Nope. COPS is filmed with live cameras just like they are... it seems like it's a different, fundamental approach to dealing with the public. Go watch Highway Cops (New Zealand show), or Ultimate Police Interceptors (Britain). It's night and day.
You're thinking of the movie 300, not police officers. "Ready your breakfast and eat hearty... For tonight, we dine in hell!" Seriously though, what are you talking about?
There's a lot to be said on this issue, but maybe we should take a step back and entertain the notion that some races are just full of ignorant, stupid people. The race, as a whole, is going in circles, and is doing nothing but riling up a bunch of boorish "supporters" who are really just interested in the drama coming to a violent end. What I guess I'm trying to say, is fuck NASCAR.
Parker, Crown or whoever else wants to chime in, I have a serious question for you: I deal a lot with the public and generally try not to judge people without being given a reason. That said, I own an office building that I park behind when I'm at work. For the last year or so I have had several run ins with an elderly black man who walks the area. Multiple times while leaving I've encountered him out behind my building, taking a break from his laps around the block. The first time, I opened the back door and about tripped over him as he was sitting on the stoop, he was nicely asked to move along. Then he was found taking his break sitting/leaning against our air conditioner....asked to move along. The next time he was told to get the fuck gone before I tresspass him. Now, I really have no problem with the guy taking a break but I'm tired of cleaning up garbage and empty bottles of Wild Irish Rose and Modello. I know that the garbage is not from him, but I don't want ANYONE out there. So, last week we meet again, again leaning against my air conditioner (that's been replaced twice after being stolen). I ask him "how many times do I Fucking have to tell you not to stop here?" His response as he starts to leave: "Fuck you, white mother fucker". Now we have race involved, and not from the white guy. Am I to a) think "wow, I bet this guy has had a rough life of being oppressed by the white man and therefore he should be felt sorry for and to let him do what he wants, even though it goes against my property rights, maybe we should bond over a cup of soup or b) think "well, here's another case of a black man who thinks the rules don't apply to him.....damn, I'm pissed, I should go knock some sense into him. I have to admit, I was super pissed, told him to fuck off and got in my car and left. If race is constantly brought up (by either side) in unwarranted situations, how do we grow as a culture when every discussion and encounter is viewed as an us against them situation.
I've followed this thread with great interest. I think what we are seeing in Ferguson and NYC is the 'perfect storm' of three very serious issues that the United States as a population has resisted dealing with, and the failure to do so will only make matters even worse. The three issues are (in no particular order) race, rich/poor divide, and failure to curtail police behavior. In both cases, an indictment should have been returned. I read all the transcripts and witness statements in the Ferguson matter (you can find them on the NY Times website). What is clear from all the testimony is that there is doubt as to what happened. In other words, there was certainly enough evidence that a crime had been committed to hold the officer over for trial. Trials determine guilt or innocence, it is not the purview, nor should it be, of a grand jury. I was not surprised that an indictment was returned in Ferguson, but shocked by the NYC one. You have it on video for Christ's sake, and let's keep in mind, all the guy was SUSPECTED of doing is selling loose cigarettes - I point this out for later purposes. First of all, the US incarcerates more people than any other country. See this. I would also point you to 'Rise of the Warrior Cop' by Radley Balko - I've pointed out this book in the past, but if this issue matters at all to you (and it really should) then you need to understand that there has been a deliberate and fundamental change in the way the US polices its citizens. And it is not a good change. Race plays a part in the interactions. When you start looking at the numbers, there isn't really another conclusion. You could argue 'well, police are in urban areas more which have more blacks and more crime' and try to pass it off as 'a coincidence' - but it is no coincidence. Even worse, legislatures pass laws that penalize minorities more. For instance, crack was treated as a different drug than cocaine for many years - with greater sentences. It was the 'scourge' of our inner cities (re: black people) and needed to be stopped. Now here's where things get murky via race: Rich/Poor divide. Your income level is largely determined by your parents. Due to a horrific host of institutional failings, blacks have less money - a lot less. I can hear you saying 'but wait, this is America, you can make your own future, you are not bound by your parents choices.' Well, in fact, you are. Your parents live somewhere, and it wasn't your choice. Are there good schools? Are there good opportunities job wise? Is there a good community - black or white - that cares about its citizens? These are all fundamentally important things that determine a lot of what will happen to you and your chances at a decent income level. Would anyone seriously pick being born to a poor single mother in Camden, NJ, over being born to two middle income white parents in Haddonfield? Of course not, we all know what the odds are, and they aren't on that kid in Camden. Why does it matter? Eric Garner was suspected of selling loose cigarettes, which means NYC misses out on some taxes. He gets taken down by 5 cops. He certainly looked black in the video. He also didn't look wealthy. Now, had Eric dreamed big and defrauded the country out of Trillions (yes, you read that right) of dollars, and Eric had been smart enough to be white as well, he would have not only been left alone, he would have been nominated for Cabinet positions. This is not hyperbole. The fact that he was black and apparently not wealthy meant that interaction was really going to go one way. Finally, this country needs to stop with the 'foreign terrorism' war and look inward. The greatest threat to our freedom (on a daily basis) isn't being posed by muslims with bad facial hair. The threat is the police. As a country, if we really care about freedom, we need to change this 'Stop Crime At All Costs' nonsense. It has only worsened the race and rich/poor divide in this country. But the very first thing that has to happen for there to be any hope of resolving any of these issues is you have got to get money out of elections. I have never seen it this bad. When the Supreme Court tells you that 'money is speech' you better listen - and react.
Interestingly enough, Eric Garner's daughter has come out saying that she doesn't think it's a race issue, it's a police issue.
It's tough to say. I could see it being a black issue, a loitering/poor issue, a police issue or a mixture. What I do know is the way police interact with anyone is markedly different from when I was young. I have been thrown to the ground by a cop with a knee in my back and I'm white and was in my own suburban neighborhood. I also clerked for a judge in the criminal division for a year, did some defense work, and I know a lot of cops. It is frightening to listen to how many officers perceive those that they are there to protect and serve. In short, the 'us against them' attitude cops have is very disturbing, especially considering being a police officer is statistically less dangerous than being a citizen of a major metropolitan city.
Having grown up a middle class white kid in an area that was 99% white I had nothing but pleasant experiences with the cops even when I got caught doing some particularly stupid and dangerous stuff. Except for one night when the car I was riding in got stopped for 'speeding through a stop sign' and 'stopping to buy drugs at the last corner' depending on which officer you asked. It was a rough stop, we were all man-handled against the car, treated like shit, and had everything done to us to try and intimidate us into admitting some sort of wrong for a ridiculously long time. I was flabbergasted through the entire experience and still baffled when we finally pulled away. My friends and I were discussing it when we were pulling away when my buddy driving asked us if we really just forget he's black or have that little idea what it's like dealing with the cops in some neighborhoods when you're black. I try to remember the experience whenever I catch myself explaining away these events with a comment like, "Well, if he hadn't been doing anything wrong in the first place..." or "How had is it to be compliant to stay out of an escalating situation..." Those things are different when you've had multiple experiences with a group that have gone horribly not because you weren't compliant enough or respectful enough but just because of an ingrained belief on one part that you're somehow deserving of poor treatment period.
Not to get political, but I really want to try to get the word out about this because I think it's they only way to get money out of elections is through term limits for the congress. I think it's sick that this page only has 120,000 likes at this point because so many just don't want to be bothered or think it can't happen. It's a legitimate and perfectly doable way of getting this done. I've included a blurb from the FAQ page to explain how it works: Article 5 of the US Constitution provides us the “means” to amend the US Constitution to include an Amendment Limiting Terms in the US Congress without needing the approval of the US Congress. This statement has confused a few people. They have looked up Article 5 and responded by saying there is nothing there about Term Limits. Article 5 provides TWO options for amending the US Constitution: One is for an Amendment to be presented by a Super-Majority in the US House of Representatives and a Super-Majority in the US Senate. OR Two thirds of the STATE Legislators (State governments) to present an Amendment. Following the presentation in either option of an Amendment, the Amendment then has to be ratified (approved) by three quarters of the States. What this means to us is that we can start a grassroots effort to add an Amendment to the US Constitution limiting Terms in the US Congress and push the Amendment at the State level with petitions until two thirds of the States request that an Article 5 Convention be called. When 34 States apply for the Convention for the SAME topic, the US Congress is REQUIRED by Article 5 to call for the Convention. Once an Amendment has been presented at the Convention and agreed to by a majority of the states at the convention (over 25 states), then it is sent back to the states to be ratified. If 38 States then ratify the Amendment, it becomes part of the US Constitution, without needing Congress's approval. This convention will focus ONLY on Term Limits and nothing else to avoid confusion and guarantee its ratification.
I just LOL at this idea. I listen to Mark Levin quite a bit and he has been pushing for a convention of the states for a handful of amendments including term limits. The absolute apathy the American citizen has to do anything AT ALL for governing is staggering. My guess would be that IF something like this gained any sort of real momentum congress would just draft and vote on their own version first (as has happened historically as the states convention has never been used outright to ratify any current amendments to my knowledge, they have been started but congress bends to the pressure and did it themselves). Im guessing they'd draft it with some nice back room deals that'll be almost wholly ineffectual in solving the core problem.
I've stayed out of this thread(for good reason), but here is a little test for you all. https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/u ... ndexrw.htm Good luck.
They should have designed the test the other way around. Linking African faces and household items with one side and European faces and weapons with the other first. Before switching. I don't know how much doing it the way it is shifts the results towards the result they want. But I know I did make more mistakes when African faces were linked with household items.
Same here. Tried to do it as fast as I could and made I think, 3 mistakes with household items and none with the weapons. I don't understand the test because so many of the weapons looked old school 19th century that I would associate with Europeans more so. That being said the test concluded that I am afraid of black people.
Now once again, I'd really like to take the police situation out of this whole conversation. Symptom, symptom, symptom. Most of those "When Whites Just Don't Get It" have been centered around education, employment and housing access (bank loans etc.) That's the other shit, when black people try to get better jobs and move so their kids can be in better schools. When that shit gets shut down, now you're really fucked. I saw this story, and I'm going to link it, even though its going to start another merry go round on the police issue, but I think its worth a read. Now some of these cases, there was some questionable shit going on. Unfortunately for revenge's point, not all black people were trained on how deal with the police when they've done nothing wrong, but it'll speak for itself. Also revenge, I'm a bit confused, are you implying that not listening to the police results in death? I'm sure they're trained to subdue people in other ways. And the prevailing concern here (backed by irrefutable, substantial, hard statistical evidence from hundreds of studies and data analysis) is that if the same amount of white people acted like black people, they wouldn't be dead. Or not nearly as many. The issue is even if these people were committing crimes, they would get their day in court, if determined to be guilty, serve their time and be reformed. Unfortunately due to special circumstances, a lot of these black people aren't making it to court. 25 Things Black People Should Avoid Around Cops. OR if you want something really funny, here is an article by the Onion that is so on point.
Apparently I'm more likely to be afraid of white people with cannons. Just to throw something out there that's serious, I know a lot of people say, "Well it's just me, what am I supposed to do?" One of the things that stick out to me is there are no publicly recognizable non-minority led groups that promote racial equality. If you really want to enact change, put to good use the systems that do not regularly benefit minorities and push for equality through them. A whole bunch of minorities protesting in the backwaters of Missouri does little to nothing. A bunch of Christian suburban white soccer moms boycotting whatever the flavor of the week is, surprisingly, gets shit done.
Your data suggest little to no difference in automatic association between Weapons and European American faces vs. African American faces. Apparently I'm afraid of everyone.