F is for Fascism (Ferguson MO)

[ImTheCaptain]

with the non-indictments in both situations. no one was cheering or anything but they defs were not feeling like it was inexcusable. bottom line, i'm not really surprised at the 47% figure

 

[olddke]

with the non-indictments in both situations. no one was cheering or anything but they defs were not feeling like it was inexcusable. bottom line, i'm not really surprised at the 47% figure

At least in my circle the Garner case was almost universally viewed as a failure of the system and that an indictment should have been handed down. The Brown case was much more mixed based on what "reporting" people were putting their faith in. After the documents came out a few people changed their opinions but it was split and I would say probably 2/3 were accepting of the non-indictment.

 

[wfumike02]

At least in my circle the Garner case was almost universally viewed as a failure of the system and that an indictment should have been handed down. The Brown case was much more mixed based on what "reporting" people were putting their faith in. After the documents came out a few people changed their opinions but it was split and I would say probably 2/3 were accepting of the non-indictment.

Agreed. Most I've discussed it with (and me, too) agree with the Ferguson result but disagree with the result in the Garner case.

 

[Wakeforest22890]

Nearly all the white people I know thought the Ferguson decision was right and I would say it's about 50/50 on the Garner decision. Most that defend the actions on that front have said "Garner shouldn't have talked back." Yeah as if that's deserving of a death sentence from judge, jury, and executioner NYPD cop.

 

[bmoneydeac]

How do you know what "nearly all the white people" you know think about this stuff? Did you do a phone survey?

 

[Deacs89]

Nearly all the white people I know thought the Ferguson decision was right and I would say it's about 50/50 on the Garner decision. Most that defend the actions on that front have said "Garner shouldn't have talked back." Yeah as if that's deserving of a death sentence from judge, jury, and executioner NYPD cop.

Garner can talk back he should not have resisted arrest. The issue here is 1. the law and 2. why he would not receive proper treatment.

 

[Wakeforest22890]

How do you know what "nearly all the white people" you know think about this stuff? Did you do a phone survey?

I thought it was implicit that I meant who I had talked to about the incidents which is upwards of probably 50 people if not more.

If I was ball parking it I would say most white people I know in NC would likely either not care one way or the other or would come down on the side that the cop was justified. That's a total guess though just based on the other political views that they hold.

 

[bmoneydeac]

I thought it was implicit that I meant who I had talked to about the incidents which is upwards of probably 50 people if not more.

If I was ball parking it I would say most white people I know in NC would likely either not care one way or the other or would come down on the side that the cop was justified. That's a total guess though just based on the other political views that they hold.

Word. I was just curious because I've probably talked to like three or four people about it to the point where I'd feel good about stating where they stand. All of the chatter on FB is strongly pro-Garner.

 

[pourdeac]

Nearly all the white people I know thought the Ferguson decision was right and I would say it's about 50/50 on the Garner decision. Most that defend the actions on that front have said "Garner shouldn't have talked back." Yeah as if that's deserving of a death sentence from judge, jury, and executioner NYPD cop.

That's ridiculous. The cop did not intend that to be the case. What is the point of characterizing it that way? This isn't Nazi's killing jews. I don't think the solution to our historical race issues is to keep making up shit to make it look like whites hate blacks and are intentionally killing them. Do you?

Most whites don't look at these situations as racial anyway, they look at them in the context of police violence and criminal activity, and are evaluating them that way based on the evidence and as individual cases. But the people who claim to want racial equality on here (and nationwide) have immediately turned it all into a blanket racial thing and have forced more of a racial divide by interjecting junk like in that post. I really question whether "racial harmony" is your goal at all. Sure doesn't look like it.

IMO a lot of this comes from the "zero tolerance" BS I've hated for years. That's not tolerance, it's intolerance. The cops are FORCED to enforce laws with a zero tolerance viewpoint because the pubic is so intolerant of human error that cops get criticized when someone's pet laws aren't enforced to the letter. That creates all these crappy altercations over shit like cigarettes. It's stupid that some guy died over cigarettes but everyone is so intolerant of human error (his) that it happens. But on the other hand, the cops sometimes end up in situations where they end up unintentionally killing someone, and people here want to string them up. But it's the identical INTOLERANCE for human error (cop). It's no different.

 

[PhDeac]

I'm not sure how you can say somebody who kept choking somebody who had trouble breathing didn't mean to kill him.

 

[RChildress107]

You're right. There's also #3--a cop loses his life.

Officers (and former officers) say the video of the incident could be used as a training video on how to handle these situations. The only thing done wrong was the first officer shouldn't have holstered his gun when the assailant briefly put down the knife:

http://http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/12/10/nyregion/in-brooklyn-synagogue-shooting-officers-hewed-to-their-training-officials-say.html?_r=0&referrer=

I don't doubt that the officer was following training. I question whether he was trained to effectively handle this situation in the best way possible. I, and many others on this thread, believe that the current role police officers play in our society (whether they are being asked to play that role or are seizing the role themselves) is inappropriate and leads to situations like the ones discussed on this thread.

I believe that a shift in the the function we expect police to play, will hopefully lead to a shift in attitude and training that will ultimately make our society safer and more just.

These cops did everything in their power to avoid that outcome. Is your objection that they should have asked him nicely to put the knife down?

Your first sentence is false. Unless you are vastly underestimating the power of police to behave reasonably.

My objection is that the police officer should be the most cool, calm, and collected person in that situation. He clearly wasn't.

People on a ledge do not present a clear and imminent threat to the lives of officers, like a guy wielding a knife does. The situations are not analogous. I can't think of a better way to get someone's attention and take command of the situation than using harsh words loudly.

Neither can many police officers, apparently. That's part of the problem. Using harsh words loudly is something a child does to try and get control of a situation. It's rarely the most effective way to get someone to do what you want.

I'm confused. Did no one else read that the reason the synagogue stabber was shot was because he lunged at the officer with his knife?

Noone questions that. Simply pointing out that it might not have reached that point in the first place if the officer had behaved differently.

 

[Wrangor]

I'm not sure how you can say somebody who kept choking somebody who had trouble breathing didn't mean to kill him.

This is part of the problem with this discussion. I think the cop should be prosecuted/disciplined/etc... But just because the cop screwed up doesn't mean he wasn't just trying to do his job. Once the situation became physical all bets were off. Cop wasn't intending to kill him, he was intending to subdue him most likely using a technique he has used many times. This doesn't excuse the action, but it also doesn't mean he had murderous intent. Poor training + poor police philosophy = a bad unintended result. Turns out this bad results was the worst result possible, and a man who had committed a petty crime lost his life.

Labeling the cop as an intentional murderer does nothing to advance discussion, and is a huge part of the problem. Both sides of this issue are quick to label (criminal/murderer/racist/thug), and that is completely unproductive and narrowminded. In Garner's case he deserves punishment (I am in no place to pass that judgment, but just my opinion). More importantly the system of over militarization of our police needs to be put under great scrutiny. Instead we have people calling individual cops murderers and racists, which will do nothing to prevent this type of action from occurring in the future.

 

[RChildress107]

How about we start putting some accountability on the guy who stabbed a man and is wielding a knife in a public place?

You could also argue the probability of a worse outcome was negated by the cop.

3 reasons:

1. Cops are public servants given a great deal of power and responsibility. They should absolutely be held to a higher standard than the general public. They should be held to an even higher standard when compared to the mentally ill population.

2. Holding cops to a higher standard has a higher chance of being successful. Asking someone who is supposed to be a model for public service to behave appropriately in order to avoid bad outcomes might actually work. Asking a guy who just stabbed someone and is wielding a knife in a synagogue to behave rationally has a very low probability of success.

3. He's dead. We don't hold dead people criminally accountable in this country. Had he lived he almost certainly would have been held accountable by spending a large portion of his life behind bars or in a mental institution.

Exactly. An innocent person who is not wielding a knife, had just stabbed someone and disobeying an order. That would truly be tragic in this case.

So when "bad people" (which i guess for you includes potentially mentally ill people) lose their life it is not "truly tragic"?

lol with a gun drawn on you? for me it would tell me that they are not playing around and I better listen. I guess everyone is different. Hello sir I know you just stabbed somebody but would you kindly put the knife down?

Correct. The type of people who stab people in churches and then waive a knife around when a gun is drawn on them ARE different than you (I hope) and me. That's the entire point.

Saying "Well I would behave rationally in that situation, why didn't he?" assumes that he was rational to begin with. Based on the evidence that is a very poor assumption.

 

[DeaconSig]

This is part of the problem with this discussion. I think the cop should be prosecuted/disciplined/etc... But just because the cop screwed up doesn't mean he wasn't just trying to do his job. Once the situation became physical all bets were off. Cop wasn't intending to kill him, he was intending to subdue him most likely using a technique he has used many times. This doesn't excuse the action, but it also doesn't mean he had murderous intent. Poor training + poor police philosophy = a bad unintended result. Turns out this bad results was the worst result possible, and a man who allegedly committed a petty crime lost his life.

Labeling the cop as an intentional murderer does nothing to advance discussion, and is a huge part of the problem. Both sides of this issue are quick to label (criminal/murderer/racist/thug), and that is completely unproductive and narrowminded. In Garner's case he deserves punishment (I am in no place to pass that judgment, but just my opinion). More importantly the system of over militarization of our police needs to be put under great scrutiny. Instead we have people calling individual cops murderers and racists, which will do nothing to prevent this type of action from occurring in the future.

Fixed for you. We don't even know that Eric Garner committed a crime at all.

 

[olddke]

This is part of the problem with this discussion. I think the cop should be prosecuted/disciplined/etc... But just because the cop screwed up doesn't mean he wasn't just trying to do his job. Once the situation became physical all bets were off. Cop wasn't intending to kill him, he was intending to subdue him most likely using a technique he has used many times. This doesn't excuse the action, but it also doesn't mean he had murderous intent. Poor training + poor police philosophy = a bad unintended result. Turns out this bad results was the worst result possible, and a man who had committed a petty crime lost his life.

Labeling the cop as an intentional murderer does nothing to advance discussion, and is a huge part of the problem. Both sides of this issue are quick to label (criminal/murderer/racist/thug), and that is completely unproductive and narrowminded. In Garner's case he deserves punishment (I am in no place to pass that judgment, but just my opinion). More importantly the system of over militarization of our police needs to be put under great scrutiny. Instead we have people calling individual cops murderers and racists, which will do nothing to prevent this type of action from occurring in the future.

Still an indictment for manslaughter or negligent homicide or some other charge would seem appropriate. Not an attorney, so if the suggested charges are incorrect get over it, you get my point.

 

[Wakeforest22890]

That's ridiculous. The cop did not intend that to be the case. What is the point of characterizing it that way? This isn't Nazi's killing jews. I don't think the solution to our historical race issues is to keep making up shit to make it look like whites hate blacks and are intentionally killing them. Do you?

Most whites don't look at these situations as racial anyway, they look at them in the context of police violence and criminal activity, and are evaluating them that way based on the evidence and as individual cases. But the people who claim to want racial equality on here (and nationwide) have immediately turned it all into a blanket racial thing and have forced more of a racial divide by interjecting junk like in that post. I really question whether "racial harmony" is your goal at all. Sure doesn't look like it.

IMO a lot of this comes from the "zero tolerance" BS I've hated for years. That's not tolerance, it's intolerance. The cops are FORCED to enforce laws with a zero tolerance viewpoint because the pubic is so intolerant of human error that cops get criticized when someone's pet laws aren't enforced to the letter. That creates all these crappy altercations over shit like cigarettes. It's stupid that some guy died over cigarettes but everyone is so intolerant of human error (his) that it happens. But on the other hand, the cops sometimes end up in situations where they end up unintentionally killing someone, and people here want to string them up. But it's the identical INTOLERANCE for human error (cop). It's no different.

The cop continued to choke him after he said I can't breathe and the guy died. Seems like he was pretty intent on continuing his actions to me. It's not making shit up when it's true.

Your first statement of the second paragraph is the whole problem: whites don't view it as racial because it doesn't matter to them one way if it's racial or not for the most part. If it is racial, doesn't matter since white people are the beneficiaries of the current structure. The statement that it has "immediately [been] turned...into a blanket racial thing and have forced more of a racial divide" seems to me to actually mean "if we don't talk about racial issues or realize that there might be racial component to things then they may go away even if they do exist." Pretty easy to say that when you're not a person of color in the first place. And if my goal isn't racial harmony then what is my goal? I mean seriously what possible goal do you think I could have other than wanting to live in a society where people of all races actually get equal opportunity? To insinuate that people who are interested in discussing problems with the current structure through a lens of race (among other lens) aren't actually interested in "racial harmony" is some serious Fox News propaganda bullshit.

 

[deacvision7]

It has amazed me the number of people who simply do not want to put things in some sort of real perspective and/or ridicule those that make an attempt. One might call it a "war on science".

That isn't science, you dolt. You just made a horrible analogy and got called out on it; then you made a slightly better but still awful analogy and got called out on it again.

At no point were you doing anything scientific by making random analogies.

People on a ledge do not present a clear and imminent threat to the lives of officers, like a guy wielding a knife does. The situations are not analogous. I can't think of a better way to get someone's attention and take command of the situation than using harsh words loudly.

I think Jungbug here would agree with me.

For the record, I agree with Junebug that the man wielding a knife and taking up an aggressive position is not the same as a person standing on a building ledge contemplating jumping to their death. The two situations are quite different and should be treated differently, IMO.

 

[Wrangor]

Fixed for you. We don't even know that Eric Garner committed a crime at all.

True. Pretty insignificant to my post though. It isn't as though the cop's discipline/punishment should be any different because Garner was actually or allegedly selling illegal cigs.

 

[RChildress107]

For the record, I agree with Junebug that the man wielding a knife and taking up an aggressive position is not the same as a person standing on a building ledge contemplating jumping to their death. The two situations are quite different and should be treated differently, IMO.

Most would agree. However, neither is best handled by losing your cool and repeatedly yelling obscenities.

 

[deacvision7]

Most would agree. However, neither is best handled by losing your cool and repeatedly yelling obscenities.

IIRC, the initial cop on the scene only cussed once. The other times he raised his voice were in reaction to the man with the knife stepping forward towards somebody.