Ferguson

[FunkyDexter]

This is what we fail to do with Ferguson.

Now there I would agree with you but as I've said several times in this thread, the riots are not a response to the Ferguson shooting. They're a response to years of frustration built up by a real or perceived inequity. The shooting didn't cause the riots to happen, it merely cause them to happen now. You're examining the wrong thing.

Of course the shooting should be examined, any killing should be, but you're not going to find the answers to the riots there. If you want answers to the riots you need to be examining the inequities, real or imagined, that have built up the level of frustration to a point where people will decide to go out and riot over an incident that they cannot know was race related.

you completely miss the point

Perhaps he missed the point you were trying to make but I don't think he missed the most important point of what you actually posted. This statement was pretty unequivocal:-

the constant statements that these people are protesting legitimate issues and are good people: we see these same good people looting, burning, spreading violence throughout the community

What you did there was take two groups of people and conflate them as the same group based on nothing more than the colour of their skin.

[NeedSomeAnswers]

Yet you completely miss the point, and demonstrate a high-horse condemnation. Have you had such discussions with you black associates? How does a black woman married to a white man have this 'conversation about racism' that society seems to want us to have? They don't need the sharptons and elitists telling us how to act, or how to talk, or what to say, or what not to say.

I don't think i missed the point i just vehemently disagree with it. your assertion that you see black people as generally violent saddens me more than anything, but i suspect that same attitude pervades our police forces.

Black Associates? these people are my friends not associates, people i have known for 15 - 20 years, and to be honest i am not sure what conversation you are expecting me to have, but maybe i am missing something from the US media.

This is what we fail to do with Ferguson. We play the 'if he had been white' game rather than look at the issues outside of race - the actual events. The actual events are denied because the white cop was, de-facto, racist.

FD has argued pretty much through out that the protests now are not really about Ferguson, but are about the perceptions that black people and in particular young black men are treated differently by the Police.

This has led to some people saying/thinking that the Ferguson cop was defacto racist but they are also in the wrong.

My own opinion is that there just is not enough evidence to go against the police officers testimony, the officer come across as genuine and i find it difficult to come to any conclusion as to guilt. However i am very sad that the officer felt fearful and threatened enough to feel that lethal force was required.

To be honest this should not be about individuals, and i have a lot of sympathy for many of the good police officers who get blamed along with the bad ones, but i do also think it is naive to think that there is not a prejudice against black and ethnic minorities by the police. Does this mean that each incident is racist? no but as we are not tackling the problem will it be viewed as such, yes!

It is not unique to the US we do the same thing in the UK. You only have to look at the Stephen Lawrence case and the under cover police monitoring of his family in the aftermath to show this.

Anyway Ferguson aside, have you seen the Eric Garner video? can you really tell me that regardless of race that that was lawful?

[NeedSomeAnswers]

I can tell that my tension breaker didn't work :/

I'll unsubscribe now.

Oh come on this thread was started with "I don't want to start a heated debate!" which is code for "Let have a heated debate".

and "Lets have a heated debate" was from Mrs Merton. Possible one of my favorite shows no longer on.

Famous for lines such as - when talking to Debbie mcgee wife of Magician Paul Daniels. - "So what first attracted you to multi-millionaire Paul Daniels?"

[SJWhiteley]

I don't think i missed the point i just vehemently disagree with it. your assertion that you see black people as generally violent saddens me more than anything, but i suspect that same attitude pervades our police forces.

...

Anyway Ferguson aside, have you seen the Eric Garner video? can you really tell me that regardless of race that that was lawful?

It is not my assertion that I believe black people are violent. Violent people are violent. Black societies have been invaded by a violent culture. The portrayal of that culture is that black people are violent and white people are racist. All these events play on those two notions.

The fact that a cop killed a man because he [the cop] was threatened had nothing to do with race, yet we want to do nothing but paint it purely as a racial issue. Why are you sad that he felt threatened? The implication is that he saw a black man as threatening rather than a violent man.

The Eric Garner video is a completely separate issue. The cops concerned acted unlawfully. Those unlawful acts resulted, either directly, or indirectly in the death of a man. However...the lack of any kind of prosecution of criminal misconduct is not surprising. There is a long history of the thin blue line creating a barrier to justice: not just for black people, but all races. As my stepfather told me (he was a policeman): don't trust the police; cooperate, but do not trust.

Look, the issues here have been attributed to purely to racism. This is the bigger problem. More and more we are seeing - told - any conflict is driven by racism (and please look up the definition of racism). When the answer, as supported by the 'black community' (whatever that really means) is to burn and destroy, there is a problem. And even the protesters have a problem: what are you protesting, exactly? The choice was to simply paint the encounter with black and white, and that is the basis of the conflict. Obviously this is the bull crap we need to eradicate and concentrate on the real racism.

[Xanith]

The Eric Garner video is a completely separate issue. The cops concerned acted unlawfully. Those unlawful acts resulted, either directly, or indirectly in the death of a man.

Just a quick correction. Choke holds (and believe it or not there are some that dispute that it even was a choke hold), are not illegal. They are simply against Police policy.

[SJWhiteley]

Just a quick correction. Choke holds (and believe it or not there are some that dispute that it even was a choke hold), are not illegal. They are simply against Police policy.

Yes, that is what I understand, also.

However (and I must admit that I'm tainting my opinion of this from other, closer, police interaction cases) while technically, the officer may not have broken the law, the very acts and motions used by the team involved against an individual was disproportionate, extreme and unwarranted; ergo unlawful.

[FunkyDexter]

The fact that a cop killed a man because he [the cop] was threatened had nothing to do with race, yet we want to do nothing but paint it purely as a racial issue.

I genuinely don't know whether it had nothing to do with race but I do agree with your assertion that we shouldn't automatically make the assumption that it was. However, given the fact that there does seem to be an inequity between the treatment people of different races can expect to recieve we probably shouldn't assume that it wasn't either. I guess that's part of what the ensuing investigation was meant to uncover. The problem seems to be that the investigation hasn't been rigorous or transparent enough to dispel all doubt one way or the other.

Interestingly, the riots that followed the Mark Duggan shooting didn't seem to have any particular racial undertones to me. The fact that Duggan was black was certainly mentioned on the news but almost in passing and the riots were definitely more class than race based. They weren't about black kids vs the police, they were about estate kids vs the police. I'm curious as to what the undertones of the Ferguson riots and the Garner protests. Do they feel racial? I'm not sure about the Ferguson riots (I was incommunicado when most of the press coverage was coming out) but the Garner protests haven't felt particularly racial to me. They've felt more like they're against unchallenged police brutality and the news articles I've seen have shown as many white people marching as black. That's through the filter of a UK media though, I'm curious to hear how it feels to those of you who are a bit closer to events over there.

[NeedSomeAnswers]

It is not my assertion that I believe black people are violent. Violent people are violent. Black societies have been invaded by a violent culture.

So now i am confused, you don't think that black people are violent, but black societies have been invaded by a violent culture which is it? Those statements are somewhat contradictory.

The fact that a cop killed a man because he [the cop] was threatened had nothing to do with race, yet we want to do nothing but paint it purely as a racial issue

On the Ferguson case itself i don't know how we can say one way or the other, my point was anyway not that this one case was racially motivated anyway, but that the feeling is amongst the black community that they are discriminated on by the Police. This case was just a touch paper for various previous unresolved incidents.

Why are you sad that he felt threatened? The implication is that he saw a black man as threatening rather than a violent man.

Yes that is the implication, i don't see how an officer or anyone else can really determine if a man is truly violent in an instant.

The Eric Garner video is a completely separate issue.

And the Tamir Rice case what about that?

What i would like to know is how can you be so sure that there is no racial elements to these cases, you seem to completely dismiss it as if the suggestion is laughable, when looking at recent history it looks perfectly plausible to me.

Its almost as if you think that Racism no longer exists (as in white people being racist towards black people)

Look, the issues here have been attributed to purely to racism. This is the bigger problem. More and more we are seeing - told - any conflict is driven by racism (and please look up the definition of racism). When the answer, as supported by the 'black community' (whatever that really means) is to burn and destroy, there is a problem.

Ok so now we are back to the argument that the real problem is black people and there Rioting.

You really believe that there is no reason for the black people to protest then none whatsoever? and essentially the black community are just using these cases as an excuse to Riot as they have been invaded by Violent behavior?

[homer13j]

2. The reasons for the arrest seem highly dubious. A policeman is accusing him of selling cigarettes to someone. Garner and the bystanders that you can hear are saying he just broke up a fight. Either way, neither of these things is an arrestable offence as far as I'm aware.

We're talking about New York City where the normal rules of society do not apply. In the past selling loose/untaxed cigarettes on the street was no big deal, but now NYC has the highest cigarette taxes anywhere. It's gone far beyond the tipping point where the black market puts a serious dent in revenues and as a result police are now cracking down on illegal sales whenever they see them and arresting everyone involved.

I also have no desire to watch the video, but from what I understand Garner was placed in a choke hold for resisting arrest. Had he allowed himself to be cuffed he would still be alive.

[FunkyDexter]

resisting arrest

Depends what you mean by that. He'd verbally resisted in so far as he'd protested that he shouldn't be arrested. He hadn't physically resisted in any way. From what I understand selling of cigarettes is an on the spot ticket/fine with no need to arrest or detain him at all so why should he allow himself to be put in cuffs? I wouldn't.

[NeedSomeAnswers]

I also have no desire to watch the video, but from what I understand Garner was placed in a choke hold for resisting arrest. Had he allowed himself to be cuffed he would still be alive.

You should see it, its not graphic you will have seen worse thing in the Movies, the only unsettling thing is you know that this is real.

He didn't physically resist. He complains verbally as to why he is being arrested and that is it, then one of them decides to grab him by the neck about 2-3 of them push him the the ground while one of them puts him in a headlock (chock hold).

Then you clearly hear him saying multiple times - "i cant breath", and it really does sound like he cant breath, but the officers just completely ignore him and keep him in the chock hold ..... until he really does stop breathing.

[FunkyDexter]

You should see it

I actually agree which is an unusual position for me where this sort of thing is concerned. I can understand peoples reticence, particularly given some of the other videos that have made it onto the net (Isis beheadings, Saddam hanging, Lee Rigby killing etc.) which are clearly meant to play into a sort of morbid curiosity which, I hope, most of us would be pretty appalled by. This is like that, though. It's not graphic or horrific beyond the fact that you know Garner never recovered. And until you've watched it I don't think you can really apreciate how unnecessary Garner's death was.