FBI Opens Investigation into Shooting of Michael Brown

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Literally not one person in this thread is suggesting otherwise. If I come across that way apologies, my original point is this shooting in no way compares to George Floyd. It is obviously problematic in its own ways.

I don't know if you've been paying attention to the Chauvin trial or people who have been defending him, but a lot of people have been saying well Floyd had a ton of drugs in his system and that's why he died. And it wasn't Chauvin's fault as a result.

So if someone said: While no one deserves to die for what he did, Floyd's actions clearly set off a chain of events that led to this happening. It is a tragedy to be certain, but what if he had gotten away and hurt a mom pushing a stroller in his drug addled attempt to get away?

Seems very like what people defending Chauvin has been saying.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Again Rainmaker, I have already made it clear that both mistakes weren't equal. But the say the motorist did nothing wrong is just false. Also. To say he ran because "he was afraid of the police " is bullshit. He wasn't too afraid to pull over in the first place. He was only afraid of having to face the warrant he had.
Again, nothing justifies the shooting. Nothing justifies his running either.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Well if he wasn't afraid, he should have been.

[GrantDawg]

But no one in this thread is saying the shooting was justified. Would you find where anyone has? I will wait.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I don't know if you've been paying attention to the Chauvin trial or people who have been defending him, but a lot of people have been saying well Floyd had a ton of drugs in his system and that's why he died. And it wasn't Chauvin's fault as a result.

So if someone said: While no one deserves to die for what he did, Floyd's actions clearly set off a chain of events that led to this happening. It is a tragedy to be certain, but what if he had gotten away and hurt a mom pushing a stroller in his drug addled attempt to get away?

Seems very like what people defending Chauvin has been saying.

Give me a freaking break with this.

[GrantDawg]

I agree, Rainmaker. He should have feared them and complied. So we are in total agreement?

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Give me a freaking break with this.

Don't be mad that it is being pointed out you are doing the exact same thing as the defenders of Chauvin are doing.

"Chain of events" language is a very easy way to give some blame to someone for their own death. I heard it with Eric Garner as well.

And what if it wasn't an accident and the cop meant to shoot him. But did so because she feared a fleeing suspect may hit a mom pushing a stroller. I mean according to your statement that logical, right?

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

I agree, Rainmaker. He should have feared them and complied. So we are in total agreement?

You mean like George Floyd did?

[Lathum]

Because I'm not. People like you are a huge part of the problem with getting people to realize how big an issue this is. You paint a broad brush for all cops and all situations instead of realizing there is a tremendous amount of gray area.

[ISiddiqui]

And you are part of the problem basically minimizing shootings of misdemeanors, saying well he started the chain of action and what if something worse happened. It's really not that big of a gap from doing that to justifying the shooting. You may think it is but folks who justify these shootings use the same language. You are just carrying water for them by doing the whole "what about what the victim did" nonsense. (And an 'I'm not justifying it, but' sort of statement is never super compelling, fwiw)

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

Bullshit. I could not have been more clear that I don't justify the shooting. The reality is the victim has some accountability in all this. Your failure to admit that is just as bas as those on the other side saying he got what he deserved because he didn't comply. People with your opinions are the reason there is no middle ground and you make it worse by accusing anyone who does see some middle ground as justifying the death. You are just as much a part of the problem as those saying he deserved it.







f

[ISiddiqui]

I could not have been more clear that I don't justify the shooting. The reality is the victim has some accountability in all this.

You've just contradicted yourself in one sentence.

There was an officer who didn't fear for her life (or someone else's) who mixed up her tazer and her gun and shot a man dead (and for a misdemeanor at that). I simply don't care what else the man did.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

How on earth am I contradicting myself? I'll say it again. When people like you asses zero blame on the victim when their actions clearly had something to do with the outcome you minimize the overall problem. You are just as much a part of the problem in this dialogue as those saying he got what he deserved.

[ISiddiqui]

Let's use the same argument with Floyd, who you've been very clear you find different. Should George Floyd be held accountable and be given blame for being really drugged up and using a counterfeit money? That caused the chain of events that led to Chauvin kneeling on his neck, right?

If Floyd shouldn't have accountability for his death due to his actions, then why not?

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

The two situations aren’t remotely similar. The Wright shooting happened in the blink of an eye. Floyd was drawn out and there was ample opportunity for cooler heads to prevail. The two scenarios aren’t remotely similar and continuing to lump them together hurts the overall cause and just amplifies your bias.

[ISiddiqui]

So the accountability of the victim for his death only matters depending on how quickly the cop acted? C'mon man. Would Floyd's accountability be more relevant if Chauvin when he approached the scene saw a drugged out Floyd refuse to get into the car (Floyd was only on the ground because he refused to get into the car and suggested he just lie on the ground instead) and just shot him?

And just to focus this. We are talking about the accountability of a man in his own shooting death for driving away from a traffic stop. Seriously? In a situation, mind, where the cop has already resigned because of it and the government is prosecuting her for manslaughter.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Let's use the same argument with Floyd, who you've been very clear you find different. Should George Floyd be held accountable and be given blame for being really drugged up and using a counterfeit money? That caused the chain of events that led to Chauvin kneeling on his neck, right?

If Floyd shouldn't have accountability for his death due to his actions, then why not?

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

By your logic just leaving the house would make one accountable, I mean, how far back do we go?

Here is the real problem. Every time something like this happens and someone has the opinion there may be some gray area, people like you immediately jump to accusations of victim blaming. All that does is not allow for a dialogue about it because in your mind the cop is an evil murder who was just looking to shoot a black man. All that attitude does is drive away people in the middle. Your argument is every bit as bad as people on the other side claiming he got what he deserved and refuses to admit even a little fault on the cop, says they deserved it because they didn't comply, attacks the persons character, etc...

FWIW I think in both cases the cops are at fault, but I am also willing to entertain the idea in the second case there could be accountability on both sides.

[GrantDawg]

So, your opinion passing counterfeit money is ok? Let's add all this up so far. It is completely fine for people to pass counterfeit money, attack police, and try to run away from warrants? Lathum and I have both been clear that what the officers did was wrong, and they should be punished. Chauvin deserves a murder charge, because what he did was prlonged and purposeful. This officer deserves the man2 charge, because she killed an individual by her negligent action. Nothing either victim did warranted the outcome. Something they both did may have or definitely was wrong (I honestly haven't looked at whether Floyd actually passed a counterfeit bill.)
In the end, the victims did not deserve what happened to them. If I walk down a dark alleyway in a sketchy part of town and someone robs me, they are still at faut for the robbery. I was still stupid for being there. Both can be true.

[ISiddiqui]

But you literally did victim blame... It's the definition of accountability

(I hate to Edward definition here, but the definition of accountability involves 'being responsible' and the definition of responsibility involves blame or burden of obligation - not to mention the definition of blame is to "assign responsibility"

And the thesaurus says blame and accountability are synonyms:

https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/accountability

https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/blame )

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Lathum]

OK, you clearly aren't willing to see any level of gray area, so we're good here. Enjoy that beautiful baby...

[GrantDawg]

And you are justifying crime by the bad actions of police.

[ISiddiqui]

If I walk down a dark alleyway in a sketchy part of town and someone robs me, they are still at faut for the robbery. I was still stupid for being there.

If you walk down a dark alley in a nice part of town (recall this was misdemeanor offense where the officer did not fear for her life) and someone kills you, what response do you think if someone said well he was stupid for being there. Or if it was a woman walking through a dark alley who got raped. Would you be saying on social media: well she was stupid for being there.

It seems there are people we victim blame and people we don't. And we seem to victim blame a lot more of the people who get killed by the cops.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[ISiddiqui]

And you are justifying crime by the bad actions of police.

Heaven forbid I don't think a misdemeanor matters when it comes to the cops killing a person.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

If you walk down a dark alley in a nice part of town (recall this was misdemeanor offense where the officer did not fear for her life) and someone kills you, what response do you think if someone said well he was stupid for being there. Or if it was a woman walking through a dark alley who got raped. Would you be saying on social media: well she was stupid for being there.

It seems there are people we victim blame and people we don't. And we seem to victim blame a lot more of the people who get killed by the cops.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

No. The two situations are different. If you can't see the difference, then I can't help you.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Heaven forbid I don't think a misdemeanor matters when it comes to the cops killing a person.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

I think crimes are crimes. Both committed a crime. The one crime doesn't justify the other.


Let's break it down just on the shooting. If the officer had pulled the taser and hit him with it, she would have been completely justified. He would have been arrested, and picked up further charges. When she shot him, then she committed a crime. She should be punished for that crime. That does not mean he did not commit a crime, It does not mean he was "right" to flee the officers.
Lathum has it right. Arguments like yours and Rainmakers just entrench the "police are always right" side, and do damage to actual change.

Any reasonable person can see the shooting was not justified.
Any reasonable person can see the kid fighting the cops and fleeing was not justified.
Both can be true.

[JPhillips]

Hard not to see two different tiers of police interaction.

[GrantDawg]

And we all agree that there needs to be reforms, right?

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Hard not to see two different tiers of police interaction.

Is anyone actually denying there is?

We have a HUGE problem in this country right now with the way police treat black people, young black men especially, but the issue is until the "police are always justified" crown and the "victim didn't do anything wrong" crowd are willing to admit there can be nuance in these cases nothing will change.

Hell, I am all for police reform, mental health training, accountability, etc..., by all accounts I am pretty far left and some guys are making me out to justifying the cops actions. Imagine how the people who actually justify the cops actions are made to feel?

[miami_fan]

Fired Buffalo police officer wins lawsuit, will get her pension | Crime News | buffalonews.com

How the good apples are treated.

[ISiddiqui]

Arguments like yours and Rainmakers just entrench the "police are always right" side, and do damage to actual change.

Please. The victim was accountabile stuff is going to be used by the people who defend the shooting. They are used in every police killing to justify things - even with Chauvin. It's the 'just asking questions' of police killing debate.

The way to effect real change is to nip that shit in the bud. Unless the officer reasonably feared their life was in danger what the victim did simply does not matter. It's what we've done regarding rape and the narrative and how we approach rape has drastically changed for the better.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Any reasonable person can see the shooting was not justified.
Any reasonable person can see the kid fighting the cops and fleeing was not justified.
Both can be true.

This.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

The way to effect real change is to nip that shit in the bud. Unless the officer reasonably feared their life was in danger what the victim did simply does not matter.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

It most certainly does matter. It exasperates the situation and makes it far more tense. Not only that, it makes the person unpredictable which also makes the situation more tense. Cops are still human beings and subject to every emotion you and I are, fear, stress, etc...This is why they need more training in de-escalation, mental health, non lethal force, etc...To say what the victim did doesn't matter is completely excusing their behavior. Are you really advocating just letting people committing crimes go about their business because the situation may escalate?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

So, your opinion passing counterfeit money is ok? Let's add all this up so far. It is completely fine for people to pass counterfeit money, attack police, and try to run away from warrants? Lathum and I have both been clear that what the officers did was wrong, and they should be punished. Chauvin deserves a murder charge, because what he did was prlonged and purposeful. This officer deserves the man2 charge, because she killed an individual by her negligent action. Nothing either victim did warranted the outcome. Something they both did may have or definitely was wrong (I honestly haven't looked at whether Floyd actually passed a counterfeit bill.)
In the end, the victims did not deserve what happened to them. If I walk down a dark alleyway in a sketchy part of town and someone robs me, they are still at faut for the robbery. I was still stupid for being there. Both can be true.

No one is saying it's OK to commit crimes. Just that a simple misdemeanor is pretty tame. Totally fine with whatever fine, probation, or light jail time he may have gotten for his crime.

It would be insane to say "sure it was wrong for the husband to kill his wife, but she was having an affair". Or "that drunk driver was in the wrong for killing the pedestrian, but the guy was jaywalking". This is only done with cops to excuse their horrific actions. And it's usually only done when the victim is black.

Cops are given extraordinary powers by the state over people. That comes with responsibility. The issue isn't just about their sheer incompetence and disregard for human life, it's about the drastic difference in force used between people of different races and ethnicities.

[ISiddiqui]

Are you really advocating just letting people committing crimes go about their business because the situation may escalate?

They literally have his address. Why can't they go to his place and arrest him there? And back to your mom pushing a stroller example, a driver being tased is far more dangerous on the road. After all, after he was shot he hit another car. Hell there is a reason that many cities have banned their police (or highly restricted them) from car chases.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

They literally have his address. Why can't they go to his place and arrest him there? And back to your mom pushing a stroller example, a driver being tased is far more dangerous on the road. After all, after he was shot he hit another car. Hell there is a reason that many cities have banned their police from car chases.

Also firing a gun in a confined space like that with a ton of metal and pavement nearby is incredibly dangerous. She could have killed one of her fellow officers or a bystander.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Hell there is a reason that many cities have banned their police (or highly restricted them) from car chases.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

yes, because a driver fleeing the police is a danger to public safety, and may, I don't know, hit someone in a cross walk...

I stand by my point that the second someone, black, white, purple, whatever, starts acting that way letting him go should never be an option. Their behavior is too unpredictable at that point. Sure they have his address, and what's to say they wont get ambushed and shot when they go there to arrest him? What is to say he won't take his girlfriends hostage? What is to say he won't act in a similar way so I guess they just need to keep letting him flee.

Does he deserve to be shot, absolutely not, but this whole "they have his address so lets let him break away from custody and take off" is nonsense and puts innocent people at risk.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Also firing a gun in a confined space like that with a ton of metal and pavement nearby is incredibly dangerous. She could have killed one of her fellow officers or a bystander.

Literally not one person is advocating her actions so I'm not sure who you are even arguing against.

[ISiddiqui]

What if, what if, what if. What do you think police do when they call off high speed chases? Just shrug and go oh well.

All this excuse making for a cop who killed a black man when she didn't fear for her life...

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Sure they have his address, and what's to say they wont get ambushed and shot when they go there to arrest him? What is to say he won't take his girlfriends hostage? What is to say he won't act in a similar way so I guess they just need to keep letting him flee.

What is to say anyone who commits a misdemeanor won't do these things? Unless there are some precogs on the force, we don't typically make decisions on hypothetical future crimes.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

What is to say anyone who commits a misdemeanor won't do these things? Unless there are some precogs on the force, we don't typically make decisions on hypothetical future crimes.

We don't?

Then I guess no one is ever considered a threat since we can't look into the future. Basically you are advocating for criminals to decide if they want to be arrested or not.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

What if, what if, what if. What do you think police do when they call off high speed chases? Just shrug and go oh well.

All this excuse making for a cop who killed a black man when she didn't fear for her life...

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

I hope you realize you are part of the problem.

No one is making excuses for her. In fact I have said several times she needs to be help accountable. What you refuse to admit is both parties can be responsible for what happened. Until you are willing to admit there is nuance and gray area you are just as much a contributor to this riff as the "back the blue" crowd.

[ISiddiqui]

If this is being part of the problem, then I'll gladly be part of the problem. A guy ran from the police. An officer killed him. The victim's responsibility matters not a whit to me and it's a red herring as best, a disingenuous way to minimize the blame from her at worst. Hell, I don't think the police force is even trying to use the some responsibility argument here. The head of Minneapolis Police Union though did blame the death on non-compliance and used the chain of events language, while saying the Mayor was completely ridiculous in how he was handling this shooting (Mayor had said the officer should be dismissed before she resigned).

If he was running and she shot him in the back, he has the same responsibility for causing the situation right?

Oh and I'm not necessarily a Defund the Police sort of guy, but your arguments definitely push me in that direction, so I guess congrats? I guess you are part of that problem.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[ISiddiqui]

Anyways, here is a Jalopnik article about the case for ending traffic stops (it was written in 2020 but they brought it back out for the Wright killing).

https://jalopnik.com/the-case-for-en...ops-1843925565

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[RainMaker]

The video Chicago Police released today of them murdering a 13-year old might be the worst video yet. Holy shit.

Also worth pointing out that the prosecutor tried to cover it up and lied to a judge the other day.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

I agree, Rainmaker. He should have feared them and complied. So we are in total agreement?

Like this?

[CrimsonFox]

[Qwikshot]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

The video Chicago Police released today of them murdering a 13-year old might be the worst video yet. Holy shit.

Also worth pointing out that the prosecutor tried to cover it up and lied to a judge the other day.

Yeah, I watched the video, holy shit indeed.

[Qwikshot]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Anyways, here is a Jalopnik article about the case for ending traffic stops (it was written in 2020 but they brought it back out for the Wright killing).

The Case For Ending Traffic Stops

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

I was thinking about this, and perhaps traffic patrol is only armed with tasers. But I guess you could propose elimination.

Having once been surrounded by police as a teenager, I never felt threatened or in danger.

I guess the question is what is the purpose of patrols?

Is it crime prevention?
Is it police presence?
Is it effective?
Is it wanted?

I'd argue wealthier neighborhoods like police presence because they don't feel threatened by it.

In more problematic neighborhoods, does it work or is it done so that taxpayers feel that the police are providing the service they are paying for: arresting criminals

if so,

does the deaths of innocent (or not so innocent) civilians justify the actions occurring.

Sadly, I would think most conservatives are okay with this, like they are with school shootings, it's just a fact of life because they don't have to worry about no-knock warrants, or profiling.

Sadly as well, I feel for police, I do think it's a vocation, but what is the purpose of police? Are we placing them in an unfattenable situation? If they do outreach, is it viewed as being soft on crime? If they do aggressive, is it viewed as racially driven?

I don't have the answer, but this shit's been going on for years...kids getting killed by cops is not new (Tamir Rice anyone?)

[GrantDawg]

I am still waiting for anybody to show me where anyone said the female officer was justified in shooting the kid, or shouldn't be punished. Can anybody find that for me?

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[Carman Bulldog]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

The victim's responsibility matters not a whit to me and it's a red herring as best, a disingenuous way to minimize the blame from her at worst.

What about this scenario....

Bobby Victim decides to go for a stroll in the middle of the night and decides to do so in a neighborhood notoriously well known for a high level of crime, including robberies. He is wearing extremely expensive clothing, visible expensive jewelry, etc. Victim is on his very expensive phone, not paying attention to his surroundings and then flips out his wallet to check something inside of it, with a large wad of cash visible. Bobby Victim then decides to wander into a very dimly lit back lane.

Billy Criminal comes along and tells Bobby Victim to give him his jewelry, money, Air Jordans, etc. Bobby Victim refuses and Billy Criminal then kills Bobby Victim and takes his stuff anyway.

A. Does the victim's responsibility not matter a whit to you and only acts as a red herring?; or

B. While Bobby Victim certainly did not deserve to die, you agree that there are actions that he took or did not take that could have reduced his likelihood of being killed, again, reiterating that does not mean he deserved to die, that it was his fault, that it meant someone had the right to kill him, etc.

[GrantDawg]

Victim blamer! Burn him! He's a witch!

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk