Hordini wrote: I'm guessing they must have deserved it because of their white privilege.
It could also be a rare moment of public service.....
Literally EVERY time I've ever shopped at Target, my bank sends me a new card due to security breaches (and it's always the Target charges they suspect )
So those "protesters" were merely protecting the public from the banking menace that is Target stores
I'll defer to Kobe Bryant's take on the Trayvon Martin shooting:
I won’t react to something just because I’m supposed to, because I’m an African-American,” he said. “That argument doesn’t make any sense to me. So we want to advance as a society and a culture, but, say, if something happens to an African-American we immediately come to his defense? Yet you want to talk about how far we’ve progressed as a society? Well, we’ve progressed as a society, then don’t jump to somebody’s defense just because they’re African-American. You sit and you listen to the facts just like you would in any other situation, right? So I won’t assert myself.”
Huh, Fisher ran a tight ship when he was here with the Titans. Guess he's lost control of the Rams.
It's in no way surprising that pro football players did something idiotic and uninformed though. Are we sure their hands weren't up in a "Bitch, I'm 'bout to slap you!" pose instead?
SlaveToDorkness wrote: Huh, Fisher ran a tight ship when he was here with the Titans. Guess he's lost control of the Rams.
It's in no way surprising that pro football players did something idiotic and uninformed though. Are we sure their hands weren't up in a "Bitch, I'm 'bout to slap you!" pose instead?
Well the Jerry Rice interview just hit. Maybe they were synmpathising with their fellow NFL, who's banning from the NFL was just overturned.
Well the Jerry Rice interview just hit. Maybe they were synmpathising with their fellow NFL, who's banning from the NFL was just overturned.
You mean Ray Rice??? Jerry Rice is a Hall of Famer, I didn't think he'd been banned from anything
Well, perhaps aside from Dallas Cowboys' Stadium, since he destroyed so many of their "dream seasons" when he was with San Fran
You are correct. I have blasphemed against the greatness of Jerry Rice, respected for his many years of uber talent, despite working for the spawn of satan that is San Francisco.
I'll defer to Kobe Bryant's take on the Trayvon Martin shooting:
I won’t react to something just because I’m supposed to, because I’m an African-American,” he said. “That argument doesn’t make any sense to me. So we want to advance as a society and a culture, but, say, if something happens to an African-American we immediately come to his defense? Yet you want to talk about how far we’ve progressed as a society? Well, we’ve progressed as a society, then don’t jump to somebody’s defense just because they’re African-American. You sit and you listen to the facts just like you would in any other situation, right? So I won’t assert myself.”
The local scribe at the PD (Jim Thomas) interviewed those guys yesterday and it should be in Wednesday's paper. I did hear Jim's take on the sports talk show this morning and he senses it wasn't the player "picking a side".
...
“The true story came out from the grand jury testimony,” Barkley said, adding that he was made aware of “key forensic evidence, and several black witnesses that supported Officer Darren Wilson’s story…” He continued, “I can’t believe anything I hear on television anymore. And, that’s why I don’t like talking about race issues with the media anymore, because they (the media) love this stuff, and lead people to jump to conclusions. The media shouldn’t do that. They never do that when black people kill each other. ”
He also called those who rioted after the decision was announced “scumbags,” and said “There is no excuse for people to be out there burning down people’s businesses, burning down police cars.”…
“[W]e have to be really careful with the cops, because if it wasn’t for the cops we would be living in the Wild, Wild West in our neighborhoods,” he said. “We can’t pick out certain incidentals that don’t go our way and act like the cops are all bad…. Do you know how bad some of these neighborhoods would be if it wasn’t for the cops?”
...
I just... Bloody hell... As if enough people's lives aren't being ruined enough by this whole thing.
That lymeric was offensive, I will agree, but then everything that has happened afterwards, things that have been directed at the users mother as well as her I find to be inexcusable and frankly disgusting
Well, by the legal definition race crimes are ones motivated by the victim's race. They're not attacking her because she's a particular race, just because she said something they don't like. Even if her comment was related to race, I don't think related crimes would fall under hate-crime laws.
DarkLink wrote: Well, by the legal definition race crimes are ones motivated by the victim's race. They're not attacking her because she's a particular race, just because she said something they don't like. Even if her comment was related to race, I don't think related crimes would fall under hate-crime laws.
My bad, I put up the wrong link. But have since corrected it.
I like how quickly the police there say it isn't race related. That's some lightning investigative work there.
Nothing in that link actually says one way or another. But, I do hope that this does get national attention, because seriously... when people are taught that "they" are out to get you, and you go and do some fethed up gak like that, yeah... "They" are gonna get you!
I like how quickly the police there say it isn't race related. That's some lightning investigative work there.
Nothing in that link actually says one way or another. But, I do hope that this does get national attention, because seriously... when people are taught that "they" are out to get you, and you go and do some fethed up gak like that, yeah... "They" are gonna get you!
There's a link inside the link, I shouls have put this up. Kind of interesting is that I had to go through a few reports to find one that gave the attacker's race. It reminds me of the report that talked about the plot to blow up the St.Louis arch that was accompanied by a picture of a white man being led away in cuffs. I went through three news reports to find out it was a couple of Black Panthers.
Here's a good example, CNN, which goes to great pains to mention Brown was killed by a White cop, somehow fails to mention that it was a group of Blacks that beat this man to death.
We have a large Bosnian community here... especially those who left home because of the war/gang issues.
Ironic eh?
We're having this mass protests/riots & media attention over Brown's death. Yet, this murder by black youths & the rampant black-on-black homicides? <crickets>
We have a large Bosnian community here... especially those who left home because of the war/gang issues.
Ironic eh?
We're having this mass protests/riots & media attention over Brown's death. Yet, this murder by black youths & the rampant black-on-black homicides?
<crickets>
Anthony Zurcher By Anthony Zurcher Editor, Echo Chambers
Five NFL players take the field in St Louis with a Ferguson protest gesture.
Five American football players in St Louis took the field on Sunday with the "hands up, don't shoot" gesture that has become a symbol of protest for those angered by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson's killing of black teenager Michael Brown.
According to some witness testimony - contradicted by others and apparently dismissed by the grand jury that declined to indict Mr Wilson - Brown's hands were raised in surrender when he was fatally shot in St Louis suburb of Ferguson.
The action by the players now threatens to engulf the NFL in the growing debate over the police shooting and, more largely, racial justice in the US.
"We kind of came collectively together and decided we wanted to do something," said Jared Cook, one of the participants. "So we wanted to come out and show our respect to the protests and the people who have been doing a heck of a job around the world."
Later on Sunday the St Louis Police Officers Association issued a statement condemning the display. Jeff Roorda, the association's business manager and a representative in the Missouri legislature, said:
"Now that the evidence is in and Officer Wilson's account has been verified by physical and ballistic evidence as well as eyewitness testimony, which led the grand jury to conclude that no probable cause existed that Wilson engaged in any wrongdoing, it is unthinkable that hometown athletes would so publicly perpetuate a narrative that has been disproven over-and-over again."
A protestor argues with a Rams fan outside the St Louis stadium on Sunday. Protestors and fans scuffle outside the St Louis Rams stadium on Sunday
The association called for the players to be disciplined by the Rams and for the NFL to issue a "very public apology".
"I know that there are those that will say that these players are simply exercising their First Amendment rights," Mr Roorda said. "Well I've got news for people who think that way. Cops have first amendment rights too, and we plan to exercise ours. I'd remind the NFL and their players that it is not the violent thugs burning down buildings that buy their advertiser's products. It's cops and the good people of St Louis and other NFL towns that do."
It probably shouldn't be a surprise that the Ferguson controversy has spilled over into US sport - as controversial social issues often do. In 1968 several US Olympians raised a black-gloved fist in a black power salute while on the medal podium.
In 2012 players on the Miami Heat basketball team posed in hooded sweatshirts to express solidarity with Trayvon Martin, a black teen who had been shot and killed by an armed civilian in Florida. Players from the Washington Redskins had engaged in a similar show of support for Michael Brown in August.
A tweet from Meagan Hatcher-Mays
Moreover, the NFL is more than just a Sunday afternoon pastime, it's a major cultural phenomenon. The Rams and the NFL had reportedly been consulting with local authorities about the possibilities of demonstrations affecting the game.
Coming on the heels of the violent clashes between protestors and police when the grand jury's decision was announced last week, a protest by St Louis players likely would capture the nation's attention - and it did. Social media exploded with reaction, and commentators were quick to weigh in.
Tommie Smith raises his right arm in protest during the 1968 Olympics. US Tommie Smith would be suspended from the US track team following his "black power" salute during the 1968 Olympics
"Even if we didn't have miles of grand jury testimony and forensic evidence showing that Mike Brown initiated the confrontation which ended his life, and no matter how you feel about the state of community relations with law enforcement, the football stadium is not the place for this," writes Hot Air blog's Jazz Shaw.
He says that NFL should be about football and entertainment, not political statements of any stripe. "The Rams need to pull these guys aside and put an end to this," he concludes.
The demonstrations are an "indicator of how deeply Ferguson has touched America," writes the Christian Science Monitor's Mark Sappenfield.
"The fact that five Rams took the one moment they could be sure that the stadium was watching to show their solidarity with Ferguson, then, is significant," he writes. "Clearly, it was coordinated. Clearly, it was something that felt that they could not not do."
The NFL players have a right to express their views, says St Louis Post-Dispatch sports columnist Bernie Miklasz.
"Please don't tell me that players should keep their mouths shut on a volatile issue that's confronting St Louis in a profound way," he writes. "And it's about time that people speak up so we can have open dialogue on a matter of critical importance. This isn't North Korea."
Given the stakes, and the acrimony surrounding the Ferguson issue, it wasn't long before supporters on both sides began digging into the backgrounds of Sunday's key participants.
DC Clothesline blogger Dean Garrison says that all five of the Rams players have what he views as questionable backgrounds, ranging from arrests to disciplinary action by the NFL.
"These five men may not be hardened criminals, but they are obviously not choir boys either," he writes.
Labelling them "thugs", he adds: "They disrespected their teammates. They disrespected the fans. They disrespected their city. They disrespected all of America."
Deadspin's Timothy Burke writes that Mr Roorda is a former police officer who was fired after "repeatedly lying and falsifying reports".
During his work in the legislature, writes Think Progress's Travis Waldron, Mr Roorda "has pushed back against reform ideas that have become popular in the wake of Brown's death, including the idea that police should wear body cameras" and helped raise money for officer Wilson.
A tweet from Nick Baumann
Although the NFL has been quick to punish displays of "unsportsmanlike behaviour" on the field, including a controversial, open-ended penalty for offensive language, it has generally given players more freedom for political expression. On Monday the league announced it will not discipline the players.
Last week New Orleans player Benjamin Watson wrote a viral Facebook post about his mixed emotions following the grand jury action.
"I'm angry," he wrote, "because the stories of injustice that have been passed down for generations seem to be continuing before our very eyes."
Yahoo's Frank Schwab writes that a player was fined for "negative comments" about openly gay player Michael Sam, "but that was a violation of the league's anti-discrimination policies".
"Given how much controversy the NFL has unwittingly found itself in this year, it will be very careful about anything it says about the Rams' statement, if it says anything at all," he writes.
The NFL has found itself in yet another delicate situation. It could risk angering those who support the grand jury's decision not to indict Mr Wilson and who view the protests as a misguided, lawless action. Or take sides against the demonstrators on a issue that is exposing sharp racial divides in the US when 68% of its players are black.
For now it seems the NFL has opted for the former.
I understand that people have their own point of view, and their own opinions, and the right to voice them, but keep that to your own time. I do think that any sports team should ban all players from making any statement like this on the field. Equally, I don't agree with teams that try and gag stuff players say off the field, but this is not appropriate, especially when they are supporting something that has been shown to be a lie.
I think that is what the biggest problem is, communities being torn apart for a lie just because that lie fits what they want the truth to be. Whatever else is happening, protesting over a lie, or even something that cannot be proven as truth, damages everyone.
Anthony Zurcher By Anthony Zurcher Editor, Echo Chambers
Five NFL players take the field in St Louis with a Ferguson protest gesture.
Five American football players in St Louis took the field on Sunday with the "hands up, don't shoot" gesture that has become a symbol of protest for those angered by Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson's killing of black teenager Michael Brown.
According to some witness testimony - contradicted by others and apparently dismissed by the grand jury that declined to indict Mr Wilson - Brown's hands were raised in surrender when he was fatally shot in St Louis suburb of Ferguson.
The action by the players now threatens to engulf the NFL in the growing debate over the police shooting and, more largely, racial justice in the US.
"We kind of came collectively together and decided we wanted to do something," said Jared Cook, one of the participants. "So we wanted to come out and show our respect to the protests and the people who have been doing a heck of a job around the world."
Later on Sunday the St Louis Police Officers Association issued a statement condemning the display. Jeff Roorda, the association's business manager and a representative in the Missouri legislature, said:
"Now that the evidence is in and Officer Wilson's account has been verified by physical and ballistic evidence as well as eyewitness testimony, which led the grand jury to conclude that no probable cause existed that Wilson engaged in any wrongdoing, it is unthinkable that hometown athletes would so publicly perpetuate a narrative that has been disproven over-and-over again."
A protestor argues with a Rams fan outside the St Louis stadium on Sunday. Protestors and fans scuffle outside the St Louis Rams stadium on Sunday
The association called for the players to be disciplined by the Rams and for the NFL to issue a "very public apology".
"I know that there are those that will say that these players are simply exercising their First Amendment rights," Mr Roorda said. "Well I've got news for people who think that way. Cops have first amendment rights too, and we plan to exercise ours. I'd remind the NFL and their players that it is not the violent thugs burning down buildings that buy their advertiser's products. It's cops and the good people of St Louis and other NFL towns that do."
It probably shouldn't be a surprise that the Ferguson controversy has spilled over into US sport - as controversial social issues often do. In 1968 several US Olympians raised a black-gloved fist in a black power salute while on the medal podium.
In 2012 players on the Miami Heat basketball team posed in hooded sweatshirts to express solidarity with Trayvon Martin, a black teen who had been shot and killed by an armed civilian in Florida. Players from the Washington Redskins had engaged in a similar show of support for Michael Brown in August.
A tweet from Meagan Hatcher-Mays
Moreover, the NFL is more than just a Sunday afternoon pastime, it's a major cultural phenomenon. The Rams and the NFL had reportedly been consulting with local authorities about the possibilities of demonstrations affecting the game.
Coming on the heels of the violent clashes between protestors and police when the grand jury's decision was announced last week, a protest by St Louis players likely would capture the nation's attention - and it did. Social media exploded with reaction, and commentators were quick to weigh in.
Tommie Smith raises his right arm in protest during the 1968 Olympics. US Tommie Smith would be suspended from the US track team following his "black power" salute during the 1968 Olympics
"Even if we didn't have miles of grand jury testimony and forensic evidence showing that Mike Brown initiated the confrontation which ended his life, and no matter how you feel about the state of community relations with law enforcement, the football stadium is not the place for this," writes Hot Air blog's Jazz Shaw.
He says that NFL should be about football and entertainment, not political statements of any stripe. "The Rams need to pull these guys aside and put an end to this," he concludes.
The demonstrations are an "indicator of how deeply Ferguson has touched America," writes the Christian Science Monitor's Mark Sappenfield.
"The fact that five Rams took the one moment they could be sure that the stadium was watching to show their solidarity with Ferguson, then, is significant," he writes. "Clearly, it was coordinated. Clearly, it was something that felt that they could not not do."
The NFL players have a right to express their views, says St Louis Post-Dispatch sports columnist Bernie Miklasz.
"Please don't tell me that players should keep their mouths shut on a volatile issue that's confronting St Louis in a profound way," he writes. "And it's about time that people speak up so we can have open dialogue on a matter of critical importance. This isn't North Korea."
Given the stakes, and the acrimony surrounding the Ferguson issue, it wasn't long before supporters on both sides began digging into the backgrounds of Sunday's key participants.
DC Clothesline blogger Dean Garrison says that all five of the Rams players have what he views as questionable backgrounds, ranging from arrests to disciplinary action by the NFL.
"These five men may not be hardened criminals, but they are obviously not choir boys either," he writes.
Labelling them "thugs", he adds: "They disrespected their teammates. They disrespected the fans. They disrespected their city. They disrespected all of America."
Deadspin's Timothy Burke writes that Mr Roorda is a former police officer who was fired after "repeatedly lying and falsifying reports".
During his work in the legislature, writes Think Progress's Travis Waldron, Mr Roorda "has pushed back against reform ideas that have become popular in the wake of Brown's death, including the idea that police should wear body cameras" and helped raise money for officer Wilson.
A tweet from Nick Baumann
Although the NFL has been quick to punish displays of "unsportsmanlike behaviour" on the field, including a controversial, open-ended penalty for offensive language, it has generally given players more freedom for political expression. On Monday the league announced it will not discipline the players.
Last week New Orleans player Benjamin Watson wrote a viral Facebook post about his mixed emotions following the grand jury action.
"I'm angry," he wrote, "because the stories of injustice that have been passed down for generations seem to be continuing before our very eyes."
Yahoo's Frank Schwab writes that a player was fined for "negative comments" about openly gay player Michael Sam, "but that was a violation of the league's anti-discrimination policies".
"Given how much controversy the NFL has unwittingly found itself in this year, it will be very careful about anything it says about the Rams' statement, if it says anything at all," he writes.
The NFL has found itself in yet another delicate situation. It could risk angering those who support the grand jury's decision not to indict Mr Wilson and who view the protests as a misguided, lawless action. Or take sides against the demonstrators on a issue that is exposing sharp racial divides in the US when 68% of its players are black.
For now it seems the NFL has opted for the former.
I understand that people have their own point of view, and their own opinions, and the right to voice them, but keep that to your own time. I do think that any sports team should ban all players from making any statement like this on the field. Equally, I don't agree with teams that try and gag stuff players say off the field, but this is not appropriate, especially when they are supporting something that has been shown to be a lie.
*meh*
I think this is an over-reaction honestly. Like when the NFL force RG3 to turn out his shirt earlier this year, because it said something like "praise jesus" or something.
I think that is what the biggest problem is, communities being torn apart for a lie just because that lie fits what they want the truth to be. Whatever else is happening, protesting over a lie, or even something that cannot be proven as truth, damages everyone.
It's the prevailing Narrative™.
Now it's Congressmen doing the "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" protest at the Congressional floor.
If Mike Brown truly had his "hands up" and said "don't shoot"... he'd likely be alive today.
Here's a good example, CNN, which goes to great pains to mention Brown was killed by a White cop, somehow fails to mention that it was a group of Blacks that beat this man to death.
when some people made statements along the lines of "gonna punch/kill/ect the first white guy I see"
then stories where some people were beaten/killed never got media attention, and if they did, race definatly wasnt a factor, if the race of victim vs perpetrator is even mentioned.
The quote from kobe bryant is telling, its just sad that so many people gobble up any bait the media puts out for them.
The media knows every groups triggers, its so transparent, and the parralels to 1984's televised minutes of hate are enough to give one shivers.
hotsauceman1 wrote: I'm going to say something.
If you don't want to be killed by a cop, don't do things that will get you killed by a cop
Hmmm... needs more seasoning saucy.
How 'bout:
NEWS FLASH! DRUDGE ALERT! It has just been discovered that brutally assaulting a police officer can be hazardous to one’s health. We are now getting reports that this is actually what experts call “illegal.”
As of right now, law officials have issued a formal warning to “Avoid hitting cops.”
hotsauceman1 wrote: I'm going to say something.
If you don't want to be killed by a cop, don't do things that will get you killed by a cop
Like just standing nearby when a cop is trying to pistol whip someone else. Especially when the cop is drunk.
Abel has been widely held up as an example of an officer who shouldn't have gotten his job back, but Campbell says the picture is more complicated. Though Abel was off duty when he shot someone on the street, Campbell explains, he was sucker-punched and was only trying to arrest the culprit. It just didn't turn out to be the guy he shot. "All he was trying to do is arrest somebody who was guilty of an assault," Campbell says, although he adds, "Should he have taken his gun out in those circumstances? Probably not."
hotsauceman1 wrote: I'm going to say something.
If you don't want to be killed by a cop, don't do things that will get you killed by a cop
Like just standing nearby when a cop is trying to pistol whip someone else. Especially when the cop is drunk.
Abel has been widely held up as an example of an officer who shouldn't have gotten his job back, but Campbell says the picture is more complicated. Though Abel was off duty when he shot someone on the street, Campbell explains, he was sucker-punched and was only trying to arrest the culprit. It just didn't turn out to be the guy he shot. "All he was trying to do is arrest somebody who was guilty of an assault," Campbell says, although he adds, "Should he have taken his gun out in those circumstances? Probably not."
hotsauceman1 wrote: I'm going to say something.
If you don't want to be killed by a cop, don't do things that will get you killed by a cop
Like just standing nearby when a cop is trying to pistol whip someone else. Especially when the cop is drunk.
Abel has been widely held up as an example of an officer who shouldn't have gotten his job back, but Campbell says the picture is more complicated. Though Abel was off duty when he shot someone on the street, Campbell explains, he was sucker-punched and was only trying to arrest the culprit. It just didn't turn out to be the guy he shot. "All he was trying to do is arrest somebody who was guilty of an assault," Campbell says, although he adds, "Should he have taken his gun out in those circumstances? Probably not."
That when you are at the mercy of cops that can kill with little or no repercussions even in clearly unjustifiable situations, it's foolish to think that "don't do things that will get you killed by a cop" is something that can be predictably achieved..
hotsauceman1 wrote: I'm going to say something.
If you don't want to be killed by a cop, don't do things that will get you killed by a cop
Like just standing nearby when a cop is trying to pistol whip someone else. Especially when the cop is drunk.
Abel has been widely held up as an example of an officer who shouldn't have gotten his job back, but Campbell says the picture is more complicated. Though Abel was off duty when he shot someone on the street, Campbell explains, he was sucker-punched and was only trying to arrest the culprit. It just didn't turn out to be the guy he shot. "All he was trying to do is arrest somebody who was guilty of an assault," Campbell says, although he adds, "Should he have taken his gun out in those circumstances? Probably not."
That when you are at the mercy of cops that can kill with little or no repercussions even in clearly unjustifiable situations, it's foolish to think that "don't do things that will get you killed by a cop" is something that can be predictably achieved..
So you're saying that we have thousands of dictators running around in the US? Weird world view dude... o.O
Yep. Every single LEO wakes up every morning wanting to shoot someone on their knee's begging for their life.
Maybe they need to discriminate on not hiring the prior military since we're trained killers to too lessen the PR ramification
CaulynDarr wrote: That when you are at the mercy of cops that can kill with little or no repercussions even in clearly unjustifiable situations, it's foolish to think that "don't do things that will get you killed by a cop" is something that can be predictably achieved..
Cop shoot less people then crimnals, far FAR less,
criminals often walk away as well, even when they are caught.
Criminals also intentionally shoot innocents, or actually dont care, while police do it by mistake.
Odd that you demonize LEO's while glossing over thugs shooting people.
We are acttualy at the point where even a justified shooting, of a dangerous 6ft 300ilb criminal who was attacking the officer is labeled as "evil cop shoots innocent boy" by default
Rather then at the point where officers actually shoot innocent people with impunity as a rule.
Jihadin wrote: Yep. Every single LEO wakes up every morning wanting to shoot someone on their knee's begging for their life.
Maybe they need to discriminate on not hiring the prior military since we're trained killers to too lessen the PR ramification
There are bad cops who though incompetence or malice have killed or maimed or violated the civil rights of people unjustly. It is very hard to hold these cops accountable criminally or even just administratively. Hey, you may get lucky and just get one who will seize any cash on you legally though civil forfeiture.
I don't think all cops are bad. I like cops and the function they play in our society at large. That doesn't mean that I'm not scared to death of running into a bad one. Cops(and prosecutors as well) have authority, and if they decide to use it against you unjustly, you at best might be out thousands of dollars in legal fees. At worst you could end up dead.
There are bad cops who though incompetence or malice have killed or maimed or violated the civil rights of people unjustly. It is very hard to hold these cops accountable criminally or even just administratively. Hey, you may get lucky and just get one who will seize any cash on you legally though civil forfeiture.
There are bad cops who though incompetence or malice have killed or maimed or violated the civil rights of people unjustly. It is very hard to hold these cops accountable criminally or even just administratively. Hey, you may get lucky and just get one who will seize any cash on you legally though civil forfeiture.
Jihadin wrote: Yep. Every single LEO wakes up every morning wanting to shoot someone on their knee's begging for their life.
Maybe they need to discriminate on not hiring the prior military since we're trained killers to too lessen the PR ramification
I've seriously seen that argument put forth actually.
Or you can look at the article I posted earlier that shows how police unions often get these same cops reinstated later on.
That's lovely.
But you're barking up the wrong tree.
I'm vociferously anti-union. The funny thing is, is that the people protecting bad cops are the people protecting unions, who are the same people with all the white guilt, faux-outrage regarding Ferguson.
Police officers get disciplined for doing something wrong*. In the case, and in the case in Cleveland, neither did.
*The better word is probably "incorrect, as I'm sure the comments to come will follow the "so it's okay to shoot an unarmed person?"
Jihadin wrote: Why on weapon ranges its a human shape silhouette to condition the mind to not trigger a delay in between sight picture and squeezing the trigger
LTC Grossman's "On KIlling" goes into that quite a bit. Not just human shaped targets, but targets that pop up and go down when hit. They do that for a reason.
Jihadin wrote: No indictment in the Garner case due to lack of evidence The big guy that died that was selling black market(?) cig's
I saw that today. Never mind that there was an illegal choke hold, caught on camera.
Lack of evidence my ass.
A Grand jury indictment can be based on hearsay evidence and other things that cannot be used in court, and even with this video showing at a minimum an illegal choke hold, there isn't anything.
Cops are a joke in the country, and the legal section is right up there with them in being broken. 2 "prosecutors" throwing cases.
Jihadin wrote: No indictment in the Garner case due to lack of evidence
The big guy that died that was selling black market(?) cig's
I saw that today. Never mind that there was an illegal choke hold, caught on camera.
Lack of evidence my ass.
A Grand jury indictment can be based on hearsay evidence and other things that cannot be used in court, and even with this video showing at a minimum an illegal choke hold, there isn't anything.
Cops are a joke in the country, and the legal section is right up there with them in being broken. 2 "prosecutors" throwing cases.
Tragic death.
I wonder if they'll release the Grand Jury Testimony...
FWIW, the cop in the Garner case is no longer a cop.
The consistent behavior across the country of cops using excessive force is why I use that generalization.
I find it disheartening to know that if the police wrongly raid my house, my dog is going to get shot and killed even if she is in her cage. Or that if I have any high amount of cash in my possession if I get stopped I can kiss that goodbye. Or if I record a police officer doing something wrong, I have a good chance at being arrested.
Co'tor Shas wrote: I will say, in general the policemen and women are good individuals. We shouldn't dump the actions on bad cops on the rest.
I know.
It sucks because I've had both outstanding interactions with cops as well as interactions that have made me look over my shoulder nervous that a state trooper isn't following me out of retribution.
On a national scale though, there have been far too many instances where cops act in the wrong and because nothing happens to them, it just continues. To many times things like this have happened for me not to look at a cop and wonder if something is going to happen. Hell, just looking into the civil forfeiture laws alone makes me not trust cops.
But I'm also a white male and don't really have to worry too much about these things. I have a few black cousins that are in their young tween years that have been harassed by cops while I was supervising them at a playground. It's a bit disheartening to have to explain to a cop why a pair of 13 year old and 10 year old girls are playing on a playground in the summer.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jihadin wrote: Its so easy though for those individuals who do not like to fire the synapses of the brain to separate the bad cops from the majority of good cops..
Please tell me how I am to know that a cop approaching me is a good cop or a bad cop?
I find it disheartening to know that if the police wrongly raid my house, my dog is going to get shot and killed even if she is in her cage. Or that if I have any high amount of cash in my possession if I get stopped I can kiss that goodbye. Or if I record a police officer doing something wrong, I have a good chance at being arrested.
I...can't er actually disagree with that in many ways.
What were you doing Rivenskull for a LEO to approach you?
Besides I would not be belligerent towards him/her or give "attitude" to an LEO.
I'm biased though because I spent a good portion of my adult life in uniform
Jihadin wrote: What were you doing Rivenskull for a LEO to approach you?
Besides I would not be belligerent towards him/her or give "attitude" to an LEO.
I'm biased though because I spent a good portion of my adult life in uniform
Are you referring to when my younger cousins were approached at the playground or the hypothetical approach? Or I could give the details when I was walking to a bus stop and was stopped by a cop driving by.
Jihadin wrote: What were you doing Rivenskull for a LEO to approach you?
Besides I would not be belligerent towards him/her or give "attitude" to an LEO.
I'm biased though because I spent a good portion of my adult life in uniform
Are you referring to when my younger cousins were approached at the playground or the hypothetical approach? Or I could give the details when I was walking to a bus stop and was stopped by a cop driving by.
On a national scale though, there have been far too many instances where cops act in the wrong and because nothing happens to them, it just continues.
Imo, you may be looking at things slightly wrong. Think about this: how many interactions per day do all police and LEOs have with "civilians"??
Yes, there's a lot on the news, especially right now, but the total percentage is probably extremely small for "bad cops doing bad things". Of course, you will probably respond with something along the lines of "that's still too many" and I agree with you. I agree completely that things like the Police Unions, right now, are doing far too much damage to the public, and public perception by fighting to keep the bad cops around.
Jihadin wrote: What were you doing Rivenskull for a LEO to approach you?
Besides I would not be belligerent towards him/her or give "attitude" to an LEO.
I'm biased though because I spent a good portion of my adult life in uniform
Are you referring to when my younger cousins were approached at the playground or the hypothetical approach? Or I could give the details when I was walking to a bus stop and was stopped by a cop driving by.
Do you know what a "Green on Blue" is?
As in the notion that an allied force mistakenly open fire on a force of a different nation?
On a national scale though, there have been far too many instances where cops act in the wrong and because nothing happens to them, it just continues.
Imo, you may be looking at things slightly wrong. Think about this: how many interactions per day do all police and LEOs have with "civilians"??
Yes, there's a lot on the news, especially right now, but the total percentage is probably extremely small for "bad cops doing bad things". Of course, you will probably respond with something along the lines of "that's still too many" and I agree with you. I agree completely that things like the Police Unions, right now, are doing far too much damage to the public, and public perception by fighting to keep the bad cops around.
Bingo.
Statistically, the number of these incidents is INCREDIBLY low in comparison to the total number of interactions.
RivenSkull wrote:the cop that stopped at the car accident I was in about 90 minutes ago was very nice an professional.
To be fair, so are loaded guns and lawyers when they're not pointed at you.
I've had plenty of good experiences with cops. I've had a couple bad experiences with cops. Regardless, they're human beings, and prone to be as human and fallible as anyone else, and they can most likely kill you and get away with it. This is why you always be polite to them and never invoke them unless absolutely necessary.
RivenSkull wrote:the cop that stopped at the car accident I was in about 90 minutes ago was very nice an professional.
To be fair, so are loaded guns and lawyers when they're not pointed at you.
I've had plenty of good experiences with cops. I've had a couple bad experiences with cops. Regardless, they're human beings, and prone to be as human and fallible as anyone else, and they can most likely kill you and get away with it. This is why you always be polite to them and never invoke them unless absolutely necessary.
Way to ruin my attempt (think he got it though) to reach this conclusion you dang
RivenSkull wrote: On the notion of good cop interactions, the cop that stopped at the car accident I was in about 90 minutes ago was very nice an professional.
On the flip side of that, a good friend of mine lives out near Montgomery, Alabama, was in a car wreck with his wife on one of the highways. The driver who hit/drove them off the road took off, and she was injured (turned out to be very minor, but she was in a good deal of pain in places where with his limited, military medical training, said "DO NOT MOVE!!!!"), so he's on the side of the highway, trying to see/flag down an officer (after calling 911, who told him that an ambulance would be on it's way, but due to location it'd be a little while). The first cop he managed to flag down asks if everything is fine, he calmly tells the officer they'd been involved in a hit and run, and he thinks his wife may be injured. The cop says, well, if it's not life threatening, there's not much he can do about it, and drives off.
Now, this cop doesn't just drive off.... He drives about 50 feet up the road, and pulls over. About 10 minutes later, his lights go on, and he's pulled someone over (presumably for speeding)! So, my buddy, being an MP in the NG down that way, calls in again, emphasizing that he's a part of a crime scene as he was involved in a hit and run. The dispatcher says, well, we had an officer just out that way, to which he replies "yes, car number XXXXXX, right?" dispatch says, "yes, that's correct, how did you know?" and he relays to her how this cop just drove off without doing his job.
Long story short, after that phone call, the original officer came back to the scene, to be met by a waiting Chief of Police, who personally drove out to the scene
RivenSkull wrote: On the notion of good cop interactions, the cop that stopped at the car accident I was in about 90 minutes ago was very nice an professional.
The cop says, well, if it's not life threatening, there's not much he can do about it, and drives off.
To be fair, there really isn't much that a first responder can do, even if there is life threatening injuries. From my training of it, the best we got is put a dressing on a bleeding wound.
And I live in a state with some of the best EMS training in the world. Alabama you are lucky if they even know what side of a band aid is down.
To be fair, there really isn't much that a first responder can do, even if there is life threatening injuries.
I think that, in this situation, the bigger point is that, due to the fact the incident was a hit and run, the officer should have been there in order to take statements and that "initial investigation" type stuff.
To be fair, there really isn't much that a first responder can do, even if there is life threatening injuries.
I think that, in this situation, the bigger point is that, due to the fact the incident was a hit and run, the officer should have been there in order to take statements and that "initial investigation" type stuff.
Absolutely. Additionally, even if treatment was basic, the presence of an authority figure with even a rudimentary understanding of 'treat victim for shock' can make a big difference, especially as opposed to being blown off and the stress that induces in the victim and the others present (which tends to transfer to the victim).
To be fair, there really isn't much that a first responder can do, even if there is life threatening injuries.
I think that, in this situation, the bigger point is that, due to the fact the incident was a hit and run, the officer should have been there in order to take statements and that "initial investigation" type stuff.
Absolutely. Additionally, even if treatment was basic, the presence of an authority figure with even a rudimentary understanding of 'treat victim for shock' can make a big difference, especially as opposed to being blown off and the stress that induces in the victim and the others present (which tends to transfer to the victim).
I think you are over estimating the ability of police to treat for shock.
But yes, the bigger point is the fact he didn't do any investigation. Glad he got in trouble for it too.
Co'tor Shas wrote: I will say, in general the policemen and women are good individuals. We shouldn't dump the actions on bad cops on the rest.
Just like the majority of people receiving government assitance are hard working people trying to get by...
Exactly, people focus on the bad, and that sometimes leads other people to believe that there is only bad. Yes we should deal with it, but we should also not attack a group of people wrongfully.
Exactly, people focus on the bad, and that sometimes leads other people to believe that there is only bad. Yes we should deal with it, but we should also not attack a group of people wrongfully.
Da Boss wrote: I don't think people are particularly dumping on the individual cops, but the system that lets them get away with murder consequence free.
I friggin' KNEW someone was going to go for the technicality on that post.
I mean, I wrote it, I thought "Man, that's a snappy phrase! Good job Boss. You managed some pith without rambling on like a gobshite!" and then I immediately thought "I should clarify that to "crimes". No, wait. "Questionable acts". That's pretty unassailable"
Da Boss wrote: I friggin' KNEW someone was going to go for the technicality on that post.
I mean, I wrote it, I thought "Man, that's a snappy phrase! Good job Boss. You managed some pith without rambling on like a gobshite!" and then I immediately thought "I should clarify that to "crimes". No, wait. "Questionable acts". That's pretty unassailable"
Heh... I get it... I seem to get caught on that trap as well.
The thing to keep in mind is that there is a difference between resisting arrest by not cooperating, as what Garner was doing in Staten Island, and resisting arrest by violent assaults and threats of harm, as Michael Brown did in Ferguson. Police deserve a very wide berth in responding to the latter, but absolutely less of one with the former imo.
To sum up: Where's the line?
The decision to not indict Officer Wilson for Brown's death is the right call.
However, the decision to not indict Officer Pantaleo for at least involuntary manslaughter for Garner's death is extremely disappointing. Officer Pantaleo would still have his day in court.
The thing to keep in mind is that there is a difference between resisting arrest by not cooperating, as what Garner was doing in Staten Island, and resisting arrest by violent assaults and threats of harm, as Michael Brown did in Ferguson. Police deserve a very wide berth in responding to the latter, but absolutely less of one with the former imo.
To sum up: Where's the line?
The decision to not indict Officer Wilson for Brown's death is the right call.
However, the decision to not indict Officer Pantaleo for at least involuntary manslaughter for Garner's death is extremely disappointing. Officer Pantaleo would still have his day in court.
Couldn't agree with this more.
I was really expecting involuntary manslaughter of the criminally negligent variety because he used a department illegal maneuver to subdue Garner.
So as there are a few posters in the area, is there anything still happening there? I think the media's about to move otnot the next big thing, especially as thats just out their door in NY (meanwhile 800,000 people could die here before a NY journalist noticesbut thats another topic).
Frazzled wrote: So as there are a few posters in the area, is there anything still happening there? I think the media's about to move otnot the next big thing, especially as thats just out their door in NY (meanwhile 800,000 people could die here before a NY journalist noticesbut thats another topic).
It's spreading... protest-wise.
There was a "die in" at one of the High Schools yesterday.
There was a Blacks on White killing by hammer last week.
But, yeah, the national media died down a bit since folks have read the Grand Jury report as it largely exonerated Officer Wilson.
ROLLA, MO (KTVI) – Governor Jay Nixon answers why the National Guard left North County unprotected the night of the Grand Jury decision.
On November 24th, businesses burned while National Guard Quick Responders waited for a call that didn’t come until after midnight.
One guardsmen told me, “We were watching, on TV and smart phones, the city burn, while we stood by ready.”
The 700 Guardsmen who got the call were sent to St. Louis City and Clayton.
We’ve been asking the Governor’s office this week whether St. Louis County`s Police Chief requested Guardsmen in North County.
Thursday in Rolla, I asked, “What`s the answer to the yes or no question, did St. Louis County`s Police Chief ask for North County to be protected?”
Governor Nixon responded, “Well certainly we all worked together to make sure we were working on the dual pillars.”
Hayes followed up, “So then why did Rapid Response sit and watch businesses burn?”
Governor: “Well as I said before the plan that night was to make sure we had officers out there.”
Hayes: “But they weren’t out there.”
Governor: “There were 700, yes they were.”
Hayes: “But there were 1500 sitting and waiting. 700 out on the streets and 1500 waiting for a call.”
Governor: “There were 700 assigned that night, others came later as the night went on.”
Not until 1am November 25th- nearly two hours after Fox 2 asked the Governor`s office – “Where`s the guard in North County?”
I asked the Governor, ‘”..like they were in Clayton, why not have them in North County like… it sounds like you`re saying the St. Louis County Police Chief did ask for that presence.”
Governor: “No, what I`m saying is the plan was that the law enforcement officers who have been trained would be out on the front lines. You didn`t want to have a Kent State situation. You certainly didn`t want to have a situation where Guardsmen who had only been there a few hours, who had not been used to the very kinetic atmosphere of people throwing things, screaming things at the very front tip of that spear. That was the plan. I think it has prevented loss of life.”
The “dual pillars” the Governor referenced protecting means safety and speech. He never clearly answered whether Unified Commanders asked for Guardsmen to be in North County and we`re still waiting for an answer about whether Unified Command will answer that question as the command`s spokesman has yet to answer our request.
“Ferguson, Bosnian death immigrant warning is this. You are on these black young men 14th birthrights and land rights. If there’s an accident that occurs you are considered the invader and embezzler thief. You came to build a dream on the 14th Constitutional nation of supremacy. Fourteenth biblical inheritors… The Bosnian immigrant was invading. The Bosnian immigrant was joining globalists and they came to America for the American dream at the expense of black infant babies. At the expense of the Mike Brown. At the expense of the black housing. At the expense of the black’s education… The immigrant Bosnian is seen as a foreign invader and a thief.”
I think she never heard of Ethnic Cleansing in Bosnia and/or the Holocaust of WWII
Edit
Reading the comments section though is....entertaining
What the heck indeed? Where are all the protests and marches, White House representatives and celebrities for this man? I guess he should have strong armed a store worker and attacked a cop.
What the heck indeed? Where are all the protests and marches, White House representatives and celebrities for this man? I guess he should have strong armed a store worker and attacked a cop.
Be like on the 12 page of the paper but
"White Bosnian was killed...."
ST. LOUIS (KMOX) – St. Louis police are investigating an alleged hate crime in the Bevo neighborhood early this morning that left a 26-year-old woman beaten.
According to a police report, at about 5:30 a.m., a Bosnian woman was driving on the 4600 block of Lansdowne when three black males in their late-teens to early-20s stepped in front of her vehicle.
When the woman tried to drive around them, the suspects reportedly pulled out a firearm, so she stopped the car.
After hitting her windshield with a crowbar, the suspects pulled the woman from her car, threw her on the ground and kicked her.
A suspect grabbed her purse, searched it, and told the others it was empty. All three suspects then fled the scene.
Police say the woman said she thought the crime was racially motivated because the suspects asked her if she was Bosnian.
Slay responds
“This has all the appearances of a hate crime based on the information that we have,” St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay responds. “The fact that they did suggest that she was a Bosnian – she was a Bosnian lady. We’ve already turned this over to the FBI.”
Slay says he has been meeting with the Bosnian community already to discuss their concerns about safety – this after the hammer attack that killed a 32-year-old man in the Bosnian neighborhood earlier this week.
KMOX is speaking with residents of the Bevo neighborhood, following a week of shootings and murder, about what is causing all the violence.
Resident Michael Tallie says he thinks much of it is racially motivated.
“I would have to say so. I think it’s just blacks taking there aggression out on anybody that’s white,” he says. “It’s bad, it’s messed up, I hate it.”
When asked if white people should be scared, Tallie replied “everyone should be scared.”
The St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department released the following information:
Incident: Robbery 1st
Location: 4600 block of Lansdowne
Date/Time: 12/5/14 @ 05:25
Victim: 26-year old white female
Suspect(s): Three unknown black males, late teens-early 20s
The victim stated she was driving in the 4600 block of Lansdowne when three unknown suspects walked in front of her vehicle. When the victim attempted to drive around them, the suspects displayed a firearm and ordered her to stop her vehicle, to which she complied. One of the suspects then approached the driver’s side, produced an object, possibly a crowbar, and struck the windshield of her vehicle. The suspects then ordered the victim to exit her vehicle. The victim refused and one of the suspects pulled her out of the car. During this time, another suspect opened the passenger side door of the vehicle, went through the victim’s purse and stated that it was empty. One of the suspects then pushed the victim to the ground and kicked her. All three suspects then fled the scene. A passerby located the victim on the ground and contacted this department. EMS responded, however the victim refused further medical treatment and said she would respond to a hospital at a later time. As of now, officers are investigating this incident as a “bias crime” based on the victim’s account of the incident. The investigation is ongoing.
The Governor needs to be booted too. Not sending in the National Guard is inexcusable. Anyone who participated in the looting needs to be held responsible for the damages, garnish their wages if necessary.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Wow, I thought I would never run into it irl. But today I got told my opinion on Mike brown cannot matter because I'm white.
I literally got told that
hotsauceman1 wrote: Wow, I thought I would never run into it irl. But today I got told my opinion on Mike brown cannot matter because I'm white.
I literally got told that
I'm not being facetious here... that was totally racist.
I said you should not attack cops if you don't want to get shot. I then tried to explain that forensics and eye witness stories support the cops story. And my friend (not the one who said it) said that forensics don't mean anything because they are a suggestion. Then this other girl said I was racist......
I'm not sure, but it always seems girls get the maddestime over race stuff.
hotsauceman1 wrote: I tried to explain to him 3 labs came to the same agreement....
the funew thing, he agrees with me that Mike brown did wrong.
I mean... the thing I'm having issue with here.... let's say, hypothetically that my wife poisons me to death. By his logic, all the forensic evidence gathered from my decaying corpse is merely "suggesting" that I was poisoned?? Lol... I mean, I suppose if you have a lawyer who is that good then yeah, anything can become a mere suggestion.
That speech reminded me of when I worked in the ER--and we had a mental health evaluation due on a patient. You'd go in to draw blood "Sir, I'm here to draw your blood..." and receive a 15 minute dissertation on why President Nixon let the aliens murder Native Americans. Just a true flight of thoughts there.
Hopefully Peter, Paul and Mary and Stevie Wonder don't sue her for plagiarism...as I heard at least 3 different direct song lyrics in there .
I liked the reverb she added to the speech, that definitely added a lot of gravitas to it.
I'm not sure, but it always seems girls get the maddestime over race stuff.
Eldargal raged so hard on the BoLS ferguson thread they locked it. Of course, she tends to chalk up everything she doesn't like to racism and/or sexism anyways...
I'm not sure, but it always seems girls get the maddestime over race stuff.
Eldargal raged so hard on the BoLS ferguson thread they locked it. Of course, she tends to chalk up everything she doesn't like to racism and/or sexism anyways...
Why do you think I left that forum, She was annoying.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Wow, I thought I would never run into it irl. But today I got told my opinion on Mike brown cannot matter because I'm white.
I literally got told that
I'm not being facetious here... that was totally racist.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Wow, I thought I would never run into it irl. But today I got told my opinion on Mike brown cannot matter because I'm white.
I literally got told that
I'm not being facetious here... that was totally racist.
CptJake wrote: I don't like 'hate crimes'. The acts are already illegal. 'Hate' really shouldn't be a crime.
Much like killing a police officer carries a higher penalty than killing an ordinary person, hate crimes carry a higher penalty. The reason is because they are targetting more than just the person directly affected. They are designed to intimidate groups of people. They are attacks on a group rather than just an individual.
CptJake wrote: So is your position that the attack on the Bosnian was designed to intimidate Bosnians, females, white folks, white females, female Bosnians, or what?
How would a prosecutor ever really prove the attack was designed with that intimidation in mind?
Again, I don't think 'hate' should be a crime.
Depends on how "good" the prosecutor is, and who he/she gets as "eyewitness" accounts.
I recall reading in the hammer attack that the group of people who were "supporting" the 4 dudes who killed the bosnian guy were shouting/chanting "kill the whites" or something similar.
I rather agree with you that "hate" shouldn't be a crime, but until we are well and truly beyond a racial society, it seems to be a necessary class of crime to have. But, if we have this classification of crime, it NEEDS to cut both ways.
CptJake wrote: So is your position that the attack on the Bosnian was designed to intimidate Bosnians, females, white folks, white females, female Bosnians, or what?
How would a prosecutor ever really prove the attack was designed with that intimidation in mind?
Again, I don't think 'hate' should be a crime.
Depends on how "good" the prosecutor is, and who he/she gets as "eyewitness" accounts.
I recall reading in the hammer attack that the group of people who were "supporting" the 4 dudes who killed the bosnian guy were shouting/chanting "kill the whites" or something similar.
I rather agree with you that "hate" shouldn't be a crime, but until we are well and truly beyond a racial society, it seems to be a necessary class of crime to have. But, if we have this classification of crime, it NEEDS to cut both ways.
I don't think anybody is actually claiming that "hate" should be a crime.
Hate is a feeling, and we don't actually promote the concept of thought-crime (unless you are a member of certain particular religious beliefs).
It is when you commit crimes that are motivated or informed by hate, that we use the term "hate-crime". And we consider such crimes particular odious for the reasons that skyth brought up.
On this college the ferguson thing is getting out of control. My friend needed a blue book for class. But guess what, protesters blocked the only way you could get one. So guess who failed the test? I mean, who are you hurting there? Certainly not the cops.
My own sister just told me to check my privilege......
I hate college liberals. They are the worse at arguing, spewing forth pre-made arguments made by Pre-upper division professors.
On this college the ferguson thing is getting out of control. My friend needed a blue book for class. But guess what, protesters blocked the only way you could get one. So guess who failed the test? I mean, who are you hurting there? Certainly not the cops.
My own sister just told me to check my privilege......
I hate college liberals. They are the worse at arguing, spewing forth pre-made arguments made by Pre-upper division professors.
On this college the ferguson thing is getting out of control. My friend needed a blue book for class. But guess what, protesters blocked the only way you could get one. So guess who failed the test? I mean, who are you hurting there? Certainly not the cops.
My own sister just told me to check my privilege......
I hate college liberals. They are the worse at arguing, spewing forth pre-made arguments made by Pre-upper division professors.
I hate college liberals. They are the worse at arguing, spewing forth pre-made arguments made by Pre-upper division professors.
Could be worse... you could be 10+ years older than damn near ANY student in the classroom
But hey, I was off killing babies, depending on who you ask
I saw a vet response to that "What else could I do, There where hundreds of the tiny things crawling towards me, with their claws and their fangs, Have you never faught Vampire babies damnit"
Jihadin wrote: What selection of color shirts? XL here to and in black
White, of course.
I'm white half Asian so need a tannish white shirt. I'm a tall and broad half Asian. Even the full blooded Thai's thought I was Thai Special Forces or something
I need a 3XL. That's several sizes too large on me, but I'm gonna need to grow into it to lose some relative thin privilege to offset my white privilege.
"Being thin is not having bravado to sidestep the fact that you're cursed to be a white male."
Yep, I reckon it is Alph. If something else develops out of the Ferguson thing, rather than users going off topic and debating t-shirt slogans, start a new thread. This one is done.
)
stuff there...
.
