# Violence in Baltimore



## ZmanTX (Apr 27, 2015)

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/27/us/baltimore-unrest/index.html

https://www.yahoo.com/news/thousands-expected-mondays-funeral-freddie-gray-081844148.html

Anyone else watching this? Makes me sick watching the live feed. 

Anyone who lives around the Baltimore, Maryland area or who is a LEO or Military out there stay safe and watch your 6.

Z


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Apr 27, 2015)

Orioles game has been postponed - 

Oh, and dear Fucktards:

Looting not only doesn't help your cause, it makes those who might support you, hate your thieving asses.


----------



## Kraut783 (Apr 27, 2015)

7 Police officers injured, one unresponsive......  Be strong, be safe brothers!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...aca83a-ecf3-11e4-8666-a1d756d0218e_story.html


----------



## BloodStripe (Apr 27, 2015)

#BaseballGamesMatter. 


Where is Michelle Obama at? Her husband and I share an affliction for the same team.


----------



## 0699 (Apr 27, 2015)

I'm not sure why they're mad at the CVS store.  It didn't kill anyone.


----------



## racing_kitty (Apr 27, 2015)

Supposedly, another flyer made the local social media rounds calling for a "purge."  Pass the popcorn and bullets, please.  I'd love to see a real purge happen there.  Then, once all that's left are the victors, send in the heavy guns of the law to kill them where they stand, as the parameters for the use of deadly force will have most certainly been met many times over.  However, I understand that this is naught but a fantasy, and such actions are illegal and impossible.

That being said, the National Guard has just been called up, and a state of emergency declared, according to the Baltimore Sun.


----------



## 0699 (Apr 27, 2015)

racing_kitty said:


> *calling for a "purge."*


 
Do the people calling for a "purge" really think they could win against LE if it came down to it?  The only thing keeping the cops from wrapping this up in 5-6 minutes is because the cops (most of the time) follow the law while the protestors don't.  If the gloves ever truly came off, it'd be over PDQ.

Just like Iraq; the only reason the insurgents won is because we weren't allowed to bomb them back to the Stone Age.


----------



## ZmanTX (Apr 27, 2015)

You know the Mayor and everyone is trying to say it's people outside the community doing the rioting and looting and that is complete bull shit. You can clearly see the kids who had just got released from school still wearing their backpacks throwing bricks and rocks. 

Then the cutting of the fire hose?!? I wouldn't be surprised if CVS just left that location all together.
Z


----------



## DA SWO (Apr 27, 2015)

Cops should get food poisoning enmasses and sit out for 72hrs.
Maybe the Mayor would rethink her position.
Need more ammo, gun show this Sunday.


----------



## 0699 (Apr 27, 2015)

ZmanTX said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if *CVS just left that location all together*.


 
That's what happened to a lot of inner cities after the '68 riots.  Business owners took their insurance money and moved to the suburbs, or business owners couldn't get insurance coverage, leaving nowhere in the inner city for the remaining population to buy healthy food or find jobs.

And somehow it was all 'the mans' fault.


----------



## Brill (Apr 27, 2015)

Live coverage here on all local news channels. Orioles fans are pissed that the game was canx'd. Weather is a little chilly but this weekend it'll warm up and I'm sure it'll get worse.


----------



## policemedic (Apr 27, 2015)

EMS has strike teams prepositioned and ready for events like disasters.  They travel interstate and bring extra paramedics, EMTs and supplies to where they're needed.

LE needs the same infrastructure; I wish my department would send some of us up there just to spell our brothers for a day.


----------



## RackMaster (Apr 27, 2015)

Don't worry, I hear Sharpton is on his way...  :-/


----------



## Centermass (Apr 27, 2015)

Baltimore,

This just in.

Your mayor is an idiot. ETA: *Actually, it was on Saturday when she made this statement:*






Fast forward to 7:30.



> "We also gave those who wished to destroy, space to to do that as well.” – Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake



About an hour ago, she finished a news conference, and was asked about this quote. She then blamed the media for taking her comment out of context. 

I relooked at the video, and quite clearly, she stated exactly that, in plain language. Nothing before or after mitigates it or puts it in a different perspective. There was no excuse IMO, for such a statement or the lawlessness that has taken place.

And for the record, if there was wrong doing on the part of the officers, they be held accountable and punished to the fullest letter and extent of the law.


----------



## pardus (Apr 27, 2015)

Fuck Baltimore, if they elected a fucking retard like that to power then let the place burn to the ground. I just hope the innocent law abiding non retarded citizens escape along with emergency workers.
Then wall the place off and use it as a dumping ground for every scum group that riots like this.

As @0699 stated, these pricks could be cleaned up in a heartbeat if the authorities were let loose. Just look at the London riots, the cops stood back because they were legally restrained, the minute after the Prime Minister took the gloves off the cops dove in, kicked ass and finished that shit quick-smart!
The protesters should be damn thankful I'm not in charge or a member of the Guard there with the authority to rock and roll, I'd take great pleasure in cleaning those streets with _deadly_ efficiency.


----------



## racing_kitty (Apr 27, 2015)

policemedic said:


> EMS has strike teams prepositioned and ready for events like disasters.  They travel interstate and bring extra paramedics, EMTs and supplies to where they're needed.
> 
> LE needs the same infrastructure; I wish my department would send some of us up there just to spell our brothers for a day.



While I doubt your department specifically would take part, the opportunity may come soon enough.  From the Twitter feed of a senior editor at the Sun, one Matthew Hay Brown:



> Maryland State Police activating 500 officers for Baltimore; requesting up to 5,000 from neighboring states


----------



## x SF med (Apr 27, 2015)

Fuck this bullshit "BlackLivesMatter"  _*All*_ lives matter.

So, to protest a possibly criminal act, you destroy your home, burn businesses and kill people...  I do not see the logic here.

the Baltimore mayor is a complete idiot. Stupid is as stupid does.

...and that's all I'm gonna say about that.


eta - ok, I fibbed - last point - every police officer involved in the transport and initial intake should have been immediately been put on unpaid leave pending a full investigation of the events.  The cops were wrong, the rioters are wronger.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Apr 27, 2015)

Momentary comic interlude -


----------



## pardus (Apr 27, 2015)

"If you've got a business, you didn't burn that"


----------



## Kraut783 (Apr 27, 2015)

x SF med said:


> eta - ok, I fibbed - last point - every police officer involved in the transport and initial intake should have been immediately been put on unpaid leave pending a full investigation of the events.  The cops were wrong, the rioters are wronger.



Exactly.....there is a system and process for this, but no one has the patience......and most are just looking for an excuse to cause chaos.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Apr 27, 2015)

I just re-watched a good portion of the Mayor's most recent press conference again - she is not a leader - it is embarrassing.  As far as I'm concerned, (and this started with our current President), this is what you get when you allow social media to dictate via soundbites and funny quotes, who your future leader will be.


----------



## Muppet (Apr 28, 2015)

Fucking savages. All involved with the asshattery! Fuck them all....

M.


----------



## Etype (Apr 28, 2015)

None of these people care when soldiers get killed, black or otherwise, but now ONE person dies and this happens.  

I guess being from Baltimore carries more weight than being an American.


----------



## Muppet (Apr 28, 2015)

Etype said:


> None of these people care when soldiers get killed, black or otherwise, but now ONE person dies and this happens.
> 
> I guess being from Baltimore carries more weight than being an American.



And this surprises you brother??? Rumor is that there is a purge coming up in some of the neighborhoods there. Not substantiated by PD yet.... 

M.


----------



## DA SWO (Apr 28, 2015)

racing_kitty said:


> While I doubt your department specifically would take part, the opportunity may come soon enough.  From the Twitter feed of a senior editor at the Sun, one Matthew Hay Brown:
> 
> Maryland State Police activating 500 officers for Baltimore; requesting up to 5,000 from neighboring states



I am fine with MD State Police helping, I am not fine with cops from neighboring states coming in (see Hurricane Katrina Relief).
Cops from neighboring states are not certified under MD law, and probably don't know the finer points of the law.
MD has a National Guard that can be activated, and they can augment the local police.


----------



## DA SWO (Apr 28, 2015)

Muppet said:


> And this surprises you brother??? Rumor is that there is a purge coming up in some of the neighborhoods there. Not substantiated by PD yet....
> 
> M.


What do you mean by purge?


----------



## Muppet (Apr 28, 2015)

DA SWO said:


> What do you mean by purge?



Do you remember that movie, The Purge, where there is a gov. Sanctioned "free for all"? Something like that but this will not be sanctioned and these savages will just have the free for all bullshit. Again, not sanctioned and it has not made PD alerts like the gang thing.... The bloods, crips and black gorilla family have apparent made a truce and all vow to " take out cops". That is an alert that has made it up here to Philly. @policemedic could elaborate more perhaps....

M.


----------



## Florida173 (Apr 28, 2015)

DA SWO said:


> I am fine with MD State Police helping, I am not fine with cops from neighboring states coming in (see Hurricane Katrina Relief).
> Cops from neighboring states are not certified under MD law, and probably don't know the finer points of the law.
> MD has a National Guard that can be activated, and they can augment the local police.



I believe it's within the governor's ability to request assistance from law enforcement from neighboring states in the Emergency State Function 13. Besides, where does the authority come from?

Another point is that national guard doing Defense Support to Civil Authorities is incredibly expensive.


----------



## DA SWO (Apr 28, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> I believe it's within the governor's ability to request assistance from law enforcement from neighboring states in the Emergency State Function 13. B*esides, where does the authority come from*?
> 
> Another point is that national guard doing Defense Support to Civil Authorities is incredibly expensive.


The authority comes from the Legislature.
How is a NG PFC more expensive than a cop from another state (who is getting overtime) ?
Good thing MD passed that gun control bill, wonder how many sheeple feel safer today.


----------



## AWP (Apr 28, 2015)

After Hurricane Andrew states began signing pacts or whatever allowing for one state to request another's NG units in the event of a major disaster. Problem: How many states have done this when every Guard unit, Army and AF, was already activated? If you aren't putting every single soldier or airman on state orders then how can you justify asking for outside assistance?

Re: Baltimore...let that city burn. If the mayor is going to encourage those animals then let them reap it.


----------



## JohnnyBoyUSMC (Apr 28, 2015)




----------



## Florida173 (Apr 28, 2015)

DA SWO said:


> The authority comes from the Legislature.
> How is a NG PFC more expensive than a cop from another state (who is getting overtime) ?
> Good thing MD passed that gun control bill, wonder how many sheeple feel safer today.


False equivalency. NG PFC doesn't go by himself, he goes with an entire unit of joes, support, and home-state coordination.  It's incredibly expensive and there are many factors that prefer other means to accomplish the mission, or transfer mission, as soon as possible.



Freefalling said:


> After Hurricane Andrew states began signing pacts or whatever allowing for one state to request another's NG units in the event of a major disaster. Problem: How many states have done this when every Guard unit, Army and AF, was already activated? If you aren't putting every single soldier or airman on state orders then how can you justify asking for outside assistance?


Typically activating servicemen in affected areas is a hardship. We did this this quite successfully during hurricane Katrina to Mississippi and Louisiana.


----------



## Brill (Apr 28, 2015)

DA SWO said:


> What do you mean by purge?



This was spread over social media:


----------



## AWP (Apr 28, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> Typically activating servicemen in affected areas is a hardship. We did this this quite successfully during hurricane Katrina to Mississippi and Louisiana.



Fair enough, but if you're bringing in other states while leaving your own units, minus the affected areas, inactive then something's wrong. The entire purpose of a State possessing the National Guard is to handle State business, so if you're going outside of your state for help it should mean all other options were exhausted. Something like a riot shouldn't be another state's responsibility, the law exists to cover natural disasters, not a group of assholes being assholes.


----------



## Florida173 (Apr 28, 2015)

Freefalling said:


> Fair enough, but if you're bringing in other states while leaving your own units, minus the affected areas, inactive then something's wrong. The entire purpose of a State possessing the National Guard is to handle State business, so if you're going outside of your state for help it should mean all other options were exhausted. Something like a riot shouldn't be another state's responsibility, the law exists to cover natural disasters, not a group of assholes being assholes.


 
Definitely can't disagree with you on the last part, but I can offer up the rebuttal that the activities of the state next to me could have consequences to my state.  Sort of like an Area of Interest concept.


----------



## RetPara (Apr 28, 2015)

From FOXNews.....  
*Social media analysis suggests links between Baltimore and Ferguson violence*
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2015/04...inks-between-baltimore-and-ferguson-violence/

I'm reading Days of Rage about the underground revolutionary groups of the 60-80's.   Professional protests/Agitprops moving between cities.   It's pretty much know in the WTO protests, but pure domestic activities....   this is a first note of it....


----------



## Rapid (Apr 28, 2015)

"How did this happen?", asks the media. Today alone, I've seen half a dozen articles with titles asking questions like that. Then they bring in some 'experts' who brush this off as a failure of 'society as a whole'. Ignoring the fact that it is THE MEDIA who keeps telling black people that they are being viciously oppressed, that they are being deliberately 'murdered', that the police is racist in all of their actions*. If not outright saying things like that, then they will convey the message indirectly by giving credence or 'equal worth' to such viewpoints (providing air-time to idiots who push this kind of agenda) and/or doing nothing to refute them. Because after all, sensationalism and outrage are two things which get great ratings. And a fucking riot? Cop cars burning? Fuuuuck yes, that is going to make for some great footage, bro! 

They are the ones fueling the fucking fires (even if it is mostly by proxy), and then they try to blame this on Average Joes and their families... Fuck.

*not to say that there aren't shitty, racist cops... but they are fucking far from a representation of law enforcement as a whole.


----------



## DA SWO (Apr 28, 2015)

Rapid said:


> "How did this happen?", asks the media. Today alone, I've seen half a dozen articles with titles asking questions like that. Then they bring in some 'experts' who brush this off as a failure of 'society as a whole'. Ignoring the fact that it is THE MEDIA who keeps telling black people that they are being viciously oppressed, that they are being deliberately 'murdered', that the police is racist in all of their actions*. If not outright saying things like that, then they will convey the message indirectly by giving credence or 'equal worth' to such viewpoints (providing air-time to idiots who push this kind of agenda) and/or doing nothing to refute them. Because after all, sensationalism and outrage are two things which get great ratings. And a fucking riot? Cop cars burning? Fuuuuck yes, that is going to make for some great footage, bro!
> 
> They are the ones fueling the fucking fires (even if it is mostly by proxy), and then they try to blame this on Average Joes and their families... Fuck.
> 
> *not to say that there aren't shitty, racist cops... but they are fucking far from a representation of law enforcement as a whole.


The same media constantly puts relatives on who loudly profess to the goodness of the person killed.


----------



## Florida173 (Apr 28, 2015)

• March 20, 2015: Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance

• March 13, 2015: Malicious destruction of property, second-degree assault

• January 20, 2015: Fourth-degree burglary, trespassing

• January 14, 2015: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute

• December 31, 2014: Possession of narcotics with intent to distribute

• December 14, 2014: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance

• August 31, 2014: Illegal gambling, trespassing

• January 25, 2014: Possession of marijuana

• September 28, 2013: Distribution of narcotics, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, second-degree assault, second-degree escape

• April 13, 2012: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, violation of probation

• July 16, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession with intent to distribute

• March 28, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance

• March 14, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to manufacture and distribute

• February 11, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance

• August 29, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, violation of probation

• August 28, 2007: Possession of marijuana

• August 23, 2007: False statement to a peace officer, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance

• July 16, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance (2 counts)


----------



## 0699 (Apr 28, 2015)

^^^

He's not a criminal, he's an undocumented pharmacist.


----------



## AKkeith (Apr 28, 2015)

Ray Lewis has a great message. 

https://www.facebook.com/officialraylewis/videos/10153320592515701/


----------



## Blizzard (Apr 28, 2015)

AKkeith said:


> Ray Lewis has a great message.
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/officialraylewis/videos/10153320592515701/


A bit ironic an perhaps hypocritical considering the source....
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...baltimore-ravens-atlanta-murder-2000/1566198/

On the other hand, this mom seems to have a clear message that is easy to support:


----------



## Blizzard (Apr 28, 2015)

0699 said:


> ^^^
> 
> He's not a criminal, he's an undocumented pharmacist.


I'm sure he was turning his life around.


----------



## 8654Maine (Apr 28, 2015)

0699 said:


> ^^^
> 
> He's not a criminal, he's an undocumented pharmacist.



I don't know.  I think Heisenberg is pretty well documented.

BTW, this does not imply that what happened to Gray wasn't some fucked up shit.


----------



## Brill (Apr 28, 2015)

Here's some video of the protesters.

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/video/11438391-surveillance-video-shows-looting-inside-mondawmin-mall/


----------



## policemedic (Apr 28, 2015)

Take this for what it's worth.

I've been doing this for 24 years. Patrol, Narcotics, Fugitives, SWAT, and some POG staff slots too.  Of those 24, the majority were spent in the highest crime districts of one of the busiest cities in America.  I say that only for context; I'm no one special and certainly no better than any other constable on patrol anywhere in the world.  Hell, some of our members have had longer and/or more illustrious careers wearing a badge than I have.  I certainly haven't accomplished all that I wanted (fuck you, hiring freeze).

Freddie Gray appears to have been a career asshole.  But that doesn't excuse police misconduct, especially if that misconduct resulted in undeserved injury or death.  All the facts aren't in, and we should wait for the results of the investigation to be released before coming to a conclusion.  I have full confidence the Baltimore Police Department will conduct a fair, impartial, and thorough investigation and will release the findings as soon as feasible.  If the BPD officers involved were at fault, let them face our good justice.  No one is above the law...particularly those of us sworn to uphold it.

When a police officer arrests someone, a professional remains dispassionate.  Make no mistake, sometimes that's hard to do.  But you do it.  Because it's not personal and it's not about you.  And when it is--when the bad guy assaults you--transport is done by someone else (usually) to ensure unemotional conduct.  If you assault the police, you deserve every bit of force applied against you until you stop resisting and you're in cuffs.  At that point, you get medical treatment if required or requested and any forcible or punitive measures against you stop.  Period.

For the record, the thin blue line is not about protecting cops who break the law or who violate the constitutional rights of those we are sworn to protect.

Every honest cop knows what I mean when I say this.

None of the above in any way excuses the violent, anarchist conduct we are witnessing in Baltimore.  Dispassionate observers clearly see the riots have nothing to do with Freddie Gray or police misconduct.  The people involved are engaged in criminal conduct; nothing more and nothing less.  Freddie Gray is an excuse and not a cause.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 28, 2015)

@policemedic great post. 

I have no excuses for what those kids are doing in Baltimore. It is beyond absurd to me to destroy the city you live in. Most of those doing the rioting are not there for justice, and I dont think what they are doing is right nor justified.

But it is dominating discussion. 

Freddie Gray is a household name in America, and he wasn't two weeks ago. And the thing is, it seems like he should be. I'm not attacking individual cops here, but our system is not set up correctly. Our system has problems that need to be addressed. 

Unfortunately sometimes it takes riots like this for issues to garner the proper attention. It is stupid and unfortunate, but sometimes it takes flashpoint like this to remind people who don't otherwise see it that there are problems in our cities. 

Police brutality is a problem, systemic racism is a problem, we need to work on them as Americans together. But not by burning down our neighborhoods.


----------



## DA SWO (Apr 28, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> @policemedic great post.
> 
> I have no excuses for what those kids are doing in Baltimore. It is beyond absurd to me to destroy the city you live in. Most of those doing the rioting are not there for justice, and I dont think what they are doing is right nor justified.
> 
> ...


How many arrests are made daily? and how many use excessive force?
If a suspect resists arrest does he/she get to go until they feel like being cooperative?
Systemic racism?  any proof of that?


----------



## Ranger Psych (Apr 28, 2015)




----------



## Ranger Psych (Apr 28, 2015)

I'm just gonna leave this here. Nothing of value was lost...


March 20, 2015: Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance
March 13, 2015: Malicious destruction of property, second-degree assault
January 20, 2015: Fourth-degree burglary, trespassing
January 14, 2015: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute
December 31, 2014: Possession of narcotics with intent to distribute
December 14, 2014: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance
August 31, 2014: Illegal gambling, trespassing
January 25, 2014: Possession of marijuana
September 28, 2013: Distribution of narcotics, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, second-degree assault, second-degree escape
April 13, 2012: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, violation of probation
July 16, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession with intent to distribute
March 28, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
March 14, 2008: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to manufacture and distribute
February 11, 2008: Unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance, possession of a controlled dangerous substance
August 29, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, violation of probation
August 28, 2007: Possession of marijuana
August 23, 2007: False statement to a peace officer, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance
July 16, 2007: Possession of a controlled dangerous substance with intent to distribute, unlawful possession of a controlled dangerous substance (2 counts)


----------



## Florida173 (Apr 28, 2015)

Saw some speculation that Gray had spinal surgery recently


----------



## Florida173 (Apr 28, 2015)

Ranger Psych said:


> I'm just gonna leave this here. Nothing of value was lost...



fail...


----------



## Salt USMC (Apr 28, 2015)

Ranger Psych said:


> I'm just gonna leave this here. Nothing of value was lost...
> 
> 
> March 20, 2015: Possession of a Controlled Dangerous Substance
> ...


Why does this matter at all?  This has no bearing on the fact that an American suffered a massive spinal injury and was denied medical attention while in police custody.  Does that not bother you even the slightest?


----------



## racing_kitty (Apr 28, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> Saw some speculation that Gray had spinal surgery recently


I saw that, as well.  I'm not too sure about the source, but it's something that has yet to be discounted.  That said, it still does not excuse the six arresting officers for using more force than was necessary to subdue Gray.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 28, 2015)

DA SWO said:


> How many arrests are made daily? and how many use excessive force?
> If a suspect resists arrest does he/she get to go until they feel like being cooperative?
> Systemic racism?  any proof of that?



This isn't about resisting arrest. This was about a cuffed prisoner being abused. Proof of systemic racism man, look around.

"Such approach to policing led to increased arrests. By 2005, well into O’Malley’s tenure as mayor, Baltimore police arrested so many people that judges had to free arrestees because they could not get court hearings within 24 hours, as required, according to the Baltimore Sun. That year, there were 108,447 people arrested in a city of roughly 600,000 residents. According to a June 2010 report by the Justice Policy Institute, about two-thirds of the people in jail were there for non-violent offenses."
In Baltimore they adopted a zero tolerance policy. That policy led to a 1/6 of the population being arrested. 

As to systemic racism if you think that a black man can walk down the street the same as a white American you live in a fantasy world. In Chapel Hill I have a friend who gets stopped and frisked many times he is out at night on Franklin Street. I don't know a single white person who has been stopped and frisked. 
That is racism, it is a problem.

 The U.S. Sentencing Commission reported in March 2010 that in the federal system black offenders receive sentences that are 10% longer than white offenders for the same crimes. Marc Mauer of the Sentencing Project reports African Americans are 21% more likely to receive mandatory minimum sentences than white defendants and 20% more like to be sentenced to prison than white drug defendants.
The way we prosecute drug crimes is a problem.

The fact that schools that are predominantly black have school resource officers who arrest and criminalize childhood antics, while white kids are just "kids being kids". The school to prison pipeline is a problem.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/tavissmiley/tsr/education-under-arrest/school-to-prison-pipeline-fact-sheet/

These are systemic problems in America today.


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 28, 2015)

DA SWO said:


> How many arrests are made daily? and how many use excessive force?
> If a suspect resists arrest does he/she get to go until they feel like being cooperative?
> Systemic racism?  any proof of that?


Ill play devil's advocate a bit here- Regardless of the amount of arrests, we have to agree that police brutality is an issue we can't tolerate, right?

As to systemic racism- well, yea, there's a pretty solid record of proof. Blacks haven't even been voting everywhere in this country for 60 years yet! I think there is a systemic race problem in America. I think there is a pronounced systemic issue with police brutality specifically targeting minorities, and the data from just this year absolutely corroborates that statement.

Freddie Gray could have been the second coming of Hannibal Lector for all I care. And yeah, career criminal. But he was killed in police custody, and if your answer to that statement even resembles anything other than, "Yeah, that is fucked up, people shouldn't worry about being killed by the police", well, then you might be part of the issue.


----------



## policemedic (Apr 28, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> As to systemic racism if you think that a black man can walk down the street the same as a white American you live in a fantasy world. In Chapel Hill I have a friend who gets stopped and frisked many times he is out at night on Franklin Street. I don't know a single white person who has been stopped and frisked.
> That is racism, it is a problem.



I'm unfamiliar with Chapel Hill.  What kind of neighborhood is Franklin St.?

I will say that I have legally stopped people who were subsequently cleared (at the scene, and within minutes) of criminal activity based on description and temporal and geographic proximity to a crime.  This happens more often in high crime areas than others, for obvious reasons.  All of those people got an explanation and apology.  

The fact that your friend has been stopped, while unfortunate, does not in and of itself indicate bias.  He does, however, deserve to know why he was stopped.  Frisking requires greater justification than that required to stop him for investigation.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 28, 2015)

policemedic said:


> I'm unfamiliar with Chapel Hill.  What kind of neighborhood is Franklin St.?
> 
> I will say that I have legally stopped people who were subsequently cleared (at the scene, and within minutes) of criminal activity based on description and temporal and geographic proximity to a crime.  This happens more often in high crime areas than others, for obvious reasons.  All of those people got an explanation and apology.
> 
> The fact that your friend has been stopped, while unfortunate, does not in and of itself indicate bias.  He does, however, deserve to know why he was stopped.  Frisking requires greater justification than that required to stop him for investigation.



Franklin Street is the street that fronts UNC-CH, it is nice.


----------



## policemedic (Apr 28, 2015)

amlove21 said:


> Ill play devil's advocate a bit here- Regardless of the amount of arrests, we have to agree that police brutality is an issue we can't tolerate, right?
> 
> As to systemic racism- well, yea, there's a pretty solid record of proof. Blacks haven't even been voting everywhere in this country for 60 years yet! I think there is a systemic race problem in America. I think there is a pronounced systemic issue with police brutality specifically targeting minorities, and the data from just this year absolutely corroborates that statement.



This doesn't jive with my experience.  Yours may be different, and since I respect you personally I respect your viewpoint.



amlove21 said:


> Freddie Gray could have been the second coming of Hannibal Lector for all I care. And yeah, career criminal. But he was killed in police custody, and if your answer to that statement even resembles anything other than, "Yeah, that is fucked up, people shouldn't worry about being killed by the police", well, then you might be part of the issue.



Here we agree.  People occasionally die when they encounter the police and the vast majority of these incidents are justifiable.  When they're not, those responsible should be held responsible.  As I said, no one is above the law.  That said, let's hear all the facts in this case.  I have my own opinion, but it isn't supported by anything other than a SWAG, supposition, and (my own) expert analysis at this point.


----------



## Kraut783 (Apr 28, 2015)

Hundreds of thousands calls for service are answered everyday by Police.....a small percentage we hear about in the news, again, there is a system in place for investigating, arresting, or firing the perps. 

There is a place for protesting, and socially calling attention and addressing the issues. What is happening in Baltimore is criminal behavior....bottom line.


----------



## policemedic (Apr 28, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> Franklin Street is the street that fronts UNC-CH, it is nice.



Well WTF.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 28, 2015)

Kraut783 said:


> There is a place for protesting, and socially calling attention and addressing the issues. What is happening in Baltimore is criminal behavior....bottom line.



Yep no one is disagreeing with you there.


----------



## Florida173 (Apr 28, 2015)

amlove21 said:


> As to systemic racism- well, yea, there's a pretty solid record of proof. Blacks haven't even been voting everywhere in this country for 60 years yet! I think there is a systemic race problem in America.


Sorry.. Doesn't fit here.  Don't conflated issues because you are falling victim to confirmation bias. Baltimore in no way represents a racism issue. It's black leadership and black policies that have gotten them here.


----------



## Florida173 (Apr 28, 2015)

Kraut783 said:


> There is a place for protesting, and socially calling attention and addressing the issues. What is happening in Baltimore is criminal behavior....bottom line.


Progressive radio hosts are comparing what is happening in Baltimore to the Boston Tea Party


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 28, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> Progressive radio hosts are comparing what is happening in Baltimore to the Boston Tea Party



They are idiots.


----------



## policemedic (Apr 28, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> Progressive radio hosts are comparing what is happening in Baltimore to the Boston Tea Party



Interesting.


----------



## policemedic (Apr 28, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> Franklin Street is the street that fronts UNC-CH, it is nice.



Makes me interested in the organizational culture of that police force.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 28, 2015)

policemedic said:


> Makes me interested in the organizational culture of that police force.



Wel the thing that really bothered me is that my friend thought it was normal or ok. That is the issue, that it is so common that it is normal. I would never be stopped by the police and for sure would never be frisked.


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 28, 2015)

Ranger Psych said:


> I'm just gonna leave this here. Nothing of value was lost...


Gotta disagree here, something was lost. Possible faith in the justice system. Although the investigation is not over (this is important), if it holds true that he was denied proper medical care, and was injured while in custody as a result of negligence then this is a serious red flag. 

Let's assume a close loved one (child, spouse, ect..) has diabetes and falls prey to hypoglycemia, through no fault of their own, and becomes combative. Unfortunately many officers confuse hypoglycemia with being intoxicated (understandably). If the subject becomes combative they may not be aware of what is happening. An overzealous officer/s could then go unintentionally too far for whatever reason (personal, professional, ect). You would expect professionals to at least contact medical support for assistance before transport. Many jails will refuse a subject that has been injured before being medically cleared. How would you feel about that loved one dying in custody? There would understandably be questions and would hope no one had malicious intent. Same issue applies here. No matter how much a shit bad this guy was, it was the duty of the officers to ensure proper medical care and exercise the minimum amount of force necessary to take the subject into custody. That is the issue here. Unfortunately the flag has been planted on the criminal that died. There is a problem with *some agencies and officers that hold themselves above the law or above those they protect. This is where the few ruin it for the many. I don't necessarily believe it to be a true racial issue (as of course the department is mixed), I see this as an issue where law enforcement is going through growing pains and sometimes is slow and resistant to change and growth. 

Hope that helps to clear up the issue a bit.


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 28, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> Sorry.. Doesn't fit here.  Don't conflated issues because you are falling victim to confirmation bias. Baltimore in no way represents a racism issue. It's black leadership and black policies that have gotten them here.


Black leadership and black issues have gotten the city of Baltimore to the point where white police officers arrested a black guy, who died under yet-to-be-determined causes in the care of those white officers, and the protests turned violent? I'm not following.

In no way is my statement confirmation bias. We have a well documented history of racism (see: slavery, the civil rights struggle) in America, and a well documented problem with police brutality towards minorities (see: Watts, Rodney King, et al). How is me saying, "The Freddie Gray issue is an example of the continued race issue in America, and here are some other examples of race issues in America" confirmation bias? It sort of makes me feel like you don't know what confirmation bias means. Unless you want to assert that there hasn't been a race issue in America, or that police brutality among minorities hasn't been an issue.

Or, I guess, if your contention is that these riots actually _aren't _ in the name of standing up to police brutality or the death of Freddie Gray. Which, I mean, is fine and all I guess, but then you're speaking for a couple thousand people you don't know and the overall motivation of that group.


----------



## Brill (Apr 28, 2015)

https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=zYw5SbHYVKBM.kLaJN-znQs40

The Baltimore marathon route went through west Baltimore all the way by the zoo (very near the mall that was looted) and there is no way in hell I would go there without a major police presence. Very sketchy area.


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 28, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> Wel the thing that really bothered me is that my friend thought it was normal or ok. That is the issue, that it is so common that it is normal. I would never be stopped by the police and for sure would never be frisked.


Never once in my life. Ever. And there were times that I was a less than upstanding guy and probably needed it. 

There's a definition for people that think stuff like this isn't a problem, and can't understand these sorts of issues- it's white privilege. 

"Why do you care if a policeman stops and frisks you? If you aren't doing anything, well, then you have nothing to worry about!"

You know who says stuff like that? White people that aren't stopped and frisked repeatedly over a lifetime.


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 28, 2015)

lindy said:


> https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=zYw5SbHYVKBM.kLaJN-znQs40
> 
> The Baltimore marathon route went through west Baltimore all the way by the zoo (very near the mall that was looted) and there is no way in hell I would go there without a major police presence. Very sketchy area.


I lived in DC for 5 years, and did a clinical rotation in BMore for a month, working mainly inner city.

I am a grown man, almost always armed, and I like to think I am not a total pussy. But, full disclosure, there are places in Baltimore that I know I am not welcome and I am more than happy to avoid.


----------



## racing_kitty (Apr 28, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> Progressive radio hosts are comparing what is happening in Baltimore to the Boston Tea Party



I'd liken it more to the French or Bolshevik Revolution than I would the American Revolution, but that's just my opinion.



TLDR20 said:


> Wel the thing that really bothered me is that my friend thought it was normal or ok. That is the issue, that it is so common that it is normal. I would never be stopped by the police and for sure would never be frisked.



A classmate of mine has the same problem for the same reasons with a couple of the local departments here (mainly the one I refer to as Spurberry).  He avoids that particular suburb like the plague, because it has happened so many times.  Even with a minority behind the badge, that particular suburb is known throughout the Mobile-Baldwin area as prone to such behavior.  

Other people that I associated with in my high school days were also stopped and frisked on a near-daily basis; however, their "suspicious traits" had more to do with multicolored mohawks, long chains hanging from their belt loops, spiked dog collars, etc. than it did their melanin content (or lack thereof).  That shit got old after a while.




amlove21 said:


> Black leadership and black issues have gotten the city of Baltimore to the point where white police officers arrested a black guy, who died under yet-to-be-determined causes in the care of those white officers, and the protests turned violent? I'm not following.
> 
> In no way is my statement confirmation bias. We have a well documented history of racism (see: slavery, the civil rights struggle) in America, and a well documented problem with police brutality towards minorities (see: Watts, Rodney King, et al). How is me saying, "The Freddie Gray issue is an example of the continued race issue in America, and here are some other examples of race issues in America" confirmation bias? It sort of makes me feel like you don't know what confirmation bias means. Unless you want to assert that there hasn't been a race issue in America, or that police brutality among minorities hasn't been an issue.
> 
> Or, I guess, if your contention is that these riots actually _aren't _ in the name of standing up to police brutality or the death of Freddie Gray. Which, I mean, is fine and all I guess, but then you're speaking for a couple thousand people you don't know and the overall motivation of that group.



I can't remember where I read it (due to the high volume of news sources I peruse while dancing the insomniac polka), but at least one of the six arresting officers was a minority officer.  The Baltimore police department is 55% minority, with the bulk of them being African American.  The departmental leadership is black, as well.  This is more about police brutality than it is race.  That does not eliminate race as a factor, but having minority officer(s) there for the assist definitely supplants race as the top aggravating circumstance.


----------



## Florida173 (Apr 28, 2015)

racing_kitty said:


> That does not eliminate race as a factor, but having minority officer(s) there for the assist definitely supplants race as the top aggravating circumstance.


Wait.. Race or racism? Because race is only a factor in that the suspect was black.. Racism would be that the officers thought that their race was superior to the suspect.


----------



## Brill (Apr 28, 2015)

amlove21 said:


> I lived in DC for 5 years, and did a clinical rotation in BMore for a month, working mainly inner city.
> 
> I am a grown man, almost always armed, and I like to think I am not a total pussy. But, full disclosure, there are places in Baltimore that I know I am not welcome and I am more than happy to avoid.



If you were armed in Baltimore, you broke the law. Sinner.


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 28, 2015)

racing_kitty said:


> I can't remember where I read it (due to the high volume of news sources I peruse while dancing the insomniac polka), but at least one of the six arresting officers was a minority officer.  The Baltimore police department is 55% minority, with the bulk of them being African American.  The departmental leadership is black, as well.  This is more about police brutality than it is race.  That does not eliminate race as a factor, but having minority officer(s) there for the assist definitely supplants race as the top aggravating circumstance.


I agree only if you'll assert that a minority can't be racist, and can never be racist toward even members of their own race. 

I can't possibly agree with the 'this is not a race issue' line here. I'd really love to, actually, but I don't think that's a possibility.


----------



## racing_kitty (Apr 28, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> Wait.. Race or racism? Because race is only a factor in that the suspect was black.. Racism would be that the officers thought that their race was superior to the suspect.



When dealing with allegations of racism, and claiming that all six arresting officers were as white as the virgin snow, race is a factor in fanning the rage of the masses and the posting public here.  Notice nobody's talking about the traitor to the color that helped put this guy in his grave, it's just the white boys.  And it's white privilege, not class privilege.  Yeah, while racism would be more accurate, my wording is not incorrect.


----------



## racing_kitty (Apr 28, 2015)

amlove21 said:


> I agree only if you'll assert that a minority can't be racist, and can never be racist toward even members of their own race.
> 
> I can't possibly agree with the 'this is not a race issue' line here. I'd really love to, actually, but I don't think that's a possibility.



I will not assert that as it is not true.  Looking at the AA on Hispanic violence as Mexicans move into Compton shoots it full of holes right there.  That's racism, even though there are no whites involved.  Which minority would you assert has the privilege there?  I'll wait for your answer.

I did not say that race was not an issue at all.  I said that it was not the primary issue.  Perhaps my wording was less clear than it needed to be.


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 28, 2015)

amlove21 said:


> I can't possibly agree with the 'this is not a race issue' line here. I'd really love to, actually, but I don't think that's a possibility.


I am sorry, but what evidence do you have to support that this is a race issue? Some of what you are saying in previous posts raises valid concerns. However, now it appears as if the intent is to say this issue is one race trying to oppress another. Again, this is an issue of the police mentality and culture. Where law enforcement as a whole must evolve. IE... the concept of inflicting injury on a suspect in custody, denying medical treatment, focused enforcement in an area to generate revenue or even having an agency investigate their own high visibility felony involving one of their own. Unfortunately, public confidence has been lost in the police ability to police their own.

If this had been a white or hispanic person that died, the community would not have been up in arms. That is racism from the community.


----------



## policemedic (Apr 28, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> the thing that really bothered me is that my friend thought it was normal or ok. That is the issue, that it is so common that it is normal. I would never be stopped by the police and for sure would never be frisked.



Don't be so sure; I was.

Mind you, I was a teenager in Montréal and was just leaving Driver's Ed but the officer explained to me why and I understood his reasoning.

If I were stopped outside of Philadelphia now, and I understand how that could happen, I would expect a more interesting experience because I am always armed (with interesting handguns).

There's a difference between being stopped for investigation and being frisked.  There's also a legal difference between being frisked and searched, both in how it's done and the justification needed to do so.


----------



## Florida173 (Apr 28, 2015)

amlove21 said:


> How is me saying, "The Freddie Gray issue is an example of the continued race issue in America, and here are some other examples of race issues in America" confirmation bias? It sort of makes me feel like you don't know what confirmation bias means


This is exactly confirmation bias if you believe every time you see an act of possible police brutality as a racism issue.


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 29, 2015)

racing_kitty said:


> I will not assert that as it is not true.  Looking at the AA on Hispanic violence as Mexicans move into Compton shoots it full of holes right there.  That's racism, even though there are no whites involved.  Which minority would you assert has the privilege there?  *I'll wait for your answer.*



I did not say that race was not an issue at all.  I said that it was not the primary issue.  Perhaps my wording was less clear than it needed to be.[/QUOTE]
Neither has the privilege there! But I also don't feel like your example speaks to racism. Violence amongst the same racial group isn't racism unless, as @lindy pointed out, that it has something specifically to do with a feeling that a race is superior/inferior to another. 

What I am saying is that I believe this was a race issue. The presence of a minority officer doesn't rule that out, not in the least. 

You explained yourself well, no worries there. No animosity here at all. It's important we can discuss this stuff off the cuff- not everything has to be polished. 



ke4gde said:


> I am sorry, but what evidence do you have to support that this is a race issue? Some of what you are saying in previous posts raises valid concerns. However, now it appears as if the intent is to say this issue is one race trying to oppress another. Again, this is an issue of the police mentality and culture. Where law enforcement as a whole must evolve. IE... the concept of inflicting injury on a suspect in custody, denying medical treatment, focused enforcement in an area to generate revenue or even having an agency investigate their own high visibility felony involving one of their own. Unfortunately, public confidence has been lost in the police ability to police their own.
> 
> If this had been a white or hispanic person that died, the community would not have been up in arms. That is racism from the community.


Well, let's do this. Let's take all the police brutality cases this year only, in America only,  to include those that were settled out of court. I will be willing to bet you a month's pay that the majority (51% or more) involved predominantly white officers and black/hispanic people being arrested. Every officer that's been charged with, suspended for, or suspected of police brutality in the past year in America. Including those that were settled out of court. I'll put the first link to the Baltimore Sun, talking about how much more Baltimore spends on out of court settlements for police brutality. How many white people do you think accounts for that money?

You wanna take that bet?

My intent in talking about this issue is to highlight the police brutality issue in this country at the moment. To deny that the majority of the time, it's white officers and black citizens is awfully disingenuous. 

You're right- if it was a white person that died, we wouldn't have been up in arms. Know why? _This hardly happens to white people at a rate which it happens to blacks. _White people don't have generation upon generation of these stories in their families to be pissed off about. 

And no, I am in no way saying there is a race trying to gain ultimate superiority- that's a little wonky for me even to type. 

But yes, there is a race issue in America. And there is a police brutality issue in America. And the Freddie Gray event demonstrates both, in my opinion.


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 29, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> This is exactly confirmation bias if you believe every time you see an act of possible police brutality as a racism issue.


No- I think that race might be involved every time a black or hispanic dies in police custody when those police were predominately white, and excessive force was used in the arrest. 

Confirmation bias is searching for data (erroneously) to support a preconceived notion or previously held belief, usually in the face of the actual findings. 

America has an issue with race is not an preconceived notion or erroneous belief. When predominantly white officers _kill black people at a regular pace on video in America, _that's not me shoehorning bad data into an answer that jives with my preconceived notions.


----------



## racing_kitty (Apr 29, 2015)

amlove21 said:


> Neither has the privilege there! But I also don't feel like your example speaks to racism. Violence amongst the same racial group isn't racism unless, as @lindy pointed out, that it has something specifically to do with a feeling that a race is superior/inferior to another.



I've got quite a large quantity of legal Mexican in-laws in the San Diego area that will wholeheartedly beg to differ.  African Americans and Hispanics are not in the same racial group, unless you are simply referring to them as non-Caucasian, and the resentment that my in-laws have encountered from the black community for not only being here but marrying into a white family is nothing short of astonishing.  It is racism, because the blacks feel superior to the Mexicans.


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 29, 2015)

racing_kitty said:


> I've got quite a large quantity of legal Mexican in-laws in the San Diego area that will wholeheartedly beg to differ.  African Americans and Hispanics are not in the same racial group, unless you are simply referring to them as non-Caucasian, and the resentment that my in-laws have encountered from the black community for not only being here but marrying into a white family is nothing short of astonishing.  It is racism, because the blacks feel superior to the Mexicans.


Yep, sorry, just misunderstood what you typed. 

So, we agree that minorities can exhibit racism towards other minorities- so a minority officer as part of the six arresting makes no never mind now, right? Race could and very well may be the primary factor in Freddie Gray's treatment?


----------



## racing_kitty (Apr 29, 2015)

It could be the primary reason, but I do not believe that it is the primary reason, unless any minority officer present was of the same mentality as a Jew supporting the Nazi army (think George Soros's admission in his 60 Minutes interview).  I've met more than my fair share of minority police officers that would join the Klan if it weren't for their skin color, which is why I do not dismiss your premise outright.


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 29, 2015)

amlove21 said:


> Well, let's do this. Let's take all the police brutality cases this year only, in America only,  to include those that were settled out of court. I will be willing to bet you a month's pay that the majority (51% or more) involved predominantly white officers and black/hispanic people being arrested. Every officer that's been charged with, suspended for, or suspected of police brutality in the past year in America. Including those that were settled out of court. I'll put the first link to the Baltimore Sun, talking about how much more Baltimore spends on out of court settlements for police brutality. How many white people do you think accounts for that money?
> 
> You wanna take that bet?


Lets indeed. You will bet me a month's pay over faulty data? Again, these numbers are based on what data? As the one making the statement, the burden of proof falls on you. Otherwise your statement is nothing but posturing.

What classifies as police brutality? The accusation? Sustained? Cops are constantly being accused of brutality where none exist. I was personally accused of excessive force (and cleared) because the woman did not like being told to not talk on her phone in the library. I asked her several times to discuss the issue outside and she forced me to place her into custody. Was that brutality?

Personal observation? Ok let's play, as a street cop for almost five years (not at present) I saw the opposite of what you claim. However, we can't rely on my observations because they are only representative of a small portion of the population.



> My intent in talking about this issue is to highlight the police brutality issue in this country at the moment. To deny that the majority of the time, it's white officers and black citizens is awfully disingenuous.


I have already agreed that and stated at least twice that the issue is about law enforcement and their actions. To say that the majority of time it is white versus black is equally disingenuous. You have zero proof to this claim. What is reported on the news is not indicative of reality.



> You're right- if it was a white person that died, we wouldn't have been up in arms. Know why? _This hardly happens to white people at a rate which it happens to blacks. _*White people don't have generation upon generation of these stories in their families to be pissed off about.*


Sorry, this argument is ridiculous. This is not a Klingon Empire where the children are held accountable for the father's sins.   What happened prior to the enactment of the Civil Right's Act is within the realm of those generations. Those rioting in the streets had no dog in the fight within that context. Academically and legally this hold no relevance. The argument could even be made morally speaking, but I acknowledge that there is the possibility there is some relevance.



> But yes, there is a race issue in America. And there is a police brutality issue in America. And the Freddie Gray event demonstrates both, in my opinion.


The issue of race is focused around people's desire to dwell on the past and not work to improve the future. Does racism exist? Absolutely. It does not mean however, that everything that occurs is rooted in race. Many people do not tolerate racism in others. This event *possibly demonstrates police brutality. We won't know until the final report is out. Nor should we rush to hang those officers involved before all of the facts are in. Do I agree that it is probable that there was some misconduct or negligence on some officers part? It is highly likely, but I won't condemn another man without knowing for sure.

EDIT: Not saying you are condemning anyone. Believe me, I understand the frustration and worry at the possibilities that are going on here (Baltimore and across the nation). However, it does no one any good to constantly bring race into the picture before it is proven. If the officers are found to have acted with racial malice, then that needs to be handled. Until then let's wait till we have more data to reach a logical conclusion is all I am saying.


----------



## policemedic (Apr 29, 2015)

racing_kitty said:


> I've got quite a large quantity of legal Mexican in-laws in the San Diego area that will wholeheartedly beg to differ.  African Americans and Hispanics are not in the same racial group, unless you are simply referring to them as non-Caucasian, and the resentment that my in-laws have encountered from the black community for not only being here but marrying into a white family is nothing short of astonishing.  It is racism, because the blacks feel superior to the Mexicans.



Latin and black girls are equally hot.

That is all.


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 29, 2015)

ke4gde said:


> Lets indeed. You will bet me a month's pay over faulty data? Again, these numbers are based on what data? As the one making the statement, the burden of proof falls on you. Otherwise your statement is nothing but posturing.


I'll bet a month's pay over exactly what I stated- that if we looked at all the police brutality cases in America, 51% of those cases would be white officers vice black/hispanic citizens. I don't know what faulty data you're speaking of, but we can narrow it down to cops that were either convicted or the city settle out of court, for ease. The only true claim I have made is that I would bet on that 51%. Which, still true. 


ke4gde said:


> Cops are constantly being accused of brutality where none exist. I was personally accused of excessive force (and cleared) because the woman did not like being told to not talk on her phone in the library. I asked her several times to discuss the issue outside and she forced me to place her into custody. Was that brutality?


Well, I don't really know, and I am ok with saying I am neither a lawyer nor a civil rights expert. Was it? Is that story relevant to a guy ending up with a severed spine, or being choked to death, or being shot while running away? 



ke4gde said:


> Personal observation? Ok let's play, as a street cop for almost five years (not at present) I saw the opposite of what you claim. However, we can't rely on my observations because they are only representative of a small portion of the population.


And that observation plays here. But, are you saying you saw black cops being overly aggressive with white people being arrested? Black cops systematically singling out and searching white people? Or are you saying that people were falsely claiming police brutality? 



ke4gde said:


> Sorry, this argument is ridiculous. This is not a Klingon Empire where the children are held accountable for the father's sins.   What happened prior to the enactment of the Civil Right's Act is within the realm of those generations. Those rioting in the streets had no dog in the fight within that context. Academically and legally this hold no relevance. The argument could even be made morally speaking, but I acknowledge that there is the possibility there is some relevance.


What is a klingon? Is that the dude that had to take the ring to that volcano or whatever?

I hate this argument. It always feels like, "Bro, I get it- your great great grandpa was a slave, and now you're sort of held to a different standard- get over it." Sorry man, until equality is truly reached, and we don't have to have these arguments anymore, it plays. It will always play. Again- _we dont understand this because we dont deal with it. _Legally, it 100% is relevant. Playing the race card is a viable defense- granted, that's got a huge negative context and in that negative context (highlighting our race issue in a shitty way to get a client off of a crime he actually committed *cough* OJ), but the race card is there because we have to keep reminding people that this is an issue. It's not going away. 



ke4gde said:


> EDIT: Not saying you are condemning anyone. Believe me, I understand the frustration and worry at the possibilities that are going on here (Baltimore and across the nation). However, it does no one any good to constantly bring race into the picture before it is proven. If the officers are found to have acted with racial malice, then that needs to be handled. Until then let's wait till we have more data to reach a logical conclusion is all I am saying.


It's ok if you ARE saying that. Really. 

I can be wrong, totally off. But I wont know until I have a conversation about it and can figure it out with my peers. 

But I feel the exact opposite about race. 

It does no one any good to fail to bring race into the picture before racism is disproven in our society. Until it is laughable that anyone would ever treat anyone different because of race (or ethnicity or sexual orientation or whatever), then we have to bring it up. And keep bringing it up. And keep talking about it. Granted, that's 100% personal opinion. 

But I feel the opposite isn't advancement, it's comfortability with the way things are and that obviously isnt working.


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 29, 2015)

amlove21 said:


> I'll bet a month's pay over exactly what I stated- that if we looked at all the police brutality cases in America, 51% of those cases would be white officers vice black/hispanic citizens. I don't know what faulty data you're speaking of, but we can narrow it down to cops that were either convicted or the city settle out of court, for ease. The only true claim I have made is that I would bet on that 51%. Which, still true.


Negative. Show the numbers. I cannot stress this enough. The faulty data is the arbitrary statement that 51% of police brutality is white on black. This is simply not true. However, since you made the claim the responsibility to prove it rest with you. I am also looking for the numbers, but so far the last hour has proven difficult to find current statistics for the previous year. It appears they are not all in yet and have not been analyzed. Even then, accusations (which is not the same as convictions or sustainment) account for a mere fraction of total citizen contacts.


> Well, I don't really know, and I am ok with saying I am neither a lawyer nor a civil rights expert. Was it? Is that story relevant to a guy ending up with a severed spine, or being choked to death, or *being shot while running away*?


Wow. Just wow. First of all, the Justice Department of the United States concluded that Brown was NOT running away, and not one witness actually testified to actually seeing him run away or had his hands in the air. In addition, the multitude of physical evidence proved that Brown was running towards Wilson. The case of Garner is less cut and dry as to the events that occurred, and he was being placed under arrest. The only similarity to the current event is perhaps the issue of medical treatment. Out of all of these events, the severed spine is the most damning and telling of the issue of brutality IF it is found to have occurred. We just don't have all the facts yet.

The story I told is relevant in the context that excessive force accusations are made all the time and each must be investigated thoroughly. And yes it was necessary to take her into custody. If you wish to discuss the finer points of that incident I can. However, it may take away from the overall issue.


> And that observation plays here. But, are you saying you saw black cops being overly aggressive with white people being arrested? Black cops systematically singling out and searching white people? Or are you saying that people were falsely claiming police brutality?


Forgive me, I was unclear in my intent on that one. I am saying that in the majority of times, it was white officers getting complaints from white citizens about excessive force and whatnot. However, since you mentioned it, in most instances yes. People were falsely claiming brutality. That is not to say that it does not happen and should be stomped out when found.


> What is a klingon? Is that the dude that had to take the ring to that volcano or whatever?


 No dude lol Star Trek, big smelly dark skinned warriors with ridges on their heads that kicked ass and took names. The joke was more intended for those that know me and played Star Trek Online with. Apologies lol.





> I hate this argument. It always feels like, "Bro, I get it- your great great grandpa was a slave, and now you're sort of held to a different standard- get over it." Sorry man, until equality is truly reached, and we don't have to have these arguments anymore, it plays. It will always play. Again- _we dont understand this because we dont deal with it. _Legally, it 100% is relevant. Playing the race card is a viable defense- granted, that's got a huge negative context and in that negative context (highlighting our race issue in a shitty way to get a client off of a crime he actually committed *cough* OJ), but the race card is there because we have to keep reminding people that this is an issue. It's not going away.


Bullshit. I did not place anyone in bondage. I did not discriminate against anyone as a law enforcement officer. Those kids were not in Selma getting sprayed with fire hoses and having dogs let loose on them. I am not to be held accountable for the actions of my ancestors. I am to be held accountable for my own actions and no one else. True equality will never be reached in the way you are claiming. As human beings we naturally tend to gravitate towards those like us. It does not mean we shouldn't try, it just means that it will never be perfect and the fight must continue to strive for equality. Legally it is not relevant UNLESS it can be shown that the officers reasons at the time of the event were racially motivated. Note that it is at the time. Of course the race issue isn't going away. People keep race baiting in the name of equality, but it is anything but equal. There are those of us out there that see a person beyond the pigment of their skin. Of course there are those out there who do not. I do not need to be reminded, or blamed for things I did not do. Pure and simple.


> It's ok if you ARE saying that. Really.
> 
> I can be wrong, totally off. *But I wont know until I have a conversation about it and can figure it out with my peers. *
> 
> But I feel the exact opposite about race.


Now this I can get behind and completely agree with. The most important part of all of this is the conversation. For how are we to know if we don't talk? Although, isn't it hypocritical to believe that about everything else, but race has to be interjected in every event?


----------



## AWP (Apr 29, 2015)

I looked for some data on police brutality cases. Let's throw around some numbers to prove or disprove certain claims.

Yeah....

There's not a lot of information out there, nothing from a scholarly source. This sums it up well and you'll note that even the numbers in this article vary:
http://journalistsresource.org/stud...rce-brutality-race-research-review-statistics#

One of the few reputable sources available:
http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=703



> Males were more likely than females to have force used or threatened against them during their most recent contact with police during 2008, and blacks were more likely than whites or Hispanics to experience use or threat of force.



I didn't read the follow-on reports to see what numbers constituted "more likely."

Even the FBI is stumped over the available, or lack thereof, data:

http://www.fbi.gov/news/speeches/hard-truths-law-enforcement-and-race



> Not long after riots broke out in Ferguson late last summer, I asked my staff to tell me how many people shot by police were African-American in this country. I wanted to see trends. I wanted to see information. They couldn’t give it to me, and it wasn’t their fault. Demographic data regarding officer-involved shootings is not consistently reported to us through our Uniform Crime Reporting Program. Because reporting is voluntary, our data is incomplete and therefore, in the aggregate, unreliable.
> 
> I recently listened to a thoughtful big city police chief express his frustration with that lack of reliable data. He said he didn’t know whether the Ferguson police shot one person a week, one a year, or one a century, and that in the absence of good data, “all we get are ideological thunderbolts, when what we need are ideological agnostics who use information to try to solve problems.” He’s right.
> 
> ...



When the Director of the FBI can't find reliable data we're left with vague terms. We're also left with a staggering lack of context regarding the available data. Let's say white people are less likely to have a case of police brutality. What's their criminal background? Did they follow the officer's instructions? Compare that with other ethnicities. Were officers more aggressive with minorities? Which ones? Where? Size of the department? Experience of the officer?

We can say that black people are more likely than white people to suffer from police brutality or excessive force and the arguments end there because *we lack context regarding the incomplete data*.

Enjoy your debate.


----------



## RetPara (Apr 29, 2015)

Freefalling said:


> ....
> We can say that black people are more likely than white people to suffer from police brutality or excessive force and the arguments end there because *we lack context regarding the incomplete data*.
> Enjoy your debate.



Great....  Just fucking great....   SOMEONE has to inject reason and logic into a perfectly good web brawl.   What the happened to good old days where something could be discussed for DAYS & DAYS based solely on our personal bias's, restricted points of view, and preconceived notions?


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

I think that it is hard for people in America to talk about racism, and things like privelege because they talk from a position of their personal experience. "Well there can't be racism because I'm not racist", "privelege? I have had to work for everything I've gotten..." But that isn't the point. On average the system has racist tendencies. On average a tall white handsome male is more likely to succeed in life not based on merit. That is what I am talking about, those are systemic issues.


----------



## Florida173 (Apr 29, 2015)

amlove21 said:


> No- I think that race might be involved every time a black or hispanic dies in police custody when those police were predominately white, and excessive force was used in the arrest.
> 
> Confirmation bias is searching for data (erroneously) to support a preconceived notion or previously held belief, usually in the face of the actual findings.
> 
> America has an issue with race is not an preconceived notion or erroneous belief. When predominantly white officers _kill black people at a regular pace on video in America, _that's not me shoehorning bad data into an answer that jives with my preconceived notions.



Your bias is getting in the way of the facts.



TLDR20 said:


> I think that it is hard for people in America to talk about racism, and things like privelege because they talk from a position of their personal experience. "Well there can't be racism because I'm bit racist", "privelege? I have had to work for everything I've gotten..." But that isn't the point. On average the system has racist tendencies. On average a tall white handsome male is more likely to succeed in life not based on merit. That is what I am talking about, those are systemic issues.


There is some pretty solid writings out there that talk about white privilege and how it did exist before, but in no way fits today's societal climate. It was based on specific tenets that don't exist today


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> There is some pretty solid writings out there that talk about white privilege and how it did exist before, but in no way fits today's societal climate. It was based on specific tenets that don't exist today



I doubt that, but post it up.

An example of my privelege, I went to a school without a resource officer, I got in fights in High School and didn't become a criminal. I can walk down the street in Durham without fear of being stopped. Those are privileges not afforded to many in our country.

My sociology teacher did a great demonstration of privelege. She put a trash can on the desk in the front of the room and said whoever gets a piece of paper in the can gets a million bucks. Obviously everyone had an equal chance, 1 piece of paper, 1 chance. But the kid at the desk is yhe only one who made it in. That is an example of privelege. Through no control or effort of his own, he was placed in a position to succeed not based on merit or experience, but based on where the can was placed. 

In the real world the can is normally placed out of reach for many not due to their lack of effort, but based on things they cannot control. Of course some do overcome those stacked odds, and they deserve the praise they receive. But on average, less privileged people are held out of reach by the system.


----------



## Florida173 (Apr 29, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> In the real world the can is normally placed out of reach for many not due to their lack of effort, but based on things they cannot control. Of course some do overcome those stacked odds, and they deserve the praise they receive. But on average, less privileged people are held out of reach by the system.


I suppose if you were to believe that the trashcan was the only way to get a million dollars and that someone was just providing it there for the taking.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> I suppose if you were to believe that the trashcan was the only way to get a million dollars and that someone was just providing it there for the taking.



It has nothing to do with the money. It has to do with opportunity.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Apr 29, 2015)

Oh, don't even give me that privilege bullshit. I'm white. I was a microcosom minority in school (Starting class of 1000ish, graduating of 460, 60 of which were varying degrees of sheet of paper, school size of 4k with a campus cop among other things, oh yeah no red or blue clothes, dickies/ben davis, no hats and bag inspections on demand) Not only was I white and fodder for the fucking masses thanks to , I was also poor white with 2 whopping new sets of jeans and shirts for a fucking school year having to learn to IMT thanks to the gangster neighbours at the tender age of 14, working 2 jobs from 15-17 before I even enlisted in the army. I got in fights too, more appropriately I defended myself multiple times against multiple assailants each time. They finally got the point that why yes, I am the crazy white guy you shouldn't fuck with when I chased the last group (different each fucking time, it seemed everyone wanted to fuck with that white kid) for 6 blocks away from school.

I also had a drunk father that I put in jail for assaulting my mother and a schitzophrenic grandmother who I had to caretake as well during this whole fucking fantastic growing up. Oh yeah, we also had a one bedroom house. I rode in the back of pickup trucks more than I can remember and lived in a bumper pull trailer for a few years too due to the 89 quake in california and our house being unstable until we reinforced the foundation with a shitton of pier blocks using a bottle jack to raise the house to make it work.

*In the real world if you can't reach the can you get the fuck up and go put the shit in the can, not bemoan that you're not sitting close enough to it.*  My can I needed to reach was getting the fuck out of california and the military provided me a means to do so and also get to do shit I would never either be allowed to, be legally able to, or afford to do.  I had no college fund, no college prospects, and no boost from my parents to go do/accomplish/achieve jack shit.

I haven't had a single privilege from being white other than being shit on because I am white by anyone who isn't and is butthurt because they think the grass is greener.  Every thing I've had or have I achieved on the merit of my accomplishments *I* fucking built. Not my name, not my color or lack thereof, but what the hell I have learned how to do and can demonstrate on demand.

I don't give a shit what color someone is, never have never will. I give a shit that you're a decent person that keeps their word and does the job they're supposed to do in the confines that our society has built for us.  That means not fighting the cops, not rioting, not being a fucking douche bag, not slinging dope... the shit ain't hard but it sure as hell seems to be for some people these days.

When I hear white privilege, I sneer at whoever is saying it and the entire concept in general. Being a decent human being goes a hell of a lot further than being white.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Apr 29, 2015)

Matter of fact, there were a ton of opportunities in school that I was outright not eligible for because I wasn't (insert anything but white here).  privilege, pfft.


----------



## Florida173 (Apr 29, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> It has nothing to do with the money. It has to do with opportunity.


lol.. right... like it had nothing to do with the trashcan.. my point stands.. it's not the only opportunity.  Pretending the other students will never have an opportunity is nothing but self-victimization.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> I think that it is hard for people in America to talk about racism, and things like privelege because they talk from a position of their personal experience. "Well there can't be racism because I'm bit racist", "privelege? I have had to work for everything I've gotten..." But that isn't the point. On average the system has racist tendencies. On average a tall white handsome male is more likely to succeed in life not based on merit. That is what I am talking about, those are systemic issues.



@Ranger Psych did you read the above? You basically did exactly what I said in your posts.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Apr 29, 2015)

What's hard to talk about?
I'll tell you what's hard to talk about:


"The Fourth Estate has contacted sources who allege that Freddy Gray received spinal and neck surgery a week before we was arrested, and was allegedly receiving a large structured settlement from Allstate Insurance. The surgery is allegedly related to a car accident in which Gray was involved.

Sources allege that Gray also attempted to refinance his structured settlement into one lump sum payment through Peachtree Funding.

If this is true, then it is possible that Gray’s spinal injury resulting from his encounter with the Baltimore Police was not the result of rough-handling or abuse, but rather a freak accident that occurred when Gray should have been at home resting, not selling drugs.

The structured settlement from Allstate and Gray’s attempt to convert it into one lump sum payment has been confirmed by Howard County Circuit Court Records."

liveleak dot com/view?i=b62_1430261133 since the forum wants to make the sole photograph a media link instead of linking to the article.


----------



## CDG (Apr 29, 2015)

Here we go again..... Nearly every time something like this happens, the "poor victim" is anything but.  Yet there is a perpetual conversation of systemic racism, despite a lack of hard evidence.  It's circumstantial, anecdotal, 2nd/3rd/4th/whatever hand stories, etc.  And god help you if you're white and attempt to weigh in on the conversation on the opposite side of the "victim".  Well that's ipso facto proof of racism right there!  Explain how it's any different to automatically dismiss any argument from a Caucasian person based solely on the fact they're Caucasian and therefore can't understand how much the Man is oppressing everyone.  You know what doesn't help get your paper any closer to inside the can?  Standing on the corner selling drugs. Repeatedly.


----------



## Board and Seize (Apr 29, 2015)

[Trigger Warning]Possible micro/macro-aggression ahead[/sarcasm]
*Baltimore: Welcome to the New America *

I'm a bit late to this party, but I'm going to wade right in.  Those who adhere to the new orthodoxy espoused by the social 'sciences' aren't going to like what I have to say.  And we have a few here on the board.  But I think I can expect more intellectually conversation here, than where I am sitting right now.  In fact, let's start there before circling around to southern Africa...

I am reaching the end of my second year as an undergraduate at a small, northeastern, elite liberal arts college.  A real bastion of the new emerging orthodoxy (I'll get to that in a bit).  One of my major fears coming here (to the point of nightmares) was that I would, in a moment of indiscretion, revert back to the modes of speech I developed as an enlisted recondo and be branded (perhaps even prosecuted) as a hate criminal.  Not because I am particularly hateful (I don't think I am), but because of the casual way we used to play with racist slurs.  Na'meen?  I'm pretty much over that fear now that I've adjusted to 'polite' society and speech.  I had a phenomenal class that dealt specifically with race, identity, privilege, and racism.  It opened my eyes to many things, and really got me thinking deeply about the issues we now see daily in the news.

*On to the Orthodoxy!*

I want to relate two different experiences I've had here as a way to illustrate what I mean by a new orthodoxy:

*Vignette #1*, or Share the Love: we have a student organization here that showcases student art in a 'coffee-house' environment.  It's primarily spoken word and music.  As one of the few available alternatives to our sloppy greek/alcohol/idiotic-behavior scene it usually gets a decent turn out.  It also tends to coalesce our, let's say 'alternative' crowd: racial minorities, LGBTQ, etc.  The white/frat/straight/etc. population at my school is hegemonic, so all the various 'others' tend to coalesce together and show up.  The stated purpose of this group is to provide a safe space (I wish we could unload that phrase) for students to share before a group.  Okay so far, all good.  

Being friends with the founder and several participants, and as a student sound engineer, I've been to a number of these events.  It's a cozy, loving environment.  People sit where they can, snapping their earnest support as the performers_ spew some of the most vitriolic and hateful speech I've *ever* heard in my life_.  Most of this hate is explicitly anti-white, anti-straight, and anti-man.  I mean, the filth that comes out of these kids' mouths is shocking - and that's coming from a Marine grunt!



*Vignette #2*, or Keep Your Identity out of your Politics!: Earlier this school year we had the largest protest in school history (I think).  It started as a black protest against institutional racism, and quickly morphed into catch-all identity politicking.  While the movement successfully kickstarted thought and conversation on campus, it was inherently hypocritical (like all contemporary identity politics).  They espoused the goals of openess, inclusivity, and tolerance.  

They were an underground group that met and planned the protest in secret.  They hid their identities and sought to obfuscate their connections to faculty in the education and social 'science' departments.  Their core group was composed exclusively of minorities, or 'people of color'.  They actively alienated anyone not fully in their camp and tried to paint the issues as binary, black/white, with-us-or-against-us, terms.  Their demands included a raft of totalitarian policies that are actively intolerant of anything not 100% in line with their agenda.  Again, I am (and already was) friends with a couple of core members of the group.  They are decent people, who are genuinely trying to make things better.  But they have been deceived.  

I wrote a response to the movement which I presented to some groups and circulated around.  It generally got a good response, but sometimes it did not.  Those times, the people I interacted with were experiencing an emotional reaction.  If you ever want to win a debate that you are on the weaker side of, piss off your opponent.  Similar to hypoxia symptoms (HAPS), when fight-or-flight kicks in, you lose the ability to produce new rational thought.  Watch your opponent say the same thing over and over even when it makes no sense.  (I've had this done to me several times by a scary smart Brother - it isn't fun to have it explained immediately afterwards...)  This is the same reaction I often came up against when we changed decades-old TTPs at the III SOTG DA/CQT course.  Try explaining to a guy who has invested his sense of worth and identity into his job performance that the old combat glide he spent so many hours mastering is a terrible, stupid, and ineffective technique.  The rational brain shuts down as he perceives your 'attack' on the technique as an existential threat to his identity.  Same story here.  Thus, keep your identity out of your politics - if you can't maintain separation between yourself and the things you support, you can't engage in meaningful, critical, and intellectually honest discussion about them.
Etymology - orthodoxy comes from the Greek and literally means right or true belief.  As in, this is the only correct way to think about something.  Being in the military we've all encountered orthodoxy many times.  I hope that we've all recognized the stifling effects on free thought that it has.  Bureaucratic inertia, "If it was good enough for Chesty.... bla bla bla", "This is how _we_ did it, back in the day", "Don't ask why! - just do it!".  Man, if we could stomp out orthodoxy - imagine the whole DoD being as lean, agile, and innovative as SOF.  Imagine shit that didn't float to the top.  While orthodoxy is a _useful_ tool for cohesion, group identity, etc. it is, in my opinion, the root of much evil.

So what is the new orthodoxy?  You know exactly what it is.  "Social Justice Warriors", identity politics, political correctness, tearing down of anything smacking of Western Tradition or Christianity, breaking up the atomic family, and so on.  I have two major problems with this:

Any orthodoxy is inimical to freedom, innovation, and change.  The problem with the new orthodoxy is that it *is* an orthodoxy.
The entire* ecosystem of movements pushing this agenda is inherently hypocritical.  They espouse a set of values, and then seek to enforce them using means that are the opposite.  Openess through secrecy and conspiracy.  Inclusivity through exclusivity.  Tolerance through absolute intolerance.
As for the goals, I broadly agree with a lot of them.
*This is painting with a _really_ broad brush, I know.  Generally though, I stand by this claim.

*Southern Africa*

I'm going to try and wrap this up - it's getting too long and taking too much time to write.  Simply put, for those that subscribe to the new orthodoxy (in whole or in part), do you know the history of these ideas?  They aren't new, nor original to the US.  Most of this dogma was developed in southern Africa, linked closely with and often spurred by COMINTERN agents.  Check out Steve Biko and Umkhonto we Sizwe.  Mandela and the ANC were not the family-friendly folks they are presented as nowadays.

*The New America*
Also trying to keep it short.  I believe that the rioting and general assholery we are seeing in Balitimore is a near-direct result of the new orthodoxy.  The celebration of victim-hood, coupled with equivocated concepts of racism (individual or structural bias) and an outrageous sense of entitlement are all core to the new orthodoxy.  You reap what you sow. Social 'science', you've largely won the culture.  Baltimore is your reward.  Thanks a lot.


(If I get more time later, I might come back to this and flesh out some stuff I kind of glossed over - I'm out of time!)
edit: I didn't even get into my whole rant on the pervasiveness of Orweillian Newspeak/Doublespeak in this movement.  In fact, reading assignment: Read (or reread) 1984 and Brave New World in this context.  Prepare for chills down your spine.


----------



## amorris127289 (Apr 29, 2015)

https://instagram.com/p/2EXdtSGIhT/


----------



## AKkeith (Apr 29, 2015)

White men under the age of 25 are at the highest risk to be killed by police.

Evidence to support.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ard0309st.pdf


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 29, 2015)

AKkeith said:


> White men under the age of 25 are at a higher risk to be killed by police.
> 
> Evidence to support.
> 
> http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ard0309st.pdf


Thank you, I could not find that last night.


----------



## AKkeith (Apr 29, 2015)

So much privilege we even get the higher statistics in arrest related deaths.


----------



## DA SWO (Apr 29, 2015)

It's CNN so feel free to ignore.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

AKkeith said:


> White men under the age of 25 are at the highest risk to be killed by police.
> 
> Evidence to support.
> 
> http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ard0309st.pdf



I don't think those statistics say what you think they do. While yes 42% of the total reported deaths by police were white, the population of whites is 77% of the population. The statistics say that although African American Males account for 6-8% of the US population, they account for 35% of the people killed by police. So, speaking on a true percentage basis, you are more likely to be killed if you are young black man than if you are a young white man.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

DA SWO said:


> It's CNN so feel free to ignore.View attachment 13149



Again, Blacks account for only 12.6 percent of our population, so the statistic is misleading.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

To put it in perspective using the raw data from the chart @AKkeith posted. If you are a white male your chance of being killed by police is roughly 9.1x10^-6. For blacks it is 4.02x10^-5. That is an entire order of magnitude greater. While I am not a math whiz, I can see that I am a shitload less likely to be killed than a black man of my age group.


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 29, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> I don't think those statistics say what you think they do. While yes 42% of the total reported deaths by police were white, the population of whites is 77% of the population. The statistics say that although African American Males account for 6-8% of the US population, they account for 35% of the people killed by police. So, speaking on a true percentage basis, you are more likely to be killed if you are young black man than if you are a young white man.


The statistics are not misleading. Digging deeper we find what we are looking for. You must not look at the overall population (as most are not involved in criminal activity), but at the percentage of crime committed. 
Uniform Crime Report (UCR) for 2012
Total crimes committed: 9,390,473
of the total crimes committed,
White: 6,502,919 (69.3%)
Black: 2,640,067 (28.1%)


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

ke4gde said:


> The statistics are not misleading. Digging deeper we find what we are looking for. You must not look at the overall population (as most are not involved in criminal activity), but at the percentage of crime committed.
> Uniform Crime Report (UCR) for 2012
> Total crimes committed: 9,390,473
> of the total crimes committed,
> ...



Why would I do that. The point of @AKkeith 's post was to point out that you are more likely to be killed by police if you are white than if you are black. That is not supported by the facts.

UPDATED USING THOSE NUMBERS*Even using that stats you just posted you are still more likely to be killed if you are black than white. The chance if you are black is 5.79x10^-4, the chance if you are white is 3.11x10^-4. So even if using your wonky statistics, you are incorrect.


----------



## amorris127289 (Apr 29, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> I don't think those statistics say what you think they do. While yes 42% of the total reported deaths by police were white, the population of whites is 77% of the population. The statistics say that although African American Males account for 6-8% of the US population, they account for 35% of the people killed by police. So, speaking on a true percentage basis, you are more likely to be killed if you are young black man than if you are a young white man.



According to previous statistics posted, you are also more likely to be arrested for being of color. I believe that puts an individual of color at a higher risk, statistically speaking just because they are more likely to be arrested. 

 According to the video Rangerpsych posted, you are 42 times more likely to be raped than killed by a LEO. Where are the riots for rape?



If laws were obeyed, arrests would not be made and the whole situation would be avoided. Regardless of race, Integrity first and this would not be an issue. But everyone in a society does not follow the laws, And it will always be that way so there will always be profiling.
"When the power of love is greater than the love of power, then there will be peace."


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 29, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> Why would I do that. The point of @AKkeith 's post was to point out that you are more likely to be killed by police if you are white than if you are black. That is not supported by the facts.


Because when you made the statement that you are more likely to be killed if you are black than white. That is not the entire truth. It is excluding crucial data that puts those numbers into context. The majority of crime is committed by those that are white, which as you mentioned are the majority of the population. No offense intended, but your statement is inflammatory and unsupported by complete fact.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

ke4gde said:


> Because when you made the statement that you are more likely to be killed if you are black than white. That is not the entire truth. It is excluding crucial data that puts those numbers into context. The majority of crime is committed by those that are white, which as you mentioned are the majority of the population. No offense intended, but your statement is inflammatory and unsupported by complete fact.



I updated my post above. You are still wrong, less wrong, but wrong nonetheless.


----------



## AWP (Apr 29, 2015)

AKkeith said:


> White men under the age of 25 are at the highest risk to be killed by police.
> 
> Evidence to support.
> 
> http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ard0309st.pdf





TLDR20 said:


> Again, Blacks account for only 12.6 percent of our population, so the statistic is misleading.



The entire report, much like almost all data available, is misleading. It lacks context and it lacks enough information to draw any conclusions. To be blunt: so what if XXXXX were the most likely to be killed? We don't know the contributing factors, only raw numbers. If someone said...F-16's were more likely to crash than B-52's. Fine. Whatever....but WHY? Engine failure? Pilot error? Poor maintenance?

If someone said "XX% of decedents died while resisting arrest. YY% were black, ZZ% were white..." then we'd have a more complete picture. "XX% were killed by an officer with less than 5 years of experience." Now we can look at trends. The data needed may be too granular but without it we're just spewing "black vs. white" crap when it could show meaningful trends that allow our society to fix the problem. Otherwise we're stuck on race and furthering America's racial divide...and that helps no one and solves nothing.


----------



## amorris127289 (Apr 29, 2015)

http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/story/28925497/police-woman-makes-threats-on-facebook-to-kill-cops

"Police released part of her post to FOX 5. In it, she says “all black ppl should rise up and shoot at every white cop in the nation starting now.” Police said later on Dickens wrote, “I thought about shooting every white cop I see in the head until I'm caught by the police or killed by them. Ha!!!! I think I can pull it off. Might kill a least 15 tomorrow. I'm plotting now.”"


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

Freefalling said:


> The entire report, much like almost all data available, is misleading. It lacks context and it lacks enough information to draw any conclusions. To be blunt: so what if XXXXX were the most likely to be killed? We don't know the contributing factors, only raw numbers. If someone said...F-16's were more likely to crash than B-52's. Fine. Whatever....but WHY? Engine failure? Pilot error? Poor maintenance?
> 
> If someone said "XX% of decedents died while resisting arrest. YY% were black, ZZ% were white..." then we'd have a more complete picture. "XX% were killed by an officer with less than 5 years of experience." Now we can look at trends. The data needed may be too granular but without it we're just spewing "black vs. white" crap when it could show meaningful trends that allow our society to fix the problem. Otherwise we're stuck on race and furthering America's racial divide...and that helps no one and solves nothing.



Because statistics like this feed into the idea that there is equivelency in the way blacks and whites deal with/are dealt with by the police, when in reality there isn't.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

amorris127289 said:


> http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/story/28925497/police-woman-makes-threats-on-facebook-to-kill-cops
> 
> "Police released part of her post to FOX 5. In it, she says “all black ppl should rise up and shoot at every white cop in the nation starting now.” Police said later on Dickens wrote, “I thought about shooting every white cop I see in the head until I'm caught by the police or killed by them. Ha!!!! I think I can pull it off. Might kill a least 15 tomorrow. I'm plotting now.”"



Do you have any fucking input? We aren't a news aggregation site, if you don't have commentary let the big boys talk.


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 29, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> Because statistics like this feed into the idea that there is equivelency in the way blacks and whites deal with/are dealt with by the police, when in reality there isn't.


Of course there is not perfect equality. We are human and prone to flaw. However, as Free mentioned, there must be context and data to paint an accurate picture. The assertions being made are inaccurate. Are blacks discriminated against at times? Absolutely. Are whites? Most definitely. The issue needs to be focused on discrimination of all kinds, race, religion, orientation, ect... Not a focus on black vs white which is, I believe, the main issue among many members here based on what I have read.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

CDG said:


> Here we go again..... Nearly every time something like this happens, the "poor victim" is anything but.  Yet there is a perpetual conversation of systemic racism, *despite a lack of hard evidence*.  It's circumstantial, anecdotal, 2nd/3rd/4th/whatever hand stories, etc.  And god help you if you're white and attempt to weigh in on the conversation on the opposite side of the "victim".  Well that's ipso facto proof of racism right there!  Explain how it's any different to automatically dismiss any argument from a Caucasian person based solely on the fact they're Caucasian and therefore can't understand how much the Man is oppressing everyone.  You know what doesn't help get your paper any closer to inside the can?  Standing on the corner selling drugs. Repeatedly.




First of all I haven't seen anyone defend the "poor victim" I don't know if he was innocent, or a poor victim, but I know he was denied medical care after being detained by the police, which is a fucking no-go. Who cares if he recently had spinal surgery, or what his criminal record was. Once he was in the care of the police, they had a responsibility to get him timely medical care if it was required. 

If you want to read into the things I said that much man then go ahead. I don't think anyone "automatically dismissed any argument from a Caucasian person based solely on the fact they're Caucasian...." No one did that, I am white, Amlove is white, I think most of the people posting here are white, so no one is dismissing anything. What I did say is that often people have a difficult time talking about things like racism and privelege because they become personally offended at the idea of it. Then within a few posts a perfect example of what I was talking about was provided for me by Ranger Psych, who explained in detail how he was most certainly not privileged and he doesn't care about race. 

Lack of hard evidence?  

Here is a link to definitions of terms that relate to the topic: http://www.aspeninstitute.org/sites...t/docs/rcc/RCC-Structural-Racism-Glossary.pdf

Notice that we are not talking about individual racism, or even perceivable stuff. But it is there. 

Here are things that speak to the systemic problems we face in just the sentencing of people convicted of crimes. 

http://www.sentencingproject.org/template/page.cfm?id=122
Read any of the vignettes or articles, they all say similar things and point out the same trends. If you are black you are more likely to get heavier sentences, you are more likely to spend the entire length of your sentence in prison, and you are more likely to be convicted in the first place. Are there variables? Of course, but across the entire nation, in both states and in federal cases the results are the same. 

If you like charts here are a few that will point out some of the means of systemic racism. 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/02/civil-rights-act-anniversary-racism-charts_n_5521104.html

As to hard evidence, there is no smoking gun here, the way our system has been set up from the very beginning has been an issue. The past is important because many of the rights blacks and other minorities have today have been borne out of that past. My parents were alive when schools were segregated, that past is alive and well. Institutions, and deeply laid feelings don't disappear because a law was passed, they are still there and they fuel current actions.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

ke4gde said:


> Of course there is not perfect equality. We are human and prone to flaw. However, as Free mentioned, there must be context and data to paint an accurate picture. The assertions being made are inaccurate. Are blacks discriminated against at times? Absolutely. Are whites? Most definitely. The issue needs to be focused on discrimination of all kinds, race, religion, orientation, ect... Not a focus on black vs white which is, I believe, the main issue among many members here based on what I have read.



Right, the way it was presented as in "whites are even more privileged in being killed by police..." is what got my response. Because as has been shown that is not true.


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 29, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> Right, however the way it was presented here on this site was without the proper context. I think that has been provided now.


LoL  context in which direction?



TLDR20 said:


> I know he was denied medical care after being detained by the police, which is a fucking no-go. Who cares if he recently had spinal surgery, or what his criminal record was. Once he was in the care of the police, they had a responsibility to get him timely medical care if it was required.


I believe to the point of the original conversation this bears reinforcing because it is the most important point to the entire thread that crosses racial lines. If it did happen to him (I say if because the final report has not been released and so far much of what we know is speculation until the official report is released), it could happen to any one of us.

EDIT: Now let me finish my damn midterm!


----------



## amorris127289 (Apr 29, 2015)

Yes Sir.

In support of my other post, learn and follow the rules and these riots are pointless. I posted a comment earlier. I was sharing an article someone sent to me.

You guys were arguing over the "black lives matter" and the race topic. When there are people plotting to kill potentially innocent LEO because of the color of their skin. I am sure there are corrupt cops, but what about people like the woman in the article I shared, or in the video I posted earlier of a woman dancing on the American Flag, the flag that drapes the coffins of soldiers that were killed trying to defend this country and those that live in it. Yes protestors have the right to burn and mistreat the flag but should that not be the topic of discussion? Stand for the nation that you guys took the oath for. Follow the laws set forth by the nation and it would be better off. I hate how someone posts something Like the woman who stomped all over the flag, but then when you read comments on the post there are people saying dumb N***** rather than calling her a terrorist to the nation.


----------



## racing_kitty (Apr 29, 2015)

Because the US is a racist bagodix that needs to be rebuilt, Bolshevik style... /sarc


----------



## amorris127289 (Apr 29, 2015)

I cannot speak on how things are in the bigger cities, I live in a small city now and grew up in the military so race was never an issue around me and being from a younger generation than you admin(I assume) so I never saw the segregation issues. It was always due your job and everything else would be taken care of.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

racing_kitty said:


> Because the US is a racist bagodix that needs to be rebuilt, Bolshevik style... /sarc



I know your post is sarcasm, but it gets at a good point. We are so divided here in the states that if you say something different than the views of others you are immediately a socialist/communist/progressive windbag, or the fascist/neocon/racist. However there is a lot of gray in the world. Many of us fall somewhere in the middle on many of these issues. I personally hate that there are people destroying their communities. I also hate that there is video of a cop shooting an unarmed black teen in the back as he runs away. I don't think there are easy solutions to the problems that face America today, but I think writing things off as not problems because you can't see them is one of our biggest issues. I have been trying to point that out, but I am neither the smartest, nor the most articulate. I know my writing style can come across as smug or accusatory, but I have been here long enough that long time members should know that, and y'all obviously don't mind as I was regularly elected to site leadership:) It is good to have a dialogue, and I am a member of this site for topics like this that go on for pages and pages. They often get very interesting.


----------



## Dienekes (Apr 29, 2015)

Racism definitely exists in America. How do I know? I am from Louisiana. My high school flag that we flew at all football games and generally throughout the year is a confederate flag(apparently that is racist in some circles). I would bet money I've probably heard the n-word more than any black person. The old people and farmers around here are especially racist and even use the n-word when casually talking to a black person, Ex: "Hey n-word, go grab that wrench". Yep, heard the guy say it. My grandfather even said that he wasn't going to my cousins wedding because "She is marrying an n-word". That guy is Cambodian. None of these are of the Neo-Nazi or KKK type. I can't speak to that type of racism.

I said all that to establish my credibility on the subject. Now, if you talk to these people about why they are racist, they would say two things: That the majority of people on welfare are black and that minorities have a privilege in the system. I won't speak as to why about they welfare because I don't have any evidence. Ex: My high school math teacher approached the class with a very large STEM scholarship to LSU. I asked where I could apply, and she said it's only for women and minorities. I said that's bullshit. She being a woman got pissed and exclaimed about white male privilege. Well I failed to ever see any of that privilege because to my knowledge there was never any similar scholarship or any scholarship period that was only available to white males.

This affirmative action stuff, which is essentially reverse racism, is one of the main reasons that racism exists today. I wasn't around in the 60's or 70's so I don't know why people were racist then, but today it is because of this stuff. When companies have a quota to fill for minorities, that perpetuates racism. Ex: Talked to a guy who got an internship in engineering. He told me he got that one from attending the Society for Black Engineers career fair, not the regular career fair. Same goes for schools. When I have friends with 4.0's that are very involved on campus worried about not getting into med school because med schools except a disproportionate amount of minorities, that perpetuates racism. Ex: I have a white female friend whose grandmother is from Spain so she checked the minority box because she is 25% Spanish even though she looks like the whitest girl you've ever seen. She attributes that to her getting accepted, not her 4.0 and ridiculous resume. That is a fucking problem.

Next, is the news, and you all know it is a problem. My racist friends always complain about how the news only shows a story about a black person getting killed because he is black. they then search all these stories about white people getting killed that never make the news. That perpetuates racism.

You want to know how to defeat racism? Stop talking about it. When we get past this affirmative action bullshit, and the news quits attributing everything bad that has ever happened to anyone to racism, that is when you will see racism wither away and die. When everyone gets treated equally by the "system", and no one mentions race about anything, then it won't exist.


----------



## Board and Seize (Apr 29, 2015)

And now I'm hopping the fence. 

@jroberts1187 and @amorris127289, your recent posts are walking talking examples of 'white privilege' - whether you're white or not.  As dismissive as I am of the so-called social 'sciences', there is a huge body of scholarly work that is the product of some very bright minds on these topics.

When you dive into a discussion like this, do yourself a favor and at least learn what the terms being used mean.  Maybe even look for the historical context.  You guys are are trying to counter arguments, cool.  But the very tactics you are using support the other side!  Privilege, in this context explicitly refers to members of a structurally reinforced majority being blind to the plight of the structurally repressed minority.  So you don't see it.  So you think AA is reverse racism.  Bully for you.  But guess what?  These attitudes are _exactly_ what the SJW's are referring to when they talk about privilege.

Anecdotal evidence does not suggest a trend.  Correlation does not suggest a causation.  If you've been lucky enough to avoid racially charged situations so far, that's great, but don't confuse your experience for that of millions of people living in radically different circumstances than yourselves.

RACIALISM != RACISM (That's 'does not equal' for the non-math/computer nerds out there).  If you don't know what I'm talking about, educate yourself.  Guess what, this decade is already being defined by the new social justice / civil rights movements.  Pretending that problems don't exist just because they don't affect you does not make them go away.

I'm not trying to be a dick.  I'm not trying to say that you need to doing a mountain of research before engaging in the debate.  But for the love of pete, please don't become a living, breathing strawman of your own position!


----------



## CDG (Apr 29, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> First of all I haven't seen anyone defend the "poor victim" I don't know if he was innocent, or a poor victim, but I know he was denied medical care after being detained by the police, which is a fucking no-go. Who cares if he recently had spinal surgery, or what his criminal record was. Once he was in the care of the police, they had a responsibility to get him timely medical care if it was required.
> Agreed.  I am certainly not arguing that him being a career criminal means he's not entitled to medical care.  However, do you not agree that it fairly significantly changes the storyline if he was recently coming off spinal surgery and was at a drastically higher risk for something like this, which makes it much more unlikely he was the victim of police brutality?  Negligence and brutality are different issues.
> 
> 
> ...



I read through the links as well.  In rebuttal:

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/conspicuous-consumption-and-race-who-spends-more-on-what/

http://washingtoninformer.com/news/2013/sep/18/blacks-have-little-show-hard-earned-dollars/

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/inequality/

As you said, there's no smoking gun.  However, the system is, IMHO, not nearly as inherently racist as some claim.  It's not racist if you spend more of your money on status symbols than the white family down the street and then can't afford to send your kids to college like they can.  It's not racist if you can't get a job because you dropped out of school, so a white guy who actually graduated gets it instead.  It's not racist that white people recovered from the recession better because they invested more and therefore offset their losses at a higher rate once the stock market rebounded.  Feelings have nothing to do with it.

ETA:  I don't disagree that racism exists.  What I do disagree with is the stated prevalence and influence of it in 2015.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

CDG said:


> I read through the links as well.  In rebuttal:
> 
> http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/conspicuous-consumption-and-race-who-spends-more-on-what/
> 
> ...



So you are admitting the system is racist, just not as much as some claim, I'll take that.:)


----------



## CDG (Apr 29, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> So you are admitting the system is racist, just not as much as some claim, I'll take that.:)



Lol.  I am admitting that the system is not perfect.  I don't think anyone can argue that it is.  I am not admitting that the negative issues affecting the black community are because of a racist system.


----------



## Centermass (Apr 29, 2015)

And now, we have the the evil NG, who have been receiving support from the community. At least, from some segments of the Baltimore community, until the criticism of those deeds began to flow. So much for unwavering support.

Whole Foods Feeds The Oppressor

Read the follow on comments. Just goes to show once again, there's no shortage of stupid people on this planet.  

Whole Foods has since removed the post.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

Fucking people


----------



## x SF med (Apr 29, 2015)

We burned, looted and demolished our neighborhood, but a company is evil because it fed the people that are trying to mitigate any further damage we might do... the evil oppressors are stealing food out of our children's mouths because we forced the shut down of an entire city and we rely on the city to feed our kids....

Logic? Where is it?


----------



## racing_kitty (Apr 29, 2015)

x SF med said:


> We burned, looted and demolished our neighborhood, but a company is evil because it fed the people that are trying to mitigate any further damage we might do... the evil oppressors are stealing food out of our children's mouths because we forced the shut down of an entire city and we rely on the city to feed our kids....
> 
> Logic? Where is it?


Logic is a tool of white privilege, so shut your white male privileged ass up.


----------



## Dienekes (Apr 29, 2015)

Board and Seize said:


> And now I'm hopping the fence.
> 
> @jroberts1187 and @amorris127289, your recent posts are walking talking examples of 'white privilege' - whether you're white or not.  As dismissive as I am of the so-called social 'sciences', there is a huge body of scholarly work that is the product of some very bright minds on these topics.
> 
> ...



Apologies, I guess my debating needs work. I was trying to convey that racism exists because people believe the grass is greener by providing examples, and posit that removing those things that initiate racist feelings would remove the racism itself. As in attacking the root of the problem. What do the members here see as the reason racism exits?


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 29, 2015)

ke4gde said:


> Wow. Just wow. First of all, the Justice Department of the United States concluded that Brown was NOT running away, and not one witness actually testified to actually seeing him run away or had his hands in the air. In addition, the multitude of physical evidence proved that Brown was running towards Wilson. The case of Garner is less cut and dry as to the events that occurred, and he was being placed under arrest. The only similarity to the current event is perhaps the issue of medical treatment. Out of all of these events, the severed spine is the most damning and telling of the issue of brutality IF it is found to have occurred. We just don't have all the facts yet.


I am going to take the time to address your whole post, after I read it a couple more times. But I want to address this part right now, because it highlights the very issue we are talking about.

I referenced a white officer shooting and killing an unarmed black guy, and you went off on your Brown/Garner tangent- I wasn't referencing Brown or Garner. I was referencing Michael Scott, in South Carolina. The officer has been charged with murder. 

Just let this sink in- you've been railing on and on how race and race-related brutality aren't the main issue here, and you picked the wrong two cases _because there have been too many at this point for you to keep them straight. 





_


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 29, 2015)

racing_kitty said:


> Logic is a tool of white privilege, so shut your white male privileged ass up.


Lol.


----------



## Board and Seize (Apr 29, 2015)

jroberts1187 said:


> Apologies, I guess my debating needs work. I was trying to convey that racism exists because people believe the grass is greener by providing examples, and posit that removing those things that initiate racist feelings would remove the racism itself. As in attacking the root of the problem. What do the members here see as the reason racism exits?



No need to apologize, we're all in this thread to hash out our thoughts on these tough and thorny issues.  My critique wasn't directed towards your debating technique - it was aimed at your thought process.

The claim that racism would just vanish without affirmative action, or everyone being so hyper-focused on it, is itself a classic example of 'privilege'.  I get that you are well-intentioned, and trying to seek a solution to the problem.  And there is some truth to your position - matters are certainly exacerbated by those in the new orthodoxy trying to make literally everything either an instance of racism or about race.

But.

None of us exist in an a-historical bubble.  We all have a past and come from a lineage.  And for Americans, that past is riddled with every kind of racism.  You might not think you owe your ancestors much or anything - but that simply isn't true.  Your proposed solution is unfortunately a naive one.  It imagines that there is a firewall between the past and present.  And it sounds like, from your earlier post, that your experience of racism has been pretty, I don't know, shallow?

The main thing I was driving at is that your exact argument is one that is held up by those in the new orthodoxy as evidence that they are correct.  I'm sure you arrived at the position yourself, and it certainly seems sensible at first glance.  But you need to dig deeper man.  Things aren't that simple.  And if you go around saying that, feeling like you've proven your point, you are only undermining yourself and giving credence to the other side.

I'd suggest that you do some self-education on this topic.  Wikipedia, as always, is a great first resource.  At the very least, you will become aware of where the debate currently is, and common rebuttals to ideas that you might have.


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 29, 2015)

amlove21 said:


> I am going to take the time to address your whole post, after I read it a couple more times. But I want to address this part right now, because it highlights the very issue we are talking about.
> 
> I referenced a white officer shooting and killing an unarmed black guy, and you went off on your Brown/Garner tangent- I wasn't referencing Brown or Garner. I was referencing Michael Scott, in South Carolina. The officer has been charged with murder.
> 
> ...


Considering that you did not specify which shooting, the confusion lays on your end I'm afraid. Communication involves the sender ensuring the message was received properly. The trial has not even started and you are condemning the officer? If his motives were racial then that will come out when the evidence is presented. You are basing your inflammatory statement on a video that only shows a portion of what occurred. I am not defending the officer. In fact, given that the South Carolina state law enforcement has charged him with murder, it appears to indicate that he may have done many things wrong. However, being charged with murder is not the same as being convicted of murder. Why is it automatically assumed there were racial motivations in the shooting? A cursory review of the available information does indicate in this case that 1) he did not have probable cause to pull the vehicle over and 2) there was insufficient cause for the use of deadly force. IF the shooting was racially motivated then it is likely that he would have been charged under a hate crime statue as well.

I didn't pick those two cases. You did. I responded to your vague accusation. I am sorry that I don't take news reports at face value and convict someone in the court of public opinion. I make the determination based on the available information, and my training and experience. I give the officer the same benefit of the doubt I gave and subject I was investigating for any crime. Your final statement is irrelevant as each use of deadly force is different based on the facts of the situation. Although I admit that keeping all of the misinformation and gross speculation is difficult to keep straight.

EDIT: I recognize that I am not perfect, nor am I an authority on everything. If I was ever mistaken during a criminal investigation or trial I quickly admitted as such, whether or not it damaged the overall case.


----------



## Board and Seize (Apr 29, 2015)

Disclaimer: This post is not directed specifically at ke4gde, usage of the word 'you' is intended to be the general plural.



ke4gde said:


> Why is it automatically assumed there were racial motivations in the shooting?... IF the shooting was racially motivated then it is likely that he would have been charged under a hate crime statue as well.



So this gets at both my original post in this thread attacking the new orthodoxy, and my last two seemingly on the other side.  Folks, if you don't like the current state of the race discussion, you need to help move it forward.  To do that, you need to be up to speed on where it currently is.

I mentioned the equivocation that the new orthodox-ers use.  We need to be able to spot it, and figure out what they mean.  Claiming that the Scott case is an instance of racially motivated violence does _not_, most likely, mean that the police officer just hates blacks and took this opportunity to murder one.  Rather, it is a claim about _structural_ racism.  It is a claim that the system itself promotes this type of behavior.

If we (non-orthodox-ers [I know - it's a silly, made up word]) are to have even a chance to win the debate, we need to speak the same language.  Or at least understand it.  I would submit that it is intentionally confusing and unclear.  (Again with the _1984_ reference - really, if you haven't read it, you should!) Don't let that be used against you - learn their language and beat them at their own game!


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 29, 2015)

Board and Seize said:


> Disclaimer: This post is not directed specifically at ke4gde, usage of the word 'you' is intended to be the general plural.
> 
> So this gets at both my original post in this thread attacking the new orthodoxy, and my last two seemingly on the other side.  Folks, if you don't like the current state of the race discussion, you need to help move it forward.  To do that, you need to be up to speed on where it currently is.
> 
> ...


Thank you for the clarification. Correct me if I am wrong, but this goes to one of my original posts about this being an issue about law enforcement and the culture within. Not necessarily about focusing on one minority or another, but about how it treats all citizens. Many agencies are still stuck in the old guard mentality of policing (ie pay at the pump, extra justice, ect..) where everyone is automatically assumed to be a dirtbag. That of course doesn't mean every cop is that way, but sometimes that attitude infects the command structure and those who have been in a while into the lower levels.


----------



## Florida173 (Apr 29, 2015)

Board and Seize said:


> If we (non-orthodox-ers [I know - it's a silly, made up word]) are to have even a chance to win the debate, we need to speak the same language. Or at least understand it. I would submit that it is intentionally confusing and unclear. (Again with the _1984_ reference - really, if you haven't read it, you should!) Don't let that be used against you - learn their language and beat them at their own game!



Who again would I be engaging with these new terms and understanding of the current situation?  Other college educated individuals or can I just head down to my local ghetto?


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

ke4gde said:


> Thank you for the clarification. Correct me if I am wrong, but this goes to one of my original posts about this being an issue about law enforcement and the culture within. Not necessarily about focusing on one minority or another, but about how it treats all citizens. Many agencies are still stuck in the old guard mentality of policing (ie pay at the pump, extra justice, ect..) where everyone is automatically assumed to be a dirtbag. That of course doesn't mean every cop is that way, but sometimes that attitude infects the command structure and those who have been in a while into the lower levels.



I would argue that there is a racial aspect to many enforcement strategies. While they may not be overt, they are there and are underlying. [insert black killed by police] may not have been killed because the cop was a racist, but the system that put both the cop and the victim/perp there in first place has structural issues at many levels.


----------



## Board and Seize (Apr 29, 2015)

@Florida173

Well, here for starters.

After that, anywhere else you find someone using these terms in the first place.  But if you'd rather be a participant in the race to the bottom, be my guest.

*edit*: wording


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 29, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> I would argue that there is a racial aspect to many enforcement strategies. While they may not be overt, they are there and are underlying. [insert black killed by police] may not have been killed because the cop was a racist, but the system that put both the cop and the victim/perp there in first place has structural issues at many levels.


Ok, I can see that as being very probable. I will concede that there may be a racial aspect in some jurisdictions. Which should be stomped out if the basis of the strategy is to harass or infringe the citizenry in that area. Race should never be a single or primary enforcement strategy, but should be taken into the totality of the situation and only used as an identifier. As in a local gang is suspected of a specific type of crime in an area. In this example most gangs are racially segregated and the race is used to distinguish between other gangs of different races. Forgive me if that sounds negative, as it is difficult to articulate what I mean.


----------



## racing_kitty (Apr 29, 2015)

I've done a little searching online, and a little contemplating.  White privilege is something that you never heard of when it came to the civil rights fight in the 1960's.  Racism was the problem, and that's what MLK, Malcolm X, et al addressed in leading their movements and organizations.  Everyone and their brother has read and heard the audio for King's "I Have a Dream" speech at least once in their lives, and how he called for blacks to be recognized by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin.

Fast forward a couple of generations.  The civil rights fighters of both colors are now either grandparents or deceased.  There is still racism in America, but a larger number of white people were raised to take King's words to heart, and take them to heart they did.  Gen X gave birth to the millennials, and now you have a generation of Caucasians that legitimately do not understand why the way they were raised is still wrong, even though they do everything right when it comes to respecting others.  

Any massive changes that King would hope to have wrought would only now be starting to become apparent.  Changing the hearts and minds of a generation is not something that takes a year or two.  The entry-level and middle men of King's time were the senior managers and CEO's of the 80's and 90's, and to some extent the first decade of the new millennium.  Those who took his words to heart were only just getting their feet in the door, graduating college, and establishing themselves at that time.  

However, to the black community, after 100+ years of getting shit on, that wasn't quick enough.  They wanted the changes NOW!!!  AA was created so that the racists still in charge could not subvert the changes that the activists of the time have made.  Rather than teach successive generations that things were changing, that it would be slow, and that patience was needed, they were taught that AA was their right, and that without it they will never ascend.

Humans, by their nature, are impatient and violent.  Centuries of warfare bear out this statement.  These most recent generations in particular are notorious for instant gratification as opposed to learning to eat soup with a knife.  What a white man of the 80's (or certain regions of the US today, like ID) would say is typical of blacks because blacks are dumb fucks, a white man of today is not going to understand because they were raised the way they should have been raised fifty years ago, while the black community ran out of patience and eventually came to unofficially declare war on those who aren't black.  Witness the one reporter for the Guardian who, when covering day one of the riots, tweeted about how black business owners queued up to defend black businesses but pointed out explicitly which ones were run by the Chinese.  Did the Chinese make them sit at the back of the bus?  Was George Wallace from Beijing?  If anything, the Chinese got a pretty raw fucking deal themselves in the race history of the nation, so why send the mob to their businesses to burn it out?  

To someone who was brought up from the cradle to believe that all men are truly equal, affirmative action will look unnecessary and racist in the literal definition of the word.  To someone who was taught that all the white man will do is lie, even the sincere white man is nothing but a bag of flesh that deserves to be eradicated from the face of the planet.  Generational failure has ensured that King's efforts will never truly come to pass.


----------



## Board and Seize (Apr 29, 2015)

racing_kitty said:


> Whole Post



Great analysis!


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 29, 2015)

ke4gde said:


> ...snip...


Alright, I am not real sure where your animosity is coming from here, and I am not real concerned to find out. Just take a breath.


What was inflammatory about me saying a police officer from South Carolina shot an unarmed black man and was charged with murder? Did you mean the original comment about police shooting unarmed black people? I never commented on the innocence or guilt of anyone. Never condemned anyone. Never convicted anyone in a court of anything.
After your cursory review of the information, which you readily admit wasn't great- wouldn't it be fair to say that Michael Scott was pulled over for no good reason and then shot dead illegally? So, what makes you so mad about me saying, "A white cop pulled over a black guy illegally and then shot him illegally, and using the race issue in America I feel exists as a basis, I feel this could be a motivation and is relevant to the conversation we are having."
There is really no way for me to retort to your contention that a media bias is the influencing factor in available information about all things; I just want to point out that this gives you the freedom to both use and discard ALL information available to everyone, except cases that you're directly involved in.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

http://www.vice.com/read/david-simo...ore-police-went-wrong-429?utm_source=vicefbus

Interesting take from a guy that really knows Baltimore.


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 29, 2015)

amlove21 said:


> Alright, I am not real sure where your animosity is coming from here, and I am not real concerned to find out. Just take a breath.
> 
> 
> What was inflammatory about me saying a police officer from South Carolina shot an unarmed black man and was charged with murder? Did you mean the original comment about police shooting unarmed black people? I never commented on the innocence or guilt of anyone. Never condemned anyone. Never convicted anyone in a court of anything.
> ...


There is no animosity. I am responding in the same tone as you did. However, we can both take a step back.

Your original statement:


amlove21 said:


> Well, I don't really know, and I am ok with saying I am neither a lawyer nor a civil rights expert. Was it? Is that story relevant to a guy ending up with a severed spine, or being choked to death, or being shot while running away?


Forgive me, but I don't see a reference to that specific case. In the early days of reporting, the Brown shooting was alleged to have occurred as he was running away. Hence my original response. The tone of that response was generated from the statement occurred with the statement that :


amlove21 said:


> Just let this sink in- you've been railing on and on how race and race-related brutality aren't the main issue here, and you picked the wrong two cases _because there have been too many at this point for you to keep them straight. _


 How was that supposed to be received? Too many cases to keep straight as in cops are on a murderous rampage of black folk?

It would absolutely not be fair to say that Scott was pulled over for no good reason, or was killed illegally. What were the subject factors of the encounter? Did the subject attempt to go for the taser or handgun? Were other weapons found at the scene? What officer safety factors can the officer articulate to justify the use of deadly force? These are all legal reasons for the justifiable use of deadly force. We don't know with certainty yet. Preliminary information can be wrong or distorted. Your statement was a condemnation of someone before he was convicted. Which, in the spirit of the discussion, leads to overreaction and misinformation being propagated.

Just because information released in the media is available to everyone it does not make it accurate. If you should point anything out, it is that I don't let others think for me. I gather data and come to logical conclusions based on available information. Which is what I have done here. I rarely comment in these forums unless I can provide input from a perspective of someone directly familiar with the subject based on training and experience. Which I feel I am able to do on this topic. Now, we can continue to attempt to out snark each other, or we can return to topic, or just about face and go our ways.


----------



## Dienekes (Apr 29, 2015)

racing_kitty said:


> I've done a little searching online, and a little contemplating.  White privilege is something that you never heard of when it came to the civil rights fight in the 1960's.  Racism was the problem, and that's what MLK, Malcolm X, et al addressed in leading their movements and organizations.  Everyone and their brother has read and heard the audio for King's "I Have a Dream" speech at least once in their lives, and how he called for blacks to be recognized by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin.
> 
> Fast forward a couple of generations.  The civil rights fighters of both colors are now either grandparents or deceased.  There is still racism in America, but a larger number of white people were raised to take King's words to heart, and take them to heart they did.  Gen X gave birth to the millennials, and now you have a generation of Caucasians that legitimately do not understand why the way they were raised is still wrong, even though they do everything right when it comes to respecting others.
> 
> ...



You ma'am are the generation gap whisperer


----------



## amlove21 (Apr 29, 2015)

@ke4gde , I will be honest, it seems like you're reading my posts long enough to just hit reply, real fast. 

My first question, you completely ignored. You defended the fact that you were talking about Brown, and not Scott, but I am not taking you to task because you were wrong. I am highlighting the fact that there are too many instances of white police officers being in some way responsible for the death unarmed minorities to keep them all straight this year- and it's May.

My second quip was meant to be received exactly as it was typed. _You are an avid follower and have experience in police brutality cases, and even you have too much on your plate right now to address them all correctly. _Anything more than that is what you inferred, and you reinforced that fact here. 


ke4gde said:


> How was that supposed to be received? Too many cases to keep straight as in cops are on a murderous rampage of black folk?


No, I meant exactly what I typed the first time, and then re-explained above. The "murderous rampage of black folk" is you putting your personal spin on a national issue, like the damn biased news you so despise. Don't put words in my mouth. 

As for Scott's pull over and subsequent murder- I was using your words. Sorry if I paraphrased, but you said of the Scott case:


ke4gde said:


> A cursory review of the available information does indicate in this case that 1) he did not have probable cause to pull the vehicle over and 2) there was insufficient cause for the use of deadly force. IF the shooting was racially motivated then it is likely that he would have been charged under a hate crime statue as well.


No probable cause to pull Scott over, and insufficient cause for use of deadly force. Do you not feel that way now? Are you saying that the semantic difference of "pulled over illegally" and "the officer did not have probable cause to pull over the vehicle" and "killed illegally" and "insufficient cause for use of deadly force" make me someone that condemns police officers and holds them in the court of public opinion? 

Im good with whatever you want to do as far as continuing the conversation.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Apr 29, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> I know your post is sarcasm, but it gets at a good point. We are so divided here in the states that if you say something different than the views of others you are immediately a socialist/communist/progressive windbag, or the fascist/neocon/racist. However there is a lot of gray in the world. Many of us fall somewhere in the middle on many of these issues. I personally hate that there are people destroying their communities. I also hate that there is video of a cop shooting an unarmed black teen in the back as he runs away. I don't think there are easy solutions to the problems that face America today, but I think writing things off as not problems because you can't see them is one of our biggest issues. I have been trying to point that out, but I am neither the smartest, nor the most articulate. I know my writing style can come across as smug or accusatory, but I have been here long enough that long time members should know that, and y'all obviously don't mind as I was regularly elected to site leadership:) It is good to have a dialogue, and I am a member of this site for topics like this that go on for pages and pages. They often get very interesting.



Which is why you're comfortable SJW'ing and trying to then flip my post about my experience about racism (SURPRISE, IF YOU READ IT I RECEIVED IT HEAVILY FROM 0-17y/o) around as though it bolsters your argument.

I'm laughing that you flat out ignored B&S coming off the cerebral top rope.  


Ignore that which does not support your argument, attack the individuals, twist statements to fit the narrative. Where have I seen this before?


----------



## DA SWO (Apr 29, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> I don't think those statistics say what you think they do. While yes 42% of the total reported deaths by police were white, the population of whites is 77% of the population. The statistics say that although African American Males account for 6-8% of the US population, they account for 35% of the people killed by police. So, speaking on a true percentage basis, you are more likely to be killed if you are young black man than if you are a young white man.


However, white males tend to interact with the cops at a lower rate (percentage wise) than black males; so a white male stands a greater chance of dying if he interacts with the police.






see stats can be made to mean anything.
Do those white lives matter?


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

Ranger Psych said:


> Which is why you're comfortable SJW'ing and trying to then flip my post about my experience about racism (SURPRISE, IF YOU READ IT I RECEIVED IT HEAVILY FROM 0-17y/o) around as though it bolsters your argument.
> 
> I'm laughing that you flat out ignored B&S coming off the cerebral top rope.
> 
> ...



Your post did bolster my position because you literally "pffft" the idea of privelege due to personal experience, which makes it seem like you don't understand what privilege is, and scoff at the idea of something you don't understand. Privilege in the sense we are discussing does not involve individuals. So individual experience has little bearing on the discussion.

I don't get what you are saying referencing B&S's posts, I didn't have anything to engage him about. I am not a social justice warrior. I have made my points clear. I think I have clearly addressed anything that has been purported towards me. If I didn't understand @Board and Seize's posts then  maybe I'm not smart enough to get what he is saying, but I didn't get him attacking my position off the cerebral top rope, that is for sure.

I haven't twisted anything to support any narrative, as I don't have any narrative. I have expressed what I see are problems with our country today.


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 29, 2015)

amlove21 said:


> @ke4gde , ...


No, I am reading everything before I hit reply. 
If your first question was "What was inflammatory about me saying a police officer from South Carolina shot an unarmed black man and was charged with murder?" My fault, I was going too far back for that specific question and got my wires crossed. At the time I was doing a little too much multi-tasking and got turned around. Apologies for that statement as it had not occurred at that point and it was unfair to assume you would make one without having done it yet.


amlove21 said:


> I am highlighting the fact that there are too many instances of white police officers being in some way responsible for the death unarmed minorities to keep them all straight this year- and it's May.


 Too many instances based on what information? News reports? Unless you have statistics corroborating that statement then it is now inflammatory and unfair to all officers. Just because anyone (including minorities) is unarmed, that does not mean that deadly force is not an option in the performance of duty. Some of the factors I listed come into play when an officer is deciding what level of force to use. 

As to your second statement, too much on my plate in what way? The statement, to me is ambiguous and open to interpretation. Perhaps it is just me, I don't know. 


amlove21 said:


> No, I meant exactly what I typed the first time, and then re-explained above. The "murderous rampage of black folk" is you putting your personal spin on a national issue, like the damn biased news you so despise. Don't put words in my mouth.


 Let it sink in? So that is an effective means of communicating a point? Perhaps I am just not accustomed to the way you interact with people, this came across as condescending. Which, if we get down to the heart of the matter you have no expertise in this area to attempt to school me on what is the main issue here as an outsider never having walked a beat (based on what you put in your profile and on your responses here) and painting every encounter with a racial brush. If that was not your intent or how you meant to come across then again we just may not be communicating well with each other. I didn't put words in your mouth. I was using an Reductio ad absurdum argument to show the ridiculousness of the statement. There the fault lies with me as I thought you would see how absurd it was. 


amlove21 said:


> No probable cause to pull Scott over, and insufficient cause for use of deadly force. Do you not feel that way now?


 I feel that it is possible, but I don't know all the details of the case. I am allowing for the possibility that there is other information yet to be released. 


amlove21 said:


> Are you saying that the semantic difference of "pulled over illegally" and "the officer did not have probable cause to pull over the vehicle" and "killed illegally" and "insufficient cause for use of deadly force" make me someone that condemns police officers and holds them in the court of public opinion?


Again, we don't know for sure he was pulled over illegally. In the video, the officer says he pulled him over for the taillight issue which he was wrong on. However, Scott had an outstanding warrant for his arrest, which does not require probable cause to arrest him for. So given the scenario that he did not die, even if the officer had pulled him over illegally (ie without probable cause) then the arrest would still be justified. Since he died as a result of fleeing, does that mean the officer is liable for his death? I don't know. That is a discussion the attorneys will have to have with the judge and the jury. As to illegal use of deadly force, again we don't know the officers justification for it. We have incomplete information at this time. Based on only the video, we don't see any justification. So your statement does condemn the officer since we do not yet know all of the details. Coupled with your earlier statement that there are too many instances of white officers killing blacks leads a reasonable person to conclude that you were condemning him. 

Maybe I am wrong, and maybe I don't have enough interaction with you to determine your style of discussion. I don't think I am, but I am willing to acknowledge the possibility. My logic as far as the foundation of the problem in these cases is solid.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 29, 2015)

DA SWO said:


> However, white males tend to interact with the cops at a lower rate (percentage wise) than black males; so a white male stands a greater chance of dying if he interacts with the police.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well now you are using two different variables to suit your statistic. I took the variables given and in both cases showed a black male in the US is more likely to be killed by the police than a white male. That is supported by both what you posted and by what AKKeoth posted.


----------



## AKkeith (Apr 29, 2015)

Fellow prisoner in transport van says Freddie Gray was trying to injury himself.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...6-11e4-8666-a1d756d0218e_story.html?tid=sm_tw


----------



## Shredder577 (Apr 30, 2015)

If you live in a western nation, you're privileged. That goes for just about every single person. Hell, even homeless people typically have access to internet and TV (e.g. public recreational centers, libraries, etc). I don't understand why everyone hates the idea of being "privileged". Personally, I live under a roof, have access to food, water, clean clothing, and all my medical needs are catered for. Most Americans, regardless of race, sexuality, sex, gender, whatever, can say something very similar to that. Which is a GOOD thing. If you're an American, you're 'privileged'. Deal with it. 

White privilege is a self-serving manufactured delusion that people promote because it's 'trendy' and it's much easier to blame someone or something else, than to take personal responsibility. Blacks are being victimized, not by "the man", but by themselves. 

I will gladly take the additional stares and glances and in return benefit off of affirmative action. That's a pretty damn good deal, in my book. 

You cannot group an entire race together and say privilege exists, that's ignorant. With that logic, you may as well say I'm a violent criminal just because blacks are more likely to commit violent and hate crimes. 

Yeah, a black guy was shot in the back by some cock sucking power abusing pussy, it does not mean I'm, or any other black/minority for that matter is being actively oppressed. It merely means that individual was being oppressed at the time of his death. 

This is kinda off topic, but sense everyone was talking about "white privilege", I thought I would get it off my chest. And yes, this is coming from a black guy.... Like that matters  

I swear, this white guilt liberal BS along with political correctness is killing what once was the best country on Earth.


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 30, 2015)

Shredder577 said:


> ...


----------



## racing_kitty (Apr 30, 2015)

AKkeith said:


> Fellow prisoner in transport van says Freddie Gray was trying to injury himself.
> 
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...6-11e4-8666-a1d756d0218e_story.html?tid=sm_tw



Supposedly, this has been discounted.  It wouldn't surprise me all that much if the fellow prisoner wasn't going after some reduced charges or otherwise reduce the amount of time he was going to serve in the lockup.  I'll see if I can't follow the breadcrumbs and get a link to where this was disproven, as I read it in the comment section of the article (I know, sane people never read the comments, but I'm not sane).


----------



## Shredder577 (Apr 30, 2015)

ke4gde said:


>


 Y'know, I was going to reply with something snarky, But I have decided to ignore it as you added none of your own thoughts and merely retorted with a superfluous picture. 

Have a wonderful night.


----------



## racing_kitty (Apr 30, 2015)

I haven't found the nugget to either confirm or deny the WaPo article, but I did find the article from the Baltimore Sun that explained there was no settlement from a car wreck that resulted in spinal injuries for the deceased.



> Online reports are swirling that Freddie Gray had spinal surgery shortly before he died in police custody, and had collected a payout in a settlement from a car accident. Those reports — which raise questions about the injury that led to his death in April 19— point to Howard County court records as proof.
> 
> But court records examined Wednesday by The Baltimore Sun show the case had nothing to do with a car accident or a spine injury. Instead, they are connected to a lawsuit alleging that Gray and his sister were injured by exposure to lead paint.



That doesn't mean he didn't have a preexisting injury before he was loaded up in the wagon, just that (here's a big fucking surprise) media outlets have gotten it wrong in their rush to either crucify or exonerate the six arresting officers. 

Here's a novel fucking idea: wait for the investigation to come out before you run all your print about speculation.  As it stands, if the initial investigation is completed and released Friday, it's not going to be made public.  As per CBS:



> The Baltimore Police Department said Wednesday the results of its investigation into the Freddie Gray's death will go directly to the State's Attorney's Office, not to the public.
> 
> "We cannot release all of this information to the public because if there is a decision to charge in any event by the State's Attorney's Office, the integrity of that investigation has to be protected," said Police Captain Eric Kowalczyk.



Makes perfect sense to me.  Why?  Because if they have enough to build a case (and to my untrained eye, it appears they just might), they will need to spend as much time as possible getting the charges right and dotting every I and crossing every T before they can spare someone to throw to the masses like PR meat to starving wolves.  Again, a generational inability to understand delayed gratification means they demand the six officers be executed immediately by means that would make the crucifixion of Christ look absolutely humane.  Hopefully, the system will work as the founders intended, and justice will be served fairly.  As even a broken clock is right twice a day, so might a broken judicial system (perceived or actually) reach the proper verdict based on the facts of the case in their entirety, NOT the dribbles and leaks that increasingly look to me like their only purpose is to inflame passions and incite a race war.


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 30, 2015)

Shredder577 said:


> Y'know, I was going to reply with something snarky, But I have decided to ignore it as you added none of your own thoughts and merely retorted with a superfluous picture.
> 
> Have a wonderful night.


Awww the little lion thinks he can keep up with the rest of the pride. How cute. 

At your age and experience level, it is highly recommended that you keep your trap shut and your eyes and ears open. You have zero real world experience, whereas the majority of board members here can maintain an intelligent debate without referring to an authority figure as a "was shot in the back by some cock sucking power abusing pussy". You have zero clue what happened, much less what it means to be in a life threatening situation. So puff your chest at someone else. Not impressed kid.

Now, that does not mean you can't contribute by asking questions and what not. Have a pleasant day in school and pass me the snacks.


----------



## RetPara (Apr 30, 2015)

racing_kitty said:


> Supposedly, this has been discounted.  It wouldn't surprise me all that much if the fellow prisoner wasn't going after some reduced charges or otherwise reduce the amount of time he was going to serve in the lockup.  I'll see if I can't follow the breadcrumbs and get a link to where this was disproven, as I read it in the comment section of the article (I know, sane people never read the comments, but I'm not sane).



I think we need some clarification in order to completely comprehend if those that have Liked or Agree this comment were Liking/Agreeing with


racing_kitty said:


> Supposedly, this has been discounted.  It wouldn't surprise me all that much if the fellow prisoner wasn't going after some reduced charges or otherwise reduce the amount of time he was going to serve in the lockup.  I'll see if I can't follow the breadcrumbs and get a link to where this was disproven, as I read it in the comment section of the article .



Or were you Liking/Agreeing with the following.   





racing_kitty said:


> I know, sane people never read the comments, but I'm not sane.



Myself... I was agreeing with the latter.....


----------



## 8654Maine (Apr 30, 2015)

Shredder577 said:


> Y'know, I was going to reply with something snarky, But I have decided to ignore it as you added none of your own thoughts and merely retorted with a superfluous picture.
> 
> Have a wonderful night.



I'm going to second and add to what @ke4dge wrote.

There are some salient points being debated.  I've been around the block and have some notches on the belt, yet, I learn something new from these posts.

This forum will allow input from the least to the most experienced.  Just write something intelligent or ask a poignant question.  Jive or talk smack at your own risk.

My input is that empathy allows me to put on the clothes and lives of those that I disagree with.  The world seems very different from that viewpoint.

I can understand the rage against perceived bias, whether skin or uniform.

Doesn't mean I agree with it.


----------



## CDG (Apr 30, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> Well now you are using two different variables to suit your statistic. I took the variables given and in both cases showed a black male in the US is more likely to be killed by the police than a white male. That is supported by both what you posted and by what AKKeoth posted.



The problem is that no one knows what the no-shit numbers are.  Numbers can be twisted to fit nearly anything you want them to. However, if we're going to continue referencing those which support specific viewpoints, I'll be more than happy to go point/counterpoint. While it may appear from a pure percentage of the population breakdown that blacks are killed at a higher percentage, even if lower total numbers, when adding the variable that takes race into account as it relates to violent crimes, police are once again more likely to kill a white suspect than a black one.  The article also mentions the case of 18 year old white male Gilbert Collar, naked and unarmed, who was shot and killed by a black police officer.  I don't recall any riots after that case.  In fact, I had never even heard of it until searching around for stats related to this current discussion.  What would the most likely COA been had the race of the officer and Mr. Collar been reversed?  Is this evidence of systemic racism?  Because the shooting of Walter Scott has been used as such.   

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...e-whites-than-blacks-but-minority-d/?page=all


----------



## Shredder577 (Apr 30, 2015)

@ke4gde 
Shooting someone in the back when they pose no immediate danger to you, as they flee, and then planting your taser next to them, is sick. How any one could defend a man like that - is beyond me. What's even more, is he did not stop using force. He shot Scott multiple times. If you defend an officer like that, you're part of the problem. Believe me, I'm definitely not against the use of lethal force and understand that in some situation LEO's have no other alternative. I'm not shunning any officers that use lethal force justly. 

Although your second point is actually a really good one. It reminds me of some advice a couch gave me.. "Never miss an opportunity to shut the fuck up.". Which I should be doing, so I appreciate that. 

@8654Maine 
Absolutely. I'll admit I'm still trying to adjust to this kind of environment, and remember that I'm talking to professionals, and not my friends or random strangers on Facebook. Although that's no excuse and I take full accountability for my actions. I appreciate the words of wisdom.


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 30, 2015)

Now here is an instance where I could use some help in deciphering what it going on, check my logic cause I am colored confused (get it? lol no? ok):
*Baltimore Protesters Go Free as Arrest Paperwork Backs Up*
From the article 


> The public defender...had filed habeas corpus petitions demanding that people arrested Monday night be released if they weren't formally charged within 24 hours.


On one hand I am glad that the rule of law as it relates to habeus corpus is being observed. However, the tin foil side of me thinks WTF? These protesters were legally arrested and now released because of a "slow down" in completing paperwork. It is not as if thousands upon thousands of protesters had been arrested to where officers could not have completed the required paperwork. Even with the logjam that was there, enough officers would have been available to complete the required paperwork for so few arrests (comparatively speaking). It is almost as if the administration intentionally delayed the paperwork in order to allow them to go free. In light of the Baltimore administration's response to everything it seems as if they are playing a very dangerous game. Now the signal has been sent to other violators to feel free from prosecution. In effect the arrests never took place because they were never booked.

For those that don't know, the officer that arrested each individual does not have to be the one to file the initial booking paperwork as probable cause is transferable to another officer via the Fellow Officer Rule. Therefore any officer can fill out the initial booking report while the others can file the necessary paperwork at a later date. Given that most were arrested for the same offense (assuming no other charges), the paperwork should be relatively simple, short, and in a virtual template form.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 30, 2015)

CDG said:


> The problem is that no one knows what the no-shit numbers are.  Numbers can be twisted to fit nearly anything you want them to. However, if we're going to continue referencing those which support specific viewpoints, I'll be more than happy to go point/counterpoint. While it may appear from a pure percentage of the population breakdown that blacks are killed at a higher percentage, even if lower total numbers, when adding the variable that takes race into account as it relates to violent crimes, police are once again more likely to kill a white suspect than a black one.  The article also mentions the case of 18 year old white male Gilbert Collar, naked and unarmed, who was shot and killed by a black police officer.  I don't recall any riots after that case.  In fact, I had never even heard of it until searching around for stats related to this current discussion.  What would the most likely COA been had the race of the officer and Mr. Collar been reversed?  Is this evidence of systemic racism?  Because the shooting of Walter Scott has been used as such.
> 
> http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...e-whites-than-blacks-but-minority-d/?page=all



I can't read that link without filling out some crazy survey.  But taking all the stats that have been posted here on Shadowspear so far, including those relating to crimes, it has been shown that blacks are more likely to be killed by the police than whites. While from a purely numerical standpoint more whites are killed, that makes sense, as both whites commit more crimes, and have more interactions with the police, because there are more white people than black people. But from a percentage standpoint you are more likely to be killed by the police if you are black. I'm not here twisting any statistics. I have been very clear at the numbers I have used, they were provided here and in the US Census data.

ETA: Finally got that link to work. The last line shows what I have been trying to say the whole time"The odds that a black man will be shot and killed by a police officer is about 1 in 60,000. For a white man those odds are 1 in 200,000.”

It is still highly unlikely, but unbelievably more likely if you are black.


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 30, 2015)

Shredder577 said:


> @ke4gde
> Shooting someone in the back when they pose no immediate danger to you, as they flee, and then planting your taser next to them, is sick. How any one could defend a man like that - is beyond me. What's even more, is he did not stop using force. He shot Scott multiple times. If you defend an officer like that, you're part of the problem. Believe me, I'm definitely not against the use of lethal force and understand that in some situation LEO's have no other alternative. I'm not shunning any officers that use lethal force justly.


I'll just focus on this response since you appear to be trying to understand what is being said by myself and others, which is appreciated. As I have mentioned in previous posts, you don't know that he did not pose an immediate danger. You were not there. You don't know that he planted the taser. The video only shows one aspect of the entire event. Furthermore, you are not versed in use of force at all. You have zero experience in attempting to apprehend a subject or combating one. Until you have, you are speaking out of your ass and it does not help your case. Even those on this board that have not walked a beat, but have been in harm's way understand being in a stressful situation and having to make a life or death split decision. EDIT: It is for this reason that the SCOTUS evaluates an officer's actions based on what he knew at the time and not what is known after the fact.

Not once in any of my posts have I defended the officer's actions. However, I have advocated the delay in judgement until all the facts are in. So, in point of fact, you are the one that is part of the problem. The only thing you need to jump to is to reach the top shelf, not a conclusion.


----------



## Shredder577 (Apr 30, 2015)

@ke4gde 

You are right.

Everyone deserves innocence until proven guilty in a court of law. I'm going against my own principles, which is hypocritical. I apologize.


----------



## nobodythank you (Apr 30, 2015)

Shredder577 said:


> @ke4gde
> 
> You are right.
> 
> Everyone deserves innocence until proven guilty in a court of law. I'm going against my own principles, which is hypocritical. I apologize.


Appreciated. Don't dwell on it. We all stick our heads up our fourth points of contact from time to time. I am guilty of it more than I care to be. This is a difficult topic to discuss from any angle.


----------



## CDG (Apr 30, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> ETA: Finally got that link to work. The last line shows what I have been trying to say the whole time"The odds that a black man will be shot and killed by a police officer is about 1 in 60,000. For a white man those odds are 1 in 200,000.”
> 
> It is still highly unlikely, but unbelievably more likely if you are black.



Is it?  From the same article, and the same speaker: “Adjusted for the homicide rate, whites are 1.7 times more likely than blacks to die at the hands of police,” he said. “Adjusted for the racial disparity at which police are feloniously killed, whites are 1.3 times more likely than blacks to die at the hands of police.”


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 30, 2015)

CDG said:


> Is it?  From the same article, and the same speaker: “Adjusted for the homicide rate, whites are 1.7 times more likely than blacks to die at the hands of police,” he said. “Adjusted for the racial disparity at which police are feloniously killed, whites are 1.3 times more likely than blacks to die at the hands of police.”



Yes.
Read that again. We are talking about the likelihood of a non-police(citizen) being killed by the police.... Not the police being killed, that would be a different stat. Why would we include police being killed? That takes something from outside of the scope of the argument and randomly inserts it.


----------



## CDG (Apr 30, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> Yes.
> Read that again. We are talking about the likelihood of a non-police(citizen) being killed by the police.... Not the police being killed, that would be a different stat. Why would we include police being killed? That takes something from outside of the scope of the argument and randomly inserts it.



I think you're misreading the sentence.  The author is attempting to take out the police officers who are killed feloniously when figuring the numbers, not insert it.  That's why the disparity drops from 1.7x to 1.3x.  It's because the author is NOT including police killed feloniously as part of the control numbers.


----------



## racing_kitty (Apr 30, 2015)

The Gil Collar case was in the news here for quite some time. I almost didn't register at USA because of it. He was naked, unarmed, and tripping serious balls on LSD when he was shot right there on the front porch of the USA cop shop. The officer that shot him is well known amongst the student body as quick to draw on you. 

There were candlelight vigils, and other forms of protest, but nothing got violent.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 30, 2015)

CDG said:


> I think you're misreading the sentence.  The author is attempting to take out the police officers who are killed feloniously when figuring the numbers, not insert it.  That's why the disparity drops from 1.7x to 1.3x.  It's because the author is NOT including police killed feloniously as part of the control numbers.



Fair enough.I have found the actual link after a bit of digging, his numbers are here.


----------



## Blizzard (Apr 30, 2015)

This thread contains a lot of thoughtful (and fairly civilized) discussion related to police relationships with minority communities.  With this latest high profile incident there is of course some amount of inevitable speculation but most here look to be withholding judgment until a more complete picture with facts is known.  That said, I want to play the "what if" card a little bit...

Over the past few months, the media has chosen to raise the profile on several incidents.  As we know, major protests and unrest have taken place in response to these incidents with the underlying premise being widespread systematic injustice in minority communities around the country when it comes to police action. However, quantifiable evidence to support assertions (on either side of this argument) appears to be fairly elusive. Nonetheless, it hasn't stopped a vocal rush to judgment of these incidents by many, including our leaders at the highest level.  Many have even gone so far as to blatantly call these out as brutality and abuse (direct and intentional).  Yet, as facts surrounding incidents is made known, we've repeatedly seen the evidence doesn't necessarily support what many in these vocal groups are asserting.  A clear example is Ferguson, where the actual facts of the situation ultimately cleared the officer of wrong doing but, in a seemingly paradoxical version of injustice, still resulted in the officer's loss of a job/livelihood.

So, with that in mind, here's the "what if" question (and a few more):

What if the situation in Baltimore, which certainly is not lacking in its questions, turns out to be another instance where the facts do not support an assertion of impropriety on the part of law enforcement (in the past couple days, speculation has been floated in reference to this)?   If this turns out to be the case, how does this change the arguments that are being put forth, particularly by those asserting wrong doing?  Should it change the argument?

Should there be some culpability, perhaps even by the media, as it relates to the accused in these instances?

Is law enforcement ultimately being painted into an untenable position when it comes to their actions?

What does the endgame look like?


----------



## DA SWO (Apr 30, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> Well now you are using two different variables to suit your statistic. I took the variables given and in both cases showed a black male in the US is more likely to be killed by the police than a white male. That is supported by both what you posted and by what AKKeoth posted.


That was my point.
Stats are useless if you don't know how they are generated, and in what context (which impacts the how they are generated) they were generated.

I am not sure I buy the story that he broke his own spine either, I agree with others that he may be trying to reduce his time inside.

That said, how easy is it to "sever" a spine? and wouldn't it be pretty obvious that it was severed?  To a layman (me) that seems like a pretty severe trauma, could you hide a trauma like that?


----------



## racing_kitty (Apr 30, 2015)

In my hunt for the nugget of news that disproved the allegations that Gray broke his own neck, I found this:



> Sources said the medical examiner found Gray's catastrophic injury was caused when he slammed into the back of the police transport van, apparently breaking his neck; a head injury he sustained matches a bolt in the back of the van.
> 
> Details surrounding exactly what caused Gray to slam into the back of the van was unclear. The officer driving the van has yet to give a statement to authorities. It’s also unclear whether Gray’s head injury was voluntary or was a result of some other action.
> 
> The medical examiner's office declined to comment on this open investigation and said it does not release preliminary findings.



No guarantee that it wasn't brutality at the hands of the driver, but it doesn't disprove the other prisoner's statement, either.


----------



## CDG (Apr 30, 2015)

DA SWO said:


> That said, how easy is it to "sever" a spine? and wouldn't it be pretty obvious that it was severed?  To a layman (me) that seems like a pretty severe trauma, could you hide a trauma like that?



Wasn't there a discussion between the docs/medics on here awhile back where something was mentioned about a spine being severed and then basically falling back into place where everything seemed fine?  The patient later died by moving and causing the spine to re-separate and stay that way.


----------



## TLDR20 (Apr 30, 2015)

CDG said:


> Wasn't there a discussion between the docs/medics on here awhile back where something was mentioned about a spine being severed and then basically falling back into place where everything seemed fine?  The patient later died by moving and causing the spine to re-separate and stay that way.



I doubt it. Once nerves are severed they don't magically heal. Nerve tissue is one of the few tissues that doesn't really heal. That is why spinal injuries are so severe, and why evolution saw fit to impart our largest nerve with a bone capsule and a fluid case in addition.


----------



## policemedic (Apr 30, 2015)

CDG said:


> Wasn't there a discussion between the docs/medics on here awhile back where something was mentioned about a spine being severed and then basically falling back into place where everything seemed fine?  The patient later died by moving and causing the spine to re-separate and stay that way.


 
We may have had a discussion about SCIWORA--spinal cord injury without radiological abnormality--or spinal injuries without neurological deficit that later develop deficiencies, but these are different issues.


----------



## CDG (May 1, 2015)

Copy all.  Thanks @TLDR20 and @policemedic.


----------



## comrade-z (May 1, 2015)

http://touch.baltimoresun.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-83434308/

Officers have been charged with homicide it appears.


----------



## RackMaster (May 1, 2015)

Now let's see the riots stop... :-"


----------



## Muppet (May 1, 2015)

RackMaster said:


> Now let's see the riots stop... :-"



Prolly not bro...

M.


----------



## The Accountant (May 1, 2015)

Once she began her speech with saying something along the lines of. "I spent time and spoke with the victims family to figure out how we can find justice" I did not need to listen any longer. I am wondering, how would her associating so much with the family NOT be a conflict? I know little to nothing about what supposedly occurred, but someone in her position shouldn't be personally meeting with the family, correct? I would find it understandable if she spoke with them or interviewed them if they were present during the arrest/transport. Just a little confused on that front. Guess we will see how this turns out.


----------



## Florida173 (May 1, 2015)

K9Quest said:


> Once she began her speech with saying something along the lines of. "I spent time and spoke with the victims family to figure out how we can find justice" I did not need to listen any longer. I am wondering, how would her associating so much with the family NOT be a conflict? I know little to nothing about what supposedly occurred, but someone in her position shouldn't be personally meeting with the family, correct?


There's your conflict of interest. The FOP is requesting a special prosecutor because of her relationship with the Gray 's attorney and marriage to a councilman.


http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-riots/bs-md-fop-letter-20150501-story.html


----------



## Kraut783 (May 1, 2015)

4 months in her position of State attorney and this happens....she is a blue flamer on her way to the top!  Next stop U.S. Attorneys office.  I'm sure she is very happy to have the opportunity to take advantage of this.


----------



## Florida173 (May 1, 2015)

*MUGSHOTS OF BALTIMORE POLICE CHARGED IN CONNECTION WITH FREDDIE GRAY'S DEATH*






So.. This makes it a bit more interesting.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/240860-charged-baltimore-officers-post-bail


----------



## racing_kitty (May 1, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> *MUGSHOTS OF BALTIMORE POLICE CHARGED IN CONNECTION WITH FREDDIE GRAY'S DEATH*
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's why the media didn't go on about racism as much as simply police brutality. Notice that the only pictures released before now were of three white males arresting the deceased. I've read conflicting reports whether it was the female or the black male driving the wagon. 

Either way, it's inflammatory reporting on the media's part trying to stoke a race war. Had it been six white officers, you'd have heard speculation that they burned crosses at shift change briefings every day.


----------



## TLDR20 (May 1, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> *MUGSHOTS OF BALTIMORE POLICE CHARGED IN CONNECTION WITH FREDDIE GRAY'S DEATH*
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I would not say that things are more interesting. The race of the police doesn't change the systemic nature of the problems.


----------



## Florida173 (May 1, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> I would not say that things are more interesting. The race of the police doesn't change the systemic nature of the problems. But let's not also pretend that black officers cannot be racist.



I've heard nothing but that blacks can't be racist because they are a minority.. Is it because they're in a uniform that allows it?

And it absolutely matters. Police brutality is not a race issue in this instance and the slugs of the world like sharpton and the #blacklivesmatter sheep don't have any more of a say than any other race.


----------



## TLDR20 (May 1, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> I've heard nothing but that blacks can't be racist because they are a minority.. Is it because they're in a uniform that allows it?
> 
> And it absolutely matters. Police brutality is not a race issue in this instance and the slugs of the world like sharpton and the #blacklivesmatter sheep don't have any more of a say than any other rave.



I think people of every race can be racist. I think that people in a position of authority can be more prone to it due to their position.  Police brutality and the systemic issues are the problem. I have never said this is a black/white issue. I don't think it is, I think most issues are more complex than a binary problem.


----------



## 0699 (May 1, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> I think people of every race can be racist. I think that people in a position of authority can be more prone to it due to their position.  Police brutality and the systemic issues are the problem. I have never said this is a black/white issue. I don't think it is, I think most issues are more complex than a binary problem.



I agree with you, but I believe there are those (in and out of power) that *WANT* it to be a race issue.  It's a lot easier if you can blame things on an easily identifiable group like whitey, blacks, Jews, etc.  When you are trying to blame things on a group that has been hand-selected, sooner or later the question of "who selected them" rears its ugly head...


----------



## TLDR20 (May 1, 2015)

0699 said:


> I agree with you, but I believe there are those (in and out of power) that *WANT* it to be a race issue.  It's a lot easier if you can blame things on an easily identifiable group like whitey, blacks, Jews, etc.  When you are trying to blame things on a group that has been hand-selected, sooner or later the question of "who selected them" rears its ugly head...



That is a good point.


----------



## 8654Maine (May 1, 2015)

It is easier to be outraged and indignant when the opposition doesn't look like you, act like you, or live in the same surrounding.  I'm talking about being vitriolic from any side.


----------



## Centermass (May 2, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> I would not say that things are more interesting. The race of the police doesn't change the systemic nature of the problems.



I say it does. Now you can throw the "Big, Bad Evil White Cops" premise out the window.



TLDR20 said:


> I think people of every race can be racist. I think that people in a position of authority can be more prone to it due to their position.  Police brutality and the systemic issues are the problem.* I have never said this is a black/white issue.* I don't think it is, I think most issues are more complex than a binary problem.



Really? This was an earlier post of yours:



TLDR20 said:


> This isn't about resisting arrest. This was about a cuffed prisoner being abused. *Proof of systemic racism man, look around.*



Unless you were a first hand witness to all the events that unfolded, that statement about a "Cuffed prisoner being abused" appears to me you've already pronounced all involved "Guilty" and passed sentence before anyone of them have had there day in court.

I guess "Innocent until proven guilty" doesn't exist in your repertoire.  

Sergeant Crowley was thrown under the bus.

The Duke Lacrosse Players and their coach were thrown under the bus.

George Zimmerman was thrown under the bus.

Darren Wilson was thrown under the bus.

And now, those Baltimore Police officers may be facing the same. Until they're adjudicated one way or another, we just don't know.

Here's a novel idea, yeah, I know. I have been known as a simple son of a bitch at times, but how about not   rushing to judgement, jumping to conclusions, or letting mob rule, lynch mobs, agendas, pre-conceived notions, or the media overrule the notion or get in the way of "Presumed innocent until proven guilty?"


----------



## The Accountant (May 2, 2015)

Centermass said:


> The Duke Lacrosse Players and their coach were thrown under the bus.



Not to stray the thread away, but. Perfect example of false accusations ruining lives. Growing up playing lacrosse on Long Island I grew up just a few years younger than a good amount of guys on that team. Personally knowing a few, and knowing the coach from being in the lacrosse community. It was nothing short of a disaster, the school handled it horribly. It ruined the lives of the few guys who were on trial, one of which just recently had an article written about him. To this day he has a hard time finding a job due to the fact when employers research his name that incident pops up. There is a fairly good book written about what happened "Its Not About the Truth". The woman who made these accusations is now in jail for the murder of her boyfriend. 

Bringing it back to the topic, all I can say is I hope they get the truth of what happened and handle it accordingly before any more damage is done to peoples lives and/or the city of Baltimore.


----------



## TLDR20 (May 2, 2015)

Centermass said:


> I say it does. Now you can throw the "Big, Bad Evil White Cops" premise out the window.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Here is my thing man, I have stayed out of some other discussions about this because like you I agree that officers are often thrown under the bus in these circumstances. But his neck wasn't broken when he was running away, and it certainly was when he arrived at the hospital. I would consider myself an expert in trauma medicine, and spines do not just sever themselves. So like I said a cuffed prisoner died in police custody. There is no denying that. He was certainly unarmed and he was cuffed. 

As to the system being racist I still stand by that. The system isn't white, it is a system. So again I don't think I have said this is a black white issue. I think that black people take the brunt of the system sometimes.


----------



## Florida173 (May 2, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> As to the system being racist I still stand by that. The system isn't white, it is a system. So again I don't think I have said this is a black white issue. I think that black people take the brunt of the system sometimes.


It makes it easier to demonize something when you can't quite define it with specifics right?


----------



## TLDR20 (May 2, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> It makes it easier to demonize something when you can't quite define it with specifics right?



Well I have given specific examples of the problems. So...I don't know what you want me to say. Let me be perfectly clear with what I am saying so that you can understand it clearly. The American Justice system has tendencies that tend to target blacks and minorities. Regardless of the race of any officer involved in any arrest, when looked at from the big picture there is a pattern that will show. I am not going to once again post the links I have already posted twice. But go through and read them. If they do not convey the message that our system is not doing right by a part of our population than maybe we will just have to disagree. There is a ton of academic research about all the things I have talked about:School to Prison Pipeline, sentencing of minorities, profiling, and many other problems. 

I don't know how I can be more clear with what I am saying, but if you want to believe I am only saying that white police are racist to black suspects than believe that to your hearts content. But that would be a myopic view of a complex problem.


----------



## Florida173 (May 2, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> Well I have given specific examples of the problems. So...



You're misunderstanding me on what needs to be defined. Tell me about the system, not the problems that have been conflated to be under this system.


----------



## TLDR20 (May 2, 2015)

See above, I replied to quickly.


----------



## AWP (May 2, 2015)

There was a recent case where a professional wrestler, Perro Aguayo Jr., died in the ring. Originally his death was considered by many to be caused by Rey Mysterio Jr., a well-known WWE wrestler, until the facts came out later. That didn't stop everyone under the sun from blaming Mysterio and a botched wrestling move. It later came to light that Perro's spinal injury probably occurred in the moments before Mysterio's kick, but Mysterio was the last to touch him in the ring, so it must be Mysterio's "fault", right?

Maybe the gentleman in Baltimore was abused, maybe he wasn't. Maybe his injury was exaggerated when he was placed in vehicle for transport...Dying in police custody doesn't equal abuse and initial narratives are often wrong (Hands up, don't shoot).  Many of us were appalled by the Anthony or Zimmerman verdict, but they had their day in court. Good, bad, or other, that's how things work in America and an arrest does not mean someone's guilty.

Well, it isn't supposed to mean they're guilty.


----------



## TLDR20 (May 2, 2015)

@Freefalling you are correct, the facts will come to light soon. Maybe he was running with a partially severed spinal cord.maybe he was injured when he was tackled, maybe a lot of things. But having the background I have I trauma medicine, and knowing what I do know about spinal injuries, that is extremely doubtful. People cannot walk around on severed spinal cords.

No one is doubting these guys broke their department policy by not securing the suspect. That had been established as far as I had seen.


----------



## AKkeith (May 2, 2015)

Here is one law professor's take on the case. He thinks it will be thrown out. Interesting read, at least for me, it has more information about the case than other places I have been reading.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/01/l...ercharged-charges-will-likely-be-dismissed/2/


----------



## Ranger Psych (May 2, 2015)

So what if it happened when he was tackled? What's the solution then, just let known, repeat criminals run amok?  Taze them so they eat shit "all on their own" but wait, it's a police action being done so even if he curbed himself resisting arrest now the blame in your magical world is back on LE... put the onus where it belongs..... on the douchebag repeat offender back at it again.


----------



## TLDR20 (May 2, 2015)

Ranger Psych said:


> So what if it happened when he was tackled? What's the solution then, just let known, repeat criminals run amok?  Taze them so they eat shit "all on their own" but wait, it's a police action being done so even if he curbed himself resisting arrest now the blame in your magical world is back on LE... put the onus where it belongs..... on the douchebag repeat offender back at it again.



If it happened in the course of his arrest then they should be cleared. It was ruled a homicide due to the imprint on his skull from the bolt in the back of the van. That didn't happen in the course of the arrest. 

My magical world... What world would that be? The one where blacks and minorities are subject to the same sentencing standards, school opportunities, and a reduced impact of drug offenses? That would be my magical world.


----------



## Ranger Psych (May 2, 2015)

Funny,  minorities have more opportunities than the "rest of America", starting with college:  http://www.collegescholarships.org/other-minority-scholarships.htm http://www.ed.gov/edblogs/whhbcu/2013/11/21/scholarship-opportunities-for-minority-students/  I personally know, All I had when I went and started college was the Pell grant and my MGIB.  yaay for the combat disabled veteran oh wait you're white, here's a double headed dildo you know what to do. 

But hey, I'm a straight white male and it's ONLY my experience so it's totally unapplicable, by your own social justice warrior rules.


----------



## Salt USMC (May 2, 2015)

@Ranger Psych TLDR is not trying to marginalize your experiences, nor the experiences of any other poster here.  I've said it before but it's worth repeating: *Your experiences, while significant, are only applicable to your situation*.  You cannot extrapolate your own experiences to the macro level because there are just too many factors and externalities to consider.  It's kinda like saying "This is how insurgents fight in RC-E, therefore that's how they fight across the entire country."  
Your argument of "White privilege doesn't exist because I'm white and had no privilege" essentializes the argument and ignores decades of history.  I do agree with you, somewhat: modern scholarship is beginning to say that "white privilege" or "minority privilege" is an oversimplification of the privilege problem.  They argue that "class privilege" better captures the range of issues presented by privileging, and would also include experiences like yours that cut across color lines.


----------



## TLDR20 (May 2, 2015)

All you had was your MGIB? That is a shitload of money! You earned it, but you certainly shouldn't complain about it. The MGIB is the best tool for advancing in class the USG has ever had. 

There are plenty of scholarships available to people of all races. I am a white hetero male, and I receive a scholarship from the state of NC, a Pell Grant, the GI bill, and I will receive a scholarship for being a male in nursing. There are scholarships out there for disabled veterans of all colors. There are of course some that are only available to minorities, just like there are only some scholarships available to women, men, children of veterans and thousands of other random people. Pointing out scholarships doesn't some how prove anything about anything brother.


----------



## 0699 (May 3, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> Your post.



Look at you taking advantage of all that "white privilege"... :-"


----------



## TLDR20 (May 3, 2015)

Yep, those scholarships are available to us pesky whites, us terrible men, and even us downtrodden straight guys.


----------



## x SF med (May 3, 2015)

Okay...  I have to play the "Bad Mod"...  On Topic Please.   We're straying into the issues of privilege/racism/social injury of the downtrodden and away from the incident itself.


----------



## Salt USMC (May 6, 2015)

I think most of us missed this (myself included)
Last Wednesday Brooke Baldwin, the CNN reporter who insinuated that veterans-turned-cops were behind the escalating tensions in cities such as Baltimore, went on air and issued a real no-shit apology.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2015/0...ticle_organicsidebar_expansion&iref=obnetwork

Good on her.  She didn't resort to the bullshit "I'm sorry if I offended anyone" non-apology, instead referring to her own words as "a false narrative" which was wrong.  Then she just apologized.  As simple as that.  She didn't try to dodge, duck, dip, dive, or even dodge the controversy.  She owned her mistake, admitted that she was wrong, and apologized.  How refreshing!

EDIT: She actually apologized a second time as well.  Someone at CNN must've been REALLY pissed off!


----------



## Florida173 (May 6, 2015)

x SF med said:


> Okay...  I have to play the "Bad Mod"...  On Topic Please.   We're straying into the issues of privilege/racism/social injury of the downtrodden and away from the incident itself.



From the narratives in Baltimore and the talking heads, I believed these to be the exact issues related to the incident itself.


----------



## racing_kitty (May 6, 2015)

And here I was, thinking I somehow was going to fail a drug test after I saw that.  A proper apology is a dying art form these days.  Good on her for owning up to it and having the balls to say the two hardest words to string together in the English language.


----------



## racing_kitty (May 6, 2015)

x SF med said:


> Okay...  I have to play the "Bad Mod"...  On Topic Please.  We're straying into the issues of privilege/racism/social injury of the downtrodden and away from the incident itself.





Florida173 said:


> From the narratives in Baltimore and the talking heads, I believed these to be the exact issues related to the incident itself.



That's exactly what the media was portraying it to be, until the arresting crew turned out to be 50% non-white.  Then they had to resort to some serious "step'n-fetch-it" to avoid looking even more stupid than they already did.


----------



## TLDR20 (May 6, 2015)

racing_kitty said:


> That's exactly what the media was portraying it to be, until the arresting crew turned out to be 50% non-white.  Then they had to resort to some serious "step'n-fetch-it" to avoid looking even more stupid than they already did.



I still don't think the race of the officers speaks to the racist nature of the system.  Black officers can surely be racist to both black and white suspects. If the media's message is/was that this could only be a racial issue if they were white they had an extremely shitty view of the problem. What I think is actually the issue though is people say the system is bad, and people assume they are talking only in terms of black criminals and white cops. Again that is myopic. The media is obviously fucking retarded.


----------



## Florida173 (May 6, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> racist nature of the system.


Alleged


TLDR20 said:


> Black officers can surely be racist to both black and white suspects


They actually can't be by definition and most common sense internet searches.


----------



## x SF med (May 7, 2015)

IMOO-  the true issue is the alleged use of excessive force/deadly force in the arrest of an individual.  The riots are a symptom of a racialism in many stratified urban areas where neighborhoods coalesce along cultural/racial lines.

In the publicized  words of one of the protestors "I'm gonna go out and kill me some white cops as payback..."  racialism/racism is not any less ugly when it is black to white rather than the perceived 'norm' of white to black, actually in my experience, the former is much more prevalent.  And why is the much more violent Latino vs Black issue not often raised in the media?  There is no play on racial guilt for slavery in this country...  because the Spanish slave trade did not feed the New Orleans Markets, and The conquistadors did not import African slaves into their holdings in the New World...  Oh! wait, they did, but the Spanish population of the US was not in charge of the government ...  and there were no Black slave owners, or were there?

We cannot change history, we can change the present and the future, we should not forget history, but neither should we dwell on it, or live in it. 

The aftermath of the riots to protest one man's death in custody was, again, IMOO, nothing more than a mob of bored rabble rousers looking for an excuse to create havoc and cause damage.

Did those riots change what had happened? No.  Did those riots speed up the investigation of the incident? Unlikely. did those riots interrupt the social services, health services, public safety and welfare services that many in that community rely on to feed their kids? Absolutely.

The Baltimore community, refused to allow any of the parties involved to accept their responsibility for any part in the incident. Do I believe the 'victim' had a hand in the final outcome - to a degree, yes, had he not been a known felon, with warrants for his arrest, he would not have been in the position to be in the back of a police van that night.  The community wholly absolved him of any culpability, and called him innocent.  This is not in any way meant to relieve any responsibility from the officers involved, if the detainee were violent and resisting, Newton's 3rd law comes into play...  but those same officers have the responsibility to deliver that detainee to the jail in the same shape they found him, or get him medical attention if that detainee is injured in any way prior to, during or after arrest.

Mob rule prevailed and logic failed in this incident...  that's the shortest answer.  It is not a conspiracy against the Black Community as a whole.


----------



## Florida173 (May 7, 2015)

Are the disagrees that I am getting coming from me believing that the nature of the system may not be racist, or from the fact that blacks can't feel that their race is superior to blacks... because I'm a bit confused.


----------



## Il Duce (May 7, 2015)

@Florida173 my disagree was for both.


----------



## TLDR20 (May 7, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> Are the disagrees that I am getting coming from me believing that the nature of the system may not be racist, or from t*he fact that blacks can't feel that their race is superior to blacks*... because I'm a bit confused.



Both. The system has tendencies that lean towards disproportionate punishment of blacks, not allegedly, factually. I seriously doubt you can find a definition of racism that says it is only from white to black, or only from black to white, or only x to y. Black police officers can surely feel superiority to people of there own race just as a white person can against people of their own race. 

Further you are taking a definition that fails to take into account the whole situation. Racism has come to include under its umbrella term many others, including racial discrimination, stereotyping, and other prejudicial behaviors that exist. While those may not be  Webster definitions of racism, they fit under the umbrella when describing problems of a systemic nature rather than the actions of an individual.


----------



## Florida173 (May 7, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> Both. The system has tendencies that lean towards disproportionate punishment of blacks, not allegedly, factually. I seriously doubt you can find a definition of racism that says it is only from white to black, or only from black to white, or only x to y. Black police officers can surely feel superiority to people of there own race just as a white person can against people of their own race.
> 
> Further you are taking a definition that fails to take into account the whole situation. Racism has come to include under its umbrella term many others, including racial discrimination, stereotyping, and other prejudicial behaviors that exist. While those may not be Webster definitions of racism, they fit under the umbrella when describing problems of a systemic nature rather than the actions of an individual.


 
I think the word you are looking for is classism. It fits the situation a lot better than having anything to do with race... unless you want to get into a discussion about ethnicities and how different Africans can feel superior to other Africans.. but we are talking about here in the states where most blacks don't know their lineage for obvious and unfortunate reasons.



> class·ism
> ˈklasˌizəm/
> _noun_
> noun: *classism*
> prejudice against or in favor of people belonging to a particular social class.


----------



## TLDR20 (May 7, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> I think the word you are looking for is classism. It fits the situation a lot better than having anything to do with race... unless you want to get into a discussion about ethnicities and how different Africans can feel superior to other Africans.. but we are talking about here in the states where most blacks don't know their lineage for obvious and unfortunate reasons.



No, that isn't the word I am looking for. I have used the terminology that is correct. Classism would fit under the umbrella here for the systemic nature of the problems, and in black officers case, might explain why they go along with some of the policies. But I think that black officers are jut as likely as white officers to do things that could include stereotyping, profiling, and discrimination, which while may be classist(if that is a term that gets you to agree there is a problem), may also have racial roots. 

If you are saying that black officers, and then of course white officers are classist, would that not suggest a systemic problem? If people assume people of a different class are beneath them and therefore warrant more scrutiny and a different punishment system isn't that a problem? Take the word race out of it and think of the issues solely as class issues. It doesn't change the fact that they are problems. But don't get it too twisted, those problems disproportionately affect blacks, hence why they are often labelled as racial problems.


----------



## Florida173 (May 7, 2015)

> ra·cial
> ˈrāSHəl/
> _adjective_
> adjective: *racial*
> of or relating to race.


 


> rac·ism
> ˈrāˌsizəm/
> _noun_
> noun: *racism*
> the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.


 
You are correct that there is an overwhelming racial component to what is going on, but that doesn't make anything inherently racist.


----------



## Florida173 (May 7, 2015)

Especially interesting for Baltimore considering that Obama apparently praised the Baltimore Police department just two months ago "as a model of unbiased community policing"

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/050615-751384-obama-praised-baltimore-police-department.htm



> In a March White House report on police reforms, Obama and his Task Force on 21st Century Policing praised Baltimore's force and its black chief for "implementing national best practices for policies and training," including "use of force" reforms. His task force even quoted Baltimore Police Commissioner Anthony Batts, who said he changed "outdated procedures" that "put officers at odds with the community."


----------



## TLDR20 (May 7, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> You are correct that there is an overwhelming racial component to what is going on, but that doesn't make anything inherently racist.



If i said that if you were black in America and convicted of a crime you were likely to get a sentence at least14.5% longer, what kind of problem is that? Is it a racial one? If a system leans towards having more than one racial problem, I would say the system is racist. Taking Webster definitions and trying to apply them to something as nuanced as racism is a silly way to argue. It is like pornography, the definition doesn't fit what it is all the time, but I know it when I see it.


----------



## Florida173 (May 7, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> *If i said that if you were black in America and convicted of a crime you were likely to get a sentence at least14.5% longer, what kind of problem is that?* Is it a racial one? If a system leans towards having more than one racial problem, I would say the system is racist. Taking Webster definitions and trying to apply them to something as nuanced as racism is a silly way to argue. It is like pornography, the definition doesn't fit what it is all the time, but I know it when I see it.


 
I would say welcome to the world of statistics that I have to deal with on a daily basis.  I can make them say whatever I want.

The system is nuanced for me to put a one size fits all approach to characterizing it with one word, especially with the decentralized nature of our LEAs.  Are you calling for a federal police force?


----------



## TLDR20 (May 7, 2015)

Florida173 said:


> I would say welcome to the world of statistics that I have to deal with on a daily basis.  I can make them say whatever I want.
> 
> The system is nuanced for me to put a one size fits all approach to characterizing it with one word, especially with the decentralized nature of our LEAs.  Are you calling for a federal police force?



 I am sure that you can not make a statistic say that white people face harsher sentences for the same crimes. But you can try if you want to throw it out there and get it published, because that statistic would be groundbreaking. 
Look at the problems I have highlighted, tell me with a straight face that they are not problems. I can point them out again- 
1. School to Prison Pipeline
2. Sentencing Disparities
3. Police brutality
4. Another systemic problem-Militarization of police

If you do not think those are systemic problems, many with racial components, than we are too far apart to even engage in a conversation. When the system has so many things in place that have racial components, the system leans itself towards being racist. If blacks are systemically targeted, either through criminal definitions or sentencing policies than there is an implied understanding that they are of less value, which would fit under the Webster definition of racism. I will concede that all these problems do not fit solely under the definition of racism alone. That does not mean they suddenly are not issues. 

I have never called for a federal police force. I have not said anything about that, in fact I think that would lead to worse problems. I understand the disparate nature of police forces in different localities. But these things are widespread.


----------



## Florida173 (May 7, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> I am sure that you can not make a statistic say that white people face harsher sentences for the same crimes. But you can try if you want to throw it out there and get it published, because that statistic would be groundbreaking.


It's a spatial statistics issue with disparity between rural and inner-city.  The number is a gross over-generalization to a non-centralized problem.

I'm not denying the issues that you have stated as not happening or relevant, but that there is a different story and narrative/truth for each case.  Below is a good opinion about the situation in Baltimore and an actual story line that makes sense over "it's the racist system" argument that I hear constantly.



> *From the Wall Street Journal Yesterday*
> There is another view. In this view, the disaster of inner cities isn’t primarily about race at all. It’s about the consequences of 50 years of progressive misrule—which on race has proved an equal-opportunity failure.
> Baltimore is but the latest liberal-blue city where government has failed to do the one thing it ought—i.e., put the cops on the side of the vulnerable and law-abiding—while pursuing “solutions” that in practice enfeeble families and social institutions and local economies.


http://www.wsj.com/articles/baltimore-is-not-about-race-1430781505


----------



## AKkeith (May 7, 2015)

Now it's turned into arguing what "class" or what "race" gets a slightly worse sentence for the same crime?

How about people take some personal responsibility and not commit crimes.? Everyone has a choice. Sure the "right" choice may be more difficult for some due to situations they were born into but for God sake. Everyone has a choice. People need to stop blaming race/religion/sec/skin color/upbringing/whatever other excuse you can think of, and take control of their own lives. Anyone and everyone can be successful and happy if they put their minds to it, dedicate their life to it, and stop making excuses.


----------



## TLDR20 (May 7, 2015)

AKkeith said:


> Now it's turned into arguing what "class" or what "race" gets a slightly worse sentence for the same crime?
> 
> How about people take some personal responsibility and not commit crimes.? Everyone has a choice. Sure the "right" choice may be more difficult for some due to situations they were born into but for God sake. Everyone has a choice. People need to stop blaming race/religion/sec/skin color/upbringing/whatever other excuse you can think of, and take control of their own lives. Anyone and everyone can be successful and happy if they put their minds to it, dedicate their life to it, and stop making excuses.



Absolutely. No one is making excuses. But acting like there are not effects of policy is stupid. Drug crime policy of the 80's had a terrible side effect, the difference between powder cocaine and crack cocaine is the best example of a policy that treated the predominate users of one drug completely different than the users of a slightly different drug. Those policies led to the aggressive imprisonment of one sector of America, while leaving another relatively easy off. That is a policy that is not racially motivated, at least on the surface. BUT it acted like a racially motivated policy nonetheless. Now say you were convicted of a crack cocaine possession, possession of 28 grams carries a mandatory 5 year sentence. Meanwhile it takes the possession of 500 grams of cocaine to receive the same mandatory sentence. Chemically crack cocaine and powdered cocaine are almost identical.  Again this policy on the surface is not racially motivated, but it has second and third order effects that lead to the system as a whole to be perceived as racist. 

This conversation is not about making excuses. It is about the problems. I don't think I or anyone else has excused criminality in the least. IF you break the law you deserve to be punished. However like I pointed out above, and in different places here, that punishment should be similar across the board. Not heavily skewed to punish some a great deal more than others. When people go to prison their life obviously and rightly changes forever. However rightly or wrongly in the States when one gets out of prison, and are "reformed" they still have many of their rights taken from them forever(I know in that prisons probably make people worse, but that is another discussion entirely).


----------



## Totentanz (May 7, 2015)

AKkeith said:


> Now it's turned into arguing what "class" or what "race" gets a slightly worse sentence for the same crime?



It's a statistic that should be relatively flat.  There are certain factors that should influence sentencing (e.g. circumstances of the crime, criminal history, et al), and certain factors that should not (in this case, I'll go for the easy one - race).  If sentences are not equal with respect to the second set of factors, then we have a problem.  The problem has nothing to do with the excuses offered or personal responsibility; those are a separate matter entirely.

The issue with addressing this is that it's an incredibly complex one (as we've noticed through the course of the thread).  And yes, when you throw personalities (and their ability - or lack thereof - to take accountability for their actions, individually or as a group) and local cultures into the mix, it conflates a lot of the factors to the point where the whole thing is a giant, indistinguishable, mess.  And then, when bad decisions are made, it becomes easier to blame a nameless system... whether or not the system was at fault (and rather than polarize, it it might do some good to consider that the system may, in fact, be less than ideal, and capable of being improved).  I won't claim to have the answer to any of it... though I will say that I think 

The other part of the problem is that certain personalities and institutions like to use the above (and the associated chaos) to agitate violence and advance their own ideology.  I don't for one second believe that the majority of them are truly working toward equality.  It doesn't marginalize the problem they're pointing out (the one TLDR20's been discussing), just causes me to tune out their crap.

TL;DR: if the system is broken it should be fixed, regardless of the wailing and gnashing of teeth in Ferguson, Baltimore, et al.


----------



## Il Duce (May 28, 2015)

I think this article is a very accessible summary of the case on institutional racism and bias in law enforcement that @TLDR20 has referenced.  http://www.vox.com/2015/5/28/8661977/race-police-officer if that view is something you're interested in learning more about.

Interestingly it mirrors, in my opinion, many of the issues we have in the military.  The status and authority that come with military service and rank are a powerful tool abusers use to hide their actions and culpability - something at the heart of issues we have with EO, SHARP, hazing, and I would argue areas of Intelligence Oversight.  I remember very clearly my first company commander @marauder 06 talking about people abusing their power in the military as a double betrayal - the first against those they were abusing, the second against the institution since it ruined the hard-earned reputation and authority of others.


----------



## racing_kitty (May 28, 2015)

Could you produce a better source than Vox? I'd be interested in reading from a more reputable source. 

http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/46-times-vox-totally-fucked-up-a-story-1673835447


----------



## Florida173 (May 28, 2015)

racing_kitty said:


> Could you produce a better source than Vox? I'd be interested in reading from a more reputable source.
> 
> http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/46-times-vox-totally-fucked-up-a-story-1673835447



You don't like getting your news from liberal columnists/bloggers?


----------



## Il Duce (May 28, 2015)

@racing_kitty 

It's a first-person narrative opinion piece.  Not a great deal of facts in the sense of an academic article or research piece.  The only facts that would be true or untrue is if the personal events of this former officer happened or did not - or even if this is a legit, credible former officer.  However, I don't think that's the applicability of the article.  There are a significant number of academic studies on race, policing, and bias out there - if I come across one I think would be of benefit I'll post it.  I thought what was good about this article is it's short and pretty accessible - told in the first person with simplified terms. 

@Florida173 

Vox is definitely a liberal site, but the article isn't news it's opinion.  If you're interested in understanding the generally liberal side of this issue - which I believe is that institutional racism is a huge problem in US law enforcement - I think a liberal site is not an unreasonable source for that knowledge.  If you're not interested in understanding that position, or if you already understand everything you need to understand about all positions that aren't your own - i.e. they are the result of idiots/America-haters/liars/etc. spreading their filth - then there's probably nothing for you to gain.


----------



## racing_kitty (May 28, 2015)

Last month: "Goddamn motherfucking racist ass pigs! Get dafuq out my 'hood, you murdering cracker ass fuck!"

This month:


Merry fucking Christmas.

ETA: Here's the money quote from the actual article that screen shot came from:



> Police Commissioner Anthony Batts said his officers “are not holding back,” despite encountering dangerous hostility in the Western District.
> 
> “Our officers tell me that when officers pull up, they have 30 to 50 people surrounding them at any time,” Batts said



Yeah, I'll be fucking damned if I'm working alone in a crowd like that.


----------



## AWP (May 28, 2015)

Il Duce said:


> @racing_kitty
> 
> It's a first-person narrative opinion piece.  Not a great deal of facts in the sense of an academic article or research piece.  The only facts that would be true or untrue is if the personal events of this former officer happened or did not - or even if this is a legit, credible former officer.  However, I don't think that's the applicability of the article.  There are a significant number of academic studies on race, policing, and bias out there - if I come across one I think would be of benefit I'll post it.  I thought what was good about this article is it's short and pretty accessible - told in the first person with simplified terms.
> 
> ...



It is an opinion piece but backed with facts and vignettes to support the author's opinion. So there was institutionalized torture in the NYPD. That occurs in the majority of communities? The author can't say but he implies it exists and because he's a former LEO his opinion carries weight even without enough fact to support his assertions. He may well be right, but without enough to support his claims he is wrong with his generalizations. He even starts the article with an opinion grounded in numbers, but how many people upon reading the article will remember it that way? The latter is a rhetorical question but I think it is one to consider.

Like I posted earlier, even the Director of the FBI said he doesn't have enough information regarding race and law enforcement.


----------



## AfroNinja267 (May 29, 2015)

One of the biggest problems with cases like this (at least in my naive 15 year old opinion) is that people don't bother really learning about it. Rather, they read a headline and assume they know all they need to know.

Last week I got into it with a teacher and another student over the military (story for another day) and when the topic switched to police brutality I realized I should not discuss politics with my teachers. He got in my face, saying that there's a pattern going on (Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Freddy Gray) and when I pointed out that neither of us know enough about the circumstances of each case to form an opinion he got even angrier. 

Now imagine people like that, only a lot younger, angrier, and more naive hearing about Freddy Gray. This is what I feel produces violence like that in Baltimore and it needs to stop.

Sorry if I ranted a bit, back to hiding now.


----------



## racing_kitty (Jun 23, 2015)

The Baltimore Sun has acquired a copy of the autopsy report.  A couple of snippets:



> Gray tested positive for opiates and cannabinoid when he was admitted to Maryland Shock Trauma Center, according to the autopsy. The report makes no further reference to the drugs found in his system.
> 
> The report does not note any previous injuries to Gray's spine.
> 
> ...



And...



> The van made several stops. The second stop occurred a few blocks away on Baker Street, where officers placed an identification band and leg restraints on Gray.
> 
> "Reportedly, Mr. Gray was still yelling and shaking the van," the medical examiner wrote. "He was removed from the van and placed on the ground in a kneeling position, facing the van doors, while ankle cuffs were placed, and then slid onto the floor of the van, belly down and head first, reportedly still verbally and physically active."



According to the article, the fatal injury occurred after the second stop and before the fifth stop.  The noise that the second arrestee heard may have been Gray having a seizure resulting from the injury.  

Sounds to me like the driver of the wagon is going to have the hardest time of it at trial, since as the operator of the vehicle he should've made sure that the prisoner was safely belted in in accordance with department policy before driving away.  If Mosby can prove it was a "rough ride," then the murder charge might stick.  Otherwise, a lesser charge of manslaughter would have been more realistic.  That doesn't mean the jury won't be able to consider the lesser charge; however, that will be addressed at trial.  I don't see the other five being convicted, but IANAL.


----------



## Salt USMC (Jun 23, 2015)

It's good to see that, at the very least, the arresting officers have a good chance of being cleared.


----------



## Florida173 (Jun 30, 2015)

A little bit of new information on what is going on in Baltimore.


> This could be the break the Baltimore cops were looking for.
> 
> The mound of evidence prosecutors in the *Freddie Gray* turned over to defense attorneys  includes a crucial videotaped statement from a witness who told police in no uncertain terms that the Baltimore man who died in custody in April had been deliberately trying to injure himself in the back of a police van.







http://www.bizpacreview.com/2015/06...-wide-open-judge-almost-has-to-dismiss-219608


----------



## pardus (Jun 30, 2015)

Haha, sounds like Donta is going to have some explaining to do on the streets!


----------



## Rapid (Jul 6, 2015)

_"Gun violence in Chicago at the weekend left 10 people dead, including a 7-year-old boy, and more than 50 wounded."_

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-33414256

50 wounded? 10 dead? No 'racist cops' to blame though, I guess, otherwise this would have been major news... rather than a tidbit I came across.

But hey, it's getting better!

_"Despite the multiple shootings since Thursday, the number of incidents was lower than in the same period in 2014. Last year, 16 people were shot dead and more than 80 others were injured, according to the Chicago Tribune."_


----------



## Centermass (Jul 27, 2016)

*Freddie Gray case: Charges against three remaining officers dropped*

In a hearing Wednesday meant to start the trial of Officer Garrett Miller, Chief Deputy State's Attorney Michael Schatzow told Williams that the state was dropping all charges against Miller, Porter and Sgt. Alicia White.

Full Story

Now Mosby needs to be charged.


----------



## Etype (Jul 27, 2016)

Rapid said:


> _"Gun violence in Chicago at the weekend left 10 people dead, including a 7-year-old boy, and more than 50 wounded."_
> 
> Chicago boy, 7, among victims as gun violence sweeps city - BBC News
> 
> ...


Even the Brits recognize how manipulative our media is.

Why doesn't BLM get it?


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jul 27, 2016)

Etype said:


> Why doesn't BLM get it?



Because when it comes to black-on-black violence, who does the finger have to point to and accountability have to come from?

Which, interestingly enough, I could/would become a huge supporter of BLM if they focused on reducing this type of violence -


----------



## Devildoc (Jul 27, 2016)

Centermass said:


> *Freddie Gray case: Charges against three remaining officers dropped*
> 
> In a hearing Wednesday meant to start the trial of Officer Garrett Miller, Chief Deputy State's Attorney Michael Schatzow told Williams that the state was dropping all charges against Miller, Porter and Sgt. Alicia White.
> 
> ...



Color me not surprised.  That moron of a DA brought what she thought were her slam-dunk cases first; with each not guilty/acquittal, etc., each successive case would be harder and harder to convict.


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 27, 2016)

Centermass said:


> *Freddie Gray case: Charges against three remaining officers dropped*
> 
> In a hearing Wednesday meant to start the trial of Officer Garrett Miller, Chief Deputy State's Attorney Michael Schatzow told Williams that the state was dropping all charges against Miller, Porter and Sgt. Alicia White.
> 
> ...


----------



## Devildoc (Jul 27, 2016)

DA SWO said:


> View attachment 16179



Ha!  She gon' be Nifonged!

Mike Nifong - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Devildoc (Jul 27, 2016)

And thus it starts.....

Disbarment Charges are Filed Against Baltimore State Attorney Marilyn Mosby


----------



## Brill (Jul 27, 2016)

Centermass said:


> *Freddie Gray case: Charges against three remaining officers dropped*
> 
> In a hearing Wednesday meant to start the trial of Officer Garrett Miller, Chief Deputy State's Attorney Michael Schatzow told Williams that the state was dropping all charges against Miller, Porter and Sgt. Alicia White.
> 
> ...



I hope she gets disbarred but will probably be nominated to the become a Federal judge by Hillary.


----------



## Florida173 (Jul 27, 2016)

I've been told by my friend that it's just a bar grievance and they rarely go anywhere. They do require a response even if they are outrageous. She's attached her client's docket lines in response to one before cause he was all out lying. If they find probable cause, then you're on to something... Apparently anyone can do them; although they are sometimes done by judges, opposing counsel, but usually a disgruntled client.


----------



## Brill (Jul 27, 2016)

Florida173 said:


> I've been told by my friend that it's just a bar grievance and they rarely go anywhere. They do require a response even if they are outrageous. She's attached her client's docket lines in response to one before cause he was all out lying. If they find probable cause, then you're on to something... Apparently anyone can do them; although they are sometimes done by judges, opposing counsel, but usually a disgruntled client.



If there were any transparancy b the commission, this would be an interesting showdown but Mosby, who was a nobody, seems to be politically protected.

Banzhaf has an interesting background.

John F. Banzhaf III - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## DA SWO (Jul 27, 2016)

Florida173 said:


> I've been told by my friend that it's just a bar grievance and they rarely go anywhere. They do require a response even if they are outrageous. She's attached her client's docket lines in response to one before cause he was all out lying. If they find probable cause, then you're on to something... Apparently anyone can do them; although they are sometimes done by judges, opposing counsel, but usually a disgruntled client.


Ethics complaints are nothing to laugh at.
She was reprimanded by the Judge for withholding evidence favorable to the defense (major no-no)
She was filing charges before the investigations were complete, and lied that the investigations were finished.

Mr. Nifong would disagree with your friend.


----------



## Florida173 (Jul 27, 2016)

DA SWO said:


> Ethics complaints are nothing to laugh at.
> She was reprimanded by the Judge for withholding evidence favorable to the defense (major no-no)
> She was filing charges before the investigations were complete, and lied that the investigations were finished.
> 
> Mr. Nifong would disagree with your friend.



I'm not defending her and agree with what you are saying. Just providing an opinion from someone in the business.


----------

