Modern Racism: Officer Wilson Walks Page 6

Started by Magic Christmas Lights November 25th, 2014 1:20 PM
  • 10757 views
  • 192 replies

Nyro

The Bug Master

Male
Texas
Seen December 5th, 2014
Posted December 3rd, 2014
63 posts
8.5 Years
The officer was medically examined and was found to have a bruise. That's not exactly getting your face shattered. If he was hit hard in the face to the point where he was truly afraid of death, he should have either some messed up teeth, broken jaw, broken nose, anything more severe than a bruise. Let alone saying he was hit twice, it just seems unlikely.

We have no evidence saying he tried to steal his gun, that he wouldn't obey orders, or charged and tried to take him down. NONE. You're just going off what someone who is very likely trying to cover their own ass is saying. I'm not saying he is in the wrong or is lying, I'm just saying that it is more likely that him out of anyone would lie. You can't just take someone's word in this world, even for something trivial, and sure as hell not for murder.
Wait you think a police officer is more likely to lie then a guy that help another guy rob a store and assaulted the clerk? Ok, now I know this convo has gone south.

Nah

Age 30
she/her, they/them
Seen 6 Hours Ago
Posted 6 Hours Ago
15,645 posts
9.5 Years
Wait you think a police officer is more likely to lie then a guy that help another guy rob a store and assaulted the clerk? Ok, now I know this convo has gone south.
Police officers are human too, and therefore can lie about things. Not saying he did lie, but you can't automatically assume that Wilson is not lying at all just because he's a cop.
Nah ンン
“No, I... I have to be strong. Everyone expects me to."

Nyro

The Bug Master

Male
Texas
Seen December 5th, 2014
Posted December 3rd, 2014
63 posts
8.5 Years
Police officers are human too, and therefore can lie about things. Not saying he did lie, but you can't automatically assume that Wilson is not lying at all just because he's a cop.
Of course not but he said "more likely" and that is an assumption based on personal bias. The "friend" stole also, did nothing to stop brown and is an accomplice (these are facts btw). Secondly the court called into question the friends previous juvenile record.

I am sorry call me whatever you will but a guy that stole and was an accomplice to a crime IS NOT what I would call trustworthy exactly. I am not stupid I know there are bad cops out there, hell probably more then any of you being as I lived on a reservation in my youth and Native American agents tend to be very corrupt but to say this particular cop is less trustworthy then someone with a background is a little out there.

Kanzler

naughty biscotti

Male
Toronto
Seen April 22nd, 2022
Posted March 11th, 2022
5,957 posts
14.8 Years
I think this is a helpful article and I'm writing a biochemistry essay right now so I don't have much to say and here you go:

Why police are rarely indicted for misconduct

On Monday evening, St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Robert P. McCulloch announced that a grand jury decided not to indict Ferguson, Missouri, police officer Darren Wilson for the Aug. 9 shooting death of unarmed teenager Michael Brown. The announcement concluded a tumultuous summer of mass protests against police violence and racial discrimination. Although the decision will be a disappointment to many, those who follow prosecutions of police for use of excessive or unwarranted force say a decision not to indict Wilson is unsurprising.

There are major legal, institutional and social impediments to prosecuting police. Thousands of officers are involved in shootings every year, resulting in about 400 deaths annually. However, successful criminal prosecution of a police officer for killing someone in the line of duty, if no corruption is alleged, is extremely rare. Even when officers are convicted, the charges are often minimal. For example, Coleman Brackney, a Bella Vista, Oklahoma, police officer who was convicted of misdemeanor negligent homicide in 2010 after shooting an unarmed teen to death while in custody in his cruiser, went on to rejoin the police and was recently appointed chief of police in Sulphur Springs, Oklahoma.

Structural barriers

There are significant structural barriers to successful police indictment or prosecution. For one, investigations are usually conducted by a combination of police detectives and investigators from the prosecutors’ office. Prosecutors tend to take a greater role when there is a reason to believe that the shooting might not be justified. However, they must rely on the cooperation of the police to gather necessary evidence, including witness statements from the officer involved and other officers at the scene. In some cases they are the only living witnesses to the event.

The close collaboration between police and prosecutors, which is an asset in homicide investigations, becomes a hindrance in police shooting cases. In most cases, the prosecutors’ reliance on the cooperation of police creates a fundamental conflict of interest. As a result, prosecutors are often reluctant to aggressively pursue these cases.

Moreover, the local elected district attorneys often want to avoid being seen as inhibiting police power. Even in communities where distrust of police is common, no prosecutor ever got thrown out of office for defending the police. At its core, the public sees the DA’s office as a defender of law and order and expects these officials to uphold them.

The way prosecutors handled the Wilson case illustrates this conflict of interest. It took prosecutors months to collect and present evidence to the grand jury. While this has the appearance of thoroughness, it also has the effect of creating a public cooling-off period as short-term demands for prosecution become muted. The radically different approach of the St. Louis County DA is telling. Typically, prosecutors make a short presentation to the grand jury in which they call for specific charges to be considered and then put on their best show of the evidence to see if it passes muster. Indictments occur in more than 90 percent of cases, owing to the low threshold of probable cause and the one-sided nature of the proceedings. In Wilson’s case, however, the DA said he planned to provide the grand jury with all the evidence and allow them to decide, without any prompting, whether an indictment was justified and for what offense.

The American public and its representatives need to realize that there are better ways to prevent crime and serve the community than licensing excessive police force.
The DA hoped to accomplish two things. First, this approach allowed him to absolve himself of any responsibility for the outcome. Second, it served to confuse and undermine the confidence of the grand jury. Normally, the jury is given clear guidance and overrules prosecutors only in extreme cases. By giving the jurors a wide variety of conflicting evidence and little framework in which to evaluate it, the DA is opening the door to a he said/he said dynamic in which they may err on the side of caution and avoid an indictment.

Legal hurdles

There are also huge legal hurdles to overcome. State laws that authorize police use of force, which are backed up by Supreme Court precedent, give police significant latitude in using deadly force. In the 1989 case Graham v. Connor, the Supreme Court ruled that officers may use force to effect a lawful arrest or if they reasonably believe that the person represents a serious physical threat to the officer or others. This means that police may use force over any resistance to arrest and that if the resistance escalates, officers may escalate their force. The court also said that the totality of circumstances must be judged with an understanding of the split-second nature of police decision-making.

Furthermore, in Missouri and many other states, even a perceived effort to take an officer’s gun justifies the use of deadly force. Therefore, in judging the reasonableness of the officer’s actions, the jury may consider factors such as the alleged perpetrator’s size and previous actions as well as the officer’s training and guidance. All this creates numerous avenues for justifying police action based on the officer’s reasonable understanding of the situation rather than a more objective post hoc assessment.

Juror mindset creates yet another challenge to successful indictments and prosecutions. Grand juries and criminal court juries consist of local residents. Even in periods of heightened concern about police misconduct, most citizens retain a strong bias in favor of police. Popular culture and political discourse are suffused with commentaries about both the central importance of police in maintaining the basic structural integrity of society and the dangerous nature of their work. In addition, the legal standard for judging police misconduct calls on jurors to put themselves in the officers’ shoes, further strengthening the tendency to identify with the police.

Race relations

Another important dynamic in police prosecutions is the state of race relations in the United States. Despite the rhetoric about being a postracial society, racial divisions and bias remain omnipresent in American society and nowhere more than in the realm of criminal justice. There is abundant evidence of jury bias in a variety of racially disparate criminal justice outcomes, including false convictions, application of the death penalty and drug convictions. Research shows that whites have a generally more positive view of the police than blacks do. The sad reality is that white jurors are much more likely to side with police, regardless of the race of the officer and the person killed. This was seen in the Rodney King prosecutions in California, in which a mostly white suburban state court jury did not convict four Los Angeles Police Department officers in the severe beating of King after a high-speed car chase, despite the incident’s being videotaped. (The jury acquitted three of the four officers and deadlocked on a charge of excessive force against one officer.) A more diverse federal jury later found two of the officers guilty of violating King’s civil rights.

Regardless of what happens in Brown’s case, there are no simple fixes for these problems. Advocates such as the Rev. Al Sharpton have called for a federal prosecution. Even if federal officials get involved, they must bring a different kind of charge, related to civil rights violations. While this legal twist of logic has been an important check on failed state legal processes going back to the civil rights fights of the 1950s and ’60s, it is not a substitute for local criminal prosecution, especially in an era of heightened resistance to federal legitimacy.

Internal administrative accountability is sorely lacking. In “Jammed Up: Bad Cops, Police Misconduct and the New York City Police Department,” Robert Kane and Michael White show that police rarely face internal disciplinary charges for use of force. Recent reports from Philadelphia and Seattle show that even when officers are subject to discipline, the majority of such cases end up being overturned by arbitrators or courts as a result of extensive due process protections for police officers.

Instead, states should create a police prosecutor’s office, or blue desk, that is more removed from local politics. While relying on state attorneys general has its own challenges, the outcomes are likely to be viewed as more legitimate. These blue desks could become repositories of expertise on police prosecutions. Even if tied to state politics, they might be better able to insulate themselves from accusations of overly aggressive prosecutions as well as charges of not supporting the police.

Laws on the use of force need reform. Police shootings were much more common in the 1970s when regulations about the use of force were even looser. In response to public outcries and rioting in the 1960s and ’70s, local police began to tighten up regulations and offer training to officers, resulting in significant reductions in shootings. The 1984 Supreme Court case Tennessee v. Garner institutionalized some of these changes nationally, including making it unlawful for police to shoot a fleeing suspect. Since then, however, the courts have mostly expanded police authorization to use force.

Finally, the U.S. needs to dial back the dramatic expansion of police power over the last 40 years. For example, the growing prevalence of paramilitary SWAT teams and the ongoing war on drugs have significantly contributed to excessive use of force. In part this happened through the combined direct enforcement practices of these two types of policing. But they also contributed indirectly to a larger ethos of militarized patrolling that equates policing with the use of force and a war footing. The public and its representatives need to realize that there are better ways to prevent crime and serve the community than licensing excessive police force.
http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/11/ferguson-police-misconductdarrenwilsongrandjury.html

pokecole

Brave Frontier is great.

Age 24
Male
Springfield, South Dakota
Seen November 3rd, 2018
Posted January 3rd, 2017
206 posts
12.1 Years
Wait you think a police officer is more likely to lie then a guy that help another guy rob a store and assaulted the clerk? Ok, now I know this convo has gone south.
I don't recall saying that he was more likely to lie than anyone. I said it was more likely that he would lie than under normal circumstances, as human nature tends to lean towards saving our own behinds. Don't mistake and judge me for it.

EDIT: I can't read. I did say that, but I didn't really mean it that way. English...
I meant that if everyone was on equal terms without history that the person trying to not get convicted would be more likely to do something like lie. The kid really doesn't have a whole lot of reason to lie, everyone already knows he's guilty of whatever they charge him with; he's not going to end up saving himself by telling any lie.

Also, my thinking someone who wants to save their self is just as much personal bias as you thinking someone who has robbed a store or assaulted someone is likely to lie. Just because you side with the law doesn't mean you are right.
Watching anime. Lots of it. Vocaloid is love and life as well.
Hit me up if you play BF as well :P

Nyro

The Bug Master

Male
Texas
Seen December 5th, 2014
Posted December 3rd, 2014
63 posts
8.5 Years
I don't recall saying that he was more likely to lie than anyone. I said it was more likely that he would lie than under normal circumstances, as human nature tends to lean towards saving our own behinds. Don't mistake and judge me for it.

EDIT: I can't read. I did say that, but I didn't really mean it that way. English...
I meant that if everyone was on equal terms without history that the person trying to not get convicted would be more likely to do something like lie. The kid really doesn't have a whole lot of reason to lie, everyone already knows he's guilty of whatever they charge him with; he's not going to end up saving himself by telling any lie.

Also, my thinking someone who wants to save their self is just as much personal bias as you thinking someone who has robbed a store or assaulted someone is likely to lie. Just because you side with the law doesn't mean you are right.
No one knows who is "right" because both sides had witnesses who the jury was asked to "ignore" basically on the premise that they were obviously making up lies. It all came down to evidence as only 3 witnesses in the entire case even remotely seemed credible. I mean you had people saying he was shot in the back "under oath" AFTER both autopsy specialists said otherwise and THEN you had a witness say Brown was armed also. Both sides had absolutely ludicrous testimonies and that is because for a supposed possible indictment "murder" case this thing was rushed. Due to the fact of all the emotions and protests.

pokecole

Brave Frontier is great.

Age 24
Male
Springfield, South Dakota
Seen November 3rd, 2018
Posted January 3rd, 2017
206 posts
12.1 Years
No one knows who is "right" because both sides had witnesses who the jury was asked to "ignore" basically on the premise that they were obviously making up lies. It all came down to evidence as only 3 witnesses in the entire case even remotely seemed credible. I mean you had people saying he was shot in the back "under oath" AFTER both autopsy specialists said otherwise and THEN you had a witness say Brown was armed also. Both sides had absolutely ludicrous testimonies and that is because for a supposed possible indictment "murder" case this thing was rushed. Due to the fact of all the emotions and protests.
I would agree with this. This is why cops, especially in suburban areas, need to be supervised more carefully. Otherwise they have the ability to do whatever because they have no evidence that says they did anything wrong. Again, I'm not saying he's guilty, but I'm saying that if he is we wouldn't know otherwise. That's why we need more supervision.
Watching anime. Lots of it. Vocaloid is love and life as well.
Hit me up if you play BF as well :P

twocows

The not-so-black cat of ill omen

Age 32
Male
Michigan
Seen February 19th, 2023
Posted April 30th, 2021
4,307 posts
14.2 Years
I think this is a multi-faceted issue and I think it's worth addressing each facet.

1. I don't know enough about the particular circumstances of Officer Wilson and Michael Brown, and honestly, I don't think anyone else does either, no matter how much they think they do. So far, there's no video of the incident, and all accounts of the matter are second-hand or from Officer Wilson. In a court of law, that would be called "hearsay" and not admissible. People on both sides are (possibly unconsciously) focusing on the bits that fit the narrative they want to see and ignoring the stuff that conflicts with that view. I have no idea where the truth is, it could be that Officer Wilson was a complete tool who shot a harmless kid, it could be that Michael Brown was being extremely hostile and attacking Officer Wilson, or the truth could be somewhere in between. It doesn't matter, because there's no concrete evidence and thus I don't think I have anything worthwhile to say on it and I don't think anyone else does, either.

2. The police reaction after the fact was absolutely unprofessional and completely unnecessary. It was poorly handled at every stage and disrespectful to the community and ultimately, I think the police response is partially to blame for a lot of the rioting that eventually ensued.

3. I'm extremely unhappy with many of the protesters. There are the obvious malcontents who like to capitalize on any chaos and the people who don't try to stop them, sure. Those are obvious. But there are also the people who are causing other harm to people completely unrelated to the situation. Doctors and emergency workers trying to get to work being blocked by protestors purposely blocking major intersections. People who are just trying to run a business being targeted for trying to make a living. This whole "boycott Black Friday" thing was pretty representative of how bad the protests have gotten. If the problem is the police and the criminal justice system, why boycott unrelated businesses? These protests aren't even about anything important anymore, it's just people trying to cause problems for other people because they're mad. I have a terrible opinion of most of the people protesting right now.

4. The court case. I don't really know enough about that situation to say anything useful one way or another.

5. The media has capitalized on this whole issue and played it up, which has exacerbated the riots and caused a lot of suffering. But then my opinion of most major news networks was already so low it couldn't really go any lower, so whatever.
VNs are superior to anime, don't @ me

Kyrul

Long Live The Note

Age 30
Male
Missouri
Seen February 28th, 2019
Posted February 28th, 2019
841 posts
11.7 Years
3. I'm extremely unhappy with many of the protesters. There are the obvious malcontents who like to capitalize on any chaos and the people who don't try to stop them, sure. Those are obvious. But there are also the people who are causing other harm to people completely unrelated to the situation. Doctors and emergency workers trying to get to work being blocked by protestors purposely blocking major intersections. People who are just trying to run a business being targeted for trying to make a living. This whole "boycott Black Friday" thing was pretty representative of how bad the protests have gotten. If the problem is the police and the criminal justice system, why boycott unrelated businesses? These protests aren't even about anything important anymore, it's just people trying to cause problems for other people because they're mad. I have a terrible opinion of most of the people protesting right now.
I'm a National Guardsman that just got released from Ferguson after spending over a week there. You are very correct about people causing others harm in matters completely unrelated to the situation. Most of the situations we had to call in were unrelated to the protests, like this one dude who attempted a drive by. The good news is that pretty much all the protests are peaceful now. It was just a bad situation made worse by the media. I wouldn't lose faith in humanity yet though. On Thanksgiving night a few of the protesters brought us leftover Thanksgiving food while we were on patrol and I'm supposed to be the 'bad guy' in all this. Most of them are good people.

Yoshikko

the princess has awoken while the prince sleeps on

Female
Seen April 27th, 2020
Posted February 6th, 2020
3,065 posts
11.8 Years
You know, any other time this wouldn't even NEED a video or "further investigation". This has nothing to do with evidence. This thread is nothing but people trying to avoid the fact that America's justice system is screwed up and racist. There are already countless of rebuttals against every possible argument in favour of Darren Wilson presented here because it's simply impossible to defend him. HE KILLED A MAN. You can't get more simple than that. You really can't discuss this. There is no ambiguity here, it doesn't matter what the circumstances are, Michael Brown was unarmed and did NOT pose a threat to Darren Wilson. He is (as countless others) a trigger happy racist with permission to kill. Besides that he broke countless of other policies which should have gotten him in trouble but didn't (i.e. not filing a police report, wiped the gun, etc). Seriously, you can't defend him. There was a crystal clear video in Eric Garner's case and did that help him? No. It wouldn't have mattered if there was a video and a 100 witnesses saying the same thing.
The thing is you people forget the guy DID commit a crime, NO ONE can deny that he was caught on video. So no matter what he was NOT an innocent child. Not only did he commit a crime but but even if you do not agree he attacked the cop he still did assault the store clerk that is a FACT and on video THEREFOR he committed a VIOLENT crime. An innocent child does not commit a VIOLENT crime.
LMAO, the store owner can ****ing deny it and he DID. Oops that still doesn't matter though because like I said that's not what it's about to you people. The store owner said long ago that the person in the video was NOT Michael Brown, and Darren Wilson HIMSELF admitted that he didn't even know of a robbery. Seriously, pathetic.

"No one knows who is right!! What is "right" anyway?! I mean he killed an unarmed boy that begged for his life but like, he robbed a store!!!! Even though the store owner said it wasn't him! I'm still gonna believe it's him because I'm ignorant and racist! Because I'm desperately grasping at every possible excuse I can find to justify his murder!!!"

twocows

The not-so-black cat of ill omen

Age 32
Male
Michigan
Seen February 19th, 2023
Posted April 30th, 2021
4,307 posts
14.2 Years
You know, any other time this wouldn't even NEED a video or "further investigation". This has nothing to do with evidence. This thread is nothing but people trying to avoid the fact that America's justice system is screwed up and racist. There are already countless of rebuttals against every possible argument in favour of Darren Wilson presented here because it's simply impossible to defend him. HE KILLED A MAN. You can't get more simple than that. You really can't discuss this. There is no ambiguity here, it doesn't matter what the circumstances are, Michael Brown was unarmed and did NOT pose a threat to Darren Wilson.
I could not possibly disagree with you more. You're right about one thing, it doesn't get any more simple than this: he killed a man in what he claims was self-defense. There are only two circumstances in which killing someone is legitimate, and that's one of them (the other being defense of others). If he's telling the truth, then he literally did nothing wrong.

The question is whether what he did was actually justifiable self-defense, and at this point in time, I'm not convinced either way. You claim that an unarmed person can't be a threat to an armed person, but that's simply not true at all. An unarmed person can easily be a threat if (a) they don't know or don't care that the other person is armed, and (b) the armed person is unwilling to use their weapon. Is that what happened? I don't know, and nobody else does either, no matter what they say. There's simply not enough evidence to affirm or deny his defense.

However, in the US, you are innocent by law until proven guilty. And that's one law that I agree with on principle, and not just in this case, either. That principle is ethically (our system should serve to protect the innocent wherever reasonably possible) and logically (the burden of proof in any argument always rests on the party making the affirmative claim) sound.

I find it unfortunate that people are so quick to cast judgment in cases where they weren't there. Where will they be when the tables are turned, when they or their loved ones are in the chair or all over the media for something they didn't do or did for what they believe are ethically justifiable reasons? The principle of "innocent until proven guilty" is far more often applied in cases where a person or persons of power (such as the government) is accusing someone of less power. It's a righteous and fair principle that has served us very well and I agree with it thoroughly.

He is (as countless others) a trigger happy racist with permission to kill. Besides that he broke countless of other policies which should have gotten him in trouble but didn't (i.e. not filing a police report, wiped the gun, etc). Seriously, you can't defend him. There was a crystal clear video in Eric Garner's case and did that help him? No. It wouldn't have mattered if there was a video and a 100 witnesses saying the same thing.
I find your lack of empathy concerning. You're not even trying to understand it from his perspective. You act like he was prancing down the street with a flaming cross and cackling evilly while shooting innocent black folk in cold blood. That's not what happened. Did events unfold how he said? Possibly, but probably not; he is probably embellishing the story a bit for obvious reasons.

But that doesn't mean he did what he did out of spite or hatred or whatever. There are a thousand things that police officers can do that are self-serving: grift, extortion, etc. What Officer Wilson did couldn't possibly serve himself; in the absolute best case, he'd still have extra work, a worse reputation, and get absolutely nothing positive out of the whole situation. I think you'd have to be crazy to think he did it out of spite or whatever. This action was very obviously something done out of fear or panic. I don't question that assessment even slightly. What I do question was whether that was a justified response for a trained police officer in the situation. And to know the answer to that, I would have to know how events actually unfolded, and that's something the public (myself included) does not know at this point.
VNs are superior to anime, don't @ me
Male
Solus
Seen March 25th, 2017
Posted January 13th, 2017
796 posts
9.2 Years
You know, any other time this wouldn't even NEED a video or "further investigation". This has nothing to do with evidence. This thread is nothing but people trying to avoid the fact that America's justice system is screwed up and racist. There are already countless of rebuttals against every possible argument in favour of Darren Wilson presented here because it's simply impossible to defend him. HE KILLED A MAN. You can't get more simple than that. You really can't discuss this. There is no ambiguity here, it doesn't matter what the circumstances are, Michael Brown was unarmed and did NOT pose a threat to Darren Wilson. He is (as countless others) a trigger happy racist with permission to kill. Besides that he broke countless of other policies which should have gotten him in trouble but didn't (i.e. not filing a police report, wiped the gun, etc). Seriously, you can't defend him. There was a crystal clear video in Eric Garner's case and did that help him? No. It wouldn't have mattered if there was a video and a 100 witnesses saying the same thing.

LMAO, the store owner can ****ing deny it and he DID. Oops that still doesn't matter though because like I said that's not what it's about to you people. The store owner said long ago that the person in the video was NOT Michael Brown, and Darren Wilson HIMSELF admitted that he didn't even know of a robbery. Seriously, pathetic.

"No one knows who is right!! What is "right" anyway?! I mean he killed an unarmed boy that begged for his life but like, he robbed a store!!!! Even though the store owner said it wasn't him! I'm still gonna believe it's him because I'm ignorant and racist! Because I'm desperately grasping at every possible excuse I can find to justify his murder!!!"
Spoiler:


It truly scares me how black and white some people think the world is. This isn't a comic book, and the police aren't Batman. In real life, if you think this way around someone who has reason or desire to kill you, you die. To imply that a man, especially one like Michael Brown, is unable to cause harm without a weapon is not only objectively incorrect, but insulting to those who have had their lives threatened or taken in a similar manner.

Stop pretending like you know more than trained professionals about something that happened to people you don't know in a place you probably have never been. That goes for pretty much everyone here. Unless he does it again, it'd be worse to lock up a man on the off chance that he did do something like this for the racism, than to let him go free with the scare he's certainly had over the entire situation.

Kanzler

naughty biscotti

Male
Toronto
Seen April 22nd, 2022
Posted March 11th, 2022
5,957 posts
14.8 Years
I think the takeaway message for the average joe on a personal level is that if police give you a lawful order, you comply. Maybe you'll die, but if you don't comply you'll die harder. Police shouldn't be shooting people dead on a regular basis and that's on them, but everybody has to uphold their bit of the equation.
I think the takeaway message for the average joe on a personal level is that if police give you a lawful order, you comply. Maybe you'll die, but if you don't comply you'll die harder. Police shouldn't be shooting people dead on a regular basis and that's on them, but everybody has to uphold their bit of the equation.
The problem here stems from the fact that not everyone has the same opinion on what a "lawful order" is.

Yoshikko

the princess has awoken while the prince sleeps on

Female
Seen April 27th, 2020
Posted February 6th, 2020
3,065 posts
11.8 Years
The problem here stems from the fact that not everyone has the same opinion on what a "lawful order" is.
Actually the problem here is racism and stems from the fact that WHITE people can shoot up a theatre and bomb a city and still be taken in ALIVE without a single scratch on them, but when a black person allegedly robs a store he deserved to be murdered by police. And Darren Wilson admitted that he didn't even know anything of a robbery and he was stopping Michael Brown and his friend for jaywalking. And when five eye witnesses say the same exact thing about Michael Brown running away from the officer. And still being shot. And the official autopsy supports this like..... or were Wilson's "injuries" that convincing??? This is the last thing I'm gonna say on this and I'm not even gonna respond to Kameken sorry. At least I know who to avoid on here now!!

Nah

Age 30
she/her, they/them
Seen 6 Hours Ago
Posted 6 Hours Ago
15,645 posts
9.5 Years
Actually the problem here is racism and stems from the fact that WHITE people can shoot up a theatre and bomb a city and still be taken in ALIVE without a single scratch on them, but when a black person allegedly robs a store he deserved to be murdered by police. And Darren Wilson admitted that he didn't even know anything of a robbery and he was stopping Michael Brown and his friend for jaywalking. And when five eye witnesses say the same exact thing about Michael Brown running away from the officer. And still being shot. And the official autopsy supports this like..... or were Wilson's "injuries" that convincing??? This is the last thing I'm gonna say on this and I'm not even gonna respond to Kameken sorry. At least I know who to avoid on here now!!
I don't think that anyone here can deny that racism and racism in law enforcement isn't still a problem in America. It is still a problem. I think the issue that some people are having with this case is that it may or may not be all that clear (people can interpret evidence in different ways ya know) whether or not this particular case is fueled by racism. This isn't the 1950's anymore; not every single white American is a racist/white supremacist these days. No one who is not racist wants to be painted with the same brush as actual racists, but there's this general feel you get from some people in threads like these that some people believe that all white Americans are racist, simply because they were born white.

But since no one gives two ****s about that, I'm going to ask y'all this question again because I'm genuinely curious to hear the answers:

Who here actually read all 4500+ pages of the grand jury report?
Nah ンン
“No, I... I have to be strong. Everyone expects me to."

Kanzler

naughty biscotti

Male
Toronto
Seen April 22nd, 2022
Posted March 11th, 2022
5,957 posts
14.8 Years
The problem here stems from the fact that not everyone has the same opinion on what a "lawful order" is.
That's the thing though, what a "lawful order" is shouldn't be an opinion. It's a big part of why these confrontations occur in the first place. Lack of respect for authority, especially for police, and all that.

Who here actually read all 4500+ pages of the grand jury report?
I could probably legit read that, beginning on the 18th. I'll get back to you guys on that by Christmas, lol.

Corvus of the Black Night

Wild Duck Pokémon

Age 30
Non-binary
With the Birds
Seen January 9th, 2015
Posted January 9th, 2015
3,416 posts
14.3 Years
Actually the problem here is racism and stems from the fact that WHITE people can shoot up a theatre and bomb a city and still be taken in ALIVE without a single scratch on them, but when a black person allegedly robs a store he deserved to be murdered by police. And Darren Wilson admitted that he didn't even know anything of a robbery and he was stopping Michael Brown and his friend for jaywalking. And when five eye witnesses say the same exact thing about Michael Brown running away from the officer. And still being shot. And the official autopsy supports this like..... or were Wilson's "injuries" that convincing??? This is the last thing I'm gonna say on this and I'm not even gonna respond to Kameken sorry. At least I know who to avoid on here now!!
So where did you get this information from?

twocows

The not-so-black cat of ill omen

Age 32
Male
Michigan
Seen February 19th, 2023
Posted April 30th, 2021
4,307 posts
14.2 Years
Actually the problem here is racism and stems from the fact that WHITE people can shoot up a theatre and bomb a city and still be taken in ALIVE without a single scratch on them, but when a black person allegedly robs a store he deserved to be murdered by police. And Darren Wilson admitted that he didn't even know anything of a robbery and he was stopping Michael Brown and his friend for jaywalking. And when five eye witnesses say the same exact thing about Michael Brown running away from the officer. And still being shot. And the official autopsy supports this like..... or were Wilson's "injuries" that convincing??? This is the last thing I'm gonna say on this and I'm not even gonna respond to Kameken sorry. At least I know who to avoid on here now!!
White or black or whatever, they can be and often are taken in unharmed regardless of the severity of their crime if they're not acting in a threatening manner when confronted by the police, or if the police are able to subdue them without excessive force anyway. Most people who don't resist are taken in without any incident. On the other hand, white or black or whatever, they can and have been harmed or killed for taking threatening action because they forced law enforcement into a position where they couldn't resolve the situation peacefully. Many people, regardless of race, have been harmed while resisting, and while there may be something to say for proper application of force, the key point is that they were resisting arrest to begin with.

Law officers respond to perceived threats with force. Sometimes, they respond with unnecessary and undue force and that's something that should be addressed, sure. But the core issue is that they're responding to something threatening to begin with. It seems pretty simple to me; you don't get shot in broad daylight with dozens of witnesses by a police officer in the age of cell phone cameras if you're not doing something threatening.

Also, if you think someone having a political disagreement with you is a good reason to avoid them, well, I find that unfortunate. I'm friends with many people I'm ideologically opposed to on many things; my cousin's about as far left as you can get and a conspiracy nut, and my dad's about as far right as you can get without being a conservative extremist. I disagree with both of them on a great many things and talk about it (often at length) and yet I'm on very good terms with both of them.
VNs are superior to anime, don't @ me

Yoshikko

the princess has awoken while the prince sleeps on

Female
Seen April 27th, 2020
Posted February 6th, 2020
3,065 posts
11.8 Years
White or black or whatever, they can be and often are taken in unharmed regardless of the severity of their crime if they're not acting in a threatening manner when confronted by the police, or if the police are able to subdue them without excessive force anyway. Most people who don't resist are taken in without any incident. On the other hand, white or black or whatever, they can and have been harmed or killed for taking threatening action because they forced law enforcement into a position where they couldn't resolve the situation peacefully. Many people, regardless of race, have been harmed while resisting, and while there may be something to say for proper application of force, the key point is that they were resisting arrest to begin with.

Law officers respond to perceived threats with force. Sometimes, they respond with unnecessary and undue force and that's something that should be addressed, sure. But the core issue is that they're responding to something threatening to begin with. It seems pretty simple to me; you don't get shot in broad daylight with dozens of witnesses by a police officer in the age of cell phone cameras if you're not doing something threatening.

Also, if you think someone having a political disagreement with you is a good reason to avoid them, well, I find that unfortunate. I'm friends with many people I'm ideologically opposed to on many things; my cousin's about as far left as you can get and a conspiracy nut, and my dad's about as far right as you can get without being a conservative extremist. I disagree with both of them on a great many things and talk about it (often at length) and yet I'm on very good terms with both of them.
I bolded the part that I think is key here, because the reality is.. that DOES happen, and it happens to people of colour. Mainly black people. (I'm not saying it never happens to white people, but SIGNIFICANTLY less). And it HAS been happening and it has been caught on video multiple times. Michael Brown was not resisting arrest, he was running away because Darren Wilson was getting his gun out after he tried to forcefully pull Michael Brown into his van (?? professional much??). Every eyewitness is saying the same thing. It literally states in the law that you cannot shoot someone who is running away. It's against the law. The official autopsy supports that this happened like why are people resisting that, it's an official autopsy. They are choosing to believe otherwise. Eric Garner was caught on video, murdered by an illegal chokehold. But the officer was still not indicted and there are no consequences and it's because Eric Garner was black. Like literally there is no room for discussion. And the reason I decide to avoid people who think this way is because it's not just an opinion or a political standpoint, it's deeply rooted racism, it's my choice if I don't want to associate with people like that and I don't get why you made a point out of that lol.

Nah

Age 30
she/her, they/them
Seen 6 Hours Ago
Posted 6 Hours Ago
15,645 posts
9.5 Years
I bolded the part that I think is key here, because the reality is.. that DOES happen, and it happens to people of colour. Mainly black people. (I'm not saying it never happens to white people, but SIGNIFICANTLY less). And it HAS been happening and it has been caught on video multiple times. Michael Brown was not resisting arrest, he was running away because Darren Wilson was getting his gun out after he tried to forcefully pull Michael Brown into his van (?? professional much??). Every eyewitness is saying the same thing. It literally states in the law that you cannot shoot someone who is running away. It's against the law. The official autopsy supports that this happened like why are people resisting that, it's an official autopsy. They are choosing to believe otherwise. Eric Garner was caught on video, murdered by an illegal chokehold. But the officer was still not indicted and there are no consequences and it's because Eric Garner was black. Like literally there is no room for discussion. And the reason I decide to avoid people who think this way is because it's not just an opinion or a political standpoint, it's deeply rooted racism, it's my choice if I don't want to associate with people like that and I don't get why you made a point out of that lol.
That way of thinking in the bold is why these discussions never go anywhere. Just because it's abundantly clear to you that this is an open-and-shut case and that Wilson killed Brown out of racism, doesn't mean that it is that clear to everyone. People coming into these threads and being like "this is what happened and that's how it is end if story and if you think otherwise you're a racist and I'm not gonna listen to you" is INCREDIBLY unhelpful to actually trying to attempt to fix social problems. Having that attitude and labeling anyone who does not agree with you an enemy causes the discussion to come to a halt and makes people less inclined to actually think about something and maybe even change. This is a discussion, not a battlefield.

Also, when you say things like "Michael Brown was not resisting arrest, he was running away because Darren Wilson was getting his gun out after he tried to forcefully pull Michael Brown into his van " or "The official autopsy supports that this happened like why are people resisting that, it's an official autopsy." please expand on that and provide specific links and lines from official reports. Explain WHY the autopsy report supports your claim. Point out the specific lines/witnesses/pages in the grand jury report where it was said that Brown was not resisting arrest. Then maybe we can start getting somewhere.

And I'm sorry if it seems like I'm getting after you in particular, I don't mean it to be like that. I mean it more as a general thing, because lots of people are like that.
Nah ンン
“No, I... I have to be strong. Everyone expects me to."

twocows

The not-so-black cat of ill omen

Age 32
Male
Michigan
Seen February 19th, 2023
Posted April 30th, 2021
4,307 posts
14.2 Years
I bolded the part that I think is key here, because the reality is.. that DOES happen, and it happens to people of colour. Mainly black people. (I'm not saying it never happens to white people, but SIGNIFICANTLY less).
Do you have a source for that?
And it HAS been happening and it has been caught on video multiple times. Michael Brown was not resisting arrest, he was running away because Darren Wilson was getting his gun out after he tried to forcefully pull Michael Brown into his van (?? professional much??). Every eyewitness is saying the same thing.
I hadn't heard that. How many witnesses were there that said this?

The official autopsy supports that this happened like why are people resisting that, it's an official autopsy.
I also hadn't heard this.

They are choosing to believe otherwise.
Up to this point, the only thing I've chosen to believe is that, in light of a lack of evidence, I would presume innocence; this is something I always do regardless of who is on trial. If the things you're saying are true, that's significant evidence in the other direction, but I hadn't heard of either of these things, possibly because I haven't followed it all that closely. Is there a major news source that has reported these things? If so, a link would be helpful.

Either way, this is one particular anecdote, and if it is the case that the officer acted improperly, I still don't think it's representative of the whole. One of the reasons I do support body cameras for police is because I feel they will establish that most officers are good people trying to do the right thing and clear up a lot of myths.

Eric Garner was caught on video, murdered by an illegal chokehold. But the officer was still not indicted and there are no consequences and it's because Eric Garner was black.
I don't think that incident had happened when I made my initial post. I completely agree with you on that one. There's no real room for argument in my opinion. Maybe the guy should have surrendered more quickly, but this was a pretty obvious case of gross overuse of force. I think it's much different than the Michael Brown one; there's a video recording that shows pretty clearly what happened. I still don't think it's a race thing, though, I think it's a misuse of police force thing.

Like literally there is no room for discussion. And the reason I decide to avoid people who think this way is because it's not just an opinion or a political standpoint, it's deeply rooted racism, it's my choice if I don't want to associate with people like that and I don't get why you made a point out of that lol.
I think what I've said so far is evidence enough that my perspective has nothing to do with race. I haven't said one thing about anyone's race aside from that I don't think it's a significant factor in what has happened. Everything I've said so far would apply equally if everyone was exactly the same color.

Are there racists talking about this? Of course. The Klan weighed in on it and so did the modern equivalent of the Black Panthers. It's pretty obvious that some of the things being said are racist. I don't think that's the majority, though, and I don't think you should say that everyone who feels a certain way about the issue has deep-seated issues of racism and avoid them as a result. Even people I know who actually are prejudiced against a particular race aren't bad people, they're usually just ill-informed and are over-generalizing their bad experiences or those of people they know.

I'll leave you with this story, which I've always liked.
VNs are superior to anime, don't @ me
Age 26
Male
Puerto Rico
Seen February 10th, 2022
Posted April 1st, 2016
98 posts
8.8 Years
The Fergunson case was pretty clear. The young delinquent, (black, white, latino, doesn't matter) went for the officer's gun and he got shot. You can't try to disarm an officer, in fact, you can't try to disarm anyone. You're going to get shot 9/10 times. If Michael Brown had succesfully disarmed the officer, what do you think he was planing to do? The thing I don't understand is why Wilson got out like a God and didn't face at least some kind of penalty-electronic shackles perhaps?

Now, the '' I Can't Breath " case was Discusting. He killed that man with his bare hands. That officer should be punished with all the force of the law.
FC: 0275-8985-5713| IGN: Javier