Racist Police Response to Ferguson Protests

[bono_212]

Originally Posted by PhilsFan

I didn't say that they do, so...?

You're basically insinuating that if you're a liberal, you just get race relations.

All I'm trying to say is that if someone identifies with one political leaning, or another, that does not mean that that person 1) Understands all of the subjects that side may focus on nor 2) Does it mean that a person on the other side of the line completely agrees with everything their contemporaries do.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by Axver

it's pretty clear the teen did not pose a threat to the officer's life and the officer had no need to use his gun or apply deadly force.

Well, according to the officer, Michael did go after the officer's gun. If that is true, then he indeed posed a threat to the officer's life.

Also - there may be laws/rules in America that simply do no exist in your country (for better or worse). One of those is the fleeing felon rule:

At Common law, the Fleeing Felon Rule permits the use of force, including deadly force, against an individual who is suspected of a felony and is in clear flight -

Fleeing felon rule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Assaulting an officer is a felony. Once Michael hit the officer, his life was at serious risk (legally).

[AEON]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

"The Media" did this?

This isn't about saintly blacks and racist cops. It's about the fact that black people have to deal with things that are evidently unimaginable to white people. That there are different standards of justice in this country. And that both Brown and Martin would be alive today if they were white -- because the cops or asshole Rambo neighborhood watch domestic violence purveyors would have treated them differently from the start.

This isn't to say that they are angels or absolved from doing stupid, illegal things. It's that there's a working assumption in place that's entire based in race that occasionally results in death.


Sent from

Translation - it's okay to crucify a white officer with an impeccable service record if it helps to bring "larger" and "more important" issues to light.

[cobl04]

Originally Posted by AEON

Translation - it's okay to crucify a white officer with an impeccable service record if it helps to bring "larger" and "more important" issues to light.

Originally Posted by AEON

(and by doing so - completely erasing an otherwise stellar career and reputation)

..............

Originally Posted by Diemen

As for systemic racism, just look at how much more favorably the media portrays white killers compared to black victims:

When The Media Treats White Suspects And Killers Better Than Black Victims

Headline about white killer: Ala. suspect brilliant, but social misfit
Black shooting victim: Montgomery's latest shooting victim had history of narcotics abuse, tangles with law

White killer: Son in Staten Island murders was brlliant, athletic - but his demons were the death of parents
Black victim: Trayvon Martin was suspended three times from school

White killer: Oregon school shooting suspect had fascination with guns, but was devout Mormon, friends say
Black victim: Police: Slain Lakeland teen had been shot before, death possibly drug-related

White criminal: Straight A student plotted to bomb school
Black victim: Shooting victim had many run-ins with the law

Notice a pattern?

[AEON]

Originally Posted by cobl04

..............

Which media is this? Are you referring to WND? That is certainly NOT how this event has been reported by the major news outlets.

If a white man shoots a black man - it's a total media circus. If a black man shoots a black man, it's not even worth mentioning (to the media - there's no money in it).

[AEON]

Originally Posted by prbiker15

Reminds me of how the media was treated in Venezuela during the protests in that country. Sad.

You're joking right? The US media has almost complete free reign here. They simply follow/create the stories that make the most money.

[cobl04]

I was merely pointing out that you keep bringing up this cop's "impeccable record" and Brown's "not nice person". You are complaining about the media and yet your posting style is very similar to how media reports on white killers/black victims.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by PhilsFan

Because Darren Wilson murdered a teenager and the police responded by violating first amendment rights ever since?

"Murdered"...you don't know that.

Looting and shooting at cops (and at least one other protester) is NOT a first amendment right.

[cobl04]

Originally Posted by AEON

You're joking right? The US media has almost complete free reign here. They simply follow/create the stories that make the most money.

Being teargassed for doing your job is free reign? What world do you live in?

[AEON]

Originally Posted by cobl04

I was merely pointing out that you keep bringing up this cop's "impeccable record" and Brown's "not nice person". You are complaining about the media and yet your posting style is very similar to how media reports on white killers/black victims.

That is NOT how this has been played out. At first Michael Brown was shown as a sweet, lovable, huggable bear gunned down by the mean racist white cop. It is only well AFTER the circus has started that we find out that Michael Brown was not such a sweet guy after all and the mean racist cop had a perfect record serving that SAME community, day in and day out, for four years.

So, we're supposed to believe that after four years of terrific service - the white cop just suddenly decided to shoot a lovable, cuddly black man in the middle of the day for no reason other than he didn't like blacks? It's just a strange coincidence that only 10 minutes earlier that Michael was stealing from the convenience store and pushing around the clerks with ZERO fear.

Yet - the facts don't matter. The fire is set. The line has been drawn. The sides have been taken. Reason is out the window. Even if the facts clearly show this officer acted according to law and training - he's done. Why? So the networks can make more money on our clicks, visits, and viewing hours. They hype this stuff up for money, it's as simple as that.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by cobl04

Being teargassed for doing your job is free reign? What world do you live in?

What are you referring to?

EDIT: Watch CNN and tell me honestly that the press coverage is being suppressed.

[Axver]

Wow, this discussion just isn't worth it if you're going to keep missing the point (gross over-use of deadly force) or ignoring what's on record (journalists being arrested).

[AEON]

Originally Posted by Axver

Wow, this discussion just isn't worth it if you're going to keep missing the point (gross over-use of deadly force)

On this I am not sure about until we see more forensics...

Originally Posted by Axver

or ignoring what's on record (journalists being arrested).

I do want to be clear that I think that the riots are another issue. The police certainly over-reacted those first few nights. From what I've read, even conservatives agree on this. However, since then, the "protesters" are turning violent in the absence of a strong police presence. Even forums with a strong liberal presence (reddit) - have turned on the protesters.

Yes - the media was caught in the crossfire those first few nights. However, there is not, nor has there been, an overall media blackout. The riots have been thoroughly covered - often with the reporters at risk of being caught in the middle of the action.

[cobl04]

Follow Anonymous on Twitter (if you have it).

Journalists have been arrested. That is a fact. Sounds a little like suppression to me

[Vlad n U 2]

Not sure if anyone happened to be watching CNN recently?

[BVS]

Originally Posted by AEON

Which media is this? Are you referring to WND? That is certainly NOT how this event has been reported by the major news outlets.



If a white man shoots a black man - it's a total media circus. If a black man shoots a black man, it's not even worth mentioning (to the media - there's no money in it).

This is not just a white man shooting a black man.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[BVS]

Originally Posted by AEON

Yet - the facts don't matter. The fire is set. The line has been drawn. The sides have been taken. Reason is out the window. Even if the facts clearly show this officer acted according to law and training - he's done. Why? So the networks can make more money on our clicks, visits, and viewing hours. They hype this stuff up for money, it's as simple as that.

You do realize you're just as guilty as everyone you accuse, right?

You are bending over backwards to try and justify putting 6 bullets in an unarmed man. Do you realize how often cops get assaulted? Yet they find a way to apprehend without taking deadly force, which is how real cops are trained. And you've dismissed eyewitnesses as just sticking with their tribe(not a disgusting presumption at all).


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[AEON]

Originally Posted by BVS

You do realize you're just as guilty as everyone you accuse, right?

You are bending over backwards to try and justify putting 6 bullets in an unarmed man.

No, I am questioning this notion that Michael was gunned down while peacefully surrendering to the charge of jaywalking.

Originally Posted by BVS

Do you realize how often cops get assaulted? Yet they find a way to apprehend without taking deadly force, which is how real cops are trained.

Michael is 6'4" and almost 300 pounds, if he didn't want to be apprehended by hand, he wasn't going to be. And as we saw only 10 minutes before he was shot, Michael did not hesitate to use his size to do whatever he wanted to do.

Originally Posted by BVS

And you've dismissed eyewitnesses as just sticking with their tribe(not a disgusting presumption at all).

Unfortunately I am. After watching the citizens being interviewed this week on CNN, it is obvious they are using this incident to lodge a bigger complaint at society. Also - their stories contradict on some of the most key parts of the incident. Some say he was shot surrendering. Some say he was shot running away. Another says he was shot while doubling back and charging the cop (this is also the officer's version).

I am simply challenging this notion that Darren Wilson, an officer with a reputation for gentleness and an unblemished track record, suddenly went into a racist rage and gunned down a black man who was peacefully surrendering to the charge of jaywalking. Is it possible? Yes. Is it probable? No.

Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference[/QUOTE]

[Salome]

Originally Posted by AEON

I am simply challenging this notion that Darren Wilson, an officer with a reputation for gentleness and an unblemished track record, suddenly went into a racist rage and gunned down a black man who was peacefully surrendering to the charge of jaywalking. Is it possible? Yes. Is it probable? No.

Under the same circumstances, would Darren Wilson have fired with the aim to kill if the suspect had been Caucasian.
Is it possible? Yes. Is it probable? No.

[PhilsFan]

Yes he was murdered. He was shot six times while on his knees surrendering. The officer had no idea if he was a violent person. He only knew he was big and black and not on a sidewalk.