Claiming the Coveted Victim Status

People used to be proud of what they had accomplished and sometimes even claimed to have accomplished more than they had. Today is is more stylish to claim to have been victimized and claim your accomplishments are meaningless. In fact, better not to have any, since you can then claim to have been denied. It is especially useful to be a member of multiple victimized groups. What to do if you have accomplished too much and outrun your victimization? Seems to me that the “taking a knee” protests by rich and privileged athletes is an example of reclaiming the coveted victim status, riding on the backs of actual victims and/or using history to vault over their way to obvious privelge.

Consider a professional athlete. Few people today or in the history of the world have enjoyed greater privilege. They make millions of dollars, have legions of adoring fans, can often get away with crime that would land ordinary people in jail, & have the capacity to collect expensive things like houses and cars. They are usually good looking and always athletic. Women love them men want to be them. They can assert their supremacy over ordinary folks with their money and with their physical power. But all this money, love and fame fails to deliver the victim status, in fact detracts.

So they protest. Protest is easy these days.

In the 1960s, protestors faced fire hoses, dogs that would bite them and cops who really would hit them with sticks. Some were even murdered. Today similar protests have evolved into a kind of Kabuki play. There is a lot of theatrical screaming, but the only people getting hit are the cops and any unfortunate who wanders into the crowd and questions its core chanting.

Being at the cutting edge of the change in 1960 was exciting and affirming because there were real challenges.

On the radio this morning, I heard player complaining that racism was still a factor for them. They could still be victims. They reported two incidents last year. One involved an anonymous fan, who was reported by another fan to have used a racial slur and was ejected. An even more egregious violation occurred when an anonymous fan called a player by a racial slur and threw a peanut at him.

So lets make the equation. Mean dogs + fire hose + physical beatings + risk of death = anonymous fans twice reportedly saying mean things and in one case throwing a peanut.

And this allows the rich, privileged athletes to retain their victim status.

What a world. A couple of guys, maybe unemployed and drunk, out of a country of 300 plus million can make comments and toss a peanut and that negates those millions of dollars.

I will make a deal with anybody. Give me a couple millions dollars a year and in return somebody can come to my house and throw a peanut at me every week. Is there anybody would not jump at this deal?

Great to be a victim.

Posted by Christine & John at September 29, 2017 8:38 AM
Comments
Comment #420240

“coveted victim status”, GMAFB, whoever you are. Set C&J free, or better yet, bring Lee Jamison back. The author of this article doesn’t understand the concepts of unity and solidarity, much less non violent protest and resistance to being harassed by a racist POS. He’s threatening their jobs, and they’re reacting in a peaceful way. You sure think a lot about money for someone claiming to be non-materialistic. I don’t give a flying fig about how much money they make for their owners. I guess you’re opposed to capitalism in this case.

Posted by: ohrealy at September 29, 2017 11:15 AM
Comment #420244

ohrealy

In our society, money buys privelge. And these guys have more than money. They have fame and the admiration of masses of people. Beyond that, they are physically fit and attractive.

They have more of the total package of what society can bestow than almost anybody else in world history. They just need to check the privilege.

Ask too, what do they really want people to do. America is not a racist country, as evidenced by the success of the athletes themselves, of many celebrities, of successful business people and the very highest officials even including Secretaries of State, Attorneys Generals and Presidents. These successful guys often are grateful for their success. But some trade on the victim status of people who “look like them.”

It is not 1960 anymore. Every society has its challenges and every individual in society needs to adapt and do what they can do well. Some will do better than others by a combination of luck and skill.

Race remains one factor among many that influence success, but it clearly is no longer a determining factor and its effect is not clearly beneficial of harmful. An applicant to law school will be much better off if he can check the box that indicates black, for example.

Posted by: Christine & John at September 29, 2017 12:09 PM
Comment #420247
America is not a racist country

I agree, but there are still many places in this country where racism still prevails, including The White House, The Congress, and the Supreme Court.

….There were people there whose ancestors came from every continent and subcotinent on earth. Some people see this and find that it is a hopeful omen of more good things to come from a country that can attract all these people, and are happy. Other people complain about someone speaking a foreign language in their presence, or complain that the person who mows their lawn was allowed into the country. Posted by: ohrealy at December 18, 2006 1:25 PM.
Posted by: ohrealy at September 29, 2017 1:35 PM
Comment #420251

I am not a Trump fan, but I do not believe that racism prevails in the White House and certainly not that it has infected the modern Supreme Court. And it is not a major factor anymore in determining individual success. Behaviors far outweigh phenotype. As evidence, we note that Nigerian immigrants have incomes and education levels higher than native American blacks and whites. If race was the determiner, this would not be possible. It certainly would not have been possible when racism was strong in the USA, even as late as 1960. But it is not 1960 anymore.

Re your comment - I agree. I spoke German, Polish, Norwegian & Portuguese. I know what it is like to be a foreigner and respect all those who take the time to master another language. The rule I apply to myself in foreign countries is one I apply to others in mine. If you plan to live in place for any length of time, learn the language and understand that customs so that you can mix in. You should be grateful for the kindness of strangers who help you get along in their country but you cannot expect special consideration.

Posted by: Christine & John at September 29, 2017 2:31 PM
Comment #420257

Immigrants success is easy to understand, just as lack of success is understandable for people who never go anywhere. I remember telling someone that becoming an adult means putting some distance between yourself and where you grew up. He pointed out that was Siddhartha did.

“You should be grateful” is one of the kinds of statements that “You Should Avoid”. What are you, 100 years old?

Posted by: ohrealy at September 29, 2017 5:34 PM
Comment #420258

Not 100 years old. But I think that the capacity to be grateful is an important aspect of both success and joy in life. In my observation of just over 60 years, people unable to be grateful are more often unsuccessful and even when they do succeed, they are often joyless and miserable people.

So, I understand that telling people to be grateful may be out of style in our ironic age. More’s the pity. It may help explain unhappiness among so many people.

Re immigrants - It is true that people who move are generally more successful than those who don’t. Not sure about the direction of causality, however. Probably a feedback loop.

I don’t doubt that Siddhartha did that. The journey motif is one of the oldest in literature.

One of the great things about America was that you could move and recreate yourself in the new place. It is one of the things that made us a land of opportunity. I lived in Europe for around 12 years total and found that Europeans are more fearful of failure because it follows them.

Americans can fail and get back up. The words of Davy Crockett apply here. His slogan for reelection was something like, “If you reelect me, I will serve you well. If you do not, you can go to hell and I will go to Texas.”

Posted by: Christine & John at September 29, 2017 5:54 PM
Comment #420261

Going to Texas might as well have been going to hell for Crockett.

I’ve had a lot of opportunities in my life, and I’m grateful for them, and especially for the character of my parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents, but I don’t expect anyone to tell me I should be grateful. It’s something you say to a child or someone to whom you feel superior. Other people might not have the same advantages or backgrounds. They can only look forward if they hope to accomplish something for themselves. When people look only backwards, or are mired in the present circumstance, they’re setting themselves up for stagnation. We’re all going into the future. If you don’t like that then the future is going to mess with you even more than it would otherwise.

Posted by: ohrealy at September 29, 2017 6:46 PM
Comment #420262

C&J,

A couple of guys, maybe unemployed and drunk, out of a country of 300 plus million can make comments and toss a peanut and that negates those millions of dollars.

Today it may be peanuts. Tomorrow it may be gas chambers. You hold the same naivete that many Jews held before the Holocaust. There was a belief that if people tolerated petty acts of antisemitism that there wouldn’t be trouble. Those who believed this refused to resist Nazism until it was far too late. The Holocaust had its roots in centuries of antisemitism. Even though there were many wealthy and prosperous Jews living in the Weimar Republic and surrounding nations, those riches did not matter a whit in the face of Nazism.

Likewise, the threats faced by African-Americans today are far more serious than thrown peanuts. Just ask Philando Castile, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice or one of countless other young men killed when they posed no actual threat to anyone.

Posted by: Warren Porter at September 29, 2017 6:56 PM
Comment #420264

Is Warren telling us that the deaths of the three persons he lists were not properly investigated?

How many deaths of minorities in Chicago are being blamed on the police?

Will linking arms at football games affect the violence found in America?

Posted by: Royal Flush at September 29, 2017 7:33 PM
Comment #420266

ohrealy

My admonition that people should feel grateful is just good advice to those who want to be more successful and happier in their lives. It is a practical value.

I admit that I do not much like churlish people. I do not seek to punish them, but I can choose not to be as helpful. Most people are like this, especially most successful people whose help the churlish people might find most useful.

If you cannot really be grateful, it is probably a good idea at least to pretend to be.

Re advantages - nobody has the same advantages, but it is sometimes hard to know what an advantage is. As I mentioned elsewhere, one of the best things that happened to me was that I broke my leg in a few places and laid in traction when I was in 6th Grade. It made we weak and I was bullied. I am grateful to those bullies to making me stronger and grateful to the good luck of breaking the bone, since that is when I started to read much more.


Warren

Reasonable distinctions. The peanut throwing guy was just a loser. Nobody else joined in. Lighten up.

My brother in law is one of those guys who easily takes insult. He moved out of Phoenix because a couple of kids drove by and called him a “bald-header F-er”. In fact they were accurate, but they did not represent the people of Arizona.

Re blacks being killed by cops - you know that an unarmed black guy has a greater chance of being hit by lightning or killed falling in his own bathroom than being shot by the cops. It is a bogus issue.

The real danger to young black men is homicide by other young black men. blacks account for around 13% of the population, but 52% of the homicides. That is the danger and the cops can be helpful. The silly idea that the cops are a threat TAKES black lives.

Posted by: Christine & John at September 29, 2017 7:59 PM
Comment #420267

WP, the Philando Castile case is important for a couple of reasons. One, the police don’t believe that the 2nd amendment applies to a black man. Two, the cop shot into a car with a small child who will be forever traumatized by his actions.

In Chicago, the killing of Laquan McDonald is going to be remembered for a very long time. From Slate:

1. Gunshot wound of the left scalp. 2. Gunshot wound of the neck. 3. Gunshot wound of the left chest. 4. Gunshot wound of the right chest. 5. Gunshot wound of the left elbow. 6. Gunshot wound of the right upper arm. 7. Gunshot wound of the left forearm. 8. Gunshot wound of the lateral right upper leg. 9. Gunshot wound of the left upper back. 10. Gunshot wound of the left elbow. 11. Gunshot wound of the posterior right upper arm. 12. Gunshot wound of the right arm. 13. Gunshot wound of the right forearm. 14. Gunshot wound of the right hand. 15. Gunshot wound of the right lower back. 16. Gunshot wound of the right upper leg.

McDonald was boxed in by police cars and the construction fence… McDonald didn’t pose an immediate threat to anyone, and he had nowhere to run. McDonald was shying away from the police rather than moving toward them, according to this witness, when a white male officer shot him. He fell to the ground. There was a pause. Then the officer fired again and again and again.

Sparked by events in Ferguson, Missouri, an extraordinary series of protests and conversations across the nation have brought us to something akin to a truth and reconciliation moment with respect to patterns of police abuse and impunity in minority communities.

The fate of Laquan McDonald—a citizen of Chicago so marginalized he was all but invisible until the moment of his death…

He was a ward of the state, and literally had no one.

Posted by: ohrealy at September 29, 2017 8:03 PM
Comment #420268

ohrealy

The Castile case where a Hispanic officer shot a black man, closely follow by the case where a black officer shot the white woman who called the cops, shook Minneapolis. Both these cases were and are being investigated.

I think we can agree that police procedures can and do go wrong. We can get better. But the idea that there is an epidemic of police shooting innocent blacks is just not supported by the data.

So far this year, sixteen people who were unarmed and not fleeing a crime scene have been shot by cops. Of them, four were black. In an average year, many more people are killed by lightning strikes. Any deaths are serious issues. The risks vary.

Warren

thinking about small offenses that could grow into bigger ones - the threat we should fear now is the limitation on free speech imposed by angry mobs. This is how the Nazis got their start. It was not by throwing peanuts.

Posted by: Christine & John at September 29, 2017 8:35 PM
Comment #420269

I don’t see what the ethnicity of those two officers has to do with the facts of the shootings. In both cases, there was an effort by the police to claim that something different happened than what was apparent to witnesses.

I tell you that a kid was shot 16 times, and you talk about data like you’re looking at actuarial tables. Shooting someone 16 times sounds more like a mob hit or an assassination. The message is clear. Get away or get gunned down like a dog.

Philando Castile was shot 7 times. WTF is that all about if not a paranoid fear of black men stoked by racists like the POS, his attorney general, the former members of the attorney general’s Senate staff who work in other positions at the WH, and even the former head of the FBI that they fired.

Posted by: ohrealy at September 29, 2017 9:33 PM
Comment #420270

Ohrealy

Sorry, I thought that you thought that race was an issue. I thought that it made a difference that both shooters were people of color and that made a difference in the Castile trial the police Officer Jeronimo Yanez is Latino, the prosecutor Ramsey County Attorney John Choi is Asian, and the presiding judge, Judge Edward Wilson is Black. In fact, the only person of white was the woman killed by Mohamed Noor. It is hard to maintain that white supremacy myth when no white people are involved, except as a victim.

We agree that police should be more circumspect and that the use of force is a problem, even if it is a small and diminishing one. I thought we disagreed about the salience of race.

Re the hysterical fear of black guys, Castile actually had a gun. The white woman shot by the black police officer was in her pajamas. Did Mr Noor have a hysterical fear of white women?

I stipulate that in the cases you mention horrible things happened. I am sure we can come up with lots more examples. But we make policy not by such individual case but rather by the total.

The idea that the police are targeting blacks is not supported by the data. It is a pernicious myth that is killing people, mostly blacks,as homicides have gone up by about 900 a year since Ferguson.

Let’s put that in context. From 1882-1968, 3445 blacks were lynched in the United States. If these trends continue, the additional deaths from homicide after Ferguson wil have overtaken that number.

http://www.chesnuttarchive.org/classroom/lynching_table_year.html

Posted by: Christine & John at September 29, 2017 10:00 PM
Comment #420271
Castile actually had a gun

And he notified the officer that he had a gun, as a law abiding gun owner does when the police are in that situation.

The rest of your post is either miscommunication or the disingenuousness that right wingers frequently feign when confronted with things they don’t want to know about.

Posted by: ohrealy at September 29, 2017 10:15 PM
Comment #420272

Ohrealy

It was indeed a tragic misunderstanding, as the investigation showed.

The rest of my post evidently went over your head. Nothing exists in isolation. The data show the the BLM narrative is a error or even a lie. When we see the actual facts, we can dispense with the hysteria.

Posted by: Christine & John at September 29, 2017 10:44 PM
Comment #420275
Seems to me that the “taking a knee” protests by rich and privileged athletes is an example of reclaiming the coveted victim status, riding on the backs of actual victims and/or using history to vault over their way to obvious privelge.

Why on earth would you consider these NFL players to be doing anything more than giving back? I mean lets face it many are black and some have been on the s**t end of the stick with the militarized police force. Others see the actual victims and want to bring it to the attention of the people of this country.

But, just like conservative reliance upon alternate facts, have it your way , name one NFL player that has “rode on the back” of actual victims. Name one NFL player that has “reclaimed the coveted victim status” you think seems to exist.

What a line of crap this is C&J. Not an ounce of merit in this foolish attack on the character of the NFL players you seek to attack. Zeig Heil C&J Goebbels and Trump would be proud of this propaganda.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 30, 2017 12:12 AM
Comment #420277

All those extremely privileged athletes are claiming their “oppressed” status from their poorer brethren.

It is like a much less privileged guy like me claiming membership in an oppressed group because poor people in Appalachia look like me.

The problem with protests against cops is that it takes away attention from the real problem which is homicide. Homicide is the leading cause of death for young black men. More effective policing has saved many black lives. Since Ferguson, crime rates in many black communities have risen. This is the consequence.

Posted by: Christine & John at September 30, 2017 1:00 AM
Comment #420280

Royal Flush,

Is Warren telling us that the deaths of the three persons he lists were not properly investigated?

My current opinion is that the law, as it is currently written, gives police too much latitude to decide when they can and cannot shoot another person. Police observing identical behavior from a white person and a black person are more likely to ‘reasonably fear’ imminent danger from the latter than they are to the former. I feel that fears premised on another man’s skin color can never be reasonable, but apparently juries and investigators across the country disagree. By treating black people differently than white people in interactions with law enforcement, this is a fundamental violation of the 14th Amendment’s assurance that all citizens are entitled to equal protection under the law.

Jack,

Re blacks being killed by cops - you know that an unarmed black guy has a greater chance of being hit by lightning or killed falling in his own bathroom than being shot by the cops. It is a bogus issue. The real danger to young black men is homicide by other young black men. blacks account for around 13% of the population, but 52% of the homicides. That is the danger and the cops can be helpful. The silly idea that the cops are a threat TAKES black lives.

The point of Black Lives Matter (at least to me) isn’t to minimize the number of Black Men who die. The point is to minimize the number of Black Men who die at the hands of police. There is a principle at stake here that is far more important than the lives of individual human beings. Black people have the fundamental right, granted by our Constitution, to be treated equal to Whites when they interact with agents of the state such as law enforcement.

To me, the ends do not justify the means here. I am not willing to violate the individual rights of Black Americans even if it reduces criminal homicide.

That said, there is a great deal of work being done within the Black community to reduce the black homicide rate. It is good work and it oftentimes involves the same people who champion the BLM cause. Because it isn’t controversial, we don’t hear about it much in the news, but it still happens.

thinking about small offenses that could grow into bigger ones - the threat we should fear now is the limitation on free speech imposed by angry mobs. This is how the Nazis got their start. It was not by throwing peanuts.

The antisemitism evident in centuries of German culture are what specifically set the stage for Nazism. Street violence, while never condonable, is a far more general phenomenon.

It is like a much less privileged guy like me claiming membership in an oppressed group because poor people in Appalachia look like me.

That’s a terrible analogy. White people in Appalachia are never denied their rights simply on the basis of their skin color.

Posted by: Warren Porter at September 30, 2017 7:39 AM
Comment #420283
The rest of my post evidently went over your head. Nothing exists in isolation. The data show the the BLM narrative is a error or even a lie. When we see the actual facts, we can dispense with the hysteria. Posted by: Christine & John at September 29, 2017 10:44 PM

No, the rest of your post was making excuses with data that doesn’t interest me, because it’s not relevant to the killings that we were discussing. You object to “BLM” because it has the word black in it. You seem to be comforted by the fact that the police are able to get away with murder. Mentioning the facts of these cases isn’t hysteria, it’s a factual relation of the details of crimes committed by law enforcement officers in violation of the law, as well as their own procedures. The police aren’t some kind of posse sent out to kill horse thieves before trial. The protests are a peaceful way of bringing publicity to what is happening, even though you want to claim it isn’t happening because of your data. They started before the current POS’s term, but are being aggravated by his own desire to distract attention from Mueller’s efforts, or millions of people in Puerto Rico needing assistance from someone actually able to coordinate an effot to help them, by pointing at black athletes who have now been joined by so many others in solidarity.

Posted by: ohrealy at September 30, 2017 8:36 AM
Comment #420284

Warren

If what you say about BLM is right, they are seriously misguided and morally flawed, since they are implicitly willing to sacrifice many innocent lives to make a political point.

It is true that all lives matter. But if they are focused only on this small risk and ignoring the one that is so much worse, I question their judgement.

Re the Nazis - they were not only about Jews. Theirs was a political movement of revolutionary socialism with many different aspects. Had it been only about Jews, there would have been no WWII and - ironically - likely not Holocaust, since the final solution did not begin until influenced by the war and its exigencies.

It is a big and dangerous mistake to reduce the totalitarian movements of the early-mid 20th century to questions of hatred. Hatred is common. The movements, which include other totalitarian revolutionary socialist groups, such as Mussolini’s fascists & communists under Mao and Stalin, are an especially murderous group. The Soviets killed more than 20 million w/o a well-defined ethnic hatred and the Chinese killed maybe 50 million people who they thought were the same ethnic group.

Posted by: Christine & John at September 30, 2017 9:13 AM
Comment #420285

Ohrealy

The rest of my post was using data and facts. I am sorry if they do not interest you.

It is not a fact that the police generally get away with murder. Our justice system is set up to give the benefit of the doubt to the accused. That is who OJ Simpson “got away” with it and how lots of criminals get off. It also protects people who are innocent in ambiguous situations.

We go through the legal process.

You might “feel” a certain way, but that is not fact. I mentioned before that my son was attacked by six thugs, who kicked him in the head and called him racist names. I “feel” they should have been punished. One of them openly laughed in the courtroom when my son described his injuries. Yet witnesses could not make a positive enough identification the the perps plea bargained to restitution, which we never go, BTW, since the thugs plead poverty. Was I unhappy? Yes? Did I call it racism or injustice? no.

Your or my feelings are not good policy

Posted by: Christine & John at September 30, 2017 9:20 AM
Comment #420286

Your claims about my feelings are erroneous, but feelings are what legislators use to make laws and authorities use to make policies. People are disgusted by the death penalty, and it goes away. Then people feel disgusted by the actions of individuals, and the death penalty comes back. Then people find out that the police and courts haven’t played fair, and it goes away again. Then politicians play on peoples’ feelings and bring it back again.

Many people have been the victims of crimes, and many of the perpetrators have been black. The victims of the police shootings may not have committed any of those crimes, or any crimes at all, yet they are dead because they were presumed guilty. Many police feel that they are out there to f*ck with people, and are unable to control their own feelings.

I found one incident in Chicago a while back particularly disgusting. A gang member went out with his small child on a holiday weekend, and the child was shot by someone attempting to kill the gang member. From the report of where this happened, I thought that the child had been brought to the closest hospital with emergency facilities, which happens to be the hospital where I was born. I later found out that instead, the father brought the child to a hospital much farther away, apparently more interested in his own security rather than the life of his child, who died on the way there. He was guilty of neglect resulting in death, but no one else of his ethnicity is guilty by association.

OJ was not found guilty partly because the prosecutors wanted to throw everything they had at him, which was unnecessary and counter-productive. They could have agreed to dismiss some of the evidence, and had a better case, a shorter trial, and the jury could have had a different “feeling” about the case.

Posted by: ohrealy at September 30, 2017 10:22 AM
Comment #420287
All those extremely privileged athletes are claiming their “oppressed” status from their poorer brethren.

Oh please C&J, once again name one, hundreds took the knee so name one that “claimed their oppressed status” as you wrongly claim.

It is like a much less privileged guy like me claiming membership in an oppressed group because poor people in Appalachia look like me.


No it isn’t C&J this false narrative you throw out to defend and deflect is nonsensical. Making the logical leap from supporting a cause to stealing the “claimed oppression” by supporting the cause can only happen in the conservative mind. Most would call it delusional.


The problem with protests against cops is that it takes away attention from the real problem which is homicide.

Focusing on one problem that usurps the constitutional rights of Americans isn’t wrong C&J. This is yet another diversion which is much more of a problem that focusing on the militarized police problem.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 30, 2017 10:50 AM
Comment #420288

Ohrealy

“I later found out that instead, the father brought the child to a hospital much farther away, apparently more interested in his own security rather than the life of his child, who died on the way there. He was guilty of neglect resulting in death, but no one else of his ethnicity is guilty by association.”

You are exactly right. We should judge behaviors, not race.

If you judge similar behaviors differently only because of race, you are racist. If you do not, you are not. Simple.

When I explain the statistics, I am explaining the disparities based on behaviors in the aggregate. If we look to individuals, we do not attribute the group.

When I hear of a something happening, I want first to know the circumstances and not the race.

J2t2

They claim to be speaking on behalf of the oppressed. They have the right to make that claim, just as Ivanka Trump can claim to speak for poor women. We do not have to accept it.

Re cops and crime - so far this year cops have shot 16 people who were unarmed and not fleeing. Of these, four were black. You can find their names on the Washington Post data base. Each death is a problem, but this is a very small number. I looked into even these four. The most recent involved a man who was beating on the door of his former girlfriends house. He had a couple outstanding warrants and a restraining order for his girlfriend, who he has earlier and often assaulted. When the cops arrived, he said he was not going back to jail and fought them. They tazed him and he was unaffected.

I think we can regret this guy was killed and maybe the cops should have been asked to risk their own safety more to subdue him, but I am not sure taking a knee is appropriate.

Consider the story that Ohrealy tells above, with this horrible man who got his own daughter killed. The daughter is the kind of person we should protect, the general victim of homicide. BLM is not helping in this and may be hurting.

Posted by: Christine & John at September 30, 2017 1:23 PM
Comment #420289

And this is a report by President Obama’s and Eric Holder’s DoJ. They find that differential enforcement comes from differences in behaviors, in location and in rates of offending. Race is a small factor or none at all. I am sure Holder did not much like this report, but it came out.

https://www.nij.gov/topics/law-enforcement/legitimacy/pages/traffic-stops.aspx

Posted by: Christine & John at September 30, 2017 1:27 PM
Comment #420296
If what you say about BLM is right, they are seriously misguided and morally flawed, since they are implicitly willing to sacrifice many innocent lives to make a political point.

C&J, were John Adams and John Hancock misguided and morally flawed to protest an unjust political system rather than address the murder rate in colonial Boston? Thousands of men lost their lives because of the Founding Fathers, but we generally think that is a good thing because of the political changes that came about as a result.

Mind you, no one in the BLM movement believes that reducing the criminal homicide rate in the African-American community isn’t a laudable goal. Indeed, many people (including Colin Kaepernick) have done a great deal of work on this very issue. They just think that reducing those homicides shouldn’t come at the expense of individual Constitutional Rights.

Was this guy a victim
It is challenging without knowing the full context regarding why the officer and Dillan Tabares interacted in the first place. Did the police know he was marked as absconded? Or did they approach him simply because they thought he was “suspicious” (whatever that means). Assuming that the police initiated contact with Dillan Tabares for legitimate reasons, I think the homicide is justified.

This individual approached an armed officer with taser drawn. After the taser proved ineffective, Dillan Tabares punched the officer without any visible provocation and in the ensuing scuffle an unknown item was removed from the utility belt of said officer. Given those circumstances, none of which were present in any of the infamous killings of Black men, I think the officer was justified to shoot Dillan Tabares.

In the grand scheme of things, Mr. Tabares might have been a victim of society or circumstance, which led to him being in his unfortunate situation, but he was ultimately responsible for his own death.

Notably, I do not consider his past run-ins with the law or the fact that he may have been under the influence of illicit drugs at the time of his death into my analysis. Of course, shooting from the hip as I am doing now shouldn’t override the conclusions of the formal investigation, should it find that the officer acted improperly.

Posted by: Warren Porter at September 30, 2017 4:08 PM
Comment #420297
Re the Nazis - they were not only about Jews.

I focus on the Jewish angle because that was the experience of my family. Next weekend I will once again visit my great-aunt who recently turned 100. After living in Holland through the tumult of the ’30s as a teenager, she has provided me with many unique insights regarding what was going on at the time.

Posted by: Warren Porter at September 30, 2017 4:13 PM
Comment #420299
Consider the story that Ohrealy tells above, with this horrible man who got his own daughter killed. The daughter is the kind of person we should protect, the general victim of homicide. BLM is not helping in this and may be hurting. Posted by: Christine & John at September 30, 2017 1:23 PM

I only told that story to see what your reaction would be, and I found out that you are only interesting in hearing bad stuff about minorities, in spite of your own protestations.

Posted by: ohrealy at September 30, 2017 4:20 PM
Comment #420312

Warren

I understand why people might focus on Jews. The murder and persecution were unique and uniquely terrible in world history.

But we cannot understand totalitarianism only or even primarily through this lens.

Totalitarians rise to power principally by subverting and destroying and/or co-opting non-state institutions. It is not exciting and it is hard to point to an exact start or end, but that is how it works.

If we attribute their rise to hate or prejudice, we miss the mechanism. The bad guys, in fact, use these things to distract from what is going on.

Posted by: Christine & John at October 1, 2017 9:05 AM
Comment #420313

Ohrealy


You missed the point. I advocating protecting the innocent victim, i.e. the daughter. I assumed from your article that she was a minority. I am interested in protecting all citizens from violence and helping all be successful, since their success is our success.

In 1924,the Congress made laws to keep out “people like me,” i.e. immigrants from southern and eastern Europe. We were a disliked minority. The lesson of how that stopped is interesting and I think applicable.

I grew up in “disadvantaged” circumstances. My father’s first language was not English. Both my parents were HS dropouts. People openly ridiculed my ethnicity. We never owned a car. I went to city public schools. We wore our shoes until they had holes in the bottom and then put in cardboard. We never once went on vacation. During my entire childhood, I never stayed at a hotel, never ate a steak. We had an old black and white TV, only one. It got really bad reception. By today’s standards (and those of the time) we were poor, but I didn’t stay that way.

And, BTW, the cops used to harass us regularly. They would kick us out of public parks, drive along side us as we walked along the streets and tell us to keep moving. On a comical side, a suburban cop told us to leave down and not come back. Local stores had signs saying that only two kids could come it at a time and the clerks followed us around. This is just the way it was.

I attribute my success to many factors, but in retrospect I see two were key. I lived in a neighborhood with very low rates of crime and I had a stable family. Stability is important to development.

We know how to do this. I just want to give others the type of opportunities

Posted by: Christine & John at October 1, 2017 9:25 AM
Comment #420315
The lesson of how that stopped is interesting and I think applicable.

Discrimination against “ethnic whites” ended once it became difficult to distinguish them from the WASPs who already lived here. Unless interracial reproduction turns everyone’s skin brown, that isn’t going to happen for African-Americans.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 1, 2017 9:42 AM
Comment #420317

Yeah. How did discrimination against Asians stop? How is it that immigrants from Nigeria and other African countries and their kids can do so well economically and educationally?

Racism still exists, but it is no longer a determining factor. It can be helpful in some situations. For example, a applicant will be helped getting into university by checking the right box.

It is really simple. If you treat similar behaviors differently just because of race, you are racist. If you do not, you are not. All the rest is BS. We should not be racist.

Race is used instrumentally by politicians on all sides. Do you really believe that cops target blacks for traffic stops. I do not AND the Eric Holder’s DoJ could not find evidence beyond “disparate impact”. Do you really think cops are out to shoot blacks? I do not and the statistics involved indicate that it is not happening. Again, we need to rely on “disparate impact.”

I have not heard anybody (except black people) use the n-word in more than forty years. We have all sorts of special hiring programs.

A telling personal story. A few years ago, I promoted three black employees into higher level positions. I did this - I stretched them - because I saw their potential. A black civil rights group approached me and wanted to give me an award for my affirmative action. They stopped when I told them that I had promoted these people because they were the most qualified and that I saw their potential.

How perverse is that? My morality conflicted with theirs. I promote w/o regard to race and they give me a hard time because of it.

Posted by: Christine & John at October 1, 2017 10:11 AM
Comment #420318

We stop racism by not behaving in racist ways. Just do that.

Posted by: Christine & John at October 1, 2017 10:23 AM
Comment #420320

Racism has been weaponized. It’s used as an assault on people who stand in the way of progressive ideology. It’s close to being a faux issue except for those who go out of their way to inject it into any issue that progressives feel threatened by. And these days, they are threatened by the slightest grievance.

People who scream racism only hurt their cause. If you put the blame where it should lie it’s called racism. Just ask Bill Cosby. It took 25 years for his accusers to speak up, but only a few months after he told black kids to pull up their pants. Take a guess what the real reason for his current dilemma is.

Posted by: Weary Willie at October 1, 2017 12:31 PM
Comment #420322
Theirs was a political movement of revolutionary socialism with many different aspects.

And that is yet another myth C&J. If it were socialism why did so many capitalist, businessmen, in Britain and America support them once Hitler was in power? The socialist fought the right wing fascist in Germany, Spain and Italy as fascism was becoming popular in Europe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francoist_Spain


They claim to be speaking on behalf of the oppressed

“They” isn’t a name it is a group. Speaking on behalf? They may be supporting the cause but I didn’t hear them speaking, they linked arms or took a knee during the national anthem. Is this kinda like the “disrespecting the military” accusation? I mean just another twisted half truth to deflect from the issue.

And, BTW, the cops used to harass us regularly. They would kick us out of public parks, drive along side us as we walked along the streets and tell us to keep moving

Remember that 60’s thing vs. today? Well this is kinda like that, I mean you didn’t get choked to death, get your neck broke, tasered or shot multiple times for walking down the street like kids today. Such a good example of the brutality that is the real issue here.

Re cops and crime - so far this year cops have shot 16 people who were unarmed and not fleeing.

You find this number acceptable? 25% were black yet blacks make up what 12% of the population? But you miss the point as well. Nearly a thousand a year killed by police. Some of course necessary and justified but since when is fleeing considered to be an automatic death sentence? Law enforcement in other countries, well maybe not the 3rd world dictatorship countries but in 1st world democracies, do not kill or maim on a regular basis as those in this country do. It is the training and militarization of the police that causes this. The police didn’t use to be judge jury and executioner as they are becoming today. Do we really want this type of law enforcement?

Posted by: j2t2 at October 1, 2017 1:39 PM
Comment #420323

J2T2

Businessmen as a group are not defenders of the free market. As people like you often say, they are interested in making money and if they can do that by limited competition by others and/or using the power of government to solidify their positions, many are delighted to take the chance.

The fight between Nazis and communists in Germany was a type of socialist civil war. Neither group wanted free markets, both were advocating revolutionary change and they agreed that using government as mechanism was they way to do it.

Not all socialism is revolutionary, BTW. The non-revolutionary sort, sometimes called democratic socialism, tends to be more inefficient than dangerous and is often self limiting.

Re getting harassed by the cops - I am just pointing out that ordinary kids of the past can trade oppression stories with oppressed kids today. I did not get chocked to death or have my neck broken, but then neither - obviously - did anybody complaining about those things. It is uncommon.

Re the number killed - I do not find that acceptable, however, if you read the background of the situations, you see the circumstance involved.

As for the statistics, they indicate that blacks are affected LESS often when compared to the general crime statistics. As the report from Eric Holder’s DoJ indicated, race is an issue, but the disparities can be best explained by circumstances not involving race.

Blacks are involved in 52% of the murders. If the number of police incidents mirrored that, we would expect more. The polices go where they crimes are. They interact with people committing crimes. MOST blacks and most whites do not commit crimes. They rarely have unpleasant encounters with cops. Among the minority that commit crimes, around half of the most violent offenders - killers - are black. This is the population we compare, not the general one.

You might note that 96% of the victims of police shootings are male. If we took your logic, we would be surprised that it was not closer to 50% and postulate an anti-male sexism. But if we compare offenders and behaviors, the statistics are explained.

The myth that police are targeting blacks is both wrong and pernicious. We need to call it out. Maybe we can take a knee next time athletes or others make those claims.

Posted by: Christine & John at October 1, 2017 2:40 PM
Comment #420327

“How perverse is that? My morality conflicted with theirs. I promote w/o regard to race and they give me a hard time because of it.”
Posted by: Christine & John at October 1, 2017 10:11 AM

Good job John. Integrity is “doing the right thing when no one is looking”

Words are not really that meaningful, actions are!

“Racism has been weaponized.” Very well said Weary.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 1, 2017 4:56 PM
Comment #420330
Racism still exists, but it is no longer a determining factor.

Truly talented individuals can overcome racism. Just look at people like Barack Obama and Ben Carson who have accomplished a great deal in their lives and have become wealthy as a result. The more odious aspect of racism is how the mediocre get treated. The life of a mediocre white citizen might be very different from the life of a mediocre black one. Ultimately, even flawed people deserve to be treated with equal respect and dignity in the case of enforcing the law and under no circumstances should their Constitutional rights be violated.

We stop racism by not behaving in racist ways. Just do that.
It sounds like good advice, but we’ve been trying that for the past few decades and while much progress has been made, it still isn’t good enough. Implicit bias still permeates decisionmaking throughout the country and that hurts racial minorities unfairly.
How did discrimination against Asians stop? How is it that immigrants from Nigeria and other African countries and their kids can do so well economically and educationally?

I suggest you read about the problems with the “model minority” trope. Yassmin Abdel-Magied says it well:

Those who want you to outperform your identity aren’t interested in seeing you as equal at all. No one should ever have to be the “model minority” in order to be accepted as equal. Equality should be given, not earned for good behavior. If “good behavior” is required, that isn’t really equality.
Racism has been weaponized. It’s used as an assault on people who stand in the way of progressive ideology. It’s close to being a faux issue except for those who go out of their way to inject it into any issue that progressives feel threatened by. And these days, they are threatened by the slightest grievance.

WW,

The real question is why do you let white fragility control you so much? Why do you lash out like this whenever someone suggests racism might motivate an observed behavior or interaction? Maybe a better route would be to accept that the other person might be right. You join others in the movement to prevent racist behaviors/interactions from reoccuring.

If the thought of being accused of racism terrifies you, why don’t you modify your behavior to prevent those accusations from occurring? Treat people equally regardless of the color of their skin or their religion or their culture. Do not let racially prejudiced assumptions guide your thinking. Give everyone the same benefit of the doubt, even if they don’t look or behave like you do. And don’t get angry when other people don’t follow the same cultural rules and taboos that you do.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 1, 2017 7:03 PM
Comment #420332

I wonder how many understand the words…

“racism” “bias”

It seems that many folks commingle these words when in fact, their meanings are quite different.

I like John’s definition of “racism” and will not try and improve upon it. Warren is trying too hard to explain “racism” rather than simply define it. Some of what Warren suggests is racist; is merely bias.

“BIAS” a particular tendency, trend, inclination, feeling, or opinion. One can display “bias” without being “racist”.

I like blue eyes. I like blond hair. I don’t like “rap” music.

That doesn’t make me racist.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 1, 2017 7:30 PM
Comment #420334

It’s true, racism and racial bias are not the same. Racism requires power of some sort, whether that be through culture or institutions. In this country, power is held almost exclusively by whites. Occasionally, black individuals might obtain some power, but never enough to overcome the checks and balances to advance a black supremacist agenda, which is why black supremacy really isn’t a thing here.

Racial bias and prejudice, on the other hand, can exist in other realms. The people who assaulted Jack’s son were probably racially prejudiced against whites. Some types of affirmative action, such as racial quotas, are racially biased. While racial prejudice is certainly problematic, it is far less of an issue than systemic racism, which is why the Left concentrates much of its efforts on combating the ways whites abuse their power to oppress nonwhites.

“BIAS” a particular tendency, trend, inclination, feeling, or opinion. One can display “bias” without being “racist”. I like blue eyes. I like blond hair. I don’t like “rap” music.
I don’t care what you like or don’t like. I do care about how you treat other people. It that treatment changes on the basis of another person’s skin color, then that’s racist behavior. Posted by: Warren Porter at October 1, 2017 10:09 PM
Comment #420340

Re ideal minority or anybody else - We all have challenges. This is the problem. When a group does worse, the grievance industry calls it racist. When a group does better, the grievance industry calls it racism. If we find a groups doing similarly, the grievance industry calls it racism.

Racism is simple, as I said. If you treat similar behaviors differently just because of race, you are racist. If you do not, you are not.

Re your idea of power and racism - that is the crap the grievance industry makes up. Our president and out attorney general were black. You do not get any more powerful than that. I had bosses that were black. Fortunately, the were not racist. But they could have been. People of all races can be racist and behave in racist ways.

However, you come to the correct definition at the end - “I do care about how you treat other people. It that treatment changes on the basis of another person’s skin color, then that’s racist behavior.”

All that matters is what you do.

If we like rap music performed by white but dislike it when we learn it is done by whites, that would be racist. If you just do not like rap music, that is just taste. Similarly, if you do not like Mozart, you are not racist.

Posted by: Christine & John at October 1, 2017 10:43 PM
Comment #420342
Businessmen as a group are not defenders of the free market.

Lets assume for this conversation that businessmen are not defenders of the free market, that some other group, say union workers or government bureaucrats are the defenders of free market capitalism C&J. So what? They, meaning the biggest of American businessmen of the 30’s did defend the Nazis and the Fascist in the 1930’s C&J. The Socialist of the time did not.

The fight between Nazis and communists in Germany was a type of socialist civil war. Neither group wanted free markets, both were advocating revolutionary change and they agreed that using government as mechanism was they way to do it.

So you would have us believe, C&J, that John Rockefeller, Andrew Mellon, Henry Ford and Charles Lindbergh supported revolutionary socialism!

“It should be noted that businessmen from many countries, including England and Australia, also worked with the fascist regimes of Europe prior to WWII. The fascist governments were involved in a high level of construction, production, and international business.”

http://www.rationalrevolution.net/war/american_supporters_of_the_europ.htm

The definition of revolutionary socialism C&J? Or right wing political ideology?

Re getting harassed by the cops - I am just pointing out that ordinary kids of the past can trade oppression stories with oppressed kids today. I did not get chocked to death or have my neck broken, but then neither - obviously - did anybody complaining about those things. It is uncommon.

Kinda like having your cake and eating it too C&J? It seems the level of harassment by police has been lurching towards a whole new level against those they consider to be a “disliked minority” since your days. To the point those that have experienced it are no longer around to complain. Which of course is the problem.

I would suggest the fact that we have the Fascism of the 1930’s and the militarization of the police in the same conversation should be telling C&J.


Posted by: j2t2 at October 1, 2017 11:29 PM
Comment #420343

The problem is mistaking groups for reality. We group things for convenience and to make sense of our world. But the groups are not reality. For example, there is no such thing really as blacks, whites etc. There are individuals who could be grouped in many different ways.

For example, there are blacks and white who live in New York. They could be grouped together as New Yorkers. Does a black New Yorker have more in common with a white New Yorker living the same building than either does with a small farmer in Mississippi of either race?

We could group by income, occupation or education. If we add this to geography, we could come up with more homogeneous groups.

Harvard lawyers come in many skin shades, but they are more similar to each other than to most people who just happen to be the same color.

Even the race thing itself is not clear. Brazilians often consider people like Halle Berry as white and certainty would not consider her black. There are people we consider white who have darker skin than some we consider black. It can get very confusing.

A couple of my cousins were surprised when their DNA turned up a significant percentage of African ancestry. On the other side, most “African Americans” have lots of European ancestry.

Immigration is making it even more complex. Nigerian immigrants, for example, have been very successful in the U.S., so successful, in fact, that the term “African-American” is sometimes not applied to them, which is double ironic, since they actually are African-Americans in the truest sense.

Indian Americans are the richest ethnic group in the United States, earning a median income of $100,547. Today, we generally do not include them in the black category. Yet many of them would have been called “black” if they walked down a street in Alabama in 1950.

Meanwhile, many major American universities are “majority minority” yet we do not celebrate this or even notice it.

Maybe we should give up the group identities and treat them for what they really are - convenience, constructs and fluid categories.

Posted by: Christine & John at October 1, 2017 11:39 PM
Comment #420345

WP:

“It sounds like good advice, but we’ve been trying that for the past few decades and while much progress has been made, it still isn’t good enough. Implicit bias still permeates decisionmaking throughout the country and that hurts racial minorities unfairly.”

And what would be your solution besides Jack’s suggestion? Who gets to decide whether something was done with “implicit bias”? We can all agree on having government/police treat people equally is a goal that should be achieved, but determining “implicit bias” could quickly become Orwellean. What are your practical/implementable suggestions?

Posted by: Mike in Tampa at October 2, 2017 9:58 AM
Comment #420348
What are your practical/implementable suggestions? Posted by: Mike in Tampa at October 2, 2017 9:58 AM

Issue one bullet per police officer, like Barney Fife. If they can’t shoot, they don’t need 16 tries.

Posted by: ohrealy at October 2, 2017 11:20 AM
Comment #420356

If you eliminated ALL deaths by police - innocent, guilty, fleeing and stationary - you would to significantly impact vast numbers of homicides among back young men. Each year, more young black men die of homicide, most at the hands of other young black me, than died in all the lynching from 1978 - 1968. The police are not the problem here.

All lives matter. The police generally save lives, black lives too.

Posted by: Christine & John at October 2, 2017 4:42 PM
Comment #420358

“I don’t care what you like or don’t like.”

Now you’re understanding bias Warren. You shouldn’t care about bias. After all, who am I to dictate what you like or dislike.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 2, 2017 5:23 PM
Comment #420362
All lives matter. The police generally save lives, black lives too.

Seems to me C&J you are trying to “claim the coveted victim status” for the police.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 2, 2017 11:03 PM
Comment #420365

I am claiming that the police do good work and save black and other lives. When BLM makes their jobs harder, more black lives are lost.

Some people associated with BLM have called for attacking and even killing police. This is horrible.

Posted by: Christine & John at October 3, 2017 9:42 AM
Comment #420366

Of course most police do good work. The problem is they don’t weed out the bad ones they protect them.

Just because the BLM focuses on one issue, the police brutality you seem to think doesn’t exist now that you are older, doesn’t mean they are responsible for the black lives lost. You could just as easily and erroneously blame Trump for the same thing. Do you blame the guns for the murders?

You do make a case for the “coveted victim status” for the police C&J. But in this case you don’t blame the victim like you do most other times.

Some people associated with BLM have called for attacking and even killing police.

Yes I’m not surprised some have muttered such nonsense. How can you blame them for this response when it is the police department that has led them to this point. Violence begets violence.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 3, 2017 10:48 AM
Comment #420367

BLM was born in the “hands up don’t shoot” lie and subsisted on a misunderstanding of statistics, falsely claiming that blacks were targeted for death by cops

The police do NOT target blacks, as Eric Holder’s DoJ found. I referenced that study above. They find only “disproportional impact”. Every drop of rain and every ray of sunlight has disproportional impact, so that is easy to find if you look for it.

The chances of an innocent black man being killed by cops is less than his chance of dying in a bathroom accident and much less than my chance of being hit by a car when I ride my bike to Washington in a few minutes. In other words, it is not a major risk. And so I can blame the thugs for calling for the death to police, although their evil may be based on their ignorance and inability to understand math.

Re weeding out those cops who do wrong - I am 100% in favor. The BLM method is what I dislike.

Recall the case of Freddy Gray in Baltimore. He was a petty crook and died in custody. The lead defendant was a black cop, accused - and found not guilty - of manslaughter.

Freddy Grey did not deserve to die, but he was a shit. A petty crook and sometime drug dealer. The cop accused of killing him was from the same sort of poor background. He made something of himself. Yet they paint murals of Freddy and demonize the cop. This is wrong. AND those riots related to the case destroyed property in mostly black areas, which the fool mayor came close to condoning. Subsequent relaxation of policing led to a increase in crime and murders. Tens or hundreds of black died at the hands of other blacks as an indirect result of BLM. Nice job.

Posted by: Christine & John at October 3, 2017 11:21 AM
Comment #420371
what would be your solution besides Jack’s suggestion?

BLM has their list of ideas. Strangely enough, as controversial of an organization as BLM is, their solutions are not that radical.

determining “implicit bias” could quickly become Orwellean. What are your practical/implementable suggestions?

Personally, I do not think the solutions listed above strike at the heart of the problem. The problem is how the law defines justifiable homicide and the burden of proof involved. Right now, the law gives far too much latitude to the police when determining whether or not a homicide is justified. The police can essentially murder someone and then claim, “We wuz scared” in order to justify it. This is possible because the law currently justifies homicide in instances where by the homicide victim does not actually pose a threat to the cop as long as the cop reasonably thinks said victim is threatening. I say, get rid of the current standard and make the police prove in court beyond a reasonable doubt that the person killed posed an imminent threat to them. That shouldn’t be too hard if they are constantly using body cameras.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 4, 2017 2:37 AM
Comment #420376

WP, The “list of ideas” includes some that I really like and some that would not work out so well. I have thought for a long time, for instance, that the militarization of the police has gone too far. If I were living in a poor neighborhood, I’m not so sure that I’d be in favor of outlawing enforcement of “broken windows” violations. It would result in a pretty crappy place to live.

Just as racial bias has improved since the 1960s, so have the police. In my high school, “hoods” (the term of the era) became either criminals or went into police work. My observation is that police forces have a much higher level of professionalism as compared to previous.

Posted by: Mike in Tampa at October 4, 2017 8:18 AM
Comment #420382

On “broken windows”, my recollection is that the mayor of Tampa was knocking down buildings as quick as they became problems back in the late 80s early 90s.

Fewer bullets equals fewer fatalaties.

Posted by: ohrealy at October 4, 2017 11:21 AM
Comment #420383

Warren thanks for the link.

So C&J I started looking at the claim you made about BLM “associates” but the shootings in Dallas and Louisiana were not by BLM people nor did they seem to be “associates” of BLM.

Also,C&J, I didn’t see the part, in the list of ideas link, where the BLM suggests attacking and/or killing police. Are you sure about that? Sometimes when using conservative news outlets as your source… well lets just say they are like Trump the truth is not a factor in what is said.

I am also at a lost to find any of the ideas that focus only on black people. It seems to me their campaign zero is all inclusive when it comes to race.

So it seems what you are left with as you support the authoritarian viewpoint is denial of the problem, deflection, diversion and attacking the messenger as your reasoning on the issue. You are not alone as the conservative propaganda machine has once again distorted the issue to the point conservatives march lockstep toward an authoritarian future.


Posted by: j2t2 at October 4, 2017 12:09 PM
Comment #420387

“I say, get rid of the current standard and make the police prove in court beyond a reasonable doubt that the person killed posed an imminent threat to them.” WP

Wow…I still have trouble believing that any American citizen with some knowledge of our Constitution would write such a hateful and crippling statement about members of our nations police forces.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 4, 2017 4:13 PM
Comment #420399

RF,

Reread your Constitution and tell the part where it authorizes agents of the state to shoot its citizens without any meaningful due process for those who are killed.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 4, 2017 8:48 PM
Comment #420401

This is what proceedings are supposed to be like, rather than executing people on the street;

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/sixth_amendment

Posted by: ohrealy at October 4, 2017 9:00 PM
Comment #420413

ohrealy,

Thanks. Unfortunately, Philando Castile had no trial, no jury to weigh the evidence for and against shooting him, no presumption of innocence and no due process. The same can be said for Eric Garner, Freddie Gray, Trayvon Martin, Tamir Rice and so many others.

Let the police prove in court beyond a reasonable doubt that these men posed a physical threat to themselves or others. Anything less than this seems like a recipe for a dystopian police state.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 5, 2017 6:39 AM
Comment #420418

Warren, j2t2, Phx8 et al

Are we to believe BLM apologists or our own “lying eyes”

These are big demonstrations. In this one the BLM protestors call for dead cops.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqQXmnMr_w8

In this one they are more poetic, chanting “pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8Yqv8mnywU

March organizers say they are not going to apologize.

BLM is based on a lie and on bad interpretations of statistic. I admit that I dislike groups like BLM. Some good people support such things, but most are ignorant or pernicious.


Posted by: Christine & John at October 5, 2017 8:12 AM
Comment #420427

That is one of the most horribly written articles I have ever seen. I mean, its structure. I really cannot follow the convoluted structure. Give me the bottom line. Why do they say that the dead cops chant was justified?

I summarize links and/or use them to support my own arguments. I expect similar consideration.

I think we should avoid just posting links.

Posted by: Christine & John at October 5, 2017 11:34 AM
Comment #420441

Yeah C&J the problem is they back up their writing with factual information. So chronologically they go backwards telling us who said what and ultimately to where the chant you suggested was BLM actually originated.

It wasn’t BLM is the bottom line.

As for the red herring , they don’t say they simply tell us who did the chanting that many on the right has blamed BLM for.

I guess I’m not surprised that those on the right do not want links to factual information. But it helps to stop the myths and misinformation that abounds in the red column.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 5, 2017 2:36 PM
Comment #420442

It was chanted by people at BLM rally carrying BLM signs. And they were there in large numbers, not just a few outliers. And they are in the middle of the demonstrations. Nobody seems to be telling them to be quiet.

The YouTube I linked shows that. Are you saying that those were somehow staged by BLM enemies.

Re that link of yours - I is just very poorly organized. Seems like something a HS kid would produce.

And the convoluted origin of a chant is not really relevant. These guys said it. It is bad.

Tell me the truth - did you actually go through that whole link and understand it? I am an educated person with reasonable patience for reading and watching video. I could not follow it. I do not think it is meant to be understood, but rather is one of the dog pile things that are thrown up to discourage inquiry.

When I was in graduate school, we used to have a joke, with some truth, that if you wanted to advocate a point with weak evidence, find some convoluted and confused source, preferably in German, and put that in a foot note. Even if you readers can find the book, they cannot follow it.

Posted by: Christine & John at October 5, 2017 2:49 PM
Comment #420444

Warren is horrified that our nation’s police are not being considered guilty until proven innocent.

He would deny them “due process” under the law.

His position is repugnant to all American’s who respect our judicial system.

I often hear the Left decry the death penalty. They argue, “better 100 guilty be set free than one innocent be executed”.

Obviously, for Warren Porter, defender of the constitution, practitioner of justice, possessor of great moral authority, this sentiment does not apply to police.

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 5, 2017 3:27 PM
Comment #420448
It was chanted by people at BLM rally carrying BLM signs. And they were there in large numbers, not just a few outliers. And they are in the middle of the demonstrations. Nobody seems to be telling them to be quiet.

Using your logic C&J the Oathkeepers are Nazi/Klan/White Supremacist because they were at the C-Ville rally protecting first amendment rights. I mean there they were in the middle of things armed with all sorts of weapons, participating in fights and such.

The YouTube I linked shows that. Are you saying that those were somehow staged by BLM enemies.

Talk about confusing links C&J the audio is bad I can’t really understand what they are saying, and where are they and how many? Certainly not 100 people there. Certainly not the middle of anything.

And the convoluted origin of a chant is not really relevant. These guys said it. It is bad.

Really! Seems to me you are grasping at straws here C&J. I guess you have to lump all “them people” into a group to get your desired outcome. To bad a reporter listing facts in the post has upended the right wing narrative on the issue.

C&J this exaggeration over the link is definitely shoot the messenger type stuff. You keep doing that when you really don’t have anything but a wish to base the narrative on. Kinda like the whole “disrespecting the military” thing with the football players.

If it is really that hard for you to understand maybe you can get your better half to help you with it. Or try this link it may be a bit easier to understand it wasn’t BLM that was responsible for the chant.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-monsters-who-screamed-for-dead-cops

Did the joke include video shot from so bad a vantage point you couldn’t make out any faces or …well….anything?

Posted by: j2t2 at October 5, 2017 5:21 PM
Comment #420449

C&J, I think this is the same march the video you linked to was supposed to be from. Take a look at these pictures and see if the banner of the chanting group is anywhere to be found.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/13/millions-march-nyc_n_6320348.html

IMHO it is time to stop hating on BLM for things they didn’t do and look at what they have done. The Campaign Zero project seems to me to be worthy of praise.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 5, 2017 5:27 PM
Comment #420453
Are we to believe BLM apologists or our own “lying eyes”

Some people said vile things. Does that mean it is okay to violate people’s individual rights?

On March 5, 1770, a mob of Bostonians shouted vile things at a group of British regulars, which led to the Boston massacre. Did that rhetoric invalidate the political movement that those people represented?

I categorically condemn people who shout slogans in the streets calling for dead cops or frying pigs in a blanket like bacon. However, I am smart enough to separate message from messenger and not let feelings about the latter pollute the former.

As an academic exercise, protecting Black lives probably will come at the expense of a few Blue ones. That is the trade off we make to ensure we live in a free society where all men are created equal and are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights.

And they were there in large numbers, not just a few outliers.

Tasneem Nashrulla’s thesis in the Buzzfeed piece shared by j2t2 is that the hundred or so people visible in the video are actually outliers. When a movement numbers in the tens of millions, a few hundred people amounts to no more than .01%. There have been thousands upon thousands of BLM protests and only a tiny number involve rhetoric like this.

Nashrulla focuses mostly on the fact that the organizers of that particular sub-gathering within the larger protest have no ties to BLM’s formal organization and have been repeatedly condemned by the formal leaders of BLM.

Warren is horrified that our nation’s police are not being considered guilty until proven innocent. He would deny them “due process” under the law. His position is repugnant to all American’s who respect our judicial system. I often hear the Left decry the death penalty. They argue, “better 100 guilty be set free than one innocent be executed”. Obviously, for Warren Porter, defender of the constitution, practitioner of justice, possessor of great moral authority, this sentiment does not apply to police.

When answering the question, did this police officer shoot this man, I wholeheartedly believe the officer should be presumed innocent and be provided with due process if he claims he did not kill anyone.

The matter of “justified” homicide is different, not just for the police, but for anyone. A justified homicide can only occur when the person being killed has committed a crime. If there is reasonable doubt that said person committed a crime, it ought to put the justification for the homicide in doubt as well.

Posted by: Warren Porter at October 5, 2017 6:26 PM
Comment #420454

My legal dictionary disagrees with Warren Porter.

justifiable homicide

A killing without evil or criminal intent, for which there can be no blame, such as self-defense to protect oneself or to protect another, or the shooting by a law enforcement officer in fulfilling his/her duties.

Warren, are our soldiers “justified” in killing an enemy who has not “committed a crime”?

Posted by: Royal Flush at October 5, 2017 6:47 PM
Comment #420464

J2t2

“Using your logic C&J the Oathkeepers are Nazi/Klan/White Supremacist because they were at the C-Ville rally protecting first amendment rights. I mean there they were in the middle of things armed with all sorts of weapons, participating in fights and such.”

In fact, it seems like everybody at the C-ville rally was indeed lumped into the same barrel.

Re the chant - it is not hard to understand. They clearly say the pigs in a blanket and the dead cops.

Re outliers - the whole BLM is based on the “hands up don’t shoot lie” The strategy has been to block roads and generally make trouble. If they stop doing this stuff, they will be okay. But they don’t stop.

Let’s stipulate that some BLM folks are honest and good people. They seem to attract lots of bad ones, since demonstrations are often accompanied by nasty slogans and violence by fellow traveling protestors.

Posted by: Christine & John at October 5, 2017 10:39 PM
Comment #420469
the whole BLM is based on the “hands up don’t shoot lie”

But it’s not C&J. BLM started with Trayvon Martin in February of 2012, then Jordan Davis, Renisha McBride, Eric Garner, John Crawford and then in August of 2014, two and half years after the origination of the BLM movement, the Micheal Brown incident happened. Even then the testimony that was behind the “hands up don’t shoot” verbiage wasn’t discredited until the feds investigation was a year or so years later.

The strategy has been to block roads and generally make trouble.

Blocking roads! My oh My perhaps they should have boarded a corporate ship in the harbor, dressed as Indians and threw all the tea or whatever overboard. Or perhaps they should occupy a national preserve with lethal weapons and completely trash the place after being there for several months to avoid paying grazing fees.

If they stop doing this stuff, they will be okay. But they don’t stop.
And what? sit around like those old teabaggers with signs that demand keeping the government out of their medicare? How did that work out for the geezers? The government is still involved in their medicare.

I realize the killing of young people by agents of the government isn’t as serious as the government charging grazing fees on federal lands but it is none the less n important issue. Protesting is a means to bring the problem to the attention of the American people. Asking them to go away before you give them your “ok” is probably to high a price to pay don’t you think.

I mean you are basing your anger towards this group on falsehoods, myths and misinformation.

Posted by: j2t2 at October 5, 2017 11:52 PM
Comment #420470

J2T2

I recognize their right to protest. They recognize my right to dislike them and think they are stupid.

We all abhor the killing of innocents. There is not racial disparity in police shootings when compared to crime rates, except that whites are OVER represented and Asians under. The numbers are small relative to the population.

BLM to the extent that they make it harder for cops to do their jobs, KILLS blacks. The homicide rate among young black men is appalling. If BLM cared about saving black lives, they would work on that issue. The cops are a solution here, not a problem.

Posted by: Christine & John at October 6, 2017 12:22 AM
Post a comment