Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Get off the race baiting. The victim could have been any color. This is just cops running bad.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Guys. don't you think saying this isn't about race is a bit shortsighted. given the context of the US justice system? I mean we know it's biased against black and Hispanic people. All the statistics point to that. And we've got incident after incident after sorry incident like this.

There are lots of statistics that point to lots of things. We have no reason to think this was about race, whatsoever.

Yeah, except lots of things are still about race.

Ignoring it doesn't make it go away and not understanding doesn't make it any less true.

I'll clarify.

I meant statistics can be used to support pretty much anything, even opposite sides of the coin using the same set of stats. I've seen people citing the number of black males killed by police in 2014, and all of the people including those stats fail to include how many of them were killed while exchanging fire with police, etc. I'm not saying its right, wrong, or indifferent, simply that numbers can often be used to mislead.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:
Get off the race baiting. The victim could have been any color. This is just cops running bad.

Agreed.

Which is why I think it really speaks to the mainstream media's overall agenda that the Dillon Taylor case in Utah hasn't been covered at all.

Huh? Are you saying that the media is creating the racial tension or something.

 cincydooley wrote:

Which is why I think it really speaks to the mainstream media's overall agenda that the Dillon Taylor case in Utah hasn't been covered at all.

Yup...

Here's another case of media blackout:
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-30287363


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Huh? Are you saying that the media is creating the racial tension or something.

Absolutely.

 whembly wrote:
Here's another case of media blackout:
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-30287363
.

You sure about that? A mainstream media blackout? Totally sure?

 Ouze wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Here's another case of media blackout:
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-30287363
.

You sure about that? A mainstream media blackout? Totally sure?

Right... but, as a hate crime?

EDIT: maybe they need to protest and riot to get me attention?

Oh wait, the Bosnian can't because they have to work.

The very last link that I put in there explicitly describe it as a hate crime.

 whembly wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Huh? Are you saying that the media is creating the racial tension or something.

Absolutely.

In this case that is false. There is already a strained relationship between the NYCPD and the minority communities in NYC. Now media outlets often take advantage of the racial tension for more viewership, but they did not create it, merely took advantage of what was already there to make more money. The tension is already here, the news outlets merely make it worse than it already is.

 Ouze wrote:
The very last link that I put in there explicitly describe it as a hate crime.

Okay... I did miss that.

Riposte.

 whembly wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
The very last link that I put in there explicitly describe it as a hate crime.

Okay... I did miss that.

Riposte.

That being said, : I'll readily concede Dillon Taylor - for whatever reason - has been under-reported.

 Frazzled wrote:
Get off the race baiting. The victim could have been any color. This is just cops running bad.

And there it is: How To Shut Down a Discussion About Race 101

 cincydooley wrote:

I'll clarify.

I meant statistics can be used to support pretty much anything, even opposite sides of the coin using the same set of stats. I've seen people citing the number of black males killed by police in 2014, and all of the people including those stats fail to include how many of them were killed while exchanging fire with police, etc. I'm not saying its right, wrong, or indifferent, simply that numbers can often be used to mislead.

You didn't need to clarify anything, I knew exactly what you are saying.

When statistics disagree with what you believe, you dismiss them as "just being statistics." And hey, why not? It's a lot easier to do that than address the idea that there may be a problem. Of course, I'm sure you would never use statistics in support of something you agree with...

Which is why I think it really speaks to the mainstream media's overall agenda that the Dillon Taylor case in Utah hasn't been covered at all.

"You guys need to stop race-baiting, it's bad. Now allow me to race-bait..."

And the Dillon Taylor shooting was covered. Just because you didn't hear about it doesn't mean it didn't happen. And before you ask, "Yeah, well why didn't all the white people riot after that?" It's because they were too busy doing this:

After a baseball team won some games against another baseball team.

Damn
For a good three seconds there I thought it was someone in the fire (looks like a right arm)

 Ouze wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
The very last link that I put in there explicitly describe it as a hate crime.

Okay... I did miss that.

Riposte.

That being said, : I'll readily concede Dillon Taylor - for whatever reason - has been under-reported.

I am completely cynical about news media. The only time anything gets reported is if there is drama to be made and ratings to be gained.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:


And the Dillon Taylor shooting was covered. Just because you didn't hear about it doesn't mean it didn't happen. And before you ask, "Yeah, well why didn't all the white people riot after that?" It's because they were too busy doing this:

Nope, I wasn't even going to make that point.

The important point is that the Dillon Taylor case supports that in a lot of these cases, it isn't race, but bad or overzealous policing as the problem.

I've already said, multiple times in this thread, that I'm very surprised that the LEO in Garner's case wasn't indicted for criminally negligent manslaughter. I think he should have been, especially since he used departmentally prohibited technique. For that reason, I think when the family brings a wrongful death suit against the NYPD, they're going to win big, and easily.

White people are never going to riot over white people getting killed. Most of us don't identify with other white people as "our brothers" like people in the black community do. I can't think of a single reason I'd call another white person a "race traitor/Uncle Tom" like black people have to Charles Barkley, or Ben Carson, or Allen West. I just don't think they're ever going to be similar situations, because, as I said, the majority of us don't identify like that. "White guy" wouldn't crack my top 10 for things I'd use to describe me, whereas I know "black man" is in the top three for many of my black friends. We've had the discussion quite a bit. It's a huge cultural difference that I won't ever be able to relate to, in part, because I'm not in the minority.

Oh, and yes, I think the dude bashing in the bus is a thug and should go to prison.

 cincydooley wrote:

The important point is that the Dillon Taylor case supports that in a lot of these cases, it isn't race, but bad or overzealous policing as the problem.

Yes, and what you are failing to either admit or realize, is that this "bad policing" affects minorities much more frequently than anyone else. Now I know that conclusion is based on statistics, and you now do not like statistics because reasons, but it that doesn't make it any less of a reality.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

The important point is that the Dillon Taylor case supports that in a lot of these cases, it isn't race, but bad or overzealous policing as the problem.

Yes, and what you are failing to either admit or realize, is that this "bad policing" affects minorities much more frequently than anyone else. Now I know that conclusion is based on statistics, and you now do not like statistics because reasons, but it that doesn't make it any less of a reality.

Which I believe is due to policy more than "a bunch of racist cops running around," which is the prevailing narrative that many people are pushing right now. That's the problem I have.

But the whole thing is a chicken and the egg scenario in the first place. All I know is that if you don't break the law you won't typically be arrested. Know your rights and all that.

 cincydooley wrote:

Which I believe is due to policy more than "a bunch of racist cops running around," which is the prevailing narrative that many people are pushing right now. That's the problem I have.

So the problem you have right now is that things like this happen because it's "policies" that perpetuate a racially biased law enforcement system instead of the public officials who carry out said policy?

I'm sure that's a heavy burden for you to carry.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

Which I believe is due to policy more than "a bunch of racist cops running around," which is the prevailing narrative that many people are pushing right now. That's the problem I have.

So the problem you have right now is that things like this happen because it's "policies" that perpetuate a racially biased law enforcement system instead of the public officials who carry out said policy?

I'm sure that's a heavy burden for you to carry.

I'm not carrying any burden.

I don't break the law so I don't care.

I think, in the strict context of the Garner case, that the overzealous enforcement of something like a dude selling loosies (though, according to reports, local stores were complaining about it) is probably prejudicial towards blacks and hispanics in cities.

Do I think the force used on Garner was unnecessary? Absolutely.

Do I think the LEO should have been indicted for criminally negligent manslaughter? Absolutely.

Do I think Garner would be alive had he complied with police when they originally tried to cuff him? Absolutely.

 cincydooley wrote:

Do I think Garner would be alive had he complied with police when they originally tried to cuff him? Absolutely.

oooh! guess which space I just got to fill on my DakkaDakka bingo card?

 Chongara wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

Do I think Garner would be alive had he complied with police when they originally tried to cuff him? Absolutely.

oooh! guess which space I just got to fill on my DakkaDakka bingo card?

Hopefully the "blame the victim" space, because thats the one I was going for. Enjoy.

 cincydooley wrote:
I don't break the law so I don't care.

I'm sure you have never once broken any law ever in your life.

I think, in the strict context of the Garner case, that the overzealous enforcement of something like a dude selling loosies (though, according to reports, local stores were complaining about it) is probably prejudicial towards blacks and hispanics in cities.

Do I think the force used on Garner was unnecessary? Absolutely.

Do I think the LEO should have been indicted for criminally negligent manslaughter? Absolutely.

Good, good... you're making real progress here. Keep going...

Do I think Garner would be alive had he complied with police when they originally tried to cuff him? Absolutely.

Dammit! You were on a hot streak and you just ruined it! So, so close... Oh well, maybe next time, I have a funny feeling we won't have to wait long to have this exact conversation again.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
I don't break the law so I don't care.

I'm sure you have never once broken any law ever in your life.

Sure I do. I always speed. I don't ever wear my seatbelt. Sometimes I text and drive (I really try not to, though, because it really is unsafe). I open my wife's mail sometimes, too. So I guess there's that. And I have occasionally partaken (partook?) in some of nature's finer things. But that's about it.

Dammit! You were on a hot streak and you just ruined it! So, so close... Oh well, maybe next time, I have a funny feeling we won't have to wait long to have this exact conversation again.

I'm sure we will. It doesn't make the statement any less true, nor does it make the LEO's response any more appropriate.

 cincydooley wrote:

Sure I do. I always speed. I don't ever wear my seatbelt. Sometimes I text and drive (I really try not to, though, because it really is unsafe). I open my wife's mail sometimes, too. So I guess there's that. And I have occasionally partaken (partook?) in some of nature's finer things. But that's about it.

And the odds of any of those things getting you choked, beaten, or shot to death by an LEO carrying out their department's poor "policies" are astronomically low, so at least you have that going for you. Also, I see you are part of the reason automobile insurance is stupidly expensive, so thanks for that.

I'm sure we will. It doesn't make the statement any less true, nor does it make the LEO's response any more appropriate.

It's not true.

I'm just spit-balling, but hear me out: instead trying to arrest a citizen who posed no threat allegedly committing a minor, nonviolent offense, how about issuing said citizen a citation and moving on.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

And the odds of any of those things getting you choked, beaten, or shot to death by an LEO carrying out their department's poor "policies" are astronomically low, so at least you have that going for you

Quite true.

Also, I see you are part of the reason automobile insurance is stupidly expensive, so thanks for that.

It's not true.

Well, I mean, it is.

I'm just spit-balling, but hear me out: instead trying to arrest a citizen who posed no threat allegedly committing a minor, nonviolent offense, how about issuing said citizen a citation and moving on.

Nothing really mind blowing about it...I agree with that.

But they did choose to try and arrest him.

 cincydooley wrote:

I've seen people citing the number of black males killed by police in 2014, and all of the people including those stats fail to include how many of them were killed while exchanging fire with police, etc.

All of them?

 cincydooley wrote:

I'm not saying its right, wrong, or indifferent, simply that numbers can often be used to mislead.

So can words, and not even necessarily as the result of intention, as your above use of the word "all" nicely demonstrates.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

I'm just spit-balling, but hear me out: instead trying to arrest a citizen who posed no threat allegedly committing a minor, nonviolent offense, how about issuing said citizen a citation and moving on.

I'm still trying to figure out why there were 2 plainclothes cops in the vicinity at all.

How did the situation build up to involve that many LEO's in the first place

Edit

Geraldo nailed it.
Indict the LEO but the possibility of Acquittel (spelling off this morning) is strong outcome of a verdict. They're pinning the death on the choke hold applied by the one officer but not the 4-5 other guys piled on top the guy

 Peregrine wrote:
I am absolutely shocked that a white cop killed a black guy for no good reason and didn't face criminal charges. Shocked.

I think you are projecting racism here.

It is obvious that a liberal bastion such as NYC is incapable of having a culture that fosters racism.

Thus, it becomes obvious that the real culprit here is New York City's draconian anti-smoking laws.


Later,
ff

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Huh? Are you saying that the media is creating the racial tension or something.

yes, partly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Breotan wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
The very last link that I put in there explicitly describe it as a hate crime.

Okay... I did miss that.

Riposte.

That being said, : I'll readily concede Dillon Taylor - for whatever reason - has been under-reported.

I am completely cynical about news media. The only time anything gets reported is if there is drama to be made and ratings to be gained.

There is great truth there. Stirring a little race baiting is just the thing for a ratings uptick.

 dogma wrote:


So can words, and not even necessarily as the result of intention, as your above use of the word "all" nicely demonstrates.

That's fair. Rephrase:

All the articles I've read on the usual sites (MSNBC, CNN, various facebook nonsense) have included the number of black men killed without situational context.

I'm still trying to figure out why there were 2 plainclothes cops in the vicinity at all.

It seems like, from the interaction, that they'd probably had interactions with Garner in the past. There seemed to be some familiarity there. I think I'd also read/heard (can't be sure) that some of the other local stores had called to complain that Garner was selling loosies and costing them money, or something like that.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/05/us/walmart-cant-breathe-ad/index.html?c=us