Jump to content

Charlotte Riots and Black Lives Matter


Recommended Posts

Ok dumbass here you go Declares Open Season on white people and white cops 

 

and those protests are how small compared to the large majority that are still happening and they needed to call in the national guard

12 minutes ago, Riley24 said:

Where did you hear that BLM declared a race war....? Is that on their websites agenda, or Info Wars?

here is a FOX NEWS article reporting that the protests have been mostly peaceful. But if this isn't good enough for you, Google "Charlotte protests peaceful" and you'll get a whole list of articles reporting exactly what I said.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/09/24/fourth-night-charlotte-protests-is-largely-peaceful.html

And you're the one that accused me of not doing research. Embarrassing.

 

Ok dumbass here you go Declares Open Season on white people and white cops 

 

and those protests are how small compared to the large majority that are still happening and they needed to call in the national guard

                                                          BLUE LIVES MATTER

            All Gave Some, Some Gave All.

                   Never Forget 9/||/01

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, nic227 said:

Yes the video doesn't really help anyone as it's quite shaky and not clear. Saying "Police" identifies you as a police officer, it is not a command to do something. But "Drop the gun" is a clear, short command anyone understands quickly, because the only meaning it has is to drop the gun. If you didn't understand it the first time by the sixth time you will have. Giving suspects time and space to evaluate the the situation and arrive at favourable logical conclusion, is damn near impossible in a scenario like this, and plain stupid as well, as this causes unnecessary danger to officers on scene and civilians nearby, by giving the suspect time to try something stupid. This isn't Dr. Phil, where you can sit down and talk about your problems, it's an immediate threat situation, there isn't a lot of time for anything. This situation was deteriorated by Scott, not the officers, by simply not following clear commands.

Unfortunately a settlement is quite possible as you said, but I really hope the family doesn't get a cent for the stupid actions of this man.

Deadly force is only appropriate if the officer feels his or her life or the lives of others are in imminent danger. A suspect refusing to relinquish their gun doesn't mean deadly force can be applied. If the suspect appears to raise the gun, or charges officers are examples where police can escalate. Giving the suspect time to evaluate their situation is important.

Ultimately, it comes down to whether or not the police officer who fired the gun was in imminent danger (which it appears that he was) and did he in any way contribute to the escalation of the situation that unnecessarily deviated from tactics, techniques, and procedures. The last part is where I have questions and I think police could find themselves in a dispute. I think the police already explained the victim was not the initial target. That kind of places them at a disadvantage from a civil standpoint from the jump. They have to explain

There are a lot of factors that influence my opinion about a settlement. I don't think the family should get any thing because it appears to be a justifiable homicide. There is strong evidence to argue the victim at a minimum contributed to the outcome, if not made it inevitable. However, we do have to evaluate the tactics, techniques, and procedures in place. If, for example: training was inadequate or lacked, accountability in the department was flawed. These factors could have deprived the shooting officer with the appropriate tools and guidance to handle the situation. If other officers made mistakes, that can also contribute to liability civilly. 

Police shootings can be very complicated, and should be treated as such by everyone, including the public. Ask hard questions, but wait for data before drawing conclusions.

MSI MPG Z490 GAMING EDGE WIFI, Core™ i7-10700 8-Core 2.9 - 4.8GHz Turbo, MSI GeForce RTX™ 2070 TRI FROZR, 16GB Kit (2 x 8GB) HyperX FURY DDR4 2666MHz, 500GB Black SN750 2280 M.2 SSD, 1TB MX500 7mm, 560 SSD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ThomasH33 said:

Ok dumbass here you go Declares Open Season on white people and white cops 

 

and those protests are how small compared to the large majority that are still happening and they needed to call in the national guard

Ok dumbass here you go Declares Open Season on white people and white cops 

 

and those protests are how small compared to the large majority that are still happening and they needed to call in the national guard

LOL- one bozo in his backyard posts a video in his backyard, and that's enough to convince you? I'm sure I couldn't find a single video of a white gun rights advocace encouraging violence, right?  

And dude, you're still not getting it. The majority of the protests have been peaceful. Accept it. If you continue to say that the majority of them are violent, you're lying. Facts are incredibly stubborn things; the world doesn't conform to your beliefs just because you want it to.

Also, you really shouldn't call someone "dumbass" online. It's mean. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Riley24 said:

LOL- one bozo in his backyard posts a video in his backyard, and that's enough to convince you? I'm sure I couldn't find a single video of a white gun rights advocace encouraging violence, right?  

And dude, you're still not getting it. The majority of the protests have been peaceful. Accept it. If you continue to say that the majority of them are violent, you're lying. Facts are incredibly stubborn things; the world doesn't conform to your beliefs just because you want it to.

Also, you really shouldn't call someone "dumbass" online. It's mean. 

Oh im so sorry you special snow flake go down to charlotte and tell me how it is hope you're feeling the white guilt

                                                          BLUE LIVES MATTER

            All Gave Some, Some Gave All.

                   Never Forget 9/||/01

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, nic227 said:

You must be living under a damn rock. They're anything but peaceful, I mean a protester literally shot another one a couple nights ago, semis were looted and they're contents burned, stores were looted, cars destroyed, police and civilian ones by the way, white people were targeted for being white. But no of course that's just part of the "peaceful" protest.

You realize its a CITY, right? A fairly big city. There's protests in many areas of the city. Most of them have been peaceful. Its possible for peaceful protests and riots to occur in the same city, even at the same time. I can't believe I have to explain that.

24 minutes ago, nic227 said:

Tell me what the hell else are they supposed to do to try to disperse a crowd, try the buddy approach and nicely ask? Anything the police do these days could be seen as "antagonizing" by BLM.

What I was talking about is when the police bring riot gear to a peaceful protest. Yes, that happens.

26 minutes ago, nic227 said:

Bullshit we treat black people differently, this isn't goddamn 50 years ago, we treat people differently if they're uneducated dipshits that continuously break the law, can't act civilized, and bitch about how bad their situation is they've created for themselves. If you can't grow up and make better choices, too bad. I will not treat a criminal with the same respect as a decent, civilized human being. That being said, I couldn't care less about the color of their skin.

Black people didn't create their oppression, that's historically false. And please read this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/07/11/arent-more-white-people-than-black-people-killed-by-police-yes-but-no/?utm_term=.91cd1ad51294

"U.S. police officers have shot and killed the exact same number of unarmed white people as they have unarmed black people: 50 each. But because the white population is approximately five times larger than the black population, that means unarmed black Americans were five times as likely as unarmed white Americans to be shot and killed by a police officer."

 

29 minutes ago, nic227 said:

You could also say we have seen SCORES of unarmed white people be killed (more than black people actually, but who cares, right?), but I guess their life doesn't matter, because they don't have an organization for that, hmm? Usually people get shot by police for either having a weapon, or not following orders, but wait, there is a simple fix for that, COMPLY with commands and you'll be fine, but then you'd have to face prison time for your stupid actions which got you into this mess in the first place. Also most people that get shot by police have lengthy criminal records, and are the farthest thing from a good citizen, so why do we really care about them so much?

I believe in justice. When someone breaks the law, I want them arrested. If someone poses an immendent deadly threat to a cop or someone else, I understand why that person has to be killed. But if you think the police are allowed to kill someone for "not following orders", you are LITERALLY INCORRECT. Nowhere in the law, police training, or police procedures does it justify such an action. So take yourself off "team cops", because you're justifying the murders of unarmed people for "not listening". If that's just your opinion, fine. But it is a disgusting one, and it makes me question your morals.

32 minutes ago, nic227 said:

All lives DO matter, not just right now but always will. But if BLM will continue with their bullshit that only their lives matter then sorry, but they can go fuck off, because no, not ONLY their lives matter. But I guess that makes me racist in BLM's eyes.

Oh my god dude, I literally just explained what "black lives matter" means, and you're still wrong about it. They do NOT claim that only black lives matter. How do you STILL not get it? Or are you just lying?

33 minutes ago, nic227 said:

Police officers aren't perfect, they're human, but 99% of them are trying their best to do a job you could never work one shift of. This generation is unfortunately a bitchy and whiny one, I can't wait until respect and common sense make a comeback.

EXACTLY- they're human. They're subject to the same racial biases that we ALL are. Me and you have the same biases, because we're also human. We've all been ingrained with racial stereotypes, including cops. These protests are exposing those biases, and I can tell how incredibly uncomfortable that makes you. So uncomfortable that you have to lie about what the entire movement is about. By bringing attention to these biases and injustices, we can hopefully influence police training and get beyond it. I'm sorry, but you're on the losing side of history. Just look at the DOJ reports, dude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Riley24 said:

It blows my mind that people still don't understand the concept of Black Lives Matter, and why saying All Lives Matter is a red herring. At this point, if you still don't get it, I question your intelligence or intellectual honesty.

I can't speak for most folks, but to me, it's not the message that I have issues with, but rather the actions of the people who use BLM as a slogan. Like many groups/ideologies that started out from seemingly noble ideas, I feel like BLM has been hijacked by what seems like radical and even racists. From a video of a BLM rally where whites were ordered to go to the back, to a gay pride parade that was stopped unless they made BLM issues the main focus, or a memorial for the Orlando victims interrupted simply because cops where the ones organizing it. The people who have taken up the BLM flag have continuously proven that they cannot be reasoned with, and with them chanting death to cops, it's not hard to see why other people see them in such a negative light.

7 hours ago, Riley24 said:

IOur current society treats black people as if their lives don't matter. We have seen SCORES of unarmed black people be killed in the street because they posed a vague threat, or simply just didn't follow orders. All Lives DO NOT matter RIGHT NOW, and that's the problem. I support fixing that problem. Anyone that shuts their ears and says "no no no, all lives matter" just simply doesn't get it, or doesn't want to.

I have to disagree, if society did in fact treat blacks as if they didn't matter then we never would have black police chiefs, black attorney generals, black musicians, black movie stars, black supreme court judges, and even a black president. I don't think it's so much a matter of race or skin color, but rather an individual's own upbringing and will to achieve in life.

Regarding the "SCORES" of unarmed blacks, just in 2016 alone, according to The Counted, only 26 "unarmed" blacks have been EDIT: shot dead (not just killed) by police. However, the "unarmed" bit is usually given in a literal sense. Some of these cases involved suspects where unarmed but went to reach for a weapon when shot, so the real number of true unarmed killings might be lower. Someone will have to dig deeper for that number. But let's say it's really just 26, BLM seems to always say how unarmed killings by police officers are so prevalent. But 26 killings in just one year out of the thousands of police interactions everyday? It doesn't really scream "epidemic" to me.

7 hours ago, Riley24 said:

And let me get this straight. The police shoot and kill this guy with all of their cameras recording, and say that the video proves Scott jumped out of his car and pointed a gun at the police. And as parts of their city are burning, they STILL do not release evidence that could potentially calm the crowd?

Didn't the police chief say in a press conference that the police videos were inconclusive to whether or not a gun can be seen? Releasing something like that can only serve to fan the flames. And they were right. Even with the release of the dash and body cam footage, there is still a huge debate on whether or not he was armed.

7 hours ago, Riley24 said:

Also, police in San Francisco peacefully ended a 6 HOUR standoff with an armed man last night. I want you to guess the race of the suspect. Tell me again how we value black lives so much. The police in San Francicso valued that guys life. The police in Charlotte simply didn't.

I can't really say much on the 6 hour standoff, I'll have to make some time to research more about it. But if the point of that statement is to say that police take other races into custody more than blacks, then I suggest looking up which ethnicity makes up the majority of our prison system.

7 hours ago, Riley24 said:

What I was talking about is when the police bring riot gear to a peaceful protest. Yes, that happens.

The problem with that is whenever there's a protest involving police shootings blacks, most of them have turned up into violent riots.

Edited by Beren
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Beren said:

I can't speak for most folks, but to me, it's not the message that I have issues with, but rather the actions of the people who use BLM as a slogan. Like many groups/ideologies that started out from seemingly noble ideas, I feel like BLM has been hijacked by what seems like radical and even racists. From a video of a BLM rally where whites were ordered to go to the back, to a gay pride parade that was stopped unless they made BLM issues the main focus, or a memorial for the Orlando victims interrupted simply because cops where the ones organizing it. The people who have taken up the BLM flag have continuously proven that they cannot be reasoned with, and with them chanting death to cops, it's not hard to see why other people see them in such a negative light.

I agree. I disagree with all of those things as well. But we don't apply that standard to any other groups. The example I always use is gun rights groups. People at pro-second amendment rallies march with loaded rifles wearing masks, intimidating anyone that shows up to voice a dissenting opinion. People in gun rights groups openly call for the murder of government officials, cops, and even the president. But when we see people like them do things like that, we excuse it as "its just a few crazies", and we don't let it distract us from the political issue of gun rights vs. gun control. But when some people who use BLM as a slogan take it too far, we immediately say that their entire message isn't worth discussing.

Look, the issue at hand is oppression. It takes a different form than it has in the past. We also look at the past with rose-colored glasses. There were violent and even deadly riots during the civil rights era. People accused Martin Luther King Jr. of trying to start a race war, and encouraging violence and murder. There were viscous slave rebellions where whites were murdered. But slavery was still worse than the rebellions, segregation was still worse than the riots in the 60s, and police brutality and racial profiling are worse than the riots. Its fine to condemn the riots, I do it all the time. But it is FAR more important that we discuss the issues that are being protested. Protests and riots aren't going to stop by telling black people to shut up and behave, they're going to stop when we see nation-wide reform.

We can't expect people who might be experiencing oppression to behave entirely civilly in their protesting, and rationally debate issues with nuance on the streets. People are ANGRY. Far more angry than you or I have been in our entire lives, imagine that. We have a responsibility as calm and rational people to address the issues, and fix the system.

1 hour ago, Beren said:

I have to disagree, if society did in fact treat blacks as if they didn't matter then we never would have black police chiefs, black attorney generals, black musicians, black movie stars, black supreme court judges, and even a black president. I don't think it's so much a matter of race or skin color, but rather an individual's own upbringing and will to achieve in life.

And I would have to disagree as well. Racism is more complex than "I hate black people". Its all about the system. Please check these out:

https://thinkprogress.org/a-black-college-student-has-the-same-chances-of-getting-a-job-as-a-white-high-school-dropout-b7639607fdf1#.5ymcrk2rt

http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/26/opinion/sunday/forcing-black-men-out-of-society.html?referrer=

http://www.nber.org/papers/w9873.pdf

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-cops-race-injury-20160725-snap-story.html

http://www.npr.org/2015/08/29/435833251/shooters-quicker-to-pull-trigger-when-target-is-black-study-finds

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/30/white-people-are-more-likely-to-deal-drugs-but-black-people-are-more-likely-to-get-arrested-for-it/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/31/the-counted-police-killings-2015-young-black-men

The last three are, in my opinion the most relevant and important. There's a bunch more studies I could include but I'll spare you the reading lol, hopefully you get the point. The stereotype about black men is that they are more dangerous. All of the old steroetypes about people locking their car doors, crossing the street, or clutching their purse on an elevator: they're REAL. With the literal endless stories of harassment, profiling, etc, even long before the internet: did you think black people all across the country were lying about their experiences? Just read the recent DOJ reports, they're damning. White people shouldn't feel guilty for being born into a society that holds black people down, but we're obligated to help fix it and demand reform. Thanks to the DOJ and BLM, we no longer have the luxury of saying we didn't know. People don't like to read studies about black people facing inequality, because it makes us uncomfortable about our own place in the world. We need to get past that.

2 hours ago, Beren said:

Regarding the "SCORES" of unarmed blacks, just in 2016 alone, according to The Counted, only 26 "unarmed" blacks have been EDIT: shot dead (not just killed) by police. However, the "unarmed" bit is usually given in a literal sense. Some of these cases involved suspects where unarmed but went to reach for a weapon when shot, so the real number of true unarmed killings might be lower. Someone will have to dig deeper for that number. But let's say it's really just 26, BLM seems to always say how unarmed killings by police officers are so prevalent. But 26 killings in just one year out of the thousands of police interactions everyday? It doesn't really scream "epidemic" to me

Among unarmed victims of police shootings, black people make up a significant majority, proportionately speaking.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/study-finds-police-fatally-shoot-unarmed-black-men-at-disproportionate-rates/2016/04/06/e494563e-fa74-11e5-80e4-c381214de1a3_story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/07/11/arent-more-white-people-than-black-people-killed-by-police-yes-but-no/?utm_term=.91cd1ad51294

"U.S. police officers have shot and killed the exact same number of unarmed white people as they have unarmed black people: 50 each. But because the white population is approximately five times larger than the black population, that means unarmed black Americans were five times as likely as unarmed white Americans to be shot and killed by a police officer."

2 hours ago, Beren said:

Didn't the police chief say in a press conference that the police videos were inconclusive to whether or not a gun can be seen? Releasing something like that can only serve to fan the flames. And they were right. Even with the release of the dash and body cam footage, there is still a huge debate on whether or not he was armed.

At first, the police claimed that he jumped out of his car and pointed a gun at officers. Their own video clearly disproves that claim. At no point upon exiting the car did Scott raise his arms, and its not even clear if he had a gun in his hands. The police said they were "not sure" if the gun was loaded, days after collecting it for evidence. Their lack of transparency and honesty shows exactly why they're not trusted. 

And I have to give credit to Tulsa, they immediately released the dashcam and helicopter footage with full audio, and the officer who killed the unarmed man is currently being charged with manslaughter. The police chief released a statement after the shooting that justice would be reached, and they didn't provoke the peaceful protesters across the city. And guess what? No rioting in Tulsa, and the media NEVER covered the peaceful protesting.

2 hours ago, Beren said:

I can't really say much on the 6 hour standoff, I'll have to make some time to research more about it. But if the point of that statement is to say that police take other races into custody more than blacks, then I suggest looking up which ethnicity makes up the majority of our prison system.

I'll refer you back to the study that showed the racial profiling associated with the drug war. My using of the SF standoff was simply to show that there IS a way to handle these situations that doesn't end in tragedy. The police in SF handled it perfectly; they backed off, set up a perimeter, and talked the guy down. The police in Charlotte rushed the guy and demanded absolute obedience, and killed him when he didn't comply. His life was less important than the speed at which they were going to make the arrest. And THEY rolled up on HIM, they weren't called to his house. They had no reason to blitzkrieg the guy.

2 hours ago, Beren said:

The problem with that is whenever there's a protest involving police shootings blacks, most of them have turned up into violent riots.

That's simply not true. The VAST majority of protests have been peaceful, they just weren't reported on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

I agree. I disagree with all of those things as well. But we don't apply that standard to any other groups. The example I always use is gun rights groups. People at pro-second amendment rallies march with loaded rifles wearing masks, intimidating anyone that shows up to voice a dissenting opinion. People in gun rights groups openly call for the murder of government officials, cops, and even the president. But when we see people like them do things like that, we excuse it as "its just a few crazies", and we don't let it distract us from the political issue of gun rights vs. gun control. But when some people who use BLM as a slogan take it too far, we immediately say that their entire message isn't worth discussing.

Those people do sound crazy, but how often do we hear of gun rights groups actually killing cops in the name of their ideologies? BLM can say what they want, but the moment when people start acting upon those violent rhetoric, that's when it becomes an issue. I've also yet to see a gun rights activist go up into my face pushing their agenda, whereas BLM activists have been... more than vocal, to say the least. And I blame the media for downplaying issues and selectively reporting based on which will net them the most views. And race issues definitely garners views.

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

Look, the issue at hand is oppression. It takes a different form than it has in the past. We also look at the past with rose-colored glasses. There were violent and even deadly riots during the civil rights era. People accused Martin Luther King Jr. of trying to start a race war, and encouraging violence and murder. There were viscous slave rebellions where whites were murdered. But slavery was still worse than the rebellions, segregation was still worse than the riots in the 60s, and police brutality and racial profiling are worse than the riots. Its fine to condemn the riots, I do it all the time. But it is FAR more important that we discuss the issues that are being protested. Protests and riots aren't going to stop by telling black people to shut up and behave, they're going to stop when we see nation-wide reform.

If we were both in the 60s, I can wholeheartedly agree with you. There certainly was oppression in one form or another, the police were brutal, and there were laws actively discriminating against blacks. I don't think anyone can deny that. But, as nic227 pointed out, that's more than 40-50 years ago, progress has been made since then. What law, that we have now, specifically discriminates against blacks and other minorities? I'd like to know, because I'll stand by you to fight against it, but at this point I can't think of any. And protesting is completely fine, they have a right to do so, I only take issue when it turns into a riot and stores are looted and burned. At that point, nobody wins regardless of the point being made. Also, believe it or not, but segregation is back. But it's not mandated by the government - it's self-imposed by black students in universities, and I can't, for the life of me, understand why...

And what kind of reform does BLM want, exactly? The disbandment of the police force? Because that was brought up

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

The last three are, in my opinion the most relevant and important. There's a bunch more studies I could include but I'll spare you the reading lol, hopefully you get the point. The stereotype about black men is that they are more dangerous. All of the old steroetypes about people locking their car doors, crossing the street, or clutching their purse on an elevator: they're REAL. With the literal endless stories of harassment, profiling, etc, even long before the internet: did you think black people all across the country were lying about their experiences? Just read the recent DOJ reports, they're damning. White people shouldn't feel guilty for being born into a society that holds black people down, but we're obligated to help fix it and demand reform. Thanks to the DOJ and BLM, we no longer have the luxury of saying we didn't know. People don't like to read studies about black people facing inequality, because it makes us uncomfortable about our own place in the world. We need to get past that.

I don't mind the read, I want to be able to gather every info on a topic. I'll be looking into the sources of those articles though, as some of those sites I've found to be misleading before.

The thing with stereotypes, as much as I try to avoid using it to justify anything, is that there are some truth to them. Something had to have happened in order for it to be so pervasive in society. Blacks, while only making up around 13% of the entire US population, are responsible for around 50% of murders, 60% of robberies, and make up 40% of cop killers.

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-black-americans-commit-crime/19439

https://infogr.am/Black-34991937313

But again, I don't believe it has anything to do with race. Blacks are also disproportionately impoverished while having one of the largest single-mother rates of any demographic. And it's this level of poverty and plight that causes such high crime rate. I believe that this is the root of the problem.

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

At first, the police claimed that he jumped out of his car and pointed a gun at officers. Their own video clearly disproves that claim. At no point upon exiting the car did Scott raise his arms, and its not even clear if he had a gun in his hands. The police said they were "not sure" if the gun was loaded, days after collecting it for evidence. Their lack of transparency and honesty shows exactly why they're not trusted. 

And I have to give credit to Tulsa, they immediately released the dashcam and helicopter footage with full audio, and the officer who killed the unarmed man is currently being charged with manslaughter. The police chief released a statement after the shooting that justice would be reached, and they didn't provoke the peaceful protesters across the city. And guess what? No rioting in Tulsa, and the media NEVER covered the peaceful protesting.

Yes, I agree that Scott's death does seem highly suspicious. There are a lot of questions I keep asking regarding the entire ordeal, to both sides. Like, why did Scott not have his arms up as he backed up? Why was he doing it so quickly? What was that black object on his leg? And what made the cops deem it necessary to really shoot the guy? There has to be more to this. I'm only leaning towards the cops side for now on this simply because after the shooting, the cops were asking for the wife to come over, to which she refused. If the cops really were trying to cover up the gun, why would they be willing to have her over? As she was filming? Like I said, a lot of questions that I've been trying to find answers to. But if the cops were in the wrong, then they do deserve whatever punishment that's handed to them. Doesn't matter if the man had a lengthy record on his name.

As in the case of Tulsa, I'm more inclined to believe that the man was under the influence of something to have him behave the way he did. I'm not saying the shooting was entirely justified, but he was strangely going towards his car for whatever reason and the fact that witness say he ran out of the car saying it was going to blow. If it really was just a simple case of the car breaking down, why would he think it was going to explode? We'll have to wait for toxicology reports I guess.

And what makes you assume that it has to be the cops who provoke them first? It could easily have been any of the protesters, or even some maniac who just wants to see the world burn, who attacked first.

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

I'll refer you back to the study that showed the racial profiling associated with the drug war. My using of the SF standoff was simply to show that there IS a way to handle these situations that doesn't end in tragedy. The police in SF handled it perfectly; they backed off, set up a perimeter, and talked the guy down. The police in Charlotte rushed the guy and demanded absolute obedience, and killed him when he didn't comply. His life was less important than the speed at which they were going to make the arrest. And THEY rolled up on HIM, they weren't called to his house. They had no reason to blitzkrieg the guy.

But I'm finding it difficult to properly compare the two since the man in SF was attempting suicide and even called the police about it. There's a whole different mindset when it comes to handling the situation and the police were aware of the type of situation and were able to take the time to plan things through in SF, whereas Scott was a complete unknown to the officers who came up to him and things happened fast.

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

That's simply not true. The VAST majority of protests have been peaceful, they just weren't reported on.

Perhaps, but the vast majority of civil unrest in the US in 2013-16 that did occur stem from protests against police shootings.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_incidents_of_civil_unrest_in_the_United_States#2010s

Edited by Beren
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Beren said:

Those people do sound crazy, but how often do we hear of gun rights groups actually killing cops in the name of their ideologies? BLM can say what they want, but the moment when people start acting upon those violent rhetoric, that's when it becomes an issue. I've also yet to see a gun rights activist go up into my face pushing their agenda, whereas BLM activists have been... more than vocal, to say the least. And I blame the media for downplaying issues and selectively reporting based on which will net them the most views. And race issues definitely garners views.

Did you know that most cop killers are white? And when white people kill cops, there's no #bluelivesmatter, there's no outcry. Its seen as a normal occurrence. When a black person kills a cop, its made to seem like part of a bigger picture. 

27 minutes ago, Beren said:

If we were both in the 60s, I can wholeheartedly agree with you. There certainly was oppression in one form or another, the police were brutal, and there were laws actively discriminating against blacks. I don't think anyone can deny that. But, as nic227 pointed out, that's more than 40-50 years ago, progress has been made since then. What law, that we have now, specifically discriminates against blacks and other minorities? I'd like to know, because I'll stand by you to fight against it, but at this point I can't think of any. And protesting is completely fine, they have a right to do so, I only take issue when it turns into a riot and stores are looted and burned. At that point, nobody wins regardless of the point being made. Also, believe it or not, but segregation is back. But it's not mandated by the government - it's self-imposed by black students in universities, and I can't, for the life of me, understand why...

Progress has been made, no doubt. But do you really believe that systemic racism ended with the Civil Rights Act? What about 20 years ago, 10 years ago? In what year did we suddenly put all of our racial biases and social structures behind us? If you want to see laws, just look at the drug war. Look at Stand Your Ground. Look at Stop and Frisk. The whole point of the drug war was to target "blacks and hippies" http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/

Today, our laws are explicitly racist. But they allow and support racism in how they are applied. Now we're using minor drug crimes as a basis to target and imprison minorities. Where do you think they search more cars for "suspicion of drug paraphernalia", North Philly or Beverly Hills? You better damn well believe that people in Beverly Hills are doing coke.

Imagine growing up as a poor, young black teenager, and getting treated as a suspect no matter what you do, and having to endure disproportionate police searches or harassment, for every day crimes like jaywalking. That's oppression. Did you think every black person across the country were lying about their experiences for decades? 

33 minutes ago, Beren said:

And what kind of reform does BLM want, exactly? The disbandment of the police force? Because that was brought up

Maybe try reading their website, that might be a good source. There are many police reform groups besides BLM. The BLM message is simply "stop killing us", other groups focus more on policy than BLM does.

38 minutes ago, Beren said:

The thing with stereotypes, as much as I try to avoid using it to justify anything, is that there are some truth to them. Something had to have happened in order for it to be so pervasive in society. Blacks, while only making up around 13% of the entire US population, are responsible for around 50% of murders, 60% of robberies, and make up 40% of cop killers.

http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-black-americans-commit-crime/19439

https://infogr.am/Black-34991937313

But again, I don't believe it has anything to do with race. Blacks are also disproportionately impoverished while having one of the largest single-mother rates of any demographic. And it's this level of poverty and plight that causes such high crime rate. I believe that this is the root of the problem.

The sources for the info-graphic are incredibly unspecific, which is worrying. But assuming that those statistics are correct, what exactly is the point that you're trying to prove. That black people are more dangerous than white people? That fear of black people is rational? I need clarification. I agree that violence within the black community largely has to do with socio-economic issues, but I'm confused as to why you decided to include this as a response.

45 minutes ago, Beren said:

Yes, I agree that Scott's death does seem highly suspicious. There are a lot of questions I keep asking regarding the entire ordeal, to both sides. Like, why did Scott not have his arms up as he backed up? Why was he doing it so quickly? What was that black object on his leg? And what made the cops deem it necessary to really shoot the guy? There has to be more to this. I'm only leaning towards the cops side for now on this simply because after the shooting, the cops were asking for the wife to come over, to which she refused. If the cops really were trying to cover up the gun, why would they be willing to have her over? As she was filming? Like I said, a lot of questions that I've been trying to find answers to. But if the cops were in the wrong, then they do deserve whatever punishment that's handed to them. Doesn't matter if the man had a lengthy record on his name.

I'm guessing they wanted her to come over so they could detain her. But they seemed pretty hyped the fuck up on adrenaline, far too much so. Sadly, we can't assume that our armed public servants are thinking clearly. 

48 minutes ago, Beren said:

As in the case of Tulsa, I'm more inclined to believe that the man was under the influence of something to have him behave the way he did. I'm not saying the shooting was entirely justified, but he was strangely going towards his car for whatever reason and the fact that witness say he ran out of the car saying it was going to blow. If it really was just a simple case of the car breaking down, why would he think it was going to explode? We'll have to wait for toxicology reports I guess.

Yeah, I agree with your assessment that he could've very well been on something. But erratic behavior is not the same thing as an imminent deadly threat, which is why the officer is facing charges. Picture a white guy, like Paul Giamatti, having a mental breakdown or drug induced hallucination in the middle of the road. He's not attacking anyone, but is acting strange. Does he get gunned down in the street for not following orders, or does he get taken to the hospital? Again, I think it has to do with our ingrained stereotype that large black men are dangerous. For a LARGE part of our history, we called them "savages" and "apes". Now we call them "thugs". Through our media, we've been taught that black men pose a unique danger that other men do not. Why was that officer SO scared of Terrence Crutcher? Its an embedded racism within our society. This isn't "playing the race card", I'm not accusing the cops of being racist or evil. Its just important that we understand the double standards in our society.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e8/PaulGiamattiSept2013TIFF.jpg/220px-PaulGiamattiSept2013TIFF.jpg

https://heavyeditorial.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/terence-crutcher-4-e1474303289961.jpg?quality=65&strip=all&strip=all

They're the same build, both bald, around the same age, and even have the same facial hair. Do you really think someone that looks like Paul Giamatti gets shot and killed while potentially having a mental breakdown? Would the cop in the helicopter have said that Paul "looks like a bad dude"? Maybe. But do you REALLY think race had NOTHING to do with it, that its entirely even? Ever wonder why "the black guy always dies first" in movies?

1 hour ago, Beren said:

And what makes you assume that it has to be the cops who provoke them first? It could easily have been any of the protesters, or even some maniac who just wants to see the world burn, who attacked first.

I'm not assuming, I'm just saying it happens. And I read somewhere that it happened in Charlotte, but I can't find the article now so don't take my word for it. But here's a study that showed it actually happens: http://news.berkeley.edu/2014/08/22/berkeley-researchers-find-police-often-incite-violence-at-protests/

Bringing riot gear to a peaceful protest is a sure way to piss off all the peaceful protesters. At the protest in Dallas, before the shooting, uniformed Dallas officers were marching with the peaceful protesters, even smiling and taking pictures. That's how you do it.

1 hour ago, Beren said:

But I'm finding it difficult to properly compare the two since the man in SF was attempting suicide and even called the police about it. There's a whole different mindset when it comes to handling the situation and the police were aware of the type of situation and were able to take the time to plan things through in SF, whereas Scott was a complete unknown to the officers who came up to him and things happened fast.

If you're claiming they couldn't have avoided shooting Scott, I don't agree. If they slowed down, calmed down, and allowed his wife to explain the situation and talk him out of the car, it very well could've ended peacefully. But instead they went the "tacticool" route and look how that ended up.

Look, my overall point is that I want us to be able our racial differences so we can get beyond them. In terms of the police, there is absolutely a way forward. Mandatory body cameras, legitimate prosecutions of cops, etc. Police need FAR better training than they get now. They need to be better able to end these situations peacefully instead of freaking out and killing someone. So many military members have spoken out against the shootings, saying that they would never shoot someone that quickly in IRAQ. More rigorous training for cops also means that cops are safer, since they're better able to handle stressful situations and defend themselves when its actually necessary. Community engagement is also fundamental; cops today are seen as an occupying force, when they need to be seen as what they really are: public SERVANTS. That change in perception can only come from changing the police, not telling people what to think of them.

1 hour ago, Beren said:

Perhaps, but the vast majority of civil unrest in the US in 2013-16 that did occur stem from protests against police shootings.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_incidents_of_civil_unrest_in_the_United_States#2010s

Yeah, because it's a hot button issue right now. It has the entire country talking about it, and has enraged millions of people. That doesn't surprise me one bit. But that doesn't mean if you look at just BLM protests, that the majority of those have been violent. That's not true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

Did you know that most cop killers are white? And when white people kill cops, there's no #bluelivesmatter, there's no outcry. Its seen as a normal occurrence. When a black person kills a cop, its made to seem like part of a bigger picture.

The thing that confuses me about the FBI statistics on that is they sometimes include Hispanics into the white category, so the overall number of whites could be lower than that.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/01/09/are-black-or-white-offenders-more-likely-to-kill-police/

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

Progress has been made, no doubt. But do you really believe that systemic racism ended with the Civil Rights Act? What about 20 years ago, 10 years ago? In what year did we suddenly put all of our racial biases and social structures behind us? If you want to see laws, just look at the drug war. Look at Stand Your Ground. Look at Stop and Frisk. The whole point of the drug war was to target "blacks and hippies" http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/

Racism and racial biases, still exist, yes, I agree. But systemic racism? When I mentioned laws, I was referring to laws that could possibly prevent blacks and minorities from succeeding in life. They're not excluded from receiving a better education, from applying for jobs, or even landing in high positions within government. The war on drugs, while devastating for sure, is targeting people who are already committing crimes in the first place. Whether or not drugs should be legal, is another debate, but right now, a lot of them aren't.

Also CNN... isn't exactly the most reliable of sources. Especially after this:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/16/cnn-edits-out-milwaukee-victims-sister-sherelle-sm/

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

Today, our laws are explicitly racist. But they allow and support racism in how they are applied. Now we're using minor drug crimes as a basis to target and imprison minorities. Where do you think they search more cars for "suspicion of drug paraphernalia", North Philly or Beverly Hills? You better damn well believe that people in Beverly Hills are doing coke.

Imagine growing up as a poor, young black teenager, and getting treated as a suspect no matter what you do, and having to endure disproportionate police searches or harassment, for every day crimes like jaywalking. That's oppression. Did you think every black person across the country were lying about their experiences for decades?

I'm assuming that you meant to say, "Today, our laws aren't explicitly racist," and you're right. And regardless of how small they are, they are still crimes.

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

Maybe try reading their website, that might be a good source. There are many police reform groups besides BLM. The BLM message is simply "stop killing us", other groups focus more on policy than BLM does.

And I did, most of it boiled down to, "you owe us, give me money."

https://policy.m4bl.org/reparations/

Also, "direct community control" over all law enforcement agencies? Really? I don't think they realize what a dangerous precedent that could be.

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

The sources for the info-graphic are incredibly unspecific, which is worrying. But assuming that those statistics are correct, what exactly is the point that you're trying to prove. That black people are more dangerous than white people? That fear of black people is rational? I need clarification. I agree that violence within the black community largely has to do with socio-economic issues, but I'm confused as to why you decided to include this as a response.

Looking back at it, yes, they should have an actual link to that FBI statistics page, but the point of that was to explain why the police and the public view blacks in that stereotype of being thugs. Not that the stereotype itself is a good thing, mind you, but maybe because of this, the police act the way they do around poorer black communities.

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

I'm guessing they wanted her to come over so they could detain her. But they seemed pretty hyped the fuck up on adrenaline, far too much so. Sadly, we can't assume that our armed public servants are thinking clearly.

At this point, we can't say for sure either way.

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

Yeah, I agree with your assessment that he could've very well been on something. But erratic behavior is not the same thing as an imminent deadly threat, which is why the officer is facing charges. Picture a white guy, like Paul Giamatti, having a mental breakdown or drug induced hallucination in the middle of the road. He's not attacking anyone, but is acting strange. Does he get gunned down in the street for not following orders, or does he get taken to the hospital? Again, I think it has to do with our ingrained stereotype that large black men are dangerous. For a LARGE part of our history, we called them "savages" and "apes". Now we call them "thugs". Through our media, we've been taught that black men pose a unique danger that other men do not. Why was that officer SO scared of Terrence Crutcher? Its an embedded racism within our society. This isn't "playing the race card", I'm not accusing the cops of being racist or evil. Its just important that we understand the double standards in our society.

On the contrary, erratic behavior is unpredictable, and unpredictability can be a life or death situation for an officer. They reported to have found a vial for PCP in the car. I've seen videos of people under PCP, they can literally go berserk. But of course, we still need the autopsy and toxicology reports to know for sure. And I think that example would be better if it wasn't some well known actor. Another type of bias would be in play, or that his star power would sway the officer's actions. Of course cops wouldn't be so quick to kill him. It would have been the same if the person was Shaq. All we know is that he was acting strange, and refused to obey orders to stop, and he had a vial for PCP in the car. I think the real question should be - could the officers really tell if the windows were rolled down or not? That's why he was shot, right? Because they thought the windows were down and he was reaching? Of course, we found out that it wasn't, but that's later. How did those cops see it at that moment? I really wish one of them had a body cam. And I can understand why the officer was initially scared of him first. He was bigger than her. And men are just naturally stronger than women. But that's before backup came. I agree that she shouldn't have had reason to be scared of him after that.

And I don't think you're accusing cops of being evil. We all want this violence to end. I agree that there is embedded racism on a personal level, but I can't agree that it's systemic in that the system itself actively discriminates.

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

They're the same build, both bald, around the same age, and even have the same facial hair. Do you really think someone that looks like Paul Giamatti gets shot and killed while potentially having a mental breakdown? Would the cop in the helicopter have said that Paul "looks like a bad dude"? Maybe. But do you REALLY think race had NOTHING to do with it, that its entirely even? Ever wonder why "the black guy always dies first" in movies?

The pilot said that he looked like a "bad dude" because he seemingly wasn't obeying orders to stop. You have to put yourself in his shoes - you see a suspect, walking back towards his car, refusing to listen to the cops. Usually, that means one of two things: a. he's going to jump in and flee, b. he's going to reach for something. How would you describe him? I'd say that he looks like a bad guy too, wouldn't you? Regardless of skin color.

And the token black guy doesn't always die first, if at all:

http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2013/10/black-characters-horror-movies/verdict

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

Bringing riot gear to a peaceful protest is a sure way to piss off all the peaceful protesters. At the protest in Dallas, before the shooting, uniformed Dallas officers were marching with the peaceful protesters, even smiling and taking pictures. That's how you do it.

Yes, but around 20 officers were injured from rocks and other objects during the riots in St. Paul, Minn. They weren't wearing full protective riot gear. With amount of riots that's been happening in the US, I'd prefer to wear some protective gear too if I was a riot police.

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

ILook, my overall point is that I want us to be able our racial differences so we can get beyond them. In terms of the police, there is absolutely a way forward. Mandatory body cameras, legitimate prosecutions of cops, etc. Police need FAR better training than they get now. They need to be better able to end these situations peacefully instead of freaking out and killing someone. So many military members have spoken out against the shootings, saying that they would never shoot someone that quickly in IRAQ. More rigorous training for cops also means that cops are safer, since they're better able to handle stressful situations and defend themselves when its actually necessary. Community engagement is also fundamental; cops today are seen as an occupying force, when they need to be seen as what they really are: public SERVANTS. That change in perception can only come from changing the police, not telling people what to think of them.

We can both agree on that. This violence has to end. This racial divide is also something we need to tear down. I don't consider a person black, asian, or hispanic, I consider them as fellow human beings. I also agree body cameras should be mandatory (hopefully with better quality... the videos we get look like there taken from a potato) and better training. The problem I have with military members saying all that is most of their engagements happen over long distances and they go in there knowing that they will be engaged. When it comes to cops, shootings can happen just a few feet away, sometimes point-blank. A lot of cops have died from criminals quickly shooting them before they could even say hello. So, I don't know. Also, aren't some cops veterans as well? I don't hear them saying the same thing. Of course, they're the ones who actually know how it feels to be on patrol. But change also needs to come from the people as well. The healing process is a two-way street. Cops need to connect more with community, while the community needs to learn to not engage in crime.

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

Yeah, because it's a hot button issue right now. It has the entire country talking about it, and has enraged millions of people. That doesn't surprise me one bit. But that doesn't mean if you look at just BLM protests, that the majority of those have been violent. That's not true.

Doesn't surprise me either. And it's not just BLM protests, there are a ton of individual cases where they simply blast their own racisms and violent rhetoric. I mean, there are videos of them everywhere to the point that they've become the butt of the joke for the internet.

BLM UK seems to think that even air pollution is racist, nevermind that we all breathe the same air...

Edited by Beren
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/26/2016 at 3:06 AM, Beren said:

The thing that confuses me about the FBI statistics on that is they sometimes include Hispanics into the white category, so the overall number of whites could be lower than that.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/01/09/are-black-or-white-offenders-more-likely-to-kill-police/

And what exactly does that prove? What is your point? We can argue all day about the different ways in which surveys and studies are conducted, who is and isn't white, or the various sociological explanations for the statistics you quote. What are you saying?

On 9/26/2016 at 3:06 AM, Beren said:

Racism and racial biases, still exist, yes, I agree. But systemic racism? When I mentioned laws, I was referring to laws that could possibly prevent blacks and minorities from succeeding in life. They're not excluded from receiving a better education, from applying for jobs, or even landing in high positions within government. The war on drugs, while devastating for sure, is targeting people who are already committing crimes in the first place. Whether or not drugs should be legal, is another debate, but right now, a lot of them aren't.

Also CNN... isn't exactly the most reliable of sources. Especially after this:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/16/cnn-edits-out-milwaukee-victims-sister-sherelle-sm/

Lol, of course we don't have literal laws like we did in the 60s. I'm guessing you didn't exactly read any of the articles that I showed you, since they proved that its harder for black people to find jobs than white people, and that blacks are arrested at high rates for drug crimes, even though they don't commit them at those high rates. The ways in which we as a society apply or enforce laws has a BIG impact. Sure, all of the black people arrested for drug crimes. But if you go searching white people at a proportionally high rate, guess what you're going to find? DRUGS. And if studies are correct, MORE drugs than if you searched black people. So why are black people arrested at higher rates?

There seems to be confusion in our society about what equality actually is. If you're claiming that its just as easy to succeed as a black person in America than as a white person, you are simply incorrect. Did you seriously think that you just happened to be born into a generation with perfect racial equality, something that no other generation in the ENTIRE history of the country has enjoyed? 

And look up the content of the CNN article instead of just dismissing it. You'll find some pretty ugly stuff.

On 9/26/2016 at 3:06 AM, Beren said:

I'm assuming that you meant to say, "Today, our laws aren't explicitly racist," and you're right. And regardless of how small they are, they are still crimes.

The same argument was used post-slavery, when black people were rounded up and imprisoned for the pettiest crimes imaginable, at far higher rates than their white counterparts. You are defending a system of inequality on the technicality that people targeted for arrest committed a crime.

On 9/26/2016 at 3:06 AM, Beren said:

And I did, most of it boiled down to, "you owe us, give me money."

https://policy.m4bl.org/reparations/

Also, "direct community control" over all law enforcement agencies? Really? I don't think they realize what a dangerous precedent that could be.

"What exactly do they want?"

*reads website saying what they want*

"Yeah but I don't like what they want"

Well...um...ok? Debate that with them. And I absolutely agree that law enforcement should be civilian controlled, that's a policy model that's been floating around for a very long time. They are public servants.

On 9/26/2016 at 3:06 AM, Beren said:

Looking back at it, yes, they should have an actual link to that FBI statistics page, but the point of that was to explain why the police and the public view blacks in that stereotype of being thugs. Not that the stereotype itself is a good thing, mind you, but maybe because of this, the police act the way they do around poorer black communities.

So you're admitting that the public and the police are ingrained with racist stereotypes...? That's the entire problem being discussed. Why are we even debating?

On 9/26/2016 at 3:06 AM, Beren said:

On the contrary, erratic behavior is unpredictable, and unpredictability can be a life or death situation for an officer. They reported to have found a vial for PCP in the car. I've seen videos of people under PCP, they can literally go berserk. But of course, we still need the autopsy and toxicology reports to know for sure. And I think that example would be better if it wasn't some well known actor. Another type of bias would be in play, or that his star power would sway the officer's actions. Of course cops wouldn't be so quick to kill him. It would have been the same if the person was Shaq. All we know is that he was acting strange, and refused to obey orders to stop, and he had a vial for PCP in the car. I think the real question should be - could the officers really tell if the windows were rolled down or not? That's why he was shot, right? Because they thought the windows were down and he was reaching? Of course, we found out that it wasn't, but that's later. How did those cops see it at that moment? I really wish one of them had a body cam. And I can understand why the officer was initially scared of him first. He was bigger than her. And men are just naturally stronger than women. But that's before backup came. I agree that she shouldn't have had reason to be scared of him after that.

And I don't think you're accusing cops of being evil. We all want this violence to end. I agree that there is embedded racism on a personal level, but I can't agree that it's systemic in that the system itself actively discriminates.

They found the PCP after killing him, and you're right, we'll also need to wait for the toxicology report. If he wasn't on PCP, there also needs to be an investigation into whether or not the PCP was actually found in the car by the police. It would not be the first time in America that evidence was planted. But a drugged out guy is not a deadly threat. Someone acting erratically is not a deadly threat. I understand why the police were concerned, and I understand why they felt the need to call for backup. But I'll say it again, not following orders and erratic behavior is not an immanent deadly threat. Its a worrying situation at best. In order to end somene's life, you have to be pretty damn sure they're about to end yours. That's the whole point of self-defense. We simply cannot allow our payed public servants to be too terrified to do their jobs. And my slightly tongue and cheek example of Paul Giamatti was not about stardom, which I tried to make clear. Its about someone that LOOKS like Paul Giamatti.

And I'm glad we at least have, or are starting to have an understanding of where we're coming from. If you don't believe that systemic racism exists, that's fine. We can debate that, we can show each other articles and studies. My point then would be that the system is created by people. And if you're willing to admit that racism on the personal level exists, what is so unbelievable about the idea that the people who created and continue our current system could have the same personal levels of embedded racism?

On 9/26/2016 at 3:06 AM, Beren said:

The pilot said that he looked like a "bad dude" because he seemingly wasn't obeying orders to stop. You have to put yourself in his shoes - you see a suspect, walking back towards his car, refusing to listen to the cops. Usually, that means one of two things: a. he's going to jump in and flee, b. he's going to reach for something. How would you describe him? I'd say that he looks like a bad guy too, wouldn't you? Regardless of skin color.

And the token black guy doesn't always die first, if at all:

http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2013/10/black-characters-horror-movies/verdict

I'm not up in arms about the cops choice of words, don't get me wrong. I just don't think that if it was a jolly middle aged white guy, that they would've handled it in the way they did, or referred to him the way they did. It goes back to the classic point we all know is true: Muslims are terrorists, black people are thugs, and white people are mentally ill. Its my personal opinion that if Crutcher had been white, they would've thought he was a crazy white guy off his meds, or someone having a diabetic episode.

And the Complex link is broken. That comment was mostly a joke lol, but I still think its true to a certain extent.

On 9/26/2016 at 3:06 AM, Beren said:

Yes, but around 20 officers were injured from rocks and other objects during the riots in St. Paul, Minn. They weren't wearing full protective riot gear. With amount of riots that's been happening in the US, I'd prefer to wear some protective gear too if I was a riot police.

There's also similar allegations against police in St. Paul. The narrative that police were attacked by rioters out of nowhere is not one supported by any sources other than the police department itself.

On 9/26/2016 at 3:06 AM, Beren said:

We can both agree on that. This violence has to end. This racial divide is also something we need to tear down. I don't consider a person black, asian, or hispanic, I consider them as fellow human beings. I also agree body cameras should be mandatory (hopefully with better quality... the videos we get look like there taken from a potato) and better training. The problem I have with military members saying all that is most of their engagements happen over long distances and they go in there knowing that they will be engaged. When it comes to cops, shootings can happen just a few feet away, sometimes point-blank. A lot of cops have died from criminals quickly shooting them before they could even say hello. So, I don't know. Also, aren't some cops veterans as well? I don't hear them saying the same thing. Of course, they're the ones who actually know how it feels to be on patrol. But change also needs to come from the people as well. The healing process is a two-way street. Cops need to connect more with community, while the community needs to learn to not engage in crime.

I'd love for you to watch interviews with Michael A. Wood Jr., the former USMC FAST team member and Baltimore PD Sergeant. He talks about how his military training made him a lot less scared during interactions with potential criminals, because he knew he could draw and shoot faster than anyone he was talking to. He's a big advocate for improving police training. 

And the public will never stop engaging in crime, otherwise we wouldn't need cops. Crime is an unavoidable byproduct of having a society with laws. Respect for police has to come from improvements done by police.

On 9/26/2016 at 3:06 AM, Beren said:

Doesn't surprise me either. And it's not just BLM protests, there are a ton of individual cases where they simply blast their own racisms and violent rhetoric. I mean, there are videos of them everywhere to the point that they've become the butt of the joke for the internet.

BLM UK seems to think that even air pollution is racist, nevermind that we all breathe the same air...

I'm not demanding that you take up a liking for that specific group. Its just important that we understand why they exist in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just explain this to me and tell me how this is a legitimate group

Screenshot_1.png

                                                          BLUE LIVES MATTER

            All Gave Some, Some Gave All.

                   Never Forget 9/||/01

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Riley24 said:

And what exactly does that prove? What is your point? We can argue all day about the different ways in which surveys and studies are conducted, who is and isn't white, or the various sociological explanations for the statistics you quote. What are you saying?

Lol, of course we don't have literal laws like we did in the 60s. I'm guessing you didn't exactly read any of the articles that I showed you, since they proved that its harder for black people to find jobs than white people, and that blacks are arrested at high rates for drug crimes, even though they don't commit them at those high rates. The ways in which we as a society apply or enforce laws has a BIG impact. Sure, all of the black people arrested for drug crimes. But if you go searching white people at a proportionally high rate, guess what you're going to find? DRUGS. And if studies are correct, MORE drugs than if you searched black people. So why are black people arrested at higher rates?

There seems to be confusion in our society about what equality actually is. If you're claiming that its just as easy to succeed as a black person in America than as a white person, you are simply incorrect. Did you seriously think that you just happened to be born into a generation with perfect racial equality, something that no other generation in the ENTIRE history of the country has enjoyed? 

And look up the content of the CNN article instead of just dismissing it. You'll find some pretty ugly stuff.

The same argument was used post-slavery, when black people were rounded up and imprisoned for the pettiest crimes imaginable, at far higher rates than their white counterparts. You are defending a system of inequality on the technicality that people targeted for arrest committed a crime.

"What exactly do they want?"

*reads website saying what they want*

"Yeah but I don't like what they want"

Well...um...ok? Debate that with them. And I absolutely agree that law enforcement should be civilian controlled, that's a policy model that's been floating around for a very long time. They are public servants.

So you're admitting that the public and the police are ingrained with racist stereotypes...? That's the entire problem being discussed. Why are we even debating?

They found the PCP after killing him, and you're right, we'll also need to wait for the toxicology report. If he wasn't on PCP, there also needs to be an investigation into whether or not the PCP was actually found in the car by the police. It would not be the first time in America that evidence was planted. But a drugged out guy is not a deadly threat. Someone acting erratically is not a deadly threat. I understand why the police were concerned, and I understand why they felt the need to call for backup. But I'll say it again, not following orders and erratic behavior is not an immanent deadly threat. Its a worrying situation at best. In order to end somene's life, you have to be pretty damn sure they're about to end yours. That's the whole point of self-defense. We simply cannot allow our payed public servants to be too terrified to do their jobs. And my slightly tongue and cheek example of Paul Giamatti was not about stardom, which I tried to make clear. Its about someone that LOOKS like Paul Giamatti.

And I'm glad we at least have, or are starting to have an understanding of where we're coming from. If you don't believe that systemic racism exists, that's fine. We can debate that, we can show each other articles and studies. My point then would be that the system is created by people. And if you're willing to admit that racism on the personal level exists, what is so unbelievable about the idea that the people who created and continue our current system could have the same personal levels of embedded racism?

I'm not up in arms about the cops choice of words, don't get me wrong. I just don't think that if it was a jolly middle aged white guy, that they would've handled it in the way they did, or referred to him the way they did. It goes back to the classic point we all know is true: Muslims are terrorists, black people are thugs, and white people are mentally ill. Its my personal opinion that if Crutcher had been white, they would've thought he was a crazy white guy off his meds, or someone having a diabetic episode.

And the Complex link is broken. That comment was mostly a joke lol, but I still think its true to a certain extent.

There's also similar allegations against police in St. Paul. The narrative that police were attacked by rioters out of nowhere is not one supported by any sources other than the police department itself.

I'd love for you to watch interviews with Michael A. Wood Jr., the former USMC FAST team member and Baltimore PD Sergeant. He talks about how his military training made him a lot less scared during interactions with potential criminals, because he knew he could draw and shoot faster than anyone he was talking to. He's a big advocate for improving police training. 

And the public will never stop engaging in crime, otherwise we wouldn't need cops. Crime is an unavoidable byproduct of having a society with laws. Respect for police has to come from improvements done by police.

I'm not demanding that you take up a liking for that specific group. Its just important that we understand why they exist in the first place.

You're definitely stuck in the 60s here's the problem they are in generational poverty some of them try to fix it some don't but it's not always the cops fault 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Riley24 said:

And what exactly does that prove? What is your point? We can argue all day about the different ways in which surveys and studies are conducted, who is and isn't white, or the various sociological explanations for the statistics you quote. What are you saying?

What I'm saying is that there's a correlation between police treatment of blacks and the fact that majority of violent crimes are committed by blacks. You responded by saying that whites kill more cops, and I replied with how the FBI confusingly considers Hispanics as white, so statistically, real whites could be lower, thereby possibly making blacks the real majority.

6 hours ago, Riley24 said:

Lol, of course we don't have literal laws like we did in the 60s. I'm guessing you didn't exactly read any of the articles that I showed you, since they proved that its harder for black people to find jobs than white people, and that blacks are arrested at high rates for drug crimes, even though they don't commit them at those high rates. The ways in which we as a society apply or enforce laws has a BIG impact. Sure, all of the black people arrested for drug crimes. But if you go searching white people at a proportionally high rate, guess what you're going to find? DRUGS. And if studies are correct, MORE drugs than if you searched black people. So why are black people arrested at higher rates?

I did, and it conflicted with your points within the same articles. The reason why blacks aren't landing more jobs is because, and I'm quoting from the thinkprogress.org article, " According to Census Bureau data, blacks are almost twice as likely as whites to drop out of high school and are half as likely to get a post-baccalaureate degree." Again, this brings me back to my point that it's not about race, but rather an individual's will to achieve something greater in their lives. And as it is now, not a lot of blacks are willing to go through school, statistically speaking. Even then, from the same article, it says that "...a professional degree gives a black male a 146 percent larger increase in employment opportunities than his white counterparts." So how is that being unfair to them?

Blacks are being arrested more because the police tend to patrol high-crime areas, and they just so happen to be mostly within black neighborhoods. It's simply a case of happenstance. Sure, Billy and friends in Beverly Hills do more drugs, but they don't have to worry about increased police presence. It's not like there are gang shootouts everyday or hustlers actively dealings drugs on the streets of Beverly Hills. And most of these blacks who are caught with drugs were breaking some other law for the cops to have stopped them in the first place. They just so happen to have drugs on them at the time.

6 hours ago, Riley24 said:

There seems to be confusion in our society about what equality actually is. If you're claiming that its just as easy to succeed as a black person in America than as a white person, you are simply incorrect. Did you seriously think that you just happened to be born into a generation with perfect racial equality, something that no other generation in the ENTIRE history of the country has enjoyed?

No, I'm sorry, but that's just not true. I know that anecdotal evidence doesn't have as much weight in debates, but one of my best friends grew up in Detroit. He and his family were somewhat decent when it came to their finances. He came here to LA to study at the Art Institute and make it big in either the music or movie industry. He worked hard and helped soo many people during his time studying here, and now he has several internship offers from higher ups of top companies such as Riot Games, Universal Studios, The Asylum (people who made Sharknado), etc, just before he's about to graduate. And he has already done some work in Universal, where his uncle works too. Through his dedication and hard work towards the perfection of his craft and networking with people, he is moving up in the world. It didn't matter that he was black, only that he knew what his goals were and worked for it.

I didn't say it was going to be easy, only that it was possible so long as that individual tried.

6 hours ago, Riley24 said:

And look up the content of the CNN article instead of just dismissing it. You'll find some pretty ugly stuff.

I will, but I have a feeling that even those will have some twist. It's something that they're known to do... Once a source is caught outright lying and twisting the truth, just like in that example I showed you, everything they say I take with a grain of salt...

6 hours ago, Riley24 said:

The same argument was used post-slavery, when black people were rounded up and imprisoned for the pettiest crimes imaginable, at far higher rates than their white counterparts. You are defending a system of inequality on the technicality that people targeted for arrest committed a crime.

Again, it's still difficult to compare laws made back then with the laws we have now. Segregation was still a thing and of course blacks would be imprisoned for even sharing the same room with whites. But we don't have such laws anymore. Being arrested for drugs now is no petty thing, but that's a whole other topic.

6 hours ago, Riley24 said:

"What exactly do they want?"

*reads website saying what they want*

"Yeah but I don't like what they want"

Well...um...ok? Debate that with them. And I absolutely agree that law enforcement should be civilian controlled, that's a policy model that's been floating around for a very long time. They are public servants.

Isn't the entire point of this thread is to debate against BLM? And why should I, or anyone for that matter, like what they want? Reparations? More handouts? That's crazy. Who is going to pay and to whom, exactly? Like, with the issue of Civil War reparations, WHY would ANYONE be obliged to pay reparations today for something that happened hundreds of years ago? There were only a handful of somewhat reasonable demands based on grounded evidence (eg. removing privatized prisons), but most of them were just entirely unreasonable.

I still don't like the idea of community controlled law enforcement. There's a lot of room for abuse in that. BLM wants communities to also control the budget and the right to hire and fire officers. And what kind of community are they talking about? I can picture a "community" ran by some mob boss who now has direct control of the entire police force of that town/city since they're separate from the government now. A better way to solve this would be to provide more accountability for offices - make bodycams mandatory, have an independent group or tribunal overlook cases of police misconduct, end the privatization of the prison system so that there won't be anymore "quotas." Giving complete control to the community would make mob justice types of situations more likely towards police officers.

6 hours ago, Riley24 said:

So you're admitting that the public and the police are ingrained with racist stereotypes...? That's the entire problem being discussed. Why are we even debating?

If that makes facts racists, then I don't know what to say. If most of the crimes committed are done by a particular group, then I think it's understandable that the police would be more wary of said group. My main point is that there's probably reason as to why the police seem to be targeting blacks, and that it isn't flat out racism.

6 hours ago, Riley24 said:

They found the PCP after killing him, and you're right, we'll also need to wait for the toxicology report. If he wasn't on PCP, there also needs to be an investigation into whether or not the PCP was actually found in the car by the police. It would not be the first time in America that evidence was planted. But a drugged out guy is not a deadly threat. Someone acting erratically is not a deadly threat. I understand why the police were concerned, and I understand why they felt the need to call for backup. But I'll say it again, not following orders and erratic behavior is not an immanent deadly threat. Its a worrying situation at best. In order to end somene's life, you have to be pretty damn sure they're about to end yours. That's the whole point of self-defense. We simply cannot allow our payed public servants to be too terrified to do their jobs. And my slightly tongue and cheek example of Paul Giamatti was not about stardom, which I tried to make clear. Its about someone that LOOKS like Paul Giamatti.

Yes, evidence could be planted and that should be taken into consideration as well. But a drugged out guy is still a threat, may not always be deadly, but again, it's the unpredictability. And I can't blame the cops for being afraid. There's more than a handful of instances where the cops themselves were gunned down within the blink of an eye with no warning whatsoever. I don't think that would ever stop though, sadly. Both sides will fear that the other is going to shoot them at any moment. And I don't think any amount of training can help you from being shot in a split second.

6 hours ago, Riley24 said:

And I'm glad we at least have, or are starting to have an understanding of where we're coming from. If you don't believe that systemic racism exists, that's fine. We can debate that, we can show each other articles and studies. My point then would be that the system is created by people. And if you're willing to admit that racism on the personal level exists, what is so unbelievable about the idea that the people who created and continue our current system could have the same personal levels of embedded racism?

Yes, I don't deny that racism exists on a personal level, and it's another thing that I fear won't go away anytime soon, unless everyone around the world suddenly agrees to just stop talking about it completely and just see each other as human beings. And yes, I won't deny that certain individuals will act upon those biases to twist the law against someone else. It's just strictly the laws that aren't intentionally racist, is what I'm getting at.

6 hours ago, Riley24 said:

I'm not up in arms about the cops choice of words, don't get me wrong. I just don't think that if it was a jolly middle aged white guy, that they would've handled it in the way they did, or referred to him the way they did. It goes back to the classic point we all know is true: Muslims are terrorists, black people are thugs, and white people are mentally ill. Its my personal opinion that if Crutcher had been white, they would've thought he was a crazy white guy off his meds, or someone having a diabetic episode.

Oh, no, I didn't mean to say that you were the one against it. It's just something I keep hearing from a lot of people.

And perhaps, it's not something I want to say with certainty, but I don't doubt that it's possible that they would think that if he was white.

6 hours ago, Riley24 said:

There's also similar allegations against police in St. Paul. The narrative that police were attacked by rioters out of nowhere is not one supported by any sources other than the police department itself.

Are they from third-party sources? I can imagine why the rioters would say that the police started it and I can also see the police say that the rioters hit first. But if those narratives come from independent, neutral sources, then that's pretty damning.

6 hours ago, Riley24 said:

I'd love for you to watch interviews with Michael A. Wood Jr., the former USMC FAST team member and Baltimore PD Sergeant. He talks about how his military training made him a lot less scared during interactions with potential criminals, because he knew he could draw and shoot faster than anyone he was talking to. He's a big advocate for improving police training.

I can agree that there's room for more training for police officers. But is military-grade training a suitable replacement? I always thought that people were against the further militarization of the police force.

6 hours ago, Riley24 said:

And the public will never stop engaging in crime, otherwise we wouldn't need cops. Crime is an unavoidable byproduct of having a society with laws. Respect for police has to come from improvements done by police.

I'm not demanding that you take up a liking for that specific group. Its just important that we understand why they exist in the first place.

Raising kids to hate and even kill cops isn't helping either.

And I didn't think that you were trying to make me like them. Like I said before, BLM started out with noble, albeit with some misinformed, intentions, but just like most ideological groups today (like 3rd wave feminism), they've been hijacked by radicals and racists. To be against BLM doesn't, or at least shouldn't, make you anti-black, just like being anti-feminists doesn't make you anti-woman, etc.

Edited by Beren
Grammar/spelling mistakes & expanding/making points clearer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll just leave this here:

 

What I don't get is where people seem to think that every Officer that has shot a black man woke up one day and decided to say "Hm, today I shall kill THIS guy in particular" or in general black people seem to have this idea that every Cop has a personal goal to kill people with darker skin than them. Although what is interesting is that when a black Police officer kills another black man, the outcry remains the same and it's still "racist" in their own delusional world. Not a single moment did any of them consider that gee, the man that was shot was a real piece of work that more or less got what was coming to him. 

Another thing is that all these BLM people seem to have a very hypocritical stance on their very own propaganda. "Not every black man/woman are the same, one person cannot defy an entire race" That is great and all, but then the very same people turn around and pin EVERY cop to be a racist pig that has a personal vendetta to wipe a race from the Earth. This asinine thought process is highlighted in the above video, completely disgusting.

So let's sum up the BLM movement: Every cop is a racist pig, be it White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, whatever. Every cop is "the same" as the next. Every "white" man is equally bad, this means Joe Blow from Idaho just walking his dog deserves a beating of a life time (again, highlighted in a video posted prior in this thread). Every black man shot means every black person deserves to burn their city to the ground, riots are now considered "get together's" by these people. But WAIT!! Do you hear that? That is the sound of someone saying "But, there is peaceful protests and the actions of those rioting doesn't define BLM as a whole" That's all swell, but uh.....it's funny how the BLM movement NEVER condemns these people, the very same people that BLM are apparently trying to protect against all these white people (be it cop or not) killing them or "oppressing" them.   

That's another thing, oppression. That's a funny word, isn't it? It's not funny in the funny "Ha Ha" way but in a way that highlights a very peculiar set of events that transpired the word to be commonly used the way it is nowadays. It's funny because all of these people screaming "Racism! Racism by the white man!" But interestingly enough, don't ever highlight the fact that their own people back in the day sold them as slaves to the white man. Oh well, it's just easier to sweep facts under the already preexisting dirty rug in favor of burning down your local Mom 'n' Pop shop anyways. I mean, facts have left the building long, long, long ago anyways. 

Lastly, to whoever said "there's no outcry when a white man kills a cop" You're intolerably ignorant. If you honestly believe that people in general (prior to the BLM agenda rising), didn't look down upon those killing cops, then you're selectively remembering things you want to remember. The only difference between now and then that sparks #bluelivesmatter is that the amount of cops' being killed now vs. then is that cop killings are happening much more frequently, on a much, much greater scale too. We didn't have someone picking off cops from football fields away with a sniper rifle like it's a duck-hunt years and years ago, things we never, ever thought would happen then, are happening now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...