Anger builds after police shoot assault suspect in Minneapolis

[Nice Squirrel]

How do you figure? Are interstate highways in Minneapolis so fundamentally different than those elsewhere?

I hope everyone realizes there were 51 arrests.

Why do you think 'incoveniencing' other people is worthy of chargers greater than misdemeanors?

100s of people are affected when stunts like that are pulled. They were stuck on the highway for hours - that's pretty much wrongful detention. There is also a safety aspect in that emergency vehicles would have been affected too.

No blocking a freeway doesn't justify the expense of trial, conviction, and one year minimum in a state pen for 51 people. (I understand the emergency vehicle concern.)

Construction has a legitimate purpose. Accidents are just that, accidents. We are talking here about deliberate, organized shutdown of a major highway. And the namby-pamby response by the police last time around did not deter them from repeating this again now.

The first time they did it the police were not expecting it and did not have the resources on hand to arrest the protesters. The next few times they were able to muster enough police to prevent occupation of the freeway, but still had to close the freeway just in case. This time the protesters blocked the freeway and were arrested.

Interstate highways are not an appropriate protest venue. Your right to protest ends with other people's right to free movement. Protesters have no right to, in effect, detain drivers for hours.

I agree that an interstate highway is not the appropriate place (and law forbids pedestrians on them here), but protesters do have a right to use the public thoroughfares to stage peaceful protests. Drivers do not have a right not to be impeded. The First Amendment trumps the inconvenience of drivers, but the protesters must follow the law.

 

[ksen]

I am of the opinion that no American has the right to act badly with no consequence.

I am of the opinion that no police officer has the right to summarily execute someone no matter how badly that person is acting unless there is an immediate and legitimate threat of the officer or someone else being killed.

Now what?

 

[laughing dog]

I am of the opinion that no American has the right to act badly with no consequence. the more egregious the act, the more direct and immediate the response. Black lives do NOT matter any more than anyone else's.
Ever since the OJ case; seeing the response of black hate groups (pretty much any group of blacks large enough for normal group mentality to kick in), I am solidly of the opinion that these groups of blacks have no interest in justice or civil discourse.. just revenge for the ancient wrong doing of the slave trade.

WTF is "normal group mentality" and how many people does it take to make a "group"?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I am of the opinion that no American has the right to act badly with no consequence.

I am of the opinion that no police officer has the right to summarily execute someone no matter how badly that person is acting unless there is an immediate and legitimate threat of the officer or someone else being killed.

Now what?

Well since there is no conceivable way of reconciling these viewpoints: You must both undergo trial by combat.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

How about we do not rush to judgment as to the shooting? Michael Brown case had a lot of "witnesses" too and it turned out to be very different than the #BLM narrative of "hands up don't shoot".

It's too profitable to hold back and wait for an investigation to take place. Without this, some people having nothing else to do.

Besides, it's easier to stir up trouble when the exact truth isn't known.

BLM is about stirring up racial hatred, it isn't about justice.

- - - Updated - - -

That's not rushing to judgment, that's relaying the facts that are, as far as I know, not disputed.

The victim is alleged to have assaulted his girlfriend. He is alleged to have interfered with the paramedics. Yet you are taking these allegations about a black man as fact. However, in every alleged rape case, you continually claim the alleged rapist is innocent until proven guilty. Moreover, you ignore the fact that relations between the Minneapolis police and blacks in that part of city are bad. It is obvious you are rushing to judgment about the victim and the protesters.

Is anybody contesting those allegations?

All I've heard is that they are pretending he was cuffed before the shooting.

 

[KeepTalking]

Ever since the OJ case; seeing the response of black hate groups (pretty much any group of blacks large enough for normal group mentality to kick in), I am solidly of the opinion that these groups of blacks have no interest in justice or civil discourse.. just revenge for the ancient wrong doing of the slave trade.

So, let me see if I have this right: it is your contention that any group of blacks larger than X (X is yet to be determined) is a hate group, and they only want revenge for slavery.

I find such a statement to be hateful, racist, and just plain illogical.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

That is a non-sequitur to the issue - you are taking allegations as fact in this case while insisting that allegations are not to be taken in rape cases.

You aren't paying attention.

We are taking the allegations as true because they have been uncontested.

 

[ksen]

Besides, it's easier to stir up trouble when the exact truth isn't known.

All I've heard is that they are pretending he was cuffed before the shooting.

Apparently so!

 

[laughing dog]

That is a non-sequitur to the issue - you are taking allegations as fact in this case while insisting that allegations are not to be taken in rape cases.

You aren't paying attention.

We are taking the allegations as true because they have been uncontested.

How is that relevant to the issue that you don't know those allegations to be true?

 

[laughing dog]

That is a non-sequitur to the issue - you are taking allegations as fact in this case while insisting that allegations are not to be taken in rape cases.

You aren't paying attention.

We are taking the allegations as true because they have been uncontested.

How is that relevant to the issue that you don't know those allegations to be true?

- - - Updated - - -

Is anybody contesting those allegations?

Well, the person with the most knowledge over the situation cannot contest anything because he is dead.

T
All I've heard is that they are pretending he was cuffed before the shooting.

"Pretending"? You know this how?

 

[Malintent]

I am of the opinion that no American has the right to act badly with no consequence.

I am of the opinion that no police officer has the right to summarily execute someone no matter how badly that person is acting unless there is an immediate and legitimate threat of the officer or someone else being killed.

Now what?

We seem to agree.. so now we wait to see what the facts of the matter is.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

The suspect has died.

 

[Malintent]

I am of the opinion that no American has the right to act badly with no consequence. the more egregious the act, the more direct and immediate the response. Black lives do NOT matter any more than anyone else's.
Ever since the OJ case; seeing the response of black hate groups (pretty much any group of blacks large enough for normal group mentality to kick in), I am solidly of the opinion that these groups of blacks have no interest in justice or civil discourse.. just revenge for the ancient wrong doing of the slave trade.

WTF is "normal group mentality" and how many people does it take to make a "group"?

all people, when in sufficiently large groups, act with what is called 'mob mentality'. That is the 'normal' behavior of humans in groups. I'm saying that my observation has been that when these sufficiently large groups are composed of black people, "revenge for slavery" seems to be the mob mentality.

What does "sufficiently large" mean? it means, of course, large enough for "mob mentality" to kick in.

 

[ksen]

The suspect has died.

I feel safer already.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

There are good, innocent people that do get gunned down by the police. There's no disputing it. But why choose such bad individuals as your poster boy? It turns people off from your cause.

That ignores the reality that tacitly allowing the police to gun down "guilty" people increases the odds they will gun down innocent people. Just ask Tamir Rice. Oh right, he cannot answer because he is dead.

That's not the issue. That's just an assertion on your part. The question is why don't they find someone that the population in general is going to be able to sympathize with?

No one disputes that everyone has rights. I'm saying that by choosing someone like Michael Brown, who was obviously not the "Gentle Giant" that he's been so improperly made out to be, it hurts the credibility of the organization. If the organization wants credibility, then it needs to find someone with whom the general public can identify with to some degree or have immediate sympathy for. And as I said, there are plenty of victims out there that meet that criteria.

When BLM fades into what will have been a political fad, and it will, the organization will have no one to blame but themselves. Much like OWS had a chance to do something, but failed to take advantage of the opportunity before them, so it will be with BLM.

 

[ksen]

That ignores the reality that tacitly allowing the police to gun down "guilty" people increases the odds they will gun down innocent people. Just ask Tamir Rice. Oh right, he cannot answer because he is dead.

That's not the issue.

That's exactly the issue. If you can't see that maybe it's time for you to recalibrate.

No one disputes that everyone has rights.

I'm saying that by choosing someone like Michael Brown, who was obviously not the "Gentle Giant" that he's been so improperly made out to be, it hurts the credibility of the organization. If the organization wants credibility, then it needs to find someone with whom the general public can identify with to some degree or have immediate sympathy for. And as I said, there are plenty of victims out there that meet that criteria.

Hmm, and yet the police's credibility never seems to be hurt when they routinely rally around their own murderous thugs.

When BLM fades into what will have been a political fad, and it will, the organization will have no one to blame but themselves. Much like OWS had a chance to do something, but failed to take advantage of the opportunity before them, so it will be with BLM.

I agree that it's too bad so many people are myopic enough to worry more about proper PR than police killing thousands of civilians a year.

 

[Toni]

That ignores the reality that tacitly allowing the police to gun down "guilty" people increases the odds they will gun down innocent people. Just ask Tamir Rice. Oh right, he cannot answer because he is dead.

That's not the issue. That's just an assertion on your part. The question is why don't they find someone that the population in general is going to be able to sympathize with?

No one disputes that everyone has rights. I'm saying that by choosing someone like Michael Brown, who was obviously not the "Gentle Giant" that he's been so improperly made out to be, it hurts the credibility of the organization. If the organization wants credibility, then it needs to find someone with whom the general public can identify with to some degree or have immediate sympathy for. And as I said, there are plenty of victims out there that meet that criteria.

When BLM fades into what will have been a political fad, and it will, the organization will have no one to blame but themselves. Much like OWS had a chance to do something, but failed to take advantage of the opportunity before them, so it will be with BLM.

Plenty of people do disupute that (other) people have rights, including the right to not be shot dead on sight by police officers.

I honestly do not know how much more innocent a victim or how more heinous a shooting there could be than that of two police officers pulling up to a 12 year old and simply executing him, within a couple of seconds. Yet plenty of posters on this board are happy to excuse this heinous crime, as were the local authorities.

There simply seems to be almost no case where a person--not necessarily a suspect in a crime!--is shot dead that is not excused and brushed aside.

Maybe the death of that 6 year old child--maybe but frankly, I think only because the officers charged are black.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

The BCA is speaking out:
http://www.kare11.com/story/news/cr...r-clark-doesnt-show-entire-incident/75947500/

Drew Evans, BCA superintendent, said they've collected several videos in their investigation, from the ambulance that was on scene, a stationed mobile police camera in the area, public housing authority camera and witness cell phone video. However, none of the videos show the entire incident, only portions, he said.

No dash cam video or body camera video were taken of the incident, according to the BCA. Evans said there wasn't a camera in the squad car of the officers on scene.

"(That) video will not be released at this time, as is normal protocol with our investigations," he said. "Releasing them would impact the integrity of the investigation that's ongoing currently and it would impact the eventual prosecutorial review process that will be pending at the conclusion of our investigation."

Handcuffs were recovered from the scene, Evans said, but it is unclear at this point how or when they were used, or if they were used at all. No weapons were recovered from the scene.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

No dash cam video or body camera video were taken of the incident...

Well, that's not suspicious. I mean, why would people in the city of Minneapolis have police cars dashboard cameras?

Handcuffs were recovered from the scene...

The wording makes it sound like they found them on the ground as opposed to on a specific officer.

 

[ksen]

huh, wonder how they got there?