The Ferguson thread

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Apologies to BBI, for the comment referring to a old school cartoon character with poor sight. It was completely lighthearted, and in no way was to be viewed with animosity coming from part.

Kut (got an infraction smackdown)

I knew you were kidding.


And thought it was funny.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I'll amend, If I can look through the windows and the driver is not obscured by anything, then I don't have an issue determining race.

Like I said. If you're close and can see through the window, but at the moment you decide "I am going to stop that car" you are seldom in that position.

Apparently I'm not alone. On a Leo site I set up a poll. So far it's at 100% of respondents saying they know the race of the person at the moment they decide to stop for an infraction is 0% to 19%.

 

[jbombelli]

Like I said. If you're close and can see through the window, but at the moment you decide "I am going to stop that car" you are seldom in that position.

Apparently I'm not alone. On a Leo site I set up a poll. So far it's at 100% of respondents saying they know the race of the person at the moment they decide to stop for an infraction is 0% to 19%.

What is the other 81%?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Like I said. If you're close and can see through the window, but at the moment you decide "I am going to stop that car" you are seldom in that position.

Apparently I'm not alone. On a Leo site I set up a poll. So far it's at 100% of respondents saying they know the race of the person at the moment they decide to stop for an infraction is 0% to 19%.

Just out of curiosity, were you offended by the comment earlier that I made?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Just out of curiosity, were you offended by the comment earlier that I made?

Your inbox is full.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Your inbox is full.

It's clear now

 

[BehindBlueI's]

What is the other 81%?

The poll is busted up into 5 options, each option going down in 20% increments.

80%-100%
60%-79%
40%-59%
20%-39%
0%-19%

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Prosecutors are now considering criminal charges against members of Michael Brown’s family

Prosecutors Mull Charges In Brown Family Attack | The Smoking Gun

The decision on whether to pursue charges in connection with the ransacking of the “Justice for Mike Brown” merchandise operation (seen above) is particularly sensitive since Lesley McSpadden, Brown’s mother, is named in a police report as one of the “attackers” who participated in the assault, which cops classified as a felony armed robbery.


Additionally, prosecutors are mulling charges in the face of a Department of Justice probe that has concluded that Ferguson cops have engaged in a “pattern and practice” of discrimination against African-American citizens, whose rights have routinely been violated by members of the Missouri city’s predominantly white police force.

So, why are these things connected. Are there allegations she was framed? Even if the DoJ probe does find the "pattern and practice" does that mean the prosecutor will no longer file good cases if the suspect is black? Two wrongs making a right or what?

 

[Bill of Rights]

Sadly, BBI, I think that may be the goal. Make the law apply only to everyone else. You know, everyone's equal, just everyone else needs to be more equal than we do. I'm all for everyone being treated equally under the law. I'm all for everyone having the same opportunity to make or break their life, however they do so, whether by lawful or unlawful action, by who they marry, by with whom they associate. I just don't want to see anyone get opportunities given to them that others are disallowed. Unfortunately, I think the "civil rights" movement, while appropriate in its time, has been coopted to exactly that purpose, and other groups have followed suit. There is no NAAWP, or similar group, and to create one today would be "racist".(Edit: Well... there is, a la "Stormfront", but that's not what I mean.) Advancement is fine, and in the 1960s, "colored" people (from the name NAACP) needed opportunities to advance, as those were denied. Some (Sharpton, Jackson, et al) just never stopped pushing to keep advancing, and continue today to push for more opportunities than others may access. It seems to me that it's not about equality, for them (Al and Jesse, etc.), but about subjugation of everyone else.

That's how I see it... maybe I'm in error, but that's the impression I get. This, for me, is not about the people being led, but about the "leaders" named above, and their ilk.

Blessings,
Bill

(ETA: Oops... Meant BBI, not Hough. S'what I get for posting when I should be sleeping!)

 

[chipbennett]

The DOJ report on Darren Wilson:

Ferguson DOJ Report on Darren Wilson Shooting of Michael Brown

They pull no punches. Every single witness that testified *against* Wilson was deemed to be non-credible. Not one single, credible witness inculpated Wilson.

While the report doesn't mention him, "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" was a completely made up narrative, started by one Anthony Shahid, in the grassy knoll, within minutes of the shooting.

 

[churchmouse]

Sadly, Hough, I think that may be the goal. Make the law apply only to everyone else. You know, everyone's equal, just everyone else needs to be more equal than we do. I'm all for everyone being treated equally under the law. I'm all for everyone having the same opportunity to make or break their life, however they do so, whether by lawful or unlawful action, by who they marry, by with whom they associate. I just don't want to see anyone get opportunities given to them that others are disallowed. Unfortunately, I think the "civil rights" movement, while appropriate in its time, has been coopted to exactly that purpose, and other groups have followed suit. There is no NAAWP, or similar group, and to create one today would be "racist".(Edit: Well... there is, a la "Stormfront", but that's not what I mean.) Advancement is fine, and in the 1960s, "colored" people (from the name NAACP) needed opportunities to advance, as those were denied. Some (Sharpton, Jackson, et al) just never stopped pushing to keep advancing, and continue today to push for more opportunities than others may access. It seems to me that it's not about equality, for them (Al and Jesse, etc.), but about subjugation of everyone else.

That's how I see it... maybe I'm in error, but that's the impression I get. This, for me, is not about the people being led, but about the "leaders" named above, and their ilk.

Blessings,
Bill

I have to agree with you Bill.
What started out as a much needed set of laws have been twisted up and sent in a very wrong direction. I have seen it.
Equality under the law must work for all involved.

 

[KLB]

Sadly, Hough, I think that may be the goal. Make the law apply only to everyone else. You know, everyone's equal, just everyone else needs to be more equal than we do. I'm all for everyone being treated equally under the law. I'm all for everyone having the same opportunity to make or break their life, however they do so, whether by lawful or unlawful action, by who they marry, by with whom they associate. I just don't want to see anyone get opportunities given to them that others are disallowed. Unfortunately, I think the "civil rights" movement, while appropriate in its time, has been coopted to exactly that purpose, and other groups have followed suit. There is no NAAWP, or similar group, and to create one today would be "racist".(Edit: Well... there is, a la "Stormfront", but that's not what I mean.) Advancement is fine, and in the 1960s, "colored" people (from the name NAACP) needed opportunities to advance, as those were denied. Some (Sharpton, Jackson, et al) just never stopped pushing to keep advancing, and continue today to push for more opportunities than others may access. It seems to me that it's not about equality, for them (Al and Jesse, etc.), but about subjugation of everyone else.

That's how I see it... maybe I'm in error, but that's the impression I get. This, for me, is not about the people being led, but about the "leaders" named above, and their ilk.

Blessings,
Bill

This is today's world. We all know that people of a certain age, sex and race are all spawn of the devil.

Where I work we have a Asian Employee Network, a African American Network, Latino Employee Network and a Women's Resource group. Guess what would happen if they tried to fill in the gap with another group.

Funny thing is, they are considered to be "A Diversity and Inclusion Employee Resource Group".

 

[printcraft]

Sadly, Hough, I think that may be the goal. Make the law apply only to everyone else. You know, everyone's equal, just everyone else needs to be more equal than we do. I'm all for everyone being treated equally under the law. I'm all for everyone having the same opportunity to make or break their life, however they do so, whether by lawful or unlawful action, by who they marry, by with whom they associate. I just don't want to see anyone get opportunities given to them that others are disallowed. Unfortunately, I think the "civil rights" movement, while appropriate in its time, has been coopted to exactly that purpose, and other groups have followed suit. There is no NAAWP, or similar group, and to create one today would be "racist".(Edit: Well... there is, a la "Stormfront", but that's not what I mean.) Advancement is fine, and in the 1960s, "colored" people (from the name NAACP) needed opportunities to advance, as those were denied. Some (Sharpton, Jackson, et al) just never stopped pushing to keep advancing, and continue today to push for more opportunities than others may access. It seems to me that it's not about equality, for them (Al and Jesse, etc.), but about subjugation of everyone else.

That's how I see it... maybe I'm in error, but that's the impression I get. This, for me, is not about the people being led, but about the "leaders" named above, and their ilk.

Blessings,
Bill

I guess we could just call that privilege..........

 

[Leadeye]

I have to agree with you Bill.
What started out as a much needed set of laws have been twisted up and sent in a very wrong direction. I have seen it.
Equality under the law must work for all involved.

It's become a part of what dc is, the "government business." The law/lobby firms with connections into the government, elected, appointed, and hired, use the law of the land to promote or discourage private and discriminatory interests. I use that term discriminatory by it's definition, the interests of one group as opposed to others. In one form or another it's been going on for as long as civilization has been in existence. Today it's expensive beyond measure with consultants and law firms in dc running $1K per hour tabs, but the ROI is still good. I can't blame the NAACP, AARP, or the NRA for playing the game, it's how you get what you want for your group. The croupiers of this system are turning dc and it's environs into the richest place on earth.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

This is today's world. We all know that people of a certain age, sex and race are all spawn of the devil.

Where I work we have a Asian Employee Network, a African American Network, Latino Employee Network and a Women's Resource group. Guess what would happen if they tried to fill in the gap with another group.

Funny thing is, they are considered to be "A Diversity and Inclusion Employee Resource Group".

I had this argument with a college professor years ago. What that means is the white male is the base line you are judging from. You are essentially saying the white male is the "normal" and everyone else is "different" because that's what "diverse" means. If groups need special attention and networks, they are different. There was a very well done speech by an African lady a few years back, and I think it was a TED talk but can't remember for sure. Essentially she says she never considered herself "Black" in Africa because everyone was black and that was the norm. No one thought about race in her area because there was nothing to judge against, nothing to compare to, nothing to make it unique. Once she moved to the US she was confronted with the idea of being "Black" and the expectations that were put on her and how she her behavior was compared and judged based on its level of "blackness" and "whiteness." It was a very powerful talk, and since she spoke from experience and was an excellent public speaker she put it much more eloquently than I could (or can). I wish I could remember her name and find the speech online, its so compelling to hear an outsider's take on the way we divide the races in the name of unity.

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

IMHO:

It's no longer about equal opportunity. Over the last decade or so, it's been trending less about opportunity and more about outcome. Obama, Holder, Jackson, Sharpton and others are now very open about it. They strive for equal outcomes and to hell with anything that gets in the way of that. Anyone who won't go with their demand for equal outcomes is simply labeled racist to silence them and guess what? It works very well.

Any barrier to equal opportunity should be, and for the most part, has been removed. If you can get off your behind and contribute, better yourself and succeed, so be it. This whole idea that success is deserved and has to be regulated (notice I didn't say legislated) into existence is wrong, period.

The vast, vast majority of cops arrest criminals. To try to make it a quota based system is not only naive, it's wholly counterproductive to all of the progress we've made in reducing crime in this country. Criminals should and do get arrested for crimes. That's how it should be.

The blow back I see coming from this Ferguson report will be widespread "looking the other way" by LEO on many crimes because it won't be worth the risk to their careers. This won't end very well.

 

[HoughMade]

I've determined that I don't have any answers in the race issue and I feel like sometimes I don't even know what the questions are. I've also determined that I, personally, can't change the world. The best I can do is treat the individuals I meet as individuals, not representatives of some particular group, and teach my kids to do the same....of course I've noticed that I did not really even have to teach them that. It seems to have come naturally.

 

[Kutnupe14]

This is today's world. We all know that people of a certain age, sex and race are all spawn of the devil. Where I work we have a Asian Employee Network, a African American Network, Latino Employee Network and a Women's Resource group. Guess what would happen if they tried to fill in the gap with another group.

Funny thing is, they are considered to be "A Diversity and Inclusion Employee Resource Group".

The Ferguson police department sure seemed to think so.

 

[Doug]

IMHO:

It's no longer about equal opportunity. Over the last decade or so, it's been trending less about opportunity and more about outcome. Obama, Holder, Jackson, Sharpton and others are now very open about it. They strive for equal outcomes and to hell with anything that gets in the way of that. Anyone who won't go with their demand for equal outcomes is simply labeled racist to silence them and guess what? It works very well.

Any barrier to equal opportunity should be, and for the most part, has been removed. If you can get off your behind and contribute, better yourself and succeed, so be it. This whole idea that success is deserved and has to be regulated (notice I didn't say legislated) into existence is wrong, period.

The vast, vast majority of cops arrest criminals. To try to make it a quota based system is not only naive, it's wholly counterproductive to all of the progress we've made in reducing crime in this country. Criminals should and do get arrested for crimes. That's how it should be.

The blow back I see coming from this Ferguson report will be widespread "looking the other way" by LEO on many crimes because it won't be worth the risk to their careers. This won't end very well.

Amen.
Equal outcomes regardless of actions equals Socialism.

The result of the blow back will be increased crime in minority neighborhoods.
(Sorry, ma'am, we've made our quota of police runs to your area. You can come down to the station and fill out a report.)

The end result will be what you currently see in Detroit, near anarchy.

 

[printcraft]

Amen.
Equal outcomes regardless of actions equals Socialism.

The result of the blow back will be increased crime in minority neighborhoods.
(Sorry, ma'am, we've made our quota of police runs to your area. You can come down to the station and fill out a report.)

The end result will be what you currently see in Detroit, near anarchy.

Don't forget the awesome result that the police will get *****ed at for "not caring about the community" when crime happens and they are not around.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
At least with "don't" you won't be brought up on charges by the justice department..... well..... you know.