• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Police response to N.J. mall fight sparks outrage after Black teen cuffed as white teen watches

Well I believed my eyes: She definitely had more weight to her.
I'm sorry: did you just say that you think the female cop weighed more than Franco? I want you to confirm that is what you said and what you think.
Besides, why are you all upset that one officer managed to subdue one of the boys without throwing him to the ground and cuffing him—and didn’t need her partner to help her?
Who said I was upset?
Maybe you’re right: she looked real weak. Thank his there was a big string man to help her.[/sarcasm].
As insane as feminist institutional capture has gotten, I do know that men will step up when they are needed, and that includes carrying unconscious bodies out of a burning building where women do not possess the strength to do so.
Yeah, I said that the female cop looked physically bigger than Franco. Apparently, you think this matters. I don't particularly agree. I also don't think it is an insult to imply that a grown woman is not a sylph or to notice that a 16 year old boy still has some growing to do and will likely add some weight and some muscle to his frame over the next 5-10 years (and unfortunately beyond).

In this case, it was a strong woman who came to the aid of her fellow officer, not the other way around. I'm not sure why you failed to notice or feel compelled to point out that men can sometimes carry people out of burning buildings when sometimes women are not able to do so. I'm sorry that you are upset that female firefighters exist in Australia and elsewhere in the world.
 
This. She put one on the bench, saw that he didn't appear to want to fight anymore so she turned to see if her partner needed help.

But she somehow didn't see that the black kid "didn't want to fight anymore" then proceeded to put her knee on his back.
I think that she was simply coming to the aid of her fellow officer. Note: I think that the entire fight was treated poorly by the officers who cuffed the one boy. Too bad the male officer didn't have the presence of mind to sit him down as his partner sat down the other boy. Then this thread wouldn't exist except perhaps as an example of good, effecting policing.
 
This. She put one on the bench, saw that he didn't appear to want to fight anymore so she turned to see if her partner needed help.

But she somehow didn't see that the black kid "didn't want to fight anymore" then proceeded to put her knee on his back.
I think that she was simply coming to the aid of her fellow officer. Note: I think that the entire fight was treated poorly by the officers who cuffed the one boy. Too bad the male officer didn't have the presence of mind to sit him down as his partner sat down the other boy. Then this thread wouldn't exist except perhaps as an example of good, effecting policing.

That's what Tou Thao, J. Alexander Kueng, and Thomas Lane thought. You see where that got them. ;)

Edit: Link for reference.
 
This. She put one on the bench, saw that he didn't appear to want to fight anymore so she turned to see if her partner needed help.

But she somehow didn't see that the black kid "didn't want to fight anymore" then proceeded to put her knee on his back.
I think that she was simply coming to the aid of her fellow officer. Note: I think that the entire fight was treated poorly by the officers who cuffed the one boy. Too bad the male officer didn't have the presence of mind to sit him down as his partner sat down the other boy. Then this thread wouldn't exist except perhaps as an example of good, effecting policing.

That's what Tou Thao, J. Alexander Kueng, and Thomas Lane thought. You see where that got them. ;)
I do not disagree. But I also think in that moment, she responded to help a fellow officer. She did not mug for the many bystanders and refuse to intervene as the kid lying prone on the floor begged for his life. Would she have done the same thing as Thao et al did? I hope not.
 
I wanted to add that I have actually been trying to give the officers the benefit of doubt. I reviewed the video several times and eliminated some ideas that could explain their behavior. Still, I wonder if there could be an incorrect inference the male officer made causing a difference in his behavior. There are an infinite number of specific incorrect inferences we could imagine and so that's a road I'd rather not go down, and we ought to stick to reasoning based on evidence anyway. But it does cause me some hesitation to say this is definitely racism which is why I rather say it seems like racism based on evidence and later on, I'd like to see the internal affairs findings to check if there is evidence linked to and supporting existence of incorrect inferences that are pointed out or even if the reports contain untrustworthy conclusions or statements or inconsistencies.
 
I do not disagree. But I also think in that moment, she responded to help a fellow officer. She did not mug for the many bystanders and refuse to intervene as the kid lying prone on the floor begged for his life. Would she have done the same thing as Thao et al did? I hope not.
Yes, she would have if we're using her current actions as an indicator. If I remember correctly the black kid was actually detained while the "white kid" was allowed to leave. Did she stop that from happening? No.
 
It seems as if there's a much bigger over-arching problem at play here, one that greatly eclipses the little nuanced details like who put her hand on the white kid's chest and whether that constitutes a gentle shove or not, etc...and that is that, increasingly, it seems as if we are encamped into groups who no longer even share a common reality.

Two groups used to, not that long ago, perhaps argue about causes of [given, agreed-upon thing in reality that happened] but it was mutually agreed upon that, at least, the thing in question really happened. The model was more like:

Group A (having just watched footage of a group of black youths setting fire to a police car) might've said: "The reason that those black kids set fire to a police car is because, um, they're all rowdy, and they live like animals and there oughta be a law."
Group B (having just watched footage of a group of black youths setting fire to a police car) might've said: "The reason that those black kids set fire to a police car is because, um, they're oppressed, and they're bringing attention to systemic inequities at the hands of police, and if they were white, it'd have just been 'boys being boys'."

Both sides could have (and would have) had bones to pick over the other group's representation (especially in my overly stereotypical examples, chosen simply for contrast), but...they'd both have agreed that a group of black youths burned a police car.
They'd have argued endlessly over WHY it happened. Argued endlessly about WHAT the penalties should be. About WHO is culpable for the damages. But they'd have shared a reality over what did happen.

But today, one group sees a violent mob smashing their way into the Capitol looking to hang a sitting Vice President, and the other group sees a group of tourists. Sees "legitimate political discourse" happening. Sees patriots, eager to set things right.

One group sees a Minnesota cop kneeing a prone man in the back and neck over objections that he can't breathe until he finally dies, and the other group sees a fat loser dying of a Fentanyl overdose.

We've been told, for instance, that the Capitol rioters weren't even Trump supporters--they were really BLM agitators.
We've been told that they weren't armed. We've been told that it wasn't an insurrection; wasn't really a coup attempt.

Nearly half of the population of the U.S. is still incensed that an election was stolen, despite no election having been stolen.

I'd argue that our differences have eclipsed mere alternative viewpoints regarding the same, shared reality, and we now have (al least two) completely different realities, making reconciliation between them literally impossible.
 
I'd argue that our differences have eclipsed mere alternative viewpoints regarding the same, shared reality, and we now have (al least two) completely different realities, making reconciliation between them literally impossible.

I'd argue that there have always been two different realities, it's just those living in the alternate universe are outspoken about it again.
 
I'll post the tweet just ignore the source and check the video. I'd like to add that he may have said individual instead of official. For example "let's go talk to the individual". Either way sounded like he wanted to get something clarified but the criminal continued behaving as if he wasn't there to talk.



Ok, that video shows the start better--note that it's the black kid that uses force first.
 
I'll post the tweet just ignore the source and check the video. I'd like to add that he may have said individual instead of official. For example "let's go talk to the individual". Either way sounded like he wanted to get something clarified but the criminal continued behaving as if he wasn't there to talk.



Ok, that video shows the start better--note that it's the black kid that uses force first.

Physical contact isn't "using force". He pushed the pointing arm back, then he gets shoved.

All things equal, they both started the physical altercation. So both officers shove the white kid to the couch, cop is cuffing the black kid, and then the white kid stands up? And people are having troubles seeing the problem here?
 
WTF, I think I heard a spectator in the background of that video calling the black kid the "n word". Or did I mishear it? Around the 37 second mark. I'm surprised I'm the first to point that out. Maybe NJ is some racist hell hole like has been suggested. You never hear that shit around here.
 
I'll post the tweet just ignore the source and check the video. I'd like to add that he may have said individual instead of official. For example "let's go talk to the individual". Either way sounded like he wanted to get something clarified but the criminal continued behaving as if he wasn't there to talk.



Ok, that video shows the start better--note that it's the black kid that uses force first.

Physical contact isn't "using force". He pushed the pointing arm back, then he gets shoved.

All things equal, they both started the physical altercation. So both officers shove the white kid to the couch, cop is cuffing the black kid, and then the white kid stands up? And people are having troubles seeing the problem here?

Yes. This is settled. In that they both stood and faced off, they both consented to fight. And they're teenage boys so, bonus points for this much being settled.
 
WTF, I think I heard a spectator in the background of that video calling the black kid the "n word". Or did I mishear it? Around the 37 second mark. I'm surprised I'm the first to point that out. Maybe NJ is some racist hell hole like has been suggested. You never hear that shit around here.

It's the context of how it is being used. Yeah sure overall I'll agree with anyone who finds it unacceptable but these teens weren't using it with malicious intent.
 
WTF, I think I heard a spectator in the background of that video calling the black kid the "n word". Or did I mishear it? Around the 37 second mark. I'm surprised I'm the first to point that out. Maybe NJ is some racist hell hole like has been suggested. You never hear that shit around here.
You heard the "n" word period
 
even the white kid in the video thinks it was racist. (heard that he is actually Columbian/Pakistani)


“I don’t understand why they arrested him and not me,” he said. “I say, that was just plain old racist. I don’t condone that at all.”
Uh oh. He's not white.

 
When you want to rescue people from embarrassing themselves but it's not worth it.
star-trek-picard.gif
 
I'll post the tweet just ignore the source and check the video. I'd like to add that he may have said individual instead of official. For example "let's go talk to the individual". Either way sounded like he wanted to get something clarified but the criminal continued behaving as if he wasn't there to talk.



Ok, that video shows the start better--note that it's the black kid that uses force first.

I think this is better described as an escalation. Other teen gets in very close and is pointing threateningly. He is using force to invade space and threaten. Black teen puts his arm up to block, i.e. defend, but is met with force from hand of the threatening teen. How ought that play out instead? Should the Black teen close his eyes, not move, and hope the other teen will not poke him in the face? It's not a rhetorical question.

Black teen very assertively pushes arm of the other teen, but it's still to defend his space, not to fight. What is the position the other teen is defending, that he has a right to threateningly point right up to someone's face? Not really appropriate. Other teen takes offense at having his arm pushed out of defender's space, so he pushes the Black teen, showing unjustified aggression. Black teen goes off on him very aggressively punching, also not appropriate.
 
Back
Top Bottom