• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

The shooting of Keith Lamont Scott, and aftermath

So what if this guy has a criminal record? So does Shelby - by her own admission.
Again, wrong thread.
The severity of his past is of no concern of yours, nor should you feel entitled to judge him.
Since we are discussing his case, his past is most definitely a concern of ours.

He went to jail and served his time like he was supposed to. That's not an easy thing for anybody to go through I'm sure, and it ought to go a long way. When he walked out of jail, he was to be afforded the same benefit of the doubt as you or I - not a separate class of citizen.
Actually a felony conviction does restrict one's rights going forward - specifically about gun ownership. And when a person is sentenced their past criminal record is taken into account. Had he been arrested for gun possession he'd probably be going away for a considerable amount of time.

I've used drugs, you've fucked prostitutes, others on this board have done worse, or even been arrested for stuff. Most of us have broken the law in some way or another but we all hope that if we were caught police would only arrest us, not brutal beat us or take our lives. Things like drunk driving, using drugs, partying with some escorts, or even running from police is not sufficient enough reason for cops to use lethal force. Lethal force is to be used by police in cases of self-defense or anothers life being threatened, and for no other reason.
I agree. But if somebody has a history of violent crimes it is more likely they gave police sufficient reason to shoot.
It's a tiresome red herring. Do you think someones criminal past would help us get off a murder charge if we killed that person unjustly, and it could be shown? No.
If there was evidence you killed that person unjustly, of course not. But if circumstances were not very clear, as they usually aren't, and you claimed self defense then this would obviously be taken into account in favor of your version of the events.
 
Cell phone video of the shooting just released shot by the wife. You cannot see the actual shooting itself but something very strange is in it. The still photo shown by the police showing a gun laying on the ground near the body is very damning. The problem is that that gun is NOT present in the cell phone video. So how does the gun get there in the still shot?
I don't know. But if it is a throw gun you would have to assume that several police officers, while out to serve an unrelated warrant, decided to murder a random black man after repeatedly yelling for him to drop his gun ED-209 style. Does that seem at all credible to you? Or is it more credible that this guy with long criminal record, and possibly some brain damage from a (DUI related?) motorcycle accident refused to drop the illegal gun he had?

- - - Updated - - -

But you do claim to know, since you are saying its strange that he's waiting, even if there can be perfectly good explanations.
No, I don't claim to know - that's why I am asking.
 
Saying it looked real enough to fool the cops is not saying anything. When they're in their predatory red zone at the sight of a black person, they can't even tell a fucking book is not a gun.

What book was he supposedly reading?
 
I don't know. But if it is a throw gun you would have to assume that several police officers, while out to serve an unrelated warrant, decided to murder a random black man after repeatedly yelling for him to drop his gun ED-209 style. Does that seem at all credible to you? Or is it more credible that this guy with long criminal record, and possibly some brain damage from a (DUI related?) motorcycle accident refused to drop the illegal gun he had?

Now you're diagnosing brain damage?
But you do claim to know, since you are saying its strange that he's waiting, even if there can be perfectly good explanations.
No, I don't claim to know - that's why I am asking.


You weren't asking. You were claiming it was weird. You didn't say, "is that weird?" you said, "that is weird."

FACT: it's not weird for parents to be parked at a bus stop.
 
Remember that time a black kid in an open carry case had a toy gun in his belt and two police officers gunned him to death even though he had nothing in his hand? If you don't, the victim's name was Tamir Rice.

Remember that black "kid" was big enough to look adult.

The gun was realistic enough to fool the cops.

And his hand went for it--in hindsight, probably to ditch it but that's absolutely the wrong thing to do in a case like that.

Can you tell real from fake?

http://uniformstories.com/police/quizzes/can-you-tell-whether-a-gun-is-real-or-fake

Black Boys Viewed as Older, Less Innocent Than Whites, Research Finds

Researchers tested 176 police officers, mostly white males, average age 37, in large urban areas, to determine their levels of two distinct types of bias — prejudice and unconscious dehumanization of black people by comparing them to apes. To test for prejudice, researchers had officers complete a widely used psychological questionnaire with statements such as “It is likely that blacks will bring violence to neighborhoods when they move in.” To determine officers’ dehumanization of blacks, the researchers gave them a psychological task in which they paired blacks and whites with large cats, such as lions, or with apes. Researchers reviewed police officers’ personnel records to determine use of force while on duty and found that those who dehumanized blacks were more likely to have used force against a black child in custody than officers who did not dehumanize blacks. The study described use of force as takedown or wrist lock; kicking or punching; striking with a blunt object; using a police dog, restraints or hobbling; or using tear gas, electric shock or killing. Only dehumanization and not police officers’ prejudice against blacks — conscious or not — was linked to violent encounters with black children in custody, according to the study.

The authors noted that police officers’ unconscious dehumanization of blacks could have been the result of negative interactions with black children, rather than the cause of using force with black children. “We found evidence that overestimating age and culpability based on racial differences was linked to dehumanizing stereotypes, but future research should try to clarify the relationship between dehumanization and racial disparities in police use of force,” Goff said.

The study also involved 264 mostly white, female undergraduate students from large public U.S. universities. In one experiment, students rated the innocence of people ranging from infants to 25-year-olds who were black, white or an unidentified race. The students judged children up to 9 years old as equally innocent regardless of race, but considered black children significantly less innocent than other children in every age group beginning at age 10, the researchers found.

The students were also shown photographs alongside descriptions of various crimes and asked to assess the age and innocence of white, black or Latino boys ages 10 to 17. The students overestimated the age of blacks by an average of 4.5 years and found them more culpable than whites or Latinos, particularly when the boys were matched with serious crimes, the study found. Researchers used questionnaires to assess the participants’ prejudice and dehumanization of blacks. They found that participants who implicitly associated blacks with apes thought the black children were older and less innocent.

In another experiment, students first viewed either a photo of an ape or a large cat and then rated black and white youngsters in terms of perceived innocence and need for protection as children. Those who looked at the ape photo gave black children lower ratings and estimated that black children were significantly older than their actual ages, particularly if the child had been accused of a felony rather than a misdemeanor.

“The evidence shows that perceptions of the essential nature of children can be affected by race, and for black children, this can mean they lose the protection afforded by assumed childhood innocence well before they become adults,” said co-author Matthew Jackson, PhD, also of UCLA. “With the average age overestimation for black boys exceeding four-and-a-half years, in some cases, black children may be viewed as adults when they are just 13 years old.”
 
No, you are wrong, again.
To sum your post up:
Blah blah ... personal insults.
Blah blah ... accusations of racism and sexism.
Blah blah ... Michael Brown.

In case anyone is wondering what Derec is running from

Hardly.

No, they are not all predisposed to bad behavior, but those with lengthy criminal record that includes violent crimes and a felony are. Of course, you want to muddle the waters by playing the race card.

Wrong thread. Although her history likely played a role in her getting charged that quickly. So, yes, history matters, although hers wasn't nearly as bad as Keith Scott's.

She is a woman, so you can always hate on her too, like you usually do.
Baseless accusation. Like almost everything re you write.

No, you are wrong, again.

Your lack of self awareness of how how bigoted you are with regards to black people (and women of all colors) surprises no one, but you have left a trail of over a decade of posts where you habitually seek out any excuse to blame black people and women for what white people and men do to them.

No this is not the wrong thread and I will tell you why. BY YOUR OWN DEBATING TECHNIQUES, any incident can be used to make a point about any other incident, case in point, you continual harping on the case of Michael Brown. I'll bet just my mentioning the name Michael Brown makes you little fingers itch to type something about him right now.

Nothing i have said is baseless. But if you want to try to prove that it is, all you have to do is show all the many posts you have made over the years where you defended black victims of shootings or female victims of rape.

Note that no postings are provided.

AND he just had to type the name Michael Brown.

Predictable to the point of setting your watch by his behavior
 
Saying it looked real enough to fool the cops is not saying anything. When they're in their predatory red zone at the sight of a black person, they can't even tell a fucking book is not a gun.

What book was he supposedly reading?

Oh there's more than just books for you to pretend don't happen. There are whole lists of harmless objects cops have either used as a blatant excuse for their own bloodthirsty trigger fingers or were just too stupid or blinded by diminished capacity due to pumped-up red zone brain (also a kind of stupidity) to recognize.

Oh, look, here's some lists right here. It's amazing the things you can find when you're not hell bent on not finding them.

http://www.vocativ.com/usa/guns/st-louis-shooting/
https://youthradio.org/journalism/juvenile-justice/triggered-objects-mistaken-for-guns/
http://www.ranker.com/list/objects-mistaken-for-guns/anabel-conner
 
But you do claim to know, since you are saying its strange that he's waiting, even if there can be perfectly good explanations.
No, I don't claim to know - that's why I am asking.

You claim that its strange despite you've been presented with a lot of different scenarios where it could be perfectly normal:

"He was in an apartment complex, allegedly waiting for a school bus to drop off his son. A bit strange, I know. "

How the hell can it be strange to pick up your kid at the bus stop in a car? Just admit that it might not be strange, its ok, I won't hold it against you.

Btw, do you have kids? Do you have any idea of a logistics hell that can be sometimes?
 
Again, wrong thread.

Since we are discussing his case, his past is most definitely a concern of ours.
It's obvious that you don't care what the cops record is as an officer because you support her regardless of what it is. You apply one standard to him, while advocating a disturbing amount of apathy to the cop to use lethal force 'just because' concerning the victims record - all while committing crimes yourself.

Were you born a hypocrite, or did it take time?
 
Can't he just wait for his son in the apartment? Why wait in the car inside the apartment complex?
Why can't he wait for his son at the bus stop? I used to pick my daughter up at the bus stop all the time.

1. He can't own a gun due to a violent felony.
2. It makes police version of events much more likely.
#1 is immaterial and #2 is not logical because the cops didn't know it at the time they shot and killed him.
 
In my old residence there was a school bus stop just a few feet from my driveway. Do you think that any of those kids or their parents should have had carte blanche to enter my home and make a sandwich with the stuff I had in my fridge?
Huh? I literally have no idea what your point is here? Who said anything about neighbors and sandwiches? Normally school bus lets kids out and they walk the short way to their actual home. They don't need to be chauffeured for the last quarter mile or however long the way is.

You don't have kids, so stop trying to insinuate something negative about him because he choose to pick his son up at the bus stop. I picked my daughter up at her bus stop, too, and we lived less than a 1/4 mile away. Maybe you think I should get shot dead for it, too?
 
In the phone video, right before the shots, the wife starts repeating, "Keith, don't you do it!" It sounds like she believed he was doing something reckless right then.
 
Remember that time a black kid in an open carry case had a toy gun in his belt and two police officers gunned him to death even though he had nothing in his hand? If you don't, the victim's name was Tamir Rice.

Remember that black "kid" was big enough to look adult.

The gun was realistic enough to fool the cops.

And his hand went for it--in hindsight, probably to ditch it but that's absolutely the wrong thing to do in a case like that.

Can you tell real from fake?

http://uniformstories.com/police/quizzes/can-you-tell-whether-a-gun-is-real-or-fake

Bullshit on all fucking points Loren.

But you are Derec will keep on repeating untruths on all these cases forever and ever.
 
In the phone video, right before the shots, the wife starts repeating, "Keith, don't you do it!" It sounds like she believed he was doing something reckless right then.

I heard that, too. It could be a lot of things. Didn't she also say something earlier for him not to do something?

I just checked the video. Yes, she earlier had said for him not to let them break the windows in. That he'd better get out.

Now that I've watched it I have to wonder exactly why were the police trying to get him out of the vehicle. Aren't they supposed to ask for identification as part of the whole serving a warrant thing?
 
Saying it looked real enough to fool the cops is not saying anything. When they're in their predatory red zone at the sight of a black person, they can't even tell a fucking book is not a gun.

And apparently you can't tell the difference between the claims of the family and the word of god.

We have the TV video showing a gun on the ground.

- - - Updated - - -

Now you're diagnosing brain damage?

No, he's paying attention to the news. According to the wife he had brain damage.
 
And apparently you can't tell the difference between the claims of the family and the word of god.

We have the TV video showing a gun on the ground.
The family claims he had no gun. If their claim is true, then the gun was planted. Since the video does not show where the gun came from, the video cannot possibly address the family's claim. And if their claim is false, the video still does not show that, because it doesn't show where the gun came from.

Either way, the video does not definitely resolve the issue.
 
Back
Top Bottom