Racist Police Response to Ferguson Protests

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
14294_910492475627563_2812370739784008299_n.jpg


Mike Rowe
Off The Wall

Hello Mr. Mike Rowe. I'm a big fan and also happen to work in the lower Haight as well as live in Alameda. I have to ask with everything that is going on in Ferguson, how do you feel about the protests in SF as well as the looting/rioting in downtown Oakland?

Hi Meghan

Last week, those very protests blocked off one of the major arteries, and as a result, I was 90 minutes late to a holiday dinner in Alameda. I apologized for my tardiness, and was told by my hostess not to give it a second thought. “It’s a small price to pay,” she said, “given all that’s at stake.” Another guest, already well into the eggnog, wondered aloud if a heart attack victim waiting for an ambulance stuck in traffic might hold a different view?

Within moments, everyone was talking about Garner and Brown, and the conversation got very political very quickly. A liberal guest said, “Look, I wasn’t there, but it seems pretty clear that both men would still be alive had they been white.” A conservative guest replied, “I wasn’t there either, but it seems pretty clear that both men would still be alive if they hadn’t resisted arrest.”

This annoyed the liberal, who asked the conservative why Republicans wanted a “police state.” This annoyed the conservative, who asked the liberal why Democrats wanted “total anarchy.” Things continued to escalate, and within moments, fingers were pointing, veins were bulging, and logical fallacies were filling the air. Ho! ho! ho!

For once, I kept my mouth shut and listened as a roomful of decent people tore each others throats out. It was remarkable, because no one disagreed on the big points. No one disagreed that black lives mattered just as much as white lives. No one disputed that racial bias in law enforcement should be exposed and eliminated. In fact, no one disagreed about the basic facts surrounding each case. The breakdown happened over relevance and context.

My conservative friends were focused on the fact that both men died while resisting arrest, and were therefor responsible for their own demise. They wanted to discuss the killings in light of the incredible risk that all police officers agree to assume.

My liberal friends were focused on the fact that both men were unarmed, and were therefor victims of excessive force. They wanted to discuss the killings in the context of historical trends that suggest bias plays a recurring role in the way cops treat minorities.

By dessert, it was clear that both sides wanted law and order. But the conservatives were convinced that order is only possible when citizens treat cops with respect. Liberals, on the other hand, were arguing that order can only occur when cops treat everyone the same. And round and round we went. The chicken and the egg.

Later, on the drive home, I called a friend of mine back in Baltimore. He’s black, successful, and hard-working. He also resents the way he’s gotten swept into the zeitgeist of Ferguson. In his words, “I’m a pawn in someone else’s agenda, and I’m sick of it. I know what bias looks like in my life. I'm tired of being represented by two petty criminals who died resisting arrest.”

I hadn't thought about it like that, but he's got a point. The vast majority of black Americans have never broken the law. And yet, millions of lives are now entwined with the death of Brown and Garner. That's not fair, but it's hardly breaking news. Minorities are constantly stereotyped and the impression lingers. Looters and arsonists run amok, and Black America suffers the association. Now I'm trying to get my head around the fact that two cops are dead in Brooklyn, assassinated by a lunatic in “retaliation” for Ferguson and Staten Island. Unbelievable.

How much worse can it get for the millions of law-abiding minorities, struggling to be seen as individuals? How much worse can it get for the thousands of honest cops, trying to protect a citizenry that doesn't seem to appreciate their daily sacrifice?

A few days ago, people were marching in the streets, literally calling for the execution of police. (“What do we want? Dead Cops!”) Others are standing by today, waiting to lionize the assassins who answer the call. These are not the champions of justice; these are the enemies of civilization, and it’s up to sensible people on both sides of the aisle to close ranks and shout them down. If we want to live in a nation of laws, we need to support the humans sworn to uphold them. They’re a lot of really great cops out there who have promised to do that very thing, including the one in my family. We’d be screwed without them.

To answer your question Meghan, I support peaceful protests, and I’m all for rooting out bad cops. But let’s not stop there. If we're serious about saving lives, and eliminating the confrontations that lead to the demise of Garner and Brown, let’s also condemn the stupidity that leads so many Americans to resist arrest. I don't care if you're white, black, red, periwinkle, burnt umber, or chartreuse - resisting arrest is not a right, it’s a crime. And it's never a good idea.

Mike

PS. In lighter news, it's come to my attention that CNN will attempt to air a new episode of SGDI, tonight at 9pm Eastern. (Assuming we can get through a whole day without a riot, an earthquake, a terrorist attack, and Ebola outbreak, or a Zombie Apocalypse.)

Mike

.
 
I guess police only shoot black males that point guns at them, right?

Either that or they figured since she was a woman she couldn't shoot for shit :lol:
 
Only if you're an uptight liberal with no sense of humor.

Dont take that the wrong way.

And I'm not misogynistic, i love pussy!
 



yeah, but no. he's doing the mindless equivocation thing -- "liberals are just like conservatives, and i'm the honest broker!"

the party sounds totally made up, as does his black friend in Baltimore.

does he also think Eric Garner was "resisting arrest"?
 
Here's a list of the 10 most dangerous jobs in America. Spoiler: being a cop isn't on the list.

The 10 Deadliest Jobs:
1. Logging workers
2. Fishers and related fishing workers
3. Aircraft pilot and flight engineers
4. Roofers
5. Structural iron and steel workers
6. Refuse and recyclable material collectors
7. Electrical power-line installers and repairers
8. Drivers/sales workers and truck drivers
9. Farmers, ranchers, and other agricultural managers
10. Construction laborers


America's 10 Deadliest Jobs - Forbes


Top 10 Most Dangerous Jobs in the Country: Police Officer is NOT on the List | The Free Thought Project


"What exactly is more dangerous than being a cop? For starters, a trash collector is twice as likely to die on the job versus a cop, fishing is 7 times more dangerous than being a cop, and logging workers, nearly 9 times more dangerous.
Here are occupations more dangerous than being a police officer. Number of deaths per 100,000 employed:

  1. Logging workers: 127.8
  2. Fishermen: 117.0
  3. Aircraft pilots: 53.4
  4. Roofers: 40.5
  5. Garbage collectors: 36.8
  6. Electrical power line installation/repair: 29.8
  7. Truck drivers: 22.8
  8. Oil and gas extraction: 21.9
  9. Farmers and ranchers: 21.3
  10. Construction workers: 17.4

The majority of police deaths are not as a result of violence in the line of duty either, most have occurred accidentally rather than feloniously. Most police officers die, not in some heroic high speed pursuit of a child murderer, but in routine traffic accidents."

My dad has been a roofer his entire adult life. Worked up to the point where he owned his own company. I worked for him, as a roofer, many moons ago; commercial jobs, big buildings.

Hard, demanding, exhausting, and yes, dangerous work.

But anybody who thinks roofing is more dangerous than being a police officer is an idiot.

There are plenty of societal issues to pick apart over what's going on these days. Try to stick with one that makes sense.
 
It seems impossible for you to interact with this forum in a mature way. That's a problem, and one I'm tired of addressing.

What? I cant say "liberal" now either?

You know what, fuck you and the rest of you snobby, uptight, LIBTARD cunts.

Piss on this fucking forum. :wave:
 
Yeah, we're so thin skinned that we can't take being called "liberal". Never mind that the rest of your post was vulgar, crude, and completely inflammatory. Good fucking riddance.

Why is it that conservatives think that left-leaning people consider the word "liberal" such a horrible insult? Many seem to think that it's an awful thing to be called and that it's on par with a racial slur and will drive anybody into a froth, but I've yet to meet one true liberal who gets upset at being called that. At worst, I might see mild annoyance but that mostly arises from the fact that it's trying to be used as an insult (and usually at the expense of an actual reply).

Seriously, why do conservatives think being called a "liberal" is so awful to actual liberals?

(Maybe this is a topic for another thread)




Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
This thread makes me lose my faith in humanity little by little every time I decide to read it.
 
This is why I don't like to associate myself with any side of the political spectrum.....some people can totally embarrass and misrepresent a group with certain political ideologies. I think this can actually go for nearly any major group in this country.
I gave up on being a "conservative" or "republican" whenever they decided that the tea party is the only way to go and when they decided to stoop as low as their main opponent, whom they had justifiably criticized. But now they do almost the same thing, especially amongst their leadership, which makes them no different.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Ugh. Yeah. As I have grown older I've taken a more centrist position in politics.

it's utterly ridiculous how certain issues just divide themselves on party lines, as if one's opinion on fiscal policy has anything to do with basic human rights.

i mean for fucks sake, it wasn't that long ago that the republicans were the party that was progressive on civil rights and the democrats were ass backwards.

we're just fucked, really.
 
Our politicians and government will do anything that can distract us from the real problems.
I think social issues are really causing nothing to get done. We're so much further apart than we were 20-30 years ago; and this causes a bitter rivalry for control of power on both sides. So consequently, nothing at all will get done. Sadly, I don't see this trend changing in the future.
Tea Party conservatives aren't willing to move towards the center and most liberals aren't willing to either. They'll keep battling it out on gay marriage and racism to no end and attract the kinda people who agree with them. Those are not political issues! How to fix 18 trillion in debt is a little bit more of a problem....or I don't know maybe try keeping us informed on the whereabouts of Russia and China......or Isis maybe......or someone actually proposing a legit immigration reform. Because every immigration reform that has been proposed was for show only or was just absolutely horrific. But no, we just gotta keep fighting the zealous battle for supposed equality or traditionalism or some BS like that.
Yeah, so we're basically f**king screwed.

Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Our politicians and government will do anything that can distract us from the real problems.
I think social issues are really causing nothing to get done. We're so much further apart than we were 20-30 years ago; and this causes a bitter rivalry for control of power on both sides. So consequently, nothing at all will get done. Sadly, I don't see this trend changing in the future.
Tea Party conservatives aren't willing to move towards the center and most liberals aren't willing to either. They'll keep battling it out on gay marriage and racism to no end and attract the kinda people who agree with them. Those are not political issues! How to fix 18 trillion in debt is a little bit more of a problem....or I don't know maybe try keeping us informed on the whereabouts of Russia and China......or Isis maybe......or someone actually proposing a legit immigration reform. Because every immigration reform that has been proposed was for show only or was just absolutely horrific. But no, we just gotta keep fighting the zealous battle for supposed equality or traditionalism or some BS like that.
Yeah, so we're basically f**king screwed.

Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


Well this idea that equality should be ignored because debt is more important IS part of the problem. But yes unwillingness to compromise is part of the problem as well.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Well this idea that equality should be ignored because debt is more important IS part of the problem. But yes unwillingness to compromise is part of the problem as well.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


It's supposed equality and very much opinionated. Shouldn't be an issue because it's not a big deal. Let each state make their own ruling on gay marriage because it wouldn't be as much of a problem. Don't force it in Texas, allow it in California, etc. Would make it much less of an issue.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
It's supposed equality and very much opinionated. Shouldn't be an issue because it's not a big deal. Let each state make their own ruling on gay marriage because it wouldn't be as much of a problem. Don't force it in Texas, allow it in California, etc. Would make it much less of an issue.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


I think gay people in Texas might not like the idea that they should have to wait longer to get equal treatment under the law.
 
A majority of people in Texas don't support it. Majority should rule; as it always has. Not everyone is going to be happy about every decision. That's why, like I said, California can legalize it. The majority of their population will support it.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
A majority of people in Texas don't support it. Majority should rule; as it always has. Not everyone is going to be happy about every decision. That's why, like I said, California can legalize it. The majority of their population will support it.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


By that logic though it's entirely likely that at least one state would still have racial segregation. Would you say that the black folks living there should just live with it?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
A majority of people in Texas don't support it. Majority should rule; as it always has. Not everyone is going to be happy about every decision. That's why, like I said, California can legalize it. The majority of their population will support it.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


Majority rule doesn't trump equality for all citizens. What if one state wanted to legalize segregation? Or one state wanted to discriminate against Jewish people? Would you still say that "not everyone is going to be happy about every decision?"


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Anyone that argues that states should decide for themselves is making the state's rights argument. That worked for segregation, Jim Crow laws, and slavery, until it didn't.
 
Back
Top Bottom