to stop and continued his attack on the police officer. Michael Brown set his path on violence and squandered his life in its pursuit.
2) Neither was in cold blood, both were in the course of making and arrest. The case in New York has every one disturbed - this man did not resist arrest, was being arrested for a very minor violation of (many conservative believe foolish and destructive) law, was surrounded by police who had been ordered by a liberal mayor to crack down on cigarettes, lead by a black woman sergeant. Very different then Ferguson.
3) Black men are killing black men at a phenomenal rate, yet any white person speaks out about this phenomenon is labeled racist and compelled to silence. Conservative America does value black lives. The question is does black America and liberal America value black lives? There is a problem and it is that too many young black men set themselves on a path of violence. It is lazy reasoning to use "racism" as the cause, it is far more complex. The destruction of the black family by the welfare state and the eugenics efforts of Planned Parenthood has extreme and far reaching consequences.
1. I'll give you that (the robbing store part). The part about attacking an officer is hearsay, witnesses recount different/ opposing stories. So we will never know what really happen. If I may ask so because he robbed a store he deserves to get shot 7 times?
2. The Eric Garner one is the I am more outraged about. Its not disturbed, it was simply murder.
3. White people kill white people probably at "phenomenal rate" too!!!! People in general kill people!!!! I am not justifying anything cuss killing/murder/violence is wrong, but your point is well kinda pointless.... I do agree racism is complex. For both of your questions, it depends. I do believe people are generally good and have the ability to choose to care. BUT the system needs to change. People may care (perhaps on an individual level, idk) , but the SYSTEM doesn't. These cases showcases this sad truth!
I quote: "In both those situations it was cold blooded murder by cops. I don't think the cops planned/wanted to kill these men but they did and they did it brutally using excessive force and cruelty." If it was "cold blooded murder" it had to be "the killer" wanted to kill. Either that, or it wasn't cold blooded. Be consistent.
I just heard that cops are trained to kill, rather than be killed. It is in the training. They get used to killing and people dying. Its just part of the job. Meanwhile, all us gunless civilians are freaking out. As long as police have guns, over-reactions once in a while are going to take place. We do not live in a civilized society as I had once thought. We live in an uncivilized society where everyone needs a gun. If you don't own a gun, you really need to get with the program. Also all citizens should be allowed to carry personal guns (PG's) at all times. And children need to be taught how to handle a PG as soon as the parents feels they are old enough. And when they are young, they may play with toy PGs, as long they don't aim them at other human beings.
Stopping the cops "from it"? Clearly, it was not racism. Garner's video broke my heart, but the same could happen to a white man, same with the so-called 'gentle giant', and same for me. There is a very real purpose behind all these ginned up protests by CNN -- and not just ratings, can't see that. Sad state for the country.
@bBerean: I somewhat disagree!!! There were 9 whites on the panel (3 blacks were also on the panel) on the Ferguson. Its not just a police thing (I do agree the police officers involved were wrong in this case). But it is a race thing too!!! They let killers roam free, the victims happened to be black, that's no coincidence. It's not race baiting its a reality.
I do agree that the media is stirring the drama and instigating but this is reality. Stop and frisk, the murder on black men, its part of systematic racism
You do realize that you just implied that the 9 white members of the jury were racist and voted for no indictment because of their racism... right?
Do you assume that all white people are racist?
@MelissaBarrett: I am not assuming anything and please don't put words into my mouth Are you assuming something?
I am stating facts, there were 9 white members in the panel (which says a lot).
P.S. Racism built this country and most of the world (especially the western world). Its ingrained in our culture and the system has and still is unfair to black people. Racism is not dead
No, it is not dead, but I'm also certain it's not quite as prevalent as you think it is. 9 out of 12 jurors being white is actually a pretty good distribution. African Americans are about 13 percent of the US population yet the jury was 25% black. I see no logical reason why the distribution should have been any higher. Is there a reason juries should be racially disproportionate to national population?
Now, that being said... I would have voted no to indictment in ferguson and yes to indictment in NY. Having read the grand jury testimony and seen the evidence in the former (it's all available) and read some of the same in the later, I would have been legally bound.
I don't believe race was an issue in either. Ferguson was a good shoot. It sucked, but the cop did what he needed to do. New York was a jack-ass cop with issues. Such people exist... No racism needed.
@MelissaBarrett: I understand all your points but 9 out 12 panel were white and from what I understand white people do not make up 75 percent of the US population (they make up between 73-77% of the popular) So in both situations the panel mis-represented the actual population distribution. I have a feeling they added 2 more blacks to give the impression of a fair trial (which was not the case).
Why I feel the Ferguson case was handled poorly and has to do with race:
1. Did you hear and watch the video of Forensic Pathologist Cyril Wecht (if you haven't here's the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWUkBxmFUvU). Pretty much he's saying that the way Darren Wilson's account of the events that left Mike Brown dead is forensically not true. Darren shot to kill (and he overkilled Mike). He stood over Mike and shot him several times. Granted Mike was a large boy, 6'4 and Darren 6'1. Even so, 7 shots and shooting him when he was already down? It seems he was trying to tranquilize/put Mike to sleep
2. Also you should check out the huffington post article (link here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/2 … 20814.html). Pretty much this article accounts the discrepancies and holes In investigation that were intentionally made by the investigation.
1. Wilson washed away blood evidence. 2 The first officer to interview Wilson failed to take any notes. 3. Investigators failed to measure the likely distance between Brown and Wilson.4. Investigators did not test Wilson’s gun for fingerprints. 5. Wilson did not immediately turn his weapon over to investigators after killing Brown. 6. An initial interview with investigators was delayed while Wilson traveled to the hospital with his superiors.7. Wilson’s initial interview with the detective conflicts with information given in later testimony. .... Read the article to understand it more.
It is clear from this article, Darren and his fellow cops covered for each other backs and threw this "investigation" To argue for these 9 whites panel they had not choice but to not indict him (because justice was screwed over by poor investigation/evidence). I do have a strong feeling if the investigation was handled properly they still wouldn't indict Darren (especially in contrast to Eric Garner when it's pretty obvious what is going on)
3. His body laid on the ground for at least 4 hours, Overall all of this shows they do not have any compassion for Mike Brown. Just like there is no compassion for Eric Garner. I watched several videos of his last moments. In one video, he laid for 7 minutes not breathing/unconscious (waiting for an ambulance) and no attempts of no resuscitation. Pretending that he is not unconscious trying to wake him up. This the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vT66U_Ftdng . He laid their like cattle. Both died with no humanity or without justice. Both these cases speaks on the fact that black lives on not valued and important. Lastly I leave you this picture
If you still don't want to see the race, issue, I hope we can agree that the way cops handle and deal with people need to change. In both those situations it was cold blooded murder by cops. I don't think the cops planned/wanted to kill these men but they did and they did it brutally using excessive force and cruelty. Justice must be made and reform must be in order.
I heard and saw all of the evidence. Now, in general do I think the way cops deal with people needs to change? Honestly, not really. I would rather know that a police officer was going to do what he felt he needed to do to protect himself and others rather than worrying whether his actions were going to be upsetting to others. It's a rough job, damn rough, and I have nothing but respect for the organization.
Yes there are crappy shoots... they happen. It sucks. I'm not sure what changes you believe will stop that. I won't support any that tie our officer's hands though.
With that said, I resent the hell out of the mere insinuation that to find insufficient evidence for indictment somehow means that I- or anyone else- must be racist. I have a son that could literally pass for Brown's brother. 6'3, 350, African American, 20. If there was evidence that Ferguson was about race, I would have been all over it.
I also resent the hell out of anyone who thinks that anyone deserves to be shot, especially the "thug" comments and that crap. Yes, I do believe that is thinly veiled racism. I've seen less appealing comments that weren't veiled at all.
I'm also a mother who has lost a son, so the comments directed at Brown's family piss me off as well.
I'm also the daughter of a police officer. My husband is the son of a police officer. If either my father or my father-in-law used force, it was damn well necessary. It pisses me off to hear cops talked about like they are monsters when they are the ones protecting our butts every day.
So really, everybody just needs to take a step back and stop knee-jerking reacting. It was a set of really screwed up events that ruined lots of lives. And it's just possible, likely even from what I read, that it was just a tragedy... with everyone carrying part of the blame and no one carrying it all.
What I do know is that claiming something is racist with no proof whatsoever is actually more likely to cause racism than to fix it. So let's not turn it into an us vs. them thing.
@ I do agree that its a rough job and I do appreciate and respect cops in general. At the end of the day who are you going to call when someone rob you or assaulted your grandmother.
I mean changes such as body cameras (that can't be manipulated), new tactics/techniques that don't involve gun, promoted use of tasers, stunt guns and other less lethal weapons that can effectively take down suspects without killing them. Police arriving at reasonable times in minority/poor neighborhoods (not taking 4 hours to clean a dead boy off the pavement). The curbing of stop and frisk polices that are racist (profiling of minorities). Changes like that.
I felt Darren made a terrible/fatal mistake. Pursuing a suspect without back-up, I felt he stereotyped Michael Brown (I don't have proof of this but I truly believe that). He shot to kill, it wasn't crappy shoots (it was intentional and very knee jerked). He also did things (and his fellow cop friends) that undermined the investigation. This is not justice. I felt they handled this investigation poorly on purpose and I wonder if it will be the same if it were a white teen.
I understand you are close to this case. I am too!! I have brothers that I worry about and pray won't get shot by a cop.
What is your definition of racism? What would you qualify as proof of racism? What is not proof of racism? Do you think racism still exist? How and in what ways? Examples???
Its not us vs them, changes do need to be made in a flawed system. Even 1 unarmed civilian death is too many.
By the way what do you think about the Eric Garner case in NYC?
"I am stating facts, there were 9 white members in the panel (which says a lot)."
And what do you think it says if not that the jury was racist?
@wilderness: Those were not my words. Where did I mention that the jury was racist. If anything it is a product of a racist system that doesn't give black victims the righ of a fair trial and justice.
Is that what you meant then? That a jury composed of the same proportion as the populace in general is racist? That blacks can only get a fair trial with a disproportionately high percentage of blacks on a jury?
But wouldn't that be racist in itself - that blacks require a black jury to be fair?
@wilderness: Not at all, please don't put words (that I never wrote) in my mouth. Read, my comments again its pretty self-explanatory. By the way great way to deflect attention away from the points I am making. Bravo!!!!
Not sure what words you refer to as not coming from you.
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/127160#post2682561 contains the quote I gave: "I am stating facts, there were 9 white members in the panel (which says a lot).", of which I asked what it says if not racism. You haven't replied to the question yet, just complained that I misquoted or put words in your mouth. Will you now indicate what 9 white members has to say? Or sidestep again with another claim of false quotation?
@ wilderness: I am not sidestepping anything. The question you asked put words in my mouth and made wild assumptions/interpretations on stuff I did not say. In my original comment, I never mentioned what you asked of me at all.
This is your original comment:
Is that what you meant then? That a jury composed of the same proportion as the populace in general is racist? That blacks can only get a fair trial with a disproportionately high percentage of blacks on a jury?
But wouldn't that be racist in itself - that blacks require a black jury to be fair?
This is my original comment: I am stating facts, there were 9 white members in the panel (which says a lot).
Tell me where specifically I said the jury is racist nor was I saying that That blacks can only get a fair trial with a disproportionately high percentage of blacks on a jury. You made THOSE ASSUMPTIONS AND U MISQUOTED ME.
If you do need some clarification I said the system was racist. I didn't mention that the cop was racist or the jury was racist. Please read my comment before getting angry and defensive Thank You!
But it is a race thing too!!! That is from your post. It sounds like the race card to me, and I am not even American.
Law enforcement officers may use deadly force only when necessary, i.e. when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force posed an imminent danger of death or serious injury.
The issue with the cases you mention relate to the fact that many people believe the officers involved used unlawful force, i.e. force that was not justified. How does that relate to race?
You'll notice the use of deadly force is related to the belief of a threat, not an actual threat. So it is based on the officer's perception of a threat. This is where race potentially comes into play.
Studies have shown that black people are perceived as more of a threat than white people. For example:
So the perception of threat is affected by underlying stereotypes and/or racist assumptions. The use of deadly force is dependent on an officer's perception of a threat. Therefore there is a connection between underlying assumptions about race, and the use of deadly force.
Many people believe that the incidents you mention, are a manifestation of that connection between underlying assumptions about race and the use of deadly force. The belief is that deadly force was not used in these cases because of a reasonable perception of a threat, but because of a perception of threat based on racial stereotyping/ racist assumptions, which is unlawful. That is one of the reasons these two cases have been linked to race.
@Don W: you make a great point!!!! That is my reasoning, that incidents are in connection and were caused by a perception of threat made by stereotypes about race.
I feel the threat was exaggerated and I feel he didn't have to kill Mike! What is your opinion on the Ferguson case and the Eric Garner case in NYC?
I've seen lots of numbers being quoted that I think are relevant to the cases in Ferguson and NY as they are part of the wider picture. For example the point MelissaBarrett made that assaults are committed by a disproportionate number of black people.
It's important to recognise that these figures do not show the number of people that committed assaults, they show the number of people arrested for committing assault. It's an important difference, because the number of people arrested or convicted for a crime is influenced by the way police do their job. For example:
Arrest rates for possession of marijuana.
Based on this we might conclude that significantly more black people use marijuana than white, but . . .
Recorded marijuana usage:
Usage among black and white is almost the same (for 18 - 25 year olds it is greater for white people). So the fact that significantly more black people are arrested for possession of marijuana is not an indicator that significantly more black people commit that crime. It indicates there is a racial disparity in marijuana possession arrests. So if you are black and in possession of marijuana, you are 2.5 times more likely to be arrested than if you are white and in possession of marijuana.
Likewise, if you are black you are more likely to be searched during a traffic stop than if you are white. Again this has an impact on the number of people arrested for crimes. If you search a greater percentage of black people, then you are increasing the likelihood of detecting crime committed by black people, and decreasing the likelihood of detecting crime committed by white people.
Often this disproportionate targeting of black people cannot even be justified on operational grounds. E.g.
In Ferguson searches of vehicles driven by black people accounted for 92% of vehicle searches. Yet only 22% of black people searched resulted in the discovery of contraband, whereas 34% of white people searched resulted in the discovery of contraband. Likewise . . .
Percentage of stops resulting in a frisk in NY:
Percentage of frisks that resulted in a weapon being found in NY:
So even though from an operational perspective, frisking white people resulted in more weapons being found, black and latino people are still frisked more often.
This type of racial bias has a significant negative social impact in lots of different ways, not only for those who are targeted, but also society in general. Seeing more young black men being stopped and frisked reinforces a stereotype, which in turn influences underlying assumptions about young black men as being dangerous (even though the reality is that you are statistically more likely to find a weapon on a white person who is stopped in NY).
In my opinion it would be foolish and naive to separate the incidents involving Mike Brown and Eric Garner, from these wider issues relating to race and law enforcement in general. The police officers involved in both cases are part of society. They are not immune to the attitudes and assumptions prevalent in society. Everyone's behaviour is influenced by the attitudes and assumptions they make. The trick is in knowing when our behaviour is influenced in this way and doing something about it. Different behaviour from the officers involved or Mike Brown and Eric Garner could have averted both their deaths. But the officers are afforded with an authority other citizens do not have so I believe they must be held to a higher standard.
In both cases I believe the officers did not need to behave in the way they did. In the case of Brown, I do not believe use of deadly force was justified, and based on the physical evidence and testimony from eyewitnesses that I am aware of, I do not believe the officer's account of what happened. At the very least I think he should have been indicted and tried in front of a jury. However I do think there may be a case for reasonable doubt. In the case of Eric Garner, I believe there is no doubt. The use of deadly force was not justified, and therefore unlawful. I believe he should have been tried, and I strongly suspect he would have been found guilty, if not of murder, then certainly of a lesser charge such as manslaughter.
The most important point we have to take from all this is that this issue is about more than Mike Brown and Eric Garner. Those are only symptoms of the problem.
To get a better sense of those numbers, I would like to see socio-economic information as well...
I would guess that in both marijuana and car stops, there is a huge poor vs. privileged factor. A college student caught with a joint, for example, is probably less likely to be arrested for it than a 20 year old kid in a project. Is that a color thing or an economic thing?
Same with car stops. Does the make/model of the car effect stoppage?
I think you make some valid points, but we have to go deeper. We have to ask why. I'm not satisfied with the idea that every police officer or even most police officers are just racists. I think that's over-simplification and unrealistic. I'm also not buying the "big bully" theory.
I would also like to point out that to be arrested for marijuana, you have to actually have it in your possession. It makes the argument kind of moot for me. If you are arrested for possession, that means you have it. If you didn't then you wouldn't be arrested.
Along with socio-economic ties (or perhaps part of it) is the question of where the cops are. In the middle/upper class neighborhoods or in the ghettos? It's hard for a cop to make an arrest if he isn't there at all...
I agree with you that it would be very interesting to see socia-economic data tied in here. Are the poverty stricken arrested regardless of their skin color or are the poor blacks/hispanics still arrested in larger numbers than poor whites in the same neighborhood?
Funny... nobody needed socioeconomics for the other charts that said White people commit more crimes (until i do my little math trick to show that the black man is really the culprit).
@Cgenaea: The reason why nobody needed socioeconomics for the other charts ..... is because certain people on here are justifying a racist system. It is as clear as that!!!
When you see what you expect to see, you need nothing else. Your POINT, however ill-informed, has been proven to you.
I know black people. Most of them I know, are afraid to commit crimes or just not interested. My well-informed opinion, in a nutshell.
Thanks for truth, as it IS.
@Cgenaea: I do not understand what you mean?
Sorry. On the chart, it said that black people commit more crimes, IF you know your basic math. No one needed to see any other validation of that because it is what they expect to be true. Now when we get to the weed chart, that confirms that black people are targeted, we (some of us) need more info... socioeconomic factors. That chart is not "good" enough.
@Cgenaea: In my comments I am agreeing with that you are saying (from my understanding). The first chart you are talking about is the one, posted by Melissa right? and the charts where blacks are shown to be targeted posted by Don W.
What I have said is that certain people on here are justifying a racist system.
I'm with YOU! The idea that racism is just a whine used to get special treatment is utterly false. Racism exists. It is alive and well in communities that "deserve" it??? With their tattoos and "hate cop" sentiments...
No one acknowledges that people hate cops for a reason. Harassment, simply for being in their diverted path. Shake-downs and feel-ups by the dozen. Dehumanizing speech. Disrespect of personhood. Disrespect of property. Disrespect of adulthood. To "perceived" punks... like me...
I was arrested for paraphernalia that I did NOT have... so, no.
Wow! Did you see, Do the Right Thing by Spike Lee???
Unfortunately assumptions based on socio-economic status also have a disproportionate impact on black people, because a greater proportion of black people live in poverty compared to white people, relative to the percentage of the population. So it's a double hit. Either black people are treated differently by law enforcement because of assumptions about race, or they are treated differently because of economic status, although anecdotal evidence suggests that black people who have achieved high socio-economic status are still treated differently by law enforcement.
I do not believe every police officer is a racist, if by racist you mean someone who dislikes a person because of their race and deliberately treats them badly out of malice. However I do believe it is possible for people's behaviour to be influenced by underlying racial bias without any element of malice involved. So I don't believe that all officers who stop and frisk black people are doing so because they hate black people (black officers search more black people too). But I do believe that law enforcement policies, and the actions of individual officers, can be influenced by negative stereotypes and underlying assumptions about race.
This is systemic racial bias in practice, and it results in disproportionate numbers of arrests among black people, disproportionate numbers of convictions of black men, and disproportionate lengths of prison sentences for black men compared to white men who commit the same crime. The social impact is clear: people convicted of a crime find it harder to get a job; the children of those who are jailed suffer all the issues associated with having an absent parent; many black people develop a mistrust of the law and law enforcement officers; many black people feel unjustly victimised (because they are) which negatively impacts their outlook on life; some black people play up to the stereotype that is being applied to them (if I am going to be treated like a criminal regardless of what I do, I may as well engage in criminal activity and reap some of the benefits of that lifestyle) and so on. I'm not suggesting that this is the explanation for all bad behaviour (some black people are just lazy, greedy, selfish and destructive, just as some white people are) but it is important to recognise the social effects that law enforcement policies have on different groups within society.
Stereotyping can be useful. It's how we categories things and makes sense of the world. But applying negative stereotypes to people is a problem. In my opinion it is not acceptable for a police officer to make a judgment about someone's potential criminality based on what fashion they choose to wear (unless it relates to intelligence about people wearing specific gang-related colors etc). Neither is it acceptable to judge someone's potential criminality on the basis of what music they are listening to, car they drive, street they live on or apparent socio-economic status. Just because someone looks like this . . .
. . .doesn't mean they can't also be doing this (yes it's the same person):
Policing is not just about being able to use force. It's also about getting to know people within a community, understanding a community, being a positive influence in the lives of people in that community. Instead we have police officers who perceive people in the communities they are meant to serve as enemy combatants; where an assumption of criminality is made on the basis of what someone looks like or how much money they appear to have. And that is given tacit official approval by the fact that officers who overstep their authority are not held accountable. I believe that is wrong, and I genuinely struggle to understand why others don't also.
The disproportionate impact to black people because of socio-economic status is what I have been discussing since the beginning of this thread. I think what is being perceived as racism is actually over-policing of economically depressed populations. Crime occurs more in these areas. There are more African Americans than whites, per capita, in these areas... ergo....
Now, you are never going to convince police officers to ignore this situation for political correctness. It's not going to happen and it shouldn't.
As far as longer sentences, the poor are always going to receive longer sentences, whether black or white. Individuals that contribute to society in tangible ways are always going to get more lenient sentences. I have mixed feelings on that, but again it is what it is.
As a side note here, it is really, really difficult for me to feel outrage/sympathy for a criminal period. It sucks that it's unfair... I guess... but if you are in jail/arrested you had to commit a crime. The argument that it is unfair because your punishment is, for whatever reason, worse than someone elses kind of falls on deaf ears.
Now, once again, we have to go back to the circle to examine the cause of bias. It very much depends on what part of that circle you are in whether the bias is justifiable, and more importantly, how to stop it.
More black people, per capita, are uneducated. That is a stereotypical statement. It is also a true statement. It is in no way a racist statement. Now, we can say that we shouldn't make decisions based on that stereotype... but how do we then make decisions based on the truth? If the stereotype coincides with the truth, you are going to have to change the truth to eliminate the stereotype.
Black people, per capita, for whatever reason commit more crimes. That is a stereotypical statement. It is also a true statement. It is also in no way a racist statement. I'm not sure how you expect police officers to ignore that. Because if you are telling them that they, for some reason, have to ignore the situation they work in everyday because the facts upset people, there's going to be some real anger.
Now, if you want police officers to have the luxury of bonding with a community, then you are going to need to hire more of them.... lots more. If you want them to be non-confrontational and stop treating the community as combatants, then you are going to need to stop people from treating them as combatants.
And if you don't want people injured/killed for resisting arrest, then you need to teach people not to resist arrest.
Again, that whole circle thing...
So, what are your ideas on how to stop it... on both sides?
@MelissaBarrett: I don't believe that if you want the police officers to bond with the community you need to hire more. That sounds pretty silly actually. I feel when people see cops they get worried and a bit of afraid. The more cops there are, the more people worry and become afraid. Cops only show up (especially in large numbers), if some serious shit is going down (aka crime and other scary shit!!!!). People don't want cops around them, unless they need help and/or are in serious danger. Their presence is intimidating and other than needing help, people don't want to see them in their communities all the time.
The system needs to change, that's what these protesters and what a lot of people are saying. They know what's up. It is not ok or right to stereotype people based on a perception of threats than an actual threat. Stereotyping is useful (but not that effective because it fosters mistrust and resentment in the people and communities that are being stereotyped. Other methods need to used and implemented. The statistics that Don W showed states that the fact that oftentimes there is perception of threats than actual (in reality) threats.
It seems like you blame people and give them the sole responsibility of correcting the police over-policing and combatant behavior. It goes both ways. Both sides have to be accepting and receptive of behaviors that promote unity and understanding. It has to be genuine and not superficial. Its like you are placing the sole blame on the people and not the cops. If someone opens up to you, you feel more comfortable opening up to them!
So, honestly, your suggestion is that Police should stop policing high-crime areas and stop arresting African Americans? What other methods do you think they should use?
Yes, I blame people who are arrested for being arrested. To stop being arrested, stop committing crimes. That's what it all boils down to. If it's disproportionate, then yes... something needs to be done about that... But a criminal is still a criminal and deserves to be arrested regardless of color.
Police don't have time to bond with the community because they are doing their jobs. I, personally, would prefer they be arresting bad-guys then bonding. I'd love for them to do both, but there's no time. More funding/more officers would allow time for them to serve in addition to protecting.
So people hate cops. OK, stop hating cops. If you are intimidated by cops, stop it.
See how silly that sounds?
It sounds like you might be stereotyping cops based on what you see... Ignore what you see and believe because it makes cops uncomfortable.
You are saying it needs to be cops that offer the olive-branch. They aren't the ones wanting change... they are too busy, as you full well acknowledge, saving people who don't want them around unless they are in danger.
@MelissaBarrett: No that isn't my suggestion (that Police should stop policing high-crime areas and stop arresting African American). That's a pretty silly question to ask and even type. Please read my comment again. It is clear you do not understand it. There needs to be effective methods made by the police, to police people more effectively and not with racist methods/intentions.
You do not understand that people are being falsely arrested on faulty charges. It seems like you blame people that being arrested no matter the circumstances (even if the arrests are wrong and made by a racist system). This reasoning is flawed. People need to be arrested if they did the crime not because the police need to fill a quota or because they believe someone is a criminal.
The police need to make time to bond with the community. That is apart of their jobs. I think it is bs about there being no time for it. There is time for anything, you just need to prioritize and make time for it. The police oftentimes don't know the communities they claim they are "protecting". I am not saying spending time on the streets chatting to civilians. I mean volunteering at community centers or attending events in communities (like MLK day celebrations or Thanksgiving food shelters). If anything doing these things freely at their own time (I doubt that will happen)
People don't hate cops (that is a very general statement). It is natural to be intimidated by people more powerful than you. Especially if these people have guns..... The presence of cops mean something bad is happening.... I can relate this to going to the hospital. Some people fear the hospital because to them it may symbolizes illness and death. Cops oftentimes symbolizes tragedy and crime. They don't wear dark blue almost black for nothing (where I am from anyway). So you saying If you are intimidated by cops, stop it. ..... See how silly THAT sounds?
I am not stereotyping cops based on what I see, I am not even stereotyping, where exactly in my comment am I "stereotyping" cops? Remember their job is to protect and serve!!!!! Their job is to save people (protect part) and serve people (serve with the best interests of the community and the people).
If they aren't the ones that want change, then they are clueless. The only reason they have jobs and purpose is because of the people and the people's needs.
AGAIN PLEASE READ MY COMMENTS AND MAKE SURE U UNDERSTAND THEM BEFORE COMMENTING!!!! THANK YOU!!!!
There are roughly 765,000 police officers in the U.S. There are roughly 11 million arrests for property and violent crimes per year. These numbers do not include drug or arson arrests. These numbers do not include calls not resulting in arrests.
Police personnel work in pairs.
Now, how much time do you think they have for bonding?
Now, if you are saying there is a plague of arrests for crimes that were never committed, I need to see numbers. If you are saying that because an arrest was made for "racist" reasons, I need to see proof that the person didn't commit a crime. Because if they DID, it was a valid arrest. Period.
As far as stereotyping cops, you've done that in most of your comments. In the paragraph before you asked the question, for example:
"...If anything doing these things freely at their own time (I doubt that will happen)..." That is a stereotype.
"because the police need to fill a quota" stereotype.
I understand your comments, I just believe many of them are biased and incorrect. No need to "shout." My reading comprehension is quite good.
I think over-policing of deprived areas is definitely a factor for why black people are treated differently by law enforcement. The reason that is being perceived as racism is because legacy and ongoing systemic racial bias (justice system, housing, banking practices etc.) are some of the root causes of poverty among black people. So many people view issues with race within law-enforcement as being another part of a the wider issue about racial bias in society in general. If law enforcement treat people differently who are poor, and black people are disproportionately poor, and one of the reasons black people are disproportionately poor is because of racial bias, it's hard not to conclude that racial bias is one of the underlying problems.
But I also think racial bias does exist on an individual, interpersonal level among some police officers. Some of that bias may be based on the fact that police officers are people, and have diverse personal beliefs like anyone else. Some of it is based on assumptions perpetuated through a cycle of conflict: police officers behave differently towards black people (more likely to stop and frisk, more likely to search a vehicle). This causes anger and resentment towards police officers. This anger and resentment manifests itself in the way some black people (especially young black men) behave when coming into contact with police officers. This perceived hostility reinforces the police officer's belief that black people (especially young black men) are hostile towards them, and therefore represent more of a threat. This results in police officers treating black people differently, and back to the stat . . . It's the classic Betari box:
In effect it's a giant feedback loop. The cycle has to be broken. What's the best way to do that? I don't know, but if I was looking for a place to start I'd suggest that we can't control other people's behaviour, only our own so it makes sense to start there. For police officers that means doing better at interpersonal interactions with members of minority communities, especially young black men. The usual business of deterring, detecting and investigating crime has to go on of course, but I think there needs to be more of an effort on community outreach. Lots of good work is already done in this are, but initiatives are often fragmented, under funded and inconsistent in terms of their goals and methods. I think there needs to be a concerted national effort which includes:
1) Additional funding specifically for community policing.
2) Development of a framework for what good community policing actually looks like.
3) A gathering of data at Federal level on police use-of-force situations, including demographics such as race and relevant socio-economic factors, so we can get a clearer idea of where the problems lie.
4) Greater effort to recruit candidates that are more representative of the communities they serve.
5) Top-down acknowledgement and understanding that mutual trust between law enforcement and the community is vital for effective policing and has an important, positive long term impact.
6) An investment in the continual professional development of police officers, above and beyond firearms proficiency. Modern police officers should be trained in the areas of problem solving, conflict resolution, interpersonal communication, and cross-cultural competency.
7) All new police officer recruits should have to take part in a structured community outreach program as part of their training, to reinforce the idea that being able to win over hearts and minds is as important as being able to shoot or restrain someone.
8) Changes to internal performance review structures. Officer performance indicators should not include the number of people they stop and frisk, the number of citations they write etc. And officers should be rewarded and commended for achievements in their local communities just as much as for making good arrests.
9) Fundamentally officers must be trained to deal with every person they encounter as an individual. It is not a crime to wear a hoody. It is not a crime listen to hip hop. It is not a crime to wear saggy pants. None of these things indicate criminal activity and are not probable cause to suspect someone of committing a crime.
10) An end to the militarization of police forces (if police officers ever actually need military equipment and weapons, then something has already gone very badly wrong).
11) It's crazy that I have to this but police officers need to be verbally polite and professional when they are simply making 'contact', not rude and aggressive. This applies even when a subject is belligerent.
Local communities have to play a part too:
1) Local business, social services, professional groups, religious organizations, residents associations etc must all be involved in the discussion of law enforcement issues that affect the whole community.
2) Areas of mutual concern should identified and collaborative solutions sought.
3) Individuals need to make sure they don't allow frustration they feel about racial bias in general to negatively impact on the interaction they are having right now with this particular police officer.
4) Acceptance and understand that many police officers are good people doing a difficult job.
6) Acceptance and understanding that in certain situations (e.g approaching a car on a traffic stop alone at night) police officers will literally be afraid for their life. That's probably not the time to vent frustrations about police harassment etc.
7) It's crazy that I have to say this but, vote. Communities need to organise and encourage people to vote at all levels so that they can promote an agenda that is meaningful to them and have a say in how their communities are policed.
8) For want of a better term, 'police outreach' programs. Community groups could invite police officers to participate in community events to help foster better community-police relationships.
How do we fund all that? On the community side it has to be through NGOs, charities, not-for-profit organisations etc. On the government side. Give congress a massive pay cut? Spend less on overseas wars? I'm not sure, but it's important so I think we should find a way. I don't know how feasible some of those ideas are, or how much some of that stuff is already happening, and I'm sure holes can be picked in some of those suggestions, but you asked for ideas so . . .
With appropriate funding to the police department, I'm fine with all of that, except maybe number 10. However, again, this means that more police need to be hired. They are already horribly understaffed and making such commitments mandatory means that they have to spend less time policing. Much of what you are saying is what I have been saying, just from a different perspective in the cycle.
And I assert that none of this is going to solve the problem until the socio-economic issues are addressed as well.
My problem with number 10 specifically, is that when militarization of the police occurs, it is absolutely necessary. The Ferguson riots are an excellent example... Someone had to go out into that, if it wasn't militarized police, then it should have been actual military. At that point, and it pains to me say this, I would have rather had 20 civilian deaths than one police death. The rioters were the ones endangering people and property and, at that point, had forfeited their right for any sort of protection. Anything that happened to them would have been completely their fault. At that point, they were the enemy. They chose to adopt that role.
I agree with what you're saying, but will add that police participation in community events must be paid for (and that decreases the value of such activity). It is quite illegal to require time without pay, and unethical as well.
I also put more emphasis on changing community attitude/response. Maybe a neighborhood watch program, with strong connections to police? Maybe more education as to local crime, indicating a real need for the police? Maybe a web site indicating what crimes happened or were investigated. My area has a single individual responsible for investigating any severe police actions (death, for instance, but others as well) and that is NOT a part of the police at all - that has worked well here and the mob scenes of Ferguson quickly die a natural death as that investigator goes to work.
The #10 - interestingly one of the smaller towns in my area has decided not to own any military equipment in an effort to assuage concerns of the public. Unfortunately, just as you say, when it is needed it is NEEDED with the result that equipment and manpower from surrounding areas must be brought in - manpower that does not have any ties at all to that community. A failed program, IMHO.
As I mentioned on another thread, the DOJ just release a report on Cleveland PD which started before the recent incident with Tamir Rice. The incidents cited in the report are shocking are truly shocking (punching a 13 year old while in handcuffs, firing 137 rounds into two unarmed people etc.)
One of the outcomes of the report is "a court enforceable consent decree that will include a requirement for an independent monitor who will oversee and ensure necessary reforms".
I predict the DOJ investigation into Ferguson PD may result in something similar.
Can't agree that when militarization of police happens, it's absolutely necessary. There are a host of reasons such militarization can take place. Certainly does not mean it's necessary.
@Don W: Your comments are soo insightful!!! I enjoy reading them!!!! I agree with your points!!!!
Are you then saying that cops should not profile based on socio-economic status? Based on the type of care being driven? Clothing worn? Tattoos? Haircut? Caps/hats? Gang markings or apparel?
This brings to mind two events. Arizona had a training booklet for spotting illegals that included an example of seeing an old pickup truck with the bed full of people, all wearing multiple layers of clothing, parked in a known spot for illegals looking for work that was deemed "profiling" and decried as wrong. It wasn't wrong; it was a reasonable profile of illegal aliens.
Second, my son was stopped once for a dirty license plate and checked. He was dirty, shirtless and driving a car without a hood (been working on the car and needed parts). Again, a reasonable reason for checking registration and such, but you would deny the cops the opportunity to stop a crime in progress.
Profiling is one way cops stop crimes before they happen and they don't normally use it to stop people with dark skin. There is far more that goes into a spot check than that, and it is quite reasonable to make such checks.
But there is another problem just as great - that of the citizens automatically viewing cops as enemy combatants. Someone to disrespect, to run from, to disobey. And that is at least as big a problem as the cop that views ordinary citizens as an automatic combatant. It is giving tacit public approval to citizens who overstep their "rights" are not held accountable. I believe that is wrong, and I struggle to understand why others don't also.
@wilderness: Cops should not solely profile based on socio-economic status? Based on the type of care being driven? Clothing worn? Tattoos? Haircut? Caps/hats? Gang markings or apparel? Other more effective methods needs to be used.
In regards to your "profiling is one way cops stop crimes before they happen and they don't normally use it to stop people with dark skin. " I don't agree. You can't stop crimes before they happen, this isn't that Minority Report movie (btw the irony of the movie title) . If anything you have to stop the behavior and psychology of people who would want to commit the crime (which is probably impossible or the very least hard to do). They do normally use it to stop people with dark skin. In your examples you are using illegal aliens who hop the border from Mexico. Mexicans oftentimes to do have DARK skin (compared to mainstream American populace) .
I don't understand your logic when you say :And that is at least as big a problem as the cop that views ordinary citizens as an automatic combatant." Cops have all the power, they have the guns, resources, and the law on their side. So if they view ordinary citizens as an automatic combatant then that is probably a bigger problem and concern than citizens automatically viewing cops as enemy combatants.
Its not about citizens overstepping their rights, it is a few cops who are taking rights away from citizens and those specific cops who think they are above the law that they are supposed to enforce.
I explicitly excluded profiling based on intelligence such as gang-related apparel. That includes a specific car being driven etc. I think it's reasonable to insist that profiling should only be made on the basis of specific intelligence though. Otherwise certain groups of people, e.g. black people, start to be treated like homogenous lumps that all think, feel and behave the same. This is particularly easy for a majority social group, like white people, to do to a minority social group like black people.
That sounds very specific to me. The profiling I'm talking about is stopping and frisking someone because they are black, or wearing a hoodie, or listening to hip hop etc. None of those things should be deemed as 'suspicious' activities or indicators of criminality.
No comparison. Black people are stopped and searched repeatedly for doing nothing but walking down a street. Much more frequently than white people. Even though in places like NY, searches carried out on white subjects resulted in more weapons being found, and in Ferguson, vehicle searches carried out on white subjects resulted in more contraband being found. That is racial profiling and it's wrong.
And this gives me a tiny glimpse of why black people are angry and frustrated. Your anecdote about your son comes nowhere close to being similar to an experience of racial profiling. Nowhere near. And it demonstrates an all too familiar inability on the part of a majority group to understand the effects of policies on a minority group that they themselves (and their children) have never experienced.
Sorry if it seems like I'm sounding off at you Wilderness (I guess I am a bit) but I've seen the effects of these types of things on people I know. It's not just about the inconvenience of being stopped, or the humiliation of being searched by the side of the road like a criminal when you've broken no law. It's about the oppressiveness of it. The energy-sapping, soul-destroying, mind-bending injustice of it. That's what I see people I know who have experienced these things suffering from. Pure weariness. It's like putting a lead weight around a whole group of people's neck, then telling them they have to run a marathon. When they complain they get beat down, when they naturally start to fall behind they get accused of being lazy. It's just wrong on so many different levels.
If you had been harassed by police officers from the time you were a teen right up until now, and you had seen your friends and family, and people in your community similarly harassed. If you believed that the police were their to protect you, and the law to be applied equally to you, then experienced racial prejudice from the very people who enforce the law, you might also perceive police as a threat and be disheartened, and disillusioned with, and cynical about, and distrustful of police officers.
Young black men are experiencing this and this and these are not unique experiences. They are day to day stories of young black people. These experiences are what shape the people that these individuals become. If we do not want black people to view the police as combatants, then the police need to stop teaching them that as children.
Although I have seen the effects of racial bias, I can only imagine what it feels like. But we must try to imagine what it feels like Wilderness because with empathy comes compassion, and with compassion comes understanding, and with understanding comes trust. And that is what's needed. Children should associate police officers with security and safety. At the moment young black people are being taught to associate police officers with fear and danger. That can only perpetuate the cycle of conflict.
@Don W: Preach!!!! Your comments are giving me life lol!!!!!
@MelissaBarrett: I do with the privilege part but that can just prove that the police are not only targeting people of color but also poor people; which is draw a conclusion that the system is not only racist but classist (not sure if there is a word for that but oh well too.
What I can't believe is that you still do not want to believe that the system is racist! It seems pretty obvious!!! Like I truly want to know why?
And that's what it always comes down to. Anyone who says "Hey, maybe this might be an issue" is accused of defending a racist system or being racist or... whatever. So we stop caring. We're not racist, we're just tired of it being implied. So we either scramble about trying to prove our non-racism, or we say "Screw it, you're on your own."
I'm not really a scrambler.
@MelissaBarrett: It isn't like you are cared to begin with, so how is that a surprise? You don't even want to understand it, you get defensive and then you walk out claiming that you are offended when you never even gave a shit to begin with.
Don't worry we always been on our own, its been proven countless times. By the way it is pretty clear you are not a scrambler. I don't deal with scramblers, scramblers are people who come up with anything superficial to tell you to make it seem like they understand or are on your side.
I deal with people that can look me in the eye and tell me what's up.
I am looking you in the eye and telling you what's up.
Now, as to whether I ever cared or not, I call BS. Believe it or not, I may have been exposed to true racism in my life and I may possibly be concerned about raising a black male in today's world. But again, feel free to have your own prejudices... it's kinda makes your complaints seem kinda hypocritical though.
@MelissaBarrett: I do care what you are saying and I am trying to understand it. I got my own prejudices and so do you. What are my complaints? and how are they hypocritical?. I really want to know!
"@MelissaBarrett: It isn't like you are cared to begin with, so how is that a surprise? You don't even want to understand it, you get defensive and then you walk out claiming that you are offended when you never even gave a s**t to begin with.
Don't worry we always been on our own, its been proven countless times. By the way it is pretty clear you are not a scrambler. I don't deal with scramblers, scramblers are people who come up with anything superficial to tell you to make it seem like they understand or are on your side.
I deal with people that can look me in the eye and tell me what's up."
When you accuse someone of not caring because they have a different opinion than you or are pointing out different alternatives, then it is hypocritical to complain that other people aren't listening to your viewpoints.
When you accuse someone of not having the same opinion because they are defending a racist system, you are implicitly saying they are racist.
You accused me of defending cops because my family were cops, but anyone who said that blacks were only crying racism because they were black would automatically be labeled a racist. If its ok for you to make assumptions based on stereotypes, then you likely shouldn't be complaining when others do it.
@MelissaBarrett: If that is stereotyping then I guess you stereotyped your peoples when you said specifically (in your words)
So we stop caring. We're not racist, we're just tired of it being implied. So we either scramble about trying to prove our non-racism, or we say "Screw it, you're on your own."
My words are not stereotyping I was responding to what you said about yourself and your own peoples. You are the one that mentions we stop caring, you are the one that said we say "screw it, you're on your own....
My response was based on your assumptions and stereotyping. By the way I was specifically talking to you because clearly you are the representative of all white people in the world alive and dead!!!
Its not about having a different opinion, I am open to listening to alternatives that are actually alternatives. A lot of the things (not all) you are saying are not alternatives. From what I understand you do not see any problems with current police procedures and systems. You do not agree they this racist or discriminatory system. I am still trying to figure out why. I asked you why? Can you tell me why?
I am not accusing you of defending cops because your family is cops. I said I understand your biases because you come from a family of cops. Where does biases become the same as defending?
I don't have a "people". I was speaking for those who are tired of being called racist, just because we don't agree that we are racist. Why specifically did you feel the need to bring my race into it?
I'm representative of all white people? What does that even mean?
I've explained many times why I don't thing race is the issue. That's really all I've done. I believe it is a socio-economic issue. I'm not sure what you think I've been saying.
I'm not sure I have a bias, but if I do, it's likely towards the issues facing African Americans. Which is why I want to see the actual problems discussed rather than chasing red herrings.
@MelissaBarrett: I specifically feel the need to bring race into this because oftentimes (not every-time), the people that are called racist and deny being racist are white people. When you mention we, I feel you were mentioning other white people. It wasn't clear to me at all you were speaking of those tired of being called racist.
The representative part was sarcasm!!!!
What do you mean by I'm not sure I have a bias, but if I do, it's likely towards the issues facing African Americans.?
I am raising a black child in Rural West Virginia. Or I guess technically, did raise a black man... although my work doesn't ever seem to end there.
You don't know me, and I get that, but if given the choice between my "family" and my children, my children are always, always going to win. Both my son and I have been victims of racism, and I know full-well it exists. I'm just not seeing it where you do. Other places, sure. But I think here, in this situation, it's more about the economics.
In addition, of course the people tired of being called racist are white most of the time. It is white people who are being called racist. I'm not saying anything that a number of African American sociologists and economists haven't said... They have been called things less pleasant though.
Thank you!!! This information is known to most of us already. But the "crossover" is appreciated. Maybe these numbers will straighten their obvious confusion about the black community. But maybe not. Some people just feel better when they can feel BETTER. I hear Italians are bad with pushing past the black man in this fashion. Getting to see...
@:Don W: your comments have so insightful!!!! Thank You!!! From what I gather from this comment is that the system is racist and is unfairly targeting people of color based on perceptions of threats (aka stereotypes) than actual threats!!!! thanks for being smart!!!!
I'm not really familiar with the Garner case, but I read an article that said the kid in MO tried to take the officer's weapon away. Whether the grand jury made the right decision isn't clear, but I tend to think that if you try to take an officer's weapon, all bets are off. It's kind of like asking to be shot.
That said, what is the answer? We keep hearing that white officers are too rough in black neighborhoods. Yet, if kids like the one in the story try to take their guns, the officers are probably going to be a little jumpy in the "hood."
I've heard of officers taking their time responding to calls in those type of neighborhoods, which is sad for the innocent residents.
I, personally, think that officers need to be trained to try and diffuse situations before they escalate to violence.
If white cops are not comfortable in black neighborhoods and black residents are not comfortable with white cops - should we allow white cops to go into black neighborhoods? Should they have their own black departments? That sounds like segregation but it sounds like what they want.
Whether voluntarily or involuntarily there is a connection to race in these incidences. The statistics have an affect on the way the police will respond to these situations based on personal or learned experiences. Where are they similar? You could say that the refusal of the accused to succumb to directions made by the police contributed to the escalation of the reactions taken by the police officers. But were they justified in taking deadly force as a result? In the case of Michael Brown could the officer perhaps gotten behind his vehicle and staved off Browns rushing him? Was experience a factor in the officers encounter with him? With the Garner situation was it necessary to jump on the guys back and choke him because of a perceived threat of violence? Or could the police have just waited for reinforcements and taken him with a show of force? In both cases was there an expectation of wrong doing and or violence based on the statistical knowledge of previous racial encounters? I think we do have a mindset in this country that confrontation should be met with force and not compromise or an understanding. And I also believe that many people wish to have their rights observed under any condition whether it is prudent to the situation. You see there is so much mixed up in this mess there has to be open and clear communication with respect for both sides. As long as police respond to statistical or personal prejudices and people wish to disrespect their authority to detain and question suspects based on their racial bias the two shall continue to clash and with horrific consequences.
American media -meet - Dr. Phil ! maybe just maybe, this is not about racism at all , maybe it's also not , at least not directly , about the police at all ! Maybe what we're seeing in the inner cities is the beginning of something far more complicated than most of you can even begin to fathom . Are we witnessing the possibility of a new civil revolution . And as all revolutions go is it not simply about the socio- slavery of a populace against it's own government ? This morning I watched a video in New York City , I believe , where a" civil " march had halted at the locked doors of a Wal-Mart , the people screaming to gain access ! ? Now what's that all about ? Why did this entire group of protesters or "rioters " want access to a mall ? Pure and simply to loot , to pilfer in the name of what ? Civil discourse ? Was that single incident about Michael brown , was it about "police take downs" ? My point is simply this , When the shit really hit's the fan in America , you can bet on two things , it aint about right or wrong ! And , the media won't have a cue what's happening ! Other than the fact that they , for the most part , caused , fueled and incited most of it !
I can even hear it in his voice, (and I've rarely seen his show)! Creepy.
I just saw a show on cable called Black and Blue. It was all about how evil the cops are. It explained how the Police Chiefs demand their officers to meet certain standards ("Its all about the numbers,") as far as fighting crime and issuing tickets.
It showed cops harassing blacks. A black man was taken down in a choke hold and killed for apparently no good reason. Some kids were beat up by five or so cops because they were waiting to be picked up by someone they knew. They resisted the cops request to approach them by saying, "Why can't we stand here?"
The show mentioned the broken glass theory: If you leave some windows broken, the whole town starts to go downhill: If a couple of guys look like they're up to no good...loitering or what ever... they are to be driven out of sight or town. If these guys resist at all, the cops seem to go berserk.
So, I ask ... was this show revealing what is true for many parts of the country? Or hype?
If true, W H Y? Who sets the standards for the Police Chiefs?
It has been shown that the less police there are in a town, the less crime. (And yet, if too few cops are around, crime can also flourish.)
Are there too many cops per town?
Maybe "we" (whoever that is) are just overdoing the police thing.
I know there are a lot more cops stalking people to ticket …for revenue...in my town. It gives you this really irritating feeling."There's another one! Keep your halo on," my friend and I will say to each other while driving around town.
@Kathryn L Hill: Interesting points. From my understanding (correct me if I am wrong), what you are getting at is that cops are just trolling/looking for people to arrest/harass so they can meet a certain quota. Its seems so impersonal, and the system needs to change!
What is your opinion on the Ferguson case and the Eric Garner case in NYC?
Hi. My opinion is that cops are being way too aggressive. They seem to be taking lives into their own hands and acting as judge and jury. Quotas may be the instigator… but why are the cops complying with them?
It is impersonal and they do need to be very careful of the fact that they have a gun. Emotions are very hard to control sometimes.
Same for the people who deal with police. DO NOT PUSH their buttons.
Middle class majority types cannot possibly know what poorer minorities go through.
But, neither does anyone who is not cop.
if something else is going on to influence this abominable behavior, we need to find out.
and be able to stop it.
"It has been shown that the less police there are in a town, the less crime."
An interesting correlation, and one I could accept (although corroborating evidence would be nice) with little trouble.
The question then becomes which is causal and which is resultant (if either). Does less crime result in the city fathers hiring fewer cops or do more cops somehow cause more crime?
I took race out of the picture once. I still feel the same way... police officers are bullies... but not to everyone. They have that targeted group.
Black men are MUCH more likely to be ordered face-down to the ground, during incidents with police. They are much more likely to be ordered to SHUT UP... and speak only when spoken to.
We do have nice cops of all races. But we are speaking numbers.
Black men are more likely to be killed by officers, so it seems.
For the Garner video; one cop leaned his entire bodyweight balancing with one hand on the man's head smooshed into pavement while pivoting to make room for ALL the OTHER white cops piled atop... so dehumanizing. So unnecessary. So unnerving. The man died. Probably from head crunch.
Maybe not racist. But what??? They don't do white people like that. And from my experience, white people actually DO mouth-off to cops as well as refuse to kiss the ground.
See, I don't think so. I think that observations are colored by personal reference. One of the disparities that I see is that there are more police shootings in economically disadvantaged areas. That is because those areas have more crimes. Those areas often also have more blacks. Now, we can argue for hours about the cycle of poverty and why a disproportionate number of African Americans live in economically disadvantaged, high-crime areas... but I'm not sure it matters to the question at hand.
If there are more black criminals in an area, for whatever reason, there are going to be more black men arrested and/or shot. It really would be disproportionate if an area was 60 percent African american and 90 of the percent of people arrested/shot were white.
Now, in my local news... In an economically disadvantaged area where most people are white, guess what? More white people are arrested, more resist arrest, and more are injured/shot in the process. Criminals, whatever their colour, dislike police. They are kissing the ground everywhere. White, redneck, backwoods criminals who decided to resist and are treated accordingly.
We can debate it all day. The statistics you reference are not representarive of a proportionate amount of other persuasioned people killed during incidents of police encounters. We're talking dead, not just kissing the ground...
Yes, the police seem to be more forceful with poor people (which just HAPPEN to be black ) but what does it matter?
People are crummy all over each county. Blacks are not crummier than whites. Black people are more policed; less "protected and served". The numbers do show that...
The two really nice cops in one's family, make me proud. But they do not make up the whole of police mentality. They are rare...
Actually, more whites are killed by cops each year than blacks are... although the number still isn't proportionate to national numbers. The fact does tend to argue against racism in individuals. In short, the cops are more than willing to shoot white people too.
No Blacks aren't any crummier than whites, although statistically they are more likely to commit crimes. I hate typing that sentence, I really really do. But it's accurate. So yes, I'm sure that spills over into profiling, the same way that Muslims are profiled in Airports. It sucks, yes, but little old Catholic ladies aren't crashing airplanes into sky-scrapers either.
So we go back to the politically correct vs. reality. Cops can't be politically correct, or they can't do their jobs. If a neighborhood is 20 percent African American and 80 percent of the crimes are committed by that 20 percent, it is only logical to police that 20 percent more heavily.
That being said, that's not really racism, that's practicality. In my neck of the woods, it actually isn't African Americans committing crimes. Seriously, like never. Instead of housing projects we have trailer parks... with rebel flags for curtains... and pickup trucks with gun-racks. Our poor are white trash and I promise you that there isn't a black person within miles of those little sanctuaries of ignorance. Our police just sit at the entrances to those parks to save gas money.
Poor people commit crimes, or at least the ones that get you shot by police officers. That's where the cycle of poverty comes in... and there really are huge swaths of racism in that cycle... unfortunately, the racism is unavoidable because the previous step in the cycle makes stereotypes true...
Example Africans are poor because they are less educated -> African Americans have less educational opportunities because they are poor -> African Americans are less educated and so on for the cycle.
If you want to stop people-all people-from being shot by cops then you need a system that produces less criminals. That's the racism to fight. The cops are just shooting the people committing the crimes.
@MelissaBarrett: There are more whites in America, so it makes sense that more whites are killed by cops in America. Whites make up 70%-77% of the population in America and Blacks 13%.
I do agree that the poor people commit crimes, but so do other classes, its just that the type of crimes that poor people are involved in (often related to gain power either economic or other means. they are being executed/punnished for.
Correct me if I am wrong, but you make it seem like poor people are just bad people.
Anyway I feel that not only is racism is a problem but so is classism. America (like the rest of the world) is so tied up to money. We are all striving not be poor, we look down at the poor and at the same time pity them and wish/thank God its not us. We are slowly losing more of our humanity. We are detached from each other.
Being black (or minority) and poor seems to be a double whammy in America (among other things). Don't even get me started about being a woman.... Both groups are disenfranchised, alienated and made fun of in America.
I do think we need a system that produces less criminals. And I have ideas how to do that.
Attack and address racism aggressively on both sides (especially white people sides). Own up to it. Mainstream white America simply doesn't want to hear it because they automatically feel defensive and its an attack of them. Racism is a system. America was built on racism. America has a unique and tragic relationship to African-Americans
The Civil rights movements helped exposed how bad it is and racism didn't ended when MLK died or when Barack Obama got elected. It just continued in different ways. Today Racism is more subtle and blurred then ever.
Up minimum wage. People can't afford to live. Poor people commit crimes because oftentimes they are poor and need some way out it (often by illegal means). The poor people are speaking and crying out to people and no one is listening.
Same goes for Blacks (minorities), they are speaking and crying out to people and no one is listening.
Reform police procedures and retrain them to defend themselves without killing. An unarmed teen supposedly attacking an arm cop is not the same as an armed teen attacking an armed cop.........
No, poor people aren't bad people... but they are more likely to commit crimes. They are the least educated, as a group. The least likely to have resources and the most likely to be angry. They are also the most likely to have a culture that is more accepting of crime and- with that- more defiance at law enforcement.
Often cases, they are committing crimes to survive and see law enforcement as a threat to that survival. The see themselves as "standing up" to law enforcement. Law enforcement sees open hostility as an indication of criminal behavior... or at least a lack of respect for the law.... which it is.
Now, yes there is classism, racism, sexism.... lots of isms. Recipients of those isms are at a disadvantage. However, such groups have historically been able to bootstrap levitate themselves out of the situation when the "culture" changed.
I'm sure that White people don't like being called racist, especially when most aren't. There is no way to put this delicately, but a lot of African Americans aren't really all that responsive to being told that all their problems aren't caused by the colour of their skin either. Just like all women's problems aren't caused by the fact they have overaries.
Here's an example of a situation... You have a 18 year old male. He is wearing a t-shirt with a pot leaf on it. His pants are hanging down to his knees. Anti-police rap music is blaring from the windows of a sports car at 1:00 am in a poor neighborhood.
This is someone who should be policed. This is not racial profiling, this is criminal profiling. This is what criminals look like. He might as well be wearing a sign.
My son and I had a very long conversation about this one day. He seemed to think that this was part of his heritage. That this is how he should act because he was a 16 year old black male. That this was black culture.
He spent the next month in his room reading about MLK, Rosa Parks, slavery, Africa, and about 50 African American poets and inventors. He knew who Tupac was, had no idea who WEB Du Bois was. I educated him, then I bought him a damn belt.
Point? Young African-American culture is largely determined by popular culture and young African American males are idolizing criminals. That's who they want to grow up to be like. Want to change that? Give them role-models that are what you want them to grow into. Don't let them dress and act like criminals, and they won't become criminals. Make them want to be Doctors instead of entertainers or sports stars.
Then, when the culture begins to change... that's when social change is needed. More schools, better education, more opportunities. To be honest though, a lot of that is already in place... just waiting. In short, the only way to change racism is to prove that the stereotypes are wrong. You can't do that by telling, you have to show. A small percentage of exceptions is not going to do it. It has to be a movement.
And no, I don't advocate any softening of current police procedures. I personally don't think they are hard enough. I think their hands are tied in too many situations. Which brings me to Eric Gardner. The police officer, in that case, was acting against police procedure. Choke-holds are forbidden in most departments, and NYPD is one of those. I absolutely agree with the regulations. I believe a civil suit is most required and I believe the officer should most definitely be stripped of his shield and gun... forever... like not even security work in the private sector. The grand jury was probably right, however, in refusing to indite... It is their job to determine whether there is enough compelling evidence to bring legal charges not to determine guilt or innocence. In this case, no jury would have convicted. It would have failed on reasonable doubt before it got out of the gate.
+1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, well stated.
I'm stunned. I don't even know where to start. The stereotypical, or the misstatements about roughly 13 percent of the 13 percent African Americans.
I see you've already gotten your gold-plated, triple platinum award...so maybe that's all that's needed.
@MelissaBarrett: I agree with some of your points and disagree with others.
The example of a situation with the 18 yr old boy. It could be true but that is not always the case, but let me give an example:
You have a 30 year old male. He is wearing a suit. His pants are fitted. He looks like he's going to work. He is but his work isn't exactly legal. He's white-collar criminal and scams older people out of their life savings. But you wouldn't expect it, because he doesn't look like a criminal.
Criminals look like anything. Old, young, male, female, etc. In suits or in religious clothes or in street wear. The example you mention seems obvious but it isn't always the case. It could just be a boy trying to fit in or a boy expressing himself. Its all about the mentality not just the appearance.
P.S. not all rap is anti-police and just because you do listen to anti-police rap or stuff like that doesn't automatically make you a criminal. Its like arguing that heavy metal music makes people anti-social, devil worshipers, suicidal and potential- mass school killers, or all muslims/middle eastern people are terrorists or that watching violent movies playing violent video games makes someone angry and violent. It all depends on the individual, family, and the environment.
Random and a bit off point but I was watching a interview by Pulitzer prize winning playwright, August Wilson ( links here:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgjnNaMweBw AND https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUyvZEeDIkQ AND https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14eYrq6bFa8) He brings up a good point that blacks aren't allowed to be different. They are constantly policed (and that is not good). Every time they express themselves they are attacked or punished for it. Like I don't understand sagging (wearing your pants low) but I can't judge someone for it. Just as I can't judge a black person that uses the N-word. Sagging or using the N-word doesn't automatically make you a bad person or a criminal. August specifically said, "Blacks are expected to become like white people without really understanding that in order to do that, we got to turn our head arounds...." The perpetual state of blacks in the world are that they are living in two worlds and feeling the need to have to choose 1 or other.
I agree about the role models and pop culture part. Even so, what about pop female singers (such as Miley Cyrus). Not only do African-Americans look up and aspire to the messages/images of pop culture. Other races, males and females also do this. I would make the argument that young females idolizes Sex and the City. OR even better Miley Cyrus and that she a slut and a drug addict and advocating the use of drugs and promiscuity (this is just an example). We all need role models (but especially young children/teens). By the way I agree blacks should take personal responsibility and that not all their problems have to do with their skin color. Though I can't deny that a lot of their problems have to do WITH their SKIN COLOR.
By the way a lot of African-American role models have been threaten and/or shot dead (MLK, Malcom X, Marcus Garvey..... some would even say Tupac (that is highly debatable) . Being a real and true role model in the black community is dangerous. Who would sanely and truly want to step up and be a role model. If anything the only role model you have is yourself (maybe parents, but some parents are bad).
By the way traditional post high school education is overrated and incredibly expensive (put you in serious debt). Some people simply can't afford education (no matter how many scholarships/grants they have). Education reform is another thing America must work on.
One of the ways to change racism is to address it, accept that it is here, not fight against it, and pretends it doesn't exist. Stereotypes are part of a racist system along with other things. What I notice from online comments and even in person is that blacks are claiming racism and injustice while whites saying to get over it and stop race-baiting/playing the race card. Two different things, on two different pages and we are not communicating effectively at all. If you are interested you should watch that PBS special on after the Ferguson (America after Ferguson). In this these people are taking about two different things.
Lastly my points about changes that need to be made are not about softening police procedures. I resent the fact that you think my suggestions are softening (if anything it could be strengthening it). They are about improving and making it better and perhaps not letting what happen to Mike Brown and Eric Garner happen again.
In the context of the conversation, white collar crimes don't generally lead to confrontations with police. Arrests, yes, but not violent or confrontational arrests.
As far as "fitting in" then it goes back to my point of fitting into what kind of culture. I purposely didn't give the example a race, because it wasn't relevant. In this case it is a criminal culture. Any culture that is directly opposed to the law (and there are many) and glorifies breaking certain laws while encouraging disrespect for those who enforce the law is a culture that is going to be looked at critically by the law. There have been lots of sub-cultures like this over history, most not even slightly separated by race, and all have been subject to the same over-policing. Basically, if you are saying it's cool to break laws, the police-logically-are going to assume that you are breaking laws. And yes, I am well aware that not all rap is anti-police... but my point is that if you are specifically playing anti-cop rap, then it's likely because something in the sentiment appeals to you. Now, that being said... are all Muslims terrorists? No. Are the ones screaming "Death to the Infidels" terrorists? Um, much higher potential there. Pretty good indicator that they might be prone to it. Just like if you listen to heavy metal, of course that doesn't make you a satanist. If you have a pentagram tattooed on your forehead and are wearing a t-shirt that says "Satan Rules", the chances just jumped considerably.
Of course African Americans are entitled to embrace their culture. Although what aspect of the culture embraced says a lot about the person. I'm Italian American... cooking a lasagna or listening to Frank Sinatra says one thing... carrying a Tommy-gun or wearing a Benito Mussolini t-shirt says something completely different. I've seen Italian Americans embrace the organized crime stereotype proudly, and I always kind of want to slap them upside the head. My husband is German... don't even get me started on what would be-likely rightly-assumed if he openly embraced certain aspects of his history and culture. I'm not even sure what being like white people entails (conversely, I have no idea what being like black people entails) but I don't think anyone expects it...
And if my daughter embraced Miley Cyrus as a role-model of femininity, I would spend several days self-flagellating (likely literally) then do something about it... quickly. As a parent, it is my responsibility to discourage that. Just like it was my responsibility to put a belt on my son and teach him about African Americans he could be proud of. Last time I looked, he didn't really seem particularly Caucasian to me. But again, I'm not sure how one "acts black."
I concede your point on role models being in danger, anyone who is trying to make a difference is a target. The kind of person who would ignore that in order to encourage change is likely the only kind of person that is fitting of the position.
I agree with your points on education.
As far as accepting racism exists, I'm behind you on that as well... but I think that it truly needs to be racism addressed. I think that's where you and I differ in opinion. I think that you are trying to lump a whole lot of factors under the term that really should be separated. In addition, stereotyping is never going to be eliminated as long as a shred of validity exists. That onus lies solely on the African American community in this case. I feel I need an example to explain that... so let's take Italian American. There are plenty of stereotypes there that are stereotypical because a large group of Italian Americans really do behave that way. If we all started feeling like the stereotype of spaghetti eating was harmful to us, the way to stop that stereotype would be to stop eating the spaghetti. It would do no good to try to convince people we didn't eat spaghetti with a plate of it in our laps.
With that, do all Italians eat spaghetti? No. I personally hate pasta. Everyone knows that not all Italians eat pasta... yet it's still on every single Italian menu at every restaurant known to man.
Now, and I'm saying this as tactfully as I can, as long as the number of crimes committed by African Americans is hugely disproportionate to national average... the stereotype of African Americans as criminals is going to persist. If such acts are idolized and emblazoned in music and clothing... it's just going to confirm that. To get rid of that stereotype, the African American community is going to have to change the numbers. You can't ask law-enforcement officers to ignore a stereotype as long as it's statistically true.
Finally, from my point of view reducing accidental killings during arrests would be better accomplished by reducing the amount of individuals that are committing crimes and/or resisting arrest.
@MelissaBarrett: What do you mean by: " I think that you are trying to lump a whole lot of factors under the term that really should be separated." Can you please explain that? By the way I don't think that stereotyping should be solely eliminated but I feel that its shouldn't be used solely. Stereotyping is not as effective and cops/government need to find other ways to do their jobs, instead of half-ass racist methods that are proven to be ineffective.
As oppose to stereotyping, a lot of it is dependent on the media too and the images that are being shown! Someone mentioned me watch an episode of the new show, Black Jesus and it was God awful. The stereotypes in that show were just ridiculous! The media has a way of over-exaggerating the stereotypes especially for Black people and women that are just awful. Random but I watched a lifetime movie titled A sister's revenge. And the main character was this tall, blond, thin woman that was just all over crazy!!!! A lot the stereotypes of white women and women in general were there (gold-digging, overtly-emotional, sneaky/conniving, need to saved by a man, etc.). The media has A LOT to do with the stereotypes of races/genders. From what I gather you are not around a lot of black people (correct me if I am wrong). How can you know these stereotypes are true? A lot of the stereotypes are beyond African-Americans (and people of other races/genders) control. Now I am not justifying bad behavior of African-Americans at all but its not just African-Americans that have to change the stereotypes its the media too!!!!
We do differ. From my understanding you you do not want to accept that the system is racist (or at least the system could be). And I am still trying to figure out why? Also it seems to me like you think it is ok for cops to accidental kill unarmed citizens. Its like you put the sole blame on citizens. I mean I can understand your biases being that you come from an a cop family, but still ............
I've been trying- a lot- to separate pure racism from socio-economic factors. Because they are separate issues with separate solutions. Cops that are purely racist need to be fired. Period. Cops that are functioning on socio-economic factors are, quite honestly, just going where the crime is. It sucks, but there it is.
As I said, way back, poor people commit more crimes... there are lots of reasons for that, but there it is. More black people, per capita, are poor than white people... there are lots of reasons for that too. (And in the context of this conversation, those are pretty important). People who get commit crimes more often, get arrested more often. This causes two effects (lots more, but two that are particularly relevant) 1. They are more policed, because they commit more crimes. 2. They are resentful of police because they are policed more often. It is a circle.
Now, the only way to separate racism from socio-economic profiling (which is valid) is to eliminate the socio-economic contributing factor. If blacks and whites are proportionately represented in economically-disadvantaged areas, and are committing crimes at a proportional rate... and still being disproportionately singled out.... then the case for racism is much stronger.
The media goes with the biggest story... it is representative of what people want to see. To change the media, it has to be worth its while. African Americans already have resources in that regard, they are just being used by the Al Sharptons rather than the Du Bois's. MLK OWNED the media. There is an advantage just waiting to be used.
Now, saying I support police because of my family is akin to saying that blacks only see racism because they are black. It also completely ignores the fact that my interest in seeing racism eliminated is much stronger than my support for the police. But, I want to make sure it is actually racism that I am fighting. I've no interest in protecting criminals just because they have a certain skin color and I certainly have no interest in weakening a police force that is already too underfunded and staffed to adequately protect and serve.
@MelissaBarrett: I don't think you can successfully separate racism (idk what pure racism means) from socio-economic factors. These are intertwine. I feel a lot cop procedures are just singling out minorities no matter of their socio-economic status or education level.
By the way it seems that the only way you think the police can successfully do their job is stereotype and target black and other minorities. That isn't the only way.
P.S. you still haven't clearly answered: why you think " I think that you are trying to lump a whole lot of factors under the term that really should be separated." Can you please explain that?
Why I think you are trying to lump a whole lot of factors under the term that really should be separated:
Again, because socio-economic factors and race factors are different.
Socio-economic factors and race factors can indeed be separated. Eliminate the socio-economic factors and what is left is more likely to be racism.
You feel that cop procedures are singling out minorities, regardless of socio-economic or education factors. Fine. Explain why there is almost no difference (I gave you the .2 percent) between the amount of white and black college graduates that serve jail time... OR, remove the socio-economic factors... again.
You think police procedures should be different... Fine, explain, in detail, what you think they should do, because right now all I'm hearing is they shouldn't over-police high-crime areas... which makes no sense to me.
@MelissaBarrett: They are not really separate. If most black people in America are poor and living in economically disadvantaged communities then how can you separate the two issues? If poor people commit crimes and most if most black people in America are poor how can you separate the two. One may cause the other or vice versa.
One of the only reason it can truly be separate if its comparison to non-white/ non minorities of different socio-economic levels.
There could be a bunch of reasons why there is almost no difference between the amount of white and black college graduates that serve jail time. Perhaps one reason is that both demographics are not in situations where they can be arrested. They are educated so I guess education can be a reason. Perhaps they know the law, they have connections/lawyers, perhaps the law favors and are lenient on people with college degrees. Perhaps they follow the law or perhaps they are smart enough not to get caught breaking the law. By the way where you get these statistics from where are the links? that there is almost no difference between the amount of white and black college graduates that serve jail time.
By the way just because someone is a college graduate doesn't automatically mean they aren't poor or live in economic disadvantaged neighborhoods.
Also to blow your mind, you ever heard of Henry Louis Gates and his arrest controversy. He's the black Harvard professor arrested and accused of breaking into his own house. I am pretty sure he isn't poor.........
I have already told you how police procedures should be different. You said I don't advocate any softening of current police procedures. I will repeat them again:
Reform police procedures and retrain them to defend themselves without killing. More defensive than offense (unless offense is especially necessary)
I mean changes such as body cameras (that can't be manipulated).
New tactics/techniques that don't involve gun (such as promoted use of tasers, stunt guns and other less lethal weapons that can effectively take down suspects without killing them.
The curbing of stop and frisk polices that are racist (profiling of minorities). I can't think of anything that can aid or replace that but not solely using these methods to look for criminals
Taking the time to understand the communities they are policing.
Indirectly related to police procedures (more on providing relief for poor people)
Increasing minimum wages annually
Reforming welfare (too easily given out, often used as means to control the people that are on it, helps promotes laziness, etc.)
Reforming child support (not fair to men)
Reforming college education system (too expensive)
I probably got to think of some more but perhaps later!!! Changes like that.
The link of the source... Start on page 24, but the whole journal addresses it.
http://books.google.com/books?id=EMw_Aw … mp;f=false
You separate the two issues by eliminating the socio-economic disparities. To assume they can't be separated is fatalistic and accepting that black people will always be always just be poorer than whites. Of course one causes the other, I also said that a while back. I also said that the only way to break the cycle is going to come from within the African American community.
I am aware of the Gates incident... I'm going to be honest here too... from the cops standpoint they received a complaint about somebody trying to force a door open in a wealthy neighborhood. It is completely rational to assume that if you are trying to break into a house, that you shouldn't be there... especially if a screaming match ensues. Of course someone breaking into a house is going to say they live there... In this case it was true, in most cases, it isn't. Gates was certainly never prosecuted.
Police procedures already say to use force only as a last resort. No changes necessary... unless you want to say it a few times more... but all their training already teaches that.
Body cameras are great, I guess...but they are still going to use force on a person resisting arrest.
Police also already use non-lethal means first. It's already in their training. Again, other than repeating it, I'm not sure what else you want to do. In hand-to-hand arrests when the arrestee is resisting the order is restraint, mace, taser, billyclub, gun. Steps to be skipped depending on danger involved. This is where I most disagree on changes. If a cop feels the need to pull his gun, there is a reason. I don't want them second guessing and ending up dead because of public pressure. In addition, this wouldn't have changed anything in New York, as the officer was still on the restraint step. He went out of bounds with an illegal choke hold and should be fired for that.
With the stop and frisks, there is generally a reason for them.
Blind stop and frisks are already against policy in most departments. They are used when there is a crime reported in the area... in which case, the stop and frisk is directly related to the description given by the victim... if they say a black person did it, why on earth would the police be stopping white people? The second type is when there is a possible crime in progress or a reasonable assumption that a crime is being committed. In that case, it is the people that are at the scene. In the second case, it is possible that black people are more often targeted for crimes like loitering. So this point I concede... however it should be noted that loitering in certain situations is a very good indicator of drug sales. If the same group/person has been standing in the same spot for an hour, in a high-frequency crime area, it is completely reasonable for the cop to ask why.
As far as taking the time to understand the communities they are policing, then they need more time... which translates as more police. You also said yourself, that they aren't wanted and seen as hostile and combative... How are they going to make friends if everyone feels that way?
I can back all of your other ideas, with the possible exception of the raising of minimum wage... which I'm still on the fence about.
Ok. You believe your sources. You do not see racism but people being killed for being ruthless??? I'm shocked...
Please cite your ill-informed source for your assertion that more Whites are killed by cops. It seems ludicrous to utter... but you seem to believe that... are you counting statistics that include execution of death row inmates? There may be more white death row inmates; I can give you that... but blacks are harassed and killed by cops much more. You want to say because they commit more crimes; I beg to differ... Whites are neck and neck on the criminal offences, but they get away much longer... much easier. They have no blacks to spotlight, so yes, poor, white... they gotta police someone.
It's hard to believe that people could be oblivious to the facts. (Avitt)
I got plenty friends with police stories.
And they've got friends...
These are the US Department of Justice numbers for 2003-2009.
What are your sources?
Here are the crime numbers as well:
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/cr … verviewpdf
"The ARD program is a national collection of persons who die in the custody or under the restraint of state or local law enforcement personnel. Deaths are reportable to the program without considering whether physical custody had been established or whether a formal arrest process had been initiated prior to the time of death. The ARD collection also includes the deaths of persons attempting to elude law enforcement duringg the course of apprehension. Data collected from January 2003 through December 2009 detail the percent and type of arrest-related deaths, as well as the demographic characteristics of decedents and the law enforcement agencies involved in the death."
It would probably be a positive to read the fine print of your very own sources.
The above paragraph explains that some homework went undone; and some bias is present somewhere.
My sources are the local news broadcasts of late. You been watching the news???
I'm not sure what you think the fine print shows that I wasn't aware of... but ok.
Yes, I'm watching the news... It's horrible that the police beat up that white guy for resisting arrest after he killed that girl, isn't it?
You mean the cops didn't grab their gats and bust some caps in'em??? I'm shocked...
If you would like to have a reasonable conversation, I'm more than willing. However I don't wish to get in a pissing match with you. If all you are going to do is deliver one-liners and bait, I'm ending the conversation. HAGN.
Is that ALL you've gotten from me??? Or have you started the "pissing"...? I'm calm. You??? You mentioned something totally irrelevant to our conversation of black men dying at the hands of police. It is appropriate for me to have brought the conversation back.
No gats, no fair. And this one, guilty of murder...
@Cgenaea: Great point about blacks being more policed than whites. They are policed!
There is a real (empirically demonstrated) and perceived (feeling of grievance) issue with policing in some black communities, in relation largely to white officers and their leadership. There are multiple coroner-defined homicides that have occurred in this context some of which are going to prosecution and some of which are not. Exactly which cases are explicitly or implicitly the result of racial bias is a matter of debate but the overarching problem is clearly a real one.
This is not the same as saying all police are racist. I expect very few are explicitly racist in public of private and most do a conscientious and vastly under appreciated service for our communities. But even with the best training (which most of them have not received) racial bias effects the actions of most if not all people in ways they may find difficult to appreciate. In situations of stress I find myself being biased by race, gender, nationality etc in ways that are not objectively reasonable. I think that most people are the same and in cases of extreme ethnic, power and economic divides this can only get worse until something is done to turn the tide.
In your second source, white people outnumbered blacks in almost every crime area. Did you notice? Wasnt your argument that blacks committed more crimes?
Again, African Americans are about 13 percent of the US population... Try reading those stats with that in mind.
Aggravated Assault: Whites: 188,505 African Americans 102,371
So roughly one third of Aggravated assaults were committed by 13 percent of the population. If blacks and whites committed crimes at the same frequency, that second number should be somewhere around 39,000 rather than 102,000
"White individuals were arrested more often for violent crimes than individuals of any other race, accounting for 58.7 percent." (a quote from the wording at the bottom.)
Also, to the far right of the chart, there are percentage distribution columns, seems white people "win" again? The percentages are also higher there, than for blacks. I wonder what that means...
Killed a girl??? "apprehended". Hmmm... one more to add to the list.
I cannot believe what I am hearing uttered blatantly, with no restraint. A small portion of the small population acts a fool and the whole of the community is at risk... a large portion of the large population acts a fool and still, the very small portion has the hardest time.
Blacks commit more crimes... so... WHAT ABOUT THE BOGUS CHARGES THAT PLAGUE THE BLACK COMMUNITY??? I got one, my son's got one, and quite a few of the people I know...
AS THE MOST LIKELY TO BE CRIMINAL there is a silver platter with "charges" on it, and enough to go around the hood and back.
The person to utter that "BLACK PEOPLE COMMIT MORE CRIMES" is ill-informed and stereotypically clouded. The numbers do lie!!! The justice dept says whites commit more crimes, and I think that it is true. But the police don't know because it's much easier to stick charges to lawyerless black kids than it is to stick charges to lawyerclad criminals. It's funny. And I am no longer upset. I think it is sad that so many have bought into stereotypical bull...
Now, let's count up the BS charges silver plattered to the criminal part of town. I am POSITIVE that the numbers would be staggering. And slant the 57% of violent white offenders to a more representative number like 75.
"The numbers do lie!!!"
Unsubstantiated or supported claims aren't worth the time to type them. Proof, please, that a lower percentage of black people commit crimes than caucasians.
Such numbers don't exist. Somehow, to some, it is racist to say "Here are the numbers... what do you think is causing them and how can we fix them?"
Discussing such subjects is always uncomfortable, but it's impossible if we can't move past being offended by statistics. It is what it is, now how do we fix it?
Take your source of statistics. On just about every line, there are more white people on the list for crimes committed. When I pointed it out, you said something to the effect of, since there a way fewer black people, the picture painted by the numbers is that Black people are out there bad. Way badder than any other race. But what about the percentage columns to the right of the chart????? White people beat out the Blacks again. What do those numbers represent?
I know they don't exist, just as nearly everyone does (belief and rhetoric is another matter of course).
I don't know how to fix it. As you've made so clear, we are developing a whole subculture of people committing minor crimes and totally disrespectful of police.
But, maybe, we could start by getting rid (somehow) of the likes of Al Sharpton and others that intentionally promote racism. We can remove most of the welfare that is supporting that subclass. We could double or triple police action in the ghettos (compounding the problem short term, maybe helping long term, maybe not). We can quit slapping the wrist of minors that commit crimes and hand out some real punishment (public humiliation, maybe). We can hire, at whatever cost it takes, blacks that have earned their way to work and live in the slums and ghettos and be a living example of what is possible.
What we cannot do is cave in to racist pressures, bringing the president into every crime involving a black person. Either blacks are equal to everyone else, and deserves the same treatment from courts without the president of the US playing to the media, or they are not.
I would go about it a different way... starting with education and community pride initiatives. I wouldn't completely eliminate public benefits, but I would make them contingent upon working. If there is a difference then the shortfall would be made up with benefits... but only if the recipient is working full time.
I think all schools should have dress codes and business should refuse to let anyone dressed in way that is representative of crime culture in the door. I don't care if they are purple.
From within the African American community, there has to be a movement to break the cycle. There must be appropriate role models and they must be represented in the media. Parents must be held responsible for children that commit crimes. If they don't want to raise them to be lawful, then they can serve time at the same time.
Basically, the criminal culture has to be shown that the the way they are living is not acceptable. It is not beneficial and it is most certainly not anything to be proud of. The only way to do this is to send a message from the community that is louder than the messages of their "peers"
Thank you, the underclass Black family need to be inculcated that the thug and victimology culture has a negative result and outcome. There need to be education in the premise of accountability and responsibility. Parents have to take responsibility for their children instead of expecting the outer/dominant society to remedy the problem. They also have to stop looking up to "leaders" such as Al Sharpton and others who milk and use the Black community for their own means and ends. Excellent point made, Melissa.
What about the underclass black families who receive one of those "special" silver platters? Are they not "victimized"?
Do they have to take, "get right" classes too???
Should my married parents be held responsible for raising a "knuckle-head, thug, who is highly educated??? Near the top of her class???
Should I stop (wait, I'm no thug).
Minding my own business, trying to find the inlet back across the state line. Profiled, stopped, searched, and GIVEN my "silver platter" the only charge ever...
If it happened to me... my bruthas got no chance.
Hmph... my word against theirs... @#! $&!!!
I doubt it would work. When the kids are roaming the streets in gangs, they are not being educated; all the teachers and schools in the world won't change that. Similarly, there will be no community pride when no one works on the tenements and people are afraid to step outside.
I like the thought of dress codes by business, though, and businessmen might just be the ones to start cracking the problem. Or end up dead when they refuse admittance to the wrong thug...
The root cause is not skin color, but poverty and crime. Put the people to work and you cut both (no time = no crime), but it won't happen as long as they get free support for all their needs.
It's a tough question and all I can contribute is thoughts, mostly ludicrous and worthless. I know that, but it's what I have.
Don't under-estimate human nature Wilderness. Something as simple as a bed of flowers can be worth protecting and taking pride in, especially if the work is done with your own hands. That kind of pride spreads if it is nourished. Enough of that in a neighborhood changes things. Enough of that and the people start policing themselves.
Part of the cycle is an honest "ignorance" of any other way of life. When you see something every day, you start assuming that that's all there is. The first step in changing the cycle is giving people a reason to want to change it. They have to know there's something else to want something else.
Let someone make a difference, and that changes that person. Give them something to have pride in except their "reputation" and they'll protect it...
I love the idea of work to get benefits. If work isn't available, I'm completely cool with painting the building you live in, working a community garden, working a community day care... etc as a substitute for "paying" work. I think that would be a brilliant way to kill two birds with one stone.
You may be right, and there are those in the ghettos that do have pride in what little they have. That may be the spark that could start a wildfire, too.
Agree on the work, too - I've long said that a community day care, paying someone to run it rather than paying them welfare, is a completely viable option.
Those are some great ideas. If that's all it takes, where do we sign up???
Please say that those benefits will be enough to pay for childcare, have transportation to and from "work", pay the light bill, pay for food, maintenance of work attire, and rent. Chances are, no's the answer to that one too...
...representative of the crime culture???
Must be appropriate role models??? Wow!!!
Poor black people... they just messed up all the way around, huh???
I'm sure that there are many more black people who are much better off than that... Wouldn't you say???
Comments like that are the definition of race-baiting. If you want to take offense, that's on you. I never said any such thing as black people were messed up and I'll not apologize or defend a statement I didn't make. That's why I have largely been ignoring the barbs, because they are distracting from actual communication. I was just pointing out that when people are actually trying to discuss the issue, it's counter productive to be implying racism when none exists...
Please, continue on though. Your comments also bring up a valid point for discussion, just not in the way you think they do. I'll go back to largely ignoring your comments because other than for demonstrative purposes, I feel a conversation with you at this point would be unproductive.
I have no barbs. My truth is possibly more representative of a truer picture, as a product of the place/people of which we speak.
Your ideas are now in full-swing. Mothers have left home to work and their teens are left to their own devices. The benefits are lousy and cost more than they are worth. (Transportation alone, eats up a nice portion of wages.) Everyone is busier and angrier. Still no progress. You need that one big break... just to break even, but where??? A grant? Those secrets are well guarded, and wrapped in layers of red tape. Oh, but certain ones DO get them
Truth... that's it...
I hate that my blatant defense is, as well, ill-received as the blatant offenses. But what else can I do? Agree? Thank you, no. Blacks do NOT commit more crimes; violent or otherwise.
Too bad the police don't patrol and profile white collar criminals like they do low income neighborhoods. Worldwide it would probably save trillions of dollars, that could be put to legitimatize uses, like jobs, instead of retainers. I guess it wouldn't be as newsworthy, and would mess up the statistics, that is to say "if it was even possible to determine" who ain't being caught for crimes committed.
I agree. There is a lot of that out there, and cops don't even try for the most part. Or maybe they do (I wired an internet crime facility for the state cops) but it costs a lot of resources for limited effect.
Still, given limited resources and the necessity of prioritizing, I'd rather see the gun carrying mugger taken out than the guy trying online for my bank account. Don't like it, but I guess we all must set priorities; no one gets everything they want.
The "necessity of prioritizing"..... says quite a bit doesn't it? A very telling confession. It begs the question of who is getting prioritized. Who is on the wrong end of "prioritization". Lady Justice prioritizing is she?
As just as an analogy, the gun carrying mugger aint laundering billions in heroin money, though. White collar ain't without its mass scale victims. A dealer on the street destroys the lives of a few people and often goes to prison. The people at the top destroy the lives of a million and live in the Bahamas.
"wrong end of "prioritization"
What is the "wrong end"? Victims of crime? or only the criminals of a particular skin color that don't want punishment?
I presume, then, that you would rather you and your family be murdered than robbed? Other than that, I can't see much reason to reiterate what I already said; that white collar crime exists...
I'm still hoping that someone will say that black people are the same wonderful that white people are. No, white people are not caught as often, but we are not looking in their communities as often. And when they do get caught, they are more likely to have a lawyer on retainer. He works much magic to ensure the charges just go away.
@wilderness: what do you mean by somehow getting rid of Al Sharpton? Isn't that statement a bit weird? Though I have my issues with Al Sharpton (and his fame-whoring antics), he is needed in the Black Community. No matter what he does seem to be advocating for the black community (even if its a bit superficial and self-serving). I don't think he promotes racism. I think you and I definitions of racism differ.
I feel welfare system needs to be reformed too!!!! Welfare is just another way to control minorities and poor people and mess up the dynamics of the family. Child support also needs to be reformed. These systems are systematically bringing down minorities (specifically blacks) and poor people.
I disagree with double or triple police action in ghetto communities. That sounds silly and would probably worsen the problems. It seems like you promoting harsher methods for controlling minorities and poor people (advocating for over-policing that is ineffective). "Public humiliation", really? "supporting that subclass" You seem very bitter and resentful?
Your statement, "Either blacks are equal to everyone else, and deserves the same treatment from courts without the president of the US playing to the media, or they are not."
This forum is all about how blacks are not being treated equally or have the same treatment from the courts to whites, where have you been? BTW the president speaks on issues concerning the people; so whatever he chooses to speak about is legitimate (and simply just "not playing to the media) "
Racism isn't dead and it looks like it isn't going nowhere
Well we dont have the numbers on the percentage of blacks that commit crimes... we have numbers that say that blacks commit crimes more often... but no account for bogus charges, no account for how many of the black community are commiting those crimes and no account of the comparison to whites and their percentages of how many of them are "simply lawless"
Then the comment that "The numbers lie" was an out and out lie itself? Why would you say such a thing, knowing it to be false?
Did you look at the numbers on the source that Mel provided? They seem to me to say that Whites commit more crimes, and so do the percentages to the far right of the chart.
Then you need to take a basic arithmetic class. Melissa gave the numbers; while whites commit more crimes the percentage of criminals is lower because of the larger population.
But you didn't answer; why would you make such an obviously false statement? You even agree it was untrue, but made it anyway.
Once they're stuck on that merry-go-round, the problems become compounded. It helps to be savvy to the "good ol boys" - "let's make a used car deal" justice system.
Exactly! They had me on that merry-go-round for 7 years. The bogus charges fell off my record once I toed the line (as usual) for a while. But it ruined A LOT that I had going on. My career, for one. Certain charges are not looked upon favorably to one with my degree. No experience to this day. I feel blacklisted. But whose fault is it??? Mine??? No... it was the old cop man out cruising with nothing to do...
My appointed "defender" said to take the little six-month supervision, (plea) its your word against theirs... and THAT'S the part that pisses me off.
Police confrontation has nothing to do with race ! One crime + one police confrontation = one inevitable conclusion ! It is US who need to confront an unreasonable behavior that we can't begin understand with reason , so we attach the "Race Card " why ?
No one is acknowledging the FACT that this profiling of "bad people" often leads to silver platter charges. They rationalize that, this "criminal" must be guilty of something... my word against theirs, ha-ha-haaaaa...
Kinda puts a new spin on jailed people who MUST BE GUILTY. I know different for myself.
Now, I know that my spin leaves a bad taste in the mouths of those who love to quote the miserable "truth" statistically... but the numbers lie... I am a personal witness to THIS fact. yes, again...
I have no feelings about being "boldly (with loud announcement)" ignored by some, it is what it is...
"Now, I know that my spin leaves a bad taste in the mouths of those who love to quote the miserable "truth" statistically... but the numbers lie... I am a personal witness to THIS fact."
I asked earlier if you could back up your claim that "the numbers lie", but never got an answer except one to the effect that they don't lie after all. Yet here you are, saying the same words again - have you decided you can back it up or are you still lying about it yourself?
You never heard ME say the numbers don't lie. They do not paint a full picture. At first glance, it looks like whites commit more crimes. Then I'm told I need basic math classes to find out the real truth.
The numbers lie because it looks like black people are more lawless but I realize that there is the element of police lying and handing young thug "looking" guys "your word against mine" cases.
And inflating the numbers that STILL don't tell how many of those 13% of blacks are committing crimes.
The numbers say, "black people commit more crimes (after our basic math) but that's a lie...
The numbers say "black people commit more crimes per person than whites. Not more crimes total. And if you can't see that in the figures, then you DO need a refresher in arithmetic.
And still you claim the numbers lie - OK, back it up. Show us that the percentage of blacks committing crimes is lower than for whites. The numbers say it is higher; show us it is lower.
You gotta step out of the comfort and ride to the hood for a day, with me. Even tatts, hats, rap, and colors are a horrible indication of criminality.
Black people commit more crimes per person... well how vague is that? Certain ones have long long long rap sheets. These crimes are committed by a fully policed few.
But American history shows that white people will put on a cover to hide their identity and string you up just for looking at them...go back to their day jobs like nothing happened...
And get away with it...
Once, I was on the sidewalk wrestling with a guy for my bank card. I saw the police easing down the road. So I walked into their full view on the street near the curb. In my mind, they would see the upset and stop to serve and protect me and ensure that I walked away with my card. As they neared me, the man was swiftly disappearing and the cop yelled over the loudspeakers, "Get out of the street!!!" In a nasty tone. As he rolled on by...
I just reported the card stolen. But I felt violated twice, that day.
Here's some more interesting stats to throw in...
38% of African Americans who drop out of High School will at some point in their lives be incarcerated. That number is growing exponentially.
48% of African American Males drop out of High School.
Obvious solution: Keep African American students from dropping out of school.
Obvious benefit: No need to be shot by cop for resisting arrest if one is never being arrested in the first place.
Who needs to do this: Not police officers.
These are the kind of points I've been trying to make... African Americans, per capita, by every statistical source available, commit more crimes. So let's see how to stop that. If the numbers even up, and they are still being "harassed" and over-policed, then you have a case for pure racism.
Edit: From the same source, it appears that about 4 percent of African Americans that complete college are incarcerated in their lifetimes... which is just about .2% higher than whites with the same education level. I will be conservative and give you that .2% as pure racism.
I, personally, do not get arrested. The ONLY charge to make its way to my record was one handed to me by racist cops. No trouble since, either... so, it's not as simple as, "stop getting arrested; stop committing crimes."
I am the EXPERIENCED voice of reason. I know this stuff from experience. Not just viewing lying statistical charts.
Still no evidence that the statistics are lying. That someone is fudging the figures. You DO know that the experience of any one (or 100) people means nothing when thousands of people make up the numbers?
The statistics count how many blacks commit crimes, as well as how many whites commit crimes. From petty theft (probably heavily black, since their socioeconomic status is... ya know) to falsely accused (probably heavily black again, since we are also being stopped BEFORE we even get to the crime, because.... ya know, we wear tatts and leaves all over everything) all the way up to serial killings (probably NOT blacks, ya know... statistically)
Blacks commit more crimes... FOOLISHNESS... Millions, make up the black community. Were wasting good money on policing the thousands on the books and focus more heavily on the bulk of the black community, like we do every one else in this country. We need justice, all the way around.
If DW didn't know about the cigarillos at the time, wtf was he confronting him for??? Cuz he didn't move out the street fast enough??? Ludicrous... add micromanagement to the list of the woes.
Let me say this I truly feel we (not just us but people everywhere) differ on the definitions of racism, that is where much of our misunderstanding come from.
There are popular definition of racism:
Racism-not liking someone because of the color of their skin.
I feel this is an over-simplified and quite juvenile definition of racism.
There is another definition:
Racism-the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races. I got this online (here is the link: https://www.google.com/search?q=racism& … p;ie=UTF-8 )
Racism is consists of both prejudice and discrimination based in social perceptions of biological differences between peoples. It often takes the form of social actions, practices or beliefs, or political systems that consider different races to be ranked as inherently superior or inferior to each other, based on presumed shared inheritable traits, abilities, or qualities. It may also hold that members of different races should be treated differently. (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism)
My beliefs are more in line with the last definition (though I don't agree 100% with this definition). This definition specifically mentions prejudice and discrimination. The definition of I would like to include exclusion to this definition of racism (among other things).
The definition of prejudice (in the context of this discussion and forum):
Prejudice is preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience.
(source: https://www.google.com/search?q=prejudi … p;ie=UTF-8)
Discrimination definition is the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex.
(source: https://www.google.com/search?q=Discrim … p;ie=UTF-8
For all the people on here. What is your definition of racism? What is your definition of prejudice? What is your definition of discrimination? Are these the same, different, related to each other? Let me know
My definition would be treating people unjustly based solely on their race.
We'll take this example: My son's sister is charged more for hair-styling because her hair is difficult to work with and hair-styling requires both more products and more time. The reason her hair requires more time and products to style is because she is African American. In simplest terms, she has to pay more because of her race. So this is considered by some to be racist. After evaluating the situation in more detail, it would be unfair to the stylist to do more work and use more products for the same amount of pay.
Is the situation racist? No.
Is the situation stereotypical? Yes.
Is the situation prejudice? No.
I have to pay more for clothes because I am overweight and very tall. From one viewpoint, it's unfair because I have to pay more just because of my size. It would also be unfair to the clothing manufacture if I DIDN'T pay more because they have to use more material to make clothes that fit me.
Is that fatism? (If such a word exists)
My middle son had a special type of anemia specific to those of Middle-Eastren and Italian heritage. This anemia was expensive to treat and required special medications. Was it fair that just because his ethnicity caused his disease, we had higher medical bills?
Was it prejudiced or stereotypical to test him in the first place?
(Just as an aside, he was tested purely because of his middle name, which was D'Angelo... the doctor was brilliant to catch that one... and completely stereotypical. He had never actually physically seen any of us)
That's the problem with assuming that just because treatment is unequal that it is unfair. There is also danger in assuming that just because something is stereotypical, it's not true. That's the problem with the non-simplified, un-juvenile definitions. They aren't accurate.
Edit: This is the definition that made me laugh most...
Racism-the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
Um...races do possess characteristics and abilities specific to that race... that's kinda why they are races.
To me, the definition of racism takes many forms. But it starts with the mentality that black people commit more crimes. Now, they gotta be watched. But "they" only come around with their crap when things are cool. Because in my hood, they miss ALL the gunshots. They come 20 minutes later... but they don't miss busted taillights, or expired plates, or people hanging out... they always have a "get out of the street" to yell to adults. Me, whilst obviously wrestling for my bankcard.
They come to our neighborhoods, with their assumptions, to control. They must go to OTHER neighborhoods to "serve and protect" because people get shot and killed, still.
People hate cops like teens hate their parents. "Always effn wit me for nothin." Not because they are "ruining all the crime fun."
When they come, they come with shoulder chips.
Not much of the racial issues involved here are about poor policing , or too strict policing measures , I was a kid in the sixties in a small northern new England town ,I am sixty now and at nine PM a town alarm horn went off . That signaled the time at which all people under sixteen had to be at home , off the streets ! Yes , a curfew ! - ...... Another one , police could then make "routine traffic stops " No reason needed whatsoever . Many a time ,as a teenage driver , many friends and I were pulled over at night . Did the cops wear camera's , No. Did they do anything wrong because there were no camera's ? No, We don't need police camera's we need people to conform to basic civil laws , Yes, I know, conform , such a dirty word these days !
Lesson one , If you don't break the law , no one arrests you!.
Again. I, and many people I know (including two of three random people asked today) have been, or knows someone who has been set up by police officers. No laws broken; but people carted off to jail by lying police officers.
So... "you looked like you may be up to something, so, here, take this and sit for a sec. See you in court."
And just so you know, police officers, where I'm from, are horrifyingly condescending with the loud demands. (I do wonder what was said to MB before he jumped at the cop in the car. It was probably real nasty. I don't know ANYONE who would jump at an armed cop just because).
1. Jails are full of "innocent" people. Ask any inmate.
2. If one can't handle someone saying something condescending without flying into a physical rage, they belong in jail.
I can probably ask quite a few inmates how innocent they are, and receive honest answers. I've seen it with my own eyes. And, no, before my incident, I did not believe all the stories I heard about police set-ups. I figured, they would have nothing to gain.
But I realize that my personal experience only helps me to see, not necessarily anyone else. I know what I know, I will run where I must, with that.
As an aside, I can see you going ballistic, police or no, if certain things are simply said to you... I don't know why...
It is very hard to convict an innocent person Cgenaea, the justice system is geared towards the accused. I'm absolutely sure that false imprisonments happen, but the numbers are very, very small and getting smaller each day.
When I was young and stupid.... maybe... and not often then. By the time I graduated high school, no. That's not a society I want to live in. Idiots shouldn't duke it out (or shoot it out) just because they've been offended.
How many people do you know well that would rob a store and minutes later walk down the middle of the street, blocking traffic, and when the cop asks them to move to the sidewalk instead punches them through the window?
Point being that I don't know them either, but do know they exist. Between being superior and more important that everyone else (taking the entire street), owning everything in the world (robbing the store) and a total disrespect for cops (and everyone else, for that matter) they just don't care.
And people who rob stores don't stand in the street conversing with cops... they usually disappear.
It's not hard AT ALL to convict an innocent person when the very "defender" you give them says, "It's your word against theirs, and who do you think the judge will believe? Its MUCH worse if they try you and convict. And ive been working with these cops a long time, they'll just say they saw you put it there. Go on and take the little six months... As long as you don't get into any trouble, you'll be fine." Verbatim...
Young and stupid? Like Mike??? Hey! Should I be talking to you behind glass in your orange suit??? lol...
If I had committed a crime, you absolutely should be talking to me behind an glass. In addition, if you chose to plead guilty when you weren't then that's your bad, not anyone else's. Personal responsibility is great. If you are accused of something, then you get to go up in front of a jury...You didn't choose to do that. If you plead guilty, then you acknowledged your guilt... why on earth would you expect anyone to believe else-wise?
There was no guilt. I was not guilty of a thing, but being turned around by the barriers. Not a crime...
Yes, my bad. I am SO much smarter now... it will never happen again. However, I had NO experience with police this way. They are not people I'm supposed to have to defend myself against. I wasn't ready... I thought the people were lying when they exclaimed, "I ain een haaa dat, he pit dat on me!!!" It sounded like SUCH a lie. (I was a sheltered kid. ) but this was a real eye-opener. I WATCHED 3 white cops search the alley intently looking on the ground while the other cop unlawfully searched his licensed and insured vehicle with the "reason" we were stopped being, not halting long enough at a stop sign (a lie too, we were looking for a thru street back across.)
Then the cop talked shit the whole time in the car on the way... accusations and taunts.
Oh! And I'm not trying to convince you or anyone. This info is for me and WHY I'M so convinced of what I say, despite the statistics. I know without doubt that it happens often.
I was SHOCKED when I told "my publ def" about the incident and got that response. I felt pushed into a corner. And im sure that it was intended.
I hope it happens again. You, and everyone else will know. And they will NOT get away with it this time.
I wish a--- would!!!
I brought it up because your initial question has burned into the back of my mind from the start.
People who rob stores DON'T make spectacles of themselves. They get little... as the hood would say.
The stories keep pouring in... but the main thing is...why was DW talking to them? He had no knowledge of cigarillo theft.
Street sweeping??? Why??? Laws about jay walking? Don't people get tickets for that? Bullets seem harsh.
Now why would you try to insinuate that someone was shot for jaywalking? You surely know better by now...
I KNEW you'd catch that!
Come on! That was a misplaced joke on the end there. I'm being stern right now...
Take two...he was shot for NOTHING.
He was shot for attacking a cop, which you know quite well. Why the lie, then?
How do we know he didn't pull him into the car and pistol whip him?
"Man, come here! Down here... Di-nt-I-tell-yo-ass-to-get outta the STREET!!!" Gangster style...
Now, I, myself would've grabbed at THAT gun.
But not a cop's gun, down in his car, in the street, after my strong armed robbery.
Most of us saw or heard of a coroners report. As there were no marks from a pistol whipping, it is an easy conclusion that there was no pistol whipping.
Of course, that does assume that one looks for facts, not made up reasons to hate cops.
Don't nobody hate no cops! People hate their sh#t... people keep on getting away with killing people in the name of the ego... I mean law.
In the name of the ego. Right - a perfect example of making up reasons to hate cops. At least be honest with yourself, if no one else.
Listen, if your neighbor constantly checked your bushes to ensure they're the proper height, ensured your garbage was clean, measured your grass to ensure it's not too high, told you weekly how ugly your mailbox was, and, came over to be sure you cleaned your kitchen properly, you'd probably get a little sick of him. Right???
Cops do too much little stuff. They do too much ordering people around. The feel a bit lordly in some neighborhoods. They do crooked stuff... ego. Not my story... our story...
Follow the law instead of acting out whatever you please and they won't order you to do anything.
Don't walk down the center of the street - stay on the sidewalk. Don't punch a cop through his car window. Don't turn and attack when told to raise your hands.
Hey girl , I would have to ask myself after all that , Am I being weak and a push over to my neighbors !
And not only that, but, the nerve of them...!
I got no problem feeling like citizens should respect the police, but I also got no problem feeling like the police should respect citizens.
My own mother, (who respects alley cats...) has a story about police mistreatment.
It should not be...
Now, let's just say, DW just went on about his business, instead of stopping to insist that these two "thugs" get the fk outta the street. All this would have simply been UNdone.
Micromanagement, and the total lack of respect on the part of the police need to definitely be adjusted.
And all the traffic comes to a halt. The thugs win, and will repeat the procedure every time a cop is in sight (as well as any time they take a notion to irritate drivers). Is that the way we want our cities to operate?
A total lack of respect, yes, but on the part of the thug for the law, for anyone else around them and for the police.
Well they didn't RUSH him out of this "busy" road after he was dead.
Must not've been so busy...
Big Daddy Cop gave an ORDER and he stopped with his gun readily available???
Sure makes me wonder...
Was he brandishing?
Did he pistol whip the boy with the butt of the gun after he pulled him in??? Needed to rinse dat off???
Big Daddy Cop was still in the car, which you know. And his gun was available, which you also know. No indication he was "brandishing" - not even the idiots saying he was shot in the back claimed that. Nor was there any indication of pistol whipping, which you should have known from the coroners report.
So why the silly insinuations and accusations?
Why is his gun available while he is sitting in the car??? It's not at his side?
Personally, I'd call a gun in the holster "available". Wouldn't you?
But what has that got to do with the stupidity of someone attacking an armed cop (twice)? Or with making far out insinuations that it was the cops fault some idiot punched him through the open window?
Is the gun holster not wrapped around his sitting, so then bent, waist??? With gun pointed toward the back of the seat?
Do that experiment... what fool in his mashed potato mind...???
There is also generally a shotgun in the center console.
Repeating: "But what has that got to do with the stupidity of someone attacking an armed cop (twice)? Or with making far out insinuations that it was the cops fault some idiot punched him through the open window?"
Well, it probably depends a lot upon that evidence rinsed off... blood spatter on hands, butt of gun... maybe Mike was defending himself. Cuz again the officers gun was OUT while bugging the dudes about jaywalking in a street that one may obviously lay in for hours without major upset.
Lay in that street for hours without major upset? How ludicrous, some witnesses even observed that vehicles had to go around them strolling the street, did they not? Even so, how stupid is that? If they'd been hit by a car, the cop would be sued for not getting them out of the road!!! Ludicrous, yet not surprising as an opinion. You punch the cop, he goes over, you go for his holstered gun, not rocket science to comprehend.
This is why the problem will never be solved. People who want to see the world in conspiracies will never do anything to improve anything, because they are too busy feeling persecuted. As long as it's always someone else's fault, they they never have to actually do anything but complain.
I grew weary of the conversation and came back to this thread only to uncheck the follow button. There really is a point when you say "If you are unwilling to help yourself, why the hell should I care?"
Then the now-obvious third conflict... Which is people who have respect for the law verses people who don't.
I'm assuming that THAT can also be mistaken for racism by some.
The way that they approach, and probe, and order... it is a bit much. Do you think ALL OF US are lying??? With SO MANY people saying theyve had the SAME experiences??? Nevermind... we BOTH know how THAT one goes...
Cjenaea, , Just messed up my last post , Hey girl , you ever think about getting out of the city ?
I don't get it... I affect your posts? Sorry...
Yes! Out of the city, is my destination. But it happens in the suburbs too... I think quicker.
However, it's not the point.
My leaving, or staying... does not seem to make a difference.
And now, I hear it happens in New York... and Ohio. Where was Trayvon again???
Well , I believe strongly that we can become too involved in a sub-culture partially of our own making , is that where a lot of our cultural problems arise ? Is the new American inner city culture a self created ticking time bomb ? Something I have watched in the media for years in foreign countries and in America that baffles me is all the daytime protests ! Don't people have anything else to do ? If I wanted to join a protest march I would have to stop working . I would lose my job ! Maybe if more people actually went to work at making their world a better world instead of walking the streets looking for a reason to protest the illusion of a higher authority , it would be a better place ? I don't know the all answers Cjenaea ., Maybe talking--- right here is our way of bettering our world ! Communicating ?
Sometimes, listening is very important in communication too...
The unfortunate thing about it is, the majority of the population is simply not listening... to me, that is the TNT... But instead of ticking, the fuse gets shorter and shorter and shorter.
If Four black cops got together in Times Square, and put a DEADLY choke on Arthur Schmecki or Jemakowski on camera, there would be NO need for protest...
Theyd ALL be finished as cops... and going through a trial for manslaughter, and under review with the city for using tactics they "no longer use", and bugging their families for sandwich money from jail (because they would not be getting paid) while we sort through that.
Now three people protest what I've just said... that leaves the rest...
They would not need a tape for THAT trial. One white person HEARD that it happened. One saw the whole thing! Heard Mr. Wilberman begging for air...
Melissa , and yet we can learn so much from those so engulfed in the inner city culture , That they can't see the light of day through their own dark glasses . That's why you and I tolerate ?
The problem with racism in this country is yet to be solved because people who are not affected by it, are in denial about it.
Richard Pryor hinted at it in his, now viral joke years ago.
In speaking on the police choke hold that "will kill you" he asked the audience if they knew. Then he said, "look black people know, white people say, no, I had no idea." Today, even the black man in certain situations is clueless about the racism that plagues our youth.
They say, it is the look of them. But I have yet to see swastikas and bald heads, or black lips, black hair and black fingernails (a look KNOWN for the MURDER of innocents, and heavy drug use, but white) sprawled out on the pavement in blood, at the hands of cops... But those teens and young adults have lawyers on retainer. It lmight cost to eff with them... t
I gotta say Ladies , I have seen many police take downs , Now I know I live up here in the sticks , but the simple sad truth of it is this , there would be NO police take downs if the perpetrator or the suspect of a crime simply conformed to the realistic demands of an officer ! Being half red-neck , I've watched many a man , unfortunately women too , be forcibly arrested by a cop or cops , and here's the thing . Every instance involved someone who resisted ! That's the only reason there is ever a physically influenced arrest !
....That's the only reason there is ever a physically influenced arrest !....
Pretty broad statement. I love it when people use the words only and always when broadly applying it to peoples behavior and how it should be interpreted. Not all cops are bad but neither are all of them good. So when confronted by the police should there be only one way it will go down? Or is there perhaps a few that overstep their authority and violate the suspects rights merely because they can and will? I agree that the first thing one should do especially if you are innocent is to comply with the police. But what if the police officer wants to take the situation south and endanger your life?
You see all things have consequences for their actions and not all situations come out for the best.
And I have seen many takedowns of people who comply and are still treated horribly as well as arrested. Denial??? Maybe up there in the sticks you really just don't know...
But the other animal is. "Will you please move out of the street." As opposed to, "Get the fuck..." we are HOPING that the second individual does not like to be talked to like that, right??? Then we may... well, you know...
The Eric Garner case is very simple. Police can only use deadly force when the officer has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious injury.
If deadly force is used in circumstances other than the above, it constitutes unlawful force.
Did the police officer use force?
Did that force result in the death of Eric Garner?
The city Medical Examiner stated that Garner's death was caused by neck compressions from the chokehold and "the compression of his chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police". So yes, the force used by the officer is what caused Mr. Garner's death.
Was there a reasonable belief that Eric Garner posed an imminent danger of death or serious injury?
Eric Garner was being held by five police officers, was handcuffed, and was face down with his head against the wall/sidewalk while the chokehold was maintained. A person could not reasonably perceive Eric Garner to pose an imminent danger of death or serious injury in that circumstance.
Therefore the use of deadly force in this instance was unlawful.
Did the police officer intend for the force he applied to be deadly? That could only be decided at trial by a jury. If the jury decided the officer did not intend for his use of force to be lethal, then he could be convicted of a lesser charge such as manslaughter. I think the prospect of at least a manslaughter conviction (assuming a completely unbiased trial) would have been high.
This did not require a grand jury, the prosecutor could have taken it straight to trial. The fact it didn't get to trial at all is a travesty of justice.
An accurate and precise description of what happened. No reply from the defenders of death-by-cop (possibly murder-by-cop, something a jury should decide). We now know that police officers can choke an unarmed, handcuffed person to death and not even be taken to trial. Nice country we live in. The usual defenders of the constitution somehow rationalize the ultimate violation of a person's rights. They defend a clear-cut example of abuse of power, on video, for everyone to see. Sad. Despicable. And utterly predictable.
I am having trouble finding anyone who defends the actions of the police in the Eric Garner arrest. Can you point to a few?
The prosecutor and grand jury who decided no trial was needed. The leadership at the city where the officers are still employed. The citizens who say it's one bad incident or one bad cop and not a systemic failure. The people who are more upset about the protests or ball players wearing "I can't breathe" shirts than about the abuse of power by police and the flawed justice system that enables it to continue unchecked.
Isn't that something? One man dies from police brutality and we find defense for the criminals called police who did it? But we are angry with people who don't just shut-up and bend over...
Well I can't breathe either! And I will be out of the street soon, so Don't shoot!!!
I thought you were referring to public opinion shapers. Much of the commentary about the public protests is rooted in the attributed cause of the arrest and abuse, racism, as an effort to divide us rather than illustrate that there is abuse of authority far removed from any consideration of race. The race hustlers jump on every opportunity to shout racism and it is destroying any ability to discuss facts.
The "public opinion shapers"? Who, exactly, are they?
those big mouth right wing nuts at fox news and on the radio who shovel hate to their racist narrow minded homophobic blah blah blah - the usual
You seem to misunderstand the function of a grand jury or even the city management.
Neither one is charged with assigning guilt of a crime, or even moral guilt, but both (if you count the DA as management) IS charged with deciding whether to spend resources in a trial or if the crime is unprovable under the law. Probably a good thing or thousands upon thousands of people would be charged, jailed and spend their financial resources defending a charge which could never hold up in a court.
He asked who were defending the actions of the police officers in the Garner killing. Action, or the lack thereof, is evidence of the mindset of those who could remedy an injustice. If those who choose to do nothing blame the system for their inaction but claim to be distressed by the killing caught on video then the system is flawed, just as many of us have been saying.
That would include you, then, as you don't have a gun and are tracking down the cops to kill them.
Again, action WAS taken, it just wasn't the action you wanted to see. The grand jury heard about the case and declined to prosecute. I don't know why, I don't understand why, but it is not an indication that they are "protecting" the cop. Just that they didn't find sufficient evidence to show any kind of chance of a legal conviction.
Now, you may feel that a simple, low quality video of a cop is sufficient to convict him "beyond any reasonable doubt", but that will very seldom be the case. You know as well as I do what shenanigans lawyers go to in court, and it is never as cut and dried as you are trying to say it is.
The role of a grand jury is to decide whether there is good reason to suspect the defendant may have committed a crime (probable cause). That is all. A prosecutor is not required to go to take a case to grand jury at all. He could have sought an indictment via preliminary hearing. At the prelim the prosecutor merely needs to convince the judge that there is good reason to suspect crime may have been committed and the defendant may have been the one who committed it. The rest is for a jury to decide. There is no reasonable doubt burden of proof at this stage.
There is ample evidence to show probable cause in this case. The Medical Examiner's report alone (death was caused by compression of the subject's neck) is enough to indict on. It is very unlikely, given the evidence that is in the public domain, that any evidence presented to the jury could completely exonerate the office to the extent that the jurors genuinely felt that no indictment was possible, and it is completely at odds with legal custom and practice that this case did not go to trial. As such, it is reasonable to suspect favouritism played a part both in the prosecutor's decision not to seek indictment from a judge, and in the jury's decision not to indict.
I think that in practice there is a little more to it. After all, John Storyteller may have been murdered, and the murderer may have been Don W, but I just can't see a grand jury indicting you for it. It takes a little more than a "maybe" to get past a grand jury; whether spelled out or not, there must be a probably cause, just as there must be a probably cause for a cop to search your car for evidence of a crime.
Exactly ! ....... Those within the system , people like you and I , who have all the evidence , all the legal instruction and the working system provided for an orderly society , decided against the raising charges based on the laws .
A jury doesn't operate like a soap opera , much against the liking of many here ! it acts on fact , evidence and the letter of the law ! That simple !
Yet our culture of spectators , those with an "American Idol" mentality would rather try an officer in a public forum .
Darren Wilson's biggest mistake was the same one George Zimmerman made, not letting an attacker beat him unconscious. If these men had just taken their beatings then there would be no trouble.
Policemen are supposed to be held to a certain standard. And I guess they are, for the most part. They only have 13% leeway...
No way, should an officer be allowed to tell a citizen, ugly or no, to get the fuck out of anywhere.
Really? How about a stranger from your home? The White House? A private club? A closed store or public office? There are lots and lots of placed where you, I, or any other are barred from.
Different times, call for different measures. Do you "get" what I am saying? Police are not Baby Jesus. They have no right to disrespect citizens. When they escalate and push buttons in the situations that they encounter, they create the atmosphere for war. And they KNOW that. Police have no right to create BS. The drill sergeant has that right. But you know, half of them have no chance of that.
And citizens have no right to disrespect cops. When they escalate and push buttons in the situations that they encounter, they create the atmosphere for war. And they KNOW that. Citizens have no right to create BS.
See how that works? Both statements, yours and mine, are very true. Both also ignore the reality of the situations and apply blame to only one side - a very, very foolish thing to do.
Now I can't comment much on this specific case, being ignorant of what went down, but will say that in very nearly every case of "police brutality" it has started with disrespect of cops and pushing their buttons. Just as it did in Ferguson.
Citizens DON'T serve and protect. Ok??? The citizen is not HIRED to do a job FOR the PEOPLE. Keep law and order, that's it!!!
If a cop tells me, get the blankety blank out of the street, i'll have his badge.
And if you mouth off to a request to vacate the street and let traffic by you will be forced off. If you punch the cop you will be arrested, probably with a good deal of force.
Your choice of course - as you say it is the cop's job to enforce the law and we expect them to do so whether it is jaywalking, theft or murder. Just don't expect the cop to respect you if you show a total lack of respect for the law, others or the cop. Because you are not being paid to be respectful doesn't mean it isn't expected.
Seems to me that that is one of the bigger problems we face now - a complete lack of respect by far too many people for either the law or those risking their lives to enforce it and protect others.
You are not hearing yourself clearly. Police officers are hired to serve and protect. Mouthing off to a nasty command is generally expected from adults. Cops know this. That is why they do not approach the mayor with a, "get the f... nothing."
I understand that a dirty baseball cap-wearing slouch is no match, but he's human. Why shouldn't the police be required to approach speaking in a manner that does not ignite/incite wrath? Why should they be able to wear their badges as license to intimidate? Or "mouth off"??? Cops are not "the boss" of anyone. Citizens have certain rights granted to all, even law-breakers.
Yet , you are reciting "facts " without the definition of law in your hands as would be in a jury , or a grand juried case . We can't make up our own reasoning to take the place of the letter of the law . Each and every law in this system is made up of definition ! Sorry , he should not have resisted - bottom line !
Yes, you are right. He should not have resisted. You are also right that the police have the authority, and sometimes even the moral obligation to use whatever force is necessary to do their job.
Those are the black and white facts of this case.
But the real world does not usually hew to the rigidness of black and white. It is more often, (especially when dealing with human nature), a very gray world. Requiring judgement and decisions, rather than the blind guidance of black and white rules and procedures.
The video of this incidence sure seems to put this event clearly in the "gray" reality of real world actions and consequences. It is my opinion that those policemen used excessive and unnecessary force. As the scene rolled out, I think at least two of them, the choke-hold guy, and the knee-on-the-head guy used both poor judgement and excessive force. I believe their actions make them culpable in the man's death. I can't make a determination of that culpability; negligence, incompetence, or malfeasance, but I certainly see culpability.
As one pundit put it, he sees a huge civil suit settlement coming.
I know it won't bring back the victim, but it sure as hell will make a societal statement that is not confined to the technical merit of "black and white" legality.
Sorry my friend , but they are the" boss of everyone " The police are on the fine line of the essential enforcement of a civilized society , other wise , we would live in something far , far worse that the wild WILD west . We would look something like the middle east of today ! No woman would be safe walking in the dark , No home safe from invasion . No child safe from predation ! Imagine a civil society without police - it would -could never be ! The vast amount of work that they do is just by their silent presence on the street , in the precincts , in the schools , I fear you have been in the city too long where you are as close to the wild west as possible ., They are the civil representative authority and must be respected ,right or wrong .! I often think of why would someone try to evade or outrun the police , Who can outrun the radio airwaves ? Who can physically outfight all the cops ? No , the smart thing to do for all - obey the request of an authority . If you can't then you suffer the consequences,
Someone earlier said that fewer police indicate less crime. The fewer the cop...the more civility. Not the other way around. I tend to lean there. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. The cop who takes in what you say, is the worst cop of them all. God himself gave us the right to freedoms. That's what liberty means. God given... inalienable. No cop has a right to take it away. NO... he is NOT the boss... NO... he does not have the right to talk to me any way he wishes, nor does he have an ability to be an ass to me and my people.... messes up my pursuit of happiness. I'm no one's child. And I feel I have a RIGHT to say so.
Cops abuse their powers... take the sh#t tooooo far.
1) Should we let our gratitude to those officers who do a good job, prevent us from holding accountable those officers who don't?
2) Please explain why this young man or this young man should show respect to the officers they encountered?
3) "Obey the request of authority" - Firstly, a request by definition is something that can be refused. So you don't mean request you mean "command" - an authoritative order. So to clarify, should someone always obey a command from authority? What if a command is unjust? What if a command violates someone's rights?
Living in the city is not so bad, if you can steer clear of the cops.
Someone told them that they were the BOSS with RIGHTS that actually stretch beyond the scope of their power. Must be respected, right or wrong????? You jest. Lol...
I kinda resent your statement about where I live. But hey... what's one itty-bitty put down among friends, eh???
I'm saving mine for the perfect moment.
And hey, if he had to kill him to get him out of the street (in a few hours) then that's what had to be done... the nerve of that boy not hopping out of the street as his massa said. And the gall of him to talk back to the overseer. I mean, a cop is like yo boss. He say get ta gettn. Best get ta gettn... or you can be dead within minutes. They don't play no talkn back of regular old citzens thinking they can run their own feet.
Cop clearly gave an order to get the f out of the street. No WAY was he gonna let this kid just not...
But this aint Russia. We left the Queen MANY years ago because of all her rules. My forefathers wanted freedom. And they got it... and it took the darkies a long time to get it, but theys got it. Now SOMEBODY tell the cops.
Thank you for the two links. It may help some to see more clearly.
Speaking out for cops from a point of ignorance is blinding. They do have these encounters often. One false move; or the nerve to immediately speak out against the injustice of it, quickly buys a trip to the slammer, and/or a toe-tag. They beat young "thugs" badly... It just should not be.
But people close their eyes. So, it continues and snowballs.
Someone said, "You will not be bothered if you just comply." And, "If you were arrested, you obviously did something wrong."
But, I beg to differ... (well not, beg...)
This crap happens in Chicago too.
"Speaking out for cops from a point of ignorance is blinding."
But not "speaking out against cops from a point of ignorance, apparently. For you have done that with every thread that even thinks of insinuating a cap did something, anything wrong.
I submit to you that it is just as blinding, just as wrong, and just as stupid as defending a cop from a point of ignorance.
Right. But now you know, innocent people are being abused by police. That's important. No longer ignorance. Probably something more like ignoring will replace it. But you, or no one else can ever again say, "You MUST've been guilty if the police hemmed you up."
We cannot condone the actions of the criminal minded, but we cannot condone guilty citizens. But we NOW know people are treated unfairly by cops AND it has A LOT to do with race...
I guess its time to exit the forum , sadly as the mind of a reverse racists can never be changed . There's only one thing worse than a true racist in my mind and I truly despise a racist , one that will never listen or change their ways --and that's a reverse racist and the dialog that comes from those sources !
LOL, that has to be the funniest statement I've ever read.
It would only be 'reverse racism' if . . .
. . . you went back in time, to before Europe colonized the world, convinced the indigenous people of South America, North America, Africa and Asia to invade Europe; set up a trans-atlantic slave trade where white people were exported to work on plantations; ruined Europe over the course of several hundred years, bleeding it dry of it's natural resources so all the white people wanted to migrate to where all the black people live (to the point where black people refer to white people as 'bugs invading our homes'); set up systems that privilege black people at every conceivable social and political level so that white people lose hope of any real self-determination; then as a final flourish, subject white people to black people's standard of beauty so that some white people start to hate the color of their own skin, eyes and hair. Now that would truly be reverse racism.
Unless that happens, your cry of 'reverse racism' is actually just some white people getting annoyed, upset and confused that black people don't want to take a bunch of crap any more, and even worse that some white people actually understand where the the black people are coming from! Newsflash: that isn't racism, 'reverse' or otherwise, it's progress. I'm sorry it apparently upsets you that people don't want to be treated unfairly because of the color of their skin, but you know what I detest as much as racists? People who claim to "despise racists" but who are happy to maintain the status quo while it benefits them, and when it looks like there is a chance they may lose their privilege, decide to cry 'reverse racism'. Does this look familiar to you . . .
What is a reverse racist? Thinking about getting a t-shirt. Especially if it means I would really like to REVERSE racism to a day of true equality.
No you wouldn't. It would start with an immediate end to the legal discrimination called "affirmative action". Next might be an end to the massive charity of the US programs; if everyone is equal then we are all required to support ourselves. And when it's all over, it would mean the end to riots and mob destruction after a cop makes a good shoot.
Lovely sentiment that will be completely lost on some.
Reverse -racism ? That's when through affirmative action and all that's been allowed culturally through political correctness , It becomes okay to blast the white race for any and all reasons to go so far as to become the racist from Within A Minority to those outside of ones own race , Its okay to assume the world of white is all "crackers ", "white bread " or other like terms .----- Hey my question : doesn't that make you the racist too ? Hence, reverse racism .
It aint the "white bread" I'm dizzy about... it's the cops! White/Black alike.
But what has affirmative action done to you and Wilderness???
There is a reason it exists...
See, just 60 years ago, there was a different slewing of the Black population. White people thought of all kinds of ways to kill human beings (with the wrong skin). ...member??? Some of the most criminal criminality came from police, judges, sheriffs, doctors, lawyers, farmers, hiding behind white sheets to ensure that the ones suckling their babies the previous generation were afraid to be around them.
Idiots forgot their fathers brought these walking deaths to this country by force (hook or crook) to work.
They had NO notions of sharing the wealth... still don't. But it's too many of us for a mass grave. So, it must be dealt with.
Trust me, affirmative action is not the gift you seem to think it is... it's a bandaid on a gaping wound. But without it... welfare participants (along with the MANY white people who suck up tax dollars to at least feed kids for most of the month.) would skyrocket!
Though it is a well-guarded secret. A LOT of Blacks are NOT welfare recipients... and a LOT of whites aren't either...
White people HATE to give jobs to blacks...
But realistically, I know many white people. Some of them are among my best friends.
Being the father of a daughter in a soon to be Bi-racial marriage , I am the last guy to think of being a racist , But I'll tell you this , I don't believe America will ever heal it's ethnic divides . Ignorance , immature intolerance , emotional immaturity and all out social and cultural stupidity will make sure that never happens ! I am extremely proud of my daughter and her fiancée , they show immeasurable maturity and compassion for themselves and everyone around them . Too bad it doesn't happen more I say !
Congratulations to your baby girl! Wishing her many years of marital bliss.
You gotta talk to yo peeps about all the hate and superiority complexes.
God made us all with the same stuff. Dirt and saliva. Lol...
Character . . . that's what is missing. It's a skin color debate, not a character debate as it should be. Very sad it is perpetuated by the media and our government -- I do think there is an agenda. I hope Americans of all races don't fall for it. Even among whites of different 'classes' of prosperity (which is reflected in speech, in dress, in actions, in how one presents one's self) there is resentment and the feeling of persecution . . . don't think anyone gives a damn about that. Sadly, many many also feel entitled to a free ride. Watched a very old movie tonight, called " . . . Ruby . . ." something. Anyway, she was born on the wrong side of the tracks, loved a man (Charleston Heston) who ultimately married in his social class, and as a result all hell broke loose in the story line. If Ruby had been black, it would be pegged as a story of racism, instead, it is simply the story of humanity, We aren't cardboard dolls.
Just don't forget that "all the hate and superiority complexes " come from all of the "sides " , not just my peeps ..........:-}
What reason can be given for hating black folk?
In contrast, what reasons may be given for hating white folk?
There IS no justification, but just ONE of the parties is offensively aggressive.
I just deleted an entire response to your anti- white man dialog . I don't think it would explain anything to someone that doesn't WANT to see or change anything , I won't continue to try to have a fair dialog with you , It's pretty nice being the poor victim isn't it ? That about totally sums up the whole "Racial " part of all this entire issue !
Now, it's cool if you don't want to talk. But to blame it on one's desire to remain the "victim" is wrong. It's HORRIBLE being the poor victim.
Wanting to change the stupid ideas about/treatment of, people i grew up with is obvious, I thought. But now U mad (angry)??? Because you want to change the situation, and I'm only wallowing in it with my race cards??? You do not find one iota of silly, in that statement??? You want change more than I??? Please grip yourself... you could not possibly want to change the shituations that we are faced with daily, anymore than us'n
I STILL love you, and I will miss your bright and shiny optimism.
Well said. Requires thinking to understand.
And did I HAVE to know about your deleted response or your exit from conversation with my hopelessness? You're about to catch up with all the other parties who must announce their exit, their absence, self-imposed bans, and desire to never speak to me and my ridiculousness again. (Until next time... )
When I exit... I just exit...
Though I usually have to be pushed from the page. I have NO problems responding to the absolute worst of them.
I read that Dorian Johnson, semi-friend of Mike Brown, and the closest eyewitness to the shooting, now has a city job... some type of temporary something, but a job he didn't have before the shooting and he works for the city...
I WONDERED what happened to him, and his testimony...
The city... they are SO "kind" to give that guy a job in the middle of all that happened. That he saw...
Guys, what do you think about the death of Tamir Rice, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/1 … 16104.html
America doesn't want justice on the streets right now ,Their maturity level shows what they want They want to re-invent the system of justice . The new justice system will be called "The Jerry Springer -Grand Jury System"! Or "The Montel Williams Federal Courthouse ", How about the "Bill O'Rielly Federal Prison "?
The only reason Al Sharpton hasn't been arrested for inciting a riot or something like that is because most of America seems to understand he's simply a race baiter and a bigot and a bigmouth ! The reason he is so adored by the freakin media Just plain baffles me to no end . He will accomplish one great thing in this country though , he will keep the issues of race relations from ever healing !
It is FAR MORE profitable for Sharpton to keep the racial divide going..........and going............AND going. Not only Sharpton but Jesse also. It is sad that many disenfranchised Blacks keep falling for this nonsense instead of looking at their particular situation, take responsibility, and improving themselves educationally and socioeconomically.
In the lower income and more disenfranchised Black neighborhoods, the crux of the problem is the negative pathologies that are permeating throughout such neighborhoods-being anti-achievement, anti-education, and anti-success. It is idea that being ignorant and gangsterish are viewed as positive attributes while being intelligent and educated are perceived as acting Caucasian.
There is a passive philosophy in such communities. They feel that it is THE MAN or THE OUTER SOCIETY that is holding them back instead of their negative mentality, mindset, and consciousness. So-called leaders such as Sharpton and Jesse are only exploiting this insidiously negative psychology for their own coffers!
GM, It's not just the Black neighborhoods though , I find that similarity coming from so many broken families , white ,green or black!, leaves drifting listless souls in the inner -cities , yet its right here in small town America too . I see it every day now . Fatherless kids out of control , single moms trying , but not trying anything positive , and the system we live in simply coddles the ignorance . "It all begins at home " is the old saying that's simply ignored by all now .
I live in a small town in northern New England , about 1,000 people , welfare ridden , the fathers are gone , the schools are nothing but glorified day-cares , where horrible behavior is the norm and no one seems to want to change anything , and is it getting worse ? I fear so .
<"I live in a small town in northern New England , about 1,000 people , welfare ridden , the fathers are gone , the schools are nothing but glorified day-cares , where horrible behavior is the norm and no one seems to want to change anything , and is it getting worse ? I fear so.">
This is very interesting.
Are these problems happening in Canada, I wonder?
Canada, the USA, or Europe . . . the problem exists because the family unit of centuries and millenia of antiquity has not, is not, being taught, or at the least respected, in public schools for a good 20 years or so, and Sunday School attendance is in deep decline in the same period I've no doubt. Does one think that humans can be brought up as intellectual animals with no checks on their impulses . . . that must on their own find spirituality and morals as they journey through life? that thought just hit me. The clerics and sages and professors of old would be appalled at such a notion . . . yet, I think that is really where this cultural thought is at in the universities of today, worse the homes of far too many.
It would be interesting to get a camera and visit families to see what they are doing. Maybe some good things are going on at home and it's not being reflected in school. Maybe kids are learning programming at home or graphic arts programs on their computers. Maybe they are watching documentaries, science or how to programs. Maybe they are drawing along with You Tube tutorials.
The state is taking more and more control over what teachers must teach and how to teach it. Kids end up not learning what they need to learn, such as, basic simple math and proper spelling/writing. At one school I worked at, first graders were to write in journals spelling any way they wanted to…. seriously… I was told not to correct their spelling. In the early grades, young students are expected to grasp difficult abstract concepts too early. I've seem a lot of confused children who just don't understand what is going on in their class rooms. They go thankfully home to computers, computer games and movies, or cable TV. Their time spent learning, thinking and doing in the concrete world where things are introduced concrete to abstract, simple to complex is not happening anywhere.
Moms and Dads or single moms/dads are too tired from working to deal with their kids, so they think its fine they are busy with screen technology. It will be sink or swim for many in the future. Strangely enough the swimmers will be the ones that have good computer skills.
So maybe all is well.. a new Day is dawning, after all.
If this is off topic, I'm sorry.
Do poor black families have PC's? I imagine they do. Correct me if I'm wrong, but, aren't poor black families in the US are pretty well off?
Poor in America in comparison to other countries in 'our' modern times is quite different. We were poor when we lived with our Grandma in the mid 60's as kids and ate 'mock apple pie' and carried egg sandwiches to school, and were told we could get a free breakfast that our Grandma was appalled at. We loved the 'green stamp' store, we cherished single new items of clothing as the rest were hand me downs from who knows where. We were poor, but we were taught chores, the value of a dollar by a meager allowance, we were taught to cook, we respected the 'news' hour. We were never taught we were owed one single thing from anyone. We frequented our library and we learned all that was taught to us . . . or at least I did, that is who I was. Self acceptance, self direction, with elders around who were encouraging . . . not a major concept. Many many many years have elpased since then . . . many many dollars spent beyond anyone's comprehension to get minorities to at least that spot we were in in the 60's coming from heritage that was not college educated, were not land holders . . . enough already with the handouts. Character and morality and work ethic is at issue -- none can be legislated.
The widespread negative issues of our culture today are nationwide , because of the mobile society we live in , because of the instantly mobile communication we live in , no longer is it an "in the city " as opposed to "rural living" and their once opposing lifestyles. The crack house is next door to the farmhouse and the horse farm is next door to the slum lord apartment house , so our children's raising are no longer insulated from the "bad " neighborhood . Hence the way we are toady-- .the thug lives next door to all of us , especially with todays attitudes !
Oh I see. Well, way back in time, (not any more) in my neighborhood, residents and realtors did not allow those of black culture to buy houses. So, I live in an historically white neighborhood. But, for some unknown reason (some) kids at the local high school go downtown (into LA) to buy heroin. It started with Vicodin, (according to my son who went to this school.) But, they figured why do synthetic heroin when we can get our hands on the real stuff. So, they visit black heroin dealers downtown. Now, LA is a good twenty minutes away by car. And, of course, they all have nice cars and credit cards.
The question is why are these blacks selling heroin to high school students?
My answer is this: They don't enjoy life without making money by corrupting the youth. They don't enjoy a life free of crime and immorality…
It is reasonable to assume they don't enjoy life on any legitimate level at all.
Same with the spoiled kids from my neighborhood who go buy the disgusting despicable addicting CRAP. Same goes for all substances including grass which these high schoolers surely started with… I'm sure it is a gateway to heroin.
Instead of making pot, coke, speed and heroin legal, why not make it illegal for people to SELL the stuff.
Here is an interesting idea:It should be distributed by the govt. for free to anyone who wants it. (They can wheel and deal these substances.)
F O R F R E E!
"Happiness is what you need so bad." Interesting words of wisdom from Led Zeppelin
by Don W2 years ago
The recent DOJ report said there was a 'pattern and practice of constitutional violations (that primarily target African Americans) in stopping people without reasonable suspicion, arresting them without probable cause,...
by SPomposello3 years ago
My wife and I are an interracial couple, I'm italian and she's black/spanish mixed, and we live in NY. So I pretty much have no issues when it comes to different races and people. I work at a job that involves dealing...
by GA Anderson11 months ago
In a conversation about racism in America today, a young relative, made this statement'"It is worse than it was six years ago!"It took me a moment to catch his drift. He is a young, (many times naive),...
by Ronnie wrenchBiscuit9 months ago
The United States government, and the media, are filled with professional liars. This is not surprising, especially in government. Many elected officials, like Hillary Clinton, are former lawyers, and American lawyers...
by Ronnie wrenchBiscuit2 years ago
Not that I am in love with Arizona, which is known for it's racist policies concerning Mexican American studies in public schools, as well as racial profiling. However, a gunman who killed one person and wounded 5...
by lady_love1586 years ago
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/201 … s_sub.htmlBeck once called Obama a racist and I disagreed. Beck later apologized for his remarks but now I wonder was he right? If Obama isn't a racist he sure likes to...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.