Are people getting desensitized thanks to social media?
its not just this but we are getting accustomed to violence in general from all sources ranging from video games to movies and these incidents from police/crime violence to terrorism is happening everyday it seems so the exposure is higher than in previous times
Hey look, police manage to take armed shooting suspect into custody without killing him! 3 people injured
Yeah, but looks like 1 dead and 3 others injured. But the guy with the gun is okay!
how are the guns? are the guns safe?
Have we determined the race of the individual yet? I need to know if it's a thug, an illegal, or just some poor troubled youth.
"The students were both white males. The teacher was a white female. The shooter is a white male," Garland said. "There is no racial undertone, no terrorism involved."
Phew - dodged a bullet there.
Everything's fine, just another white person shooting random people!
I've got to ask with all due respect...at what point in your life did you become a white guiltist?
1. A person or group of people who blame themselves, their group or their country for the problems and attitudes of other people, groups and/or other countries.
2. Someone or group that attempt to make others feel guilty about something they do, such as driving SUVs, traveling by executive jet, breeding puppies, repossessing homes, charging for health care, etc. 1. Environmental guiltists around the world are trying to impose their "green" philosophy on everyone.
2. Obama took the occasion of his trip to Mexico to blame America for all the gun violence there.
3. In 2002 Mother Jones says of their country that the 9/11 attacks were, "damnable yet understandable payback…rooted in America's own crimes of commission and omission."
I did answer the question in your first paragraph. It's not in the same proportion. And in the second paragraph, the answer is both.
Except the data to support your answer has not been presented. Dignin's list never offered it. And you never contributed it either.
And I would be curious to know what proportion of the police force entered the job as racists (your opinion of course).
The data I referenced regarding the relationship between community crime rates and shooting unarmed blacks is in the links previously posted. I guess I can dig around later. There is no data that shows what percentage of the population is racist. You can say Klan members obviously are, but that's why people who want to minimize racism will fish and pick for other motivations. You can listen to former or current cops who have said that there's blatant racist cops. For other cops that are prejudice, you have to look at the stats that reflect bias and also combine it with the million of anecdotal stories from blacks about there interactions with cops.
what does this even mean? When I see a phrase like this, or 'politically correct', in my head I replace it with 'treating other people with respect'.
For Example: at what point in your life did you become a white guiltist start treating other people with respect?
I've taken the liberty with some Trump quotes here as well: "I think the big problem this country has is being politically correct treating other people with respect. I’ve been challenged by so many people and I don’t, frankly, have time for total political correctness treating other people with respect."
"...everybody else is trying to be politically correct treat other people with respect — that is why our country is in serious trouble”
I left this one as-is: “The notion of political correctness has ignited controversy across the land,” he said. “And although the movement arises from the laudable desire to sweep away the debris of racism and sexism and hatred, it replaces old prejudice with new ones. It declares certain topics off-limits, certain expressions off-limits, even certain gestures off-limits.” President George H.W. Bush, in his commencement speech at the University of Michigan, using the term to describe an assault on free speech
WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020AT 07/07/2020
1. A study by a University of California, Davis professor found “evidence of a significant bias in the killing of unarmed black Americans relative to unarmed white Americans, in that the probability of being black, unarmed, and shot by police is about 3.49 times the probability of being white, unarmed, and shot by police on average.” Additionally, the analysis found that “there is no relationship between county-level racial bias in police shootings and crime rates (even race-specific crime rates), meaning that the racial bias observed in police shootings in this data set is not explainable as a response to local-level crime rates.”
2. An independent analysis of Washington Post data on police killings found that, “when factoring in threat level, black Americans who are fatally shot by police are, in fact, less likely to be posing an imminent lethal threat to the officers at the moment they are killed than white Americans fatally shot by police.” According to one of the report’s authors, “The only thing that was significant in predicting whether someone shot and killed by police was unarmed was whether or not they were black. . . . Crime variables did not matter in terms of predicting whether the person killed was unarmed.”
3. An analysis of the use of lethal force by police in 2015 found no correlation between the level of violent crime in an area and that area’s police killing rates. That finding, by the Black Lives Matter–affiliated group Mapping Police Violence, disputes the idea that police only kill people when operating under intense conditions in high-crime areas. Mapping Police Violence found that fewer than one in three black people killed by police in 2016 were suspected of a violent crime or armed.
HOW POLICE DETERMINE WHOM TO STOP 4. A report by retired federal and state judges tasked by the San Francisco district attorney’s office to examine police practices in San Francisco found “racial disparities regarding S.F.P.D. stops, searches, and arrests, particularly for Black people.” The judges, working with experts from five law schools, including Stanford Law School, found that “the disparity gap in arrests was found to have been increasing in San Francisco.” (Officers in San Francisco were previously revealed to have traded racist and homophobic text messages, and those working in the prison system had reportedly staged and placed bets on inmate fights.)
In San Francisco, “although Black people accounted for less than 15 percent of all stops in 2015, they accounted for over 42 percent of all non-consent searches following stops.” This proved unwarranted: “Of all people searched without consent, Black and Hispanic people had the lowest ‘hit rates’ (i.e., the lowest rate of contraband recovered).” In 2015, whites searched without consent were found to be carrying contraband at nearly two times the rate as blacks who were searched without consent.
5. The Department of Justice’s investigation into the behavior of police in Ferguson, Missouri, found “a pattern or practice of unlawful conduct within the Ferguson Police Department that violates the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and federal statutory law.” The scathing report found that the department was targeting black residents and treating them as revenue streams for the city by striving to continually increase the money brought in through fees and fines. “Officers expect and demand compliance even when they lack legal authority,” the report’s authors wrote. “They are inclined to interpret the exercise of free-speech rights as unlawful disobedience, innocent movements as physical threats, indications of mental or physical illness as belligerence.”
“African Americans are more than twice as likely as white drivers to be searched during vehicle stops even after controlling for non-race based variables such as the reason the vehicle stop was initiated, but are found in possession of contraband 26% less often than white drivers, suggesting officers are impermissibly considering race as a factor when determining whether to search,” the authors wrote. Nearly 90 percent of documented uses of force by the Ferguson Police Department were used on African-Americans, and every documented use of a police canine bite involved African-Americans.
6. In Chicago, a 2016 Police Accountability Task Force report found that “black and Hispanic drivers were searched approximately four times as often as white drivers, yet [the Chicago Police Department’s] own data show that contraband was found on white drivers twice as often as black and Hispanic drivers.” The police department’s own data, the report found, “gives validity to the widely held belief the police have no regard for the sanctity of life when it comes to people of color.”
7. A 2014 analysis of Illinois Department of Transportation data by the American Civil Liberties Union found the following: “African American and Latino drivers are nearly twice as likely as white drivers to be asked during a routine traffic stop for ‘consent’ to have their car searched. Yet white motorists are 49% more likely than African American motorists to have contraband discovered during a consent search by law enforcement, and 56% more likely when compared to Latinos.”
8. A 2015 analysis by The New York Times found that in Greensboro, North Carolina, police officers “used their discretion to search black drivers or their cars more than twice as often as white motorists—even though they found drugs and weapons significantly more often when the driver was white.” That pattern held true for police departments in four states. In Greensboro, “officers were more likely to stop black drivers for no discernible reason. And they were more likely to use force if the driver was black, even when they did not encounter physical resistance.”
9. A 2013 ruling by a New York Federal District Court judge found that the New York Police Department’s “stop and frisk” practices violated the constitutional rights of minority citizens of the city. Between January 2004 and June 2012, the city conducted 4.4 million stops. Eighty-eight percent of those stops resulted in no further action, and 83 percent of the stopped population were black or Hispanic, despite the fact that those minority groups, together, made up just over half of the city’s overall population. (The number of stop-and-frisk stops has dropped dramatically since its peak in 2011.)
10. A 2011 investigation by the Justice Department found that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, headed by Joe Arpaio, had “a pervasive culture of discriminatory bias against Latinos,” and that the office also tried to interfere with the department’s investigation. The sheriff’s office “engages in racial profiling of Latinos; unlawfully stops, detains, and arrests Latinos; and unlawfully retaliates against individuals who complain about or criticize [the office’s] policies or practices,” the report’s authors said. (Arpaio responded by saying, “We are proud of the work we have done to fight illegal immigration.”)
RACE AND THE USE OF NONLETHAL FORCE 11. A controversial working paper by Harvard professor Roland Fryer Jr. found that police officers are more likely to use their hands, push a suspect into a wall, use handcuffs, draw weapons, push a suspect onto the ground, point their weapon, and use pepper spray or a baton when interacting with blacks. The study found no evidence of racial bias when it comes to police shootings, but Fryer’s methodology has come under criticism. The study relied on police reports, which have been previously shown to be a flawed data set, and its finding on justified shootings focused largely on data from Houston, Texas. (Fryer defended his work, but admitted his research is far from perfect.)
12. A study by the Center for Policing Equity found, as characterized by a preview in The New York Times, that “African-Americans are far more likely than whites and other groups to be the victims of use of force by the police, even when racial disparities in crime are taken into account.” The study looked at 19,000 use-of-force incidents between the years 2010 and 2015.
13. A 2016 study by a team of professors from U.C.L.A., Harvard, Portland State University, and Boston University analyzed suspects’ booking photographs for phenotypical signs of whiteness to test the following hypothesis: “the Whiter one appears, the more the suspect will be protected from police force.” Their findings: “police used less force with highly stereotypical Whites, and this protective effect was stronger than the effect for non-Whites.”
I'm obviously getting too old to hang around here.
I would have thought some cop hater might have tried to tackle the questions I posed a few posts back... but all I get is 'scaredy cops'. Maybe it's me? Maybe I've got no f**king clue?
Fine. Cops suck. They're all chickenshit, racist bastards targeting black people as agents of the state.
You'll probably say I'm not answering your question directly, but in one of the linked articles earlier it show there's no correlation between a city's crime rate and the rate unarmed blacks are shot by police. So it's safe to say that some departments deal with the issue of prejudice and perception when stopping blacks better than other departments.
Are stereotypes, attitudes, and actions on the part of police borne from inherently racist attitudes, or are they developed through experiences? Do racists become cops or do cops become racist?
I answered this question back in the police abuse thread. We have already been through this.
Hey look, police manage to take armed shooting suspect into custody without killing him! 3 people injured
Yeah, but looks like 1 dead and 3 others injured. But the guy with the gun is okay!
how are the guns? are the guns safe?
Have we determined the race of the individual yet? I need to know if it's a thug, an illegal, or just some poor troubled youth.
"The students were both white males. The teacher was a white female. The shooter is a white male," Garland said. "There is no racial undertone, no terrorism involved."
Phew - dodged a bullet there.
Everything's fine, just another white person shooting random people!
I've got to ask with all due respect...at what point in your life did you become a white guiltist?
Hey look, police manage to take armed shooting suspect into custody without killing him! 3 people injured
Yeah, but looks like 1 dead and 3 others injured. But the guy with the gun is okay!
how are the guns? are the guns safe?
Have we determined the race of the individual yet? I need to know if it's a thug, an illegal, or just some poor troubled youth.
"The students were both white males. The teacher was a white female. The shooter is a white male," Garland said. "There is no racial undertone, no terrorism involved."
Phew - dodged a bullet there.
Everything's fine, just another white person shooting random people!
I've got to ask with all due respect...at what point in your life did you become a white guiltist?
And you asking that is one of the points I was making. My tongue in cheek comment is about how race and ethnicity guides the reaction, both in the media and the public's reaction. When they are whites doing to shooting, people look for reasons internal to the individual as to what went wrong. When they are minorities, and/or a different religion, people look for external reasons and how that person's groip they belong to is somehow responsible. It's my observation and has nothing to do with guilt.
Hey look, police manage to take armed shooting suspect into custody without killing him! 3 people injured
Yeah, but looks like 1 dead and 3 others injured. But the guy with the gun is okay!
how are the guns? are the guns safe?
Have we determined the race of the individual yet? I need to know if it's a thug, an illegal, or just some poor troubled youth.
"The students were both white males. The teacher was a white female. The shooter is a white male," Garland said. "There is no racial undertone, no terrorism involved."
Phew - dodged a bullet there.
Everything's fine, just another white person shooting random people!
I've got to ask with all due respect...at what point in your life did you become a white guiltist?
Hey look, police manage to take armed shooting suspect into custody without killing him! 3 people injured
Yeah, but looks like 1 dead and 3 others injured. But the guy with the gun is okay!
how are the guns? are the guns safe?
Have we determined the race of the individual yet? I need to know if it's a thug, an illegal, or just some poor troubled youth.
"The students were both white males. The teacher was a white female. The shooter is a white male," Garland said. "There is no racial undertone, no terrorism involved."
Phew - dodged a bullet there.
Everything's fine, just another white person shooting random people!
I've got to ask with all due respect...at what point in your life did you become a white guiltist?
And you asking that is one of the points I was making. My tongue in cheek comment is about how race and ethnicity guides the reaction, both in the media and the public's reaction. When they are whites doing to shooting, people look for reasons internal to the individual as to what went wrong. When they are minorities, and/or a different religion, people look for external reasons and how that person's groip they belong to is somehow responsible. It's my observation and has nothing to do with guilt.
thanks for the response as my question was a legit one and not to be insulting as it may have been taken, but I see and read a lot of your post and you are pretty rough on being white or whites in general and from your picture I can only assume you are white
if what you say is tongue in cheek then I get it just wanted you to explain and you did so I appreciate that and its based on your observations so I can respect that as well
You cited a source that stated: ...the analysis found that “there is no relationship between county-level racial bias in police shootings and crime rates (even race-specific crime rates).
What does this mean?
And to be honest... my question was rhetorical in nature because how could one ever accurately determine the answer to it? There are too many variables to take into account. For example, black people living in dense urban centers are policed more heavily than whites who tend to live in suburban or rural areas where contact between them and police is less frequent. How can this reality offer anything remotely accurate when trying to compare race and crime from a policing perspective?
Likewise, I would support the notion that blacks would be more likely to be convicted of a crime than a white person charged with the same crime (for a few reasons)... so using conviction data wouldn't yield the most accurate picture either (although it does speak to the inequities between blacks and whites which are evident).
Remember... I am not speaking against the concept of black oppression. I speak to the fact that this systematic oppression places law enforcement at the point of the problem in a very challenging situation: ultimately, cops in America serve as the face for the said oppression that nearly every white American has benefited from. My problem is the second guessing and finger wagging that presents itself with every new case we are presented with (by people that don't understand they are part of the problem themselves).
Cops should be able to go home after they work their shift. If it can be demonstrated that a cop was malicious in their capacity, then they should be held accountable. The problem as I see it is that now every case is seen by some as malicious. I mean... cops get into a physical altercation with someone who gets shot... bad cop. Cops shoot a guy trying to attack them with a knife... bad cop. Guy parks his vehicle in the middle of a two way highway, disobeys simple commands, acts erratically, tries to reach into his vehicle, and gets shot by police... bad cop.
To all that might encounter police for whatever reason: the cops are on the scene. The gig is up. Stop f**king around. And if you have not tested officers for whatever reason... and they shoot you anyways... well now there is a problem and I'm all for criminal charges.
Political correctness would only equal treating others with respect if you subtracted the strong societal influence based on what is currently "in vogue"
Cop exercising way too much patience with some idiot and pays the price:
If my son ever made the brutal error of becoming a cop... I'd be expecting him to shoot well ahead of the point where the idiot got his rifle out of the truck.
Of course, in that event, you'd get fools on here calling him scaredy cop... and other fools spouting off about abuse... and others making excuses for the idiot.
Way to trot out a video that's nearly 20 years old. If that guy were black in 2016, he would have been shot as soon as he exited the vehicle. Vietnam Vet, can we jump to the conclusion that he may have had some mental health problems that should have been addressed? Perhaps he should not have been allowed to possess a gun in the first place.
Or maybe he was just watering the Tree of Liberty.
How pathetic.
You need a 'fresh' video to justify police exercising forceful tactics to ensure they aren't killed while trying to keep your house safe?
It's a mountain of such incidents that drives current police policy.
You didn't present a mountain of evidence. You presented an anecdote. From 2 decades ago.
You want me to list every pullover that has gone bad from the past decade?
Come on man. You're smarter than that aren't you? To suggest these incidents are very rare and hardly worth considering when police develop their protocols for dealing with... get ready with your listening ears... idiots that feel the need to ignore modest police requests.
Huh, that's funny considering you treat situations of police abuse as very rare and hardly worth considering when police develop their protocols for dealing with idiots who ignore modest police requests.
Political correctness would only equal treating others with respect if you subtracted the strong societal influence based on what is currently "in vogue"
Cop exercising way too much patience with some idiot and pays the price:
If my son ever made the brutal error of becoming a cop... I'd be expecting him to shoot well ahead of the point where the idiot got his rifle out of the truck.
Of course, in that event, you'd get fools on here calling him scaredy cop... and other fools spouting off about abuse... and others making excuses for the idiot.
Way to trot out a video that's nearly 20 years old. If that guy were black in 2016, he would have been shot as soon as he exited the vehicle. Vietnam Vet, can we jump to the conclusion that he may have had some mental health problems that should have been addressed? Perhaps he should not have been allowed to possess a gun in the first place.
Or maybe he was just watering the Tree of Liberty.
How pathetic.
You need a 'fresh' video to justify police exercising forceful tactics to ensure they aren't killed while trying to keep your house safe?
It's a mountain of such incidents that drives current police policy.
You didn't present a mountain of evidence. You presented an anecdote. From 2 decades ago.
You want me to list every pullover that has gone bad from the past decade?
Come on man. You're smarter than that aren't you? To suggest these incidents are very rare and hardly worth considering when police develop their protocols for dealing with... get ready with your listening ears... idiots that feel the need to ignore modest police requests.
Huh, that's funny considering you treat situations of police abuse as very rare and hardly worth considering when police develop their protocols for dealing with idiots who ignore modest police requests.
Yah. I'm an 'extreme apologist'.
I've acknowledged the legitimate cases of abuse. But seeing as we're calling people out here: you've looked at every one that has been presented as gross misuses of power.
For example... you were the person who said when the knife wielding maniac rushed the police... they should have ran into their cars and drove around the block a few times waiting for the psycho to 'chill out'. Remember that one? Lol!
Political correctness would only equal treating others with respect if you subtracted the strong societal influence based on what is currently "in vogue"
Say what?
Posted above the political correctness be replaced with treating others with respect. Those are not synonymous. It is common decency to treat others with respect. Sometimes political correctness is far from common decency. Never mind.
You can get into a debate of what PC actually means, because it really means using respectful language and labels. When Trump and his supporters reference it and say "he's not pc", what they are really saying is he's an ay hole, says disrespectful garbage, but he shouldn't be called out on it because I agree with him.
Cop exercising way too much patience with some idiot and pays the price:
If my son ever made the brutal error of becoming a cop... I'd be expecting him to shoot well ahead of the point where the idiot got his rifle out of the truck.
Of course, in that event, you'd get fools on here calling him scaredy cop... and other fools spouting off about abuse... and others making excuses for the idiot.
Way to trot out a video that's nearly 20 years old. If that guy were black in 2016, he would have been shot as soon as he exited the vehicle. Vietnam Vet, can we jump to the conclusion that he may have had some mental health problems that should have been addressed? Perhaps he should not have been allowed to possess a gun in the first place.
Or maybe he was just watering the Tree of Liberty.
How pathetic.
You need a 'fresh' video to justify police exercising forceful tactics to ensure they aren't killed while trying to keep your house safe?
It's a mountain of such incidents that drives current police policy.
You didn't present a mountain of evidence. You presented an anecdote. From 2 decades ago.
You want me to list every pullover that has gone bad from the past decade?
Come on man. You're smarter than that aren't you? To suggest these incidents are very rare and hardly worth considering when police develop their protocols for dealing with... get ready with your listening ears... idiots that feel the need to ignore modest police requests.
Huh, that's funny considering you treat situations of police abuse as very rare and hardly worth considering when police develop their protocols for dealing with idiots who ignore modest police requests.
Yah. I'm an 'extreme apologist'.
I've acknowledged the legitimate cases of abuse. But seeing as we're calling people out here: you've looked at every one that has been presented as gross misuses of power.
For example... you were the person who said when the knife wielding maniac rushed the police... they should have ran into their cars and drove around the block a few times waiting for the psycho to 'chill out'. Remember that one? Lol!
I remember suggesting that in certain situations a tactical retreat shouldn't be a forbidden action, and I remember you scoffing at the idea of de-escalation as you always do. Cops can't back down ever, or the very fabric of law and order will be torn asunder.
Political correctness would only equal treating others with respect if you subtracted the strong societal influence based on what is currently "in vogue"
Say what?
Posted above the political correctness be replaced with treating others with respect. Those are not synonymous. It is common decency to treat others with respect. Sometimes political correctness is far from common decency. Never mind.
You can get into a debate of what PC actually means, because it really means using respectful language and labels. When Trump and his supporters reference it and say "he's not pc", what they are really saying is he's an ay hole, says disrespectful garbage, but he shouldn't be called out on it because I agree with him.
I take it as not sugar coating things for overly sensitive people who need to be in their safe space...I tell it how it is most of the time its not being an a-hole but im going to tell you things that you may not want to hear but are the god's to honest truth
I remember that story. Forgotten all about it because it was in the news for about 2 minutes, then never heard of it again. If I didn't watch the morning news that one morning while I was getting ready for work, I don't think I ever would have heard about it. But I have to agree, if they were a different color it would still be in the news a year later. White people getting shot by police, not a big story, no one is going to protest and riot over it, so lets move on.
I remember that story. Forgotten all about it because it was in the news for about 2 minutes, then never heard of it again. If I didn't watch the morning news that one morning while I was getting ready for work, I don't think I ever would have heard about it. But I have to agree, if they were a different color it would still be in the news a year later. White people getting shot by police, not a big story, no one is going to protest and riot over it, so lets move on.
I forget where I saw the story(I'll have to try and find it) but the same day the guy was shot in NC 5 white people were killed by the police. No mention at all my main stream media.
I remember that story. Forgotten all about it because it was in the news for about 2 minutes, then never heard of it again. If I didn't watch the morning news that one morning while I was getting ready for work, I don't think I ever would have heard about it. But I have to agree, if they were a different color it would still be in the news a year later. White people getting shot by police, not a big story, no one is going to protest and riot over it, so lets move on.
I forget where I saw the story(I'll have to try and find it) but the same day the guy was shot in NC 5 white people were killed by the police. No mention at all my main stream media.
I saw it on mainstream media when it happened. It even made it to the 6 o'clock national news in Canada. But then it disappeared. No follow up on what happened to the cops or anything like that.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Cop exercising way too much patience with some idiot and pays the price:
If my son ever made the brutal error of becoming a cop... I'd be expecting him to shoot well ahead of the point where the idiot got his rifle out of the truck.
Of course, in that event, you'd get fools on here calling him scaredy cop... and other fools spouting off about abuse... and others making excuses for the idiot.
Way to trot out a video that's nearly 20 years old. If that guy were black in 2016, he would have been shot as soon as he exited the vehicle. Vietnam Vet, can we jump to the conclusion that he may have had some mental health problems that should have been addressed? Perhaps he should not have been allowed to possess a gun in the first place.
Or maybe he was just watering the Tree of Liberty.
How pathetic.
You need a 'fresh' video to justify police exercising forceful tactics to ensure they aren't killed while trying to keep your house safe?
It's a mountain of such incidents that drives current police policy.
You didn't present a mountain of evidence. You presented an anecdote. From 2 decades ago.
You want me to list every pullover that has gone bad from the past decade?
Come on man. You're smarter than that aren't you? To suggest these incidents are very rare and hardly worth considering when police develop their protocols for dealing with... get ready with your listening ears... idiots that feel the need to ignore modest police requests.
Huh, that's funny considering you treat situations of police abuse as very rare and hardly worth considering when police develop their protocols for dealing with idiots who ignore modest police requests.
Yah. I'm an 'extreme apologist'.
I've acknowledged the legitimate cases of abuse. But seeing as we're calling people out here: you've looked at every one that has been presented as gross misuses of power.
For example... you were the person who said when the knife wielding maniac rushed the police... they should have ran into their cars and drove around the block a few times waiting for the psycho to 'chill out'. Remember that one? Lol!
I remember suggesting that in certain situations a tactical retreat shouldn't be a forbidden action, and I remember you scoffing at the idea of de-escalation as you always do. Cops can't back down ever, or the very fabric of law and order will be torn asunder.
See, I can build straw men too!
Tactical retreat? hahaha
Yup. Get in your car and drive away (as you said). When you loop back... discover two people lying on the sidewalk with knife wounds from the maniac that you 'tactically retreated' from.
Cop exercising way too much patience with some idiot and pays the price:
If my son ever made the brutal error of becoming a cop... I'd be expecting him to shoot well ahead of the point where the idiot got his rifle out of the truck.
Of course, in that event, you'd get fools on here calling him scaredy cop... and other fools spouting off about abuse... and others making excuses for the idiot.
Way to trot out a video that's nearly 20 years old. If that guy were black in 2016, he would have been shot as soon as he exited the vehicle. Vietnam Vet, can we jump to the conclusion that he may have had some mental health problems that should have been addressed? Perhaps he should not have been allowed to possess a gun in the first place.
Or maybe he was just watering the Tree of Liberty.
How pathetic.
You need a 'fresh' video to justify police exercising forceful tactics to ensure they aren't killed while trying to keep your house safe?
It's a mountain of such incidents that drives current police policy.
You didn't present a mountain of evidence. You presented an anecdote. From 2 decades ago.
You want me to list every pullover that has gone bad from the past decade?
Come on man. You're smarter than that aren't you? To suggest these incidents are very rare and hardly worth considering when police develop their protocols for dealing with... get ready with your listening ears... idiots that feel the need to ignore modest police requests.
Huh, that's funny considering you treat situations of police abuse as very rare and hardly worth considering when police develop their protocols for dealing with idiots who ignore modest police requests.
Yah. I'm an 'extreme apologist'.
I've acknowledged the legitimate cases of abuse. But seeing as we're calling people out here: you've looked at every one that has been presented as gross misuses of power.
For example... you were the person who said when the knife wielding maniac rushed the police... they should have ran into their cars and drove around the block a few times waiting for the psycho to 'chill out'. Remember that one? Lol!
I remember suggesting that in certain situations a tactical retreat shouldn't be a forbidden action, and I remember you scoffing at the idea of de-escalation as you always do. Cops can't back down ever, or the very fabric of law and order will be torn asunder.
See, I can build straw men too!
Tactical retreat? hahaha
Yup. Get in your car and drive away (as you said). When you loop back... discover two people lying on the sidewalk with knife wounds from the maniac that you 'tactically retreated' from.
Good thinking!
I don't remember suggesting driving away, I am pretty sure I was talking about starting with deploying less than lethal tactics from the safety of the car. If I remember correctly, in the case in question there were no bystanders in the vicinity.
You wouldn't last a week on a middle school debate team, your straw man sarcastic tactics are immature and unintelligent.
Cop exercising way too much patience with some idiot and pays the price:
If my son ever made the brutal error of becoming a cop... I'd be expecting him to shoot well ahead of the point where the idiot got his rifle out of the truck.
Of course, in that event, you'd get fools on here calling him scaredy cop... and other fools spouting off about abuse... and others making excuses for the idiot.
Way to trot out a video that's nearly 20 years old. If that guy were black in 2016, he would have been shot as soon as he exited the vehicle. Vietnam Vet, can we jump to the conclusion that he may have had some mental health problems that should have been addressed? Perhaps he should not have been allowed to possess a gun in the first place.
Or maybe he was just watering the Tree of Liberty.
How pathetic.
You need a 'fresh' video to justify police exercising forceful tactics to ensure they aren't killed while trying to keep your house safe?
It's a mountain of such incidents that drives current police policy.
You didn't present a mountain of evidence. You presented an anecdote. From 2 decades ago.
You want me to list every pullover that has gone bad from the past decade?
Come on man. You're smarter than that aren't you? To suggest these incidents are very rare and hardly worth considering when police develop their protocols for dealing with... get ready with your listening ears... idiots that feel the need to ignore modest police requests.
Huh, that's funny considering you treat situations of police abuse as very rare and hardly worth considering when police develop their protocols for dealing with idiots who ignore modest police requests.
Yah. I'm an 'extreme apologist'.
I've acknowledged the legitimate cases of abuse. But seeing as we're calling people out here: you've looked at every one that has been presented as gross misuses of power.
For example... you were the person who said when the knife wielding maniac rushed the police... they should have ran into their cars and drove around the block a few times waiting for the psycho to 'chill out'. Remember that one? Lol!
I remember suggesting that in certain situations a tactical retreat shouldn't be a forbidden action, and I remember you scoffing at the idea of de-escalation as you always do. Cops can't back down ever, or the very fabric of law and order will be torn asunder.
See, I can build straw men too!
Tactical retreat? hahaha
Yup. Get in your car and drive away (as you said). When you loop back... discover two people lying on the sidewalk with knife wounds from the maniac that you 'tactically retreated' from.
Good thinking!
I don't remember suggesting driving away, I am pretty sure I was talking about starting with deploying less than lethal tactics from the safety of the car. If I remember correctly, in the case in question there were no bystanders in the vicinity.
You wouldn't last a week on a middle school debate team, your straw man sarcastic tactics are immature and unintelligent.
Running from your words... tossing out lame insults... while somehow speaking to integrity.
Political correctness would only equal treating others with respect if you subtracted the strong societal influence based on what is currently "in vogue"
Say what?
Posted above the political correctness be replaced with treating others with respect. Those are not synonymous. It is common decency to treat others with respect. Sometimes political correctness is far from common decency. Never mind.
You can get into a debate of what PC actually means, because it really means using respectful language and labels. When Trump and his supporters reference it and say "he's not pc", what they are really saying is he's an ay hole, says disrespectful garbage, but he shouldn't be called out on it because I agree with him.
I take it as not sugar coating things for overly sensitive people who need to be in their safe space...I tell it how it is most of the time its not being an a-hole but im going to tell you things that you may not want to hear but are the god's to honest truth
Not being PC is calling your female co-workers girls. Stating opinions about people that you think are god's honest truth can just be offensive and not have anything to do with PC. They're probably considered offensive because they contain overgeneralizations, myths, or prejudice. Why not list 3 of your truths and then we can see if they fit that criteria?
Comments
1. A person or group of people who blame themselves, their group or their country for the problems and attitudes of other people, groups and/or other countries.
2. Someone or group that attempt to make others feel guilty about something they do, such as driving SUVs, traveling by executive jet, breeding puppies, repossessing homes, charging for health care, etc.
1. Environmental guiltists around the world are trying to impose their "green" philosophy on everyone.
2. Obama took the occasion of his trip to Mexico to blame America for all the gun violence there.
3. In 2002 Mother Jones says of their country that the 9/11 attacks were, "damnable yet understandable payback…rooted in America's own crimes of commission and omission."
For Example: at what point in your life did you
become a white guiltiststart treating other people with respect?I've taken the liberty with some Trump quotes here as well:
"I think the big problem this country has is
being politically correcttreating other people with respect. I’ve been challenged by so many people and I don’t, frankly, have time fortotal political correctnesstreating other people with respect.""...everybody else is trying to
be politically correcttreat other people with respect — that is why our country is in serious trouble”I left this one as-is:
“The notion of political correctness has ignited controversy across the land,” he said. “And although the movement arises from the laudable desire to sweep away the debris of racism and sexism and hatred, it replaces old prejudice with new ones. It declares certain topics off-limits, certain expressions off-limits, even certain gestures off-limits.”
President George H.W. Bush, in his commencement speech at the University of Michigan, using the term to describe an assault on free speech
2. An independent analysis of Washington Post data on police killings found that, “when factoring in threat level, black Americans who are fatally shot by police are, in fact, less likely to be posing an imminent lethal threat to the officers at the moment they are killed than white Americans fatally shot by police.” According to one of the report’s authors, “The only thing that was significant in predicting whether someone shot and killed by police was unarmed was whether or not they were black. . . . Crime variables did not matter in terms of predicting whether the person killed was unarmed.”
3. An analysis of the use of lethal force by police in 2015 found no correlation between the level of violent crime in an area and that area’s police killing rates. That finding, by the Black Lives Matter–affiliated group Mapping Police Violence, disputes the idea that police only kill people when operating under intense conditions in high-crime areas. Mapping Police Violence found that fewer than one in three black people killed by police in 2016 were suspected of a violent crime or armed.
HOW POLICE DETERMINE WHOM TO STOP
4. A report by retired federal and state judges tasked by the San Francisco district attorney’s office to examine police practices in San Francisco found “racial disparities regarding S.F.P.D. stops, searches, and arrests, particularly for Black people.” The judges, working with experts from five law schools, including Stanford Law School, found that “the disparity gap in arrests was found to have been increasing in San Francisco.” (Officers in San Francisco were previously revealed to have traded racist and homophobic text messages, and those working in the prison system had reportedly staged and placed bets on inmate fights.)
In San Francisco, “although Black people accounted for less than 15 percent of all stops in 2015, they accounted for over 42 percent of all non-consent searches following stops.” This proved unwarranted: “Of all people searched without consent, Black and Hispanic people had the lowest ‘hit rates’ (i.e., the lowest rate of contraband recovered).” In 2015, whites searched without consent were found to be carrying contraband at nearly two times the rate as blacks who were searched without consent.
5. The Department of Justice’s investigation into the behavior of police in Ferguson, Missouri, found “a pattern or practice of unlawful conduct within the Ferguson Police Department that violates the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and federal statutory law.” The scathing report found that the department was targeting black residents and treating them as revenue streams for the city by striving to continually increase the money brought in through fees and fines. “Officers expect and demand compliance even when they lack legal authority,” the report’s authors wrote. “They are inclined to interpret the exercise of free-speech rights as unlawful disobedience, innocent movements as physical threats, indications of mental or physical illness as belligerence.”
“African Americans are more than twice as likely as white drivers to be searched during vehicle stops even after controlling for non-race based variables such as the reason the vehicle stop was initiated, but are found in possession of contraband 26% less often than white drivers, suggesting officers are impermissibly considering race as a factor when determining whether to search,” the authors wrote. Nearly 90 percent of documented uses of force by the Ferguson Police Department were used on African-Americans, and every documented use of a police canine bite involved African-Americans.
6. In Chicago, a 2016 Police Accountability Task Force report found that “black and Hispanic drivers were searched approximately four times as often as white drivers, yet [the Chicago Police Department’s] own data show that contraband was found on white drivers twice as often as black and Hispanic drivers.” The police department’s own data, the report found, “gives validity to the widely held belief the police have no regard for the sanctity of life when it comes to people of color.”
7. A 2014 analysis of Illinois Department of Transportation data by the American Civil Liberties Union found the following: “African American and Latino drivers are nearly twice as likely as white drivers to be asked during a routine traffic stop for ‘consent’ to have their car searched. Yet white motorists are 49% more likely than African American motorists to have contraband discovered during a consent search by law enforcement, and 56% more likely when compared to Latinos.”
8. A 2015 analysis by The New York Times found that in Greensboro, North Carolina, police officers “used their discretion to search black drivers or their cars more than twice as often as white motorists—even though they found drugs and weapons significantly more often when the driver was white.” That pattern held true for police departments in four states. In Greensboro, “officers were more likely to stop black drivers for no discernible reason. And they were more likely to use force if the driver was black, even when they did not encounter physical resistance.”
9. A 2013 ruling by a New York Federal District Court judge found that the New York Police Department’s “stop and frisk” practices violated the constitutional rights of minority citizens of the city. Between January 2004 and June 2012, the city conducted 4.4 million stops. Eighty-eight percent of those stops resulted in no further action, and 83 percent of the stopped population were black or Hispanic, despite the fact that those minority groups, together, made up just over half of the city’s overall population. (The number of stop-and-frisk stops has dropped dramatically since its peak in 2011.)
10. A 2011 investigation by the Justice Department found that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, headed by Joe Arpaio, had “a pervasive culture of discriminatory bias against Latinos,” and that the office also tried to interfere with the department’s investigation. The sheriff’s office “engages in racial profiling of Latinos; unlawfully stops, detains, and arrests Latinos; and unlawfully retaliates against individuals who complain about or criticize [the office’s] policies or practices,” the report’s authors said. (Arpaio responded by saying, “We are proud of the work we have done to fight illegal immigration.”)
RACE AND THE USE OF NONLETHAL FORCE
11. A controversial working paper by Harvard professor Roland Fryer Jr. found that police officers are more likely to use their hands, push a suspect into a wall, use handcuffs, draw weapons, push a suspect onto the ground, point their weapon, and use pepper spray or a baton when interacting with blacks. The study found no evidence of racial bias when it comes to police shootings, but Fryer’s methodology has come under criticism. The study relied on police reports, which have been previously shown to be a flawed data set, and its finding on justified shootings focused largely on data from Houston, Texas. (Fryer defended his work, but admitted his research is far from perfect.)
12. A study by the Center for Policing Equity found, as characterized by a preview in The New York Times, that “African-Americans are far more likely than whites and other groups to be the victims of use of force by the police, even when racial disparities in crime are taken into account.” The study looked at 19,000 use-of-force incidents between the years 2010 and 2015.
13. A 2016 study by a team of professors from U.C.L.A., Harvard, Portland State University, and Boston University analyzed suspects’ booking photographs for phenotypical signs of whiteness to test the following hypothesis: “the Whiter one appears, the more the suspect will be protected from police force.” Their findings: “police used less force with highly stereotypical Whites, and this protective effect was stronger than the effect for non-Whites.”
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/07/data-police-racial-bias
if what you say is tongue in cheek then I get it just wanted you to explain and you did so I appreciate that and its based on your observations so I can respect that as well
You cited a source that stated: ...the analysis found that “there is no relationship between county-level racial bias in police shootings and crime rates (even race-specific crime rates).
What does this mean?
And to be honest... my question was rhetorical in nature because how could one ever accurately determine the answer to it? There are too many variables to take into account. For example, black people living in dense urban centers are policed more heavily than whites who tend to live in suburban or rural areas where contact between them and police is less frequent. How can this reality offer anything remotely accurate when trying to compare race and crime from a policing perspective?
Likewise, I would support the notion that blacks would be more likely to be convicted of a crime than a white person charged with the same crime (for a few reasons)... so using conviction data wouldn't yield the most accurate picture either (although it does speak to the inequities between blacks and whites which are evident).
Remember... I am not speaking against the concept of black oppression. I speak to the fact that this systematic oppression places law enforcement at the point of the problem in a very challenging situation: ultimately, cops in America serve as the face for the said oppression that nearly every white American has benefited from. My problem is the second guessing and finger wagging that presents itself with every new case we are presented with (by people that don't understand they are part of the problem themselves).
Cops should be able to go home after they work their shift. If it can be demonstrated that a cop was malicious in their capacity, then they should be held accountable. The problem as I see it is that now every case is seen by some as malicious. I mean... cops get into a physical altercation with someone who gets shot... bad cop. Cops shoot a guy trying to attack them with a knife... bad cop. Guy parks his vehicle in the middle of a two way highway, disobeys simple commands, acts erratically, tries to reach into his vehicle, and gets shot by police... bad cop.
To all that might encounter police for whatever reason: the cops are on the scene. The gig is up. Stop f**king around. And if you have not tested officers for whatever reason... and they shoot you anyways... well now there is a problem and I'm all for criminal charges.
I've acknowledged the legitimate cases of abuse. But seeing as we're calling people out here: you've looked at every one that has been presented as gross misuses of power.
For example... you were the person who said when the knife wielding maniac rushed the police... they should have ran into their cars and drove around the block a few times waiting for the psycho to 'chill out'. Remember that one? Lol!
See, I can build straw men too!
"police kill unarmed white guy and murder his child"....nah doesn't fit the narrative
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/autistic-6-year-old-shot-killed-during-police-pursuit-in-louisiana-report-says/
Columbus-2003
Cincinnati-2006
Columbus-2010
Wrigley-2013
Cincinnati-2014
Lexington-2016
Wrigley 1 & 2-2018
Yup. Get in your car and drive away (as you said). When you loop back... discover two people lying on the sidewalk with knife wounds from the maniac that you 'tactically retreated' from.
Good thinking!
You wouldn't last a week on a middle school debate team, your straw man sarcastic tactics are immature and unintelligent.
Interesting tactics yourself.