Obama '08?

@cicerone imposter,

You are mistaken, Cicerone, and will persist in error until you read the police report.

@High Seas,

I read the police report posted on this thread. I admit I read it with bias, because of the past history of how police have treated blacks in this country.

I also know this country has sent us Japanese Americans into concentration camps because we looked like the enemy, but based simply on our names and faces. We were American citizens by birth. Even those with 1/16th Japanese blood were considered enemy aliens.

What is more of significance is that the mistreatment of blacks by police is still a common occurrence.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Here's an excerpt of the police report:

Quote:

"You don't know who you're messing with!" Gates told Crowley, according to the police reports, which also said he went verbally after Crowley's mother.

There were 10 other witnesses who can corroborate that part of the report, including the yelling and the "yo momma" part.

Be very careful, Cicerone, past mistreatment of Japanese-Americans, yourself and your esteemed family included, is not valid grounds for abusing law enforcement personnel going by the book.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

BullShit!!

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

BullShit!!

You and Obama are wrong.

0 Replies

@Yankee,

Yankee wrote:

Quote:
I asked if Police procedure included knowing who owns the house you are investigating a reported break-in at.

Of course they did asshole.

What would be the point of asking for ID if they did not know who owned or lived in the home?

How stupid can one person possibly be to ask such a question!

so it then seems obvious to you that once the police knew that the report of a break in was bogus, they should have apologized for the inconvenience and left.

Glad we established that.

T
K
O

3 Replies

@Diest TKO,

Remove race from this incident, the point is that these officers did a poor job front loading themselves with the necessary information to sort out ANY incident.

Whether Gates responds kindly and politely or indignantly is irrelevant. He was being treated as a criminal in his own home. A critical thinker would understand that his indignation was pretty justified.

The fact that these officers ended up arresting the man, is the perfect illustration of escalation. They didn't arrive and make the situation better, they did quite the opposite.

T
K
O

2 Replies

Obama stepped in it big time with Gates. He has just alienated most people in law enforcement in this entire country. It is really revealing as to Obama's mindset.

2 Replies

@Diest TKO,

It is Gates that should have apologized to the law enforcement officers and now it's Obama that must apologize
to the law enforcement officers, all law enforcement officers and the nation for being such a dumb ass tool.

0 Replies

@Diest TKO,

BullShit!!

You and Obama are wrong.

0 Replies

@okie,

yeah Obama should not have commented, on the other hand rational conservatives should loudly complain about any man not being secure in his own home with no crime having been committed.

2 Replies

@dyslexia,

dyslexia wrote:

yeah Obama should not have commented

Agreed and I think Gates was unstable, possibly a threat to himself and others.
The police did the right thing.

0 Replies

@okie,

Good; we have a bunch of idiot cops out there that doesn't understand our Constitution, and shouldn't be wearing a badge.

0 Replies

@Diest TKO,

Being asked to step outside may have been standard police procedure - no one has confirmed or repudiated this assertion, and, in any case, it's not being treated like a criminal.

Being asked for ID is not being treated like a criminal.

Being arrested is being treated like a criminal, and at the time the arresting officer believed Mr. Gates to be guilty of a crime.

The fact that Gates was in or around his house is immaterial to whether or not he committed a crime. Your house is not some legal sactuary where anything you do cannot be considered criminal.

Whether his indignation was righteous or overblown, Gates made a scene and acted like jerk. A neighbor reports that two black men may be breaking into a house and the police investigate and have the temerity to ask him for ID. The fact that black men have been unfairly persecuted by police in the past, doesn't mean that every interraction between a cop and a black man involves profiling or racisim. I don't blame the guy for being annoyed, frustrated or angry, but his actions weren't justified. They may not have been criminal, but they weren't justified.

I don't think Crowley should have arrested him simply because he was acting like a jerk. He should have just left the scene and saved the story for the locker-room or dinner at home. It was stupid of him to put himself in a position where he had to arrest Gates: Giving him repreat warnings that he would arrest him if he kept up his jerky behavior. The police are supposed to be able to handle these situations without taking the jerky behavior of a suspect or a citizen personally.

It would appear that Prof. Gates is still acting like a jerk, and lying about what transpired to boot.

I don't have a huge problem with the way Obama answered the question last night, but then I don't think of him as being perfect. I'm sure he was incredibly thankful to get a question that didn't have to do with healthcare.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

YOu said it! You said the police assumed Mr Gates was guilty of a crime. In this country, you are not guilty until proven guilty in a court of law or the offender had some sign of being dangerous to himself or others. No such thing was evident.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Being asked to step outside may have been standard police procedure - no one has confirmed or repudiated this assertion, and, in any case, it's not being treated like a criminal.

Being asked for ID is not being treated like a criminal.

Correct.

Being treated like a criminal is the presumption of guilt. In this case, from many of the details, it seems that the officers treated Mr. gates with a degree of suspicion that assumed a criminal act was in place.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Being arrested is being treated like a criminal, and at the time the arresting officer believed Mr. Gates to be guilty of a crime.

Provocation Finn. This crime came about due to the police officer's presence.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

The fact that Gates was in or around his house is immaterial to whether or not he committed a crime. Your house is not some legal sactuary where anything you do cannot be considered criminal.

I never said it was a sanctuary. The point is that they were investigating a non-crime, and escalated a situation to the point where they decided that Gate's conduct was disorderly. they arrived with the presumption of crime and they were wrong, and then they are a part of a situation that they alone get to decide is a crime. That presumption of criminal activity clouded their mind and their judgment. I'm not convinced these officers acted on some racial hatred, but the picture I see shows them using poor preparation and judgment.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Whether his indignation was righteous or overblown, Gates made a scene and acted like jerk. A neighbor reports that two black men may be breaking into a house and the police investigate and have the temerity to ask him for ID. The fact that black men have been unfairly persecuted by police in the past, doesn't mean that every interraction between a cop and a black man involves profiling or racisim. I don't blame the guy for being annoyed, frustrated or angry, but his actions weren't justified. They may not have been criminal, but they weren't justified.

Acting like a jerk isn't illegal. Making a scene isn't illegal either. for that matter, the arrival of police cars creates a scene. What threat did Mr. Gates harbor? Gates actions don't have to be justified, they weren't illegal.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

I don't think Crowley should have arrested him simply because he was acting like a jerk. He should have just left the scene and saved the story for the locker-room or dinner at home. It was stupid of him to put himself in a position where he had to arrest Gates: Giving him repreat warnings that he would arrest him if he kept up his jerky behavior. The police are supposed to be able to handle these situations without taking the jerky behavior of a suspect or a citizen personally.

I could not agree more. This is how it should have played out.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

It would appear that Prof. Gates is still acting like a jerk, and lying about what transpired to boot.

Why do you say he is lying? What does he even have to lie about?

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

I don't have a huge problem with the way Obama answered the question last night, but then I don't think of him as being perfect. I'm sure he was incredibly thankful to get a question that didn't have to do with healthcare.

Haha. I'm sure you're right about the health care questions. I'll agree about the Obama bit though. It's a bit much to comment on this kind of thing as the President. It's a foot in the mouth moment.

T
K
O

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Finn, NO matter what, a home owner should be able to enter his home without police interference. Period.

So if the house is on fire, the homeowner should be able to enter his home without police interference?
Or if a murder has been committed in the house, the homeowner should be able to enter his home without police interference?

There are a hundred different reasons, all legitimate, that the police or other authorities can stop a homeowner from entering their own home.

BTW, if the FD tells you to stay out of your own home and you enter anyway, you can and will be arrested.

2 Replies

@mysteryman,

mysteryman wrote:

...
BTW, if the FD tells you to stay out of your own home and you enter anyway, you can and will be arrested.

There's a moment where being right, and being off topic collide MM. You and I know what CI is talking about, and I'm sure he'd agree about fires or some situation involving the safety of the individual. The legal test here is elsewhere don't you agree?

T
K
O

1 Reply

@mysteryman,

waterboy, You brought fire into the scene; it's way out of the actual event. I won't even bother to answer your q.

3 Replies

@Diest TKO,

That may be what he is talking about, but he quite clearly said NO MATTER WHAT.

So, that means that according to him there are no reasons of any kind for the authorities to stop you from entering your home.

I simply responded to what he wrote.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know