Modern Racism: Officer Wilson Walks

[Nyro]

He didn't make that claim though.

I most assuredly DID NOT make that claim. I simply said he committed a VIOLENT crime, he assumed me saying that meant he deserved to die. That is the problem people get all emotionally tied and make ASSUMPTIONS and twist the opposite side of the arguments words to suit their purpose.

 

[Corvus of the Black Night]

I most assuredly DID NOT make that claim. I simply said he committed a VIOLENT crime, he assumed me saying that meant he deserved to die. That is the problem people get all emotionally tied and make ASSUMPTIONS and twist the opposite side of the arguments words to suit their purpose.

This is unfortunately what happens in debates like this. Manipulating and strawmanning the opposition is something I've seen a gross amount of in this thread, and it needs to stop. You absolutely need to respect opposing opinions if you are ever going to attempt to get anywhere besides seeking an echo chamber.

Again, injecting the concept of "deserving" only serves to load questions. The world doesn't function on "deserving", it is a false idea embedded in the human concept of revenge. By injecting "deserving" into a rebuttal to someone's argument, you are essentially trying to invoke emotions of guilt in their argument to attempt to convince them - however, if this guilt is solely hinged on these emotions and not reliable, logical debate structure, then it truly serves no purpose but to attempt to dehumanize your opponent.

I see this happen a lot in debates about issues involving victims. For some reason, people feel that those who believe that someone did something completely idiotic somehow believe that the individual "Deserved" the consequences. The reality is, that consequences have no concept of "deserving". By injecting the concept of "deserving" into a situation, you automatically attempt to incriminate the opposition by falsely claiming that the opposition believes that the individual in question "deserves" the reaction.

The best way to see why this concept is poor debate tact is use this example: A man touches two live wires. He dies. Does he deserve to die? Of course the answer is a resounding no, because nobody deserves to die.

However, some people will claim that it is the individual's fault for dying in the first place by partaking in a dangerous action. He is still a victim, but a self-inflicted victim. Most people would agree that this is the case with him. I can guarantee that nobody would claim that he "deserved to die", outside of rolling their eyes about how stupid he was.

So how is charging at an armed police officer after a robbery any different? Because the object of death was controlled by a human instead of a circuit board? It's an equally risky thing to do.

 

[Livewire]

Let me make this very clear. This thread has completely devolved into an absolute ****e-flinging contest between a few very vocal members. We're humans, not chimpanzees. So act like it.


Anyways, it's quite clear that this case:

A. Has a racial component. Look at the responses this case has illicited from people and the vitriol it brings out.

B. The case was handled extremely poorly by the Police department of Ferguson, with several key inconsistencies from what the police report said vs. eyewitness testimony, etc. I'm sorry, firing your weapon TWELVE TIMES is not a defensive reaction made with a cool, calm and collected head. And yes, in the heat of the moment, its can be hard to react calmly and appropriately. If you can't do that, then sorry, you shouldn't be a cop.

C. While you may judge the rioters in Ferguson, let's remember the riots and sheer destruction after some recent major sporting events, in San Francisco following the Word Series, Vancouver after the Stanley Cup finals a few years ago, etc. Well-off white people riot too, let's not fall into racial stereotypes here. Put your self in the shoes of someone who the law disproportionately targets simply because of stereotypes regarding the color of your skin. It's easy to turn to violence like rioting in order to be heard or acknowledged when you feel that's the only option you have left. Especially when you think society has failed you.

D. The lack reverence for a dead kid is pretty sick, if you ask me. Nothing that Michael Brown did, not the petty theft, or the supposed "assault" of officer wilson, warranted him being shot and killed in the street like a dog.


In the end, all this case really does is reveal that this country's racist past is still haunting us, and that racism, in its varying forms, is still alive and well. Hop on your Facebook or twitter and actually look at the reactions from people. Some of them are unabashedly hateful, racist, and sickening. So the next time you think that issues of race and socioeconomic class struggles are a thing of the past, think again and look into this case. Don't stick your fingers in your ears and go "la la la institutionalized racism isn't real la la la". We clearly haven't progressed far enough since the Civil Rights era, if things like this can still happen.

 

[Star-Lord]

E. Bob McCulloch's involvement in the case is suspicious at best.

It honestly is a point worth considering that I never see people talking about sadly. Bob McCulloch incited more rage in me than Darren Wilson, for what it's worth.

 

[Livewire]

E. Bob McCulloch's involvement in the case is suspicious at best.

It honestly is a point worth considering that I never see people talking about sadly. Bob McCulloch incited more rage in me than Darren Wilson, for what it's worth.

McCulloch's conflict of interest with being affiliated with Ferguson PD aside, the most alarming part is that this very incident happened in Berkeley, Missouri fourteen years ago, under McCulloch's watch.

In 1997, in the so-called "Kinkogate" case, McCulloch gave - using the power of the grand jury, but without informing it - a subpoena to the police in order to identify a whistleblower who was acting lawfully. He first claimed the fax contained a threat but later conceded that there was no threat and no crime, but denied any wrongdoing. The whistleblower had to quit his job.[3]

In 2000, in the so-called "Jack in the Box" case, two undercover officers, a police officer and a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) officer, shot and killed two unarmed black men in the parking lot of a Jack in the Box fast-food restaurant in Berkeley, Missouri. In 2001, the officers told a grand jury convened by McCulloch that the suspects tried to escape arrest and then drove toward them; the jury declined to indict.[2][4] McCulloch told the public that every witness had testified to confirm this version, but St. Louis Post-Dispatch journalist Michael Sorkin reviewed the previously secret grand jury tapes, released to him by McCulloch, and found that McCulloch's statement was untrue: only three of 13 officers testified that the car was moving forward.[3] A subsequent federal investigation found that the men were unarmed and that their car had not moved forward when the officers fired 21 shots; nevertheless, federal investigators decided that the shooting was justified because the officers feared for their safety.[2][4] McCulloch also drew controversy when he said of the victims: "These guys were bums."[2] The two men killed, Earl Murray and Ronald Beasley, had prior felony convictions on drug and assault charges.[2]

[2] https://www.stltoday.com/news/local...cle_cdd4c104-6086-506e-9ee8-aa957a31fee5.html

[4] https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/21/us/st-louis-county-prosecutor-defends-objectivity.html


Disgusting.

 

[Kanzler]

A. Has a racial component. Look at the responses this case has illicited from people and the vitriol it brings out.

No doubt.

B. The case was handled extremely poorly by the Police department of Ferguson, with several key inconsistencies from what the police report said vs. eyewitness testimony, etc. I'm sorry, firing your weapon TWELVE TIMES is not a defensive reaction made with a cool, calm and collected head. And yes, in the heat of the moment, its can be hard to react calmly and appropriately. If you can't do that, then sorry, you shouldn't be a cop.

While the case was handled poorly, I'm not so sure we could make such a judgement about how Brown was shot without the appropriate context, including how police there are trained to handle such situations, the nature of the confrontation, etc. As a police officer, Wilson could have been in the clear to shoot, but that will be decided by the legal system (or not).

C. While you may judge the rioters in Ferguson, let's remember the riots and sheer destruction after some recent major sporting events, in San Francisco following the Word Series, Vancouver after the Stanley Cup finals a few years ago, etc. Well-off white people riot too, let's not fall into racial stereotypes here. Put your self in the shoes of someone who the law disproportionately targets simply because of stereotypes regarding the color of your skin. It's easy to turn to violence like rioting, to be heard or acknowledged when you feel that's the only option you have left. Especially when you think society has failed you.

This explains the rioting, but doesn't condone it.

D. The lack reverence for a dead kid is pretty sick, if you ask me. Nothing that Michael Brown did, not the petty theft, or the supposed "assault" of officer wilson, warranted him being shot and killed in the street like a dog.

I think most of us agree that the shooting was unfortunate and, for Brown, undeserved. However, I don't think it's irreverent to criticize Brown for the actions he took prior and during the shooting. He did take some questionable actions which should be addressed for what they are if we want an intelligent conversation about this.

The fact that the handling of the situation was criticized at state and federal level speaks to me that, at the very least, policing in Missouri state is too decentralized and lacks oversight. I have no idea whether this is true or not. What does anybody have to say about how policing is regulated in the United States? Do local officials have too much power in their own hands?

Also, can anybody give a knowledgeable discussion about what McCulloch did and what alternatives were available? What are arguments in favour and against the way he managed the grand jury? What does the grand jury usually do given the same context of a police shooting?

 

[Livewire]

While the case was handled poorly, I'm not so sure we could make such a judgement about how Brown was shot without the appropriate context, including how police there are trained to handle such situations, the nature of the confrontation, etc. As a police officer, Wilson could have been in the clear to shoot, but that will be decided by the legal system (or not).


This explains the rioting, but doesn't condone it.


I think most of us agree that the shooting was unfortunate and, for Brown, undeserved. However, I don't think it's irreverent to criticize Brown for the actions he took prior and during the shooting. He did take some questionable actions which should be addressed for what they are if we want an intelligent conversation about this.

The fact that the handling of the situation was criticized at state and federal level speaks to me that, at the very least, policing in Missouri state is too decentralized and lacks oversight. I have no idea whether this is true or not. What does anybody have to say about how policing is regulated in the United States? Do local officials have too much power in their own hands?

Also, can anybody give a knowledgeable discussion about what McCulloch did and what alternatives were available? What are arguments in favour and against the way he managed the grand jury? What does the grand jury usually do given the same context of a police shooting?

* I'm not a police officer, but a confrontation like that doesn't just up and turn into a shooting. I think Wilson followed most of the police protocols but the situation escalated into a confrontation too quickly, and deadly force was invoked quickly under dubious circumstances. "Fearing for his life" is a very convenient mechanism that is subjective enough that the person can invoke it and not suffer any reprisals. Maybe he did truly feel his life was in danger, but he didn't really have a legitimate reason to feel that way, as an unarmed teenager doesn't pose much of a threat. And it would have been obvious to Officer Wilson that if Brown had a weapon on him, he would logically have used it before getting fired upon by Wilson. Wilson probably assumed that the kid was a ********** and probably armed and that misconception/racial stereotype contributed to the confrontation.

* It doesn't condone the rioting, but it does shed light on why people would do it. And, it shuts up the crowd using racial bias in calling the rioters thugs, looters, vandals, etc. simply for what they look like. Like the pictures making the rounds on Facebook, twitter, other forms of social media, etc., the ones suggesting the rioters are all poor inner city black folk looking to cause trouble. That's exactly the problem, believe believe it and it only perpetuates these stereotypes and misconceptions people have about one another. Nobody is really condoning the rioting. They're also not really doing anything about the propagating of racist stereotypes against the rioters.

Brown was probably unnecessarily confrontational with the police, and he did steal the cigarillos from the gas station prior to the altercation. But, lets remember that the rift between the inner-city african american community and the police goes back quite a long time. So if anything, pre-concieved notions of race from both Brown and Wilson contributed and combined to make a deadly combination here. But the difference is that the kid is the one who's dead. And most of the attempts to highlight Brown's own actions here has given way to full-on demonization and dehumanization in order to paint Wilson in a more sympathetic light.

There is a difference between the case being racially motivated and reactions to the case having racial motivation. The former is unproven, the latter is definitely true. Still, since there's no hard evidence that Darren Wilson shot Michael Brown because he was black racial reactions are simply hearsay.

Before this incident, how many years of spotless service did he have? One incident does not mean he is a bad cop. Also, it's very easy for us to judge from our armchairs and rationally state that "cops should do this, cops shouldn't do that" in a life or death situation. The fact is these situations are not calm or rational and how many human beings, police officers or not, would have acted calmly and coolly in them? Very, very few. So few that you could not make a department, unless you want to start hiring RoboCops. Your expectations of people reacting in life or death situations are unrealistic, law enforcement or not. They're small town cops, not navy seals.

As Kanzler already said, perceived injustice does not excuse violent mob behaviour. I haven't seen anyone here, in this thread, say white people don't riot or that it's acceptable for them to. I HAVE seen people here saying it's okay for blacks to do so because their reasons are so much more morally justifiable. The point is that throwing molotov cocktails and tipping over police cars is wrong, period.

You run a debate section and you cite social media as a source? How many people believe that **** and how many are just trolling to get others riled up? Social media is not a reliable indicator of anything, although if you want to use it I'm sure it's also possible to dig up plenty of dirt on the people who support Michael Brown, but that would just continue the **** flinging contest, wouldn't it?

That's the thing about race, racially-motivated instances inspire racially-motivated reactions. It's not like entire communities of people are intentionally making it all up.

Frankly, previous years of service, no matter how pristine, mean nothing when you shoot and kill an unarmed teenager, for whatever reason. That's like saying "Well, Bernie Madoff was a great lawyer until we found out he stole everyone's money". Get a clue. Police need to be able to make rational, tough calls under duress. That's part of the job, simple as that. They don't need to be "Navy Seals" to do so.

Ans yes, the rioting, looting and continued acts of violence are wrong and only perpetuate the cycle of violence and misconceptions between the involved parties. But, lets at least try and understand why someone would feel that violence is the only option - when the justice system has supposedly failed you. Only giving an explanation, you inferred the rest yourself.

I didn't cite anything, I simply made a statement on the commentary coming from people weighing in on the case, on social media and in other mediums. Just because somebody tweets about Ferguson doesn't mean their thoughts or insights are fundamentally invalid simply because it was posted on twitter.

 

[Nyro]

Yeah I think the shooting was unfortunate and extreme for sure, however I don't blame Wilson completely. Could Wilson have handled it better? Of course he could have as I stated before but do I think he shot the guy in cold blood? Absolutely not. A few very basic thoughts that went through my head watching this thing unfold:

1. Why Riot? It solves nothing but to make tensions worse. Violence only breeds more violence.

2. Why do policemen seem to be so poorly trained in Urban areas?

3. Why so much outrage over this guy? Trayvon had less protests as did Eric Garner both to me were 10x more tragic then this one.

These were just my immediate thoughts during this issue however since reading the Jury transcript I definitly have received more thoughts. One of which they needed to re-do this and get a new jury and toss out the lying witnesses on both sides. Both sides were so racially charged that half the testimonies made ZERO sense and several even got caught lying the next day.

I don't think Wilson is a murderer, he acting within his legal bounds. When a policeman has a person that has committed a violent crime he has the right to respond with force as a first response if he deems it necessary. That protocol does need to be looked at though.

Bottom line, the situation is unfortunate however demonizing Wilson is just as uncalled for as Michael Brown's death was and even more so when you take into account that Officer Wilson was within his rights. I hope the Riots stop though because the government will eventually respond with force.

 

[Sir Codin]

1. Why Riot? It solves nothing but to make tensions worse. Violence only breeds more violence.

2. Why do policemen seem to be so poorly trained in Urban areas?

3. Why so much outrage over this guy? Trayvon had less protests as did Eric Garner both to me were 10x more tragic then this one.

1. When the system has failed you, you become more disillusioned. The more disillusioned you are, the more likely you are to think that the only way the system can change is to push back.

2. Why do policemen in the United States seem to be so poorly trained in general? The amount of stories of policemen using excessive force and displaying totalitarian attitudes on pages like Cop Block I've seen are enough to make me consider anarcho-capitalism instead of libertarianism.

3. Beats me. My best guess is because Zimmerman was hispanic, making it a little less of an obvious race issue. Dan Wilson is white. When you have a black kid being shot by a white cop, it's pretty easy for the media to drum it up as a race issue (regardless of whether or not it actually was).

 

[Livewire]

Frankly, that is a very poor analogy. One is premeditated crime with a facade of good behaviour over an extended period of time, the other is genuine good behaviour being tarnished by one mistake. Unless you can prove that he had always been plotting to kill someone then the comparison holds no ground. I expected better from you.

According to whom? "Good behavior" in a Police Department with a history of misconduct and under the jurisdiction of a Prosecutor with a similarly controversial past doesn't make automatically make Wilson a saint or exclude him from suspicion. And when the "mistake" is a dead kid, then yes, that does invalidate your previously "good" behavior.

 

[Nyro]

1. When the system has failed you, you become more disillusioned. The more disillusioned you are, the more likely you are to think that the only way the system can change is to push back.

2. Why do policemen in the United States seem to be so poorly trained in general? The amount of stories of policemen using excessive force and displaying totalitarian attitudes on pages like Cop Block I've seen are enough to make me consider anarcho-capitalism instead of libertarianism.

3. Beats me. My best guess is because Zimmerman was hispanic, making it a little less of an obvious race issue. Dan Wilson is white. When you have a black kid being shot by a white cop, it's pretty easy for the media to drum it up as a race issue (regardless of whether or not it actually was).

Is that the logic? Fight back and hope all ends well? Oh man either they will give up or many people will end up hurt.

Also what about Eric Garner that black guy that was choked to death by 3-4 white cops?

 

[Sir Codin]

Is that the logic? Fight back and hope all ends well? Oh man either they will give up or many people will end up hurt.

Also what about Eric Garner that black guy that was choked to death by 3-4 white cops?

From what I'm reading, the Garner case hasn't been decided yet, so hell if I know how that'll end up being.

 

[Kanzler]

Is there any news on whether this event will receive an intervention from higher courts?

Anyways, turning in for tonight. Here's hoping you won't rip each other to shreds and that I'll have something worth reading in the morning.

 

[Nyro]

From what I'm reading, the Garner case hasn't been decided yet, so hell if I know how that'll end up being.

Yeah but no big protests yet.

Is there any news on whether this event will receive an intervention from higher courts?

Anyways, turning in for tonight. Here's hoping you won't rip each other to shreds and that I'll have something worth reading in the morning.

Doubt it. My guess is the parents make a claim against wilson in civil court, get about 50k out of him and go quiet after that.

 

[Sir Codin]

North Korea called the United States a "human rights graveyard" in response to this.

https://news.yahoo.com/north-korea-calls-us-human-rights-graveyard-over-042656891.html

Oh, North Korea, you so funny.

 

[Keiran]

1. Why Riot? It solves nothing but to make tensions worse. Violence only breeds more violence.

2. Why do policemen seem to be so poorly trained in Urban areas?

3. Why so much outrage over this guy? Trayvon had less protests as did Eric Garner both to me were 10x more tragic then this one.

1. Correct. That's why the riots are very small and isolated until the police bring in tanks and start throwing tear gas, among other things, at peaceful protesters and residential areas. Violence only breeds more violence, yes, but you have to think critically about who is starting the violence in the first place (hint: its the militarized police and local KKK chapter that was preparing to be violent before the verdict was announced).

2. They just get away with too much and are sloppy. Things such as: not wearing bodycams, or not being equipped with a taser because they find it uncomfortable. I'm sure they are trained well, but just aren't supervised well enough.

3. There is going to be more outrage as time goes on as more people get fed up with institutionalized racism. The increasing usage of social media is also helping more people be in-the know. Also, while George Zimmerman is a scumbag, his case was much less of a clownshow than this one. The ridiculousness of some of the happenings in this case are just more fuel for the flames.

 

[Nyro]

1. Correct. That's why the riots are very small and isolated until the police bring in tanks and start throwing tear gas, among other things, at peaceful protesters and residential areas. Violence only breeds more violence, yes, but you have to think critically about who is starting the violence in the first place (hint: its the militarized police and local KKK chapter that was preparing to be violent before the verdict was announced).

2. They just get away with too much and are sloppy. Things such as: not wearing bodycams, or not being equipped with a taser because they find it uncomfortable. I'm sure they are trained well, but just aren't supervised well enough.

3. There is going to be more outrage as time goes on as more people get fed up with institutionalized racism. The increasing usage of social media is also helping more people be in-the know. Also, while George Zimmerman is a scumbag, his case was much less of a clownshow than this one. The ridiculousness of some of the happenings in this case are just more fuel for the flames.

Let me ask you...did this guy deserve this?
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/30/st-louis-protesters-motorist_n_6245628.html
Were these 15 and 16 yr olds kids? Were these kids racist for him not being black and killed by their hands during THEIR riots?

Do you still think the Riots are ok? People are dying and getting hurt. Children watched their father being beat with hammers for goodness sakes. What kind of sick person does someone have to be to make excuses for this crap.

 

[Kanzler]

3. There is going to be more outrage as time goes on as more people get fed up with institutionalized racism. The increasing usage of social media is also helping more people be in-the know. Also, while George Zimmerman is a scumbag, his case was much less of a clownshow than this one. The ridiculousness of some of the happenings in this case are just more fuel for the flames.

I doubt the ability of social media to help people be "in-the-know". I'd say that people flock to social media instead of consulting the sources as well as understanding the context. It only fans the flames of the court of public opinion.

 

[Keiran]

Let me ask you...did this guy deserve this?
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/30/st-louis-protesters-motorist_n_6245628.html
Were these 15 and 16 yr olds kids? Were these kids racist for him not being black and killed by their hands during THEIR riots?

Do you still think the Riots are ok? People are dying and getting hurt. Children watched their father being beat with hammers for goodness sakes. What kind of sick person does someone have to be to make excuses for this crap.

What? Are you implying the 2 teens were protestors because they were clearly not and it isnt stated in the article. I literally don't see how your reply is relevant. D: In fact, his murder sparked protests against violence towards Bosnians...I dont think you read this article, haha.

@Kanzler, social media tends to have tons of unbiased, first-hand sources; people that are literally there when things happen & can share information, photos and videos to millions of people.

 

[Nah]

@Kanzler, social media tends to have tons of unbiased, first-hand sources; people that are literally there when things happen & can share information, photos and videos to millions of people.

It also has a bunch of really biased, second-hand sources, which is why you have to be careful with social media when talking about touchy subjects. Some of it is good, some of it is just flaming/trolling.