T Nation

The Push to 2020 Has Begun!

And we can’t even ask why someone resists men armed with guns. We have to accept that violent criminals like Jacob Blake are low IQ scum who should be allowed to set into motion the events that end their lives. The cops do not get any benefit of the doubt.

You live in fantasy land. The cops are called to deal with someone they know is a criminal. He fights them. He doesn’t respond to tasers or guns pointed at him. He goes to a vehicle with children in it. Let’s stop there. Cops are human beings. They are not supermen. They want to live. They don’t want a criminal to kill them or or anyone else. What should these HUMAN beings do? Wait until it’s too late? Give a violent criminal who is acting irrationally a chance? You want to place on cops a standard they can’t meet, because they are humans, while not putting a standard on black men that they should meet (especially since it’s their lives at stake).

And there is zero proof that any of these killings were racially motivated. Hence, a reason why I brought up behaviors that create the potential for a shooting. If police kill black men because they are black, then why do they kill white men?

So we’ve established that the narrative of cops hunting down black men is false.

We’ve established that the narrative of cops killing black men because they are black is false.

We’ve established that responding to the police with violence increases the odds you will get hurt or killed.

So who really has the problem? The cops or the criminals? And if the cops do have a problem it’s with dealing with violent criminals, not how they deal with black people.

I don’t know about anyone else, but when I see Jacob Blake or Rayshard Brooks, I don’t see “men” who represent their race but criminals. Then again, I’m not a racist.

3 Likes

You need to get woke. It’s racist to see anything but race.

None? Not even qualified immunity?

One thing is clear - the more you write, you demonstrate how little you know. Later.

You do know, that really isn’t an argument but a way out of debating the facts.

What do these two white supremacists think?

Police have an entire legal doctrine making them all but immune in civil suits for their excessive and harmful behavior, but you think cops never get the benefit of the doubt.

Hilarious. No interest in amateur hour.

I was talking about how YOU judge things. I know, the cops should just people in the leg, right? But only if they are black. It’s ok to kill white people.

Your entire narrative is objectively wrong.

No you weren’t - you’re just yammering without knowing what you’re talking about (yet again). Cops get a tremendous benefit of the doubt, and that’s one of the goals of police reform - to reduce those shields from liability so victims of excessive force can seek redress, and incentivize cops to use more restraint.

Qualified immunity essentially serves as a blank check to use force. Feel free to read up.

And, take the hint - I’m not interested in what you have to say on this stuff.

Do you think the Jacob Blake shooting was justified? Or the one with the guy who had passed out in the drive through, took the taser and fired it at the officer?

I’m no expert, but I’m not an amateur on this particular subject. Care to engage?

I’m read up on this subject. You are wrong. We do not live in a society where anyone has a blank check to use force, unless you happen to be a rioter living in a heavily Democratic jurisdiction in the last few months. That’s a strange exception, hopefully relegated to 2020.

Can you explain which case or pattern of cases has led you to arrive at your previously stated belief that system racism is a root cause of bad outcomes? I’m particularly interested in your critiques of specific instances of police use of force and how that fits into the broader pattern of systemic racism.

2 Likes

Of course not because you want to come off as a know-it-all.

But let’s talk about knowing. I was trained as an LEO, not you. You don’t know what it’s like to be issued a deadly weapon and put on the streets.

I lived in the ghetto. My life was in danger several times and it wasn’t the cops but people who happened to be black. And who saved me one of those times? A cop who happened to be walking by. I worked with kids in several ghettos so I witnessed first hand the behaviors that lead to someone getting shot by the police. I worked with kids who were in jail and saw first hand their I don’t give a F attitude.

YOU, are just a useful idiot white man who bases his beliefs on what Don Lemon says is true.

I asked you to provide ONE example of a black man being hunted down by the cops. You provided none.

I’ll ask you now to provide one example of a police officer shooting a black man because he is black. Will you? I doubt it.

I’ll ask you to explain why white men are shot by the police since it can’t be race.

I’ll ask you to explain why those same reasons don’t apply when the person shot is black.

I’ll ask you to explain why, if cops shoot both white and black men who are unarmed, it’s only about race in the case of black men.

I’ll ask you to explain why a study conducted by a black professor at Harvard showed that white cops are quicker to shoot white suspects than black suspects. A finding that surprised the professor.

YOU have put forth the BLM narrative when it comes to police and race yet, when questioned about it you avoid any attempt at proving it’s true.

3 Likes

He’s the kind of person who thinks cops should use their highly tuned Kung Fu skills or shoot weapons out of suspects’ hands. He also believe that law abiding people, including the police, should give criminals a fair fight.

1 Like

Are you asking someone that has never taken a position on anything?

Happy reading.

Oh no, far from it, I just don’t like to waste that kind of time.

Well you got me. I can’t really compete with dodging questions and linking other people’s thoughts with brief one-liners.

Good night.

2 Likes

Yes.Or.No
Just answer the question.

Haha

What does that have to do with police hunting down black men?

Is your answer that police shoot black men because of immunity? That makes sense to you?

Then why do they shoot white men?

I don’t expect an answer from you. Which tells us your answer.

From the top, I posted this recently:

This notes that AAs are shot at a rate of 31 per 10 million, while whites are shot at a rate of 13 per. Disproportionate, given that AAs only make up 12-13% of population. Even when you remove shootings against armed people (which is the most likely scenario when cops are justifiably using force to defend themselves), the rates are about the same (30 and 10, respectively).

Dispositive of racism? No. But look at all the other data that show disproportionate results in wealth, education, health care, even marijuana arrests and punishment - something is clearly up for AAs generally, and that general trend tracks exactly in the data showing cops shooting citizens.

In other words, if the data showed proportionality in other areas, I’d be more inclined to think the shooting disproportionality would be explained by reasons other than racism/discrimination and be more of a one off anomaly. But that’s not the case.

And as I also said (above), I think other factors are playing a role. But setting aside biases either way, I don’t see a way around looking at all these data points in their totality and not being alarmed systemic racism is a real possibility.

As for excessive force (which is far broader than shooting), almost 90% of AAs believe cops are more likely to use force against them. That belief comes from somewhere, and no, it’s not the predictable boogeyman of the “librul media!”. I think with that kind of overwhelming belief, along with all the data across all the subject matters affecting them (crime, health care, economy, effevt of pandemic, etc.), it’s high time we listen to what they are saying.

That’s my view. None of this is to say I believe all LEOs are bad or complicit - the vast majority are hardworking and fair public servants doing a very tough and dangerous job - but some are, and we need to make our rules not protect the bad ones (modifying QI is a place to start, but that’s not all). Cops deserve the right to protect themselves, and in a close call, we need to err on the side of the cop’s judgment. But cops have a unique place in our society - they are the government, and they operate with a monopoly of force. That’s fine and necessary, but We the People have a right to make sure that monopoly on force is carefully guarded and monitored in the name of protecting our civil liberties. And, yes, unpopular as it is on the Right these days, protecting the civil liberties of those that don’t look like you or think like you.

All hail liberty, lest she be drowned in the name of the new authoritarianism.

Savvy?

1 Like