The lights are out on 2 Officers, state of the nation.

muttly · May 17, 2015

Turtle said:
Yeah, mainly because it's an incident universally condemned by everyone and you really don't have a choice, but your comments also included the possibility that there was an encounter that we didn't see on the dash cam or the phone video that could explain the officer's actions, and tried to soften it by saying it's possible that it occurred because of the stress that may have been brought on of being in an altercation of which there is no evidence.
.

I included the possibility of an encounter because there may have been one. The taser is seen falling to the ground in the video. You can't say definitely that there wasn't an encounter with the taser. I also said it was a moot point, as in, it doesn't matter that there was an altercation, because he was running away and it wasn't justified to shoot him. I also described it as a terrible decision. I mentioned the stress of a possible altercation mostly to explain(not justify) that when someone is involved in one, they will sometimes react irrationally.
Then there are people who think he shot him because he is black.

muttly · May 17, 2015

Turtle said:
That's not true at all, I merely refuse to ignore the reality and will acknowledge the facts, instead of trying every way I can to alter or mitigate those facts.

Yeah , me too .

Turtle · May 17, 2015

muttly said:
I included the possibility of an encounter because there may have been one.

There is no evidence, or even a hint, that an off-camera encounter took place, not even in the police officer's fictional report. The only reason to bring up such a possibility is to place the officer in a better light, to offer up some pipe dream of an excuse as to why the officer felt threatened. There is no other reason. Otherwise, you could bring up any number of other possibilities, like they were really lovers and were making out off-camera and the officer discovered his lover had been cheating on him and he ran him down and shot him in a rage of passion.

The taser is seen falling to the ground in the video.

The taster is seen being thrown to the ground.

You can't say definitely that there wasn't an encounter with the taser.

Considering the officer admitted that the suspect didn't go for his taser, I think you can.

I also said it was a moot point, as in, it doesn't matter that there was an altercation, because he was running away and it wasn't justified to shoot him.

Exactly. And there's no reason bring bring up a moot point, other than to cast the officer in a better light.

I also described it as a terrible decision. I mentioned the stress of a possible altercation mostly to explain(not justify) that when someone is involved in one, they will sometimes react irrationally.

Mentioning stress is a mitigating factor which engenders empathy, making the cop as much of a victim. It allows for people to understand the dilemma the officer was in and therefore solicits forgiveness. It absolutely places the officer in a better light.

Then there are people who think he shot him because he is black.

It's certainly a possibility, one that you refuse to entertain. Instead, it's an isolated incident, just a bad decision, it's over and done with, doesn't have anything to do with systemic racism within law enforcement. Got it.

Turtle · May 17, 2015

muttly said:
Yeah , me too .

You're on a roll. You should book a weekend at the Comedy Club. Everything you post about this subject looks for the best possible interpretation of the statistics to show that the police are not racist or do not engage in selective policing, because you don't believe a racial disparity in policing or sentencing exists. Even the statistics of Ferguson you parroted above fail to mention the fact that the DOJ looked at the Zip Codes of those ticketed and weighted them for population density, and showed that the majority of vehicles drivers in Ferguson was dramatically lower than the black population. In other words, despite the black population percentage, not very many of them have cars. But blacks were ticketed at an alarming rate compared to white drivers. But according you you, that's only because the white folks in Ferguson are all old and don't commit crimes. Whites absolutely jaywalk, but they weren't ticketed for it. Over a 2 year period Ferguson had more jaywalking tickets than the entire rest of Missouri did, and the ones issued in Ferguson were almost exclusively to black people. That's hard to do by accident. Something's up. And by your own admission, black folks don't have the money, the white folks do, so it ain't just about revenue. There's something else at work. And those racist emails that don't prove anything? They didn't come from street cops, they came from police commanders and officials high in the court system, the very people who influence attitudes and how policing is done and how sentencing is administered. They came from the very people who are in control of the system, hence the word, systemic.

But to you, none of that matters, there's something to explain it all away so that it's not nearly as bad as it looks.

muttly · May 17, 2015

Turtle said:
There is no evidence, or even a hint, that an off-camera encounter took place, not even in the police officer's fictional report. The only reason to bring up such a possibility is to place the officer in a better light, to offer up some pipe dream of an excuse as to why the officer felt threatened. There is no other reason. Otherwise, you could bring up any number of other possibilities, like they were really lovers and were making out off-camera and the officer discovered his lover had been cheating on him and he ran him down and shot him in a rage of passion.

The taster is seen being thrown to the ground.

Considering the officer admitted that the suspect didn't go for his taser, I think you can.

Exactly. And there's no reason bring bring up a moot point, other than to cast the officer in a better light.

I'm just going by what an eyewitness said, as follows: ( emphasis mine)
From link excerpt:
eyewitness to the shooting, Feidin Santana, recorded video of the incident on his phone.[25] The video was subsequently shared with Scott's family through an activist of Black Lives Matter, and later with the news media.[25][26] Santana said that after a STRUGGLE in which Slager deployed his Taser, Scott was "just trying to get away from the Taser", and that before he started recording he observed that Slager "had control of the situation".[27]In an interview with Matt Lauer on The Today Show, Santana said Scott "never grabbed the Taser of the police. He never got the Taser."[28]

I mean, seriously dude.
I brought it up because it was part of the allegation, of a possible altercation. ( struggle)
I offered no such excuse. I merely brought up the 'MOOT POINT' because it was mentioned by an eyewitness.

I didn't hear that the officer said he wasn't going for the taser. I thought Slager's claim was that he DID go for his taser.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Walter_Scott

muttly · May 17, 2015

Turtle said:
It's certainly a possibility, one that you refuse to entertain. Instead, it's an isolated incident, just a bad decision, it's over and done with, doesn't have anything to do with systemic racism within law enforcement. Got it.

It's possible if there were evidence of Officer Slager being a racist. So yes, it would be a possibility . Yet you are entertaining the possibility with what evidence that he is? And if you did have evidence of him being a racist, how does this relate to an officer in some other random city?
Sounds like someone is taking random incidents found by scouring the internet about police, and painting with a broad brush.

Turtle · May 17, 2015

muttly said:
It's possible if there were evidence of Officer Slager being a racist. So yes, it would be a possibility . Yet you are entertaining the possibility with what evidence that he is? And if you did have evidence of him being a racist, how does this relate to an officer in some other random city?

I have no idea if that particular cop is racist, but he did shoot an unarmed black man in the back and then lied about what happened, he was officially reprimanded twice for unprofessional conduct during traffic stops, and is currently being sued along with the city for civil rights violations after he tased a black man during a traffic stop after he had the man down on the pavement and in handcuffs, lied about it, said his dash cam was malfunctioning, but the recovered dash cam video shows plain as day what happened. The other two officers with him at the time gave the same story in their report as he did. He was back on the job as if nothing happened, even after the video was recovered, and the other two officers were not reprimanded, much less fired, for filing false reports, which indicates a particular mindset that supports and promotes that type of action and that type of lying.

As for how it relates to an officer in some random city, that question has already been answered by the large number of reports from all over the country of biased policing and the judicial process, of too many reports from too many cities and towns of the same type of behavior, where the police not only act as if they are above the law, but are the law, of the manner in which officers are trained, the militarization of the police and the mindset that follows, of the police getting caught lying about abuse, of too many police departments in the wake of rioting having to address the problem by dramatically change their training procedures and the procedures in how they interact with the public,

Sounds like someone is taking random incidents found by scouring the internet about police, and painting with a broad brush.

I suppose to you it does. It doesn't take much scouring. All you have to do is go to YouTube and do a quick search and you find a really uncomfortable number of results. But, of course, they're all isolated incidents (albeit a snotload of them), with almost all of them being able to be explained away as some kind of misunderstanding, or something.

muttly · May 17, 2015

Turtle said:
You're on a roll. You should book a weekend at the Comedy Club. Everything you post about this subject looks for the best possible interpretation of the statistics to show that the police are not racist or do not engage in selective policing, because you don't believe a racial disparity in policing or sentencing exists. Even the statistics of Ferguson you parroted above fail to mention the fact that the DOJ looked at the Zip Codes of those ticketed and weighted them for population density, and showed that the majority of vehicles drivers in Ferguson was dramatically lower than the black population. In other words, despite the black population percentage, not very many of them have cars. But blacks were ticketed at an alarming rate compared to white drivers. But according you you, that's only because the white folks in Ferguson are all old and don't commit crimes. Whites absolutely jaywalk, but they weren't ticketed for it. Over a 2 year period Ferguson had more jaywalking tickets than the entire rest of Missouri did, and the ones issued in Ferguson were almost exclusively to black people. That's hard to do by accident. Something's up. And by your own admission, black folks don't have the money, the white folks do, so it ain't just about revenue. There's something else at work. And those racist emails that don't prove anything? They didn't come from street cops, they came from police commanders and officials high in the court system, the very people who influence attitudes and how policing is done and how sentencing is administered. They came from the very people who are in control of the system, hence the word, systemic.

But to you, none of that matters, there's something to explain it all away so that it's not nearly as bad as it looks.

Again, the types of crimes that Ferguson PD ticketed weren't conducive to many violations that older whites, in particularly would commit. Consider the white population in Ferguson being roughly around 26%, ( given the current demographic trends from a census taken 5 years ago) there just isn't many white jaywalkers in the streets of Ferguson. You can say that there are, but it wouldn't be accurate. Since many blacks didn't have cars, naturally many more of them than whites would be walking foo, and often in the roadway. Older whites would tend to drive in cars or be driven by someone else. When older whites do drive, they largely do not excessively drive over the speed limit. Many of them, frankly, would struggle to even obtain the actual speed limit, given their driving habits. So no, there wouldn't be much jaywalking or speeding tickets by whites in Ferguson.
Btw, citizens stopped for speeding,it is a largely non discretionary violation. Meaning, the race of the driver isn't immediately known before the police action of pulling over a vehicle. Police use methods such as radar, or what is called as pacing, where an officer follows a suspected speeder(mostly determined by a vehicle observation going at a higher rate of speed.) and drives to the speed where the officer cannot close the gap behind the speeder. The officer observes the speed he is going and it would translate to the speed of the suspected speeder.
The officer often doesn't know the race of the violator. (See New Jersey turnpike study article below.)
Regarding drug offenses and loitering, older whites wouldn't be committing the vast majority of these crimes. They wouldn't normally be found hanging out for long periods in parking lots of establishments smoking and dealing dope . The most older whites would be doing, is maybe spending too long inside a McDonalds' dining area drinking their senior discount coffee .

Getting back to the jaywalking for a second, yes they were ticketed excessively. It is documented in the DOJ report that the city needed more revenue, and the remedy would be to enforce the laws more aggressively, such as jaywalking.
Now you are saying racist officers were doing it punitively because they were black?
A handful of stereotypical emails over the course of a few years, from a department of over 70 is the smoking gun that the whole system is racist? Not really.

It just came down to in Ferguson, that law breaking done by the smaller, older white population didn't make a dent in the budget gap..
There is just so much chipping house paint or high lawn grass violations that they could write.

http://www.city-journal.org/html/12_2_the_racial_profiling.html

Turtle · May 17, 2015

Trying really, really hard at explaining things away to put the police in the best light, to somehow prove no racial bias. It's hilarious that you can't see what you're doing when you do it.

Unclebob · May 17, 2015

I was skeptical at first. But now I have to agree with the mutt. Whites are definitely much more law-abiding than blacks are. You can't argue with the mutt's facts. No, really, it doesn't do any good. He's right because he said so.

We've tried letting blacks go free range and that hasn't worked. Maybe we need to do like we did with the Indians and put them on reservations. You know, out of sight, out of mind.

muttly · May 17, 2015

]

Turtle said:
I have no idea if that particular cop is racist, but he did shoot an unarmed black man in the back and then lied about what happened, he was officially reprimanded twice for unprofessional conduct during traffic stops, and is currently being sued along with the city for civil rights violations after he tased a black man during a traffic stop after he had the man down on the pavement and in handcuffs, lied about it, said his dash cam was malfunctioning, but the recovered dash cam video shows plain as day what happened. The other two officers with him at the time gave the same story in their report as he did. He was back on the job as if nothing happened, even after the video was recovered, and the other two officers were not reprimanded, much less fired, for filing false reports, which indicates a particular mindset that supports and promotes that type of action and that type of lying.

As for how it relates to an officer in some random city, that question has already been answered by the large number of reports from all over the country of biased policing and the judicial process, of too many reports from too many cities and towns of the same type of behavior, where the police not only act as if they are above the law, but are the law, of the manner in which officers are trained, the militarization of the police and the mindset that follows, of the police getting caught lying about abuse, of too many police departments in the wake of rioting having to address the problem by dramatically change their training procedures and the procedures in how they interact with the public,

I suppose to you it does. It doesn't take much scouring. All you have to do is go to YouTube and do a quick search and you find a really uncomfortable number of results. But, of course, they're all isolated incidents (albeit a snotload of them), with almost all of them being able to be explained away as some kind of misunderstanding, or something.

It sounds like from what you wrote, you are buying into the false narrative of officers, particularly white officers, who are targeting and killing blacks based on their race . And the examples of what you find on the internet and elsewhere, is always an officer who happens to be white and the victim who happens to be black. Discounting the fact that blacks disproportionately commit violent crimes with their population, and also the statistic which puts serious holes in the narrative-- Of the 12,000,000 arrests, the total amount of individuals killed is roughly around 0.00003%.
I guess some would buy into the narrative considering what they see advanced in the media and with the war on cop campaign. Many in the media,( especially the national news media) are mostly interested in the narrative of police(particularly white officers) incidents involving black individuals. It's a big money maker for them. It sells. Riots are a big money maker for them as well.
Black on black crime doesn't make much noise on the national news.
When the three remaining officers identities in Baltimore were released, a collective amount of air went out of the sail of race instigators and news media organizations, who could no longer reap large ratings dollars from their coverage:

Black on black incidents are not reported on with as much fervor. Neither is black on white crimes. It doesn't generate as much outrage in the public. It hardly cause a blip on the national news.
Take the case of Terrence Kellum. A local story in the Detroit,Mi.
The Detroit P.D. along with coordination of ICE, attempted to arrest Kellum in his home. According to the police dept, Kellum attempted to attack the agent with a hammer. The agent fired multiple times (some reports approx. 10 times) and killed him.
Kellum's father, who was present at the time, disputes he had a hammer and didn't threaten the agent. The attorney of the family also said that one of the bullets entered from the back of Kellum.
Autopsy results have yet to be released. Law enforcement have their version and the family of Kellum disputes it. Protests have also been organized, albeit not as large as seen in other in incidents.Three weeks into the investigation, and still no charges or conclusion . The person who was killed(Kellum ) happens to be black.
Sound familiar? But yet the national news media isn't much interested in the story. A scant few national online news stories on this, but generally a big yawn from them. It's lacking one significant detail to make this story skyrocket to the news division of CNN and other national news networks, and also on Turtle's radar:
The ICE agent, who did the shooting, is not white . He happens to be black.

This article doesn't even mention the race of the ICE agent:
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/ne...attorney-kellom-shot-back-ice-agent/27372203/

muttly · May 17, 2015

Unclebob said:
We've tried letting blacks go free range and that hasn't worked. Maybe we need to do like we did with the Indians and put them on reservations. You know, out of sight, out of mind.

With all do respect, that is a retarded statement.

Unclebob · May 17, 2015

muttly said:
With all do respect, that is a retarded statement.

The sarcasm must have went right over your head.

Ragman · May 17, 2015

muttly said:
With all do respect, that is a retarded statement.

We don't say retarded anymore, it's special needs.

Turtle · May 17, 2015

muttly said:
]

It sounds like from what you wrote, you are buying into the false narrative of officers, particularly white officers, who are targeting and killing blacks based on their race .

That's b because, again, we have another example of you not understanding what you read. I didn't buy into that narrative. I said it happens often enough that it's something that should not be dismissed as irrelevant or non-existent. You, on the other hand, take the posit that it happens so rarely that is not even worth taking seriously.

And the examples of what you find on the internet and elsewhere, is always an officer who happens to be white and the victim who happens to be black.]

Actually, I've posted examples in this very thread where the officers are white and so is the victim. You seem to think I'm trying to make a case that all police are racist. I'm not. I'm saying the police are out of control and abuse their power routinely, including creating protocols within their procedures that allow then to justify that abuse, and when racist cops and systems are involved with that abuse it becomes an even bigger issue. You steadfastly maintain there are no racist cops, the justice system is color blind, and that blacks get exactly what they deserve.

No, racist emails sent by police commanders isn't a smoking gun that the entire department is racist, but it's a concern that should not be dismissed as meaningless, or worse, as harmless fun. Those emails were sent by people with considerable influence in policing, procedures, and justice, all of which mold the mindset of everyone under them. The gun might not be smoking, but it certainly doesn't pass the sniff test of a freshly cleaned and oiled gun, either.

Windsor · May 18, 2015

muttly said:
An incident which has been universally condemned by everyone. A rare incident involving a cop shooting an unarmed individual in the back. It doesn't happen much. With this particular incident, the officer was arrested and charged with murder in less than a week.

Shooting someone in the back who is not trying to harm you, that's murder. I'm glad there charging him accordingly.

Windsor · May 18, 2015

muttly said:
You said seek the truth. I gave some information that was dismissed because of what you believe. The Ferguson police dept isn't in any financial position to defend themselves from the accusations heaped on them from the DOJ. You ought to know that allegations against cities can't be defended because of this, don't you? Be honest. So they go ahead and accept the recommendations from the DOJ instead of going bankrupt with lawyer fees, fighting it in court.
You said seek the truth, but the DOJ report that you think is great, doesn't even provide statements from the four black officers on the force about allegations of discrimination and racism .
You said seek the truth. Here is an excerpt from someone seeking the truth about crimes in Ferguson that the DOJ didn't do FOR SOME REASON:
Article excerpt:
Of course, what the DOJ report leaves unmentioned is whysuch an approach is needed: the absence of a reliable tax base. And even so, these practices don’t necessary show “racial bias” on the part of the primarily white police force in now 70 percent black Ferguson.

And that brings us to the third element of the story, the actual crime rates. For all the MSM attention given to Ferguson, few supposed journalists have done any reporting other than repeating whatever hashtagswere held up by vapid celebrities.

So it was left to me. I called the Ferguson Police Department to obtain the crime reports sorted by race that extended back at least a decade. (Significantly the Justice Department examined only a sample size of the last three years—probably to avoid revealing systematic and long-standing black criminality). I was told by an officer that I was the firstjournalist to ask for this information.

I was told to consult The Missouri Uniform Crime Reporting Program (MUCRP), which allows anyone to pull reports—going back to the year 2001—for every city in Missouri.

You can search for various report types, including arrests by age, sex, crime with race.

So, doing what the Department of Justice and apparently every journalist in America is incapable of doing, I pulled those arrest reports on the MUCRP site for Ferguson going back to 2001.

In viewing the following, please remember that according to the 2000 U.S. Census, the city of Ferguson was only 52 percent black.

Since 2001, 18513 people have been arrested inFerguson: 84 percent have been black

Since 2001, 479 people have been arrested for burglary in Ferguson: 91percent of them have been black.

Since 2001, 286 people have been arrested for weapons charges inFerguson: 89 percent have been black

Since 2001, 18513 people have been arrested inFerguson: 84 percent have been black

Since 2001, 9 people have been arrested for murder in Ferguson. 8 of the 9 have been black.

Since 2001, there have been 28 people arrested inFerguson for rape. All have been black.

Since 2001, 133 people have been arrested for robbery in Ferguson: 90percent have been black

Since 2001, 146 people have been arrested for motor vehicle theft inFerguson: 93 percent have been black.

Since 2001, 4,845 people have been arrested for larceny in Ferguson: 80percent have been black.

These numbers are nearly a complete match to the crime statistics I pulled from the City of St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department Annual Report to the Community, which breaks down the arrests rates for violent crime by race (you can research 1999-2012 at the site).

In other words, black criminality in and around Ferguson is systematic and long-standing. And as the proportion of blacks in Ferguson rose, the absolute amount of crime increased even more dramatically.

These figures make the MSM’s whining about Ferguson’s “racism” not just irrelevant, but offensive. Ferguson was burned out, businesses weredestroyed, and the city’s future was ruined because local governments were unable to maintain public order and because the MSM will not to do its job and report the truth about what’s going on.

http://www.vdare.com/articles/hands-up-dont-shoot-was-a-lie-data-shows-latest-doj-report-is-too

You show data from community's that are mostly black and say look it's mostly blacks doing the crimes there.
The cities surrounding furguson are predominantly black also so the 52% black in Ferguson don't mean nothing really because people don't just commit crimes in the cities that there residents in. They do it in neighboring cities also.