ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 24th May 2018, 07:27 PM   #161
bobdroege7
Master Poster
 
bobdroege7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,517
Originally Posted by sadhatter View Post
It would likely not be a fine but an obstruction charge for wasting the cops time with your stunt. I'm assuming in your scenario you tell the police you intentionally let the air out of your tire.

Otherwise your point boils down to if you lie and get away with it you don't get charged. And im sorry but I saw that on last night's episode of "no **** ".
I'm not intentionally involving the cops with my little stunt.

I'll be on my way as soon as triple A comes and fixes my flat.

I either flunked a mechanical aptitude test or just would rather not change a tire if I can pay someone else to do it.

Hey, maybe the scofflaw will help me out and we can go get a beer after.
__________________
Un-american Jack-booted thug

Graduate of a liberal arts college!

Faster play faster faster play faster
bobdroege7 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 07:29 PM   #162
bobdroege7
Master Poster
 
bobdroege7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,517
Originally Posted by banquetbear View Post



Thats nice. Whats the fine for intentionally blocking a legal right-of-way?
If you don't have the right to park in a handicapped space, then you don't have the right of way to leave it, now do you?
__________________
Un-american Jack-booted thug

Graduate of a liberal arts college!

Faster play faster faster play faster
bobdroege7 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 07:34 PM   #163
banquetbear
Graduate Poster
 
banquetbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,444
Originally Posted by bobdroege7 View Post
If you don't have the right to park in a handicapped space, then you don't have the right of way to leave it, now do you?
...is that the argument you intend to use in a court of law to defend yourself?
banquetbear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 07:40 PM   #164
Bogative
Graduate Poster
 
Bogative's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,045
Thumbs up

Originally Posted by banquetbear View Post
...so "walking away" in itself is not de-escalation, as you claimed it was. Gotcha.
I'll try to explain this to you again. When the only officer at the scene who had confronted Brown in any authoritative manner walks away from the interaction, yes, it is de-escalation. As I said earlier, I do not consider the presence of other officers to be escalation. Now if you have proof that the other officers were confronting Brown and escalating the situation, I would be more than thrilled to see it.


Quote:
At what point was it explained to Brown that he was being detained for "trying to push his way past the initial cop?"
Not sure when they verbally explained it to him, but it should've been more than obvious when the officer physically blocked him from getting into his car. From that moment on Brown is detained until the officers tell him he is free to go were placed him under arrest.


Quote:
At what point did the initial officer relay this information to the other officers in order so that they could tell Brown that this was the reason he was being detained?
Evidence that the police are required to explain the reason why they're detaining a suspect to either the suspect, or other officers and what kind of timeframe is required.

Quote:
You said what I said was "a lie."
Because it is. The officer explains to Brown the reason for the interaction/detainment.

Quote:
Yet here you are, guessing why you think he was detained. If we can't be sure exactly why they detained him, why are you so confident that Brown knew?
I'm changing my speculation to absolute certainty that Brown knew why he was being detained. I turned the volume up on the video and listened again, the officer explained to him what was going on at the 50 second mark the video. Did the officer use the actual word "detained"? No, but with all my interactions with police officers I was never specifically told that I was being detained, the act of being stopped is itself detainment.

Quote:
I believe that it is wrong to escalate to physical force when there are other options on the table.
To be frank, what you believe doesn't matter in this situation. The only thing that matters is the Milwaukee Police Department's guidelines and rules on escalation of force.


Quote:
It isn't about "bad PR." Its about bad policing.
It's also about Brown's behavior and disregard for the law. He felt entitled enough to block two handicap spaces when he parked instead of using a normal spot like most people do. He felt he was entitled enough try to push the police officer out of his way to get into his car. He also felt entitled enough to ignore an officer telling him to take his hands out of his pocket for the safety of every officer there.
Bogative is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 07:42 PM   #165
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 17,999
Originally Posted by mgidm86 View Post
If Milo or that nazi Spencer guy had parked across multiple disabled spots and flashed their awesomeness to the cops and got treated the same way this would be a completely different thread. This would be a cheering section for the cops.
You are absolutely correct.

And they would be wrong to do so. The cops' actions would be indefensible, regardless of the race or ideology of the victim.



It's so bloody obvious that this wasn't about the law. It wasn't about safety. It was all about power. It was about who's in charge. It was "you didn't do what I told you" and "I own this right here." No, you don't own it officer. This is America.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 07:44 PM   #166
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 17,999
Originally Posted by Bogative View Post
He felt he was entitled enough try to push the police officer out of his way to get into his car.
That didn't happen.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 07:46 PM   #167
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 17,999
Originally Posted by Bogative View Post
To be frank, what you believe doesn't matter in this situation. The only thing that matters is the Milwaukee Police Department's guidelines and rules on escalation of force.
Truer words were never spoken.

Three officers were suspended for violating those guidelines.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 07:55 PM   #168
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,095
Originally Posted by sadhatter View Post
Because he is a *********** moron?

Seriously the "he was afraid if he did what they told him he would be harmed" defense is just laughable. If the man felt that he needs a helper for daily tasks.

If a mugger pulls a gun on me and demands my wallet I'm not going to assume he is going to shoot me if I do so. One should extend the police that much courtesy, to assume they are not just out to murder you in full public view.

And if you feel that is the case, explain to me how you can morally justify not arming yourself and killing police.
Really? Just how much courtesy would you extend to a police officer who started a completely unnecessary confrontation over a parking infraction? A police officer who is deliberately trying to make a felony out of not even a misdemeanor?

And it's not about courtesy, anyway. It's about fear. Maybe at 2 o'clock in the afternoon, a smiling police officer pulling a black person over to tell them their brake lights aren't working gets the benefit of the doubt. A belligerent cop overreacting to a parking infraction in an empty parking lot at 2 o'clock in the morning? I'd be very afraid.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 08:11 PM   #169
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 4,128
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
Really? Just how much courtesy would you extend to a police officer who started a completely unnecessary confrontation over a parking infraction? A police officer who is deliberately trying to make a felony out of not even a misdemeanor?

And it's not about courtesy, anyway. It's about fear. Maybe at 2 o'clock in the afternoon, a smiling police officer pulling a black person over to tell them their brake lights aren't working gets the benefit of the doubt. A belligerent cop overreacting to a parking infraction in an empty parking lot at 2 o'clock in the morning? I'd be very afraid.
The cop was fine till Brown got aggressive. 'How ya doin? You got your drivers license?' That is a reasonable approach. Brown's immediate aggression changed the game, and it was very quickly no longer about his Privileged Princess parking. It became about picking a fight with a cop. And cops like to win that game.

Do you seriously think this has anything to do with race? This is about a damn fool starting a pissing match with a cop who gave it right back in spades. Both were wrong, and both were stupid. Neither showed any interest in race.
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 08:33 PM   #170
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 38,831
Originally Posted by sadhatter View Post
Same gets said for ghosts. Doesn't make it accurate.
Ah, yes, the conservative parallel failure.

> People have been reporting UFOs, Ghosts, Bigfootz and Abusive Police for the past century.

> Now, with every citizen armed with a camera, plus security cams on ever third light pole, we:
a) Have yet to see a clear video or picture of a UFO, a Ghost or a Bigfoot.
b) Have hundreds of videos of cops abusing people and overstepping their authority.

Congratulations! Off to GenSkepPara with you as you've just disproved the existence of three of their favorite woo-ish beliefs.

Now as to Current Events, that'd be a resounding "You Fail!"
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 08:33 PM   #171
rdwight
Critical Thinker
 
rdwight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 329
Originally Posted by sadhatter View Post
Because he is a *********** moron?

Seriously the "he was afraid if he did what they told him he would be harmed" defense is just laughable. If the man felt that he needs a helper for daily tasks.

If a mugger pulls a gun on me and demands my wallet I'm not going to assume he is going to shoot me if I do so. One should extend the police that much courtesy, to assume they are not just out to murder you in full public view.

And if you feel that is the case, explain to me how you can morally justify not arming yourself and killing police.
Why? Even if you take it as a given that complying with such a command comes with no risk, is it really beyond your belief a black man in this situation will have the same outlook? It is not like objects being removed from a pocket or simply fast movements themselves haven't caused lethal force in turn.

If the cops feel like after all the time spent there, surrounding a suspect with 6 other cops and additional backup around them, that instantaneous adherence to a command to remove their hands from their pocket is threatening enough to warrant their actions, then maybe they are a bit too paranoid to be on the force. Especially since his hands have been in and out of his pockets for most of the time there.

I'm tired of these random 'fears' cops are drilled with about worst case scenarios in every interaction with the public. If it has led to a quantifiable lowering or violence against police, I want to see the evidence.
rdwight is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 08:36 PM   #172
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 38,831
Originally Posted by Bogative View Post
My best estimation of the number of times I've been pulled over by police is between 70 and 80. I have never one time in all those interactions with law enforcement been forced to the ground and tasered.

I attribute that to never once having disobeyed a lawful order and never once tried to push past a cop and ignore what they were telling me to do.
On how many of those occasions were you black, may I ask?
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 08:44 PM   #173
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 11,021
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
The cop was fine till Brown got aggressive. 'How ya doin? You got your drivers license?' That is a reasonable approach. Brown's immediate aggression changed the game, and it was very quickly no longer about his Privileged Princess parking. It became about picking a fight with a cop. And cops like to win that game.
He wasn't aggressive at all.

Quote:
Do you seriously think this has anything to do with race? This is about a damn fool starting a pissing match with a cop who gave it right back in spades. Both were wrong, and both were stupid. Neither showed any interest in race.
The post you were responding to didn't say anything about race.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 09:22 PM   #174
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 6,117
Originally Posted by sadhatter View Post
Seriously the "he was afraid if he did what they told him he would be harmed" defense is just laughable.
As long as you actually accept a premise that runs so clearly counter to evidence as the above, you will continue to reach false conclusions.

Again, we have Levar Jones, Philando Castile, the girl that was beaten by Officer Barrel Roll, Sandra Bland and Michael Bennett as more famous counterexamples - as well as several occasions of this being done en masse in Baltimore and Ferguson. And we also know that the cop was being openly belligerent. NYPD is famous for demanding that black and Hispanic pedestrians empty their pockets - and then arresting them for having knives/weed/etc. in public view.

Sterling Brown's concern is entirely appropriate here.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 09:33 PM   #175
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,095
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
As long as you actually accept a premise that runs so clearly counter to evidence as the above, you will continue to reach false conclusions.

Again, we have Levar Jones, Philando Castile, the girl that was beaten by Officer Barrel Roll, Sandra Bland and Michael Bennett as more famous counterexamples - as well as several occasions of this being done en masse in Baltimore and Ferguson. And we also know that the cop was being openly belligerent. NYPD is famous for demanding that black and Hispanic pedestrians empty their pockets - and then arresting them for having knives/weed/etc. in public view.

Sterling Brown's concern is entirely appropriate here.
Given that it only takes one cop to yell "Gun!" upon seeing anything or nothing in a "suspect's" hand (particularly if that hand is black), mortal terror would be a reasonable response to the demand of "show me your hands." I'd imagine the pressure of the fight or flight response increasing with the arrival of each new potential murderer.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 10:13 PM   #176
banquetbear
Graduate Poster
 
banquetbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,444
Originally Posted by Bogative View Post
I'll try to explain this to you again.
...do you plan to say anything significantly different?

Quote:
When the only officer at the scene who had confronted Brown in any authoritative manner walks away from the interaction, yes, it is de-escalation. As I said earlier, I do not consider the presence of other officers to be escalation. Now if you have proof that the other officers were confronting Brown and escalating the situation, I would be more than thrilled to see it.
Apparently not.

De-escalation is a process. Its deliberate, and the goal of de-escalation is to, you know, DE-ESCALATE. The officer didn't walk away to de-escalate the situation. He walked away because he wanted to chat to one of the other officers. To characterize that action as an attempt at "de-escalation" is disingenuous. It wasn't.

As to what happened while the officer was away from Sterling: well in just over 3 minutes later Sterling was being thrown to the ground and tazed. So things escalated. As to who escalated? I don't see Sterling doing much more than arguing and standing with his hands in his pockets.

Quote:
Not sure when they verbally explained it to him, but it should've been more than obvious when the officer physically blocked him from getting into his car.
You mean "if" they verbally explained it to him, not "when", don't you? The only person who knew that Sterling "pushed the officer" was the officer himself. He didn't report it when he called in for help. He told the other officer "he got right up in my face" but he didn't mention any push. So how could they "verbally explain" something to him when nobody knew that it happened?

Quote:
From that moment on Brown is detained until the officers tell him he is free to go were placed him under arrest.
It appears "that moment" never happened.

Quote:
Evidence that the police are required to explain the reason why they're detaining a suspect to either the suspect, or other officers and what kind of timeframe is required.
Why would I need to provide evidence of that? I never claimed the police were required to explain the reason why they're detaining a suspect to either the suspect. This was about your assertion that "he was being detained because he tried to push a police officer out of his way and enter his vehicle while being lawfully questioned."

When did the first officer tell Sterling that he was being detained for this reason? When did the first officer explain this to the other officers?

Quote:
Because it is.
No it wasn't.

Quote:
The officer explains to Brown the reason for the interaction/detainment.
And what was that reason? Try not to guess this time.

Quote:
I'm changing my speculation to absolute certainty that Brown knew why he was being detained. I turned the volume up on the video and listened again, the officer explained to him what was going on at the 50 second mark the video.
The officer says nothing about this alleged "push" at 50 seconds. The officer says he's there because of how the car is parked.

Quote:
Did the officer use the actual word "detained"? No, but with all my interactions with police officers I was never specifically told that I was being detained, the act of being stopped is itself detainment.
Anecdotes are anecdotes, and even if you have been stopped nearly a hundred times in your life your personal experience really isn't relevant. It doesn't matter whether or not they are obliged to tell him why he was being detained or not. The fact is that "not telling him" in this particular circumstance was not a smart way to de-escalate.

Quote:
To be frank, what you believe doesn't matter in this situation. The only thing that matters is the Milwaukee Police Department's guidelines and rules on escalation of force.
And look how that turned out!

Quote:
It's also about Brown's behavior and disregard for the law.
Why? You don't think that police deal with people that get angry all the time? People get pissed off. Thats a fact of life. The officer successfully managed to de-escalate. Sterling was co-operating, he gave his name immediately when asked, then the officer lost his ****. The officer lost control of the scene when he got emotional and stopped trying to listen. That isn't on Brown.

Quote:
He felt entitled enough to block two handicap spaces when he parked instead of using a normal spot like most people do.
It was two in the *********** morning. The carpark was *********** empty. This wasn't the calculated decision-making of an "entitled" person to block two "handicapped" spaces. It was a guy who decided to pop down to the shop in the early hours of the morning and parked right next to the doors because maybe he was feeling just a little bit lazy and didn't want to walk that far. It inconvenienced nobody. Yes he's not allowed to do it. Yes, he got "caught", and he deserved a ticket, even though I suspect that 99 times out of a hundred in identical circumstances nothing would have happened. But there is no need to pretend that this was anything that it was not.

Quote:
He felt he was entitled enough try to push the police officer out of his way to get into his car.
There are several people in this thread who dispute the characterization of a "push." I've chosen not to dispute it because materially it doesn't change the arguments I've put forward. I've just watched it again. He didn't try and push the officer out of the way to get into his car. It simply didn't happen. You should stop characterizing it as such.

Quote:
He also felt entitled enough to ignore an officer telling him to take his hands out of his pocket for the safety of every officer there.
You keep using the word "entitled." I think we will add that to the list of buzzwords you've been using that "sounds like it fits" but doesn't quite mean what you think it means.
banquetbear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 10:22 PM   #177
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 6,117
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
Given that it only takes one cop to yell "Gun!" upon seeing anything or nothing in a "suspect's" hand (particularly if that hand is black), mortal terror would be a reasonable response to the demand of "show me your hands." I'd imagine the pressure of the fight or flight response increasing with the arrival of each new potential murderer.
And now my standard caveat:

Native Americans are more likely, per person, to be abused by police than black people,

fully half of all people killed by police have a mental illness.

is racism a part of the issue? Absolutely. Is it beyond that, to police who respond to everything with over-the-top aggression and escalation, along with police chiefs, DAs, unions and fellowships, and now a president and Attorney General who outright approve of such idiotic shows of force? Yes, and this is, by far, more important.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 11:26 PM   #178
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,471
Originally Posted by mgidm86 View Post
If Milo or that nazi Spencer guy had parked across multiple disabled spots and flashed their awesomeness to the cops and got treated the same way this would be a completely different thread. This would be a cheering section for the cops.

And who above said "with everything going on in this country right now"? What exactly is going on? The way I see it the media have decided that reporting on racism is the trendy thing to do and is so important that they will report on anything involving a black person and then hope there's racism. Here is another such story.

The cops apologize publicly because they are pressured to do so (see previous paragraph).

Do people here think the recent reports are due to a spike (Massive Wave) in racism?
Being a neo-nazi scumbag is not the same thing as being black. I'll assume you can figure out the difference.

But no, I wouldn't be cheering the cops on.
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 11:43 PM   #179
Bogative
Graduate Poster
 
Bogative's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,045
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Truer words were never spoken.

Three officers were suspended for violating those guidelines.
Yes, and considering the tensions between the citizens of Milwaukee and the police force over the last few years, I would expect nothing less from the police chief to throw the officers under the bus to avoid sparking that powder keg.

When I watch the video, I see nothing that I wouldn't expect to happen to me if I pulled the same shenanigans.
Bogative is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2018, 11:50 PM   #180
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,095
Originally Posted by Bogative View Post
Yes, and considering the tensions between the citizens of Milwaukee and the police force over the last few years, I would expect nothing less from the police chief to throw the officers under the bus to avoid sparking that powder keg.

When I watch the video, I see nothing that I wouldn't expect to happen to me if I pulled the same shenanigans.
Then it's a good thing you're not a police chief.

Your affection for police violence in response to virtually nothing would be more disturbing if it was less common.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 12:21 AM   #181
Bogative
Graduate Poster
 
Bogative's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,045
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
What does that have to do with this situation? You can't have your hands in your pockets when a cop's writing you a parking ticket? How paranoid are these guys anyway?
Not paranoid, but vigilant. 39 officers were killed in the line of duty by gunfire in 2015. 66 in 2016. 44 last year. And I'm sure many many more who were shot but not killed and shot at and not hit.

The police training institute at the local university teaches their trainees to keep the hands of anyone they are interacting with visible. Apparently, many years of experience, and a little bit rational thinking, it makes sense to not allow someone to keep their hands in their pockets in case there is a weapon that could be hidden in there.

Here is an example in which a cop was foolish enough to approach a robbery suspect with his Taser pulled instead of his service weapon. The suspect was walking away from the cop with his hand in his jacket pocket. The cop commands the robbery suspect to take his hands out of his pocket several times. The suspect pulls out a gun and shoots the cop four times. Maybe this cop should have been a little more "paranoid."

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE



Here's another example of why cops grab the wrists of people they are interacting with when they refused to keep their hands visible. Unfortunately, the cop wasn't forceful enough and he was shot for a misdemeanor drug charge.

https://youtu.be/AgDoDKqgr0M?t=475

As I mentioned earlier, these are the types of videos that are used to train police officers on how to avoid being shot.
Bogative is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 12:27 AM   #182
Bogative
Graduate Poster
 
Bogative's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,045
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
That didn't happen.
You're correct. Brown crowded the officer who was standing directly in front of the driver's door and tried to get in the car according to the audio. Doesn't look like Brown made physical contact with the cop.
Bogative is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 12:33 AM   #183
Bogative
Graduate Poster
 
Bogative's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,045
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Truer words were never spoken.

Three officers were suspended for violating those guidelines.
This is true. But I haven't heard the disciplined officers' side of the story, from their union, or seen any other body can footage from the other officers.
Bogative is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 01:45 AM   #184
Bogative
Graduate Poster
 
Bogative's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,045
Originally Posted by banquetbear View Post
De-escalation is a process. Its deliberate
So I went and read the definition of de-escalation on four separate dictionaries sites and not one of them said anything about de-escalation being "deliberate" or a process. Walking away from an escalated situation in this case and having other officers stand near Brown was de-escalation unless you have proof that other officers escalated the situation.

As an example, if the U.S. Navy turns its Pacific fleet back towards California tomorrow and cancels scheduled exercises with Japan and South Korea, it will be a de-escalation with North Korea no matter the reason they do sospace and whether it was deliberate or a process to do so specifically for de-escalation.



Quote:
As to what happened while the officer was away from Sterling: well in just over 3 minutes later Sterling was being thrown to the ground and tazed. So things escalated. As to who escalated? I don't see Sterling doing much more than arguing and standing with his hands in his pockets.
Browne escalated the situation when he refused to remove his hands from his pocket. Unless you believe it was an unlawful order and I'm going to need evidence of that. As I said earlier, you may consider the presence of officers and escalation within itself, but I don't. For all we know there was another officer deliberately trying to de-escalate the situation.



Quote:
You mean "if" they verbally explained it to him, not "when", don't you? The only person who knew that Sterling "pushed the officer" was the officer himself. He didn't report it when he called in for help. He told the other officer "he got right up in my face" but he didn't mention any push. So how could they "verbally explain" something to him when nobody knew that it happened?
Help me understand why this is important to you. Are you suggesting that Brown's detainment was illegal? Nevermind. I understand from a later response why you're pushing this angle. Your trying to lay the blame of the escalation on the cops while minimizing Brown's responsibility.



Quote:
It appears "that moment" never happened.
Which is irrelevant. I did some more reading overnight and all the information I found says that the officer's detainment of Brown was legal as soon as he learned Brown was the driver of the car parked illegally in the handicapped spots. I thought questioning someone was not technically detainment unless they are suspected of committing a crime, Brown was in this instance.(this response is what I'm referring to when I say "see above" in future responses.)



Quote:
Why would I need to provide evidence of that? I never claimed the police were required to explain the reason why they're detaining a suspect to either the suspect. This was about your assertion that "he was being detained because he tried to push a police officer out of his way and enter his vehicle while being lawfully questioned."
See above.

Quote:
When did the first officer tell Sterling that he was being detained for this reason? When did the first officer explain this to the other officers?
See above.



Quote:
No it wasn't.
The officer tries to explain to Brown what's going on 16 seconds after his initial contact with Brown before Brown interrupts him and the officer calls for an additional squad.

Quote:
And what was that reason? Try not to guess this time.
See above.

Quote:
The officer says nothing about this alleged "push" at 50 seconds. The officer says he's there because of how the car is parked.
See above.


Quote:
It was two in the *********** morning. The carpark was *********** empty. This wasn't the calculated decision-making of an "entitled" person to block two "handicapped" spaces. It was a guy who decided to pop down to the shop in the early hours of the morning and parked right next to the doors because maybe he was feeling just a little bit lazy and didn't want to walk that far. It inconvenienced nobody. Yes he's not allowed to do it. Yes, he got "caught", and he deserved a ticket, even though I suspect that 99 times out of a hundred in identical circumstances nothing would have happened. But there is no need to pretend that this was anything that it was not.
Brown could've also walked out of the building and cooperated with the police officer, but he chose not to. "Yes officer, my driver's license is in my pocket, let me grab it for you" would have likely avoided the entire ordeal. He showed the initial aggression by walking up very close to the cop and reaching for his door handle. But he didn't, he chose to be a jackass.


Quote:
There are several people in this thread who dispute the characterization of a "push." I've chosen not to dispute it because materially it doesn't change the arguments I've put forward. I've just watched it again. He didn't try and push the officer out of the way to get into his car. It simply didn't happen. You should stop characterizing it as such.
I did, see my reply to Meadmaker.

Last edited by Bogative; 25th May 2018 at 01:51 AM.
Bogative is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 01:58 AM   #185
Bogative
Graduate Poster
 
Bogative's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,045
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
Then it's a good thing you're not a police chief.

Your affection for police violence in response to virtually nothing would be more disturbing if it was less common.
Virtually nothing? I posted three separate videos in this thread as examples as to why it's important for cops to be able to see people's hands with whom they are interacting.

Your affection for wanting police officers to increase the risk of putting themselves in physical danger would be more disturbing if it was less common.
Bogative is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 03:41 AM   #186
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 17,999
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
This is about a damn fool starting a pissing match with a cop who gave it right back in spades. Both were wrong, and both were stupid.

And that is why the cops were suspended. Cops aren't supposed to get into "pissing matches", and they sure as heck are not supposed to "give it right back in spades". Not only is it bad practice, it could be illegal. You say "both were stupid", but only one of them was detained. Only one of them was thrown to the ground. Only one of them was tased. Only one of them was arrested.

Cops can't do that. At least, they don't have the legal authority to do that. Unfortunately, sometimes cops go well beyond their legal authority. It's getting harder for them to do that in the age of body cameras. When there's video of the incident and we can see what happened, we don't accept the cops' word about it automatically.

As for your characterization of Brown as "aggressive", I would say that a better description would be "non-submissive". He wasn't aggressive, but he had an attitude. He wasn't all "yes sir" and "no sir". That's what the cop wanted, and when he didn't get it, he decided to show that boy who was boss. He made sure that Brown understood the most important fact about the encounter, which was "I own this right here."

No, officer, you don't. Maybe a couple of days without pay might give you time to rethink your concept of ownership.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 03:47 AM   #187
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 17,999
Originally Posted by Bogative View Post
"Yes officer, my driver's license is in my pocket, let me grab it for you" would have likely avoided the entire ordeal.
You do realize that Brown did, in fact, give the officer his license, don't you? When the officer asks Brown his name, the officer was holding Brown's license and looking at it. You get that, right?


But that wasn't good enough for Officer "I own this." He wanted that "Yes officer" attitude. He wanted submission. He wanted supplication.

Well, dude, you can't always get what you want.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 04:09 AM   #188
banquetbear
Graduate Poster
 
banquetbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,444
Originally Posted by Bogative View Post
So I went and read the definition of de-escalation on four separate dictionaries sites and not one of them said anything about de-escalation being "deliberate" or a process.
...are you being serious?

It appears you are more ignorant of the subject than I thought.

Can I suggest that rather than relying on dictionary definitions, you start by googling "police de-escalation" and start reading any of the links that pop up. I'll give you some links to start:

https://boingboing.net/2018/04/25/st...s-of-what.html
https://theintercept.com/2017/11/09/...alation-video/
https://www.themarshallproject.org/r...ation-training

Its a process. It requires training. It often requires a complete change of paradigm. If you are accidentally de-escalating then you aren't actually actively trying to de-escalate. It needs to be deliberate. Policy. Everyone needs to be on the same page.

Quote:
Walking away from an escalated situation in this case and having other officers stand near Brown was de-escalation unless you have proof that other officers escalated the situation.
Nope. You simply just don't understand how it works. Going from a routine conversation to six police and a guy on the ground getting tasered in a little over five minutes is a classic textbook case of de-escalation failure. Walking away was not a de-escalation tactic, he was just walking away.

Quote:
As an example, if the U.S. Navy turns its Pacific fleet back towards California tomorrow and cancels scheduled exercises with Japan and South Korea, it will be a de-escalation with North Korea no matter the reason they do sospace and whether it was deliberate or a process to do so specifically for de-escalation.
Are you sure? What if they turn away yet at the very same time the President of the United States claims they are still sailing towards North Korea? What if that same President threatens North Korea with nuclear hell and fury?

Quote:
Browne escalated the situation when he refused to remove his hands from his pocket.
It wasn't Brown's job to implement de-escalation tactics.

Quote:
Unless you believe it was an unlawful order and I'm going to need evidence of that.
Evidence of what? That it took less than three minutes from when the initial officer walked away before Brown was taken to the ground by the other officers? Watch the tape. I haven't claimed the order was unlawful.

Quote:
As I said earlier, you may consider the presence of officers and escalation within itself, but I don't. For all we know there was another officer deliberately trying to de-escalate the situation.
De-escalation tactics don't work if only one officer attempts de-escalation while the others at the location don't. Like this incident for example:

Quote:
Mader was the first responding officer to a 2016 call involving RJ Williams, a 23-year-old black man believed to be suicidal. Mader, who is white, made the determination that Williams did not pose an immediate threat to him or fellow officers, even though he was holding a gun. Mader began trying to talk Williams down.

“He wasn’t angry,” Mader previously told the Guardian. “He wasn’t aggressive, he didn’t seem in position to want to use a gun against anybody. He never pointed it at me. I didn’t perceive him as an imminent threat.”

But amid Mader’s attempts to convince Williams to drop the weapon, two veteran officers arrived on the scene and, almost immediately, shot and killed Williams.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ettles-lawsuit

So from what we did see there was no attempt at de-escalation. Nobody tried to develop a rapport with Brown. From asking him to take his hands out of his pockets to taking him down took seconds. That wouldn't happen if the police were trying to de-escalate.

Quote:
Help me understand why this is important to you. Are you suggesting that Brown's detainment was illegal? Nevermind. I understand from a later response why you're pushing this angle. Your trying to lay the blame of the escalation on the cops while minimizing Brown's responsibility.
What I'm actually doing is pointing out that you got things wrong.

I stated that Brown didn't know why he was being detained.

You called that a lie: and stated that Brown knew why he was being questioned.

I said that wasn't a lie: and asked why you changed "detained" to questioned?" You never answered that question.

I also asked why did you think he was being detained?

You guessed that "I think he was being detained because he tried to push a police officer out of his way and enter his vehicle while being lawfully questioned."

I pointed out that at no stage did the initial officer state that Brown was being detained for this reason, and that at no stage did the initial officer tell any of the other officers that "Brown tried to push him", so that it was literally impossible for any of the other officers to tell Brown that they were detaining him for pushing the initial officer out of the way.

So why am I pushing this?

Because you called me a liar.

I didn't lie. Brown didn't know why he was being detained.

Quote:
Which is irrelevant. I did some more reading overnight and all the information I found says that the officer's detainment of Brown was legal as soon as he learned Brown was the driver of the car parked illegally in the handicapped spots.
Irrelevant to my point.

Quote:
I thought questioning someone was not technically detainment unless they are suspected of committing a crime, Brown was in this instance.(this response is what I'm referring to when I say "see above" in future responses.)
Irrelevant to my point.

Quote:
See above.
Irrelevant to my point.

Quote:
See above.
Irrelevant to my point.

Quote:
The officer tries to explain to Brown what's going on 16 seconds after his initial contact with Brown before Brown interrupts him and the officer calls for an additional squad.
How is this a response to the question of whether or not what I said was a lie?

What I said wasn't a lie.

Quote:
See above.
What was the reason again?

Quote:
See above.
You've already conceded (not to me) you got things wrong about the push. So this "see above" has nothing to do with my point. I was right. You were wrong. There was no push.

Quote:
Brown could've also walked out of the building and cooperated with the police officer, but he chose not to. "Yes officer, my driver's license is in my pocket, let me grab it for you" would have likely avoided the entire ordeal. He showed the initial aggression by walking up very close to the cop and reaching for his door handle. But he didn't, he chose to be a jackass.
But he was co-operating. Let me quote from the OP again:

Originally Posted by banquetbear View Post
POLICE "What's your name?"

STERLING BROWN "Sterling. Sterling Brown."

POLICE "I'm asking you."

STERLING BROWN "I'm telling you. Sterling Brown."

POLICE "These are simple questions man."

STERLING BROWN "No I'm answering..."

POLICE "These are simple questions, and you are being like all bad-ass to me alright?"
He is complying. Plain as day. That's the goal, is it not? He's doing exactly what you suggest he should do, he realized that maybe he was too aggressive at the start of the encounter and Brown makes the decision to de-escalate. The incident started as a pissing contest. And Brown makes the decision to calm it down. And what does the officer do? The officer ***** it up. And it only gets worse from there.
banquetbear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 05:19 AM   #189
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 4,128
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
And that is why the cops were suspended. Cops aren't supposed to get into "pissing matches", and they sure as heck are not supposed to "give it right back in spades". Not only is it bad practice, it could be illegal. You say "both were stupid", but only one of them was detained. Only one of them was thrown to the ground. Only one of them was tased. Only one of them was arrested.

Cops can't do that. At least, they don't have the legal authority to do that. Unfortunately, sometimes cops go well beyond their legal authority. It's getting harder for them to do that in the age of body cameras. When there's video of the incident and we can see what happened, we don't accept the cops' word about it automatically.

As for your characterization of Brown as "aggressive", I would say that a better description would be "non-submissive". He wasn't aggressive, but he had an attitude. He wasn't all "yes sir" and "no sir". That's what the cop wanted, and when he didn't get it, he decided to show that boy who was boss. He made sure that Brown understood the most important fact about the encounter, which was "I own this right here."

No, officer, you don't. Maybe a couple of days without pay might give you time to rethink your concept of ownership.
I don't understand your point. Yes, it is wrong for a cop to engage in a pissing match. Likely illegal, although I think that the police could at least put up an argument for Brown resisting and whatnot.

Brown was dead in the wrong right out of the gate, starting with his privileged princess parking, then copping an attitude when called on it. No, Brown doesn't own the streets at 2AM either, despite his obvious belief. You may think 'non-submissive' describes his behavior. No, he was defiant and absolutely picking a fight when he was 100% in the wrong.

But none of this is really in dispute. Brown was a stupid and wrong. The cops were stupid and wrong. Brown was not justified in his stupidity, especially in refusing to take his hands out of his pockets, coupled with the ominous 'I have something in my hands'. The cops may have been justified, but IMO for PR reasons are eating humble pie.

The problem I see is that this is yet another 'while black' thread that appears to have nothing whatsoever to do with race. This has to do with cop powers and their abuse. Not the same thing, even though it is politically correct to interpret these stories that way.
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 05:43 AM   #190
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 6,117
Seems much more like people desperately scrounging for something, anything, to say "this isn't at all about race", when yet again

1) it's the most obvious explanation for the assumption that abuse will go unnoticed,

2) the racism is being treated as worse than the outright abuse,

3) many are also excusing the outright abuse and violence or threats of violence.

I'm always amused by the idea that police should be held to a lower standard of conduct than the average cashier or waitress, despite being part of a heavily armed group empowered by the state to use all necessary force should they be under actual threat or attack.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 05:47 AM   #191
SuburbanTurkey
Critical Thinker
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Boston, USA
Posts: 496
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post

I'm always amused by the idea that police should be held to a lower standard of conduct than the average cashier or waitress, despite being part of a heavily armed group empowered by the state to use all necessary force should they be under actual threat or attack.
No kidding. It's a total reversal of roles. Police are given a very, very generous leeway when it comes to improperly using force, which is a core job competency of being a police officer. No such luck for Joe Citizen.

I don't think the legal defense of "I thought he was reaching for his waistband" or "furtive movements" would keep a citizen out of jail for shooting an unarmed man. Seems to work fine for cops though.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 06:13 AM   #192
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 4,128
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
Seems much more like people desperately scrounging for something, anything, to say "this isn't at all about race", when yet again

1) it's the most obvious explanation for the assumption that abuse will go unnoticed,

2) the racism is being treated as worse than the outright abuse,

3) many are also excusing the outright abuse and violence or threats of violence.

I'm always amused by the idea that police should be held to a lower standard of conduct than the average cashier or waitress, despite being part of a heavily armed group empowered by the state to use all necessary force should they be under actual threat or attack.
The most obvious explanation for the OP is that cops don't like belligerence. Brown was as wrong as he could be, and still copped an attitude. That was the most obvious problem, not that he was black.

My white self has been at the receiving end of similar (not to the point of tazing) treatment from both white and black cops more times than I care to recall. It was because cops like to get bad guys and I was pegged as their bad guy (usually mistakenly), and having nothing to do with our respective races. That's why these 'while black' stories ring hollow when being attributed to race. They don't seem to be. They seem to be tales of cops being cops.

You are right that we are becoming desensitized to police abuses. I take it as a given now and avoid police at all costs. That shouldn't be, but at the engine room level, that's how it is. It is still a distinct problem, separate from racism.
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 06:17 AM   #193
Random
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,947
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
I'm always amused by the idea that police should be held to a lower standard of conduct than the average cashier or waitress, despite being part of a heavily armed group empowered by the state to use all necessary force should they be under actual threat or attack.

Yeah, it's weird. We give them training, we give give them uniforms, we give them a salary, we give them guns, we give them vehicles, we give them a wide variety of legal powers to arrest and detain, but when incidents like this happen, we are inevitably told that it is our job to make them feel safe...
__________________
"...Am I actually watching Big Bird argue with the Egyptian God of the Dead? Is PBS sending some kind of weird religious message here?"
Random is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 06:31 AM   #194
SuburbanTurkey
Critical Thinker
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Boston, USA
Posts: 496
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
My white self has been at the receiving end of similar (not to the point of tazing) treatment from both white and black cops more times than I care to recall. It was because cops like to get bad guys and I was pegged as their bad guy (usually mistakenly), and having nothing to do with our respective races. That's why these 'while black' stories ring hollow when being attributed to race. They don't seem to be. They seem to be tales of cops being cops.
Yeah, I tend to agree with this. I don't think, on an individual level, most cops are particularly racially biased in the way they abuse their authority. I think cops generally treat people they are interacting with poorly. However, due to the link of historical racism and modern poverty, many minorities find themselves in neighborhoods where they interact with police more often. They may be more attuned to the injustice of police overreach because they are in the neighborhoods where police are most active. Poor neighborhoods often have less political power too, so their ability to address these abuses may be diminished compared to wealthier, whiter communities. It's no mystery that "stop and frisk" was only being done in the poor parts of NYC, disproportionally impacting minorities that make up the urban poor.

The sad thing is that most of these communities desperately need effective law enforcement to alleviate some of the symptoms of poverty, but lack of police accountability just makes them another hassle for poor people.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 25th May 2018 at 06:36 AM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 12:21 PM   #195
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,471
Originally Posted by Bogative View Post
Not paranoid, but vigilant. 39 officers were killed in the line of duty by gunfire in 2015. 66 in 2016. 44 last year. And I'm sure many many more who were shot but not killed and shot at and not hit.

The police training institute at the local university teaches their trainees to keep the hands of anyone they are interacting with visible. Apparently, many years of experience, and a little bit rational thinking, it makes sense to not allow someone to keep their hands in their pockets in case there is a weapon that could be hidden in there.

Here is an example in which a cop was foolish enough to approach a robbery suspect with his Taser pulled instead of his service weapon. The suspect was walking away from the cop with his hand in his jacket pocket. The cop commands the robbery suspect to take his hands out of his pocket several times. The suspect pulls out a gun and shoots the cop four times. Maybe this cop should have been a little more "paranoid."

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE



Here's another example of why cops grab the wrists of people they are interacting with when they refused to keep their hands visible. Unfortunately, the cop wasn't forceful enough and he was shot for a misdemeanor drug charge.

https://youtu.be/AgDoDKqgr0M?t=475

As I mentioned earlier, these are the types of videos that are used to train police officers on how to avoid being shot.
you realize this is the same logic that would make a black person surrounded by cops afraid to take his hands out of his pockets, right? The difference is, excessive paranoia in civilians is one thing. Excessively paranoid cops, is quite another.

And with the attitude of the cop, and his comments ("I own this") and disbelief when Sterling gives his his name, the disproportianate police response to a parking violation, the take-down and tasing, the disciplining of the cops... it's like you're trying your best not to see an obvious racial context here.

Last edited by Fudbucker; 25th May 2018 at 12:24 PM.
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 12:32 PM   #196
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 17,285
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
Seems much more like people desperately scrounging for something, anything, to say "this isn't at all about race", when yet again

1) it's the most obvious explanation for the assumption that abuse will go unnoticed,

2) the racism is being treated as worse than the outright abuse,

3) many are also excusing the outright abuse and violence or threats of violence.

I'm always amused by the idea that police should be held to a lower standard of conduct than the average cashier or waitress, despite being part of a heavily armed group empowered by the state to use all necessary force should they be under actual threat or attack.
Again, we have posters here who continue to defend the police officers who did the act despite the fact that their chief admits it was unacceptable.

That's the extent to which people will go to defend bad behavior by police. Police can do no wrong, even when the police chief says that they were wrong.
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Gidget, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 12:34 PM   #197
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,095
Originally Posted by Random View Post
Yeah, it's weird. We give them training, we give give them uniforms, we give them a salary, we give them guns, we give them vehicles, we give them a wide variety of legal powers to arrest and detain, but when incidents like this happen, we are inevitably told that it is our job to make them feel safe...
Yes. The average person is probably only going to interact with police very rarely, and those rare cases will most likely be traffic stops where they'll present their driver's license, registration, and insurance, perhaps be issued a ticket, and that's it.

And in the case of a *********** parking violation, which some here seem to forget was the start of this stupidity, most people will never even see the person who issued the ticket, and it would be straight-up insane to expect a police officer to call for backup to deal with this kind of sub-misdemeanor infraction.

Having been in a situation where I've had multiple police officers point guns at me over absolutely nothing (they went tactical on the basis of a 911 call that a shotgun was in my car - in a nation where such guns are entirely legal even if it was true, which it wasn't), I can empathize with someone who might be too scared to make any move at all for fear of being shot.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 12:46 PM   #198
The Greater Fool
Illuminator
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 3,561
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
Having been in a situation where I've had multiple police officers point guns at me over absolutely nothing (they went tactical on the basis of a 911 call that a shotgun was in my car - in a nation where such guns are entirely legal even if it was true, which it wasn't), I can empathize with someone who might be too scared to make any move at all for fear of being shot.
Wow, I had the same thing happen to me. They didn't ask my name, didn't frisk me. They asked if I had any weapons.
__________________
- "Who is the Greater Fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the Fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']
The Greater Fool is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 12:56 PM   #199
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,095
Originally Posted by The Greater Fool View Post
Wow, I had the same thing happen to me. They didn't ask my name, didn't frisk me. They asked if I had any weapons.
They asked me that, too...after they'd had me lie face down on the pavement and put me in handcuffs, all the while with 5-6 guns pointed at me (the cop who cuffed me reduced the number by one).
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2018, 01:36 PM   #200
The Greater Fool
Illuminator
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 3,561
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
They asked me that, too...after they'd had me lie face down on the pavement and put me in handcuffs, all the while with 5-6 guns pointed at me (the cop who cuffed me reduced the number by one).
Fortunately, they didn't put me on the ground. Didn't handcuff me. I'm a big teddy bear, I think they sensed that

Back to topic. I noticed that Sterling Brown had his hands out of his pockets earlier, and it was like 30 seconds to a minute after he put his hands in his pockets that the question and takedown occurred. Before that, no one was paying much attention.
__________________
- "Who is the Greater Fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the Fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']
The Greater Fool is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:30 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.