Originally posted by Hydra Too bad most of us don't really control what color our skin is chameleon man. Oh now you're getting a grasp of the situation captain obvious. Maybe if this kid were chameleon man he wouldn't have gotten beat up? This next part might be a bit controversial, but I believe that black people have a higher incidence of criminal behavior in proportion to population than white. That might be why cops associate criminal behavior with African-Americans. I happen to think that it is more a matter of a higher incidence of poverty among black Americans, but thats just me. What does this have to do with police brutality? When was the last time a white man walking down the street was strangled to death by two cops, or how about a white kid in his apartment shot in the back 12 times by cops, or a white guy plunger raped while in police custody?
Well, Troy Davis was shot to death in his home by North Richland Hills police as 17 NRH officers executed a no-knock raid on his home. The officer who killed Davis claimed the 25 year-old pointed a 9mm handgun at the officers as they burst into the home. Davis was white. All to get 2 to 4 ounces of pot. So technically, the police can break into your home without identifying themselves. But if in those first two seconds that the police are breaking into your house without warning or identification, you might ready your gun thinking someone bad might be coming in, they can legally shoot you dead with no questions asked.
It only has bearing on the perceptions of the police officers. My comments weren't meant to justify the officers behavior, just some helpful advice to all of the idiots that keep running from the cops. mrpaige, I believe I addressed your point under the part that was addressed to all. I know the temptation to immediately hit reply with quote when we see something we disagree with, but do try to read the whole post. I even made a neat little analogy that most people can easily identify with. HINT: the relevent part has to do with walking on the sidewalk.
I read the whole post, and I still stand by mine. It's a cop-out to say that you can avoid a beating by not running or fighting. You should be able to avoid a beating always because there is no excuse for the police to break the law. I want to avoid these beatings by having the officers prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. And if that doesn't stop it, then we need the Feds in here filing RICO charges against the police departments and hauling the chiefs off as leaders of criminal organizations. The police are not above the law. If they allow illegal activities to go on in their departments without reprisal, they allow their departments to become criminal enterprises and are guilty of crimes themselves. Beating the suspects is tantamount to cruel and unusual punishment. It is a punishment beyond what the courts may well dole out for the same crime. It may well be a violation of double jeopardy to convict these people of the crime after they've already been punished by the street justice of corrupt cops. I expect the police to do their jobs and follow the law. If they cannot do that even after they've had to chase someone who ran, then they need to be fired, brought up on charges and put behind bars once convicted. Violating the civil rights of our citizens is never to be tolerated.
Hey, if three drunken off-duty officers in an unmarked car don't chase me 13 miles before running me off a dark road then I most definitely will not shoot at cops.
That's definitely an interesting theory of self-defense law. I guess if I were at a bar one night and a guy, for whatever reason, came up to me and started punching me in the face, I would be best served to simply not resist or fight back on the off-chance that the guy could be a police officer even though he is not in uniform and has not identified himself as a police officer. Prosectors should use that theory when trying to prosecute someone who claims self-defense. "But your honor, people have no right to defend themselves because the person pummeling them might well be a police officer!" And if you live in North Richland Hills, you don't even have to shoot at the police to be killed. (Heck, you don't even have to leave your living room).
Again, I am not in favor of giving cops a "blank baton" to do whatever they will with it; I just think there is some room for nuance given the extremely dangerous conditions that they work under. There will always be tragedy in some measure if people are going to hit the street. I have no fear of the police because I am law-abiding. If you are not law abiding and you F--- with the police, I see no problem with rattling your tree a bit. It is just too easy to criticize them from a keyboard. Many have said here that they aren't up for the job. I say respect the men and women who are up for it and let up with the constant second-guessing. Let the proper authorities deal with it without so much public focus which just tends to inflame the situation. If an officer tells you to shut-up, you should. It's not a matter of free speech. It's a matter of cooperation with legal authority. If an officer tells you to "move along," you should do it. Same thing.
Why should you? If you don't want to, you don't have to. What about exercizing my rights allows them to beat me? Heck, by this standard, there wouldn't be a United States because we shouldn't stand up for our rights. If the British say we can't have representation, then we should just move along and forget it. No point rocking the boat. It's disrespectful. Challenging authority is one of the things that allows this country to better itself. If we bend over and take it just because the PTBs say to, we never advance. And when the police, the very people who are entrusted with enforcing the law, instead choose to break it, it is our duty as Americans to stand up and say it is wrong and that it will not stand. Letting the PTBs whitewash the situation and tap the criminal cops on the wrist only erodes at the very things that this country stands for. I am very pro law and very pro order. And it's for that reason that I have so little respect for the police because they are so often NOT pro law. If they choose to violate the law, we should send them to the prisons with the rest of the criminals. The fact that a criminal is wearing a uniform does not absolve him of his crimes. If anything, it's worse because they are the very people entrusted with protecting law and order. When they break the law, it truly is worse because it erodes our trust in our institutions. When the police cannot be trusted, our institutions fail. By your standard, when Judge Jimmie Benton was arrested for jogging through his own neighborhood in Kingwood, should he have just gone along with it? Paid the fine and let the matter die? Or was he right to refuse an illegal order and stand up for what was right because the police were breaking the law? That's one of the things that allows corrupt people to get away with their corruption: the fear of standing up and calling foul when someone in authority does wrong. And again, where is the line drawn. If a police officer tells a woman she has to have sex with him, should she just lie back and enjoy it? I mean, it would be awful disrespectful for her not to comply. If something is wrong, it's wrong. The fact that the criminal has a badge doesn't mean he's not a criminal.
Was he shot in the back? If I'm not mistaken one of the officers in the Oregon case actually reloaded and continued shooting.
I'm law-abiding, as well, yet I still fear the police because they sometimes beat up, arrest, shoot, etc. people who aren't doing anything wrong. These cops who commit crimes are not law-abiding (by definition. They can't be law-abiding when they break the law), what makes you think that you would have to break a law before they would come down on you? I also can't believe you actually think it's okay to violate the constitution and its protections just because the law breaker wears a badge. Why do you think police officers should be able to live above the law and violate the very freedoms we send people to die to protect?
Jeez, I guess the smiley I used wasn't enough clue I was joking. Definitely don't shoot at cops. Better? mrpaige, It is illegal for cops to beat people. They are prosecuted. Don't you think it would also be wise to work from the other side to avoid the beatings as well. If I walk around flipping everyone off and hurling racial slurs, I am likely to catch a beating. The person who beats me is breaking the law and will still go to jail. Does that mean it is a good idea for me to go around flipping everyone off and insulting them? Of, course not. I should exercise my common sense and not flip people off, not insult them, and not run from/attack cops.
Nope. It's certainly not the same situation, but it's an example of excessive force without justification by the police against a white person who was doing nothing except walking through his living room.
1. You didn't use a smiley. You used the poppy eyes thingy. I interpret that differently. 2. Sure, they should use common sense, but you are proceeding from a faulty premise that all these officers who commit battery are put on trial. How many of the nearly 175,000 reported cases of excessive force by police result in trials? Fewer than 1% are even forwarded for deeper investigation and almost none result in criminal charges being filed (according to NBC News). So this idea that corrupt cops are being prosecuted is simply untrue. Heck, these officers have yet to be charged with any crime despite plenty of evidence to support an arrest and charges. We can't say for sure that they ever will be charged. It's only the ones that are videotaped that seem to result in any action at all (and sometimes even that doesn't do anything. The suburban Dallas officer who was caught on videotape assaulting an African-American man who had requested information about making a complaint against a police officer was not brought up on any charges and not fired by the department).
There's a difference between being uncooperative to a police officer and participating in a revolution.
Not necessarily. We participated in a Revolution because we felt our rights were being violated. By standing up to the police when they commit crimes or give illegal orders, we're following the very ideals that led to the American Revolution. Standing up to an authority that is wrong. Why is it okay to violate the Constitution even a little bit? Why did we have the Revolution if we're just going to give those rights away later? Why keep the Constitution if the rights it protects are not all that important anyway? Just listen to the authority and everything will be okay. I think of the Civil Rights battles of the '50s and '60s. The lunch counter sit-ins, for example. In your opinion, those uppity black folks should've moved along when the police told them to go. And if they didn't, then the police should've given them an attitude adjustment. But those people sitting at that counter were right. They were participating in their own Revolution and standing up for the ideals that this country was founded upon (ideals that were not so much lived up to by this Country, of course). And all they were doing was being uncooperative to the police. When the police are wrong, we not only have every right to stand up to them, we have a duty to do so. To do otherwise would be pissing on the Constitution.
Very well said mrpaige. Giddyup, I still don't understand how ok you are with this happening. Maybe I'm reading you wrong, but it seems like your attitude is 'sometimes the cops need to bang a couple of heads every now and then to show these guys who's boss'. Am I wrong on this, cause I hope I am. The police NEVER have the right to take revenge on anyone for any reason. It's their job to be above that sort of thing.
I have seen a bit of improper force/conduct incorporated by police with my own eyes in my life. Probably has to do with the fact that I grew up in an ethnic neighborhood. Hell, I have even been lightly tossed up for no reason...guess it was guilt by association. I have also seen cops not respond t obvious problems because they didn't want to be bothered...the people were not important enough. Anyway, something a little different now. In regards to self defense - against an undercover officer or anyone else - there is another reason to pause. In Atlanta a 19 year old hispanic kid is being tried for attempted murder or manslaughter (wish I could remember). Some guy broke into his house while he was alone - he got scared, grabbed his family's rifle, and fired. He didn't hit anything. So now he is on trial. The reason is because the white intruder said he was already leaving. Sad...I would never want to be a cop - would not want such a high risk job. So one would think that I could garner some kind of appreciation or respect for those who choose to do that which I would not. Unfortunately, I have seen too much and it has come to the point where I am uneasy around the police.
Okay, so this 16 YO kid is involved in a revolution (let's not glorify him too much)? Or is he innocent of any crime? I missed both of those aspects. More probably he was just being uncooperative and smart-mouthed. Does anyone know the facts? Lunch counter sit-ins are revolutionary. Rodney King getting high on PCP and leading police in a high-speed chase is not revolutionary. I'd a been one of the first to volunteer for the revolution, but I sure as hell would have nothing to complain about if I had been whacked upside the head for stealing one of Paul Revere's silver plates.... Htownhero, there was no revenge here. It was all in the heat of the scuffle. Revenge would be taking place tomorrow or next week. My point is to offer more but not unblinding support of the police. Has there ever been a time when law enforcement has not gotten out of hand from time to time? It's going to get worse before it gets better, but I assert that it's not because of the cops primarily. They are in evermore dangerous situations day in and day out in big-city law enforcement. People rush to judgement on police too much for my taste. If you want cops to be like priests you'll have less effective law enforcement. For sure there are some bad actors on the Forces but before the facts are in, I will cast my lot with the Blue rather than the Punks that they deal with. Thank you. No it's not clearly perfect, but that's about as good as it gets. When all the facts are known, then we can decide who to prosecute.
giddyup said Are you watching a different video than me? In the one I'm seeing the police have him handcuffed and on the ground. They pick him up and slam him down on the hood of the cruiser. (and this isn't the part I have a big problem with BTW. being a little rough with someone is far different from what happens next) Then there is some sort of verbal exchange between one of the officers and the boy in custody. At that point the officer reaches back and pops the guy right in the face. That is the part that is unjustifiable. How is that "in the heat of the scuffle"? Kid was hancuffed and bent over the hood of a car.
