FBI Opens Investigation into Shooting of Michael Brown

[stevew]

Not shooting at unarmed people?

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by stevew

Not shooting at unarmed people?

Welcome to page 2. So...What if they hate white
cops (fairly typical) and are actively trying to take the cops gun (also fairly typical)?

[tarcone]

Or maybe respect authority?
But thats not an option. Authority has to adapt to the few that cause the problems as opposed to the few adapting to what the majority do.

Another problem of our society.

[Brian Swartz]

There are situations where it's reasonable to give the policeman the benefit of the doubt. Unless there are more facts out there that I've not yet read, this isn't one of them. Part of respect for authority is holding that authority accountable when it does indefensible things. Shooting civilians for no good reason should automatically mean a lengthy prison term.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Or maybe respect authority?
But thats not an option. Authority has to adapt to the few that cause the problems as opposed to the few adapting to what the majority do.

Another problem of our society.

Unless that authority happens to be a president you disagree with.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Drake

So...serving a warrant on an address that's ten years old, the first logical move is to shoot the dog that might be a potential threat before even checking to see if the guy you're looking for even lives there.

Because it's easier to shoot the dog than knock on a neighbor's door or check if there's mail in the mailbox.

The current family living there have been there a year and the officer had visited their house twice before. He knew the person he was looking for didn't live there and he knew the dog was there.

[Ben E Lou]

A post apparently from the sister of the autistic man...

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Such as?

Such as literally anything else other than aggressive escalation.

[molson]

Officers aren't trained to "aggressively escalate" anything. There's just some % that are always going to fuck up. The goal is for that number to be as small as possible.

[jeff061]

Would be nice if after they fucked up entire departments didn't try to paint the victim in a poor light and lie about the circumstances of the shooting.

We aren't ever going to get rid of that "some %", but we should start severely punishing officers who cover things up.

We still only get wind of the instances that have video proof, imagine what's going down we don't know about.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by jeff061

Would be nice if after they fucked up entire departments didn't try to paint the victim in a poor light and lie about the circumstances of the shooting.

We aren't ever going to get rid of that "some %", but we should start severely punishing officers who cover things up.

We still only get wind of the instances that have video proof, imagine what's going down we don't know about.

I agree that it would be nice for them to man up, but the issue there is that they come from a huge pot of public .oney. That is an easy target for civil lawyers to go after, and there is a separation in the mind from "public money" and you or I, the public. So kind of a victimless or big corporation raid sorta thing.

So departments always have to be careful to not admit liability in situations like this. It's shifty but I get why they do it.

[bhlloy]

There is not publicly admitting liability and then there is "losing" key evidence, body cameras that mysteriously weren't working that day and other police officers lying under oath. I think you are being massively disingenuous here. Yes, nobody expects police departments to hold press conferences in which they say "our bad, we totally shot an innocent man" but you can't say that it's the bad 1% that carries out the worst of these incidents and then have the rest of the force lie, cheat and destroy evidence to defend them out of some notion of brotherhood. You don't get to have it both ways

[RainMaker]

I think unions are one of the biggest problems with eliminating bad cops but that's a thing that the people who want police reform don't want either.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by bhlloy

There is not publicly admitting liability and then there is "losing" key evidence, body cameras that mysteriously weren't working that day and other police officers lying under oath. I think you are being massively disingenuous here. Yes, nobody expects police departments to hold press conferences in which they say "our bad, we totally shot an innocent man" but you can't say that it's the bad 1% that carries out the worst of these incidents and then have the rest of the force lie, cheat and destroy evidence to defend them out of some notion of brotherhood. You don't get to have it both ways

Disingenuous? Just stating the truth. Any entity funded by public money is going to avoid doing anything that appears to make it liable. Im not saying it's right, or that they don't do even more. You appear to be reading an agenda into my statement which isn't there.

[cuervo72]

Prairie View officer says DA wouldn't let him testify about Sandra Bland traffic stop - Houston Chronicle

[illinifan999]

http://www.cleveland19.com/story/325...ropark-rangers

[NobodyHere]

Charges dropped in Freddie Grey case

Marilyn Mosby on Freddie Gray’s case: we could try the cops 100 times with the same result

Hopefully protesters don't get violent.

[Groundhog]

OK, so if there's no chance of legal recourse in these type of situations, what next?

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

OK, so if there's no chance of legal recourse in these type of situations, what next?

Civil court. CVS firebombings. Random assassination of police officers, maybe.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

OK, so if there's no chance of legal recourse in these type of situations, what next?

The absence of a crime tends to eliminate the need for "legal recourse".

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

OK, so if there's no chance of legal recourse in these type of situations, what next?

Sue the city. The city seems more than happy to throw taxpayer money away for political reasons.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

The absence of a crime tends to eliminate the need for "legal recourse".

OK great, so how do you eliminate crime?

edit: I misread the "a crime" as crime... Some of the folks dying don't seem to have committed a crime, but I would agree that significantly reducing crime would be the answer overall, I just think the methods I would use to do that would differ a little from Jon's...

[stevew]

Originally Posted by illinifan999

http://www.cleveland19.com/story/325...ropark-rangers

wow, that's crazy. Smart reaction by the guy in the following car, he saved his partner's life.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

OK great, so how do you eliminate crime?

edit: I misread the "a crime" as crime... Some of the folks dying don't seem to have committed a crime, but I would agree that significantly reducing crime would be the answer overall, I just think the methods I would use to do that would differ a little from Jon's...

Well Freddie Gray being dead would reduce crime in Baltimore.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Well Freddie Gray being dead would reduce crime in Baltimore.

Do you really think that's true though? In the (very slightly) longer term I think it's pretty much the opposite.

[RainMaker]

I'm just saying that Freddie Gray was a career criminal who would have committed crimes as long as he was alive. Him not being alive means the city of Baltimore was saved from him.

[cuervo72]

Freddie Gray was 25. Nobody is a career anything at 25.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I'm just saying that Freddie Gray was a career criminal who would have committed crimes as long as he was alive. Him not being alive means the city of Baltimore was saved from him.

Yeah, at what cost? That's my point. Things like this don't happen in a vacuum, and there's no "The End." when Gray dies, and you shut the book. The story continues on, and IMO it gets a little bit worse each time something like this happens.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Freddie Gray was 25. Nobody is a career anything at 25.

Over 20 arrests by the age of 25. He is what he is.

[Suicane75]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Over 20 arrests by the age of 25. He is what he is.

While I partially agree. I'm also reminded of watching this,



I don't think, if you'll pardon the expression, that's black and white. There are very real, and very scary things that need to change in this country. And they wont. So we go on.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

OK great, so how do you eliminate crime?

edit: I misread the "a crime" as crime... Some of the folks dying don't seem to have committed a crime, but I would agree that significantly reducing crime would be the answer overall, I just think the methods I would use to do that would differ a little from Jon's...

And, maybe, I misread what you were saying there to.

I thought you were asking what the folks all upset about Gray were supposed to do to right the "wrong"in his case. My reply was meant to point out that, in this instance, there was really nothing to "right".

But now I ain't entirely sure if that was the question you were asking.

[nol]

Originally Posted by molson

Here's how positive change actually works. Someone involved in an autism education group creates a program to train officers to better respond to hostile situations where autism may be a factor. They propose it to local governments. Local governments are open-minded enough to fund it.

*Someone rich and white. Otherwise it's just race baiting

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Suicane75

While I partially agree. I'm also reminded of watching this,



I don't think, if you'll pardon the expression, that's black and white. There are very real, and very scary things that need to change in this country. And they wont. So we go on.

Gray had some money. Almost every story talks about how he was decked out in designer clothes like Prada and Louis Vuitton.

It was his choice to treat his neighborhood the way he did. I am also saddened that people in his neighborhood would choose to turn him into a martyr when he was a net negative on them.

[Suicane75]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Gray had some money. Almost every story talks about how he was decked out in designer clothes like Prada and Louis Vuitton.

It was his choice to treat his neighborhood the way he did. I am also saddened that people in his neighborhood would choose to turn him into a martyr when he was a net negative on them.

Of course he had money, he sold a lot of drugs. It's how he made his living, it's how most of the people in that neighborhood make money. I'm willing to be that he didn't graduate High School and sit down and look at all the career opportunities and choices layed out before him and decide to start slinging. He slings because that's what those kids do, it's what they're taught from an early age. In a lot of cases, too many, it's all they know or have ever known. I understand the people who mourn him, I understand the people who say good riddance, But both sides know that when he dies, another will take his place, and it'll just keep going on that way until it boils over, and one, or both sides get sick of it, and we see what we've seen the past year.

It's a situation that needs to be fixed at the lowest levels and built up. That takes leaders and honesty, unfortunately I think both sides are completely lacking in both.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by Suicane75

Of course he had money, he sold a lot of drugs. It's how he made his living, it's how most of the people in that neighborhood make money. I'm willing to be that he didn't graduate High School and sit down and look at all the career opportunities and choices layed out before him and decide to start slinging. He slings because that's what those kids do, it's what they're taught from an early age. In a lot of cases, too many, it's all they know or have ever known. I understand the people who mourn him, I understand the people who say good riddance, But both sides know that when he dies, another will take his place, and it'll just keep going on that way until it boils over, and one, or both sides get sick of it, and we see what we've seen the past year.

It's a situation that needs to be fixed at the lowest levels and built up. That takes leaders and honesty, unfortunately I think both sides are completely lacking in both.

x100000000000

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Suicane75

Of course he had money, he sold a lot of drugs. It's how he made his living, it's how most of the people in that neighborhood make money. I'm willing to be that he didn't graduate High School and sit down and look at all the career opportunities and choices layed out before him and decide to start slinging. He slings because that's what those kids do, it's what they're taught from an early age. In a lot of cases, too many, it's all they know or have ever known. I understand the people who mourn him, I understand the people who say good riddance, But both sides know that when he dies, another will take his place, and it'll just keep going on that way until it boils over, and one, or both sides get sick of it, and we see what we've seen the past year.

It's a situation that needs to be fixed at the lowest levels and built up. That takes leaders and honesty, unfortunately I think both sides are completely lacking in both.

He was living off an injury settlement, not his drug dealing. Although perhaps selling poison to the neighborhood kids is how he was able to afford all the designer clothes.

What exactly needs to be fixed from our end? I keep hearing this vague phrase that everyone else can fix the problem of these communities. That it's our fault. What's your big solution?

Originally Posted by Suicane75

I'm willing to be that he didn't graduate High School and sit down and look at all the career opportunities and choices layed out before him and decide to start slinging.

I'll emphasize this. He made a choice here. I'm sorry that businesses don't want to hire high school dropouts. But that was his choice, not ours.

[Groundhog]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

What exactly needs to be fixed from our end? I keep hearing this vague phrase that everyone else can fix the problem of these communities. That it's our fault. What's your big solution?

Well, you know, the correlation between poverty/low education/crime seems pretty strong across just about every country in the world, so maybe that gives you a starting point? Or you could blame criminals for committing crimes, maybe that will fix the problem.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

Well, you know, the correlation between poverty/low education/crime seems pretty strong across just about every country in the world, so maybe that gives you a starting point? Or you could blame criminals for committing crimes, maybe that will fix the problem.

I can't force people to attend school. Again, what's your solution?

[Groundhog]

Not even close to getting the point.

[RainMaker]

Your point seems to be stating a problem and then not being able to articulate your solution.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

He was living off an injury settlement, not his drug dealing. Although perhaps selling poison to the neighborhood kids is how he was able to afford all the designer clothes.

What exactly needs to be fixed from our end? I keep hearing this vague phrase that everyone else can fix the problem of these communities. That it's our fault. What's your big solution?



I'll emphasize this. He made a choice here. I'm sorry that businesses don't want to hire high school dropouts. But that was his choice, not ours.

Not much of a choice when he suffered from extreme lead poisoning. We know that lowers IQ and increases anti-social behavior. To some degree his fate was sealed as a two year old.

But we could fix a lot of that going forward if we wanted to. We won't, though, because socialism.

[molson]

Originally Posted by nol

*Someone rich and white. Otherwise it's just race baiting

Nah, I've seen plenty of non-white and non-rich people make incredible positive changes through their communities, local governments, and charitable organizations. In fact, there's really not a lot of rich white people hanging around these communities and organizations that need the most help. And overcoming adversity gives you credibility with people, and I think teaches you a ton of skills to help further positive change.

[muns]

Originally Posted by Groundhog

OK great, so how do you eliminate crime?

edit: I misread the "a crime" as crime... Some of the folks dying don't seem to have committed a crime, but I would agree that significantly reducing crime would be the answer overall, I just think the methods I would use to do that would differ a little from Jon's...

This wasn't just totally about his death. If it was, she would have charged the officers correctly, and not swung for the grand-slam homerun so that she could then jump to the mayors office or whatever other political ambitions she had. The amount of bull shit she HERSELF has put the city through emotionally, was not needed. But she tried to go somewhere with it rather than actually do her job. Because she overcharged, and because her ambitions were tied to the overcharges there wont be anybody held accountable. That was her fault for helping/making this politically charged issue that she herself wanted to be on top of as the hero.

[muns]

Originally Posted by molson

Nah, I've seen plenty of non-white and non-rich people make incredible positive changes through their communities, local governments, and charitable organizations. In fact, there's really not a lot of rich white people hanging around these communities and organizations that need the most help. And overcoming adversity gives you credibility with people, and I think teaches you a ton of skills to help further positive change.

Nah come on Molson. That doesn't ever happen. It doesn't fit his narrative.

[Suicane75]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

He was living off an injury settlement, not his drug dealing. Although perhaps selling poison to the neighborhood kids is how he was able to afford all the designer clothes.

Yeah it was. Is it fucked up, of course it is, but again, it's the life these kids know from the time they're in diapers to the time their dead. I'm not using it as an excuse, I'm giving you the facts of the situation. It's the very foundation of the issue that needs to be addressed both internally and externall.

[quote=RainMaker;3111740What exactly needs to be fixed from our end? I keep hearing this vague phrase that everyone else can fix the problem of these communities. That it's our fault. What's your big solution?[/quote]

It's not my fault or your fault as ind, it's the fault of a failed system, it's the fault of the parents, and the leaders both inside and outside these communities. It needs to start with community, district and county wide revitalization. Neighborhoods that have no economy but the drug trade need to influxed with money, businesses and hope. Safe sex, birth control need to be taught at an age that unfortunately most people are uncomfortable with. Politicians, religious leaders, activists, have to stand up to the drug community, but they need to do so with an alternative that's more than "stay in school", rightly or wrongly it's a motto that falls on deaf ears at this point. The mentality of "I got mine" has to be moved aside for the better of the all. It's not a thing that can happen overnight, it's going to to take generations to build back up and even with everything working perfectly it's going to be a slow slow process.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Suicane75

Yeah it was. Is it fucked up, of course it is, but again, it's the life these kids know from the time they're in diapers to the time their dead. I'm not using it as an excuse, I'm giving you the facts of the situation. It's the very foundation of the issue that needs to be addressed both internally and externall.

I agree with this. I just don't know how you fix that.

They have no economy because they have nothing to offer to businesses. Safe sex would be great but irresponsible people will do irresponsible things. Community leaders have spoken out against gangs and drugs but that doesn't stop groups of people with guns and no regard for other humans. The police can handle some of that but these communities don't want that either.

[CU Tiger]

That's a way to make your message inclusive...

Black Lives Matter leader orders whites to the back of DNC march in Philly: Reports | PennLive.com


The challenge is, in my eyes, most of these organizers are just as racist as those they oppose. They just happen to point their hate sword in the opposite direction.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

The challenge is, in my eyes, most of these organizers are just as racist as those they oppose.

Well that's an interesting stereotype without any real backing...

[cuervo72]

Kind of a damned if you do scenario. Have white protesters at the forefront and the movement is one being pushed by liberal white-knighting SJW. Ask them to step into the background and be accused of being racist.

[ISiddiqui]

I think this is a good time to post this:

Americans are as skeptical of Black Lives Matter as they were of the civil rights movement - Vox

According to the American National Election Studies, 57 percent of Americans in 1964 said most of black people’s actions during the civil rights movement in the most recent year were violent. Sixty-three percent of Americans believed the civil rights movement was moving "too fast." And a majority of Americans (58 percent) believed that black people’s actions for the movement hurt their own cause.

Sound familiar?

And just a reminder: Two of the key actions by civil rights activists in 1963 were the March on Washington, when Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. gave his famous "I Have a Dream" speech; and "Bloody Sunday," when Alabama state troopers brutally beat peaceful protesters attempting to march from Selma to Montgomery for their right to vote.

It's funny now to think that in 1964 people thought the Civil Rights Movement was 'violent' and black people were hurting their own cause (and moving too fast), but the media then, as it does now, takes isolated instances and tries to portray the entire movement in the same light.