Police Brutality- Real Problem or Diversion-

Recommended Posts

Not actually, I'm being sarcastic. But the reality still lies in the fact that you and your argument is a complete sham. Let's take a look at one: "Black men were seven times more likely than white men to die by police gunfire while unarmed." Are you racist? Are you implying that black men are inferior to white men? Or are you so pigheaded that you actually think white men are more bulletproof than black men? I don't give a flying fuck about the content of the article, if you're dumb enough to tout that tagline, you're dumb enough to get criticized for it.

 

I used to live in a time where the only people that screamed "THE POLICE ARE FASCIST BLACK MURDERERS" were the local meth-addicted homeless. Now I live in a time where people actually believe it and have mounted a movement to murder cops over it. These are sick times that we live in. I dunno about anyone else, but you'll never be worth more than a doped-up bum to me so long as you keep spouting this shit.

 

Are you purposefully being so dense? If you actually read the article you'd know that it's saying that cops are seven times more likely to shoot and kill unarmed black people than unarmed white people. I just used a direct quote from the article, but if you're gonna throw a fit over something so slight then you probably weren't gonna take the article seriously anyway.

 

And you're incredibly ignorant if you think that BLM is a movement that encourages cop killing, especially since last year was one of the safest years for police officers in over a quarter century. But keep whining about a made-up war on cops.

 

I said that already earlier in the thread. I'm targeting people like ThreeCats who have the pants-on-head retarded argument that most cops are racist unarmed black man killing machines.

 

That's not my argument at all, but please do continue to misinterpret my argument if it makes you feel better.

 

Assuming this is true, I have to wonder if the discrepancy is really due to racism or if white men can on average afford better lawyers(and personal opinion, Lawyers should be banned from the courtroom if not all government buildings, if not outlawed as a profession), but even if it's due to racism, police have no authority, to my knowledge, to impact a judge's decisions in sentencing, and thus it makes no sense to blame cops, even the bad ones, for sentencing discrepancies. And since this statement is specifically for black men vs white men, I have to wonder what the figures for female sentencing look like.

 

Prosecutors have to cooperate with the police when working on their case. That presents a conflict of interest when a police officer is the one on trial. I've previously posted examples in this thread of prosecutors going easy on defendants because they were police officers.

 

Blacks remain far more likely than whites to be arrested for selling drugs (3.6 times more likely) or possessing drugs (2.5 times more likely) even though whites are equally likely to sell and use drugs.

Personally, I'd say this is a symptom of a more fundamental problem, namely that drugs are illegal despite plenty of evidence that a regulated legal market could better mitigate their negative effects than can an outright ban. That said, even if I thought the War on Drugs wasn't a colossal waste of resources that does more harm than the drugs themselves, again, I have to wonder if the discrepancy is actually due to racism, or if income/education plays a role.

 

How would income and education play a role in the discrepancy between black and white arrests for drug-related charges?

 

The Justice Department concluded that the Ferguson Police Department had been routinely violating the constitutional rights of its black residents.

Ignoring the possibility that the DoJ falsified their report to make themselves look good, Ferguson is just one town essentially unknown except to its locals prior to this whole clusterfuck. I once read in a textbook that North Carolina had over 500 municipalities. If that 500 figure is anywhere near average, that would mean that there are roughly 25,000 towns and cities in the United States. I doubt Ferguson is the only town with such a thoroughly corrupt police department, but you can't make any meaningful conclusions about the nation as a whole from a single data point out of thousands.

 

What reason do you have to believe that the DoJ could have possibly falsified the report?

 

And many of the findings that were used to conclude that the Ferguson police department were discriminating against black people are present on a national scale (excessive violence against black people, harsher sentences for black people, etc.). That doesn't mean that every district's police department is racist, but it does point to there being a national problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll admit I only have a cursory understanding of standard operating procedures in American courtrooms. Considering that, as I understand it, law enforcement agents handle much of the crime scene investigation and cataloging of evidence, it's only natural that attorneys on both the prosecution and defense sides have to work closely with law enforcement, and I can see how this can lead to a conflict of interest whenever a law enforcement agent is among either the plaintiffs or the defendants, especially if the officers handling the investigation and the officer involved in the trial are coworkers. Not seeing how this translates to implied claims that police officers in general have undue influence over Jurors(the ones responsible for conviction or acquittal) or Judges(the one responsible for sentencing except in cases of death penalty).

As for income and education, in general, these have a profound effect on one's circumstances and what opportunities are available to them, and there are many criminals who lack the income for basic necessities and lack the education to obtain a better job and turn to crime because they see it as their best or perhaps only means of survival.

As for how it might relate to drug use, being arrested implies being caught. Logically, a highly educated drug user or dealer is more likely to know how to avoid attention and how to look innocent if they catch attention, and logically, the more disposable income one has, the more they can afford to invest in measures to help them avoid detection or conceal evidence when they are detected. If the police search your house, they're a lot less likely to find your stash if you keep it in a concealed safe as opposed to leaving it on your coffee table.

As for the DoJ report, I'm naturally skeptical of the government and think it common sense to take anything said by a politician, a government agency, or a representative thereof with a grain of salt, and to be quite honest, as much as you seem to be convinced that corruption is widespread in American law enforcement, and the DoJ is, as I understand it, the part of the executive bureaucracy responsible for keeping law enforcement in check, I'm surprised you aren't suspicious that the DoJ itself is corrupt or is even the source of the corruption. Then again, I'm not convince there aren't politicians or wealthy campaign supporters thereof paying the mainstream media outlets to exaggerate racial issues as part of efforts to distract the masses from more fundamental problems.

Edited by Jeffery Mewtamer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the vast majority of black people do not believe that at all.

 

BLM does, though, which was the point.

You should stick to not posting, thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BLM does, though, which was the point.

You should stick to not posting, thanks.

@Alice Baker I totally agree with you. Black people are constantly attacked and hassled by the police which i do not deny, but on the flip side there are certain times where the police are justified in their actions towards the black community. Remember that when a police officer arrives on a call they have a limited time to first identify the problem and second try and fix the problem so that there is peace among the population and an understanding is met between the police and the civilian community.

Here is a quote direct from the lapd manual which can be accessed at lapdonline.org:

130.10 PREVENTION OF CRIME. Peace in a free society depends on voluntary compliance with the law. The primary responsibility for upholding the law therefore lies not with the police, but with the people. Since crime is a social phenomenon, crime prevention is the concern of every person living in society. Society employs full‑time professional police to prevent crime, to deter it, and when that fails, to apprehend those who violate the law.

Crime is a symptom of ills within society which are not the responsibility of the Department to cure. The Department is responsible, however, for interacting with the community to generate mutual understanding so that there may be public support for crime prevention. Community involvement is essential to facilitate a free flow of information between the public and the Department to assist in the identification of problem areas and to inform the public of crime statistics and trends. Additionally, knowledge of the community is necessary so that each Department employee may be instilled with a sense of concern for the crime problems and law enforcement needs in his assigned area of responsibility.

The prevention of crime remains as a basic obligation of society. When it becomes necessary to rely on police action to secure compliance with the law, society has failed in this responsibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BLM does, though, which was the point.

You should stick to not posting, thanks.

Where's your proof of that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly.

 

I dream for a day we can go back to Mayberry policing, but for that to happen, the nation's gotta go back to a Mayberry state of society. The day this stops happening on a daily basis Is the day we stop making snap decisions to save our own lives. BLM. What a fucking joke. "The NAACP and the ACLU take themselves too seriously to let us shut down an entire freeway for laughs, dey racis."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BLM are not a "fucking joke" at all, and you constantly saying that makes it hard for people to respect you and your side of things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BLM are not a "fucking joke" at all, and you constantly saying that makes it hard for people to respect you and your side of things.

 

 

Where's your proof of that?

 

Disrespecting veterans: http://americanspotlight.com/news/how-black-lives-matter-activists-showed-their-true-colors-on-memorial-day/

 

Vandalism (with bonus couldn't spell a 6 letter word): http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/24/black-lives-matter-vandalism-wave-strikes-confederate-memorials-around-the-country/

 

Rioting, looting, and illegitimacy: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/03/vox-riots-arson-and-shootings-aside-black-lives-matter-is-pretty-peaceful/

 

Terrorist Threats: http://www.infowars.com/some-black-lives-matter-supporters-threaten-riots-after-freddie-gray-mistrial/

 

Stranding thousands of motorists on a bridge: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/18/black-lives-matter-protesters-block-sf-bay-bridge/78984818/

 

More rioting, leader of BLM attempts to justify looting: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/9/deray-mckesson-black-lives-matter-leader-and-yale-/

 

And, finally,

Remember, kids, if you're white and studying at the library, you're racist scum: http://www.mediaite.com/online/dartmouth-protesters-disrupt-students-in-library-fck-you-you-filthy-white-fcks/

 

At best, they're a bunch of unorganized, undisiciplined morons. At worst, they are a domestic terrorist organization.

 

 

You should stick to not posting, thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 
 

 

Disrespecting veterans: http://americanspotlight.com/news/how-black-lives-matter-activists-showed-their-true-colors-on-memorial-day/

 

Vandalism (with bonus couldn't spell a 6 letter word): http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/24/black-lives-matter-vandalism-wave-strikes-confederate-memorials-around-the-country/

 

Rioting, looting, and illegitimacy: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/03/vox-riots-arson-and-shootings-aside-black-lives-matter-is-pretty-peaceful/

 

Terrorist Threats: http://www.infowars.com/some-black-lives-matter-supporters-threaten-riots-after-freddie-gray-mistrial/

 

Stranding thousands of motorists on a bridge: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/18/black-lives-matter-protesters-block-sf-bay-bridge/78984818/

 

More rioting, leader of BLM attempts to justify looting: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/9/deray-mckesson-black-lives-matter-leader-and-yale-/

 

And, finally,

Remember, kids, if you're white and studying at the library, you're racist scum: http://www.mediaite.com/online/dartmouth-protesters-disrupt-students-in-library-fck-you-you-filthy-white-fcks/

 

At best, they're a bunch of unorganized, undisiciplined morons. At worst, they are a domestic terrorist organization.

 

*Looks around with fake shocked eyes* Domestic Terrorists? Where!?

 

Yeah verex, Alice definitely knows what shes talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have zero respect for veterans(at best they deserve pity for being victims of the Federal Government's Warmongering ways; at worst, they deserve contempt for feeding those warmongering ways), but even if all of the above allegations are a mixture of falsehoods and rogue elements tarnishing the organization's reputation, I have to question their effectiveness at spreading their message(whatever it may be) when this thread remains the only place I've ever heard Black Lives Matter being mentioned. Granted, I've got better things to do than pay attention to whatever social drama mainstream news outlets(both on television and the Internet) want to peddle as news, but as much of a disorganized mess as Occupy Wall Street was, it at least got enough attention I was hearing about it from multiple directions while BLM doesn't seem to be on anyone's radar excluding those directly affected or buried in the media outlets that report on such things.

Edited by Jeffery Mewtamer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have zero respect for veterans(at best they deserve pity for being victims of the Federal Government's Warmongering ways; at worst, they deserve contempt for feeding those warmongering ways)

 

Ever, uh, heard of the draft? Also, these are civil war memorials, from a very different time in history.

 

Either way, you don't get to choose where you're assigned at intake. You could be assigned to be frontline infantry; you could be assigned stateside as a motor pool mechanic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ever, uh, heard of the draft? Also, these are civil war memorials, from a very different time in history.

 

Either way, you don't get to choose where you're assigned at intake. You could be assigned to be frontline infantry; you could be assigned stateside as a motor pool mechanic.

I thought the draft hasn't been used in a long time. When was the last time people were drafted into the military? Vietnam war, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Women don't have to, but men must register for the selective service. It still exists but hasn't been activated since Vietnam, I believe. The civil war took place before Vietnam, and it doesn't make them any less veterans no matter where or when they served. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no history buff, but to my knowledge, the War of 1812 was the only war the United States fought to repel foreign invasion, and I have trouble justifying war for any other reason. As for the Civil War, while I think slavery is fundamentally wrong, as far as I'm concerned, the confederacy had every right to secede, and the Union had no right to use force to prevent succession. I'm also not fond of the trend of eroding state rights the Civil War started.

As for the draft, the concept is atrocious, and the fact the Federal Government hasn't invoked it in roughly half-a-century is one of the few points the Federal Government has for it in my mind, though the fact they haven't dismantled the concept altogether is one in a long list of things I hold against the Federal Government. Also, I salute draft dodgers for choosing peace over being a cog in a war machine, and if they ever invoke the draft again and my number comes up, I hope my blindness would be enough to get out of it, because I'm not convinced I'd be capable of doing the noble thing and running.

I do feel sorrow for those who fall for the Federal Government's propaganda and end up scarred, crippled, or dead because of it and the families thereof. I do feel anger towards the Federal Government for not caring how many they sacrifice, for being insufficient in helping repair the damage they cause, and for apparently ignoring whether former soldiers who are still of sound body are also of sound mind. As for those that enlist fully aware that there is no honor in war and hoping to kill a few of those marked as the enemy, as far as I'm concerned, they're no better than civilians who are seriously contemplating first degree murder. Granted, I believe that even murderers aren't automatically beyond redemption, but I'm not seeing where respect enters the equation.

That said, I try to keep my interactions with others civil, even when dealing with people who have earned my personal contempt(which isn't many as there are few I can claim have wronged me personally). Respect has to be earned, but everyone deserves civility until proven otherwise, and even with those that don't deserve it, showing civility is still a good idea.

Edited by Jeffery Mewtamer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wanted to share this petition on here, apparently the prosecutor for the Tamir Rice case was doing a lot of manipulating behind the scenes in order to prevent the cop that killed Tamir from getting any charges: https://www.change.org/p/department-of-justice-investigate-the-killing-of-tamir-rice?utm_source=action_alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=500002&alert_id=xMTLhNFnlt_FdBLDnnxlb9Z%2B4w704BP6KbHvfF4KiFBpSJClIr%2Fbxd98j4VvbXhyIqfR6lwozhP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Police brutality is an issue. Always has been and the only reason yout see more is because of phones. That being said more often then not, it only shows half the story and you can never trust what you see unless you were there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should've known this would have turned into a free spewing of propaganda from the original poster. Starts topic about police brutality, instead rants on BLM, reverse racism, calls other people dumb and degrade them for staying on topic. Yeah, don't start another debate again please.

 

Since I'm here I'd like to rebuttal a specific comment in here that irks me a bit.

 

Alice Baker:

 

"Yeah, that's right. The majority by NEARLY 200% of people shot dead by cops were white." Maybe if you didn't take the piss on this statement I wouldn't have responded, but this tells me you're already biased by majority results and wouldn't care for the rest as you'll see below.

 

"The majority by an even wider margin actually had deadly weapons." And this is relevant because? I feel like you're just trying to justify the reputation of cops more than you're staying on topic with us. Obviously if someone has a deadly weapon I would assume rightful force being acted upon the person, why would there even be opposition to that notion? AGAIN, you started a topic on "police brutality" and I should've known from the title that this was going to be biased, "real problem or diversion" really?

 

"he killings of unarmed persons by police is the smallest group on the list, next to unverifiable cases." Isn't THAT what we're supposed to be talking about, unjustified police force? You fail to mention any of this part because you know even in the exact article it says "Although black men make up only 6 percent of the US population, they account for 40 percent of the unarmed men shot to death by police this year." So if you want to judge police brutality by one context-free statement of "NEARLY 200% of people shot dead are white" you might as well consider this one too.

 

"EVEN IF the subject shot by police were unarmed, that does not exclusively guarantee that it was a wrongful death or homicide." Why dismiss this as if ALL of them are rightful deaths though? Let's talk about the 99% that aren't, because as a police you are TRAINED to use other means to neutralize the situation and not directly resort to your guns. This tells me either you're lying about being a cop, or you are one of the bad ones trying to justify the wrongdoings of untrained cops that didn't do their jobs as they're supposed to. And PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong, but using a gun on an unarmed personnel is never a good idea, not for you, not for the person in question, and not for the safety of the environment and/or any people around you and him. You don't even have to be a cop to know this.

If you cannot disprove the fact that people IN GENERAL can be shot unarmed and that there has been cases for ALL races (how do you stray from the topic of police brutality AND start talking about race?) then you should know from this notion that there's been many wrongful deaths, and the fact that you tried dismissing this only shows that you weren't interested in the given topic in the first place and only wanted to talk down on people with less than relevant facts on what percentage of what race gets killed (not all police shootings result in death either, something your source did not include *hint*).

 

Let's bring this topic back on topic now. Just look up on Google "police brutality" tell me what you see. No bias, no propaganda, no victim-shaming, pure unadulterated beatings, full-on assaults of no reason, caught on tape for all of us to see. "Real problem or diversion?" Really? If this isn't a "real problem" just imagine what it could be a diversion of, worldwide police state? I would LOVE for ANYONE to look up these videos and tell anyone else on this earth in the face of how it's not a real problem....

 

 

 

 

But with all that being said I acknowledge the fact that cops in general are not to blame for the actions of impulsive individuals, BUT it is within their fault and the police department's that these individuals in question are allowed to keep their jobs, while other cops who had done minor mistakes before gets stripped of their badge. Hell, Peter Liang was almost IMPRISONED for an actual mistake that they PROVED was a mistake. Where's even TRIALS for half of the ones deserving a case? Just saying.

 

 

 

Edited by EmmyMurder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I...I feel like someone didn't read all the posts. Because all of this has been talked about and concluded so far in the thread to the point that these talking points are as dead as this topic Lolol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have actually changed my view on this. Having seen what went on overseas recently, I'd say that racially motivated police brutality is ignored, even when it is put in the media. People look at it and they just don't care. A black MOTHER was killed the other day by a cop, she had her INFANT with her. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.