Outrage sweeps nation after two black men murdered by police

[Esper]

The world would be a better place without the media shoving biased crap down our throats, actually it would be better if the media just vanished and people started figuring **** out on their own. The media has a lot to do with why things are the way they are, they're a complete joke yet people blindly follow their crap.

No, we need to have media, just different media. Without an actual media the only things people would know about were things happening in public. Everything else would be hearsay. You wouldn't have uncovered the sex abuse scandal in the Catholic church, for instance. Professional journalists need to exist otherwise the only news that would exist would look like a facebook page: mostly non-news, clickbait, and what news there is is mostly unverifiable.

I am so sick of this race war that has been brewing since Trayvon Martin was killed several years back. With all this stuff that's been happening, especially with the Black Lives Matter movement, I just know the outcome won't be good. I know, it's probably considered "racist" of me by saying this stuff, but I'm not going to submit to the politically correct demands of communists and the New World Order cabal.

What do these protesters think they're going to accomplish by these riots and stuff? If the goal of rioting and violence is to bring about racial harmony, why did Detroit go into such a decline following the 1967 blind pig riot (which my mom and her parents lived through, BTW)?

What are the "politically correct demands" you're talking about?

Why do you say that protestors are causing riots? The discussion about the place of violence in political movements (which is a whole topic in itself) aside, if you look at the BLM info online [like here] you don't see talk of violence. You see things like "We are committed to embodying and practicing justice, liberation, and peace in our engagements with one another." So the movement is striving for peace, not violence. I mean, yes, nothing is perfect and every group large enough is going to have bad eggs, but unless one believes that the movement is intentionally sending out a peace message to attract people who want people and then somehow turning them violent one has to see that they aren't trying to use violence.

 

[ShinyUmbreon189]

No, we need to have media, just different media. Without an actual media the only things people would know about were things happening in public. Everything else would be hearsay. You wouldn't have uncovered the sex abuse scandal in the Catholic church, for instance. Professional journalists need to exist otherwise the only news that would exist would look like a facebook page: mostly non-news, clickbait, and what news there is is mostly unverifiable.

Yes we do need a media change rather than this "controlling opinions media" that people seem to be getting sucked into. It's ludicrous that people actually believe this shit. Personally, I take almost everything the media has to say with a grain of salt, who's right and who's wrong? There's so many holes that literally everything can easily be nullified, you can't believe a word they say. I'm sorry that my intellect is of higher power that I'm not easily taken as bait. Every day the truth get's further and further away us, yet we stay oblivious to it. It boggles my mind, it really does.




What are the "politically correct demands" you're talking about?

Are you seriously that oblivious? What good do you see coming out of this next election? I'd really love to see your theory. My theory, is we're already fucked, period, no president can save us, it's tyranny in the end anyways, America is next in line for the fallen empire list. So.... Pick your poison.

 

[Her]

What are the "politically correct demands" you're talking about?

The most base level of respect, mostly.

 

[«Chuckles»]

Alrighty let's add my 10 cents onto this issue.

She said he let the police officer know he had a gun in the car as he was reaching for his driver's license, and the officer shot him four or five times "for no reason."

You're an idiot if you do this ever. When stopped by a police officer and they know you have a gun it would be extremely wise regardless of race not to reach for your pockets. I think at that point you definitely putting yourself in a position for things to go bad. Let it be known the officer that did this was Asian. God forbid I put holes in your narrative. Now the other fatal shooting. That in my opinion was a straight up execution. However those police officers shot a convicted child rapist, who was pointing an illegal gun at people. That execution was completely warranted, a police officer has a family, they have a partner, they have children, they bleed the same blood we do. A police officer is human. They are not here to serve at our disposable. They have a sense of self preservation as every sane human should. Now did they act in accordance to self presevation. Of course they did, this man had a gun, this man could have easily taken the life of these officers if they had not acted accordingly. The problem is a complete lack of respect for authority.

Alright now that that is cleared up onto the consequences of these shootings. Black Lives Matter, oh my America's favorite terrorist organization. They are terrorists. Yes they're manifesto and ideals might preach peace however this is saying one thing and many supporters/members/adherents have acted quite the opposite. We saw it last year, and we're seeing it now.

Now that's terrorism right? Look it up, I'm sure google will give you that answer. Now where does this tie into Black Lives Matter you might wonder. Well what have we seen lately. We've seen an off duty officer shoot and kill a home intruder over an argument they had on facebook about Black lives Matter. We saw the systematic murder of police officers, this championed by those who believe in the Black Lives Matter movement. 21 officers were injured after protesters brought I-94 to a screeching halt for more than five hours Saturday night.. There are problems but it isn't with the police. It's with a lack of respect and a culture that jumps on the bandwagon as soon as a life that has been taken gets national attention. There are facts there are statistics. They don't help the case of Black Lives Matter.

This breakdown, how can you account for the senseless violence that is occuring right now on behalf of the Black Community/Black Lives Matter Movement. It makes no sense why a minority statistic, alright not majority of the statistic would riot and lash out. Why do I believe they do? Because we treat the community like a spoilt child. I fail to see why anyone can support a terrorist organization like this. We must learn to respect authority. You can even argue that Blacks are killed disproportionately to their population size. But Blacks disproportionately commit more crime than any other racial group. Of course they are going to be shot more often when they commit more crime than everyone else. This is not racism, this is fact...

"Oh but the statistics are racist and they're cherrypicked oh my god the racists the nazi's they're all nazi's!" Well my source is the Burea of Justice Statistics. Look them up buddy I'm sure you'll cum.

Alright so the disparity in police violence is likely a problem linked to crime, not to race. Black Lives Matter are a Terrorist Organization. Just because they say they're peaceful doesn't substantiate it. Instead through actions they have proven that they are akin to a spoilt child, who will not take responsibilty for it's actions and in doing so only degrades the respect society can hold for it. Alright Russia put Black Lives Matter on their own Terror List. Everyone else should too instead of supporting a liberal agenda that automatically assumes that anyone born into poverty or a racial group entitles them to a void of moral and ethical responsibilites where consequences are non-existant.

 

[Esper]

Alrighty let's add my 10 cents onto this issue.

• The officer being Asian doesn't put "a hole in the narrative" since the narrative is that there is, paraphrasing, lots of racism in the police force (and society in general) against black people.
• I take issue with the simplistic definition of terrorism you've provided. Dictionary definitions for complex ideas like terrorism aren't sufficient. That should not be the only metric in deciding what is and is not terrorism.
• But, by the definition of terrorism you've provided and the examples you've given, it sounds as though any protester would be a terrorist if just a single other protester in the same movement acted in a violent way.
• (And by the way, the shooter in Dallas was highly critical of Black Lives Matters - hardly a member himself.)
• So by that line of thinking one could say that all police are terrorists because some of them use "unauthorized" violence. Yes, they have the authority to use violence, but it is not a blanket authority that allows violence in any situation.
• "Because we treat the community like a spoilt child." The not-so-subtle subtext here is that you think black people are like children. Or possibly that you think they, as a homogeneous group, only act in response to how white/non-black people treat them and don't act on their own for their own reasons, or have a variety of reasons and motivations.
• Authority should be respected if its actions can be shown to be for the good of the public/community/etc. Otherwise we're talking about authoritarianism.
• You're assuming that the higher rates of arrests of black people compared to white people is because they are committing more crimes as a percentage of their racial group. There is another possibility which you have not properly addressed which is that the statistics are for arrests rather than actual criminal acts committed. Lots of crimes go unsolved, unpunished, unnoticed. Did you consider that black people were being arrested disproportionately? Meaning, in other words, that whites and blacks could be committing about the same rate of crimes but that because the police are targeting black people more often (with racial profiling, for instance) they catch more crimes committed by black people.
• You're using Russia as an example of good governance?

 

[«Chuckles»]

[*] The officer being Asian doesn't put "a hole in the narrative" since the narrative is that there is, paraphrasing, lots of racism in the police force (and society in general) against black people.

Fair enough. But you can't blame the white devils for that one love. Also nice accusation or are you gonna support it?

[*]I take issue with the simplistic definition of terrorism you've provided. Dictionary definitions for complex ideas like terrorism aren't sufficient. That should not be the only metric in deciding what is and is not terrorism.
[*]But, by the definition of terrorism you've provided and the examples you've given, it sounds as though any protester would be a terrorist if just a single other protester in the same movement acted in a violent way.

Alrighty babe. Let's have a look around for some more definitions of terrorism!

So straight up let's have a look at wikipedia because that serves to give us a basic skeleton and outline. Terrorism, in its broadest sense, is defined as the use or threatened use of violence (terror) in order to achieve a political, religious, or ideological aim. It is classified as fourth-generation warfare and as a violent crime. In modern times, terrorism is considered a major threat to society and therefore illegal under anti-terrorism laws in most jurisdictions. It is also considered a war crime under the laws of war when used to target non-combatants, such as civilians, neutral military personnel, or enemy prisoners of war.[1]

Alright so now you're going to call it up on it being a broad sense. Doing that is simply arbitrary. Why because it's still the definition. You do not get to exclude people from this definition just because you believe in them. Also you're going to call it up on textbook definitions. This is not a subjective issue. Emotion is not a valid platform to make any kind of argument. So I'll go above and beyond just for you.

The Law. oh baby. Now as per 18 U.S. Code section 2331 - Definitions. Now part 5 of this section defines Domestic Terrorism as...

Spoiler:

Now that is law. Those involved in these protests satisfy the conditions to be charged as a domestic terrorist. It's plain as day. Don't play favorites because bias just destroys all credibility.

t. Barrister

The western law system works with these things called Precedents and you've gotta uphold them. Okay. So when we call ISIS a terror group, because they use violence and intimidation to further their political aims we can't just go aww maybe not for black lives matter because even though they do satisfy the conditions I kinda believe in them so nah they're sweet to continue using violence. It's a double standard. Principles and integrity need to be maintained, because yes you might not like it at all! But if someone much worse was to be in power they could use your own arguments against you.

So by that line of thinking one could say that all police are terrorists because some of them use "unauthorized" violence. Yes, they have the authority to use violence, but it is not a blanket authority that allows violence in any situation.

Um okay, you know I did provide context to the situation but alrighty man.

"Because we treat the community like a spoilt child." The not-so-subtle subtext here is that you think black people are like children. Or possibly that you think they, as a homogeneous group, only act in response to how white/non-black people treat them and don't act on their own for their own reasons, or have a variety of reasons and motivations.

I'm loving these allegations. Ad-Hominem and speculation. I'll place it all simply. Black and White I know you love the subjective frame of argument but we're big kids. I think that in the past the coloured communities have been subjected to hardship, oppression and stigmatized and treated criminally. However that doesn't happen anymore. The Afrocentric communities of America have found an equal foothold in society. They have the same rights. They should instead of being treated like children for example: Reperations and affirmative action society should treat them just like everyone else. Equality is not Equity do not delude yourself to think that. Society needs to treat every community the same. No special treatment, no unfair treatment because if we respect them like we say then they should be treated like an equal.

You're assuming that the higher rates of arrests of black people compared to white people is because they are committing more crimes as a percentage of their racial group. There is another possibility which you have not properly addressed which is that the statistics are for arrests rather than actual criminal acts committed. Lots of crimes go unsolved, unpunished, unnoticed. Did you consider that black people were being arrested disproportionately? Meaning, in other words, that whites and blacks could be committing about the same rate of crimes but that because the police are targeting black people more often (with racial profiling, for instance) they catch more crimes committed by black people.

Oh my god. I am a bit surprised at this one. Tinfoil. I'll argue this one but next time have some sources to back that allegation up. For the record no I'm not crazy I wouldn't ever consider that to be the case but let's see what your case says.

So. You're alleging that White people and Black people commit the same about of crime but that because the police are targeting baclk people more often they catch more crimes commited by black people. Okie dokie. Time for some maths. So let's use the number 1000. Now of America, afro-americans make up 12.6 % of the population

So let's just convert all the ethnic groups into a number from 1000.

724 Whites
126 Blacks
48 Asians
9 Indiginous
2 Hawaiins
and 91 others

So let's say Whites commit 10 crimes a year
And your theory suggests that blacks perform the same so for them they commit 10 as well.

10 is about 1.3812% of the white population.
10 is about 7.9365% of the black population.

So by your theory you're saying that they commit the same amount of crimes based on nothing but that they are the same. But what I've also found is that you're saying a higher percentage of the Black community is commiting crime. Which leads me to assume that you're saying blacks commit more crime than whites do regardless. If they're population size was the same blacks would be committing more crimes? Because if we follow you're theory that's what it says... (Don't worry bro, just using yourself against you ;) it's a lot of fun)

You're using Russia as an example of good governance?

Yes, yes I am, strawman. Because not every decision that government makes is a horrible one. It's an ignorant accusation to say otherwise.

 

[Grey Wind]

I think that in the past the coloured communities have been subjected to hardship, oppression and stigmatized and treated criminally. However that doesn't happen anymore.

Almost 50% of hate crimes are racially motivated. People with black-sounding names are 50% less likely to be called back for a job interview. Even though black youth are less likely to abuse drugs or alcohol than white youth, they are ten times more likely to be sent to prison for drug offences. Black youth are more likely to be tried as an adult than white youth, they receive higher sentences for the same crimes and receive higher penalties when the victim is white. But yeah, doesn't happen any more.

Combating racism and acknowledging inequalities is not "special treatment".


Attempting to label Black Lives Matter as a terrorist organisation is dumb, and "oh you just ignore it because you support them!" isn't an argument. Unless you can prove that the organisation as a whole is intent on using violence (and not just random people who may or may not support it) then I'm not going to label them as terrorists.


More white people have been shot by police, yes, but when you adjust for population size the result is that black Americans are 2.5 times more likely to be shot by police, and unarmed black Americans are FIVE times as likely to be shot by a police officer than unarmed white Americans. You brought up the rate of crimes committed by black people, but that same link shows that there's no correlation between high crime rates and the rate of police shootings. Also, black Americans who are fatally shot by police are less likely to be posing an imminent lethal threat to the officers at the moment they are killed than white Americans fatally shot by police. The statistical evidence that black people are targeted and killed by police disproportionately is overwhelming. There is a problem here, whether you want to see it or not.

 

[Keiran]

There is a problem here, whether you want to see it or not.

Right. Even if someone chooses to ignore the systemic racism of America, you can't ignore the fact that hundreds and hundreds of people are being murdered. Many people will endlessly try to disprove racism because they don't understand how racism ends up getting someone shot. They think it's believed that the cops actively hate black people and seek to kill them. But it's been proven that many people, almost entirely white people, completely lack empathy for black people. So that cop that murdered someone? Might not actively hate black people, may not be a member of the KKK (but a lot are), but due to racism they've been conditioned into lacking empathy for people outside of their own race which makes it a lot easier to pull that trigger. It's a silent side-effect of systemic racism.

 

[Nah]

I do sometimes wonder a bit how long this will all keep on going for, what exactly will it take to finally see something different happen. The usual pattern is this: A (school) shooting happens, or a black man is killed by police, or whatever. Obama makes his millionth speech that essentially boils down to "this is unacceptable, we must do something about it", the internet briefly is "outraged" at these events, and in forum threads and news article comment sections across the internet the Keirans and Espers of the world battle it out with the Chuckles and Otter Mii-Kuns of the world, and you basically see the same things said time and time again. And it's been like this for years now. You'd think that people would want to try something different just from being tired of seeing the same thing over and over and over again.

Also I can't believe that people actually believe or want to believe that the Dallas shooter was someone hired by the government to fan the flames of racial discord. That is some legit tinfoil hat stuff right there.

 

[CoffeeDrink]

Here I am. Back again after 5 months. Well anyway I think I'm just kind of sick of black lives matter and their ilk. People kill people every day, I've seen it for decades. Nothing is new, nothing has changed and yet people are outraged over these shootings when they occur on a regular basis.

It's even better now than it was in the 80 when the shootings were commonplace. The murder rates were sky high (as well as everyone else, for that matter) around this time frame. Murder rates are as low as they've ever been, and yet it's still not enough. It is strange to me that people forget how far we have come and constantly say that we are going backwards when the opposite is actually true.

Many times they (black Lives matter) ignore the fact that most African Americans are murdered by other African Americans. Sad, but true. I would hazard a guess it can still be attributed to California's Crips/Bloods war.

I'm not saying it's right (this shooting in particular), but I am saying that you must have had your eyes glued shut for the past 30 years if this is a surprise to you. Most people here will have never seen what happens behind the curtain. I remember when bean bag shot first came out. One of the first "non-lethal" alternatives in terms of disabling rounds. They pulled them because the bean bags would get up to spelled and amputate limbs.

Ranting somewhat, but there it is. People are scary. They're a random factor that can never be accounted for. But to say that bad shootings are always tied to African Americans isn't fair. People get shot all the time over little things, but at the time you have less than a second to decide whether or not you'll go home or not. Bullets kill, and I should know. It's tough to decide when to fire and when not to. If you've never been in that spot it's hard to imagine.

I actually know next to nothing in this particular case, and don't care much to look into it. I won't defend a bad shooting, but I won't stand by and have all officers demonized because of some fluke.

Black, by the by. If that helps any.

 

[Her]

Pray tell, why is black-on-black crime relevant to the story of disproportionate police brutality/brutality as a whole? It is relevant because of the implication that because these poor black folks are killing each other, they deserve such treatment by the cops and the justice system, yes? I'm not saying you're consciously implying such. You may not even be aware of the underlying thinking to the statement. It would be silly to assume that, especially considering your own admission of being black. I would expect better of most members of this forum. Not all, but most. But that implication is the insidious backdrop to why 'black-on-black crime' is consistently brought up. It would do you, and everyone else, well to purge that derail tactic from their thinking when it comes to discussions like these.

Nevermind the fact that the black-on-black crime argument is largely flawed and misrepresented in the first place. It gives credence to a point that if not wholly irrelevant, is very dangerous. Let's do better than giving more time and needless paragraphs to it.

 

[CoffeeDrink]

I shan't apologize for something that is true. I believe you are trying to draw parallels in what I said when there are none. I did not condone nor condemn the officer's actions. What I do condemn is a groups skewed view on the actual crime statistics posted by the FBI, the DOJ and other federally operated organizations. If Black Lives Matter (which is a separate issue entirely) is indeed concerned of how police brutality is dispensed, you also need to take into account the problems at home. This argument does not excuse brutality, as you seem to believe (I don't read minds) but it asks the question as to why the BLM 'movement' is not concerned over the issue.

If it truly mattered to people, they should stop brushing the problems at hand under the rug. Fighting on behalf of men such as Michael Brown (Ferguson if I'm not mistaken), who has been touted as a victim, is a travesty.

As an American, I am ashamed of those that claim themselves the victim when in actuality they aren't. It creates a kind of mob mentality that can result in dangerous consequences on both sides of the issue. This kind of 'social justice' is a pox in this country and portrays everything I fought against. Seeing the truth distorted into a spiral of untruths, lies, deceptions, and false causes upsets and saddens me.

I don't believe in taking the face value of any lethal encounter, and neither should you.

If the sciences behind it results in a good or a bad shooting that is where I let the chips lie. Saying that Black on Black crime isn't an issue is counter to solving the problem. It creates more problems in the fact that it leads away from the truth. I am not the type of person that causes the problems. The ones who cry injustice at every which turn are the problem. It doesn't do well to cry wolf, and trying to cover up other's misdeeds paints the picture of a liar. Why should we believe the words of one who always lies? We don't, and that is exactly why it's an issue.

I am not against justice. I am against false justice. I don't have the facts, and I highly doubt you have the facts of what actually happened during this particular shooting. Claiming one is guilty before they are actually judged is what gets innocents convicted and likewise lets the guilty go free.

I've already stated I don't condone bad shootings. Saying otherwise is a falsehood. I'm just tired of all the BLM rubbish. They line up hoping to get a glimpse at any wrong doing from whites, cops/other. This is what I call reactive or 'rubber necking', not proactive. In other words be proactive and constructiveven. It works to solve problems before they occur.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, yes; but no one is entitled to their own facts.

 

[Kanzler]

IMO BLM is concerned with issues of racism. Black-on-black crime or white-on-white crime or any other race-on-race crime is not really an issue of racism (it's at least much more tangential compared to discrimination in law enforcement). They started as a movement to address the issue of systemic racism in law enforcement, and it's not really up to anyone else to decide what other responsibilities they should take. Organizations tend to do better when they have focus, and this one has decided to make its focus narrow instead of broad.

 

[Aliencommander1245]

Should "We've come so far" ever be allowed as a criticism? Is that not an assertion that things are fine now and we can stop, which isn't true in the slightest?

It's fine to acknowledge things HAVE come a long way, but in the same vein you have to also acknowledge there's much more to be done

 

[CoffeeDrink]

The statement can read both ways should you wish it. I didn't think anybody would draw it quite like that. What irritates me are those that are outraged that I choose to not be offended every time somebody calls me a faggot on the Internet.

Also, I didn't quite catch this before, but just because I am black, I am not required to give a damn about the black lives matter propaganda. If you want to buy into their "woe is me" so be it.

I live in the real world. And in the real world cops aren't all racist. People seem to think that 'race out of place' is a racist note. Racial profiling is not racist. I tire of those claiming people are racists with no proof. Blacks don't need to be coddled. These kids (because that's what they are) need to grow the fuck up.

The world is not out to get you (blacks). The rest of the world is going about their own business. Killing whites won't change anything. Killing cops won't change anything. Kicking cops out of neighborhoods is definitely a bad idea. Can we at least agree on that?

 

[Aliencommander1245]

Racial profiling is.... definitely racism? It fits the definition to a T

I think to go to the opposite extreme and pretend that there's no racism at all at play, and that all these unarmed people being shot deserve it for one reason or another unrelated to race is also creating a narrative and treating it as reality?

 

[CoffeeDrink]

https://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1007274

I will state again, racial profiling and racism are two different beasts. Just as robbery and burglary are different, as well as sexual assault and sexual harassment. I'm not crazy. I even took the article from CNN if that makes anyone feel better.

 

[Aliencommander1245]

https://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1007274

I will state again, racial profiling and racism are two different beasts. Just as robbery and burglary are different, as well as sexual assault and sexual harassment. I'm not crazy. I even took the article from CNN if that makes anyone feel better.

Isn't CNN just as bad as fox news? With that example explicitly talking about the zimmerman case and trying to argue it was justified because being afraid of black male youth makes it justifiable to shoot one in self defence?

Also, the two examples you used are just genuinely strange to me- if someone says "My house was robbed" vs "My house was burgled" do they not colloqually mean the same thing? Would you stop and go "Well ACTUALLY it's only robbery if they stole something because burglary is breaking and entering with the intent to steal, not stealing itself"

If descrimination (And as such racism under it's umbrella) is

"is treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing is perceived to belong to rather than on individual merit."

If racial profiling, in the colloquial term and ignoring it's less used meaning applying to something like "The suspect is a so and so tall man of so and so ethnicity" is singling out someone purely based on their ethnic background to check for suspicious activity, how is that not textbook discrimination? Textbook racism?

 

[CoffeeDrink]

Also, the two examples you used are just genuinely strange to me- if someone says "My house was robbed" vs "My house was burgled" do they not colloqually mean the same thing? Would you stop and go "Well ACTUALLY it's only robbery if they stole something because burglary is breaking and entering with the intent to steal, not stealing itself"

"is treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing is perceived to belong to rather than on individual merit."

If racial profiling, in the colloquial term and ignoring it's less used meaning applying to something like "The suspect is a so and so tall man of so and so ethnicity" is singling out someone purely based on their ethnic background to check for suspicious activity, how is that not textbook discrimination? Textbook racism?

To start off, yes: robbery and burglary are two separate charges and crimes. Let me explain. Burglary is when someone enters a premises (some cases could be a vehicle an open area) and steals something without intent of violence. Robbery, on the other hand, is the use or threat of violence to steal from someone, and does not necessarily need to be on a specific locale to occur. Likewise, you will most likely ever hear of 'armed burglary'. Yes, burglars can be armed, but the intent of Burglary is to avoid contact in most cases. Burglary is also most associated with B&E.

The point I am trying to make is that there are key differences between actual racism and racial profiling. One does not equal the other and I believe that ishe what you and others are missing.

For example, if you are an officer on a beat in a predominantly Asian neighborhood, and spy someone of a different ethnicity (let's say white) walking down the sidewalk with a flat-screen TV wouldn't that thrive you as odd? Would you not stop and at least ask him if he needs help?

As an officer, appearing friendly goes farther initially than being violent. I can't recall any department promoting brutal or harassing stops. If you have not encountered police at least on a regular basis or delved into the inner workings of our justice system you may have missed out on these classes.

Dismissing the fact that racial profiling and racism are two separate things, I think, is counter productive. I shouldn't have to do your research for you and hold your hand. If you refuse to educate yourself on proper departmental law, penal codes, civic law, and your rights as a citizen then it makes it very hard for people to want to work with you.

There is a difference between robbery and burglary. I urge you to ask your local court about the differences. There is a difference between racism and racial profiling. Again, talk to your local court. I even have difficulty explaining the differences sometimes but it works like this: you do not have to be another race to practice racial profiling.

Racial profiling is actually used to solve crimes. If you personally were assaulted by a white female (or take your pick of gender/color), wouldn't you be concerned if the police looked for every color and not just white? That is what racial profiling is. People make it sound dirty, but in most cases it isn't.

Further more, if you were asked to identify the suspect (typically they'll have six) and they have a Black, Asian, Hispanic, Native American, Orangina, and one white woman this would technically be illegal.

Let me explain further. If one suspect in a line up is wearing a hat, all suspects must be wearing a hat.

Distinguishing features such as these cause false accusations and have even landed innocent people in prison. Do you see the problem at hand? Racial profiling is not racism. I cannot stress this enough. If a suspect is black, the suspect is black. Not white, not Latino, not orange, green, blue or whatever fuck colour people want to be these days. If the police get a description off the air that's what they go with. Not "let's stop the black guy just because a'hyuk!" The world doesn't work that way.

Not all cops are white. Not all cops are racist. Some of the best cops I've met are black. Crafting the illusion that all cops are killers and racist is a poisonous idea that prevents any actual work being done.

Edit: I typed this on my phone. There are some errors that have been 'corrected' by my phone. Ishe? Really?

 

[Esper]

I just read about a shooting in Baltimore of a woman who was wanted by police for failing to appear in court for a traffic violation. She apparently barricaded herself with a small child and a shotgun and was killed by police. The child was injured but not critically.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36957962

Now, the events aside - we won't necessarily have a good picture of what happened, who shot first and so on until later - it seems crazy that something like this could happen because of a traffic stop. My first though upon reading this was that this could be one of those cases where the police aggressively cite people for minor things and that causes people without means to end up in a debt spiral. Not showing up to court, for instance, could be because one has had their license suspended because of whatever they've been accused of. But this is all speculation on my part. Of course, I think it, that is, the way that money gets tangled in with violence, is worth thinking about.