Racist Police in America? Math Matters

This thread is a silly argument that claims to be about "math". It is an argument that has already been lost. You may notice that no one is taking this argument seriously except for you.

We are electing Hillary into the White House. She promises to address problems with law enforcement.

You have lost this argument. Game over.

This thread was an exercise to highlight the ridiculous claims of BLM that there is an epidemic of rampant racist police officers hunting down innocent black people and killing them... The math proves that to be false.

LOL... and as far as Hillary addressing any problems let alone that of law enforcement it is the Democrats policies that created the problems in the urban ghettos. It's like the old Mafia protection rackets...they create the problem in order to get people to vote for them because they say they're going to fix the problem but if they fix the problem then they don't have an argument for the people to vote for them.

It's like the old saying that goes if you're not a liberal by the time you're 20 you have no heart and if you're not a conservative by the time you're 40 you have no brain.

as opposed of course to the GOP approach to problems which is to ignore them and then offer a tax cut for the rich.

https://goo.gl/images/BfRhej

Let me put this plainly Giujohn. You have lost the argument. You have lost the argument on Able2know. More importantly you have lost the argument in American society in general.

There was a time when angry White people, like yourself, had a good deal of political sway. They defended segregated schools, lunch counters and even swimming pools. They fought ever change towards equality (much like you are fighting BLM) kicking and screaming against every reform.

But this time is over. Angry White people are now a minority. Not only do we liberal White people have a good deal of power, but we are now joined by the increasing number of minority voters who reject the Angry White message.

And now you have chosen Donald Trump to represent you. Donald Trump is adored by Angry White voters, but is seen as a pathetic, hateful clown by the rest of us.

As you will see over the next couple of months, the Angry White game doesn't work any more. We have past the point where it has any power.

Hillary Clinton is not my favorite candidate. But, she understands that she needs to address the needs and concerns of an increasingly diverse population. Having a police force that works for the community they serve and is accountable to the community they serve is part of this.

You are on the wrong side of history GiuJohn. We are moving on without you. You can either choose to get on board... or you can remain an angry White voter clinging on to a past that no longer represents society. Hillary Clinton will win the White House. She will appoint judges that you think are too liberal. The majority of Americans will be happy with this. You don't think this is rational... but that doesn't matter, this is a democracy and the country belongs to us.

I feel a bit sorry for you.

LOL... well then according to you we all don't have anything to worry about anymore... Hey check back with me in about 4 years if Clinton wins and let me know if the black community is any better off than the eight years of Obama... I haven't lost a thing but then again you aren't going to win anything.

I think if you do the math of the percentage of minorities serving time in prison to the percentage of the population in America, you will find that the police have indeed been heavy handed in dealing with them.

I don't claim to know the black experience, but I do know the benefits of being white in America. I have never once feared for my life when interacting with the police. Unfortunately, I don't think I would be able to say the same for most black people. It's a shitty thing that has happened in America. But, I don't think denying what has happened does anyone a lick of good.

Now, in dealing with BLM and the events that have happened in various cities, I do not believe they are doing themselves any good rioting, beating white folks and burning their communities to the ground. That just sours the water towards their cause.

I'm going to assume for the sake of argument and I'm probably correct in my assumption that you're not a drug dealer and do not carry an illegal gun.

The fact of the matter is that in our Urban ghettos the street trade of illegal drugs is predominately controled by black males between the age of 15 and 34.

And as a former Deep Cover narcotics agent we had a saying, where there are illegal drugs there is always an illegal gun.

I think this fact answers both of your concerns about the prison population and about being pulled over on a traffic stop.

These are the realities of the situation. To lay it at the doorstep of the police is disingenuous and does not address the root problem.

McGentrix, this doesn't happen much (so I'm going to point it out), but I agree with your entire post. Literally all of it.

There are plenty of white guys dealing drugs and, probably, carrying an illegal gun. All white guys between 15 and 34 are not stereotyped into being gangster thugs though and neither should all blacks. The war on drugs has been a dismal failure and has taken an entire generation of black people off the streets. It's extraordinary the amount of racism in the legal system. Cops are just the front line.

Yes there are in fact white drug dealers I would imagine the percentage to be fairly small in the urban ghettos... As a patrol officer I generally approached every traffic stop as a potential for my life to end... to do otherwise would diminish my chances of going home at end of shift. But a traffic stop in urban ghettos is like playing poker... you must be very good at reading the situation and not ignoring the odds. In some situations it may seem unfair to the law-abiding black motorist pulled over... But you can hardly fault that police officer who was sworn to do his duty but also wants to go home to his family in one piece.

No one is faulting those police officers. They are faulting the police officers that have no ability to de-escalate a situation and end up shooting someone for a broken tail light. There should never, ever be a situation where that happens. Police officers that jump on an old man and place them in a choke hold for selling cigarettes and kill them, they are the officers that are being faulted. The officers that use racist language, or brag that they bagged another one, they are the officers being faulted.

Much like I will not brand all blacks as criminals, I will not brand all police as bad people. But, I can with a pure conscious, label some of the cops as being bad. Some cops need to be let go from the force and retired from ever owning a badge again.

Surely you can get behind that?

There is also a problem with the police departments and the politicians who manage them. We need to better train police officers to deescalate confrontations and to work with the communities they serve.

The police should be seen as highly trained professionals who are responsible to the communities they serve (whether they are wealthy suburban communities or poor urban communities). The people of the community aren't there for the benefit of police. The police are working for the people in the community they serve.

This means that a police department, as a professional organization with a duty to serve, should listen and address the concerns of the community. Of course police should be given the training and resources needed to be successful at their job.

Law enforcement officers who can't go along with this should find another job.

I can certainly get behind the idea that a person should not be shot for a broken tail light or killed for selling cigarettes

But what you fail to understand is this:

When a police officer tells you that you are under arrest and you escalate that by resisting in any fashion you are now committing a crime. Police officers do not get paid to lose the fight.

It is the choice of the subject to either escalate the force continuum which then forces the police officer to use deadly force or to comply with the officer's command in an orderly fashion, and not risk being killed.

Isn't it a better idea to be alive to sue the police department in the event that the officers actions were illegal?

I disagree.

If a cop tells you to just sit quietly while he rapes your wife on the hood of the car, do you just wait until your court date? I doubt it and you shouldn't. Being a police officer does not give a person special rights or take away rights of others. They are to protect and serve the law. They are supposed to be professionals that KNOW what the law is and obey it.

There is nothing written in any lawbook that states a police officer has to be given respect. In fact, The freedoms given specifically in the US Constitution allows citizens to even be belligerent to police officers and they have to take it. There is no law against yelling or cursing at a police officer. It's the officers duty to uphold the law, not punch or kill someone because they were offended or easily brought to violence. The whole respect thing is stupid. You get respect by giving it. That goes both ways.

Uh... you seem to miss the point of my post I never said anything about a police officer raping your wife or that you need to show respect for a police officer... I'm talking about when a police officer says you're under arrest and the individual resists.

And you are wrong in believing that a police officer cannot take away your rights when he says you're under arrest he is taking away your right to move freely. And becoming belligerent with the police officer at this point is a crime.

Your argument is an emotional one and does not address my point.

You said this:


How does it go from a pull over to a shooting if the officer is not escalating the event?

An Unarmed Teen Flashed His Brights At A Cop And Ended Up Dead Imagine if the kid had been black? That cop most certainly escalated the stop and now that kid is dead.

Choke hold by cop killed NY man, medical examiner says Took 8 cops to give a guy a ticket for selling cigs? It was a ticketable offense! Ridiculous use of power and lack of respect of a citizen. I can go all day on this.

Cops are supposed to be trained to de-escalate events to keep people safe. It's far too common today to read about just the opposite happening and far more often in black communities. That is what BLM is supposed to be about. It's since been hijacked into its current vile form where it's now just just an excuse to steal stuff and burn things down.

I think McGentrix is making the point perfectly.

The police are professionals who are hired by a community to protect and serve them. They are working for the community. They aren't there to be respected. They aren't there to win fights.

Part of the job of the police is to act professionally and in the interest of the community they serve. Sometimes this means their job is to back down from a fight.

Of course, some times the police need to arrest people (in the interest of the community). But the police are working for the community. If the community members feel that the police are screwing up... this means that the police aren't doing their job.

That's what service means. Police officers who aren't there to serve the community should look for another job.

Of course, giving training and resources for police officers to do their job professionally and successfully are in the interest of any community.

Once again both arguments are based on your emotional assessment of the situation.

All you seem to focus on is the start and the end of the confrontation. And you can't imagine why a traffic stop might lead to the death of a motorist at the hands of the police officer.

According to what you posted it clearly states that the motorist refused to show the officer his driver's license and resisted arrest causing injury to the officer... So in fact the motorist was not killed for a traffic stop his life ended because he resisted arrest and escalated the force continuum to the point where the officer felt that his life was in danger.

No reasonable person can argue that the motorist shouldn't have just accepted any ticket that might have been given and I say might have been given and where he probably would have prevailed in court instead of resisting the officer and escalating the force.

In the case of Eric Gardner the police officers responded to a complaint from the business where he was outside selling loose cigarettes. He refused to cooperate with the officers who are investigating the complaint and then when told he was under arrest when the officer went to secure his wrist this is very large person physically resisted that arrest. The medical examiner's office attributed the death to compression of the chest which is called positional asphyxiation and the subjects poor health. If you look closely at the video you will see that the officer was not using an actual chokehold in as much as his arm was not compressing the carotid artery. In fact Mr. Gardner was not being choked because he was clearly heard to say I can't breathe 11 times; a person who can't breathe also cannot talk. Mr. Gardner was not killed because he was selling loose cigarettes he died because he was resisting arrest. No reasonable person can argue that instead of complying with the officer and receiving nothing more than an appearance ticket he should have physically resisted the officer to the point that it caused his own death.

Let's be clear here on the officer's responsibility to deescalate the situation. I would agree that are professionally trained police officer should always try to de-escalate the situation. That does not however mean he should acquiesce to any resistance and neglect to do his duty. Once the officer has made a decision to place the individual under arrest he is no longer required to de-escalate. I would agree that it professionally chump train police officer **** always try to dig us too late to situation. That does not however mean he should act we us to any resistance and neglect to do his duty. Once the officer has made a decision to place the individual under arrest he is no obligated to de-escalate the situation. During a traffic stop when the officer has probable cause to make that stop this is not a situation where the traffic offender has an opportunity to plead his case or argue with the officer that is what the court is for. I doubt seriously if the motorist had been compliant and showed his ID that he probably wouldn't even have received a citation.

Eric Gardner indicated to the officer that he was having trouble breathing. He was, in fact, having trouble breathing. The officer ignored him. Eric Gardner died.

Your argument is ridiculous.

You claim that the problem was that this citizen wasn't listening to the police. I claim the problem was that this police officer wasn't listening to the citizen.

The police officer is supposed to be a trained professional. It is his duty to act responsibly in this circumstance. And part of this responsibility is to stop when a suspect indicates that he is having trouble breathing. And part of this duty is to deescalate situations so that these violent confrontations are avoided if at all possible.

I think you have it backwards. The police are here to serve us (not the other way around).