The Shooting of Alton Sterling

[atrib]

I do not demean her. That is a common colloquialism for a mother of one's child one is not married to.

The term "baby mama" usually has a negative connotation (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=baby%20mama). You are not fooling anyone.

That is Derec's way of dehumanizing black people in his posts. It is easier to be complacent about the murder of black people by police if he can portray the victims as being less than human.

Let us remember here that the dead person, Mr Sterling is the victim of a police shooting. Whether the shooting was racially motivated or even malicious can be debated, but the fact remains that the life of a human being was ended prematurely through the actions of law enforcement officers who should have known how to do their job better. Mr Sterling was not accorded his right to due process, if indeed he was breaking the law. Derec wants to gloss over this fact by pointing at the victim's past behavior and branding him as subhuman, less deserving of equal treatment under the law. In another thread related to the murder of another black man where a policeman shot a person lying prone on the ground 14 times, Derec commented that the world is better off without said black man, because he likely would have continued his life of crime. While at the same time ignoring the far serious crime committed by the policeman who shot him 14 times while he lay bleeding on the street. Cops who kill black people without justification cannot be criminals, by Derec's definition. He is not fooling anybody.

 

[Ford]

The term "baby mama" usually has a negative connotation (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=baby%20mama). You are not fooling anyone.

That is Derec's way of dehumanizing black people in his posts. It is easier to be complacent about the murder of black people by police if he can portray the victims as being less than human.

Let us remember here that the dead person, Mr Sterling is the victim of a police shooting. Whether the shooting was racially motivated or even malicious can be debated, but the fact remains that the life of a human being was ended prematurely through the actions of law enforcement officers who should have known how to do their job better. Mr Sterling was not accorded his right to due process, if indeed he was breaking the law. Derec wants to gloss over this fact by pointing at the victim's past behavior and branding him as subhuman, less deserving of equal treatment under the law. In another thread related to the murder of another black man where a policeman shot a person lying prone on the ground 14 times, Derec commented that the world is better off without said black man, because he likely would have continued his life of crime. While at the same time ignoring the far serious crime committed by the policeman who shot him 14 times while he lay bleeding on the street. Cops who kill black people without justification cannot be criminals, by Derec's definition. He is not fooling anybody.

 

[RavenSky]

There are many things going on here. I generally think these laws are too harsh. I think age of consent should be 16, not 18. But this girl was 14 and the age difference (5 years) was significant. So I do not think that their relationship being against the law is wrong, but I think the penalty was too harsh, especially the lifelong sex offender registration.

How is 5 years suddenly "significant" when states with Romeo & Juliet laws generally allow for 4 to 5 years difference?

He threatened a homeless guy with it,

No evidence of this

And he resisted arrest.

Not a valid excuse for shooting him 4 times and killing him

Note that the "carnal knowledge" conviction is not the only one on his record. Most notably, there are a few illegal possession of a weapon (including one case where he resisted arrest whole carrying). a couple of burglaries, batteries etc. He would not be allowed to have a gun even if he never knocked up that 14 year old.

I actually agree with you on this. My point is that you keep harping on the "convicted felon" part while disagreeing with what he is a convicted felon for.

Note the scare quotes around the word "victim"

They had an ongoing sexual relationship. I do not think that was right, but I do not think she was a victim either.

You can't have it both ways. Either she was a victim (without scare quotes) and he was rightfully convicted, or she wasn't.

for the woman he demeans as the "baby mama".

I do not demean her. That is a common colloquialism for a mother of one's child one is not married to.

It is demeaning, and you use it in a derogatory manner. If you wish to convince me otherwise, stop using it.

So where is his evidence that Alton Sterling knew or should have know the age of his "baby mama" and/or that she didn't "desir[e] to engage in and initiate sex"?

They had an ongoing relationship that lasted months. Also, the "lack of knowledge" would be an affirmative defense.

Evidence for either claim? In any case, though, it just goes back to my initial argument that if you disagree with the conviction, you shouldn't use it to defame Alton Sterling - the dead victim of a police shooting.

More to the point, why is Derec arguing against these types of convictions in one thread about Alton Sterling, while using the conviction as a justification to say Alton Sterling shouldn't be allowed to purchase a gun in another?

Even if he never knocked that girl up, or managed to plead it down to a misdemeanor, he would still not be eligible to have a gun on account of his other convictions for things like burglary, battery, etc.

Maybe. Maybe not. The other convictions would apply ONLY if they were felony convictions.

A popular movement known as the Brady Campaign (a spin-off of the Brady bill which required background checks for all firearm sales), creates a scorecard for all 50 states based on their particular laws towards obtaining a gun license and gun permit. The higher the score, the stricter the policy and vice-versa. Out of a possible 100 points, Louisiana managed to score a 2.

:snort:

Note, I am not defending Alton Sterling's behavior with a 14-year old girl, nor commenting either way on statutory rape laws.

But you do pretend that that was the only wrong thing he did.

Not even remotely true.

So now the gun purchase. I have not yet seen published details about where/how Alton Sterling bought his gun. I've only seen reports that it was a very recent purchase prompted by the robbery from another street seller a week or so earlier.

I am sure that he knew people selling hot guns. He spend time in prison quite recently.

According to two witnesses, he bought it from a gun shop. Given the lax laws, however, I don't think anyone will be able to confirm that. Leave to you, of course, to assume the worst about the dead victim

Because Alton Sterling's background also includes arrests and convictions for battery, including domestic assault.

Finally she realizes her harping on the 'carnal knowledge' think was a red herring. He also has convictions for burglary, drugs etc.

Not "finally" anything, Derec. I laid out my position in a coherent order, but the entirety of it is my position.

Final note: all of the above is completely separate from the fact that Alton Sterling was entitled to due process, and should not have been shot to death in the street by a police officer.

He resisted arrest. That greatly increases the chances of something going wrong. Especially when the perp is armed. Note that he did almost exactly mirrors what he did in 2009.

blah blah blah blah... no matter how many times you defend the police, you will be wrong because it IS wrong for police officers to kill civilians just for "resisting arrest" - and yes, I put that in scare quotes because we have seen how many times a police officer is screaming "stop resisting" to someone who isn't even moving.

 

[RavenSky]

It is entirely probable that Alton Sterling walked into a local gun shop and bought his gun legally. He may not have been legally allowed to own/carry a gun because of the conviction Derec argues against the justice of, but I want to make that distinct from Alton Sterling's ability to walk into a gun shop and legally purchase a gun without any type of background check.

You're going to get a background check in any gun shop!

No you are not!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There. I have more exclamation points than you do, so I win

 

[RavenSky]

I will even give you the link: http://talkfreethought.org/showthread.php?5478-The-Derec-Dating-Derail-Thread

~~ mod

 

[Loren Pechtel]

How is 5 years suddenly "significant" when states with Romeo & Juliet laws generally allow for 4 to 5 years difference?

I've seen 5 years as 16/21, not 14/19. 14/19 is definitely well into creepy territory and it's hardly the only--or even the first--crime on his rap sheet, either.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're going to get a background check in any gun shop!

No you are not!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There. I have more exclamation points than you do, so I win

You can also claim the moon is made of green cheese. A bunch of exclamation points will do nothing more about making it true.

Legal gun sale from a dealer = brady check. Everywhere.

 

[RavenSky]

No you are not!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There. I have more exclamation points than you do, so I win

You can also claim the moon is made of green cheese. A bunch of exclamation points will do nothing more about making it true.

And you can pretend you are Mr. Expert on Everything, but making declarations without citations doesn't make your statements true If it is, provide evidence. Otherwise you may as well not bother posting anything because I will ignore it.

Legal gun sale from a dealer = brady check. Everywhere.

Since you failed to provide any sort of citation for your claims, your claims are ignored.

 

[Derec]

How is 5 years suddenly "significant" when states with Romeo & Juliet laws generally allow for 4 to 5 years difference?

I think 4 years is about the maximum for R&J laws for US. That said, he might have been able to plead down to a misdemeanor had he not had a record already.

No evidence of this

Well how would the homeless guy have known he had a gun otherwise?
And do you think he called 911 out of sheer malice?

Not a valid excuse for shooting him 4 times and killing him

Maybe not. That's what the full investigation is for. But my point is that it increases the risk of getting shot especially when armed. And when you pull that shit repeatedly (he did in 2009) your cumulative probability goes up.
Again, resisting arrest is never a good idea.

I actually agree with you on this. My point is that you keep harping on the "convicted felon" part while disagreeing with what he is a convicted felon for.

That wasn't his only felony conviction.

You can't have it both ways. Either she was a victim (without scare quotes) and he was rightfully convicted, or she wasn't.

Well according to the laws he was rightfully convicted. There is such a thing as a victimless crime though. Which can't be said for his other crimes like burglary and such.

It is demeaning, and you use it in a derogatory manner. If you wish to convince me otherwise, stop using it.

What other word do you suggest?

Evidence for either claim? In any case, though, it just goes back to my initial argument that if you disagree with the conviction, you shouldn't use it to defame Alton Sterling - the dead victim of a police shooting.

One of the articles on him said it. The mother only called the police when he knocked her up. Also I think the other cases are much more damning - several burglaries, several batteries, drug and weapons offenses and especially a previous case of resisting arrest while armed.

Maybe. Maybe not. The other convictions would apply ONLY if they were felony convictions.

You do not spend 5 years in state prison for a misdemeanor.

A popular movement known as the Brady Campaign (a spin-off of the Brady bill which required background checks for all firearm sales), creates a scorecard for all 50 states based on their particular laws towards obtaining a gun license and gun permit. The higher the score, the stricter the policy and vice-versa. Out of a possible 100 points, Louisiana managed to score a 2.

:snort:

According to two witnesses, he bought it from a gun shop. Given the lax laws, however, I don't think anyone will be able to confirm that. Leave to you, of course, to assume the worst about the dead victim

No, I am assuming the logical thing. He spent time in prison, he likely met people who run guns. Or at least he knows a guy who knows a guy.

Because Alton Sterling's background also includes arrests and convictions for battery, including domestic assault.

Finally she realizes her harping on the 'carnal knowledge' think was a red herring. He also has convictions for burglary, drugs etc.

Not "finally" anything, Derec. I laid out my position in a coherent order, but the entirety of it is my position.

blah blah blah blah... no matter how many times you defend the police, you will be wrong because it IS wrong for police officers to kill civilians just for "resisting arrest" - and yes, I put that in scare quotes because we have seen how many times a police officer is screaming "stop resisting" to someone who isn't even moving.

Well I hope we can agree that
1. Alton did resist
2. Resisting is wrong
3. Resisting increases your chances of a bad outcome

Of course police should not shoot people just for resisting. But it increases the chances of police perceiving a danger.

 

[Ford]

Of course police should not shoot people just for resisting.

You spent a considerable amount of effort above laying out the case that they should be.


#you'renotfoolinganyone

 

[Derec]

You spent a considerable amount of effort above laying out the case that they should be.

I never did. Perhaps you should read more carefully.

 

[RavenSky]

No evidence of this

Well how would the homeless guy have known he had a gun otherwise?
And do you think he called 911 out of sheer malice?

entirely possible Point is, you have no evidence for your claim, so making the claim is just you vilifying the dead victim of the police shooting

I actually agree with you on this. My point is that you keep harping on the "convicted felon" part while disagreeing with what he is a convicted felon for.

That wasn't his only felony conviction.

factual evidence? I see a lot of information about his arrests, but only two convictions with no info whether the 2009 conviction was a felony. Not saying it wan't. Just saying I don't see any factual information.

You can't have it both ways. Either she was a victim (without scare quotes) and he was rightfully convicted, or she wasn't.

Well according to the laws he was rightfully convicted. There is such a thing as a victimless crime though.

Statutory rape is not a victimless crime. So either you agree with his conviction on this point AND agree that she was a victim, or you don't. You can't have it both ways. Your choice. Pick one and stick with it.

It is demeaning, and you use it in a derogatory manner. If you wish to convince me otherwise, stop using it.

What other word do you suggest?

"The mother of his oldest son" works fine.

Maybe. Maybe not. The other convictions would apply ONLY if they were felony convictions.

You do not spend 5 years in state prison for a misdemeanor.

again, have factual evidence?

A popular movement known as the Brady Campaign (a spin-off of the Brady bill which required background checks for all firearm sales), creates a scorecard for all 50 states based on their particular laws towards obtaining a gun license and gun permit. The higher the score, the stricter the policy and vice-versa. Out of a possible 100 points, Louisiana managed to score a 2.

:snort:

According to two witnesses, he bought it from a gun shop. Given the lax laws, however, I don't think anyone will be able to confirm that. Leave to you, of course, to assume the worst about the dead victim

No, I am assuming the logical thing. He spent time in prison, he likely met people who run guns. Or at least he knows a guy who knows a guy.

It is not "logical" - it is you trying to vilify the victim of a police shooting. The state has almost no gun controls, and there are no background checks required for private sales. No back alleys or gun runners or prison connections required. I don't know where he got the gun, and fully acknowledge that. I can only report what two witnesses said. You, on the other hand, are spouting your regular biased derogatory nastiness and pretending it is "logical" or factual. Stop it.

blah blah blah blah... no matter how many times you defend the police, you will be wrong because it IS wrong for police officers to kill civilians just for "resisting arrest" - and yes, I put that in scare quotes because we have seen how many times a police officer is screaming "stop resisting" to someone who isn't even moving.

Well I hope we can agree that
1. Alton did resist
2. Resisting is wrong
3. Resisting increases your chances of a bad outcome

No, we will not agree on that either

Of course police should not shoot people just for resisting.

That we will agree on

 

[Mumbles]

I think that a lot of people haven't been in any serious fight. It's simply not natural to "not resist" when someone starts shoving you around, swinging at you, slamming you to the ground, and so forth. That takes training and preparation. key word, "and" - you need to know it's coming in order to not just panic and flail.

In any case, looks like the Baton Rouge police are going towards the Ferguson route here - they've spent the evening plainly being aggressive towards protestors, even though protestors do nothing illegal. People arrested at this point include Deray, who was apparently followed by police.

 

[Derec]

Deray, who was apparently followed by police.

Well, some good did come out of it all then.

 

[repoman]

What, increasing his cred?

Note, I don't know what Deray was doing when he was arrested.

Not to derail, but arrests for certain types of protests are fair. If you are human chained and blocking a freeway and don't disperse prepare to be arrested. To cry about that is totally immature.

However, to get a criminal or arrest record that will deny you the chance for a job or student loans for a peaceful (if obstructive) protest with no vandalism is terribly wrong and it part of a totalitarian state. However cops would probably lied and trump up a charge to fuck them over.

For a protest that is just a hassle for the cops and motorists etc... the protestor should only get a couple days in jail and a moderate fine. NEVER a criminal or arrest record that is employer searchable.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Of course police should not shoot people just for resisting.

You spent a considerable amount of effort above laying out the case that they should be.


#you'renotfoolinganyone

Nobody has claimed one should be shot for resisting.

What some of us have said is that resisting while armed makes it likely you will be shot.

"Likely" != "should".

 

[RavenSky]

You spent a considerable amount of effort above laying out the case that they should be.


#you'renotfoolinganyone

Nobody has claimed one should be shot for resisting.

What some of us have said is that resisting while armed makes it likely you will be shot.

"Likely" != "should".

Blaming the dead victim of a police shooting.

Got it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think that a lot of people haven't been in any serious fight. It's simply not natural to "not resist" when someone starts shoving you around, swinging at you, slamming you to the ground, and so forth. That takes training and preparation. key word, "and" - you need to know it's coming in order to not just panic and flail.

In any case, looks like the Baton Rouge police are going towards the Ferguson route here - they've spent the evening plainly being aggressive towards protestors, even though protestors do nothing illegal. People arrested at this point include Deray, who was apparently followed by police.

But it doesn't start with such violence.

 

[Derec]

I think that a lot of people haven't been in any serious fight. It's simply not natural to "not resist" when someone starts shoving you around, swinging at you, slamming you to the ground, and so forth. That takes training and preparation. key word, "and" - you need to know it's coming in order to not just panic and flail.

Then perhaps it's best not to fight the police in the first place.

- - - Updated - - -

Blaming the dead victim of a police shooting.
Got it.

It's like talking to a wall.

- - - Updated - - -

Nobody has claimed one should be shot for resisting.

What some of us have said is that resisting while armed makes it likely you will be shot.

"Likely" != "should".

Not even "likely" (as in p>.5), just far more likely than otherwise.

 

[RavenSky]

Blaming the dead victim of a police shooting.
Got it.

It's like talking to a wall.

Yes. Talking to you and Loren is like talking to a wall.

Maybe Trump's wall... a YUGE wall