| Author |
|
Carmen Bernardo
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 08 August 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 3666
|
| Posted: 26 November 2014 at 8:52pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
Conspiracy or not, manipulating the masses has been as old as dirt. I've read enough literature and history to see how this plays out. Eventually, they run out of people to manipulate because they've basically wasted all the available resources for their little games, and a new player comes onto the stage to finish them off while they're grown fat and lazy.
The Mesopotamian civilizations, Rome, and even the Mongol hordes. It all ends badly, no matter how big they get.
The question is: are we going to be any different from those of the past? If not, then it's a moot point, and we're just going to have to watch this play out in all its misery.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Joe Welsh
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 April 2004
Posts: 197
|
| Posted: 27 November 2014 at 3:17am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Again, I am at loss to begin to describe the disparity in our culture. I am going to get a lot of heat for this, because of the flammable situation described, but I have to ask... If the cop had been black, in the exact same situation, would we even talk about it?
I am deadly serious, If this was a black cop shooting a black suspect charging a cop, would there be such outrage? Do you think the evidence was so fabricated that 12 people declined to recommend prosecution?
In fact in today's climate of the guilty are not guilty if they are confronted by the White american police force, why wouldn't they recommend taking the next step? Just by looking at the social liberal american response and some of the responses here, am I to believe that the grand jury didn't have one person who thinks the way most of people I read about on twitter, facebook and even here on JB forum?
I may be wrong in this, but Grand jury's are secretive. If it was found out that 12 black women and men decided that there was no evidence to peruse criminal prosecution of a police office his job would you still be outraged?
Regardless how you feel about what happened, do you feel burning or looting a business that had nothing to do the situation is justified?
You can be outraged about a situation, but as soon as you ruin someone else's innocent business or life because you are upset you lose the credibility of the people who successfully protests-ted injustice
What would Martin Luther King, jr Say about this?
Respectable opinions welcome....
Joe
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Carmen Bernardo
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 08 August 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 3666
|
| Posted: 27 November 2014 at 9:42am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
The fact that every day there are scores of murders (black against black) in our major cities where these conditions prevail should be showing us something. It is one reason that I believe that much of the horrors of the slums are self-inflicted. Even more so when the parties in charge of the city where these conditions prevail often blame someone else (usually the opposite party) while doing next to nothing to alleviate the situation. It's like watching the decline of Rome all over again.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
James Howell
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 23 September 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 363
|
| Posted: 27 November 2014 at 10:51am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
I'm really tired of this "Black On Black" nonsense. In every impoverished area, on the planet, have people of the same background killing each other, from Mexican gangs, to the White Methheads, in the rural areas.
There are good people in the Black communities every day, fighting violence, you just don't hear about their exploits in the news.
The whole Black On Black crime crap, is based on the white supremacist notion, that there is something inherently wrong with black people, while conveniently ignoring not only the hostile treatment black people face every day, but the violence and destruction by members of their own people.
Never called "White On White" crime, is it?
BTW, I was "stopped and frisked" walking toward my house at 1:00 in the afternoon. by two NYPD officers.
I don't drink...
I don't do drugs..
I don't smoke...
My pants weren't "sagging"...
They violated my Constitutional Rights, and tried to goad me into doing something provocative.
I kept my cool, asserted my rights calmly, and they begrudgingly let me go.
I was scared for my life, cause asserting my rights might not have worked, and led to me being a statistic, a "tragedy".
The two officers who stopped me, were BLACK.
It's not the individual, it's the SYSTEM.
The SYSTEM is APPROVED and IMPLEMENTED.
Edited by James Howell on 27 November 2014 at 10:57am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jeremy Simington
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 10 April 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 687
|
| Posted: 27 November 2014 at 11:04am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
CARMEN BERNARDO: every day there are scores of murders (black against black) in our major cities
Info from Puditfact/Politifact:
"Black on black" homicides in 2012: 91%
"White on white" homicides in 2012: 84%
I do not know whether this is a statistically significant difference, but it's clear that there are scores of "white on white" murders every day in our major cities, too. However, this is only one set of numbers. I looked at this analysis from the US Dept. of Justice and there other sets of data that are likely to be useful. For example, homicides by intimate partners were fewer among blacks (6%) than whites (12%) in 2005. Also, gang-related homicides were fewer among blacks (5%) than whites (7%) in 2005.
The takeaway for me is, no surprise, that it's an incredibly complex issue and relying on one statistic is probably not very useful.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Stephen Robinson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5835
|
| Posted: 27 November 2014 at 11:28am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
The "black-on-black" crime statistics also seem strange
to trot out in situations where the deceased (Trayvon
Martin, Tamir Rice, even Michael Brown) did not appear
involved in any situation that would eventually lead to
their deaths by another black person.
For instance, I don't think it would have been relevant
after Sandy Hook to say, "Why isn't the nation mourning
over the countless young lives lost in gang violence in
our ghettos?" The issue with Sandy Hook was children
murdered in a school, which should be a safe space, and
for no "logical" reason (no drug deals gone bad and so
on). Most of the violence in crime-ridden areas are an
issue of poverty, which is why you see families working
hard to escape those neighborhoods. If you do this --
play by the rules of the "American dream" -- but are
killed by an overzealous neighborhood watch captain,
then there is rightly outrage.
But it is somewhat discouraging when "black-on-black"
crime is mentioned as something that "they" have to deal
with, rather than it being an "American" problem of
"our" young people killing themselves in "our"
communities.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132333
|
| Posted: 27 November 2014 at 12:02pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
At the risk of getting in trouble -- what else is new? -- I'll point out that Ferguson is a LOCAL STORY blown up to National proportions by CNN and its ilk. No question something unfortunate, even tragic happened, but no one is served by inflating the story. What happened in Ferguson was not TYPICAL, as what happened to Rodney King was not TYPICAL. Not on a national basis. 24hour news channels, with so much time to fill, devote hour upon hour to stories that Walter Cronkite or Huntley and Brinkley would have covered in a minute, with no further coverage until there was actually something new to report. Microscopic analysis by "reporters" who want to be Woodward and Bernstein when they grow up makes a bad situation worse.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132333
|
| Posted: 27 November 2014 at 12:07pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
I was "stopped and frisked" walking toward my house at 1:00 in the afternoon. by two NYPD officers.I don't drink...I don't do drugs..I don't smoke...My pants weren't "sagging"... They violated my Constitutional rights... ••• Which ones?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
James Howell
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 23 September 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 363
|
| Posted: 27 November 2014 at 12:33pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
The Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution states....
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
However, until you've been formally detained (as in a traffic stop) or arrested, the officer can't stop you from simply walking away. However, once the officer prevents you from walking away, (which in my case, they did, by asking me to identify myself, and blocking my path) an arrest has taken place. Whether the arrest is legal or not depends in large part on whether he or she had "probable cause".
Probable cause is established through factual evidence, and not just suspicions or hunches.
In other words, walking while Black, ain't Probable Cause.
Even if some people in America still think it is.
That's why a Federal Court ruled that the Stop And Frisk practices of the NYPD are unconstitutional.
Edited by James Howell on 27 November 2014 at 12:44pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132333
|
| Posted: 27 November 2014 at 2:13pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
"Probably cause" is very hard to pin down -- and it CAN sometimes be based on suspicion or hunches. (Gonna bet if you were the victim of a home invasion and the cops came to your house because one of them noticed the front door was ajar, you wouldn't be too quick to protest that "hunch".)"Stop and frisk" seems to me a perfectly valid police tool. Like any tool, it can be abused, but, again, 1.1 million cops and very few instances of abuse. When I fly, I get pulled out of the line for a search about fifty percent of the time. I suspect this has nothing to do with probable cause, and everything to do with me being White Upper Middle Class -- ie, someone who doesn't fit the "profile." "See! We search all kinds of people!" I'll say this, too: as one who has heard so many Big Bad Byrne stories that tell only a small and skewed portion of the truth, I tend to look somewhat askance at just about anybody's version of "what happened." Inconvenient details so often get left out.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
James Howell
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 23 September 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 363
|
| Posted: 27 November 2014 at 2:46pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
"Probable cause" is very hard to pin down -- and it CAN sometimes be based on suspicion or hunches."
"Stop and frisk" seems to me a perfectly valid police tool"
Only 10% of Stop and Frisk incidents ended up as arrests or summonses, and weapons are found in 2% of the time.
What about the rest of the cases?
Who cares how ineffective it is, right?
Who cares about those that are harassed by police, but are innocent?
As long as I FEEL SAFE, WHO CARES about what those other people go through...
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132333
|
| Posted: 27 November 2014 at 3:36pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
Or, imagine if those 2% WEREN'T found. Willing to take that risk as long as you're not inconvenienced? Who cares if somebody else gets shot, right?The police have a nearly impossible job to do. Making it even harder helps no one. Not even you.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
|
|
Topic Closed)
