Ferguson

kat1114 · November 2014

sarawifenow said:

I have learned a lot of things today from this threas.
1.) It is not ok to have an unpopular opinion without being told that your experience/opinion is wrong/there is no way for it to exist.
2.) You are garbage if you don't think the same way as the masses.
You know what? If my H (who is a cop) had somebody attacking him, I would hope he would defend himself. Can anbody honestly tell me that they would just sit there and let someone attack them physically?

1) Again, I have no problem with unpopular opinions. I think it's good to see other people's point of views to see where yours falls short. That being said, I think it's incredibly naive for posters to sit here and discount the fact that America has pervasive race problem.

2) Please don't let what one poster said determine that the rest of us feel you are garbage for disagreeing.

As to the comments regarding officer's fighting back, of course no one legitimately expects officers to sit there and take punches. But there are use of force continuums that determine what the appropriate use of force is in a given situation. Was the appropriate amount of force used on Michael Brown? I don't know, I wasn't on the grand jury, and I'm only on day 2 of the grand jury documents. I'm trying to reserve my judgment until I read through the documents myself.

But that doesn't change the fact that the outrage stemming from this event isn't just about Michael Brown- it's about all of the injustices people of color face everyday in our country.

firebabe6519 · November 2014

QueerFemme said:

sarawifenow said:

I also have the very unpopular opinion in this case. I won't go into it.

I agree with @sarahufl--the fact that Michael Brown lost his life that day is tragic. Loss of life is always a tragedy IMO.

I grew up in a community where I, a white person, was the minority and have been on the opposite end of racism. It is a terrible feeling and I hate racism across the board.

My family is a family of law enforcement. DH is in law enforcement. The outpouring of "cop hate" has been making me really sick to my stomach over the last several months. I can't even go onto my facebook this morning because it is just flooded. I think people have the right to be angry. I do not think people have the right to loot and hurt their community. All this hate (across all spectrums) really gets to me and hurts my heart.

Ok, that is all I am going to say about this.

You have never, ever, ever, ever, been on the opposite end of racism. You may have been on the end of prejudiced and judgement, but racism exists within a power structure. If you are white, you own the power structure. There is no such thing as reverse racism. It does not exist.

You are one hell of an ignorant creature if you really believe racism is only about white's hating other races. Blacks, whites, Hispanics, and Asians can all be racist too.

Just because you are white doesn't mean you own / run any power structures. Granted in certain areas whites may have the majority. But there are also plenty of other areas with other race majorities, and being white in those areas is often accompanied by racism towards them.

And yes I have been subjected to racism. As a mix, I get racist comments from whites who are prejudiced against interracial marriage / breedingamong many othwr reasons. And then there are racist comments from African Americans for the same exact reasons and others.

People like to shit on others just because they are different. As has quite clearly been referenced by several posts throughout this thread. You all just want to hate others who don't think, walk, and talk just like you.

It is pathetic and sad that in this day and age we are still incapable of being civilized and peacefully working together to resolve our differences and problems.

Fran1985 · November 2014

sarawifenow said:

I have learned a lot of things today from this threas.

1.) It is not ok to have an unpopular opinion without being told that your experience/opinion is wrong/there is no way for it to exist.

2.) You are garbage if you don't think the same way as the masses.

You know what? If my H (who is a cop) had somebody attacking him, I would hope he would defend himself. Can anbody honestly tell me that they would just sit there and let someone attack them physically?

1) There are two different issues in the thread. Not many (if any besides one) has said the cop was guilty and needs to go to jail. People have raised the discussion about the protest and although no one has defended violence, people have said they understand it.

2) one person made the garbage comment and she apologized. Please stop making yourself out like there is a whole group calling you garbage. There was an actual racist comment on the second page and I am not calling everyone a racist.

3) Straw man argument- no one has said cops can't defend themselves. I think most people have said that the Brown case is very complicated he said she said. But it is certainly not clear cut for the police officer either- and I think everyone's personal experience with cops heavily influences that viewpoint.

sarawifenow · November 2014

kat1114 said:

sarawifenow said:

I have learned a lot of things today from this threas.
1.) It is not ok to have an unpopular opinion without being told that your experience/opinion is wrong/there is no way for it to exist.
2.) You are garbage if you don't think the same way as the masses.
You know what? If my H (who is a cop) had somebody attacking him, I would hope he would defend himself. Can anbody honestly tell me that they would just sit there and let someone attack them physically?

1) Again, I have no problem with unpopular opinions. I think it's good to see other people's point of views to see where yours falls short. That being said, I think it's incredibly naive for posters to sit here and discount the fact that America has pervasive race problem.

2) Please don't let what one poster said determine that the rest of us feel you are garbage for disagreeing.

As to the comments regarding officer's fighting back, of course no one legitimately expects officers to sit there and take punches. But there are use of force continuums that determine what the appropriate use of force is in a given situation. Was the appropriate amount of force used on Michael Brown? I don't know, I wasn't on the grand jury, and I'm only on day 2 of the grand jury documents. I'm trying to reserve my judgment until I read through the documents myself.

But that doesn't change the fact that the outrage stemming from this event isn't just about Michael Brown- it's about all of the injustices people of color face everyday in our country.

I understand that there is a race problem in society. I have never said otherwise. There is racial profiling--no doubt--and it is a problem.

I just feel that to have an UO here automatically means that your going to be piled on. I am probably being overly sensitive. I can admit that and take full responsibility for that. My entire life I have hear nothing but cop hate and have had to defend my loved ones against it.

All I can say that I feel very unwelcomed on TK today because I don't agree with y'all. I am always up for a good debate, but when unwarranted attacks and assumptions start getting thrown at me and when people start trying to tell me that what I have experienced is in no way possible, I am going to take offense. Sorry not sorry.

Sugargirl1019 · November 2014

I saw you changed your words. Thank goodness for that was extremely against TOS.

sarawifenow · November 2014

Fran1985 said:

sarawifenow said:

I have learned a lot of things today from this threas.

1.) It is not ok to have an unpopular opinion without being told that your experience/opinion is wrong/there is no way for it to exist.

2.) You are garbage if you don't think the same way as the masses.

You know what? If my H (who is a cop) had somebody attacking him, I would hope he would defend himself. Can anbody honestly tell me that they would just sit there and let someone attack them physically?

1) There are two different issues in the thread. Not many (if any besides one) has said the cop was guilty and needs to go to jail. People have raised the discussion about the protest and although no one has defended violence, people have said they understand it.

2) one person made the garbage comment and she apologized. Please stop making yourself out like there is a whole group calling you garbage. There was an actual racist comment on the second page and I am not calling everyone a racist.

3) Straw man argument- no one has said cops can't defend themselves. I think most people have said that the Brown case is very complicated he said she said. But it is certainly not clear cut for the police officer either- and I think everyone's personal experience with cops heavily influences that viewpoint.

Based on the number of love its on that post, I think it can be inferred that many people agree with the comment. Stop implying that I am unfounded in my thinking with this.

QueerFemme · November 2014

firebabe6519 said:

sarawifenow said:

I also have the very unpopular opinion in this case. I won't go into it.

I agree with @sarahufl--the fact that Michael Brown lost his life that day is tragic. Loss of life is always a tragedy IMO.

I grew up in a community where I, a white person, was the minority and have been on the opposite end of racism. It is a terrible feeling and I hate racism across the board.

My family is a family of law enforcement. DH is in law enforcement. The outpouring of "cop hate" has been making me really sick to my stomach over the last several months. I can't even go onto my facebook this morning because it is just flooded. I think people have the right to be angry. I do not think people have the right to loot and hurt their community. All this hate (across all spectrums) really gets to me and hurts my heart.

Ok, that is all I am going to say about this.

You have never, ever, ever, ever, been on the opposite end of racism. You may have been on the end of prejudiced and judgement, but racism exists within a power structure. If you are white, you own the power structure. There is no such thing as reverse racism. It does not exist.
You are one hell of an ignorant creature if you really believe racism is only about white's hating other races. Blacks, whites, Hispanics, and Asians can all be racist to
because you are white doesn't mean you own / run any power structures
o. Just. Granted in certain areas whites may have the majority. But there are also plenty of other areas with other race majorities, and being white in those areas is often accompanied by racism towards them. And yes I have been subjected to racism. As a mix, I get racist comments from whites who are prejudiced against interracial marriage / breedingamong many othwr reasons. And then there are racist comments from African Americans for the same exact reasons and others. People like to shit on others just because they are different. As has quite clearly been referenced by several posts throughout this thread. You all just want to hate others who don't think, walk, and talk just like you. It is pathetic and sad that in this day and age we are still incapable of being civilized and peacefully working together to resolve our differences and problems.

Nope. Two different issues here. Again, people not in control of the power cannot be racist. They can be prejudiced, and they can be assholes, but racism involves having power over. People of color do not have the power in this society.

The second issue about "you may be white and not own/run any power structures". If you are white, you are part of the power dynamic in this society. You don't have to individually own Microsoft, or be a member of congress, but the system is set up for your success.

sarawifenow · November 2014

QueerFemme said:

firebabe6519 said:

sarawifenow said:

I also have the very unpopular opinion in this case. I won't go into it.

I agree with @sarahufl--the fact that Michael Brown lost his life that day is tragic. Loss of life is always a tragedy IMO.

I grew up in a community where I, a white person, was the minority and have been on the opposite end of racism. It is a terrible feeling and I hate racism across the board.

My family is a family of law enforcement. DH is in law enforcement. The outpouring of "cop hate" has been making me really sick to my stomach over the last several months. I can't even go onto my facebook this morning because it is just flooded. I think people have the right to be angry. I do not think people have the right to loot and hurt their community. All this hate (across all spectrums) really gets to me and hurts my heart.

Ok, that is all I am going to say about this.

You have never, ever, ever, ever, been on the opposite end of racism. You may have been on the end of prejudiced and judgement, but racism exists within a power structure. If you are white, you own the power structure. There is no such thing as reverse racism. It does not exist.
You are one hell of an ignorant creature if you really believe racism is only about white's hating other races. Blacks, whites, Hispanics, and Asians can all be racist to
because you are white doesn't mean you own / run any power structures
o. Just. Granted in certain areas whites may have the majority. But there are also plenty of other areas with other race majorities, and being white in those areas is often accompanied by racism towards them. And yes I have been subjected to racism. As a mix, I get racist comments from whites who are prejudiced against interracial marriage / breedingamong many othwr reasons. And then there are racist comments from African Americans for the same exact reasons and others. People like to shit on others just because they are different. As has quite clearly been referenced by several posts throughout this thread. You all just want to hate others who don't think, walk, and talk just like you. It is pathetic and sad that in this day and age we are still incapable of being civilized and peacefully working together to resolve our differences and problems.

Nope. Two different issues here. Again, people not in control of the power cannot be racist. They can be prejudiced, and they can be assholes, but racism involves having power over. People of color do not have the power in this society.

The second issue about "you may be white and not own/run any power structures". If you are white, you are part of the power dynamic in this society. You don't have to individually own Microsoft, or be a member of congress, but the system is set up for your success.

You keep referencing the bolded. I am curious where you are getting this definition from because I grew up learning a very different definition of racism. I posted the definition I was taught. I am genuinely curious.

ashley8918 · November 2014

Sugargirl1019 said:

I saw you changed your words. Thank goodness for that was extremely against TOS.

Who are you talking to?

[Deleted User] · November 2014

Fran1985 · November 2014

sarawifenow said:

Fran1985 said:

sarawifenow said:

I have learned a lot of things today from this threas.

1.) It is not ok to have an unpopular opinion without being told that your experience/opinion is wrong/there is no way for it to exist.

2.) You are garbage if you don't think the same way as the masses.

You know what? If my H (who is a cop) had somebody attacking him, I would hope he would defend himself. Can anbody honestly tell me that they would just sit there and let someone attack them physically?

1) There are two different issues in the thread. Not many (if any besides one) has said the cop was guilty and needs to go to jail. People have raised the discussion about the protest and although no one has defended violence, people have said they understand it.

2) one person made the garbage comment and she apologized. Please stop making yourself out like there is a whole group calling you garbage. There was an actual racist comment on the second page and I am not calling everyone a racist.

3) Straw man argument- no one has said cops can't defend themselves. I think most people have said that the Brown case is very complicated he said she said. But it is certainly not clear cut for the police officer either- and I think everyone's personal experience with cops heavily influences that viewpoint.

Based on the number of love its on that post, I think it can be inferred that many people agree with the comment. Stop implying that I am unfounded in my thinking with this.

She said she didn't want to read garbage posts from garbage people. She may have meant you, but I loved her post and I didn't - I meant the two racist posts I read. You are unfounded in your thinking- you are way overreading that one post.

cupcait927 · November 2014

ashley8918 said:

Sugargirl1019 said:

I saw you changed your words. Thank goodness for that was extremely against TOS.

Who are you talking to?

I believe it was @firebabe6519 I saw her post before it was edited and it had a name that was definitely breaking TOS towards @QueerFemme

QueerFemme · November 2014

cupcait927 said:

ashley8918 said:

Sugargirl1019 said:

I saw you changed your words. Thank goodness for that was extremely against TOS.

Who are you talking to?

I believe it was @firebabe6519 I saw her post before it was edited and it had a name that was definitely breaking TOS towards @QueerFemme

Oh ! I missed someone calling me a name? Bummer.

kat1114 · November 2014

sarawifenow said:

QueerFemme said:

firebabe6519 said:

sarawifenow said:

I also have the very unpopular opinion in this case. I won't go into it.

I agree with @sarahufl--the fact that Michael Brown lost his life that day is tragic. Loss of life is always a tragedy IMO.

I grew up in a community where I, a white person, was the minority and have been on the opposite end of racism. It is a terrible feeling and I hate racism across the board.

My family is a family of law enforcement. DH is in law enforcement. The outpouring of "cop hate" has been making me really sick to my stomach over the last several months. I can't even go onto my facebook this morning because it is just flooded. I think people have the right to be angry. I do not think people have the right to loot and hurt their community. All this hate (across all spectrums) really gets to me and hurts my heart.

Ok, that is all I am going to say about this.

You have never, ever, ever, ever, been on the opposite end of racism. You may have been on the end of prejudiced and judgement, but racism exists within a power structure. If you are white, you own the power structure. There is no such thing as reverse racism. It does not exist.
You are one hell of an ignorant creature if you really believe racism is only about white's hating other races. Blacks, whites, Hispanics, and Asians can all be racist to
because you are white doesn't mean you own / run any power structures
o. Just. Granted in certain areas whites may have the majority. But there are also plenty of other areas with other race majorities, and being white in those areas is often accompanied by racism towards them. And yes I have been subjected to racism. As a mix, I get racist comments from whites who are prejudiced against interracial marriage / breedingamong many othwr reasons. And then there are racist comments from African Americans for the same exact reasons and others. People like to shit on others just because they are different. As has quite clearly been referenced by several posts throughout this thread. You all just want to hate others who don't think, walk, and talk just like you. It is pathetic and sad that in this day and age we are still incapable of being civilized and peacefully working together to resolve our differences and problems.

Nope. Two different issues here. Again, people not in control of the power cannot be racist. They can be prejudiced, and they can be assholes, but racism involves having power over. People of color do not have the power in this society.

The second issue about "you may be white and not own/run any power structures". If you are white, you are part of the power dynamic in this society. You don't have to individually own Microsoft, or be a member of congress, but the system is set up for your success.

You keep referencing the bolded. I am curious where you are getting this definition from because I grew up learning a very different definition of racism. I posted the definition I was taught. I am genuinely curious.

Can't speak to where QueerFemme is getting her definitions, but I posted this a few pages back and found it helpful regrading the definitions: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/07/15/884649/-Why-there-s-no-such-thing-as-Reverse-Racism#

QueerFemme · November 2014

well, now that I'm again, totally frustrated with how our society functions, I have to go to work. Proceed without me folks.

southernbelle0915 · November 2014

sarawifenow said:

QueerFemme said:
Nope. Two different issues here. Again, people not in control of the power cannot be racist. They can be prejudiced, and they can be assholes, but racism involves having power over. People of color do not have the power in this society.

The second issue about "you may be white and not own/run any power structures". If you are white, you are part of the power dynamic in this society. You don't have to individually own Microsoft, or be a member of congress, but the system is set up for your success.

You keep referencing the bolded. I am curious where you are getting this definition from because I grew up learning a very different definition of racism. I posted the definition I was taught. I am genuinely curious.

The definition of racism that you're using isn't wrong, per se. But many people who research the topic don't agree with the general/blanket definition. They take it a step further as it manifests itself into the power structure and social hierarchy of a society.

So in the US, racism as a concept has made its way into institutions and the societal power structure in general - and it's controlled by white people (majority + slavery and all). This definition goes that if you're a part of the ruling race, you can't be subject to racism as it has manifested itself into society. You can be subject to prejudice - like someone saying "white boys can't jump" or some other stereotyping comment.

It's a different way of looking at it as a concept. I see what both of y'all are saying, but you're using different definitions of the same word - hence the perceived disagreement.

Sugargirl1019 · November 2014

ashley8918 said:

Sugargirl1019 said:

I saw you changed your words. Thank goodness for that was extremely against TOS.

Who are you talking to?

She was lucky to have changed her words before I quoted her. So I will keep her anonymous. She knows who she is. The words were "you are a dumb fuck".

Fran1985 · November 2014

sarawifenow said:

QueerFemme said:

firebabe6519 said:

sarawifenow said:

I also have the very unpopular opinion in this case. I won't go into it.

I agree with @sarahufl--the fact that Michael Brown lost his life that day is tragic. Loss of life is always a tragedy IMO.

I grew up in a community where I, a white person, was the minority and have been on the opposite end of racism. It is a terrible feeling and I hate racism across the board.

My family is a family of law enforcement. DH is in law enforcement. The outpouring of "cop hate" has been making me really sick to my stomach over the last several months. I can't even go onto my facebook this morning because it is just flooded. I think people have the right to be angry. I do not think people have the right to loot and hurt their community. All this hate (across all spectrums) really gets to me and hurts my heart.

Ok, that is all I am going to say about this.
You have never, ever, ever, ever, been on the opposite end of racism. You may have been on the end of prejudiced and judgement, but racism exists within a power structure. If you are white, you own the power structure. There is no such thing as reverse racism. It does not exist.
You are one hell of an ignorant creature if you really believe racism is only about white's hating other races. Blacks, whites, Hispanics, and Asians can all be racist to
because you are white doesn't mean you own / run any power structures
o. Just. Granted in certain areas whites may have the majority. But there are also plenty of other areas with other race majorities, and being white in those areas is often accompanied by racism towards them. And yes I have been subjected to racism. As a mix, I get racist comments from whites who are prejudiced against interracial marriage / breedingamong many othwr reasons. And then there are racist comments from African Americans for the same exact reasons and others. People like to shit on others just because they are different. As has quite clearly been referenced by several posts throughout this thread. You all just want to hate others who don't think, walk, and talk just like you. It is pathetic and sad that in this day and age we are still incapable of being civilized and peacefully working together to resolve our differences and problems.
Nope. Two different issues here. Again, people not in control of the power cannot be racist. They can be prejudiced, and they can be assholes, but racism involves having power over. People of color do not have the power in this society.

The second issue about "you may be white and not own/run any power structures". If you are white, you are part of the power dynamic in this society. You don't have to individually own Microsoft, or be a member of congress, but the system is set up for your success.

You keep referencing the bolded. I am curious where you are getting this definition from because I grew up learning a very different definition of racism. I posted the definition I was taught. I am genuinely curious.

There are a few different articles that have been posted. It is similar to gender discrimination- can be men be subject to sexism? They can be subject to bias, cruelty, stereotyping, etc, but can't be subject to sexism because they live in a society in which they are in power.

sarahufl · November 2014

wow, that blew up while I was at lunch. FTR, it was me who brought up Bill Bratton being assaulted and the NYPD's (non)involvement in this case.

And I will stand by it- Bill Bratton had nothing to do with the grand jury verdict. Sure, the NYPD has its faults, I don't deny that. But law enforcement also has a terribly difficult job that I would venture to guess most of us on this board don't have any understanding of. Like I said, I am white and fortunate. So I don't face this daily, a fact I am incredibly grateful for.

But I do live in a city of 8 million people and pay tax dollars to the people who take care of me and ensure my safety. They do a job that I do not want to do myself because, frankly, it terrifies me. I am able to comfortably walk home at night because I trust in the NYPD.

The point here is that assaulting the head of the NYPD because you are pissed off about a jury verdict in another state is completely misdirected. Getting mad about something and taking it out on someone else isn't the answer. I know the NYPD has been accused of police brutality- trust me, it is hard to get away from here. But there are 34,000 uniformed officers in this city. THIRTY FOUR THOUSAND. Saying that "they" do things is absurd.

A lot of these incidences, Michael Brown included, start because the person in question is BREAKING THE LAW. While I agree that sometimes, excessive force is used, why do so many people ignore what started it in the first place?

kat1114 · November 2014

sarahufl said:

wow, that blew up while I was at lunch. FTR, it was me who brought up Bill Bratton being assaulted and the NYPD's (non)involvement in this case.

And I will stand by it- Bill Bratton had nothing to do with the grand jury verdict. Sure, the NYPD has its faults, I don't deny that. But law enforcement also has a terribly difficult job that I would venture to guess most of us on this board don't have any understanding of. Like I said, I am white and fortunate. So I don't face this daily, a fact I am incredibly grateful for.

But I do live in a city of 8 million people and pay tax dollars to the people who take care of me and ensure my safety. They do a job that I do not want to do myself because, frankly, it terrifies me. I am able to comfortably walk home at night because I trust in the NYPD.

The point here is that assaulting the head of the NYPD because you are pissed off about a jury verdict in another state is completely misdirected. Getting mad about something and taking it out on someone else isn't the answer. I know the NYPD has been accused of police brutality- trust me, it is hard to get away from here. But there are 34,000 uniformed officers in this city. THIRTY FOUR THOUSAND. Saying that "they" do things is absurd.

A lot of these incidences, Michael Brown included, start because the person in question is BREAKING THE LAW. While I agree that sometimes, excessive force is used, why do so many people ignore what started it in the first place?

Again, these protests are not all about Michael Brown but police brutality in general. The throwing of the paint wasn't about the verdict. It's about Bratton directing his 34,000 officers to engage in tactics that people aren't supportive of.

The law being broken doesn't make using excessive force okay. Officers are held to a higher standard because they are in positions of authority.

jdluvr06 · November 2014

southernbelle0915 said:

sarawifenow said:

QueerFemme said:

Nope. Two different issues here. Again, people not in control of the power cannot be racist. They can be prejudiced, and they can be assholes, but racism involves having power over. People of color do not have the power in this society.

The second issue about "you may be white and not own/run any power structures". If you are white, you are part of the power dynamic in this society. You don't have to individually own Microsoft, or be a member of congress, but the system is set up for your success.

You keep referencing the bolded. I am curious where you are getting this definition from because I grew up learning a very different definition of racism. I posted the definition I was taught. I am genuinely curious.

The definition of racism that you're using isn't wrong, per se. But many people who research the topic don't agree with the general/blanket definition. They take it a step further as it manifests itself into the power structure and social hierarchy of a society.

So in the US, racism as a concept has made its way into institutions and the societal power structure in general - and it's controlled by white people (majority + slavery and all). This definition goes that if you're a part of the ruling race, you can't be subject to racism as it has manifested itself into society. You can be subject to prejudice - like someone saying "white boys can't jump" or some other stereotyping comment.

It's a different way of looking at it as a concept. I see what both of y'all are saying, but you're using different definitions of the same word - hence the perceived disagreement.

______ quote box disappeared
It is interesting to me that some posters separate the racism definitions. I had a professor who taught that there are two kinds of racism; societal (which would be the power structure one) and individual racism.

sarahufl · November 2014

kat1114 said:

sarahufl said:

wow, that blew up while I was at lunch. FTR, it was me who brought up Bill Bratton being assaulted and the NYPD's (non)involvement in this case.

And I will stand by it- Bill Bratton had nothing to do with the grand jury verdict. Sure, the NYPD has its faults, I don't deny that. But law enforcement also has a terribly difficult job that I would venture to guess most of us on this board don't have any understanding of. Like I said, I am white and fortunate. So I don't face this daily, a fact I am incredibly grateful for.

But I do live in a city of 8 million people and pay tax dollars to the people who take care of me and ensure my safety. They do a job that I do not want to do myself because, frankly, it terrifies me. I am able to comfortably walk home at night because I trust in the NYPD.

The point here is that assaulting the head of the NYPD because you are pissed off about a jury verdict in another state is completely misdirected. Getting mad about something and taking it out on someone else isn't the answer. I know the NYPD has been accused of police brutality- trust me, it is hard to get away from here. But there are 34,000 uniformed officers in this city. THIRTY FOUR THOUSAND. Saying that "they" do things is absurd.

A lot of these incidences, Michael Brown included, start because the person in question is BREAKING THE LAW. While I agree that sometimes, excessive force is used, why do so many people ignore what started it in the first place?

Again, these protests are not all about Michael Brown but police brutality in general. The throwing of the paint wasn't about the verdict. It's about Bratton directing his 34,000 officers to engage in tactics that people aren't supportive of.

The law being broken doesn't make using excessive force okay. Officers are held to a higher standard because they are in positions of authority.

Why is this so difficult to understand?! These protests were in direct response to the grand jury verdict. They happen all the time in NYC after other police incidents. Trust me.

And I never said excessive force is ok, just that it is used. Michael Brown was assaulting a police officer. Excessive force is rarely used when the perp isn't doing something they shouldn't be doing.

Fran1985 · November 2014

sarahufl said:

wow, that blew up while I was at lunch. FTR, it was me who brought up Bill Bratton being assaulted and the NYPD's (non)involvement in this case.

And I will stand by it- Bill Bratton had nothing to do with the grand jury verdict. Sure, the NYPD has its faults, I don't deny that. But law enforcement also has a terribly difficult job that I would venture to guess most of us on this board don't have any understanding of. Like I said, I am white and fortunate. So I don't face this daily, a fact I am incredibly grateful for.

But I do live in a city of 8 million people and pay tax dollars to the people who take care of me and ensure my safety. They do a job that I do not want to do myself because, frankly, it terrifies me. I am able to comfortably walk home at night because I trust in the NYPD.

The point here is that assaulting the head of the NYPD because you are pissed off about a jury verdict in another state is completely misdirected. Getting mad about something and taking it out on someone else isn't the answer. I know the NYPD has been accused of police brutality- trust me, it is hard to get away from here. But there are 34,000 uniformed officers in this city. THIRTY FOUR THOUSAND. Saying that "they" do things is absurd.

A lot of these incidences, Michael Brown included, start because the person in question is BREAKING THE LAW. While I agree that sometimes, excessive force is used, why do so many people ignore what started it in the first place?

Honestly I don't even want to be answering this thread anymore- but why do you keep saying people were protesting in NYC because of Brown? They were protesting police brutality.

In the two most recent incidents, neither victim was breaking the law. No one is arguing that people should break the law.

To the bolded- COME ON. that is the whole point of this discussion! You feel comfortable because you get to be comfortable because of your race! Don't you get that some people don't get that comfort because the police is the enemy for them? That they can be shot at because they are walking in a stairwell or reaching for their ID??

abbyj700 · November 2014

sarahufl said:

kat1114 said:

sarahufl said:

wow, that blew up while I was at lunch. FTR, it was me who brought up Bill Bratton being assaulted and the NYPD's (non)involvement in this case.

And I will stand by it- Bill Bratton had nothing to do with the grand jury verdict. Sure, the NYPD has its faults, I don't deny that. But law enforcement also has a terribly difficult job that I would venture to guess most of us on this board don't have any understanding of. Like I said, I am white and fortunate. So I don't face this daily, a fact I am incredibly grateful for.

But I do live in a city of 8 million people and pay tax dollars to the people who take care of me and ensure my safety. They do a job that I do not want to do myself because, frankly, it terrifies me. I am able to comfortably walk home at night because I trust in the NYPD.

The point here is that assaulting the head of the NYPD because you are pissed off about a jury verdict in another state is completely misdirected. Getting mad about something and taking it out on someone else isn't the answer. I know the NYPD has been accused of police brutality- trust me, it is hard to get away from here. But there are 34,000 uniformed officers in this city. THIRTY FOUR THOUSAND. Saying that "they" do things is absurd.

A lot of these incidences, Michael Brown included, start because the person in question is BREAKING THE LAW. While I agree that sometimes, excessive force is used, why do so many people ignore what started it in the first place?

Again, these protests are not all about Michael Brown but police brutality in general. The throwing of the paint wasn't about the verdict. It's about Bratton directing his 34,000 officers to engage in tactics that people aren't supportive of.

The law being broken doesn't make using excessive force okay. Officers are held to a higher standard because they are in positions of authority.

Why is this so difficult to understand?! These protests were in direct response to the grand jury verdict. They happen all the time in NYC after other police incidents. Trust me.

And I never said excessive force is ok, just that it is used. Michael Brown was assaulting a police officer. Excessive force is rarely used when the perp isn't doing something they shouldn't be doing.

And the grand jury verdict is simply a symptom of the bigger, real problem. Why is that so difficult to understand?

kat1114 · November 2014

sarahufl said:

kat1114 said:

sarahufl said:

wow, that blew up while I was at lunch. FTR, it was me who brought up Bill Bratton being assaulted and the NYPD's (non)involvement in this case.

And I will stand by it- Bill Bratton had nothing to do with the grand jury verdict. Sure, the NYPD has its faults, I don't deny that. But law enforcement also has a terribly difficult job that I would venture to guess most of us on this board don't have any understanding of. Like I said, I am white and fortunate. So I don't face this daily, a fact I am incredibly grateful for.

But I do live in a city of 8 million people and pay tax dollars to the people who take care of me and ensure my safety. They do a job that I do not want to do myself because, frankly, it terrifies me. I am able to comfortably walk home at night because I trust in the NYPD.

The point here is that assaulting the head of the NYPD because you are pissed off about a jury verdict in another state is completely misdirected. Getting mad about something and taking it out on someone else isn't the answer. I know the NYPD has been accused of police brutality- trust me, it is hard to get away from here. But there are 34,000 uniformed officers in this city. THIRTY FOUR THOUSAND. Saying that "they" do things is absurd.

A lot of these incidences, Michael Brown included, start because the person in question is BREAKING THE LAW. While I agree that sometimes, excessive force is used, why do so many people ignore what started it in the first place?

Again, these protests are not all about Michael Brown but police brutality in general. The throwing of the paint wasn't about the verdict. It's about Bratton directing his 34,000 officers to engage in tactics that people aren't supportive of.

The law being broken doesn't make using excessive force okay. Officers are held to a higher standard because they are in positions of authority.

Why is this so difficult to understand?! These protests were in direct response to the grand jury verdict. They happen all the time in NYC after other police incidents. Trust me.

And I never said excessive force is ok, just that it is used. Michael Brown was assaulting a police officer. Excessive force is rarely used when the perp isn't doing something they shouldn't be doing.

Yes, the protests were in response to the verdict, just as many of the protests were that happened across the country last night. But if you think that these protest are ONLY about the verdict, then you don't understand what is happening in our country. People are fed up with police abuse and our judicial system. The verdict certainly ignited the protests last night, but no, that is not the only thing protesters are angry about. Why is that so difficult to understand?

I don't think it is so clear that Michael Brown was assaulting the officer. There is a lot of conflicting testimony. I'm trying to reserve judgment until I can read through some of the testimony myself.

SBmini · November 2014

kat1114 said:

Can't speak to where QueerFemme is getting her definitions, but I posted this a few pages back and found it helpful regrading the definitions: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/07/15/884649/-Why-there-s-no-such-thing-as-Reverse-Racism#

An opinion piece by a liberal blog is hardly definitive proof of the theory that you cannot have reverse racism. Racism is simply the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races. I believe as a society we throw around the word racism a lot when what we mean is discrimination or prejudice.

None of us know what is in the hearts and minds of those involved her. Was Wilson being racist? Was he being prejudice? Or was he simply looking for a suspect and Brown fit the description? Was Brown being racist when he assaulted Wilson? Was he being prejudice? Was he angry at continuing to be stopped... or was he angry because he didn't want to be caught. What about the rioters? I don't know, you don't know. Only they know what their intentions are. Frankly- I think most of them are just opportunists taking advantage of a volatile situation to cause mayhem.

Upon reading some of the evidence presented, I do believe that there was reasonable doubt that Wilson's motives were racially charged- or even inappropriate use of force. I, nor has anyone else in this thread, read the thousand pages of evidence that was released with the verdict, however. So none of us know as much as the grand jury knows and none of us, jury included, knows what was going on inside the minds of Wilson or Brown. So forgive me, but I feel it's a little arrogant for anyone to think they know more than the jury did, or that they would have come to a different conclusion after being given all the information.

sarahufl · November 2014

Fran1985 said:

sarahufl said:

wow, that blew up while I was at lunch. FTR, it was me who brought up Bill Bratton being assaulted and the NYPD's (non)involvement in this case.

And I will stand by it- Bill Bratton had nothing to do with the grand jury verdict. Sure, the NYPD has its faults, I don't deny that. But law enforcement also has a terribly difficult job that I would venture to guess most of us on this board don't have any understanding of. Like I said, I am white and fortunate. So I don't face this daily, a fact I am incredibly grateful for.

But I do live in a city of 8 million people and pay tax dollars to the people who take care of me and ensure my safety. They do a job that I do not want to do myself because, frankly, it terrifies me. I am able to comfortably walk home at night because I trust in the NYPD.

The point here is that assaulting the head of the NYPD because you are pissed off about a jury verdict in another state is completely misdirected. Getting mad about something and taking it out on someone else isn't the answer. I know the NYPD has been accused of police brutality- trust me, it is hard to get away from here. But there are 34,000 uniformed officers in this city. THIRTY FOUR THOUSAND. Saying that "they" do things is absurd.

A lot of these incidences, Michael Brown included, start because the person in question is BREAKING THE LAW. While I agree that sometimes, excessive force is used, why do so many people ignore what started it in the first place?

Honestly I don't even want to be answering this thread anymore- but why do you keep saying people were protesting in NYC because of Brown? They were protesting police brutality.
In the two most recent incidents, neither victim was breaking the law. No one is arguing that people should break the law.
To the bolded- COME ON. that is the whole point of this discussion! You feel comfortable because you get to be comfortable because of your race! Don't you get that some people don't get that comfort because the police is the enemy for them? That they can be shot at because they are walking in a stairwell or reaching for their ID??

abbyj700 said:

sarahufl said:

kat1114 said:

sarahufl said:

wow, that blew up while I was at lunch. FTR, it was me who brought up Bill Bratton being assaulted and the NYPD's (non)involvement in this case.

And I will stand by it- Bill Bratton had nothing to do with the grand jury verdict. Sure, the NYPD has its faults, I don't deny that. But law enforcement also has a terribly difficult job that I would venture to guess most of us on this board don't have any understanding of. Like I said, I am white and fortunate. So I don't face this daily, a fact I am incredibly grateful for.

But I do live in a city of 8 million people and pay tax dollars to the people who take care of me and ensure my safety. They do a job that I do not want to do myself because, frankly, it terrifies me. I am able to comfortably walk home at night because I trust in the NYPD.

The point here is that assaulting the head of the NYPD because you are pissed off about a jury verdict in another state is completely misdirected. Getting mad about something and taking it out on someone else isn't the answer. I know the NYPD has been accused of police brutality- trust me, it is hard to get away from here. But there are 34,000 uniformed officers in this city. THIRTY FOUR THOUSAND. Saying that "they" do things is absurd.

A lot of these incidences, Michael Brown included, start because the person in question is BREAKING THE LAW. While I agree that sometimes, excessive force is used, why do so many people ignore what started it in the first place?

Again, these protests are not all about Michael Brown but police brutality in general. The throwing of the paint wasn't about the verdict. It's about Bratton directing his 34,000 officers to engage in tactics that people aren't supportive of.

The law being broken doesn't make using excessive force okay. Officers are held to a higher standard because they are in positions of authority.

Why is this so difficult to understand?! These protests were in direct response to the grand jury verdict. They happen all the time in NYC after other police incidents. Trust me.

And I never said excessive force is ok, just that it is used. Michael Brown was assaulting a police officer. Excessive force is rarely used when the perp isn't doing something they shouldn't be doing.

And the grand jury verdict is simply a symptom of the bigger, real problem. Why is that so difficult to understand?

I do understand that line of thinking, but I don't necessairly agree with it. Which I am entitled to.

Here is the thing- the grand jury had a task. The task they were presented with was to determine if there was sufficient evidence that the officer in question intentionally committed a crime. That he killed Michael Brown with intent. They felt that evidence was lacking.

They performed the task that was given to them. Nobody is disputing that he killed Michael Brown, and nobody is disputing that the event was tragic. What they are saying is that, given the TONS of evidence they had, there wasn't sufficient evidence to prove intent. That, because he assaulted a police officer, the police officer reacted with force that, unfortunately, didn't end well.

Being on a jury is hard. Trust me, I have done it. But ultimately, you are working with facts and evidence that is made available.

Maggie0829 · November 2014

kat1114 said:

sarahufl said:

kat1114 said:

sarahufl said:

wow, that blew up while I was at lunch. FTR, it was me who brought up Bill Bratton being assaulted and the NYPD's (non)involvement in this case.

And I will stand by it- Bill Bratton had nothing to do with the grand jury verdict. Sure, the NYPD has its faults, I don't deny that. But law enforcement also has a terribly difficult job that I would venture to guess most of us on this board don't have any understanding of. Like I said, I am white and fortunate. So I don't face this daily, a fact I am incredibly grateful for.

But I do live in a city of 8 million people and pay tax dollars to the people who take care of me and ensure my safety. They do a job that I do not want to do myself because, frankly, it terrifies me. I am able to comfortably walk home at night because I trust in the NYPD.

The point here is that assaulting the head of the NYPD because you are pissed off about a jury verdict in another state is completely misdirected. Getting mad about something and taking it out on someone else isn't the answer. I know the NYPD has been accused of police brutality- trust me, it is hard to get away from here. But there are 34,000 uniformed officers in this city. THIRTY FOUR THOUSAND. Saying that "they" do things is absurd.

A lot of these incidences, Michael Brown included, start because the person in question is BREAKING THE LAW. While I agree that sometimes, excessive force is used, why do so many people ignore what started it in the first place?

Again, these protests are not all about Michael Brown but police brutality in general. The throwing of the paint wasn't about the verdict. It's about Bratton directing his 34,000 officers to engage in tactics that people aren't supportive of.

The law being broken doesn't make using excessive force okay. Officers are held to a higher standard because they are in positions of authority.

Why is this so difficult to understand?! These protests were in direct response to the grand jury verdict. They happen all the time in NYC after other police incidents. Trust me.

And I never said excessive force is ok, just that it is used. Michael Brown was assaulting a police officer. Excessive force is rarely used when the perp isn't doing something they shouldn't be doing.

Yes, the protests were in response to the verdict, just as many of the protests were that happened across the country last night. But if you think that these protest are ONLY about the verdict, then you don't understand what is happening in our country. People are fed up with police abuse and our judicial system. The verdict certainly ignited the protests last night, but no, that is not the only thing protesters are angry about. Why is that so difficult to understand?

I don't think it is so clear that Michael Brown was assaulting the officer. There is a lot of conflicting testimony. I'm trying to reserve judgment until I can read through some of the testimony myself.

This is why I fully support individual cameras on every police officer on the street. Video evidence of every arrest or conflict will help clear muddy waters of he said she said.

abbyj700 · November 2014

SBmini said:

kat1114 said:

Can't speak to where QueerFemme is getting her definitions, but I posted this a few pages back and found it helpful regrading the definitions: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/07/15/884649/-Why-there-s-no-such-thing-as-Reverse-Racism#

An opinion piece by a liberal blog is hardly definitive proof of the theory that you cannot have reverse racism. Racism is simply the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races. I believe as a society we throw around the word racism a lot when what we mean is discrimination or prejudice.

None of us know what is in the hearts and minds of those involved her. Was Wilson being racist? Was he being prejudice? Or was he simply looking for a suspect and Brown fit the description? Was Brown being racist when he assaulted Wilson? Was he being prejudice? Was he angry at continuing to be stopped... or was he angry because he didn't want to be caught. What about the rioters? I don't know, you don't know. Only they know what their intentions are. Frankly- I think most of them are just opportunists taking advantage of a volatile situation to cause mayhem.

Upon reading some of the evidence presented, I do believe that there was reasonable doubt that Wilson's motives were racially charged- or even inappropriate use of force. I, nor has anyone else in this thread, read the thousand pages of evidence that was released with the verdict, however. So none of us know as much as the grand jury knows and none of us, jury included, knows what was going on inside the minds of Wilson or Brown. So forgive me, but I feel it's a little arrogant for anyone to think they know more than the jury did, or that they would have come to a different conclusion after being given all the information.

And that would be great if this were about one kid, one police officer, your decisions and one case. But it's not. It's about a social unjustice that haunts millions of black Americans. It costs some people their lives, or the lives of their family. It's about an epidemic amongst the police force and minorities. Millions of Americans - both black and white are standing up against this and saying enough is enough. It's not just about reading CNN about the Michael Brown case and deciding your the authority. You think these millions of Americans who are standing in anger against this decision are just all completely uninformed? Or do you think racsim is alive and well in this nation - and our police force struggles with it just like any other profession - except their job allows their issues to end up deadly?

kat1114 · November 2014

SBmini said:

kat1114 said:

Can't speak to where QueerFemme is getting her definitions, but I posted this a few pages back and found it helpful regrading the definitions: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/07/15/884649/-Why-there-s-no-such-thing-as-Reverse-Racism#

An opinion piece by a liberal blog is hardly definitive proof of the theory that you cannot have reverse racism. Racism is simply the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races. I believe as a society we throw around the word racism a lot when what we mean is discrimination or prejudice.

None of us know what is in the hearts and minds of those involved her. Was Wilson being racist? Was he being prejudice? Or was he simply looking for a suspect and Brown fit the description? Was Brown being racist when he assaulted Wilson? Was he being prejudice? Was he angry at continuing to be stopped... or was he angry because he didn't want to be caught. What about the rioters? I don't know, you don't know. Only they know what their intentions are. Frankly- I think most of them are just opportunists taking advantage of a volatile situation to cause mayhem.

Upon reading some of the evidence presented, I do believe that there was reasonable doubt that Wilson's motives were racially charged- or even inappropriate use of force. I, nor has anyone else in this thread, read the thousand pages of evidence that was released with the verdict, however. So none of us know as much as the grand jury knows and none of us, jury included, knows what was going on inside the minds of Wilson or Brown. So forgive me, but I feel it's a little arrogant for anyone to think they know more than the jury did, or that they would have come to a different conclusion after being given all the information.

I'm not saying that reverse racism not being a thing is a fact- it's just a social theory (one that I happen to agree with, but I digress). What are your definitions of discrimination, racism, and prejudice?

Obviously none of us are currently in a position to accurately second guess the grand jury (unless you are an amazing speed reader and made it through all the documents, then kudos to you). But just scratching the surface of the grand jury testimony, autopsies, etc., it seems to me there is enough doubt as to what happened that it should have gone to trial. Not saying that the officer definitely was in the wrong, or that he shouldn't have fired his weapon. I just can't get over that with the grand jury standard of evidence being so low, that there was no indictment of any crime.

Ferguson

Re: Ferguson

Choose Another Board

Search Boards