# Events in Missouri



## Chouan

Dear all, I would appreciate some explanation or enlightenment on the current events in Missouri. I've had the basic story from the BBC and the British news media, but none of it really explains why such an event should have developed into such widespread and profound disturbances. We had what would appear to be a similar thing happen in Britain some years ago, and it would be interesting to see if there are any parallels between them.


----------



## justonemore

While black on black violence is acceptable in certain communities, these same communities are quick to decry any type of white on black violence as "racist". A cop shooting an African American obviously shows that the entire system is overtly and covertly racist. It's pretty much the same cry as Israelis calling those who disagree with them "anti-semites". Just as Netanyahu eggs the Israelis on, there are "preachers" that egg on the african american community (Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton are 2 of the more famous ones). It's the "entitlement" attitude be it some imaginary creature from a story book entitling the Israeilis or the scars of past racism entitling African Americans to defend themselves and their "community" from all actions the white man may do with the term "racism". While I agree that the use of force by the police in the U.S. borders on the absurd, the main issue doesn't seem to be such versus that of a perceived racial event. There also seems to be a lack of clarity in the case. From comments I've seen on-line, there are many people who believe the cop "executed" this felllow. While I am no fan of american piggies, I have my doubts that this guy was killed for no reason and out of the blue by some cop. You'll might also notice that the featured pictures of the Amfrican american gent show him as a little boy of 11-12 versus the 6'4", 250 lb 18 year old man that he was at the time of the shooting. This was the same press play with the Trayvon Martin case. Both times they were made out to be sweet innocent kids but the reality is that they were pretty much into the "thug life" and its culture.


----------



## Chouan

Yes. There was a lot about the Trayvon Martin case that came out quite a while later that suggested that it wasn't anything like as straightforward as it was portrayed at the time. This seems to be a similar case. The Tottenham Riots seemed to have been sparked by a similar situation. Whether the shooting was justified (I'm pretty sure it wasn't) is a different matter, but the rioting that followed had little connection to the triggering event.


----------



## justonemore

While I wouldn't hazard a guess as to the actual situation, the nature of the wounds seem to tell of a panicked shooter. 6 shots total. All going in an upward direction and pulling to the right. 4 shots to the arm alone would seem to show this guy wasn't stopping, reacquiring his target, and adjusting fire. Justified shooting? No. But when do people in a panic ever stop to justify their next action? Just a theory of course.


----------



## Chouan

justonemore said:


> While I wouldn't hazard a guess as to the actual situation, the nature of the wounds seem to tell of a panicked shooter. 6 shots total. All going in an upward direction and pulling to the right. 4 shots to the arm alone would seem to show this guy wasn't stopping, reacquiring his target, and adjusting fire. Justified shooting? No. But when do people in a panic ever stop to justify their next action? Just a theory of course.


Sorry, I didn't make myself clear enough. I was referring to the Tottenham episode; I don't know enough about the Missouri shooting to be able to form an opinion of justification or not yet.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

Chouan said:


> Sorry, I didn't make myself clear enough. I was referring to the Tottenham episode; I don't know enough about the Missouri shooting to be able to form an opinion of justification or not yet.


Don't let a little thing like that stop you!!


----------



## Odradek

WouldaShoulda said:


> Don't let a little thing like that stop you!!


Really?
Can you elaborate?

From what I've read about the current situation, I think *justonemore* nails it in post 2.
And yes, very similar to what happened with the London riots of not too long ago. The spark incident had little relation to what followed, and a seemingly petrified establishment let things spiral out of control for fear of being labeled racist.
Of course the over-militarised US police forces are now well over the line into Judge Dread territory.

I lived in LA during the riots there in 1992, and most of what went on was either mindless violence, opportunistic looting, followed by more organised looting and arson. (A friend saw an electronics store near his house raided by a gang with two vans, who were all directed by a guy who sat in the back of a Cadillac).


----------



## SG_67

Chouan said:


> Dear all, I would appreciate some explanation or enlightenment on the current events in Missouri. I've had the basic story from the BBC and the British news media, but none of it really explains why such an event should have developed into such widespread and profound disturbances. We had what would appear to be a similar thing happen in Britain some years ago, and it would be interesting to see if there are any parallels between them.


You ask a very good question.

The fact is most of us know little about what happened. Some of the stories from so called eyewitnesses have changed.

Of course, thanks to media irresponsibility as well as the incompetence of public officials, the events in Missouri have taken on a life of their own.

It is certainly a tragedy, and when the truth comes out I firmly believe that it will be degrees separate from then original story.


----------



## Shaver

Odradek said:


> Really?
> Can you elaborate?
> 
> From what I've read about the current situation, I think *justonemore* nails it in post 2.
> And yes, very similar to what happened with the London riots of not too long ago. The spark incident had little relation to what followed, and a seemingly petrified establishment let things spiral out of control for fear of being labeled racist.
> Of course the over-militarised US police forces are now well over the line into Judge Dread territory.
> 
> I lived in LA during the riots there in 1992, and most of what went on was either mindless violence, opportunistic looting, followed by more organised looting and arson. (A friend saw an electronics store near his house raided by a gang with two vans, who were all directed by a guy who sat in the back of a Cadillac).


Not to be confused. :devil:

*....................Judge Dredd:............................................................................Judge Dread: 
*

........


----------



## Odradek

Shaver said:


> Not to be confused. :devil:
> 
> *....................Judge Dredd:............................................................................Judge Dread:
> *
> 
> ........


Damn Apple auto-correct !

This is what I meant....


----------



## WouldaShoulda

Odradek said:


> Really?
> Can you elaborate?


No.

I'm perfectly willing to wait until the facts play out.


----------



## SG_67

https://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/08/...en-before-shooting-michael-brown-says-source/

As I indicated, by the time the full truth comes out, the initial story would have changed by leaps and bounds.


----------



## dwebber18

I'll be driving through St. Louis on Saturday afternoon, I'll stop and ask some people what's up and get back to you!


----------



## Odradek

WouldaShoulda said:


> No.
> 
> I'm perfectly willing to wait until the facts play out.


Here's one. Make of it what you will.

*BREAKING REPORT: 
Officer Darren Wilson Suffered "Orbital Blowout Fracture to Eye Socket" During Mike Brown Attack*

Also, viewing that story gives me my first look at Mike Brown. As *justonemore* states back in post number 2, he was certainly no little boy.


----------



## justonemore

Odradek said:


> Here's one. Make of it what you will.
> 
> *BREAKING REPORT:
> Officer Darren Wilson Suffered "Orbital Blowout Fracture to Eye Socket" During Mike Brown Attack*
> 
> Also, viewing that story gives me my first look at Mike Brown. As *justonemore* states back in post number 2, he was certainly no little boy.


Not that it matters much but the article states that Brown was actually closer to 300lbs. Either way, 250 or 300, if i had that guy beating me and I was armed, I would give serious consideration as to ending it in the same manner. If a brutal attack on the cop by this guy is indeed proven, then there might be an element of justification (i.e. if he was charging to attack the cop again versus kneeling with his hands in the air).


----------



## Hitch

*Startling Lack of Riots*

https://www.wnd.com/2014/08/black-cop-kills-white-man-media-hide-race/


----------



## WouldaShoulda

Riots??

There are no riots.

Only protests turn violet by police presence!!


----------



## SG_67

^^^ It's incredible that this has become the narrative. 

There is this very odd, yet constant, narrative that episodes like this seem to follow:

1) A police shooting occurs where a white police officer shoots an African-American male. Not much is known about the incident.

Followed by:

2) Immediate demonstrations start against the police. Al Sharpton dons his "Borrowed" Brioni suit and flies down immediately. Chants of "No Justice, No Peace" echo through the night. Still, the actual facts are as yet unknown. 

Followed by:

3) The media go into their respective corners; MSNBC begins to paint a narrative of the black underclass being discriminated against. Fox starts to rail against agitators like Sharpton. The media as a whole go to a safe place. It's always safer to be on the side of the underclass and go against the militarization of the police force. Still, no one really knows what really happened. 

4) Calls for prosecution and heads to roll start. The Federal Govt. unnecessarily injects itself into the fray. 

And finally,

5) The truth slowly trickles out and it's a far different story than what was first reported. 

Apparently in this case, the police officer who fired the fatal shots was severely beaten himself with an orbital fracture. At least this is what is being reported by sources very close to the police dept., i.e. police sources who want to remain anonymous. 

As a medical professional, I can tell you that an orbital fracture is no easy feat! It takes a lot of trauma and can have devastating sequelae, including permanent loss of vision and can be associated with underlying traumatic brain injury depending on the force of the trauma. At the very least, this officers vision was occluded which made him all the more vulnerable to an attacker. He could easily have been disarmed, shot and left for dead. 

I recall when first hearing this story, the narrative from those who claimed to witness it was that the young man had his hands up surrendering and asking not to be shot. I suppose were the cop a psychopath and profound racist, he would have just gone ahead and shot him anyway. That's a convenient narrative I suppose but any thinking individual, upon hearing that, knows that there is more to it. And now we know that there is. 

The man and his friend were involved in a robbery and when he was confronted by the police officer, not knowing that the man had just robbed a store, apparently attacked the officer. That's quite a bit different from the original story.

Unfortunately we are dealing with a small town with a small and perhaps not as well trained a police force. Big cities, like Chicago, LA and NYC have trained shock troops who know how to handle crowds. The idea is to pour an overwhelming amount of manpower in and basically intimidate anyone who may harbor a notion of going beyond just peaceful demonstration. Instead the police bungled the crowd control aspect of this from the beginning. Looting occurred and the police force was paralyzed due to not wanting to appear to stoke racial hatred. The video of the police officer from a neighboring town threatening to "f....ing shoot you" to a demonstrator is a prime example of a police force that is ill equipped and ill trained for such an encounter. The state police should have been dispatched immediately in order to bring order and control the chaos.


----------



## drlivingston

Living in Alabama, we are no strangers to racial strife. The Civil Rights Museum is located in Birmingham. It is interesting to hear local opinions about racial episodes around the country. Yesterday morning, I was waiting outside of a Salvation Army store as it prepared to open. It was me, two young (one white, one Asian) college girls, an elderly white male, and approximately 15 African Americans of different ages and gender (mostly middle aged women). This store is in a majority black community. Listening in to the conversations, it didn't take long before they were talking about the events in Missouri. What they were saying somewhat surprised me. Not a single person in the little crowd supported the African American male. They were saying that, "He had it coming," and, "You live like a thug, you die like a thug." As I like playing the role of devil's advocate, I asked them, "Didn't you think that the use of force was unnecessary?" An elderly black man immediately responded, "Hell, no! That boy had it coming and I would have 'emptied the clip' on him." These people lived through true racism and have very little respect for others who cry "racism" because they feel that the world has wronged them. I learned a lot in that 30 minutes of conversation. One thing that I found especially funny was the fact that Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton are not very welcome in Birmingham. Residents here are none to happy with the way that they profit from race baiting.


----------



## Shaver

SG_67 said:


> ........As a medical professional, I can tell you that an orbital fracture is no easy feat!......


Having suffered an orbital fracture, I can concur.

Note to self: 'avoid brawling with guys twice your size and half your age'.


----------



## SG_67

Shaver said:


> Having suffered an orbital fracture, I can concur.
> 
> Note to self: 'avoid brawling with guys twice your size and half your age'.


At some point, it's safer to frequent book fairs and avoid the pub!


----------



## Earl of Ormonde

A violent black criminal, thief, robber, and a menacing presence if the film footage is anything to go by, turns violent on police and gets shot dead. 
What's the problem?

If the colours were reversed would gangs of white people now be on the streets rioting? NO!!! 'cos they'd all be saying what most sane people are saying about this case "serves him right" 


Race isn't the issue here. That huge chip on the poor black man's shoulder is the issue!


----------



## eagle2250

As the facts come out it seems increasingly obvious that our 'so called victim' confronted the police officer in the same unlawful manner in which he confronted the convenience store clerk that he robbed just minutes before. The apparent significant difference was the officer was better armed than the store clerk and the outcome was not in "Michael's" favor. Sounds like a dose of reality to me...not racism! Is it racist to enforce the law or to defend oneself, when under attack?


----------



## Earl of Ormonde

eagle2250 said:


> As the facts come out it seems increasingly obvious that our 'so called victim' confronted the police officer in the same unlawful manner in which he confronted the convenience store clerk that he robbed just minutes before. The apparent significant difference was the officer was better armed than the store clerk and the outcome was not in "Michael's" favor. Sounds like a dose of reality to me...not racism! Is it racist to enforce the law or to defend oneself, when under attack?


Exactly!

But lets not allow the truth to get in the way of some good old rioting and looting.


----------



## SG_67

^ Exactly! 

There's also something visually odd about the protests. If we view footage from the 60's civil rights movement, there was a solemnity and a dignity to the marchers walking hand in hand and demanding basic human rights. 

When viewing the television coverage of the current events, I see no such dignity or solemnity here. What I see are young men running around shirtless with their pants hanging down and acting like morons. It's rather hard for me to take the protests seriously when seeing that.


----------



## Pentheos

drlivingston said:


> Living in Alabama, we are no strangers to racial strife. The Civil Rights Museum is located in Birmingham. It is interesting to hear local opinions about racial episodes around the country. Yesterday morning, I was waiting outside of a Salvation Army store as it prepared to open. It was me, two young (one white, one Asian) college girls, an elderly white male, and approximately 15 African Americans of different ages and gender (mostly middle aged women). This store is in a majority black community. Listening in to the conversations, it didn't take long before they were talking about the events in Missouri. What they were saying somewhat surprised me. Not a single person in the little crowd supported the African American male. They were saying that, "He had it coming," and, "You live like a thug, you die like a thug." As I like playing the role of devil's advocate, I asked them, "Didn't you think that the use of force was unnecessary?" An elderly black man immediately responded, "Hell, no! That boy had it coming and I would have 'emptied the clip' on him." These people lived through true racism and have very little respect for others who cry "racism" because they feel that the world has wronged them. I learned a lot in that 30 minutes of conversation. One thing that I found especially funny was the fact that Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton are not very welcome in Birmingham. Residents here are none to happy with the way that they profit from race baiting.


Very interesting.


----------



## Hitch

drlivingston said:


> Living in Alabama, we are no strangers to racial strife. The Civil Rights Museum is located in Birmingham. It is interesting to hear local opinions about racial episodes around the country. Yesterday morning, I was waiting outside of a Salvation Army store as it prepared to open. It was me, two young (one white, one Asian) college girls, an elderly white male, and approximately 15 African Americans of different ages and gender (mostly middle aged women). This store is in a majority black community. Listening in to the conversations, it didn't take long before they were talking about the events in Missouri. What they were saying somewhat surprised me. Not a single person in the little crowd supported the African American male. They were saying that, "He had it coming," and, "You live like a thug, you die like a thug." As I like playing the role of devil's advocate, I asked them, "Didn't you think that the use of force was unnecessary?" An elderly black man immediately responded, "Hell, no! That boy had it coming and I would have 'emptied the clip' on him." These people lived through true racism and have very little respect for others who cry "racism" because they feel that the world has wronged them. I learned a lot in that 30 minutes of conversation. One thing that I found especially funny was the fact that Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton are not very welcome in Birmingham. Residents here are none to happy with the way that they profit from race baiting.


Its been heartening to watch the Reverend Jackson morph into a Queeg like has been.


----------



## SG_67

Hitch said:


> Its been heartening to watch the Reverend Jackson morph into a Queeg like has been.


It was the strawberries that finally gave it away!


----------



## Gurdon

*Was deadly force justified?*

The race of the dead person, the race of the killer, the reported histories of each individual, the circumstances of the community, the racist history of the region, are all, in varying degrees, interesting. They are, however, irrelevant.

Irrespective of the conflicting narratives, the only thing that matters is whether the officer was in imminent danger of serious or fatal attack. If he was, the killing was justified. If he was not in such danger, it was not.

There will be an inquiry and an official version of what happened will be produced to justify whatever the truth is determined to be.

Gurdon


----------



## SG_67

Gurdon said:


> The race of the dead person, the race of the killer, the reported histories of each individual, the circumstances of the community, the racist history of the region, are all, in varying degrees, interesting. They are, however, irrelevant.
> 
> Irrespective of the conflicting narratives, the only thing that matters is whether the officer was in imminent danger of serious or fatal attack. If he was, the killing was justified. If he was not in such danger, it was not.
> 
> There will be an inquiry and an official version of what happened will be produced to justify whatever the truth is determined to be.
> 
> Gurdon


I couldn't agree more!

It's incredible how quickly pols will forget this and start calling for heads to roll before the facts present themselves.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

Gurdon said:


> Irrespective of the conflicting narratives, the only thing that matters is whether the officer was in imminent danger of serious or fatal attack. If he was, the killing was justified. If he was not in such danger, it was not.


Are you new here??


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> You ask a very good question.
> 
> The fact is most of us know little about what happened. Some of the stories from so called eyewitnesses have changed.
> 
> Of course, thanks to media irresponsibility as well as the incompetence of public officials, the events in Missouri have taken on a life of their own.
> 
> It is certainly a tragedy, and when the truth comes out I firmly believe that it will be degrees separate from then original story.


You can't blame the media for this one.

The fault for the unrest--every bit of it--lies with the police and government who refused to release any information about what happened in the wake of the shooting. That's inexcusable, but not surprising for the St. Louis area--I lived there for five years before moving ten years back, and that's the way they handled virtually any incident having to do with the police (and boards of aldermen and other units of government, for that matter). Something was going to fill that information vacuum in Ferguson, and it ended up being social media, much of it inaccurate and speculative. Instead of doing their jobs and telling the people what had actually happened, the cops hunkered down, brought out tanks and tear gas, arrested reporters and aimed guns at peaceful protestors.

And the media is to blame for this? Give me a break.

Frankly, I think that it could have been much, much worse, and I am surprised that it did not get much worse. The police/government response could not have been more inept. At one point, you had police departments squabbling with police departments, and you still have the elected county prosecutor acting way more bellicose than is called for (and McCulloch does, in my opinion, favor cops in charging decisions and prosecutions. That's what I saw when I lived there, and he was pretty open about it).

I was struck by the number of white people in these demonstrations. I didn't see it on television (don't watch much TV) but most every photograph I saw included at least one white person. And there was, is, a reason for that. In addition to the racial angle, there was also a protest against the paternalism and cloistered nature of government in St. Louis and its surrounding suburbs, the sort that tells you "Move along, nothing to see here, we're in charge, trust us." Anyone, or at least most people, who has lived in St. Louis is familiar. Understand that there are more than 90 municipalities that ring St. Louis ranging in size from a few hundred to several thousand (about 20,000 people live in Ferguson). Each of these municipalities has its own town council and police department. Politics are never fiercer than in small towns, and so people in power do whatever it takes to stay in power, which helps explain why Ferguson is mostly black yet the city government is mostly white. The people in power stay in power by holding cards close to their chest, and that came through loud and clear during recent events. It didn't occur to them to share information that would be quickly released in other communities because they'd never done that before. When cops shoot people in St. Louis, the cops are rarely, if ever named, and life goes on without much ado. When I was living there, a cop shot an unarmed person during a drug raid--he mistook a television remote control for a pistol. He was not even put on admininistrative leave--he went right back to it, breaking down doors while armed with a machine gun. He was not indicted, and he may not, probably did not, do anything wrong. But still. If I shot and killed someone, even justifiably, I would take a few days off to get my head together. If I was a police commander, I would insist that an officer involved in a shooting take a few days off. That this didn't happen bespeaks the state of police-community relations in St. Louis.

In Ferguson, what should have happened was a release of all written reports within 24 hours of the incident. Elected and civic leaders should have immediately met with clergy, and the incident should have been talked about in churches on the Sunday afterward, which would have been a day or two after it happened. The officer's statement should also have been immediately released. Anytime an officer is involved in a shooting, he or she gives a statement to investigators that's called a Garrity statement. Such statements cannot be used in court, but they can be used to determine whether any discipline is warranted, and officers are required to tell the truth in Garrity statements. The police and elected leaders should have held a press conference early on, and they should have held daily press conferences aimed at releasing as much information as possible about what happened. Instead of releasing information that could have prevented a lot of this uproar, the police/government in St. Louis clammed up as they always have in the past. It didn't work so well this time. What's so amazing is that they acted like this when it appears that the information supports the officer's actions. Absolutely abhorrent, but par for the course in St. Louis, a city where government officials know more about what's good for you than you do. Just ask them.

Addendum: One other thing that can't be ignored is the state of race relations in St. Louis. There are people who will tell you that is the most racist, or at least racially divided, city in America, and while there is some stiff competition for that "prize," STL can certainly, I think, make a case. This is a city that, when I lived there (within the past ten years) had a black police officers' union and a white police officers' union. Same thing in the fire department, a white firefighters' union and a black firefighters' union. Even more mind blowing was the fact that the St. Louis police department was an agency of the state, not the city. The governor appointed the police board, not anyone in city government. This was a leftover from the Civil War, when control of the St. Louis police department was placed in state hands for fear that the city police would turn Confederate, or some approximation thereof. This has been changed since I left, or at least that's my understanding, but when I moved in 2005, city police were controlled by the state because no one had quite yet gotten over the Civil War. Amazing. Now, Ferguson police aren't St. Louis police, to be sure, but they are not far from the tree. Also, it should be noted that St. Louis police refused to participate in the "crowd control" organized by Ferguson and St. Louis County police, despite being asked, and the St. Louis police chief publicly criticized the methods employed by his counterparts.

It is worth noting, I think, that no one died in the uprisings, nor was anyone seriously injured. Supporters of the officer felt safe enough that they went to Ferguson to counter-protest recently, and while they weren't exactly welcome (or perhaps entirely smart), it ended without anyone getting hurt. Yes, there was looting, yes, there was some violence. But when you consider how horribly police/government handled the situation as outlined above, and when you consider that Ferguson is just a tiny piece of the metropolitan mosaic, and when you consider the incidents were confined to a small part of that tiny piece, I think that the community aquitted itself well. Much better, I think, than the police did in the aftermath.


----------



## SG_67

^ I can't speak for St. Louis as I've never even been there; I've no reason to visit. I think all big cities are at some level racially divided. Chicago is a great example and if we look at a cluster map of all the headline making shootings, I think you'll see a very specific pattern. 

As for blaming the media, it's not entirely their fault but they certainly play a part in it. Police and government ineptitude went a long way and I'm not one of these people that reflexively blames the media for everything, but they do have a habit in cases such as this to "play it safe" and by doing so will automatically dust off the racial playbook and start talking about how poverty, poor schools, lack of opportunity and, as evidenced by the current coverage, how the police force does not reflect the community. 

I don't believe a single reporter or commentator stopped to ask what really happened. The cable networks brought out their contributors as they always do in cases like this and started to take sides. I don't think I really heard anyone being critical of the protests for fear of being labeled racist. 

This entire episode has been completely bungled; from the police to the media trying to rush in for ratings any truth or critical analysis of what really happened has flown out the window. So yes, I will blame the media in part because they have been more than derelict in their coverage. They completely skipped over the 5 "W's" and gone straight into social commentary.


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> ^ I can't speak for St. Louis as I've never even been there; I've no reason to visit. I think all big cities are at some level racially divided. Chicago is a great example and if we look at a cluster map of all the headline making shootings, I think you'll see a very specific pattern.
> 
> As for blaming the media, it's not entirely their fault but they certainly play a part in it. Police and government ineptitude went a long way and I'm not one of these people that reflexively blames the media for everything, but they do have a habit in cases such as this to "play it safe" and by doing so will automatically dust off the racial playbook and start talking about how poverty, poor schools, lack of opportunity and, as evidenced by the current coverage, how the police force does not reflect the community.
> 
> I don't believe a single reporter or commentator stopped to ask what really happened. The cable networks brought out their contributors as they always do in cases like this and started to take sides. I don't think I really heard anyone being critical of the protests for fear of being labeled racist.
> 
> This entire episode has been completely bungled; from the police to the media trying to rush in for ratings any truth or critical analysis of what really happened has flown out the window. So yes, I will blame the media in part because they have been more than derelict in their coverage. They completely skipped over the 5 "W's" and gone straight into social commentary.


And what was the media supposed to do, remain silent and not cover the protests and simply wait for the police to release information when and how the police saw fit?

Balderdash, also, to the notion that the media did not try to find out what had happened. They most certainly did. I read several stories in several publications where that was the exact point of the story: What the heck happened? I paid fairly close attention to the coverage in the print press--read accounts in two St. Louis publications as well as the NYT. When the police and powers that be won't say what happened, don't blame the media for official malfeasance. And that's precisely what this was. The police and the government have an obligation to release information. They did not do so. I didn't read any editorializing disguised as news, although I did read some editorials.

If you are trying to become an informed citizen by watching cable television news, then you are not trying very hard. I don't know what cable did because I don't watch cable because I've learned that cable news isn't very good when it comes to delivering the news. I am a consumer of media, but not a blind one. If you are consuming media blindly--and anyone who relies on cable news falls into that category--and you are not happy with the result, then don't blame the media. The fault lies elsewhere. Finally, don't paint the media with a broad brush. If you weren't happy with what one outlet did, then don't be happy with that outlet, but don't go lumping the media into one big category. It sounds like that's what you're doing here, because if you had read the articles and coverage that I read, I don't think that you would be saying what you are saying.


----------



## SG_67

^ I'm not suggesting the media remain silent. It's an important story and it should be covered. 

And whether you or I agree or approve, there are a large number of people who get their news from cable television. Hell, there are people who get their news from the Daily Show!

I'm not lumping the media into one category, but suggesting that the TV coverage, at least nationwide, has been irresponsible. Just as the police actions and the way this has been handling officially been irresponsible.


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> ^ I'm not suggesting the media remain silent. It's an important story and it should be covered.
> 
> And whether you or I agree or approve, there are a large number of people who get their news from cable television. Hell, there are people who get their news from the Daily Show!
> 
> I'm not lumping the media into one category, but suggesting that the TV coverage, at least nationwide, has been irresponsible. Just as the police actions and the way this has been handling officially been irresponsible.


Just don't call it The Media, then. There are plenty of people in this country who are smart enough to go elsewhere for reliable, trustworthy news coverage, and those places are media outlets. Even with your criticism, however, the salient point remains: None of this would have happened--there would have been no rioting or looting to cover--if the authorities had promptly released accurate and official information about the incident and also reached out to the community to explain what happened. So, in that respect, it is no one's fault but the fault of the government that abdicated its responsibility and obligation to act in the public interest.


----------



## 32rollandrock

This article is a pretty good example of what I was talking about earlier when I said that the events in Ferguson have to be put into the context of the area. Here's the money quote, from midway through the story about how whites in the St. Louis area are reacting:

In interview after interview, people spoke of white flight from personal experience, ticking off their moves from neighborhood to neighborhood across the northern part of the county as if escaping a flood. "They always want to stir up to trouble, the blacks," said David Goad, 64, a retired movie projector operator who lives in a neighborhood bordering Ferguson. "I grew up around blacks, so I know how they are," he said. "That's why we had to get out in 1962, because it was getting so bad."
This was not an uncommon sentiment. But it was not universal.

I heard a lot of that sort of thing when I lived in St. Louis. Here's the entire story: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/22/...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news


----------



## SG_67

^ Your point about the media is well taken. 

However, keep in mind that there are particular procedures and policies in place with situations such as this. I have no inside knowledge of this, but I'm sure that all police departments have an internal investigation procedure for handling fatal shootings and the timing of the release of information. In an ideal world, the information would have been released immediately, but without the fact, one has to ask "what information"? The fact that someone was shot? That was well established. 

We have the governor calling for a vigorous prosecution when he doesn't even know what the circumstances are. He's asking for the prosecutor to step down when there is no basis for it. I don't really blame the police dept. themselves; it's a small dept. likely with limited resources and inexperienced at this sort of thing. The governor should have dispatched the resources of the state to help handle the situation but instead he's acting like a two bit city councilman.


----------



## SG_67

32rollandrock said:


> This article is a pretty good example of what I was talking about earlier when I said that the events in Ferguson have to be put into the context of the area. Here's the money quote, from midway through the story about how whites in the St. Louis area are reacting:
> 
> In interview after interview, people spoke of white flight from personal experience, ticking off their moves from neighborhood to neighborhood across the northern part of the county as if escaping a flood. "They always want to stir up to trouble, the blacks," said David Goad, 64, a retired movie projector operator who lives in a neighborhood bordering Ferguson. "I grew up around blacks, so I know how they are," he said. "That's why we had to get out in 1962, because it was getting so bad."
> This was not an uncommon sentiment. But it was not universal.
> 
> I heard a lot of that sort of thing when I lived in St. Louis. Here's the entire story: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/22/...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news


I'm not really sure what the point of coverage like that is. They find an old man who harbors racist feelings? Perhaps he does. Perhaps people moved out of there because, en masse, they were racist and did not want to share space with those different from themselves. What does that have to do with an 18 year old robbing a convenience store and then getting into an altercation with a police officer.

You mentioned a few posts ago about responsible journalism. What does that have to do with it. One could find people like that across the country but it's not a given that it gives rise to crime.


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> ^ Your point about the media is well taken.
> 
> However, keep in mind that there are particular procedures and policies in place with situations such as this. I have no inside knowledge of this, but I'm sure that all police departments have an internal investigation procedure for handling fatal shootings and the timing of the release of information. In an ideal world, the information would have been released immediately, but without the fact, one has to ask "what information"? The fact that someone was shot? That was well established.
> 
> We have the governor calling for a vigorous prosecution when he doesn't even know what the circumstances are. He's asking for the prosecutor to step down when there is no basis for it. I don't really blame the police dept. themselves; it's a small dept. likely with limited resources and inexperienced at this sort of thing. The governor should have dispatched the resources of the state to help handle the situation but instead he's acting like a two bit city councilman.


All police departments are different with regard to how they release information and how much and when. Some are better than others. You ask what information. Well, the circumstances surrounding the shooting--including, most importantly, the officer's statement--so that we can know whether or not it was justified. Some police departments are like Ferguson--they won't say anything, which is bad. They work for the public, so when stuff happens, they should be forthright and candid instead of secretive. Other departments will say as much as they know as soon as possible, which is a good practice and results in less suspicion and cynicism. In this case, there was absolutely no reason why more information couldn't have been released a lot sooner than it was.

As for asking the prosecutor to step aside, be careful what you say without knowing Robert McCulloch, his history and his reputation. The Cliff Notes version is, McCulloch's dad was a cop who was killed in the line of duty--by a black man--and he has often said that he wanted to be a cop himself and would have become a cop but for he lost a leg to cancer as a youth and so was prevented from joining the force, so he did the next best thing, which was to become a prosecutor. He has long been seen as going easy on cops. He should step aside on this one in the best interests of the community. If he stays in charge and doesn't file charges, there will be no credibility. If a special prosecutor is assigned and files no charges, that might actually fly.

There is a reason why the Department of Justice is on this, and that reason is that the local law enforcement system lacks credibility in the eyes of a lot of the people who live in St. Louis. It is not because the people are stupid or bad or anything else, although there is no shortage of stupid, bad people everywhere. It is because law enforcement in St. Louis hasn't done much, if anything, to build credibility with the community for many, many years.


----------



## Joseph Peter

Meanwhile, a 9 year old boy in Chicago was fatally shot 4 times last night in a backyard. There's no police force implicated and, accordingly, no protests and no breathless coverage. Just a mention or two by a few columnists; that's about it.


----------



## 32rollandrock

Joseph Peter said:


> Meanwhile, a 9 year old boy in Chicago was fatally shot 4 times last night in a backyard. There's no police force implicated and, accordingly, no protests and no breathless coverage. Just a mention or two by a few columnists; that's about it.


Did the police shoot him? Did anyone suggest that the police shot him?

Yes, that's a tragedy. But it has as much to do with Ferguson as an apple does an orange.


----------



## 32rollandrock

Good editorial in today's St. Louis Post Dispatch that sums up a lot: https://www.stltoday.com/news/opini...cle_9ed93767-275e-5d1b-a089-b5e69bd6599b.html


----------



## SG_67

^ no one has ever asked him to step aside for other prosecutions. Why this one? If the cop had shot a white kid, or rather, the cop were black and had shot a black kid, what would the narrative be? Would the prosecutor be allowed to at least do his job? 

Many people have already convicted the cop and merely want to go through the formality of the trial. Let's wait for the facts to come out. 

I do agree with you on the bungling of the entire episode. The state should have stepped in immediately with tactical as well as investigational and technical assistance. Instead the local authorities completely blew it. 

As for the shooting I Chicago. In this case it was incredibly tragic. What's even stranger is that the kid was shot multiple times! This wasn't an errant bullet from a drive by going through a window. This was a hit! But again, there doesn't seem to be the same outrage. It seems as though the only time there's so much press coverage and so much national attention is when a young black male is killed by someone white, even more so a police officer.


----------



## SG_67

32rollandrock said:


> Good editorial in today's St. Louis Post Dispatch that sums up a lot: https://www.stltoday.com/news/opini...cle_9ed93767-275e-5d1b-a089-b5e69bd6599b.html


Sorry but it doesn't sum up anything. It's a long list of grievances that may or may not be valid. The editorial talks of an I'll conceived public housing project that vertically stacked people. Chicago had this in spades and I would argue that the current rash of shootings can in large part be traced to these concentrations of poverty and organized crime that account for much of this.

None of us really know the facts on the ground. We do know this though:

1) Michael Brown shortly before being shot robbed a convenience store

2) when confronted by a police officer thereafter he became belligerent

3) an altercation took place between the officer and Brown

4) Brown was shot and killed

This should be treated like a fatal police shooting and investigated. If it was a justified action, then so be it. If not, then a prosecution should move forward.

Soul searching about the state of African Americans in this day and age has little to do with the case at hand and serves to distract.


----------



## Joseph Peter

Yes, that's a tragedy. But it has as much to do with Ferguson as an apple does an orange.[/QUOTE]

Rubbish...they are different parts of the same problem. The only difference is that the involvement of the cop in the Ferguson is a convenient reason to energize the professional grievance industry and the politics which are so easily thrown around these days. Why not a similar response for a 9 year old child? What? There's a difference because he wasnt shot by a cop and didnt apparently knock off a cigar store?


----------



## pleasehelp

While the particular factual question may be quite narrow and not influenced by race (although I think that’s arguable), I think that society would be well-served to consider both the shooting and aftermath in the broader context so that some good might come out of this tragedy.
I’m not a criminal lawyer, but I believe that the narrow factual question is whether Officer Wilson believed, at the time of the shooting, that he was in imminent danger when he used deadly force to kill Michael Brown. I hope that the answer is “yes” because if the answer is “no” then Officer Wilson is an evil man; and I’d prefer to live in a world with fewer evil people. I hope that the judicial system will work through this case in a transparent manner and that justice will be served.

The broader questions implicated by this situation are in many ways more important because they touch more people, they speak to whether this situation might be avoidable in the future and the touch on many broader issues that affect our society.

Regardless of what happened during that shooting, society should focus on the many themes implicated (none of which are new), just a few of which include:

1) A large group of people feel so distrustful of our police force that they believe that an officer would execute an innocent man in broad daylight.

2) A meaningful group of people see race as such a fundamental driver of human behavior that they believe that an elected prosecutor would be unable to impartially evaluate a case involving a white police officer and a black man, because that prosecutor’s father was killed by a black man. 

3) Some communities do not appear to view the police as a group of people that are there to protect and serve them, but rather as an oppressive force against them.

4) Police officers’ tools to protect themselves and/or assault others (depending on the perspective) are largely suited to either killing or dangerous combat. 

5) Police officers are largely not equipped with simple recording technology that would improve the transparency to the public in these situations.
I suspect that the events related to the shooting and aftermath in Ferguson would have played out differently if any of the following were true: (i) the storeowner that was robbed had a positive relationship with any of Michael’s siblings, parents, coaches, neighbors, teachers, role models, etc., (ii) Michael had a stronger respect for his community and law enforcement, (iii) Officer Wilson was more involved in the community on a day-to-day basis, either as a resident or as someone that spent time in the schools, coaching the sports teams, etc. or (iv) there was more wide-ranging private ownership in the Ferguson community by its residents.

Unfortunately, a lot of teenage boys do really stupid things. Doing those really stupid things was one of my favorite parts of being a teenage boy. A strong community that draws lines of unacceptable behavior (including a police force that is viewed as part of a community rather than an oppressor of the community) can help dampen the impact of the stupid behavior.

For a lot of these issues, I don’t care who is “at fault.” I do care that we are functioning below our potential as a society, and we can do better.

For what it's worth, I'm not advocating a heavy-handed government approach, in fact, many of the specific measures I would advocate for would involve shifting responsibility away from the government and better empowering local communities.


----------



## 32rollandrock

Joseph Peter said:


> Yes, that's a tragedy. But it has as much to do with Ferguson as an apple does an orange.


*Rubbish...they are different parts of the same problem. The only difference is that the involvement of the cop in the Ferguson is a convenient reason to energize the professional grievance industry and the politics which are so easily thrown around these days. Why not a similar response for a 9 year old child? What? There's a difference because he wasnt shot by a cop and didnt apparently knock off a cigar store?[/QUOTE]*

Uh, entirely different. The issue in Ferguson goes beyond the fact that someone died. The issue in Ferguson is rooted in distrust--deserved, in my opinion--of the police by the community. That is wholly absent in the Chicago tragedy. Doesn't mean that the community doesn't trust the cops in Chicago, but that issue isn't present in the death of the child. The only commonality that I can see is a gun. Now, if we want to start talking gun control, we can, but we would soon hit a roadblock with the Ferguson incident because the only gun involved belonged to a cop, and I have never heard anyone suggest that police in the United States should be without firearms.


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> Sorry but it doesn't sum up anything. It's a long list of grievances that may or may not be valid. The editorial talks of an I'll conceived public housing project that vertically stacked people. Chicago had this in spades and I would argue that the current rash of shootings can in large part be traced to these concentrations of poverty and organized crime that account for much of this.
> 
> None of us really know the facts on the ground. We do know this though:
> 
> 1) Michael Brown shortly before being shot robbed a convenience store
> 
> 2) when confronted by a police officer thereafter he became belligerent
> 
> 3) an altercation took place between the officer and Brown
> 
> 4) Brown was shot and killed
> 
> This should be treated like a fatal police shooting and investigated. If it was a justified action, then so be it. If not, then a prosecution should move forward.
> 
> *Soul searching about the state of African Americans in this day and age has little to do with the case at hand and serves to distract*.


Been to North St. Louis lately? Ever?

If you had, you would know that that "the state of African Americans" most certainly does have a lot to do with the case at hand. People would not have reacted the way that they did absent living the way that they do, with crappy schools and crappy cops and crappy stores (if there are any stores at all) and crappy homes and no money and no hope. You cannot separate the two. The police would not have reacted the way that they did--refusing to release any information, then sending in tanks and tear gas--if this had happened in, say, St. Charles, a predominately white St. Louis suburb. If it had been in St. Charles, they would, likely, have promptly released information so that people would have known what had happened.

Saying that there isn't a racial aspect to this is ridiculous, I think.

Before this happened, the NYT within the past year published a story about North St. Louis, which isn't far from Ferguson, that bears re-reading. The lead photograph is of a woman standing in front of her house, from which the aluminum siding has been stolen. No one, apparently, called the cops or otherwise did anything about it, and the theft likely happened in broad daylight, given that it is difficult to remove the siding from a house and load up a truck in the dark. Can you imagine that happening in your neighborhood? Not hardly, but that's the sort of thing that happens in a lot of St. Louis neighborhoods. I don't know of a solution, but it is difficult to deny the problem. Here's the story:https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/20/...ire-still-rules-the-night.html?pagewanted=all


----------



## SG_67

^ I'll leave the crappy cops comment alone as I have no evidence one way or the other. 

As for the rest, what does that say about the community? Why is it that the schools are crappy and the stores too? Why is it businesses don't want to open up in areas such as this? 

Why is it that theft and crime are rampant and nothing is done about it? You mentioned the woman whose aluminum siding was stolen. Are the police supposed to know about this without someone calling them? Why weren't they called? Why did the neighbors not come together and help out? 

There is a deep and fundamental problem in communities such as this and blaming the cops is a poor excuse for it. The NY Times can spill as much ink as it wants but until the fundamental problems are addressed nothing will happen. Communities such as this have a culture where crime and criminal enterprise is celebrated. The culture embraces it, from wearing pants too low (a style taken from the jails as inmates belts are taken from them) to rap lyrics that are either borderline misogynistic and celebrate the thug life. Just think of how much a rappers street cred goes up when they do a little time. Cooperating with the police is seen as taboo and to be avoided.


----------



## justonemore

While I'm no big fan of American cops and politicians, I'll have to agree with SG on this one. If the community is really fed up with this then there are actions they can take to prevent it. Calling the cops while your neighbor's house is being dismantled would be a good starting point. 

On the other side of the coin... If Chicago can invest millions upon millions for "red light" cameras, why can they not put CCTV cameras in some of these neighborhoods? If there are facial recognition programs that can see past masks and makeup in use in airports, then why not use them in problematic neighborhoods as well? I'm no fan of government surveillance but it seems that some of these neighborhoods need a starting point.

As to racial issues? Well it seems as if they are there but I'm not sure why. Again, perhaps this is more related as to the individual community. There are several communities where the people are poor yet they don't resort to shooting each other or celebrating criminal behavior.


----------



## justonemore

SG_67 said:


> ^Why did the neighbors not come together and help out?


Ohh. The Neighbors helped all right. The problem is that they helped whoever was stealing.


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> ^ I'll leave the crappy cops comment alone as I have no evidence one way or the other.
> 
> As for the rest, what does that say about the community? Why is it that the schools are crappy and the stores too? Why is it businesses don't want to open up in areas such as this?
> 
> Why is it that theft and crime are rampant and nothing is done about it? You mentioned the woman whose aluminum siding was stolen. Are the police supposed to know about this without someone calling them? Why weren't they called? Why did the neighbors not come together and help out?
> 
> *There is a deep and fundamental problem* in communities such as this and blaming the cops is a poor excuse for it. The NY Times can spill as much ink as it wants but until the fundamental problems are addressed nothing will happen. Communities such as this have a culture where crime and criminal enterprise is celebrated. The culture embraces it, from wearing pants too low (a style taken from the jails as inmates belts are taken from them) to rap lyrics that are either borderline misogynistic and celebrate the thug life. Just think of how much a rappers street cred goes up when they do a little time. Cooperating with the police is seen as taboo and to be avoided.


Exactly right, and exactly my point. Of course someone should have called the cops when they saw someone stealing siding from a house. That's obvious. That they did not is my point exactly. They don't trust the cops and they don't trust each other. It is a bizarre, hopeless world that neither you nor I can hope to understand. And yet, here we all are, saying stuff and acting like we know what happened and what should have happened and why things didn't happen a certain way in the midst of a near-absolute fact vacuum when it comes to official, accurate information.

You live in a place where the neighbor's siding gets stolen in broad daylight, where the schools aren't worth spit, warm or otherwise, where the cops don't come when you call 911 and where a body lies in a street for five hours. I couldn't do it without going slightly mad myself, and I doubt that anyone could. If I lived in such a place, I would be mad at the way the police acted in the aftermath of the shooting, and I would tend to believe social media before I believed anything the cops told me while showing me the business end of an assault rifle. The only thing I've really said here is that the reaction afterward was entirely the fault of the police and the powers that be in St. Louis for failure to release information and treat citizens who deserve to know what happened with the respect that they deserve. Basing conclusions on splintered, piecemeal leaks--which is largely what we have at present--is not wise, in my estimation.


----------



## SG_67

^ the police could have and should have done much more in the immediate aftermath to arrive at a coherent, and authentic, narrative. They didn't and that fueled speculation in a culture and community that is all too ready to believe the worst when it comes to authority. You're absolutely right in that. 

As it is, we're hearing the story change little by little which is all the more destructive. Of course, I'm a big believer in people getting the government they deserve. I'm not sure how the cities charter is written and how much authority the mayor has but I do recall him being interviewed and stating that he wasn't even aware of how the police were handling the investigation or the protests.


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> ^ the police could have and should have done much more in the immediate aftermath to arrive at a coherent, and authentic, narrative. They didn't and that fueled speculation in a culture and community that is all too ready to believe the worst when it comes to authority. You're absolutely right in that.
> 
> As it is, we're hearing the story change little by little which is all the more destructive. Of course, I'm a big believer in people getting the government they deserve. I'm *not sure how the cities charter is written and how much authority the mayor has but I do recall him being interviewed* and stating that he wasn't even aware of how the police were handling the investigation or the protests.


Which mayor? There are 94 from which to choose in St. Louis and its immediately surrounding communities, including Ferguson, which are indistinguishable from the city proper. A fragmented political system is part of the problem.


----------



## SG_67

^ The mayor of Ferguson.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

I am reminded of the axiom; "when everyone is in charge, no one is in charge!!"


----------



## Chouan

Would it not be better if each state had its own police force, a police force that wasn't electable but that was supervised by a committee, of all parties, of the state legislature? Then you could have joined up planning and thinking, rather than so many different authorities trying to run the show?


----------



## SG_67

^ there is such a system now. There are local police forces in individual cities accountable to that city as well as a county sheriff. The states also have a state police force. 

Across the pond here, we put a premium on local government as it is close to the community and of the community. They are also readily accountable to the community. 

That's all fine and dandy unless:

1) the community is dysfunctional as is the case in Ferguson

2) events spiral out of control and the local authorities are I'll equipped to deal properly with the situation

Unfortunately, both of the above occurred.


----------



## 32rollandrock

Chouan said:


> Would it not be better if each state had its own police force, a police force that wasn't electable but that was supervised by a committee, of all parties, of the state legislature? Then you could have joined up planning and thinking, rather than so many different authorities trying to run the show?


St. Louis actually had this until just a few years ago. As mentioned in a previous post, the St. Louis police department was an agency of the state, not the city, with the police board being appointed by the governor. It was a dysfunctional mess, which is why it was finally put in the hands of the city of St. Louis, where it belonged. Also, as mentioned in a previous post, the St. Louis metropolitan area consists of the City of St. Louis and more than 90 municipalities surrounding the city, with no discernible difference between one town and the next--they're just mashed up against each other. That is also a dysfunctional mess, but there is nothing that can be done about it. The politics are just too weird.

It is difficult to imagine a more unwieldy body politic than what exists in St. Louis, an object lesson in how not to govern an area.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

32rollandrock said:


> It is difficult to imagine a more unwieldy body politic than what exists in St. Louis, an object lesson in how not to govern an area.


Check out New Jersey some time!!


----------



## 32rollandrock

Two things to add.

First off, regardless of your feelings about the events, the St. Louis daily has done a stellar job of capturing events photographically. If they don't win the Pulitzer for photography this year, the prize should be abolished. Truly amazing stuff, but fair warning: There are many images, and it is easy to get sucked in to the point of spending 30 minutes or so. Worth the time, I think: https://www.stltoday.com/news/multi...tml_24b2b105-90e3-5ef0-9c65-769e848c0d31.html

Secondly, the Washington Post has published a very good story on how things really work in the St. Louis area when it comes to policing. Here it is (the story is lengthy, but good, the video is, I think, eye opening if you haven't lived in the St. Louis area):

Essentially, the police in St. Louis are revenue generators for the 90 or so municipalities, Ferguson being one, that ring the city of St. Louis. The cops play games of "gotcha" with motorists, and if you don't pay the fine or show up in court, you get arrested, no matter how small the violation, and taken to jail. The traffic courts set up by these municipalities are kangaroo courts, with the part-time judge usually aslo maintaining a private practice, and it is not uncommon for the judge to decide a case where a member of his own firm represents the accused.

To spend an hour or two watching traffic court in St. Louis--and I have done exactly that--is to be thoroughly outraged. Those who can afford lawyers get to go first while everyone else, i.e., the unwashed masses, sit. if you have a lawyer, you get a break--the standard deal is for moving violations, speeding for instance, to be converted to illegal parking (so it doesn't go on your driving record and cause insurance issues) with a corresponding tripling or quadrupling of the fine. If you have a lawyer, you may not even be required to show up--your attorney is good enough. If you do not have a lawyer, no deals will be made for you. So, you have situations where someone will sit and watch deals get cut for an hour or two (if he can hear at all--most of these cases are adjudicated by whisper at the front of a very large room), then, when it is his turn, he can only pay the fine or ask for time to pay the fine. If he cannot pay the fine within the agreed-upon time, he must go back to court and do it all over again. If he does not go to court, an arrest warrant will be issued, no matter how petty the violation, and he will be hauled to jail when he is stopped again, and the cost of getting out of jail will run into many hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars.

This is the context against which you have to measure the Ferguson incident--again, the Post story captures it very well. If you live with this sort of thing every day, where the police are there to generate money for city coffers to sustain municipalities that would otherwise be unsustainable, it is not surprising that people take a dim view of the police and the system as a whole. I have two firsthand experiences.

The St. Louis suburb where I lived had an ordinance banning truck parking on streets overnight. The ordinance, as written, applied to my four-cylinder Ford Ranger very-small pickup truck. It didn't happen every night, but a fair number of times, I would wake up to find a parking ticket on my pickup parked in front of my house (there was no offstreet parking). On principle, I went to court each time and got the ticket thrown out on the grounds of common sense (yes, that argument actually worked--it was legal to park a Hummer or a motorhome on the street overnight but not an economy-size pickup truck). Each time, the prosecutor would gently and condescendingly explain that I could avoid future tickets and trips to court if I would simply pay the municipality $100 a year for a truck parking permit/sticker. Like hell. That I should pay any amount of money to keep from being victimized by a corrupt system and unjust law was insulting, and telling the prosecutor so in no uncertain terms was, I will admit, a bit cathartic.

On the second occasion, I was stopped for driving while white in a black municipality not far from Ferguson. Yes, reverse profiling does happen. I was on my motorcycle, which I had just picked up from a shade-tree mechanic who had botched a job. He had put stop-leak into the radiator that now needed to be flushed pronto before there was lasting damage, and so I was going from this clown's house to a proper shop. The rings in this cycle were deteriorated, and so there was a fair amount of exhaust smoke until the motor warmed up sufficiently to expand things, at which point there was no smoke at all. Because I needed to get to a shop quickly, I did not wait for the bike to warm up, and I was pulled over within five blocks. For excessive vehicle smoke. I explained the situation to the officer and then pointed out that the bike was no longer smoking--it had warmed up enough that there was zero smoke. None, even when I revved the throttle to demonstrate. He wrote me a ticket nonetheless for excessive smoke, saying that what he saw when he first spotted me was the only thing that counted. So I went to traffic court. It started at 6:30 p.m. At 11 p.m., my case still had not been called, and the community center where court was held (there were far too many defendants to cram into anything approximating a normal courtroom) still held more than 100 people fidgeting on metal folding chairs, as one is prone to fidget after sitting for that long with nothing to do and no cell phones allowed. At this point, the prosecutor in a blanket decision dismissed every remaining case, including mine, on the grounds of the late hour--called on account of darkness, one might say. That's abhorrent. They made every defendant, including me, sit for nearly five hours while the lawyers, whose clients sat comfortably at home, went first. Then they did a mass absolution, as much as admitting that the remaining cases were BS from the get-go.

This is the sort of thing that happens every day in St. Louis. You really have to experience it to believe it and understand how it feels, and I'm a white guy with means who had lawyer friends to make my moving violations disappear (and I did that on several occasions--I once had a 75 mph in a 35 zone with excessive passing to boot, and I was guilty of every bit of it, turn into illegal parking with a $150 fine). I can only imagine what it's like for a black person with no connections or money. For a person like that, the police truly are pests enabled by a corrupt system. Traffic stuff might sound petty, sure, but it was, I think, an important, perhaps the most important, ingredient in a toxic stew that resulted in the Ferguson incident. It has nothing to do with what happened between Michael Brown and Officer Wilson, and no one at this point, even now, can or will say what happened. If you're getting pulled over and ticketed constantly for ridiculous things simply to sustain an antiquated and obsolete political system that treats you more as a commodity than a human being, you are not going to trust or respect the police. And with good reason.


----------



## Bjorn

That almost makes our taxation levels enjoyable.


----------



## 32rollandrock

An addendum.

Authorities in Ferguson today announced they're going to revamp the municipal court system and cut back on the city's fiscal reliance on traffic fines: https://www.stltoday.com/news/local...cle_bfb4e505-527f-5f70-bab9-1e41a5b2380e.html

The sad part is, everyone--everyone--who lives in St. Louis has known that the system is inherently unfair and draconian, and they've known it for years, even generations. It's scandalous that it took this shooting to force even a promise of change.


----------



## Chouan

A very thought provoking post. An interesting and illuminating read, which raises so many issues of policing and law enforcement, equity and equality before the law in the "Land of the Free", political influence in law enforcement, corruption etc etc etc.


----------



## dba




----------



## Kingstonian

Bjorn said:


> That almost makes our taxation levels enjoyable.


Get rid of all your asylum seekers and spongers and Swedish taxes could come down considerably.


----------



## 32rollandrock

The cop testified: https://www.stltoday.com/news/local...cle_74022ab8-756f-5e1d-81b3-3c577f1e9208.html

If he thought he'd done something wrong, or thought that someone else would think that he'd done something wrong, seems to me that he would have exercised his right to remain silent.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde

Indeed. Ok, I'm going to play the real life street experience card here. I was on the streets of central and west London for 13 years without a firearm, sometimes even without a truncheon(baton) because we carried no weapons at all when working in plain clothes, including stints on local and regional riot police units. Now if I had been in Michael's situation & a suspect ran off after an initial struggle, only to turn and come back towards me, I guarantee you I'm going to drop him like a sack of spuds, with or without firearm.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

> The shooting of Brown, 18, who was black and unarmed, by Wilson, who is white, gave rise to racially charged protests and looting. *Some activists have threatened more of the same* if the grand jury does not indict Wilson.


I'm confident Eric Holder will find out who these extortionists are and prosecute them.

Or have lunch with them.

If he hasn't already.

Whichever.


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> I'm confident Eric Holder will find out who these extortionists are and prosecute them.
> 
> Or have lunch with them.
> 
> If he hasn't already.
> 
> Whichever.


I don't think it's a credible threat. All in all, I think that the community has behaved in a relatively responsible fashion. Activists couldn't pull of their threat to shut down the freeway in St. Louis. At least some people in neighborhoods turned out to protect property and stop the looting. Considering how badly the authorities botched the aftermath by refusing to release information and infighting between themselves and acting like an invading force, it could have been much worse.


----------



## 32rollandrock

The officer has testified before the grand jury, so smart money says there will be no indictment. But that doesn't mean Michael Brown died in vain: https://www.stltoday.com/news/local...cle_ef44413f-745e-5a38-b4f9-65f8e30e28ef.html

Now, if these municipalities can figure out how to disappear entirely, that would be a worthy legacy.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

32rollandrock said:


> The officer has testified before the grand jury, so smart money says there will be no indictment. *But that doesn't mean Michael Brown died in vain*: https://www.stltoday.com/news/local...cle_ef44413f-745e-5a38-b4f9-65f8e30e28ef.html
> 
> Now, if these municipalities can figure out how to disappear entirely, that would be a worthy legacy.


Just what cause was Mr. Brown advancing when he robbed a store, bullied it's owner, assaulted an officer, and was subsequently shot down??


----------



## vpkozel

32rollandrock said:


> I don't think it's a credible threat. All in all, I think that the community has behaved in a relatively responsible fashion. Activists couldn't pull of their threat to shut down the freeway in St. Louis. At least some people in neighborhoods turned out to protect property and stop the looting. Considering how badly the authorities botched the aftermath by refusing to release information and infighting between themselves and acting like an invading force, it could have been much worse.


I totally agree with this. It was clear that the large majority folks who were not behaving well were not from the area. And those that were from the area were restrained and respectful while also getting their outrage across - even when some outside entities were trying to use them as their cause celebre. And considering how poorly the authorities at all levels from local to federal handled the situation, that was not an easy thing to do.

I also wish that we as Americans would realize that not having an answer or taking the time to do a thorough investigation is not a bad thing.


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> Just what cause was Mr. Brown advancing when he robbed a store, bullied it's owner, assaulted an officer, and was subsequently shot down??


There was no cause. As I stated earlier, the rioting and unrest that occurred in the wake of the shooting had nothing whatsoever to do with whatever happened between Brown and Wilson (and I think we should be careful in what we state as "fact" until we know the facts). It had everything to do with pent-up anger and frustration, deserved, toward the police and the powers that be in Ferguson and the 90-some other municipalities that ring St. Louis. What we are seeing now in these mass amnesty programs is a recognition that the system aimed at squeezing money from people who don't have it via penny ante traffic tickets has caused massive and deep suspicion and anger that invites insurrection--all it takes is a match like the Brown shooting to set things off. See Post 62 for a more detailed discussion of this.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

32rollandrock said:


> There was no cause.


That's all I was looking for. To "not die in vain" implies something heroic was going on.


----------



## SG_67

Nor should a community be held hostage to violent outbursts anytime law and order are enforced. Many of the victims of the "pent up rage and anger" were members of that community themselves who ended up suffering. 

It is my firm opinion, that if the officer who shot Michael Brown was of the same ethnic background, much of this would not have happened. If this incident were racially motivated on the part of the police officer, the outrage and subsequent rioting, too, was a product of racial motivation.


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> Nor should a community be held hostage to violent outbursts anytime law and order are enforced. Many of the victims of the "pent up rage and anger" were members of that community themselves who ended up suffering.
> 
> It is my firm opinion, that if the officer who shot Michael Brown was of the same ethnic background, much of this would not have happened. If this incident were racially motivated on the part of the police officer, the outrage and subsequent rioting, too, was a product of racial motivation.


It was both racial and socio-economic, and it can be nigh impossible to separate the two. I've seen plenty of photographs of the events and seen plenty of white people in the pictures. And I'm not sure how many members of the community ended up suffering. Certainly, the owners of the looted stores didn't live in Ferguson, and there are plenty of other stores in that area, so it's not like people in the community didn't have places to shop once order was restored. As for "law and order," it depends on your definition of "law and order." Is it "law and order" to write tickets for every penny ante traffic offense when the real goal isn't to keep streets safe but to keep municipal coffers filled? I would say no. Is it "law and order" to summon tanks and aim high-powered rifles at protestors who are not damaging property or hurting anyone? I would say no, and the St. Louis police chief happens to agree--he refused to send officers into that mess because he disagreed, wisely, with the tactics employed.

As for this being racial, Sublime said it best almost 20 years ago:

_They said it was for the black man
They said it was for the Mexican
And not for the white man
But if you look at the streets, it wasn't about Rodney King
In this f'd-up situation and these f'd-up police
_
As a former resident of St. Louis and environs, I would argue that if this brings about, or helps bring about, true reform, and by that I mean the elimination of this plethora of municipalities/fiefdoms that exist for no good reason other than to keep existing, then something good will have been accomplished. One example. Big corporation wants to build a big-box store. In the St. Louis area, what happens is, the big corporation plays one municipality against another to get the biggest tax break/construction subsidy. That, in the St. Louis area, has resulted in massive subsidies for private development that would have occurred regardless of subsidies--all the subsidies do is allow the big box store to make more money than it otherwise would. The big box store would be built regardless because subsidies aren't tipping points--it needs to pencil out in terms of sales sufficient to sustain the enterprise. The tax-increment financing system, aka development subsidies, in St. Louis and environs is nothing short of scandalous, thanks to all these municipalities competing against each other for new construction. It's the reverse of the draconian law enforcement system that economically targets the poor by saddling people with unreasonable fines and fees and arrest warrants for minor offenses.

Now, this sort of subsidy happens outside St. Louis, of course, but it's a different ballgame when you have all these cities, some of which are less than a square mile in size, crammed up against one another. In other places, a big box store will choose a lower subsidy over a higher one because it makes more sense to build at, say, a certain freeway exit than in an area with no freeway at all. But in St. Louis, there is no real difference between building at intersection Y within Town A than intersection Z within Town B just a half mile away, and so developers can, and do, drive hard bargains.

​


----------



## SG_67

^ Here in Chicago we, too, are riddled with our share of small municipalities that serve no purpose accept to gobble up tax money. And don't even get me started on the whole aldermanic system in Chicago with the different wards. Talk about fiefdoms!!!

But please don't confuse the wreck that was the handling of the Ferguson case for legitimate public protection and service from the police. There are a multitude of reasons why these communities fail or are on the brink of failing. As is always the case after something like this, the discussion turns to bigger issues of corporate responsibility and the larger role of government and corruption. 

The focus needs to be on what happened, and at this point we're not sure. But, it is slowly starting to trickle out and the narrative that seems to be forming is that Michael Brown robbed a convenience store (fine, it was just cigars but he robbed it nonetheless), got into a verbal and then physical altercation with a police officer and was shot dead. Let's resolve that first before we rail against corporations and corrupt pols.


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> ^ Here in Chicago we, too, are riddled with our share of small municipalities that serve no purpose accept to gobble up tax money. And don't even get me started on the whole aldermanic system in Chicago with the different wards. Talk about fiefdoms!!!
> 
> But please don't confuse the wreck that was the handling of the Ferguson case for legitimate public protection and service from the police. There are a multitude of reasons why these communities fail or are on the brink of failing. As is always the case after something like this, the discussion turns to bigger issues of corporate responsibility and the larger role of government and corruption.
> 
> The focus needs to be on what happened, and at this point we're not sure. But, it is slowly starting to trickle out and the narrative that seems to be forming is that Michael Brown robbed a convenience store (fine, it was just cigars but he robbed it nonetheless), got into a verbal and then physical altercation with a police officer and was shot dead. Let's resolve that first before we rail against corporations and corrupt pols.


The chief has said that Wilson, the cop, didn't know about what happened in the store when he encountered Brown. We don't have any details about whatever physical altercation may have occurred, all we have is unofficial hearsay. That said, I suspect a good portion of the community knows, or suspects, that Wilson didn't fire for no reason other than the color of Brown's skin. Otherwise, the unrest would have been much worse than it was. Making judgments as information trickles out is a dangerous game, I think.

If the only thing we worry about here is the shooting, then we will have collectively failed. It is obvious, or should be obvious, that there are systemic issues that contributed to the unrest that had nothing whatsoever to do with the shooting, and we should not wait until the culmination of the case to address those issues. That, all too often, has been the problem when it comes to racial stuff in the United States, whether it's Rodney King or OJ or Travon Martin or Michael Brown. Once the case is "closed," we go on about our business as we always have until the next incident. There is no one-size-fits-all solution because every community is different, and in St. Louis, at least, they appear to be understanding that fundamental change is needed. Otherwise, they wouldn't be making changes.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

32rollandrock said:


> If the only thing we worry about here is the shooting, then we will have collectively failed. It is obvious, or should be obvious, that there are systemic issues that contributed to the unrest that had nothing whatsoever to do with the shooting, and we should not wait until the culmination of the case to address those issues.


The way I see it, It wasn't what it was supposed to be, so now it's made into something else.

No longer a martyr and victim of racism, the dead guy dies for a greater cause and the tragedy/opportunity is not allowed to go wasted.

Well played.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

*Fire destroys one of the Michael Brown memorials in Ferguson*

Tom Jackson, the chief of Ferguson's police department, said in a statement that police are working to figure out what happened.

"To anyone who believes we didn't do everything in our power to put this fire out I want to apologize and let you know that was not the case," he said.
Jackson said that the first officer on the scene tried to put out the fire but was unsuccessful. He also said that only some of the city's police cars have fire extinguishers.
Within hours of the fire, residents had begun putting the memorial back together.

That is not a "memorial" it is a public eyesore.


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> The way I see it, It wasn't what it was supposed to be, so now it's made into something else.
> 
> No longer a martyr and victim of racism, the dead guy dies for a greater cause and the tragedy/opportunity is not allowed to go wasted.
> 
> Well played.


Absolutely, 100-percent incorrect. Have you lived in the St. Louis area? I've lived in a half-dozen cities in my adult life, and trust me: There is no place like it, at least in my experience. What happened there is much more nuanced and complex than anything that can be reduced to a sound bite. The problem is, the media--and political/social opportunists--try to reduce it to that, and it necessarily fails.

Have you been paying attention to the aftermath stories that attempt, with a fair amount of success, to get to the root of this? The stories that show what a huge percentage of the population of these rinky-dink towns have outstanding arrest warrants for minor traffic violations? The stories that reveal what a huge percentage of the budgets of these places come from traffic fines, so much so that the state legislature had to step in and limit the amount to 40 percent of a town's annual budget? The stories, which have been written over a number of years, about police corruption so rampant in these places that the state of Missouri must issue state licenses to cops so that bad ones can't jump from one town to the next?

Your conclusion is every bit as simplistic and wrong as the notion that white cops shoot black people because they hate black people. There is absolutely an institutional side to this, and to ignore that is to invite history to repeat itself, and by that I mean the civil unrest that erupted after the shooting.


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> *Fire destroys one of the Michael Brown memorials in Ferguson*
> 
> Tom Jackson, the chief of Ferguson's police department, said in a statement that police are working to figure out what happened.
> 
> "To anyone who believes we didn't do everything in our power to put this fire out I want to apologize and let you know that was not the case," he said.
> Jackson said that the first officer on the scene tried to put out the fire but was unsuccessful. He also said that only some of the city's police cars have fire extinguishers.
> Within hours of the fire, residents had begun putting the memorial back together.
> 
> That is not a "memorial" it is a public eyesore.


It is not an eyesore, it is a reminder. I don't like the eternal flame on JFK's grave. Is it OK for me to extinguish it? I don't think that you should be judging what is and is not appropriate for memorials in Ferguson. That is for the people in Ferguson to decide. How would you feel if you had put a stuffed animal or flower at that spot only to have it burn up? Calling it an eyesore, in light of everything that has happened, is not in good taste.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

32rollandrock said:


> The stories that show what a huge percentage of the population of these rinky-dink towns have outstanding arrest warrants for minor traffic violations? The stories that reveal what a huge percentage of the budgets of these places come from traffic fines, so much so that the state legislature had to step in and limit the amount to 40 percent of a town's annual budget? The stories, which have been written over a number of years, about police corruption so rampant in these places that the state of Missouri must issue state licenses to cops so that bad ones can't jump from one town to the next?


This is so far removed from the facts and the narrative, it staggers the imagination.

There is no racial element to these conditions you describe.

They are all problems that should be or should have been remedied by local citizens, their leaders and elected officials.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

32rollandrock said:


> I don't think that you should be judging what is and is not appropriate for memorials in Ferguson.


I am the self appointed arbiter of good taste!!

These tacky memorials were just as tacky when set up for common roadside accidents, the trash heap in front of the UK embassy when princess Diana died, or even following 9/11.

Tacky, every last one of them.


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> This is so far removed from the facts and the narrative, it staggers the imagination.
> 
> There is no racial element to these conditions you describe.
> 
> They are all problems that should be or should have been remedied by local citizens, their leaders and elected officials.


Due respect, but you need to spend some time in St. Louis, my friend--you're living on a different planet. A lot of people live on different planets than St. Louis because, well, St. Louis is on a different planet. Everything you've just said here is wrong, and if you lived there, or if you have kept up on the better reporting that has been published since the Ferguson incidents, you would not be saying this. Really.


----------



## 32rollandrock

And then there is this:

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/ne...involved-shooting-john-crawford-iii/16030327/


----------



## WouldaShoulda

Article~


> "After talking with the Attorney General and watching the video myself, I agree with his decision that a review by the U.S. Department of Justice is appropriate. This is a tragedy for the Crawford family and I share the concern of many in the community that this matter must be handled with the utmost seriousness and respect. I've consulted with local leaders, including leaders in the African American community, and I applaud the example they have set of calm, restraint and patience."


That won't do.

Let's stir up some animosity and violence!!


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> Article~
> 
> That won't do.
> 
> Let's stir up some animosity and violence!!


I don't know.

I didn't see him threaten or point the BB gun at anyone, including the cops. And, clearly, he had no motive to threaten the cops or anyone else, being a law-abiding citizen who simply picked it up whilst shopping. Meanwhile, the cops are fresh off a how-to-handle-crazed-shooters training mission.

I think that it is interesting how this has gotten virtually no national play.


----------



## SG_67

32rollandrock said:


> I don't know.
> 
> I didn't see him threaten or point the BB gun at anyone, including the cops. And, clearly, he had no motive to threaten the cops or anyone else, being a law-abiding citizen who simply picked it up whilst shopping. Meanwhile, the cops are fresh off a how-to-handle-crazed-shooters training mission.
> 
> I think that it is interesting how this has gotten virtually no national play.


It's gotten no play because the guy had a gun! Fine, a BB gun but how are police supposed to know.

And who the hell opens up a BB gun case, takes out the weapon and walks around the store? I'm sorry but this was about as justified as can be. The officers who responded may well have been putting their lives, and those of innocent citizens, on the line. They gave the command for him to drop the weapon and he did not respond. Let the investigation occur, but I don't see how the police can be indicted in this case.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

32rollandrock said:


> I think that it is interesting how this has gotten virtually no national play.


I almost feel sorry for Sharpton.

He always seems to back the wrong incident.


----------



## Chouan

SG_67 said:


> It's gotten no play because the guy had a gun! Fine, a BB gun but how are police supposed to know.
> 
> And who the hell opens up a BB gun case, takes out the weapon and walks around the store? I'm sorry but this was about as justified as can be. The officers who responded may well have been putting their lives, and those of innocent citizens, on the line. They gave the command for him to drop the weapon and he did not respond. Let the investigation occur, but I don't see how the police can be indicted in this case.


According to the report the BB gun was already out of it's case. 
If this scenario is a reasonable one, as you suggest, then I must remember never to pick up a gun from a shelf of a self-service shop that sells guns, because if I do the police are free to fatally shoot me.


----------



## SG_67

I'm not sure you're going to find anyplace like this. If you do, try picking it up and walking around the store. Perhaps not in a small gun shop, but in a large place like wal mart. 

Try going down the diaper aisle filled with moms and babies with a gun in your hand.


----------



## SG_67

WouldaShoulda said:


> I almost feel sorry for Sharpton.
> 
> He always seems to back the wrong incident.


In his case, he even manufactures the wrong incidents.

What do you expect from a guy who has "access" to a closet full of Brioni suits.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

Chouan said:


> According to the report the BB gun was already out of it's case.
> If this scenario is a reasonable one, as you suggest, then I must remember never to pick up a gun from a shelf of a self-service shop that sells guns, because if I do the police are free to fatally shoot me.


You mean never to pick up a gun from a shelf, waive it around, walk around with it until the police show up, and don't drop it when they do??

If that's what you mean, the scenario is a reasonable one.

FYI~



> Yes, there is good reason to think that many of these unjustifiable homicides by police across the country are racially motivated. But there is a lot more than that going on here. Our country is simply not paying enough attention to the terrible lack of accountability of police departments and the way it affects all of us-regardless of race or ethnicity.
> Read more:
> ​


https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/08/what-i-did-after-police-killed-my-son-110038.html#.VCRaMVffLCM


----------



## SG_67

WouldaShoulda said:


> You mean never to pick up a gun from a shelf, waive it around, walk around with it until the police show up, and don't drop it when they do??
> 
> If that's what you mean, the scenario is a reasonable one.
> 
> FYI~
> 
> https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/08/what-i-did-after-police-killed-my-son-110038.html#.VCRaMVffLCM


In fact, I don't believe there is any such thing as a "self service gun counter". I must admit I don't own a gun and I have never been in a gun store, but having gone to sporting goods store that carry guns, they are always locked up and not available for patrons to just grab and walk around with.


----------



## 32rollandrock

OK, here's how.

In retrospect, the guy was no threat whatsoever. Given that, could the tragedy have been averted? Yes. And easily. You get people out of the way, then you get his attention and then he puts the "gun" down and everyone goes home. Instead, they barge in and shoot him down, almost like it was preordained. The cops, like you, made assumptions and an innocent person--who never threatened anyone by pointing the "gun" at a person or issuing a verbal threat--died. Certainly, the shoppers who saw him on the same aisle didn't appear alarmed. So why did the cops come in like that?



SG_67 said:


> It's gotten no play because the guy had a gun! Fine, a BB gun but how are police supposed to know.
> 
> And who the hell opens up a BB gun case, takes out the weapon and walks around the store? I'm sorry but this was about as justified as can be. The officers who responded may well have been putting their lives, and those of innocent citizens, on the line. They gave the command for him to drop the weapon and he did not respond. Let the investigation occur, but I don't see how the police can be indicted in this case.


----------



## SG_67

^ Let's let the investigation occur and let's see what happened. I'm sure as it was in a Wal Mart there will be ample CCTV footage of the incident and the individuals behavior leading to this.


----------



## eagle2250

The community policing authorities are literally the tip of the spear in a community's response to a threat and sadly they are going to be damned if they do and damned if they don't act quickly and decisively enough to eliminate that (perceived) threat. It happens every time. Sadly, it's the nature of the beast!


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> ^ I'm wondering if the level of crime in a given community dictates that police presence? Just wondering, that's all.


I don't think so. As has been discussed earlier, Ferguson and other municipalities in the St. Louis area rely on police as revenue generators. By and large, cops are there to write traffic tickets, not respond to crimes, although they also do that. Huge issue in the St. Louis metropolitan area, so much so that the legislature stepped in several years ago and capped the percentage of a municipality's budget that can come from traffic citations. I believe it's somewhere around 40 percent.

When I've seen statistics on police staffing levels, they have always been expressed in terms of officers per capita. That's how jurisdictions tend to compare themselves with one another.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

Here in Maryland we just put up speed cameras to do that sort of thing!!


----------



## 32rollandrock

There was a small town near Ferguson that did that something like that while I was living there. It was a device that allowed the cops to turn a green light red, ostensibly to make things safer for emergency vehicles. You guessed it--they posted a cop car near the intersection and turned the light for no reason at all so they could hand out tickets for running the light. No one was punished and no one was much surprised when the cops got caught .



WouldaShoulda said:


> Here in Maryland we just put up speed cameras to do that sort of thing!!


----------



## 32rollandrock

This seals it: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/08/...n-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

When the media and powers that be talk about doom-and-gloom and falling skies, inevitably, nothing ends up happening.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

Article~


> Mr. Brown's parents are preparing to call on the people of Ferguson not to react violently to the grand jury's decision, even though they have little faith in the prosecutor, according to their lawyer, Benjamin L. Crump. "We want people to pray that the system will work, but the family doesn't have much confidence at all," Mr. Crump said. Nor, he added, are they confident that the local police will deal properly even with peaceful protesters.
> 
> Regardless of what the grand jury decides, Mr. Crump said the Browns would dedicate themselves to pressuring the federal government and states to pass "Michael Brown laws" that would require officers to wear video cameras.
> "The real change they want is for people to use their frustration and turn it into legislation," he said. "If you get the Mike Brown law passed, nobody will have to deal with something like this and the insult to injury afterwards."


Based on the video of Mike Brown moments before the incident, can Mr. Crump really belief this would have changed this outcome??


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> Article~
> 
> Based on the video of Mike Brown moments before the incident, can Mr. Crump really belief this would have changed this outcome??


I don't know. Reading between the lines, it sounds like the family is somewhat over the instant case. The question likely is, how many shots were enough? If deadly force is justified, then cops are trained to continue the use of deadly force until the threat no longer exists, which generally, but not always, means until the target is dead.

I still think that there's a way to orchestrate release of the grand jury's decision in a way that doesn't spark more rioting. Coordination between the feds, who can still file charges based on civil rights violations, and the locals would seem critical, but the signs of this happening don't look good. And there continue to be episodes of cops behaving badly in the St. Louis area: https://www.stltoday.com/news/local...cle_f1e997fb-3a07-5409-a2b5-6cba442f7d63.html

If I were in charge of police in the area, I would be using this episode to remind officers to be on their best behavior. And, just because cops shot someone doesn't mean St. Louis burns, witness this: https://www.cnn.com/2014/10/09/us/st-louis-officer-shooting/

Pretty much peaceful protests. The difference is, St. Louis police, as opposed to Ferguson police, handled the aftermath much better, and they made efforts prior to this to improve community-police relations. Still a lot of animosity, sure, but not as much in suburban towns like Ferguson, I suspect.


----------



## 32rollandrock

Looks like McCulloch, the prosecutor wants to do the right thing here. Why can't arrangements be made to release the transcripts/recordings contemporaneously?

From NYT:

Mr. McCulloch had said he planned to release audio recordings and transcripts of the grand jury proceedings in the event the jury did not indict Officer Wilson. But that release must be first approved by the circuit judge, Carolyn C. Whittington, whose office has said she intends "to analyze the need for maintaining secrecy of the records with the need for public disclosure of the records."


----------



## vpkozel

32rollandrock said:


> Looks like McCulloch, the prosecutor wants to do the right thing here. Why can't arrangements be made to release the transcripts/recordings contemporaneously?
> 
> From NYT:
> 
> Mr. McCulloch had said he planned to release audio recordings and transcripts of the grand jury proceedings in the event the jury did not indict Officer Wilson. But that release must be first approved by the circuit judge, Carolyn C. Whittington, whose office has said she intends "to analyze the need for maintaining secrecy of the records with the need for public disclosure of the records."


By do the right thing, do you mean going contrary to the 5th and 6th Amendments?


----------



## drlivingston

Booyah


----------



## Pentheos

Let the riots begin!


----------



## MaxBuck

Since I have plenty of negative things to say about the POTUS, it's important to point out that his comments in the wake of the grand jury's (IMO wise) decision have been temperate, well-reasoned and appropriate, so far as I can tell from CNN and ABC.


----------



## 32rollandrock

vpkozel said:


> By do the right thing, do you mean going contrary to the 5th and 6th Amendments?


Huh?

McCulloch has released grand jury transcripts previously in the wake of a police shooting. Annette Green, circa 2000. You can look it up. While you're at it, you might want to brush up on your constitutional law.


----------



## vpkozel

32rollandrock said:


> Huh?
> 
> McCulloch has released grand jury transcripts previously in the wake of a police shooting. Annette Green, circa 2000. You can look it up. While you're at it, you might want to brush up on your constitutional law.


I thought that all grand jury proceedings were supposed to be confidential and to release them was against the law. The Fifth establishes the grand juries and due process. The Sixth establishes a right to an impartial trial. Do you really think that releasing the grand jury information does not impact Brown's right to these things?


----------



## vpkozel

I tried to find the info on Annette Green and can't. Do you have a link to it?


----------



## 32rollandrock

vpkozel said:


> I tried to find the info on Annette Green and can't. Do you have a link to it?


https://www.stltoday.com/news/local...cle_76e8c6d2-45bc-11e0-ad12-00127992bc8b.html


----------



## 32rollandrock

vpkozel said:


> I thought that all grand jury proceedings were supposed to be confidential and to release them was against the law. The Fifth establishes the grand juries and due process. The Sixth establishes a right to an impartial trial. Do you really think that releasing the grand jury information does not impact Brown's right to these things?


The grand jury transcript in the Ferguson case has been released: https://graphics8.nytimes.com/newsg...ackage-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news


----------



## WouldaShoulda

vpkozel said:


> I thought that all grand jury proceedings were supposed to be confidential and to release them was against the law. The Fifth establishes the grand juries and due process. The Sixth establishes a right to an impartial trial. Do you really think that releasing the grand jury information does not impact Brown's right to these things?


Since there will be no trial, no.


----------



## SG_67

This entire thing is absurd. 

I hate to say this but does anyone think that Michael Brown had a bright future ahead of him? I'm not suggesting he deserved to be killed but committing a strong arm robbery at 18 can only lead to further acts of violence and crime and it's hard not to imagine that at some point, something like this, whether at the hands of a police officer or another criminal, would not have happened.

The real absurdity is there is looting and vandalism going on, as though that solves any greater societal ill. After all the evidence was in, it appears very much like Brown assaulted a police officer and then when chased turned and made a run for him. Long dead is the notion that he was on his knees with hands up saying "don't shoot I'm not armed". Long dead is the notion that the officer stood over his helpless body and unloaded his weapon on a poor, defenseless young man. 

Yet these facts seem to be lost on many demonstrators who still March with their hands up in the air indicating that regardless of any fact, they will dogmatically adhere to a false narrative.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

SG_67 said:


> ....regardless of any fact, they will dogmatically adhere to a false narrative.


So common I've gotten used to it.


----------



## taylorgtr

WouldaShoulda said:


> So common I've gotten used to it.


There are no winners in this case.

Michael Brown's family, no matter what happens, will never get their son back.

Darren Wilson's entire life purpose after this will to be to try and stay out of public view.

The town of Ferguson? well, you saw the news.

...and no matter what the verdict last night, people came prepared to riot. Who brings baseball bats, bricks and lighter fluid to a 'peaceful' protest?


----------



## Snow Hill Pond

SG_67 said:


> Yet these facts seem to be lost on many demonstrators who still March with their hands up in the air indicating that regardless of any fact, they will dogmatically adhere to a false narrative.


Yes, the false narrative is always more attractive than the truth.

It's decidedly easier to be the victim of "The Man" than look around and say, "Hey, did I just loot and pillage my hometown for no good reason?"


----------



## 32rollandrock

taylorgtr said:


> There are no winners in this case.
> 
> Michael Brown's family, no matter what happens, will never get their son back.
> 
> Darren Wilson's entire life purpose after this will to be to try and stay out of public view.
> 
> The town of Ferguson? well, you saw the news.
> 
> ...and no matter what the verdict last night, people came prepared to riot. Who brings baseball bats, bricks and lighter fluid to a 'peaceful' protest?


This.

I'm still trying to digest the grand jury proceedings. One thing I'm struggling with: Brown's body was 153 feet away from Wilson's vehicle, according to NYT synopsis of testimony and evidence. That's more than half a football field. Wilson testified that he fired after Brown, already wounded, reached for his waistband. Critical, and we'll likely never know the truth for sure. Hard to justify shooting an unarmed person from 50 yards unless that person was making an overt threat.


----------



## 32rollandrock

What's really at stake: https://www.dailydot.com/politics/ferguson-livestream-iphone-theft/


----------



## taylorgtr

32rollandrock said:


> This.
> 
> I'm still trying to digest the grand jury proceedings. One thing I'm struggling with: Brown's body was 153 feet away from Wilson's vehicle, according to NYT synopsis of testimony and evidence. That's more than half a football field. Wilson testified that he fired after Brown, already wounded, reached for his waistband. Critical, and we'll likely never know the truth for sure. Hard to justify shooting an unarmed person from 50 yards unless that person was making an overt threat.


Evidence and interview docs are posted here:

https://apps.stlpublicradio.org/ferguson-project/evidence.html


----------



## 32rollandrock

taylorgtr said:


> Evidence and interview docs are posted here:
> 
> https://apps.stlpublicradio.org/ferguson-project/evidence.html


Yeah, I know. It's a matter of finding the time.


----------



## eagle2250

In reference to the Thread titled "Preparedness," I can't help but wonder how many of the residents of Ferguson, Mo, at this point wish they had taken some preparatory actions to mitigate the impact of the very real and oh so threatening social apocalypse presently threatening their community. As the old saws tell us "we reap what we sow" and alas, "we must sleep in the beds that we make for ourselves!" Those survival rations, emergency water and supplies in my basement and the personal armory I maintain seem to be pretty prudent precautions at this point.


----------



## 32rollandrock

eagle2250 said:


> In reference to the Thread titled "Preparedness," I can't help but wonder how many of the residents of Ferguson, Mo, at this point wish they had taken some preparatory actions to mitigate the impact of the very real and oh so threatening social apocalypse presently threatening their community. As the old saws tell us "we reap what we sow" and alas, "we must sleep in the beds that we make for ourselves!" Those survival rations, emergency water and supplies in my basement and the personal armory I maintain seem to be pretty prudent precautions at this point.


But they did prepare. Boarded up windows. Some armed themselves. It's not like this was a big surprise.

Maybe it's just me, but I'm not sure how effective arming oneself and playing Charlton Heston is these days. More than 150 shots were fired last night in Ferguson, mostly, I assume, by hoodlums. In my view, the best precaution that folks in Ferguson could take would have been boarding up windows and making sure that insurance premiums were paid. It is foolhardy, in my judgment, to play Rambo when it's you against who-knows-how-many. Best to put your most prized belongings in storage, then get out of the way. There was plenty of time to do that, and I suspect that plenty of people did exactly that. No possessions are worth your life.


----------



## eagle2250

^^

I don't necessarily disagree with any of the points made in your post and would in fact heartily concur with most. I was simply inferring in my post that you quote, that if caught in a similar community crisis, I would gather my loved ones around me at the nest (with all my preset precautions in place) and limit any personal participation in ongoing events to defending, with every fiber of my being, hearth, home and loved ones against any wannabe intruders.


----------



## Stan the Man

32rollandrock said:


> This.
> 
> I'm still trying to digest the grand jury proceedings. One thing I'm struggling with: Brown's body was 153 feet away from Wilson's vehicle, according to NYT synopsis of testimony and evidence. That's more than half a football field. Wilson testified that he fired after Brown, already wounded, reached for his waistband. Critical, and we'll likely never know the truth for sure. Hard to justify shooting an unarmed person from 50 yards unless that person was making an overt threat.


Brown's body was 153 feet away from Wilson's vehicle. That doesn't mean Wilson was at Wilson's vehicle, and thus 153 feet from Brown's body.

The story is that Brown fled and Wilson gave chase after the initial tussle in the vehicle and Brown then turned back on Wilson. Either to surrender or mount a second attack, depending on who you believe. When the fatal shots were fired, the two were much closer to each other.


----------



## 32rollandrock

Stan the Man said:


> Brown's body was 153 feet away from Wilson's vehicle. That doesn't mean Wilson was at Wilson's vehicle, and thus 153 feet from Brown's body.
> 
> The story is that Brown fled and Wilson gave chase after the initial tussle in the vehicle and Brown then turned back on Wilson. Either to surrender or mount a second attack, depending on who you believe. When the fatal shots were fired, the two were much closer to each other.


Like I say, I haven't digested it yet. Silly me, I have resisted the urge to form an opinion on what happened until now. Now that everything's out there, I can base my opinion on facts, sworn testimony and forensic evidence.


----------



## 32rollandrock

Hmmm:

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local...cle_343a2224-4d61-54fb-b5ac-a13ea99951f7.html


----------



## WouldaShoulda

32rollandrock said:


> Hmmm:
> 
> https://www.stltoday.com/news/local...cle_343a2224-4d61-54fb-b5ac-a13ea99951f7.html





> *FERGUSON *• As ruins of about a dozen businesses here smoldered today, an "extremely frustrated" Mayor James Knowles III was asking what happened to onetime plans to shield vulnerable businesses with a protective line of Missouri National Guard members....


Do people want a "militarized" police presence or don't they??

SHEESH!!


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> Do people want a "militarized" police presence or don't they??
> 
> SHEESH!!


You can, actually, have it both ways. The initial response last summer was over the top. The response last night was less than needed. There is an appropriate middle ground which authorities in Missouri seem incapable of finding. Not good.


----------



## Chouan

Curious that the role of Missouri's "Grand Jury" is based on English Medieval Common Law, but pretty much abolished in Britain in 1933. This article makes for interesting reading.
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/nov/25/ferguson-lee-rigby-grand-jury-secret


----------



## 32rollandrock

Chouan said:


> Curious that the role of Missouri's "Grand Jury" is based on English Medieval Common Law, but pretty much abolished in Britain in 1933. This article makes for interesting reading.
> https://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/nov/25/ferguson-lee-rigby-grand-jury-secret


The problem with what happened in Ferguson is that it appears a de facto secret trial was held absent the adversarial system of jurisprudence. As I understand things, the purpose of a grand jury proceeding is to determine whether sufficient cause exists for someone to stand trial. This exercise went far beyond that. I think that they had enough evidence to indict Wilson, I also think they had insufficient evidence to convict him. And if a prosecutor knows that there is insufficient evidence to convict, he shouldn't be going to a grand jury for anything.

It's becoming clearer to me that McCulloch should have recused himself. He simply doesn't have sufficient public confidence/support in St. Louis to handle a case like this. What he did was split the baby by holding a secret proceeding, then tried to rectify that by releasing all of the records. It worked once before in the case of Annette Green more than a decade ago, so it's not surprising that he would go back to that well. But he failed to appreciate the difference between the Brown case and the Green case.

So a special prosecutor should have been appointed. That special prosecutor should have decided, no, there is not sufficient evidence to convict Wilson, so we 're not going to charge him nor are we going to bring in the grand jury. The special prosecutor then should have released everything--witness statements, physical evidence, the whole shebang--along with a report analyzing the case and explaining his reasoning. That, I think, would have helped a lot in terms of deflecting suspicions and accusations.

Instead, what we have is a mess. That an unarmed thug who picked a fight with an armed police officer and ended up dead would provoke this sort of conflagration is at once amazing and par for the course, especially in St. Louis. Completely and totally botched by authorities from the word go, from when they left the body in the street for five hours to when they responded to what were initially peaceful protests by bringing in tanks and firing tear gas at innocent people (remember the footage of the television news crew getting gassed and the arrests of journalists at a fast-food restaurant for no good reason). The whole thing has played out like a prolonged episode of the Three Stooges.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

32rollandrock said:


> So a special prosecutor should have been appointed. That special prosecutor should have decided, no, there is not sufficient evidence to convict Wilson, so we 're not going to charge him nor are we going to bring in the grand jury. The special prosecutor then should have released everything--witness statements, physical evidence, the whole shebang--along with a report analyzing the case and explaining his reasoning. That, I think, would have helped a lot in terms of deflecting suspicions and accusations.


If that process is legal in that jurisdiction, it would take a public official with a great deal of gravitas and STONES to pull it off.

I can't think of a single someone who could do it.

Maybe a Giuliani from a few years ago??


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> If that process is legal in that jurisdiction, it would take a public official with a great deal of gravitas and STONES to pull it off.
> 
> I can't think of a single someone who could do it.
> 
> Maybe a Giuliani from a few years ago??


McCulloch could not do it--he has too much baggage. But I think that there are plenty of other attorneys who could have done it. In the end, the case doesn't seem that complicated. It seems pretty clear that Brown instigated the fight and that Wilson would have been justified in shooting him dead during the struggle at the vehicle. The question then becomes, was he justified in shooting him outside the car? You have a half-dozen or so witnesses who can't agree on what happened at that point. You have no forensic evidence showing what happened at that point. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is a high burden. Therefore, you can't prove your case and so Wilson should not be charged.

That's what a special prosecutor needed to say. There are plenty of lawyers around with sufficient skill and integrity to reach that conclusion. If there are not, then our nation is in a lot more trouble than anyone suspects.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

Exactly.

Better to have a secret proceeding and spread the blame around even when there is no blame to be spread.

Pathetic.


----------



## eagle2250

^^Indeed it is rather pathetic. This beloved Country of ours has denied and run mightily away from the racial divide that confronts us for as long as most of us can remember. We have allowed fools like the Reverend Al Sharpton to shoot off their mouths with impunity, spouting ever growing litanies of untruths and freakishly distorted facts and in most instances , going unchallenged. And then folks like our present day President and US Attorney General aggravate the impact of such dastardly misinformation by sticking their celebrity/political noses into areas that would be better left alone, while not commenting upon the issues they could and should be addressing.....and then their contracted functionaries from academiaclaim it is the electorate that are the fools. Methinks the real fools in this instance may be our elected officials!


----------



## 32rollandrock

eagle2250 said:


> ^^Indeed it is rather pathetic. This beloved Country of ours has denied and run mightily away from the racial divide that confronts us for as long as most of us can remember. We have allowed fools like the Reverend Al Sharpton to shoot off their mouths with impunity, spouting ever growing litanies of untruths and freakishly distorted facts and in most instances , going unchallenged. And then folks like our present day President and US Attorney General aggravate the impact of such dastardly misinformation by sticking their celebrity/political noses into areas that would be better left alone, while not commenting upon the issues they could and should be addressing.....and then their contracted functionaries from academiaclaim it is the electorate that are the fools.* Methinks the real fools in this instance may be our elected officials!*


Maybe, maybe not. If their goal is to get elected and stay elected, then they have not acted foolishly. If their goal is to make this world a better place, then you are right.


----------



## Hitch

Michael Brown supporters have succeed in completely demonizing Officer Darren Wilson, making him out to be some monstrous villain who murdered an "innocent" unarmed black man, despite evidence to the contrary.
​What's funny about this is the fact these "demonstrators" and other assorted race baiters seem to be completely ignoring what Wilson was doing just before the shooting took place.
He was helping to save the life of a two-year-old child, who may have been black.
From Opposing Views:
*The report goes on to describe how Wilson responded to a call at Ferguson's Northwinds Apartment Complex for an "emergency involving a 2-year-old child who had trouble breathing." While attending to the sick child and the mother, Wilson reportedly got a call about the convenience store incident, but instead of responding himself, he reportedly stood with the family until health care workers arrived at the scene. It was only after they arrived that he responded to the theft call and, eventually, ran into Brown in the middle of the street.*
​*In the report, Whiteman claims that the sick baby was "most likely" black because of a past report in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that talks about the demographic of people living at the apartment complex in question.*
*"However, the Saint Louis Post-Dispatch reported on Oct. 18, 2014 that the very same Northwinds Apartment complex as one of many federally designated Section 8 Housing projects that the Post-Dispatch described as an 'amalgam of crime, mismanagement and African-American poverty,'" reported Whiteman.*
The report goes on to note that a large number of low income areas in St. Louis County are 99 percent African-American, which puts the likelihood of the child saved by Officer Wilson being black pretty high.
While the race of the child in question hasn't been confirmed, the color of the kid's skin isn't really that important. What's important is the fact that Wilson made taking care of this child a priority, which hardly sounds likes the cold blooded killer the Brown family and mainstream media have painted the law enforcement officer to be.
What's even more disturbing is that no one is digging to find out what exactly happened during the time before the shooting. Why hasn't the media looked into who Wilson was helping? Are they afraid they'll find out the kid was black, which would completely destroy their racially divisive narrative along with their ratings and credibility?
The point is Officer Wilson was saving a life just moments before he-according to evidence and testimony-was forced to take one. Again, this hardly seems like the actions of a murderer.
It'll be interesting to see if any major news outlets take the time to investigate this matter, or if they'll keep silent and hope it stays buried.


Read more at


----------



## eagle2250

^^To even the score, perhaps the former Officer Wilson should sit back and write a book, detailing his experiences in law enforcement, to include the Michael Brown incident....I suspect such would literally fly off the shelves Various factors have compelled him to give up one career. Perhaps it's time to begin another? Would he be an American version of Simon Rushdie? :icon_scratch:


----------



## 32rollandrock

Regardless of how one feels about Brown and Garner, the behavior of Chicago police during a recent demonstration (below) was appalling. That the cop is getting just a 10-day suspension is pathetic. Anyone who shows this sort of abysmal judgment should not be a police officer--and I don't give a wit about whether the Alabama football team won or lost that day. That's the epitome of nudge-nudge-wink-wink. Making matters worse, it would all have been swept under the rug had not bystanders made a recording of it and forced the hands of police--in a perfect world, fellow officers would have policed their own. Just one more example of how police cannot be trusted to police the police.

This cop tossed gasoline on a fire. Hopefully, he will soon be publicly identified. We'll see. The law in Illinois says that information that could endanger someone's life can be withheld. It also says that information bearing on the public duties of public employees cannot be withheld on the grounds of privacy invasion.

https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2014/1...-sweet-home-alabama-alongside-black-marchers/


----------



## eagle2250

Jeez Louise, I wonder why no one has mentioned the incident in Tarrant, Alabama involving a Grandmother, Helen Johnson, caught shoplifting from a local supermarket. Her grandchildren had had nothing to eat in two days and she found herself 50 cents short of being able to pay for a carton of eggs, so she put them in her pocket and tried to walk out. Tarrant Police Officer William Stacey responded and as he completed his investigation, concluded that there wouldbe no arrest and he bought the eggs for Helen to feed her grandchildren. In the week that followed the Tarrant PD collected cash and grocery donations from their staff and many sources outside the department and delivered them to the Johnson household, insuring the family will have a much happier holiday than they had expected!

Or how about those California Highway Patrol officers who were caught profiling/targeting a sizable number of drivers driving dilapidated vehicles, stopping them only to give them a $100 bill and to wish them a Merry Christmas! 

Guess these examples of police brutality are not quite as newsworthy, eh? :icon_scratch:


----------



## justonemore

eagle2250 said:


> Jeez Louise, I wonder why no one has mentioned the incident in Tarrant, Alabama involving a Grandmother, Helen Johnson, caught shoplifting from a local supermarket. Her grandchildren had had nothing to eat in two days and she found herself 50 cents short of being able to pay for a carton of eggs, so she put them in her pocket and tried to walk out. Tarrant Police Officer William Stacey responded and as he completed his investigation, concluded that there wouldbe no arrest and he bought the eggs for Helen to feed her grandchildren. In the week that followed the Tarrant PD collected cash and grocery donations from their staff and many sources outside the department and delivered them to the Johnson household, insuring the family will have a much happier holiday than they had expected!
> 
> Or how about those California Highway Patrol officers who were caught profiling/targeting a sizable number of drivers driving dilapidated vehicles, stopping them only to give them a $100 bill and to wish them a Merry Christmas!
> 
> Guess these examples of police brutality are not quite as newsworthy, eh? :icon_scratch:


I would guess that you're probably allowed to start a "warm and fuzzy with the fuzz" thread should you so desire....Who knows, perhaps we'll all join in with our own little heartwarming stories...:icon_cheers:


----------



## Chouan

eagle2250 said:


> Jeez Louise, I wonder why no one has mentioned the incident in Tarrant, Alabama involving a Grandmother, Helen Johnson, caught shoplifting from a local supermarket. Her grandchildren had had nothing to eat in two days and she found herself 50 cents short of being able to pay for a carton of eggs, so she put them in her pocket and tried to walk out. Tarrant Police Officer William Stacey responded and as he completed his investigation, concluded that there wouldbe no arrest and he bought the eggs for Helen to feed her grandchildren. In the week that followed the Tarrant PD collected cash and grocery donations from their staff and many sources outside the department and delivered them to the Johnson household, insuring the family will have a much happier holiday than they had expected!
> 
> Or how about those California Highway Patrol officers who were caught profiling/targeting a sizable number of drivers driving dilapidated vehicles, stopping them only to give them a $100 bill and to wish them a Merry Christmas!
> 
> Guess these examples of police brutality are not quite as newsworthy, eh? :icon_scratch:


What a country. A wealthy country where children can go without food for two days and people are forced to steal to feed them! 
*"Are there no prisons?"
"Plenty of prisons..."
"And the Union workhouses." demanded Scrooge. "Are they still in operation?"*


----------



## 32rollandrock

How did you learn of these incidents? I'm guessing you heard about it from the media, so I guess that it was newsworthy.

I work in the media and I hear this constantly from the police: Why don't you write about the good things we do? Well, for one thing, the cops are generally terrible about letting the media know about positive things. Case in point: The police rarely, if ever, alert the media when they win a wrongful death or excessive force lawsuit. But when they lose one, the successful plaintiffs make sure that the media is alerted. Now, you can argue that the media should keep tabs on pending lawsuits, and there is some truth to that, but the truth of the matter is, reporters are not omniscient, nor are they perfect. Stuff can and does fall through cracks, especially these days when the number of reporters in America assigned to cover courts, cops and local government has plummeted with the rise of the Internet. But so, so often, all it would take is a single heads-up phone call from the cops that never seems to come. Again, I speak from experience. Just this week, I'm writing about a wrongful death case against the cops in a high-profile case that is unraveling. Did I get a heads-up from the cops about the plaintiff's case going south? Nope.

More importantly, this isn't a zero-sum game. What those cops did in Alabama, while very admirable, doesn't negate the awfulness of what that Chicago cop did. If I were a police officer, I would be furious at this fool who made police-community relations infinitely worse by taunting peaceful protesters and thereby made the jobs of all police officers that much more difficult The incident has gotten national play, as well it should have. You can't blame the messenger here. If that cop had gotten fired, well, OK--that would have shown that the police take concerns seriously. A ten-day suspension? That shows that the cops just don't get it. Even if a union CBA would have made it unlikely that a termination would stick, brass still should have tried, if for no other reason than to send a message to the ranks and, more importantly, the community. Messages can be important.



eagle2250 said:


> Jeez Louise, I wonder why no one has mentioned the incident in Tarrant, Alabama involving a Grandmother, Helen Johnson, caught shoplifting from a local supermarket. Her grandchildren had had nothing to eat in two days and she found herself 50 cents short of being able to pay for a carton of eggs, so she put them in her pocket and tried to walk out. Tarrant Police Officer William Stacey responded and as he completed his investigation, concluded that there wouldbe no arrest and he bought the eggs for Helen to feed her grandchildren. In the week that followed the Tarrant PD collected cash and grocery donations from their staff and many sources outside the department and delivered them to the Johnson household, insuring the family will have a much happier holiday than they had expected!
> 
> Or how about those California Highway Patrol officers who were caught profiling/targeting a sizable number of drivers driving dilapidated vehicles, stopping them only to give them a $100 bill and to wish them a Merry Christmas!
> 
> Guess these examples of police brutality are not quite as newsworthy, eh? :icon_scratch:


----------



## WouldaShoulda

Chouan said:


> What a country. A wealthy country where children can go without food for two days and people are forced to steal to feed them!


Such is the price for having the freedom to make poor choices.

Notice the story was about a grandmother.

Where do you think mom and dad are??


----------



## 32rollandrock

Chouan said:


> What a country. A wealthy country where children can go without food for two days and people are forced to steal to feed them!
> *"Are there no prisons?"
> "Plenty of prisons..."
> "And the Union workhouses." demanded Scrooge. "Are they still in operation?"*


I have lived in five states in the United States and not once have I lived in a community where people had to resort to crime to avoid hunger. There are food pantries. There are food banks. And soup kitchens. Tons and tons of perfectly edible food gets thrown away every day in this country. If there is one thing we have in abundance in America, it is food, and so those who steal food really, in my opinion, have no excuse. In this case, it sounds like the person made a bad decision and all turned out well in the end. But if that person had gone to a church or a food pantry or a grocery store or restaurant near closing time and explained their situation, I'm certain that they would have been given food. People just aren't that cold-hearted that they would deny food to a hungry person. Money, different matter.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

32rollandrock said:


> I have lived in five states in the United States and not once have I lived in a community where people had to resort to crime to avoid hunger.


Too true.

But if one's mind is made up that Americans are greedy and unkind to the poor, one doesn't need facts.

If one's mind is made up that Americans are racists, facts don't matter.

If one believes that harsh interrogation is torture, facts don't matter.

If one believes all killing is equal, facts don't matter.

If one believes exclusive Universities and Fraternities are breeding grounds for misogyny and rape, don't look into the story.

It's as if a pattern is forming!!


----------



## Chouan

WouldaShoulda said:


> Such is the price for having the freedom to make poor choices.
> 
> Notice the story was about a grandmother.
> 
> Where do you think mom and dad are??


No idea. Eagle posted the story, so I responded to it.


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> Too true.
> 
> But if one's mind is made up that Americans are greedy and unkind to the poor, one doesn't need facts.
> 
> If one's mind is made up that Americans are racists, facts don't matter.
> 
> If one believes that harsh interrogation is torture, facts don't matter.
> 
> If one believes all killing is equal, facts don't matter.
> 
> If one believes exclusive Universities and Fraternities are breeding grounds for misogyny and rape, don't look into the story.
> 
> It's as if a pattern is forming!!


I see no pattern whatsoever to these statements. "Harsh interrogation?" Give me a friggin' break.


----------



## Chouan

32rollandrock said:


> I have lived in five states in the United States and not once have I lived in a community where people had to resort to crime to avoid hunger. There are food pantries. There are food banks. And soup kitchens. Tons and tons of perfectly edible food gets thrown away every day in this country. If there is one thing we have in abundance in America, it is food, and so those who steal food really, in my opinion, have no excuse. In this case, it sounds like the person made a bad decision and all turned out well in the end. But if that person had gone to a church or a food pantry or a grocery store or restaurant near closing time and explained their situation, I'm certain that they would have been given food. People just aren't that cold-hearted that they would deny food to a hungry person. Money, different matter.


I was simply responding to a story that eagle posted. I assumed it to be true.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

Chouan said:


> What a country. A wealthy country where children can go without food for two days and people are forced to steal to feed them!
> *"Are there no prisons?"
> "Plenty of prisons..."
> "And the Union workhouses." demanded Scrooge. "Are they still in operation?"*





Chouan said:


> I was simply responding to a story that eagle posted. I assumed it to be true.


The story is true.

Your mischaracterization is false.


----------



## 32rollandrock

Chouan said:


> I was simply responding to a story that eagle posted. I assumed it to be true.


It probably was true. People do steal food, for what reason I don't know. Perhaps they are too ashamed to ask for free food and would rather be thieves than what they consider to be beggars. Who knows? People do dumb stuff all the time.


----------



## Chouan

WouldaShoulda said:


> The story is true.
> 
> Your mischaracterization is false.


My mischaracterisation? That's what the story said! I merely commented on a country where a grandmother thought herself forced to steal because her grandchildren hadn't eaten in two days. Or are you now saying that the story isn't true? You can't have it both ways!


----------



## WouldaShoulda

Chouan said:


> My mischaracterisation? That's what the story said! I merely commented on a country where a grandmother thought herself forced to steal because her grandchildren hadn't eaten in two days. Or are you now saying that the story isn't true? You can't have it both ways!


It's a good thing we were here to set you straight!!


----------



## eagle2250

Chouan said:


> I was simply responding to a story that eagle posted. I assumed it to be true.


You assumed right. It was first reported on the Yahoo News Service and written by a Rachael Bertsche. Look it up if you like. The story about the California CHP officers handing out $100 bills to down on their luck motorists was reported on the CBS Evening News this past Friday evening. My point in sharing these was to point out that not all cops are the evil minions so many of you would like to characterize them as being. The vast majority are honorable, valiant and professional in the execution of their duties. How many of you members who seem so quick to dump on the cops have ever had to visit an emergency room for treatment after stepping in to aid a beleaguered citizen. Frankly, I have on several occasions, as has my son-in-law currently serving as a municipal police officer. Next time you find yourself in need of assistance, try calling on one of the local gang bangers or perhaps the corner drug dealer for assistance. I suspect you will be waiting awhile for that response!


----------



## 32rollandrock

Eagle, what you say is true. However, it should also be pointed out that cops are paid--and paid very well if they are part of a large department--to do what they do and assume the risks that they assume. Beyond great pay, there are great benefits, pension, job security and often generous amounts of overtime. You can retire after 20 years in with a full pension, then go get another job that has pension benefits and find yourself at age 60 or so with dual pensions collectively worth six figures, plus COLA, plus, depending on the department and CBA, lifetime health benefits for yourself and your spouse. Good cops are worth every penny of this. But there is a flip side, and bad cops are, unfortunately, all-too-often insulated from accountability by unions and other cops. And it doesn't take many bad cops to tarnish the image of the entire profession.

It can be nearly impossible to fire cops who need firing--an arbitrator hereabouts recently ruled that a cop who pleaded guilty to shoplifting after being acquitted of theft in a separate incident must be reinstated. That's crazy--such an officer is useless because he/she would effectively not be able to testify in criminal cases. But the union is nonetheless fighting for reinstatement. There are many, many other incidents of cops who need to be fired keeping their jobs. Cops who don't patrol and instead spend their shifts visiting girlfriends or sleeping in their cars. Cops who fib on the stand while under oath. Cops who keep getting in trouble every five years, knowing that, pursuant to CBA's, misconduct that occurred five years ago cannot be considered in determining discipline for instant cases of misconduct. I think that these cops are in the minority, but their misdeeds spread like oil slicks. Making matters worse are so-called bills of rights for police officers enshrined in statute in Illinois and several other states, thanks to police union lobbyists. These laws govern how investigations into suspected misconduct by police officers can be investigated. Among other things, these laws forbid use of harsh language during questioning, require that officers under investigation be given breaks during questioning (and I've seen transcripts of interviews in which officers are allowed to request breaks pretty much anytime they want, and usually when the questioning gets thorny--it's not a stretch to believe that these breaks are taken to allow cops to consult with union lawyers before answering), ban the use of polygraphs and a litany of other stuff, much of which doesn't apply when civilians fall under suspicion. It begs the question of a double standard: When civilians are suspected of criminal activity, the cops are allowed to do things during the course of investigations that are prohibited by statute when a cop is suspected of criminal activity. Here's a link to the law in Illinois:

https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=736&ChapterID=11

In my opinion, cops should be treated like everyone else when it comes to accusations of criminal activity, yet they are not. And it's the law in a lot of states. It is hard, I think, to blame activists who see this and call it a double standard.

While I can be critical of cops, I recognize how important and necessary they are. On the whole, they save lives, they keep communities safe and they make this world a better place than it would otherwise be. They are very often bona fide heroes. However, there also needs to be accountability. Look up the Burge case in Chicago, the cop who tortured innocent people into giving false confessions. Nothing has happened to him, and he continues collecting a pension at the expense of taxpayers who have paid millions to settle lawsuits filed by the wrongfully convicted. What bothers me is that cops so often protect their own no matter what. They very seldom turn in bad colleagues no matter what they do, and the result is an understandable erosion in public trust of the police. I don't know what it's like in other countries, but my gut tells me that there is not the same level of distrust in police abroad that there is here.

At some point, you have to look at what's happening now and acknowledge that police, by virtue of misconduct and misbehavior, shoulder part of the blame for these demonstrations. That doesn't mean that the protesters are 100-percent right. But it would be nice if the police would acknowledge that they have made mistakes and that there is room for improvement.

Again, I have the utmost respect for police. It is a job that I couldn't do myself, and I am grateful for police. At the same time, they are paid--and paid well--to do a job, and when they fall short, the public is entitled to be critical and demand accountability. That's how stuff gets changed for the better.



eagle2250 said:


> You assumed right. It was first reported on the Yahoo News Service and written by a Rachael Bertsche. Look it up if you like. The story about the California CHP officers handing out $100 bills to down on their luck motorists was reported on the CBS Evening News this past Friday evening. My point in sharing these was to point out that not all cops are the evil minions so many of you would like to characterize them as being. The vast majority are honorable, valiant and professional in the execution of their duties. How many of you members who seem so quick to dump on the cops have ever had to visit an emergency room for treatment after stepping in to aid a beleaguered citizen. Frankly, I have on several occasions, as has my son-in-law currently serving as a municipal police officer. Next time you find yourself in need of assistance, try calling on one of the local gang bangers or perhaps the corner drug dealer for assistance. I suspect you will be waiting awhile for that response!


----------



## 32rollandrock

There's been a fair amount published on how The System (for lack of a better word) was responsible for the flareups after the Brown shooting. Now this: 

If you accept the premise that a municipal court system straight from the Middle Ages unfairly, or at least disproportionately, targets poor people and minorities in the St. Louis area--and having lived there, I do--this is not good. After all that has happened, the powers that be still can't seem to understand that courts are not private fundraising operations for the government.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

32rollandrock said:


> ...the powers that be still can't seem to understand that courts are not private fundraising operations for the government.


Judicial reform I can get behind. I think anyone can.

That should be the emphasis.

But all we got was ginned up racial strife and class division brought to us by The Usual Suspects.


----------



## eagle2250

32rollandrock said:


> Eagle, what you say is true. However, it should also be pointed out that cops are paid--and paid very well if they are part of a large department--to do what they do and assume the risks that they assume. Beyond great pay, there are great benefits, pension, job security and often generous amounts of overtime. You can retire after 20 years in with a full pension, then go get another job that has pension benefits and find yourself at age 60 or so with dual pensions collectively worth six figures, plus COLA, plus, depending on the department and CBA, lifetime health benefits for yourself and your spouse. Good cops are worth every penny of this. But there is a flip side, and bad cops are, unfortunately, all-too-often insulated from accountability by unions and other cops. And it doesn't take many bad cops to tarnish the image of the entire profession.
> 
> It can be nearly impossible to fire cops who need firing--an arbitrator hereabouts recently ruled that a cop who pleaded guilty to shoplifting after being acquitted of theft in a separate incident must be reinstated. That's crazy--such an officer is useless because he/she would effectively not be able to testify in criminal cases. But the union is nonetheless fighting for reinstatement. There are many, many other incidents of cops who need to be fired keeping their jobs. Cops who don't patrol and instead spend their shifts visiting girlfriends or sleeping in their cars. Cops who fib on the stand while under oath. Cops who keep getting in trouble every five years, knowing that, pursuant to CBA's, misconduct that occurred five years ago cannot be considered in determining discipline for instant cases of misconduct. I think that these cops are in the minority, but their misdeeds spread like oil slicks. Making matters worse are so-called bills of rights for police officers enshrined in statute in Illinois and several other states, thanks to police union lobbyists. These laws govern how investigations into suspected misconduct by police officers can be investigated. Among other things, these laws forbid use of harsh language during questioning, require that officers under investigation be given breaks during questioning (and I've seen transcripts of interviews in which officers are allowed to request breaks pretty much anytime they want, and usually when the questioning gets thorny--it's not a stretch to believe that these breaks are taken to allow cops to consult with union lawyers before answering), ban the use of polygraphs and a litany of other stuff, much of which doesn't apply when civilians fall under suspicion. It begs the question of a double standard: When civilians are suspected of criminal activity, the cops are allowed to do things during the course of investigations that are prohibited by statute when a cop is suspected of criminal activity. Here's a link to the law in Illinois:
> 
> https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=736&ChapterID=11
> 
> In my opinion, cops should be treated like everyone else when it comes to accusations of criminal activity, yet they are not. And it's the law in a lot of states. It is hard, I think, to blame activists who see this and call it a double standard.
> 
> While I can be critical of cops, I recognize how important and necessary they are. On the whole, they save lives, they keep communities safe and they make this world a better place than it would otherwise be. They are very often bona fide heroes. However, there also needs to be accountability. Look up the Burge case in Chicago, the cop who tortured innocent people into giving false confessions. Nothing has happened to him, and he continues collecting a pension at the expense of taxpayers who have paid millions to settle lawsuits filed by the wrongfully convicted. What bothers me is that cops so often protect their own no matter what. They very seldom turn in bad colleagues no matter what they do, and the result is an understandable erosion in public trust of the police. I don't know what it's like in other countries, but my gut tells me that there is not the same level of distrust in police abroad that there is here.
> 
> At some point, you have to look at what's happening now and acknowledge that police, by virtue of misconduct and misbehavior, shoulder part of the blame for these demonstrations. That doesn't mean that the protesters are 100-percent right. But it would be nice if the police would acknowledge that they have made mistakes and that there is room for improvement.
> 
> Again, I have the utmost respect for police. It is a job that I couldn't do myself, and I am grateful for police. At the same time, they are paid--and paid well--to do a job, and when they fall short, the public is entitled to be critical and demand accountability. That's how stuff gets changed for the better.


A very thoughtful and well stated response, my friend. There is very little of what you said with which I disagree. However, you may have overstated the compensation levels for all but the largest municipalities and some State and Federal policing authorities. It has always amazed me that in spite of comparatively rigorous selection approaches, which include psychological testing, extensive background investigations, etc. a fair number of candidates unsuited for the profession make it to serve on the front lines of justice and when they do, 32rollandrock, you are right...bad things do happen and those issues must be addressed.


----------



## Bjorn

This recently popped up: https://rt.com/uk/214555-fake-posters-condemn-police/

Seems a problem in several parts of the world. Including, I would add, where I live. Though perhaps a little better here, largely corruption is very low.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## WouldaShoulda

Bjorn said:


> This recently popped up: https://rt.com/uk/214555-fake-posters-condemn-police/
> 
> Seems a problem in several parts of the world.


The International Brotherhood of The Usual Suspects is just warming up!!


----------



## 32rollandrock

eagle2250 said:


> A very thoughtful and well stated response, my friend. There is very little of what you said with which I disagree. However, you may have overstated the compensation levels for all but the largest municipalities and some State and Federal policing authorities. It has always amazed me that in spite of comparatively rigorous selection approaches, which include psychological testing, extensive background investigations, etc. a fair number of candidates unsuited for the profession make it to serve on the front lines of justice and when they do, 32rollandrock, you are right...bad things do happen and those issues must be addressed.


Amen, brother.


----------



## 32rollandrock

Progress, I suppose: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/19/...ule=Recommendation&src=rechp&WT.nav=RecEngine


----------



## 32rollandrock

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local...cle_ba858ff4-dbdc-595f-a4d0-05ed83d8a9c4.html

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local...cle_ba858ff4-dbdc-595f-a4d0-05ed83d8a9c4.html


----------



## WouldaShoulda

Strike Two;

U.S. Won't Charge Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson
https://www.wsj.com/articles/us-wont-charge-ferguson-officer-darren-wilson-1425490206

In an 86-page report on the shooting probe, prosecutors concluded "there is no evidence upon which prosecutors can rely to disprove [Mr.] Wilson's stated subjective belief that he feared for his safety."
Federal investigators concluded the claims by some witnesses that Mr. Brown was running away when he was shot were contradicted by forensic evidence and other witnesses. Claims by some witnesses that Mr. Brown had his hands up as if to surrender at the time Mr. Wilson shot him weren't reliable, prosecutors concluded.


----------



## SG_67

WouldaShoulda said:


> Strike Two;
> 
> *U.S. Won't Charge Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson*
> 
> https://www.wsj.com/articles/us-wont-charge-ferguson-officer-darren-wilson-1425490206
> 
> In an 86-page report on the shooting probe, prosecutors concluded "there is no evidence upon which prosecutors can rely to disprove [Mr.] Wilson's stated subjective belief that he feared for his safety."
> Federal investigators concluded the claims by some witnesses that Mr. Brown was running away when he was shot were contradicted by forensic evidence and other witnesses. Claims by some witnesses that Mr. Brown had his hands up as if to surrender at the time Mr. Wilson shot him weren't reliable, prosecutors concluded.


Well that settles it. Eric Holder is obviously a racist.


----------



## 32rollandrock

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/05/...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

I shouldn't do this, but, I told you so. Please see Post 62. Also, read the report. It's 105 pages, but worth the time. Really, read the whole thing. News stories that summarize its contents don't come close--a woman jailed for six days for illegal parking and still owes more than $500 on the fine after already having paid more than $500, sick racist jokes openly shared in emails within city government, the city's court system is part of the police department, and it goes on and on and on. It's like reading about apartheid: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/03/04/us/ferguson-police-department-report.html

Nothing in the report should surprise anyone who lives, or who has lived, in St. Louis, and Ferguson, one of more than 90 municipalities that ring the city, is not alone. It has been going on for years in these municipalities, and everyone with half a brain who lives there or who has lived there knows it. That it has been allowed to go on for as long as it has gone on is disgusting. Sure, Wilson might well have been justified in shooting Brown. But the encounter between these two did not occur in a vacuum, and if this tragedy results in true change, Brown's death might, just might, have a purpose.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

32rollandrock said:


> ... if this tragedy results in true change, Brown's death might, just might, have a purpose.


Elevating a dead thug to a champion for civil rights is a sickness.

Other than that, I support reform of out of control local governments.


----------



## justonemore

WouldaShoulda said:


> Elevating a dead thug to a champion for civil rights is a sickness.
> 
> Other than that, I support reform of out of control local governments.


Like Kyle perhaps?


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> Elevating a dead thug to a champion for civil rights is a sickness.
> 
> Other than that, I support reform of out of control local governments.


I did not elevate him. At all. Did you read the report? If not, you should. It explains very well the "why" part of what happened in Ferguson. In my opinion, anyone who puts forth an opinion about what happened in Ferguson, and some other places, without taking the time to read this report--and it really doesn't take that long--does not have an adequate footing on which to base an informed opinion. I don't much care for willy-nilly opinions, but I do value informed ones. This is not necessarily a criticism of you or anyone else. My concern is, people all-too-often go off saying stuff before educating themselves. Again, here's a link. It really doesn't take very long. In my opinion, it should be required reading for every high school student in this country--and everyone else should also read it. In the cold light of day, it is hard to imagine, in this day and age, that this stuff goes on right in front of everyone and that it has been accepted as "just the way it is" for as long as it has.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/03/04/us/ferguson-police-department-report.html


----------



## MaxBuck

Unfortunately, an incident like this one tends to bring out those on either side whose wish is to exonerate the participant they "support," rather than investigate the root causes of misbehavior by both sides.

The officer likely had better options for response that could have enhanced his own safety and the dead thug's chances of survival. The thug likely had better choices to make as well. Both the police and the African-American citizenry would be well-advised to look in the mirror in addition to pointing out difficulties caused by those on the other side of the fence.


----------



## Acct2000

MaxBuck, this is one of the most reasonable responses I've ever seen on this issue. 

Too many people are using this tragedy to try to score cheap political points ON BOTH SIDES!!


----------



## 32rollandrock

OTOH, I wasn't talking about Wilson or Brown. I was talking about the report that explains why civil unrest erupted. Really, it had nothing to do with the shooting. Anyone who read the report would understand that.


----------



## MaxBuck

32rollandrock said:


> OTOH, I wasn't talking about Wilson or Brown. I was talking about the report that explains why civil unrest erupted. Really, it had nothing to do with the shooting. Anyone who read the report would understand that.


Any report that claims the recent unrest "had nothing to do with the (Brown) shooting" immediately loses credibility, regardless of its authorship.


----------



## SG_67

^ Of course it had to do with the shooting!

The only reason it all of a sudden doesn't is because the original narrative of the shooting does not comport with the evidence. So instead, just change the topic and make it about "the big picture". 

When the facts don't fit with your argument, just change the argument.


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> ^ Of course it had to do with the shooting!
> 
> The only reason it all of a sudden doesn't is because the original narrative of the shooting does not comport with the evidence. So instead, just change the topic and make it about "the big picture".
> 
> When the facts don't fit with your argument, just change the argument.


Go back and read Post 62--I said much the same thing a long time ago.

Have you read the report? It is a yes or no question. If you have not, then, due respect, your opinion is not an informed one.


----------



## 32rollandrock

Also, I consistently said that we should wait for the facts, and when those came in, I recall saying that the shooting was justified.

But please, read the report. This situation is a lot more complicated, and troubling, than a cop shooting someone, regardless of whether it was justified.


----------



## SG_67

^ I wasn't arguing the point with you at all. 

I'm simply stating that the "hands up, don't shoot" narrative quickly lost it's credence and the hustlers who were pushing it have latched onto other things to justify their behavior. 

I don't doubt that the Ferguson PD has it's issues. I'll further admit that I'm blessed and lucky to live in a world where I don't have to deal with that sort of attitude on the part of the police, at least not toward me and the neighborhood I live in. 

But I don't buy either that the police actions, even bad actions, exist in a vacuum. I don't know the facts and if I'm wrong I'll shut up, but I'm willing to bet that Ferguson probably has a higher crime rate than average. Add to that a majority white police force in a majority AA city, and it has the potential for a lot of trouble.


----------



## MaxBuck

32rollandrock said:


> This situation is a lot more complicated, and troubling, than a cop shooting someone, regardless of whether it was justified.


I don't see how anyone reasonably could disagree with this.


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> ^ I wasn't arguing the point with you at all.
> 
> I'm simply stating that the "hands up, don't shoot" narrative quickly lost it's credence and the hustlers who were pushing it have latched onto other things to justify their behavior.
> 
> I don't doubt that the Ferguson PD has it's issues. I'll further admit that I'm blessed and lucky to live in a world where I don't have to deal with that sort of attitude on the part of the police, at least not toward me and the neighborhood I live in.
> 
> But I don't buy either that the police actions, even bad actions, exist in a vacuum. I don't know the facts and if I'm wrong I'll shut up, but I'm willing to bet that Ferguson probably has a higher crime rate than average. Add to that a majority white police force in a majority AA city, and it has the potential for a lot of trouble.


You're right--you don't know your facts. It goes beyond the police department, and it is a uniquely St. Louis situation. Is there racism involved? Almost by definition, yes, but it is not the sort on which race hustlers typically earn their livings. The end result is, black people are disproportionately affected, ergo the race angle.


----------



## SG_67

^ Might it just be possible, just possible, that the majority of violent crimes are committed by blacks? Often against blacks.


----------



## RogerP

The Ferguson PD doesn't have "issues". Read the report. It is an entity of institutionalized racism. It is rotten to the core.


----------



## Gurdon

*The majority of violent crimes in the US were not committed by blacks.*



SG_67 said:


> ^ Might it just be possible, just possible, that the majority of violent crimes are committed by blacks? Often against blacks.


 Actually the absolute number of whites killing whites appears to be greater than the absolute number of blacks killing blacks. According to this < https://www.blackyouthproject.com/2014/08/report-white-on-white-crime-rate-exceeds-that-of-black-on-black-crime/> more homicides of various kinds, including gang killings, were committed by whites against whites than by blacks against blacks. This should not be surprising given that there are more whites than blacks in the population.

I googled the rates of black on black and white on white homicide. The percentage of blacks killing blacks is a bit higher than the percentage of whites killing whites. There is some variability among the sources, but 93% to 94% of black homicide victims were killed by blacks and around 84% of white homicide victims were killed by whites.

The real gap is in the percentage of blacks committing crimes versus the percentage of whites committing crimes. I won't post examples, but there are lots if anyone is interested in looking them up. A far greater percentage of the black population is convicted of crimes and incarcerated than is the case in the white population.

This is where most of the discussion is centered, and where various interpretations are used to support the positions of whoever is trying to make a point. I do not have either the time or inclination to write a term paper about these topics. Nor do I think that anything I might say about my personal views would contribute to the present discussion.

Regards,
Gurdon


----------



## 32rollandrock

RogerP said:


> The Ferguson PD doesn't have "issues". Read the report. It is an entity of institutionalized racism. It is rotten to the core.


Bingo. Read the report. Then understand that the conditions described were known to everyone in St. Louis, even the state legislature that enabled it, for decades. It isn't just Ferguson, it could have happened in any one of the dozens of municipalities that surround Ferguson. Like Ferguson, they exist on the backs of black poor people who fund a power structure that is entirely white. The system is such that there can be no true black leadership, just race hustlers and penny ante local "where's mine" black politicians who profit from the system like parasites.

It was not about Michael Brown. At all. But, when you see a body lying in the street for more than five hours like so much garbage and you lived in a place like this, you'd be mad as hell, too.

One last thing. Someone said here that Ferguson probably has a lot of crime. Why would anyone say that without benefit of crime stats? A statement like that from someone who has never been to Ferguson or seen crime stats is troublesome for what should be obvious reasons.


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> ^ Might it just be possible, just possible, that the majority of violent crimes are committed by blacks? Often against blacks.


Evidence, please.

Also, keep in mind that the justice system is skewed in favor of whites and against blacks. No one can reasonably dispute this.


----------



## vpkozel

This case encompasses about 18 different issues all wrapped up in one, so trying to solve them all with one root cause is futile and dramatically simple minded.


----------



## Gurdon

32rollandrock said:


> Evidence, please.
> 
> Also, keep in mind that the justice system is skewed in favor of whites and against blacks. No one can reasonably dispute this.


The wording of the post to which you refer suggests that the writer believes it to be a foregone conclusion that "...the majority of crimes are committed by blacks."

That someone living in the US might hold this belief, however erronious, is not surprising in view of the biases in news reporting, the biases in much of the commentary, and the history of ideas about African American culture. (I am alluding in praticular to Moynihan's influential report.) And of course, that someone would believe that statement should not be surprising in light of the pervasive racial prejudice in our culture.

This is not to say that we have not made progress. During my lifetime (I turn 70 this year) I have observed positive changes in race relations and, of course, in laws and other efforts to ameliorate the effects of racism and discrimination. Behavior and speech that were formerly pervasive and public are now largely private and not common. But, at the same time, we are living with the results of Nixon's Southern strategy, and a succession of SCOTUS decisions which have the effect of turning the legal treatment of raciasm on it's head.

Regards,
Gurdon


----------



## 32rollandrock

Gurdon said:


> The wording of the post to which you refer suggests that the writer believes it to be a foregone conclusion that "...the majority of crimes are committed by blacks."
> 
> That someone living in the US might hold this, belief, however erronious, is not surprising in view of the biases in news reporting, the biases in much of the commentary, and the history of ideas about African American culture. (I am alluding in praticular to Moynihan's influential report.) And of course, that someone would believe that statement should not be surprising in light of the pervasive racial prejudice in our culture.
> 
> This is not to say that we have not made progress. During my lifetime (I turn 70 this year) I have observed positive changes in race relations and, of course, in laws and other efforts to ameliorate the effects of racism and discrimination. Behavior and speech that were formerly pervasive and public are now largely private and not common. But, at the same time, we are living with the results of Nixon's Southern strategy, and a succession of SCOTUS decisions which have the effect of turning the legal treatment of raciasm on it's head.
> 
> Regards,
> Gurdon


We have made progress, yes, but we have so much further to go. The reticence with which folks still cling to he-had-it-coming-case-closed in the Brown shooting is just one example. Look how long it has taken to begin addressing the sentencing disparities between rock and powdered cocaine, even after it became obvious that the sentencing grid was stupid and, if not racist in its intent, was racist in the end.


----------



## MaxBuck

It's wrong to assert that racism (often unintentional IMO, but not sure that matters) does not affect jurisprudence and police enforcement of the law in many, if not most, US cities. It does, and it's a shame that African-Americans are treated differently from white folks by police and the judiciary.

It's equally wrong for the African-American community to cite statistics on the prevalence of African-Americans in prison as _prima facie_ evidence of institutional racism without also acknowledging the problem of rampant lawlessness among the African-American community. And recognizing that much of the difference in their treatment results from the fact that many more African-Americans engage in crime (on a percentage basis) than do whites and Asian-Americans.

There's a bit of a chicken-and-egg issue at play here.


----------



## Acct2000

A lot of the disparate legal treatment has to do with a lack of funds in many minority families to get appropriate legal representation.

Another factor is that with drug laws, there are effectively bounties that encourage police to get as many easy victims (busts) as possibly. It is far easier for them to victimize poor people to keep their numbers up.

I worry a bit now that some of the top 1 percenters are seeing jails as a profitable business. There will be a lot of lobbying pressure to keep them full of mostly poor prisoners. Who cares about the effect on society and their lives?


----------



## 32rollandrock

MaxBuck said:


> It's wrong to assert that racism (often unintentional IMO, but not sure that matters) does not affect jurisprudence and police enforcement of the law in many, if not most, US cities. It does, and it's a shame that African-Americans are treated differently from white folks by police and the judiciary.
> 
> It's equally wrong for the African-American community to cite statistics on the prevalence of African-Americans in prison as _prima facie_ evidence of institutional racism without also acknowledging the problem of rampant lawlessness among the African-American community. And recognizing that much of the difference in their treatment results from the fact that many more African-Americans engage in crime (on a percentage basis) than do whites and Asian-Americans.
> 
> There's a bit of a chicken-and-egg issue at play here.


I get what you're saying but I'm not sure about "rampant lawlessness." Most black people, like most white people, are law-abiding citizens, I think.


----------



## 32rollandrock

FWIW, I was eating sushi last night in Chicago, not far from the Magnificent Mile, and became acutely aware that I was a minority. There were, maybe, 30 people in the restaurant, and most were people of color. No more than a half-dozen white males. And it wasn't, as I say, an ethnic neighborhood. Hadn't been as aware before, but then again, I don't get out much.


----------



## SG_67

You should come here more often. You'll find many surprises like that.

Contrary to what many may think, there are no more segregated lunch counters. A good restaurant will bring people from all over to dine, and believe me, the restaurant owners could care less as to the color of their patrons.

The people in Ferguson Mo. did themselves no favors in their reaction to the Michael Brown shooting. The original narrative has been discredited.

Is there a race problem in this country? In isolated areas perhaps. Is there a problem with crime in predominantly black neighborhoods? Absolutely.

Tune into the local Chicago news and see where the violent crimes are committed.

Here's something from the Trib:

https://crime.chicagotribune.com/chicago/homicides


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> You should come here more often. You'll find many surprises like that.
> 
> Contrary to what many may think, there are no more segregated lunch counters. A good restaurant will bring people from all over to dine, and believe me, the restaurant owners could care less as to the color of their patrons.
> 
> The people in Ferguson Mo. did themselves no favors in their reaction to the Michael Brown shooting. The original narrative has been discredited.
> 
> Is there a race problem in this country? In isolated areas perhaps. Is there a problem with crime in predominantly black neighborhoods? Absolutely.
> 
> Tune into the local Chicago news and see where the violent crimes are committed.
> 
> Here's something from the Trib:
> 
> https://crime.chicagotribune.com/chicago/homicides


Once again, have you read the report? It is a yes or no question. If you have not read the report, we are, for the most part, talking apples and oranges.

If you have not read the report, then you are, due respect, remaining willfully ignorant.

Yes or no: Have you read the report?


----------



## 32rollandrock

Also, Chicago crime stats have been pretty much discredited by Chicago magazine. I would provide a link but I am on my alleged smart phone, stuck at Union Station while Amtrak lies about departure times. This is an entirely different subject, subsidization of choo choo's, but please read the report while I make my way home as best I can. Amtrak--never, ever again.

But read the report. Don't remain ignorant when there is a better way.


----------



## SG_67

You're putting a lot of stock in "the report". 

Keep in mind that "the report" was rendered by a partisan DOJ.


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> You're putting a lot of stock in "the report".
> 
> Keep in mind that "the report" was rendered by a partisan DOJ.


How can you have an opinion about the report if you have not read it? Why won't you read it?

I base my opinion on more than just the report. I lived in St. Louis. The report comports with my own experiences and observations--I invite you to read Post 62, which I wrote in September.

It seems clear that, for whatever reason, you are not interested in the truth or reexamining assumptions. Until we, as a society, do this, nothing will get better.

If you won't read the report, will you at least say why?


----------



## 32rollandrock

A glimmer of hope:

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local...cle_7442c873-a1a1-581f-b4b4-20f93972d91e.html

If having state appellate courts take over municipal courts is the only way to starve these rinky-dink towns out of existence, then godspeed.


----------



## SG_67

32rollandrock said:


> How can you have an opinion about the report if you have not read it? Why won't you read it?
> 
> I base my opinion on more than just the report. I lived in St. Louis. The report comports with my own experiences and observations--I invite you to read Post 62, which I wrote in September.
> 
> It seems clear that, for whatever reason, you are not interested in the truth or reexamining assumptions. Until we, as a society, do this, nothing will get better.
> 
> If you won't read the report, will you at least say why?


I'm not trying to play coy...I haven't read the report. Frankly I don't care to read it.

My argument is that the AG himself came out and said that the actual events that took place resulting in the death of Michael Brown were inconsistent with the original reports. Meaning "hands up, don't shoot" really wasn't the case.

That's all. As for the rest, that's for the people of St. Louis to sort out. I don't live there so I'm not going to pretend to have insight on how race relations and community policing should be conducted.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

SG_67 said:


> I'm not trying to play coy...I haven't read the report. Frankly I don't care to read it.
> 
> My argument is that the AG himself came out and said that the actual events that took place resulting in the death of Michael Brown were inconsistent with the original reports. Meaning "hands up, don't shoot" really wasn't the case.


So you are interested in the truth and reexamining assumptions!!


----------



## SG_67

^ Funny thing isn't it!

Like I said previously, notice how the argument has all of a sudden changed. When the facts don't support the original argument, just change the argument.


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> ^ Funny thing isn't it!
> 
> Like I said previously, notice how the argument has all of a sudden changed. When the facts don't support the original argument, just change the argument.


What has changed is not the argument, but the media focus, which shifted with events. You criticize the media often enough to know that you should not blindly trust the media; rather, you should know enough, especially in a case like this, to find out for yourself what really happened and why. It is disappointing that you steadfastly refuse to do this but instead play the same tired hand: Hands up don't shoot was a farce. Well, we all know that. The issue is, how do we get beyond that and make things better? When the Missouri Supreme Court strips authority from a municipal court and puts a state appellate judge in charge of hearing traffic cases, it's a pretty big freaking deal. Some folks, at least, get it.

Contrary to your assertion, the argument has not, at all, changed. What is contained in the report has been said for a very, very long time by lots of people in the St. Louis area, long before Michael Brown was even born. Problem was, no one listened--no one, hardly, ever listens to poor black people until something happens and then the race hustlers, easily dismissed, descend and feed divisiveness and nothing gets addressed. You are falling right into that trap.

I'll say it again: The report should be required reading for every high school student in this country, and any adult who values justice, fair play and the truth should also read it. If you still refuse to read it, then it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that you are part of the problem--and I say that respectfully. Anyone with half a brain cell knows that the hands-up-don't-shoot stuff was exactly that, stuff, and that has been known for a very long time. What good does it do to continually point that out? By doing so, you are discarding legitimate points of view on the same trash heap with the race hustlers, and that's not fair.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

32rollandrock said:


> What has changed is not the argument, but the media focus, which shifted with events. You criticize the media often enough to know that you should not blindly trust the media; rather, you should know enough, especially in a case like this, to find out for yourself what really happened and why. It is disappointing that you steadfastly refuse to do this but instead play the same tired hand: Hands up don't shoot was a farce. Well, we all know that. The issue is, how do we get beyond that and make things better? When the Missouri Supreme Court strips authority from a municipal court and puts a state appellate judge in charge of hearing traffic cases, it's a pretty big freaking deal. Some folks, at least, get it.


What I get is this;

I didn't fail that community.

Bright young minds in media and proponents of social change ignored them.

The community failed itself.

If all those people missed it, how could I be at fault??

Stop blaming me/everyone but the players.


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> What I get is this;
> 
> I didn't fail that community.
> 
> Bright young minds in media and proponents of social change ignored them.
> 
> The community failed itself.
> 
> If all those people missed it, how could I be at fault??
> 
> Stop blaming me/everyone but the players.


Well, the people who held the power, who are overwhelmingly white, set up this system, not the poor black people who are burdened by it. Those people who held the power, still hold the power, go all the way up to the Missouri legislature, which has enabled the proliferation of towns such as Ferguson that otherwise could not exist. If you'd like, I can provide a description of how this occurred, but it would take up a pretty fair amount of space. I'll give one example. The legislature has taken baby steps, at best, to address the issue of towns funding themselves via municipal courts. After years of pressure, the legislature set a limit as to how much of a town's budget could come from traffic fines--I believe that the percentage now stands at 30 percent. Think about that. I don't know about where you live, but if the town where I lived got 30 percent of its general fund from traffic fines, there'd be a uprising. And when I lived in St. Louis, which wasn't that long ago, towns were continually caught trying to surpass that limit with no real consequences.

Now, you might say, "Well, why don't the black people vote the white people out and fix things?" It's a lot more complicated than that. For one thing, there is a political culture so steeped in nepotism and corruption and just plain inertia that it is nigh impossible for anyone from the inside, from the given community, to fix it. When and if black people get elected, they often engage in the same shenanigans as the white majority because it is difficult, if not impossible, to imagine anything other than what you've known all your life. I suspect that black people who run for office would be viewed with suspicion, and understandably so. The schools are also abysmal, which makes for an uneducated black population, and people who have no real education are easily led by folks who are only out for themselves.

Why is it your fault? Because you treat Ferguson as Ferguson--it's not my backyard, why should I care? Hands up don't shoot was false, so everything else is just a bunch of noise. Public opinion does matter in this country, particularly when it comes to race relations. If everyone dismisses this as someone else's problem, as you do, the problem, or problems (there is racism everywhere, after all) will never get fixed, and so you become part of the problem. Thankfully, not everyone feels as you do. Good people--not outside agitators as some might believe--traveled many miles to Ferguson to protest, and their numbers and voices helped make a difference, I think. Was hands up don't shoot a misnomer? Of course. But black lives matter is not. And those who saw fit to do something about it--their numbers and their persistence--have helped open the door for positive change.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

32rollandrock said:


> Why is it your fault? Because you treat Ferguson as Ferguson--it's not my backyard, why should I care? Hands up don't shoot was false, so everything else is just a bunch of noise. Public opinion does matter in this country, particularly when it comes to race relations. If everyone dismisses this as someone else's problem, as you do, the problem, or problems (there is racism everywhere, after all) will never get fixed, and so you become part of the problem. Thankfully, not everyone feels as you do. Good people--not outside agitators as some might believe--traveled many miles to Ferguson to protest, and their numbers and voices helped make a difference, I think. Was hands up don't shoot a misnomer? Of course. But black lives matter is not. And those who saw fit to do something about it--their numbers and their persistence--have helped open the door for positive change.


...after the kid wound up dead!!

Where were they before??

Look, if you want to relieve your angst, that's fine.

Just leave me out of it!!

To a great extent, all politics is local, and everyone is responsible for their own back yard.


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> ...after the kid wound up dead!!
> 
> *Where were they before??*
> 
> Look, if you want to relieve your angst, that's fine.
> 
> *Just leave me out of it!!
> *
> To a great extent, all politics is local, and everyone is responsible for their own back yard.


But they were there before. Activists had long complained about the undercurrents of racism that fed the flames in Ferguson. Among others, there was a group called Arch City Defenders that has existed for years. But no one who mattered would listen until events forced them to listen.

"Just leave me out of it." Please see my first point about no one listening before things reached a crisis point.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

32rollandrock said:


> Among others, there was a group called Arch City Defenders that has existed for years.


Ah, that's what I'm talking about!! Even if I may not agree with their methods, communities need dedicated, effective organizations to improve themselves where a father in the home and sobriety isn't enough.


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> Ah, that's what I'm talking about!! Even if I may not agree with their methods, communities need dedicated, effective organizations to improve themselves *where a father in the home and sobriety isn't enough*.


What do you mean by this?


----------



## WouldaShoulda

Oh, that the primary and secondary reasons for lack of social and economic mobility in 21st Century America is due to failures of family and sobriety. 

Everything else, including local corruption, education, the global economy and racism, though important on their own, are tertiary or further down the line.


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> Oh, that the primary and secondary reasons for lack of social and economic mobility in 21st Century America is due to failures of family and sobriety.
> 
> Everything else, including local corruption, education, the global economy and racism, though important on their own, are tertiary or further down the line.


So, what you're saying is Ferguson's issues are rooted in drunkenness and single-parent households?


----------



## Chouan

32rollandrock said:


> Well, the people who held the power, who are overwhelmingly white, set up this system, not the poor black people who are burdened by it. Those people who held the power, still hold the power, go all the way up to the Missouri legislature, which has enabled the proliferation of towns such as Ferguson that otherwise could not exist. If you'd like, I can provide a description of how this occurred, but it would take up a pretty fair amount of space. I'll give one example. The legislature has taken baby steps, at best, to address the issue of towns funding themselves via municipal courts. After years of pressure, the legislature set a limit as to how much of a town's budget could come from traffic fines--I believe that the percentage now stands at 30 percent. Think about that. I don't know about where you live, but if the town where I lived got 30 percent of its general fund from traffic fines, there'd be a uprising. And when I lived in St. Louis, which wasn't that long ago, towns were continually caught trying to surpass that limit with no real consequences.
> 
> Now, you might say, "Well, why don't the black people vote the white people out and fix things?" It's a lot more complicated than that. For one thing, there is a political culture so steeped in nepotism and corruption and just plain inertia that it is nigh impossible for anyone from the inside, from the given community, to fix it. When and if black people get elected, they often engage in the same shenanigans as the white majority because it is difficult, if not impossible, to imagine anything other than what you've known all your life. I suspect that black people who run for office would be viewed with suspicion, and understandably so. The schools are also abysmal, which makes for an uneducated black population, and people who have no real education are easily led by folks who are only out for themselves.
> 
> Why is it your fault? Because you treat Ferguson as Ferguson--it's not my backyard, why should I care? Hands up don't shoot was false, so everything else is just a bunch of noise. Public opinion does matter in this country, particularly when it comes to race relations. If everyone dismisses this as someone else's problem, as you do, the problem, or problems (there is racism everywhere, after all) will never get fixed, and so you become part of the problem. Thankfully, not everyone feels as you do. Good people--not outside agitators as some might believe--traveled many miles to Ferguson to protest, and their numbers and voices helped make a difference, I think. Was hands up don't shoot a misnomer? Of course. But black lives matter is not. And those who saw fit to do something about it--their numbers and their persistence--have helped open the door for positive change.


There are some excellent points here. However, you're arguing with the man who thinks that the ordinary people living in Gaza are to blame for their own predicament in being controlled by Hamas and being attacked by Israel.


----------



## Shaver

32rollandrock said:


> So, what you're saying is Ferguson's issues are rooted in drunkenness and single-parent households?


32 rnr am I reading you correctly? Do you believe that the problems faced by the black community in America are perhaps resultant of the KKK spirit living on in the heart of government?


----------



## 32rollandrock

Shaver said:


> 32 rnr am I reading you correctly? Do you believe that the problems faced by the black community in America are perhaps resultant of the KKK spirit living on in the heart of government?


In part, yes, (I've lived in St. Louis, as I've said, and there's no doubt that there are racists in government there, which the Ferguson report confirms) but only in part. It's not an "it's this" or an "it's that" thing. It's a lot of things. And personal responsibility is a big part of it, yes. But you don't, or at least should not, dismiss trying to fix a rigged system just because dysfunctional homes are a tough nut to crack. To some extent, it can be a chicken-or-egg thing, and everyone, not just folks who live in dysfunctional homes, suffers in places like Ferguson.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

32rollandrock said:


> So, what you're saying is Ferguson's issues are rooted in drunkenness and single-parent households?


Please read again;


> the primary and secondary reasons for lack of social and economic mobility in 21st Century America is due to failures of family and sobriety.


However, the primary reason for the out of control, corrupt, local government in Ferguson, is a lack of accountability or any sense of obligation the government has to it's citizens.

Where I live, lazy law enforcement uses cameras and parking tickets to generate revenue.


----------



## SG_67

WouldaShoulda said:


> Please read again;
> 
> However, the primary reason for the out of control, corrupt, local government in Ferguson, *is a lack of accountability or any sense of obligation the government has to it's citizens.
> *
> Where I live, lazy law enforcement uses cameras and parking tickets to generate revenue.


And a lack of accountability on the parts of the citizens to take ownership of their city government (or state or federal for that matter).

All municipalities, and I mean ALL, see traffic citations and other civil penalties as a source of revenue. There is nothing different about Ferguson, MO.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

SG_67 said:


> There is nothing different about Ferguson, MO.


It's a matter of degree.

We don't want to count ourselves among those that see equivalency in all corruption, all killing, or all wrongdoing!!


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> Please read again;
> 
> However, the primary reason for the out of control, corrupt, local government in Ferguson, is a lack of accountability or any sense of obligation the government has to it's citizens.
> 
> Where I live,* lazy law enforcement uses cameras and parking tickets to generate revenue*.


They do the same thing in Ferguson and environs. We have the woman who got a $150 ticket for illegal parking, didn't have the money to pay it, asked if she could make installment payments and was refused. She's spent six days in jail over the matter. They have started accepting installment payments from her. So far, she's paid more than $500 and owes an equal amount. Penalties and interest, I suppose.

Then there's Bel-Ridge, a town not far from Ferguson that had this doo-hickey that turned green lights red. It was supposed to be used in emergency situations so that ambulances and what-not could travel safely. You guessed it: They turned the green lights red before motorists had a chance to stop, then wrote them up for running red lights. This was in the late 1990s, before anyone heard of Michael Brown. When they finally got busted--a state traffic engineer went out and saw it for himself--they denied everything and refused to release municipal court records, claiming that court records are not public records.

This is St. Louis, my friend. You really have to see it and live it to believe it.


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> And a lack of accountability on the parts of the citizens to take ownership of their city government (or state or federal for that matter).
> 
> *All municipalities, and I mean ALL, see traffic citations and other civil penalties as a source of revenue.* There is nothing different about Ferguson, MO.


This is actually not true. In most places, the fines and what-not don't begin to cover the costs of issuing and processing tickets. Case in point: In the city where I live, most cops don't write even four traffic tickets per month. I'm not guessing, I know--I've seen the stats. And you cannot say that there is nothing different about Ferguson. You're the guy who won't read the report, so you have no basis on which to make that statement.


----------



## SG_67

Here's another report:

https://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Ferguson-Missouri.html

In almost all metrics, Ferguson is above the national average. Yet look at the numbers of police officers per 1000 residents. It's very close to the national average.

So much for an oppressive police presence as has been claimed by many.

So let's get to the root of the problem; crime in Ferguson MO. Is that the fault of the police? Does the report say anything about that?

How about the racial make up of the victims of these crimes?

Everyone is focusing on the police force, and while they may have their problems, Ferguson is still a place with a high crime rate. Oh and by the way, 2 police officers were shot last night for no other reason than that they were cops.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

^^^

...and yet "Country Club Hills" is more dangerous!!


----------



## 32rollandrock

Due respect, you have not read the report, and so you have no basis for making any judgments about the quality of policing in Ferguson. In addition, the crime stats that you cite are notoriously unreliable. Each department calculates things differently, and departments have been known to under-report incidents--that has happened in St. Louis, in Chicago and scores of other cities that got caught doing it due to a vigilant press and the size of the city. I would be surprised if anyone has ever truth-squaded crime stats in Ferguson and other similarly sized cities.

In short, you can reach no judgment whatsoever with crime stats alone. I would encourage you to quit trying to make points absent valid information. You should read the report.



SG_67 said:


> Here's another report:
> 
> https://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Ferguson-Missouri.html
> 
> In almost all metrics, Ferguson is above the national average. Yet look at the numbers of police officers per 1000 residents. It's very close to the national average.
> 
> So much for an oppressive police presence as has been claimed by many.
> 
> So let's get to the root of the problem; crime in Ferguson MO. Is that the fault of the police? Does the report say anything about that?
> 
> How about the racial make up of the victims of these crimes?
> 
> Everyone is focusing on the police force, and while they may have their problems, Ferguson is still a place with a high crime rate. Oh and by the way, 2 police officers were shot last night for no other reason than that they were cops.


----------



## 32rollandrock

WouldaShoulda said:


> ^^^
> 
> ...and yet "Country Club Hills" is more dangerous!!


Have you ever been to Country Club Hills? I have. The name is a misnomer at best. Just because I change my name to George Clooney does not mean that I am, in fact, George Clooney.


----------



## WouldaShoulda

HA!!

Yeah, I knew something about that had to be off!!


----------



## SG_67

32rollandrock said:


> Due respect, you have not read the report, and so you have no basis for making any judgments about the quality of policing in Ferguson. In addition, the crime stats that you cite are notoriously unreliable. Each department calculates things differently, and departments have been known to under-report incidents--that has happened in St. Louis, in Chicago and scores of other cities that got caught doing it due to a vigilant press and the size of the city. I would be surprised if anyone has ever truth-squaded crime stats in Ferguson and other similarly sized cities.
> 
> In short, you can reach no judgment whatsoever with crime stats alone. I would encourage you to quit trying to make points absent valid information. You should read the report.


There's only one way to find out. Go live in Ferguson for a while and see what happens.


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> There's only one way to find out. Go live in Ferguson for a while and see what happens.


Ah, but I have. This is a point that you repeatedly overlook: I lived in that area for five years. You have not. Thus, I think that I know a bit more than you do. Now, you will say "Well, you didn't live in Ferguson proper." Well and good, but I know enough about that area, having lived there, to know that there is no real distinction between Ferguson and Bel-Ridge and Black Jack and a host of other towns and cities squeezed together in the St. Louis metropolitan area like so many sardines that are, for all intents and purposes, the exact same thing. How do I know that? Because, among other things, I lived there.

Now, when you can intelligently discuss the differences between Kinloch and Florissant, between Wellston and University City, between Pine Lawn and Ladue--and there are actual differences between these communities that only someone who has lived there can know--get back to me. Until then, you would, for the zillionth time, do well to read the report so that you can put forth opinions based on fact as opposed to stuff you think you know.


----------



## vpkozel

Regardless of your stance on the underlying issue, the rhetoric really needs to be dialed back.

2 more cops shot is not a good thing....


----------



## 32rollandrock

vpkozel said:


> Regardless of your stance on the underlying issue, the rhetoric really needs to be dialed back.
> 
> 2 more cops shot is not a good thing....


Absolutely, 100 percent agree. No exaggeration, I felt sick when I heard that. Fortunately, they have both been discharged from the hospital. I'm struck by the lack of leadership that could calm the situation. It might be naive--in fact, I'm sure that it is naive--but if only there was an MLK who could travel to Ferguson and calm stuff down. But there isn't, and there might never be, given the times we live in. Al Sharpton, Obama, Jesse Jackson, the Clintons--I can't think of a single person in this country who has the moral authority to say, enough. Let's figure this out.

All of our prayers should be with those officers and all police officers who have justice in their hearts and act accordingly, which is the overwhelming number of police officers.


----------



## vpkozel

I absolutely agree. Most people have no idea how lucky we are to have had someone like Dr. King to help navigate that period of our country's history. It is not easy to remain a positive force for change when the easiest thing to do is be angry and lash out. It was a struggle even then between King and Malcolm X for the "soul" of the equality movement. And I fear that Malcolm X's approach is now winning.


----------



## 32rollandrock

vpkozel said:


> I absolutely agree. Most people have no idea how lucky we are to have had someone like Dr. King to help navigate that period of our country's history. It is not easy to remain a positive force for change when the easiest thing to do is be angry and lash out. It was a struggle even then between King and Malcolm X for the "soul" of the equality movement. And I fear that Malcolm X's approach is now winning.


I'm not so dismissive as Malcolm X as yourself, but I am young, relatively speaking. And I get your point.

Upon further reflection, the only person who comes to mind is Jon Stewart. He is disarming, no pun intended, enough. He is trusted enough. He is engaging enough. And he can be poignant. There is a reason why he has been listed as America's most trusted source of news on numerous occasions.

To have come this far--and the exoneration of Darren Wilson coupled with the Justice Department report is progress--and have it dissolve into senseless shootings of cops is the ultimate example of Lucy snatching the football away,


----------



## vpkozel

32rollandrock said:


> I'm not so dismissive as Malcolm X as yourself, but I am young, relatively speaking. And I get your point.
> 
> Upon further reflection, the only person who comes to mind is Jon Stewart. He is disarming, no pun intended, enough. He is trusted enough. He is engaging enough. And he can be poignant. There is a reason why he has been listed as America's most trusted source of news on numerous occasions.
> 
> To have come this far--and the exoneration of Darren Wilson coupled with the Justice Department report is progress--and have it dissolve into senseless shootings of cops is the ultimate example of Lucy snatching the football away,


I don't mean to come off as dismissive of Malcolm X, I just think that the examples of Ghandi, King, Mandela, et. al. are better ones to emulate and lead to faster progress - even though they are much harder to execute.


----------



## Shaver

vpkozel said:


> I don't mean to come off as dismissive of Malcolm X, I just think that the examples of Ghandi, King, Mandela, et. al. are better ones to emulate and lead to faster progress - even though they are much harder to execute.


Ghandi - racist, sexist.

King - plagiarist, adulterer.

Mandela - terrorist, morally 'ambiguous'.

These men are far from heroes.


----------



## SG_67

^ Mandela was also a Marxist.


----------



## 32rollandrock

SG_67 said:


> ^ Mandela was also a Marxist.


What do you have against Marxists?


----------



## SG_67

32rollandrock said:


> What do you have against Marxists?


Nothing at all. As long as they pay their bills on time and have good insurance I'm fine.

I'll treat Ming the Merciless if he has good insurance.


----------



## vpkozel

Shaver said:


> Ghandi - racist, sexist.
> 
> King - plagiarist, adulterer.
> 
> Mandela - terrorist, morally 'ambiguous'.
> 
> These men are far from heroes.


I don't expect my heroes to be perfect. Well, except for the one guy a few thousand years ago.... Oh, and Robert E. Lee, of course....


----------



## Shaver

vpkozel said:


> I don't expect my heroes to be perfect. Well, except for the one guy a few thousand years ago.... Oh, and *Robert E. Lee*, of course....


 Judas Iscariot and the car out of Dukes of Hazzard?


----------



## vpkozel

Shaver said:


> Judas Iscariot and the car out of Dukes of Hazzard?


Judas is an extremely interesting character to me. I actually have some belief in the theory that Jesus trusted him enough to have him be the one to set the crucifixion in motion and that Judas was willing to surrender his name and place in history to do so.

And that was the General Lee, not the Robert E. Lee.


----------



## Shaver

vpkozel said:


> Judas is an extremely interesting character to me. I actually have some belief in the theory that Jesus trusted him enough to have him be the one to set the crucifixion in motion and that Judas was willing to surrender his name and place in history to do so.
> 
> And that was the General Lee, not the Robert E. Lee.


And to me. The portrayal oF JI in Scorsese's remarkable 'Last Tempatation of Christ' is thought-provoking. Indeed that movie generally is one of the most intelligent cinematic explorations of the Christ myth. I was somewhat amazed that it attracted so much bile. Conversely that ghastly gorenography pushed out by Gibson tickled the Christians pink. Baffling.

BTW I was just pulling your leg about the General Lee. Dukes of Hazzard is a programme I am rather fond of. "Fightin' the system like true modern day Robin Hoods. Yeeeehah!"


----------



## SG_67

Judas was definitely portrayed as a sympathetic character in the Scorsese film. 

I've always been of the opinion that Jesus's fate was preordained. Therefore, Judas played his role as did Pontius Pilate, and everyone else involved. I don't see him necessarily as a villain.


----------



## vpkozel

Shaver said:


> And to me. The portrayal oF JI in Scorsese's remarkable 'Last Tempatation of Christ' is thought-provoking. Indeed that movie generally is one of the most intelligent cinematic explorations of the Christ myth. I was somewhat amazed that it attracted so much bile. Conversely that ghastly gorenography pushed out by Gibson tickled the Christians pink. Baffling.


I have never actually seen either one of those flicks. It is quite amazing how far Mel fell though. He has made so many great movies.



> BTW I was just pulling your leg about the General Lee. Dukes of Hazzard is a programme I am rather fond of. "Fightin' the system like true modern day Robin Hoods. Yeeeehah!"


Oh, I know. I know of very few Brits who didn't like the show - even if they did so as a guilty pleasure never to be spoken about, lol.


----------



## Chouan

SG_67 said:


> Judas was definitely portrayed as a sympathetic character in the Scorsese film.
> 
> I've always been of the opinion that Jesus's fate was preordained. Therefore, Judas played his role as did Pontius Pilate, and everyone else involved. I don't see him necessarily as a villain.


Borges has an interesting suggestion that it was actually Judas who was the Son of God, rather than Jesus.
https://southerncrossreview.org/49/borges-judas-eng.htm


----------



## MaxBuck

WouldaShoulda said:


> Oh, that the primary and secondary reasons for lack of social and economic mobility in 21st Century America is due to failures of family and sobriety.
> 
> Everything else, including local corruption, education, the global economy and racism, though important on their own, are tertiary or further down the line.


You've never said anything here with which I've agreed more.

The disintegration of the family, and especially the dominance of the single-parent, female-led household, has wreaked havoc on the African-American community.


----------

