Can we quit harping on killing "unarmed" citizens? Note that "unarmed" includes:
1) Simulated weapons.
2) People trying to take the cop's weapon.
and thus gives a very distorted picture of what's really going on.
-
Features
The death of Tyre Nichols
- Thread starter Tigers!
- Start date
1) Simulated weapons.
2) People trying to take the cop's weapon.
and thus gives a very distorted picture of what's really going on.
Just because you didn't want to believe it before doesn't make it go away.
laughing dog
Contributor
Correlation is not causation***. I am holding you to same standard you hold all studies that show discrimination- you have butkis unless you control for all the relevant influences.
But using basic logic, even if murders went up in BLM protest cities, that does not mean any of them were preventable.
*** edited thanks to the catch by Toni.
Last edited:
Toni
Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2011
- Messages
- 19,783
- Basic Beliefs
- Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
I think you meant correlation is not causation.,
Derec
Contributor
It is not. Shooting somebody who is unarmed is not necessarily murder, or even wrong at all!
Unarmed suspect does not mean that the suspect is not a threat. An unarmed suspect can still harm a police officer and even take away his or her gun. There have been cases of police officers shot with their own guns after a perp took control of it. It would have been much better if the cop had shot the perp while he or she was still unarmed!
Just the other day here in Atlanta a female MARTA officer was attacked by an unarmed perp (who also happened to be her boyfriend).
MARTA police sergeant shoots ex-boyfriend as he attacks her, authorities say11 Alive said:
He did not die, but if he had, would you call it "murder" just because he was "unarmed"?
In the ideal world, but we do not live in an ideal world. In the real world, police sometimes have to shoot perps, even if they are unarmed.
There are probably on the order of 100 million interactions between police and public in the US each year. A few questionable or criminal police shootings per year is hardly surprising given sheer numbers.
I think the MARTA cop should have shot the attacker. It's not a better outcome for a police officer not to shoot and in turn incur an undue risk of death or (greater) bodily injury.
One has to distinguish between justified and unjustified police violence. Police are authorized to use physical force, including lethal force under some circumstances. I think these two are often conflated in these discussions. What do you even mean by "extreme police violence"?
The "reform" has also often been misguided. For every good idea (e.g. body cameras) there are a dozen bad ones, like disallowing police from enforcing certain laws.
Last edited:
Derec
Contributor
That started during the Cold War. US is certainly much freer than Soviet Union was. As to comparing US to say western European countries, it depends on the issue.
I prefer Euler diagrams.
Supporting police against unfair attacks by #BLM and/or by police defunders and abolitionists is not authoritarian.
On the other hand, a lot of the contemporary Left is quite authoritarian, even if they despise police.
Derec
Contributor
Oh please! Police are attacked by the Left even when they did nothing wrong and the perp was attacking them or others.
Like when Manuel Teran aka "Tortuga" shot a GSP trooper outside Atlanta, the lefty activists are still condemning police for returning fire and killing him.
Derec
Contributor
So many? Then you should be able to come up with a few names of the victims of these alleged "summary executions" from say 2022?
Most police shootings are of armed suspects. And even among those that are unarmed, most are justified, as unarmed people can still be dangerous. Unjustified police shootings are rare. Even rarer are those so egregious they can be described as akin to a "summary execution".
A lot of businesses were destroyed, not to mention the lives taken, during these riots.
So yeah, that is probably true.
Black people are also protected by police. That's why crime bills were very popular among black politicians in the 90s.
Derec
Contributor
When police learn that one of their own has bene accused of murder, you mean? Most police shootings are justified. But left-wing activists want to pretend that every time police shoot somebody black it is "murder".
I can see how you would believe that. Not surprising really, when you get right down to it. But good luck with your whataboutisms.
Toni
Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2011
- Messages
- 19,783
- Basic Beliefs
- Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
You mean Tortuguita? You should provide links to these ‘cases’ you seem familiar with but may not be familiar to others.
Derec
Contributor
They are to blame for a lot of what has gone wrong re race relations over the last decade, yes.
Because I do think they have their share of blame. Fear of the police by blacks has definitely become worse since 2013 or so, and #BLM is to blame for that.
There is plenty of blame to go around. Just because they are guilty of beating him to death does not mean #BLM is not guilty of fostering racial animosity.
Politesse
Lux Aeterna
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2018
- Messages
- 12,115
- Location
- Chochenyo Territory, US
- Gender
- nb; all pronouns fine
- Basic Beliefs
- Jedi Wayseeker
Skin color is not the point of issue; I object to police murdering any citizens of this nation. Their authority is extralegal from the start, an exception from the law that we have tolerated for too long. If the police are allowed to execute people in the street without consequence or review, there is no law, and I'm glad the culture around policing is becoming more critical and skeptical with the passing years. Either define and legally constrain the role of the police, or eliminate them.
Last edited:
Derec
Contributor
Same thing. Little turtle. Whatever.
There is a whole thread on that. Here is a news article.
GBI confirms gun belonged to activist killed at police training facility
Toni
Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2011
- Messages
- 19,783
- Basic Beliefs
- Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
For those who were asking what was meant by the over militarizing of police forces, here’s an article that discusses the death of the activist Derec referenced as well as why there were protests: a forested park was to be destroyed in order to provide a training space for police, including ding building a mock village to train for raids and police chases. And of course a firing range. Next to a black neighborhood.
Activists had been advocating for retaining the trees which were to be raised, in order to help prevent flooding. The Cop City was being funded largely by private corporations.
www.pbs.org
Activists had been advocating for retaining the trees which were to be raised, in order to help prevent flooding. The Cop City was being funded largely by private corporations.
Protesters question circumstances surrounding 'Stop Cop City' activist's death
Beyond the distrust many in the “Stop Cop City” movement have toward police, six people who knew Tortuguita told the AP that authorities’ allegations about the protester's final encounter do not match up with the person they knew.
www.pbs.org
Derec
Contributor
I do not think you need institutions. Individuals can be racist. But intent matters.
As far as institutional racism, would you call programs that discriminate against certain races in admissions and hiring in the name of "equity" racist or not? And if not, then why?
It seems to me that when it comes to racism, there are very different yardsticks by race. Against blacks? Any microaggression, even if unintentional is deemed "racist". Against whites, not even intentional, overt and institutionalized discrimination is enough.
The former would certainly be racist. Mere discrepancy in numbers of arrests for example is not, no matter how much equity-obsessed leftists want to pretend it is.
Again, I disagree that racism has to be institutional. That is an attempt by some sociologist to redefine the term for the express purpose of only holding whites capable of being racist. That also includes redefining "institutional power" such that black CEOs, mayors, sheriffs, legislators, or even presidents do not have it, but white yokels do. It is an intellectually utterly bankrupt notion.
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 33,983
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
The separation of powers between executive, legislature, and judiciary is well known. Less frequently discussed is the separation of judicial powers between the courts and the police.
Courts have the power of determining guilt or innocence; And the power of determining what punishment is appropriate for those found guilty.
All suspects are innocent, under the law, until proven to be guilty by a court.
Police have the power to detain suspects, with a view to bringing them before a court; And the power to investigate crimes in order to identify suspects and provide evidence against them.
It follows that police should treat every suspect with the maximum of courtesy and respect conversant with their being brought to court. Under no circumstances should police make an assumption of guilt, and under no circumstances should police mete out any punishment, or even give the appearance of meting out punishment.
Persons in custody on remand, or under police detention pending charges are innocent, by definition, and should be universally treated with the dignity and respect that they will deserve if it eventuates that they're a victim of mistaken identity, completely without guilt.
For police to kill any suspect who isn't posing an immediate, clear and present danger to the lives of the public, should be considered the most severe and horrific form of homicide, and be prosecuted and punished accordingly.
But idiots gonna id.
Courts have the power of determining guilt or innocence; And the power of determining what punishment is appropriate for those found guilty.
All suspects are innocent, under the law, until proven to be guilty by a court.
Police have the power to detain suspects, with a view to bringing them before a court; And the power to investigate crimes in order to identify suspects and provide evidence against them.
It follows that police should treat every suspect with the maximum of courtesy and respect conversant with their being brought to court. Under no circumstances should police make an assumption of guilt, and under no circumstances should police mete out any punishment, or even give the appearance of meting out punishment.
Persons in custody on remand, or under police detention pending charges are innocent, by definition, and should be universally treated with the dignity and respect that they will deserve if it eventuates that they're a victim of mistaken identity, completely without guilt.
For police to kill any suspect who isn't posing an immediate, clear and present danger to the lives of the public, should be considered the most severe and horrific form of homicide, and be prosecuted and punished accordingly.
But idiots gonna id.
Derec
Contributor
A very biased article, not to mention confusing given you don't know how many people the author is talking about.
That is wrong. The 85 acres that are to become the training facility are the site of the former prison farm. It is overgrown by trees, sure, but there are still structures there and even the façade of the old Carnegie public library (shame that was destroyed btw.) was dumped there.
As you can see, hardly a virgin forest.
The forested Intrenchment Creek Park is adjacent to it, and it is also threatened by development, but not by Atlanta police. There is also the issue of the South River Forest further south, which also has nothing to do with the training facility.
You can look at the map of the area yourself. And this article, even if it is too favorable to the activists, gives a good overview of the complexities of the issue and that the forested area is much bigger than the area of the prison farm that would be taken for the training facility.
Normal parts of a training facility, which will btw. also train firefighters.
I know this area well. It is a mostly industrial area, although there are some private houses nearby. It is one of the better areas to build a facility like that if you do not want to disturb residential areas. And why should the race of the people matter anyway? Note that some residents have reported that their property has been damaged/vandalized by the activists as well.
The Bitter Southerner said:
You are pretending that all of the wooded area would be destroyed by the training facility, but it would only affect 85 acres. Take it up instead with DeKalb county for selling the park itself to some film mogul. And why is private investment a bad thing exactly?
Last edited:
Derec
Contributor
Skin color is the main issue for the activists, politicians and the media though.
And I object to police murdering citizens too. But very few police killings are murders.
The role of the police is legally defined and constrained already. And all shootings are investigated. If there is evidence of wrongdoing, as in the Tyre Nichols case, police officers get charged with crimes. Just because you would rather see perps kill police officers than police defending themselves does not mean that it would be a good idea to say that police are not allowed to use lethal force to defend themselves or others.
Last edited:
The police officers who jumped this Tyre fellow were promptly charged with murder. What else do you want?