Featured Calling for dead cops is not peaceful protesting!

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=97151

 

How can anyone claim to be protesting for peaceful change while they ILLEGALLY walk down a street blocking traffic, shouting, "What do we want? Dead cops! When do we want it? Now!"
They could care less about what is legal and why would they? The legal representatives(cops) are killing their people.

 

Statements in this manner are why we have to be careful with our rhetoric. No offense, plain_n_simple.

We have two instances on the national stage of a white cop killing a black suspect. In one case, the cops told the man he would be arrested and he did not cooperate. He didn't fight, and yeah, the cops overreacted. Once the cop got him to the ground with his arm around his neck, the suspect said "I can't breathe." The cop should've let up, but this is functionally no different than a suspect saying the handcuffs are too tight. It's probably something the cops hear all the time. In other words, it's a situation that wasn't handled as well as it should've been, but I would not label the cop as a murderer, as some seem willing to do.

In the other case, we have a young man who fit the description of a suspect in a convenience store robbery. He and a friend are walking down the middle of the street when an officer catches sight of them. He reportedly asked them to move out of the street, and upon realizing they fit the description of the suspect, began to question them. Here is where we enter the world of conflicting reports and hearsay. Some reports would have you believe that the officer got out of his car, tossed Michael Brown tot he ground, and shot him execution style. Other reports say they scuffled and Brown ran off, only to turn and charge back at the officer. The physical evidence fits the second scenario more than the first.

Two separate incidents linked only by relatively freshness within the media. Two incidents where a death didn't have to happen, but it did. To say that the "legal representatives(cops) are killing their people" is a misrepresentation that carries connotations of police firing squads marching the streets and shooting people simply for being black. That isn't the truth, but it's the representation the media is giving us, because it means more money for the media. Remember, if it bleeds, it leads. The American news media is basically the Roman arena spectator.

 

There is quite a difference between "My wrist hurts" and "I can't breathe". Shooting a black kid 6 times, twice in the head at close range. Yeah, these are our legal representatives on the street and they are racists. "legal representatives(cops) are killing their people" is a misrepresentation that carries connotations of police firing squads marching the streets and shooting people simply for being black. It's pretty close

 

The same people who are calling for the murder of white police officers in New York and elsewhere are probably the ones who will ask the police charities to help them out this Christmas.

One of the things that you have to like about people is their total cheapness and total hypocrisy. For example, De Blasio hides behind a wall of police guns and denounces the police and then goes to their funerals and cries like a crocodile.

As a white, I have to fear black cops because I don't know what they will do. Downtown Indianapolis is a site for the knockout game wherein hapless whites are attacked and beaten by blacks for amusement.

 

As a white, I have to fear black cops because I don't know what they will do. Downtown Indianapolis is a site for the knockout game wherein hapless whites are attacked and beaten by blacks for amusement.

Gee I wonder why blacks would do that? Surely it couldn't be Indy's police history:

The Michael Taylor case

"Sept. 24, 1987, Michael Taylor, a 16-year-old auto theft suspect, was shot in the head as he sat in an Indianapolis police cruiser with his hands cuffed behind his back. He died a day later.

Police investigators concluded Taylor shot himself with a gun he had somehow concealed, and the coroner ruled the death a suicide, according to an archived report by indystar.com

The FBI also concluded that Taylor shot himself. However, in 1996 a civil jury in Hancock County rejected those findings and concluded police were responsible for Taylor's death. The jury awarded Taylor's family $3.5 million, but that amount was later reduced to $2.6 million.

On March 8, 2000, Indianapolis Mayor Bart Peterson said the city would not appeal the decision."

 

You might just be upset because De Blasio readily relates to the dangers because he has a son who is half black and looks like a black man.

Right here. As I said before, white people were all up in arms and continue to rightfully be so about being attacked by Blacks with this knockout game.

Now you can get your mind around concern for just being ATTACKED. But some kind of way white America can't get it's head around the concerns that black America has about the police KILLING all of these unarmed black men.

Some kind of way, white America can get up in arms and relate when it's THEM being attacked, killed etc, but so many in white America almost instinctively dismiss the concern of black Americans over the police killings and start talking about Black on Black crime and absent fathers and how the black folks should act right when they encounter the police.

If Blacks came out and said that the white people who were attacked got what they deserved for being in the wrong place by themselves, white folks would be ready to riot.

In fact, I bet if this stupid game had picked up steam, white Americans would have been demanding that somebody do something.

That's what Blacks are demanding about the police.

Just makes no sense.

 

How are you so certain they are racists? Did they call you and tell you they killed these men because they hate black people?

Look, I'm not condoning anyone's actions here. I'll admit that the case in NY is an overreaction to a man not cooperating with the police who were arresting him. That doesn't make the cop a racist and a murderer.

In Ferguson, what would you have told the officer to do? Should he have laid down and let Michael Brown beat him? Someone charging a police officer cannot possibly have good intentions. All the evidence shows they scuffled at the car, with Brown reaching inside a police car. Who does that? The witness who claimed the officer shot Brown while he was surrendering all changed their story, or admitted they hadn't even seen it, but had only heard it from someone else. How does any of that make the officer a racist?

And you really think that two instance of white cops killing black men is representative of society as a whole? Do you likewise think that two instances of black men committing crimes leading to their altercations with police is representative of black culture as a whole?

 

Officer Wilson, according to his police chief, had not been contacted about the convenience store robbery and that wasn't why he stopped Michael Brown. So either the chief was lying or Wilson was.

And according to bystanders he told them to "get the F*** out the street".

And if police were discriminantly shooting and killing unarmed white people from one side of the country to the other, white people would be saying the same thing. There's no need to sanitize what they are doing. It's out for the whole world to see and it's time to own it so that we can fix it.

 

Absolutely

 

Zaac - I can only go off the reports I had seen. Everything I had seen leading up to and shortly after the Grand Jury announcement stated Wilson had heard over dispatch the description of the robbery suspects. If he had not, then I will not use that bit of information in discussion. I hadn't seen that in reports though.

That's the thing...we can only go by the information we are given. If the bystanders report is accurate as to what he said, I wouldn't be surprised. I've known several cops in my lifetime and each one has told me that in training they are taught to be jerks and other, harsher, terms, because it increases the chance of throwing off a suspect and it puts the cop in control of the situation from the outset. Not saying I agree, only presenting you the information I have.

Unlike plain_n_simple, I'm not going to assign a prejudice to someone I don't know, simply because the race of their victim was different form their own.

 

I understand Tony. But those two cases are done. They served to shed some light on the larger situation and I think we as Americans need to figure out a way to address what we're seeing.

I think, aside from the visibility into how people are being killed at the hands of the police, perhaps one of the most telling things to come out of these two cases is how a prosecutor can bypass due process when it comes to police officers whom they work with and depend upon to help them get convictions every day.

It's a tremendous conflict of interest. There's just no reason why, in either case, if there was so much evidence to be reviewed that it took weeks for each, there should not have just been indictments and trials by jury.

This system needs to be examined and fixed.

 

Personally, I wish every grand jury trial was treated like Ferguson, where the prosecutor hands over every shred of evidence. Typically, the prosecutor, who has a moneyed interest in bringing about a trial, will only present enough evidence to convince the grand jury to indict the defendant.

I don't how things went in NY.

 

A little known fact---but something quiet easily googled up from military archived history---

Due to the news media "leaking" a report---complete with photos of no more than 3 dead US Marines lying on the invasion beach beside a few landing craft that had been knocked out of commission---and the CLASSIFIED report being leaked to the American citizens back home----the US Military came within a "hairs breath" of being forced by protests(mainly of American shock of seeing 3 dead Marines face down on the beach)----the politicians back then were almost forced to begin withdrawing invading Marines in the south Pacific out and back home to the US----I'm just glad that US military leaders chose to ignore those protests----and it is my prayer that congress and qualifying law makers so choose to IGNORE current protestors and protests!! If we change what is not broken-----soon enough the changes made will become broken!!!

 

But that's how due process is supposed to work. The system is set up to let a defendant be tried by a jury of his peers, not by a grand jury.

And in both of these cases, information that should have been presented to a trial jury was presented to a grand jury and they essentially did what was supposed to take place during a jury trial. They in all effects said the officers were not guilty. The only reason to look at every shred of evidence is to determine guilt or innocence.

Otherwise it doesn't take much evidence from a prosecutor who WANTS TO PROSECUTE presented to a grand jury to convince them that we have enough evidence that needs to be looked at that warrants the full attention of a trial jury.

 

Nice attempt to change the subject. Fortunately for me, I'm a big boy now and you don't get to frame the conversation for me.:wavey:

 

Hey I have an idea, .......Don't resist arrest. Yea that is a good idea.


See you do not get to commit a crime thirty times then resist arrest and then cry foul.