Jacob Blake (WI), Daniel Prude (NY), Breonna Taylor (KY), Jonathan Price (TX) - here we go again

flimbro said:

terp said:

Thats a lot of words when you could have just said you have no plan after death and destruction. 

You strike me as very as very angry.  And maybe you have reason.  You can say what you will about me(let's face it.  You will.), but I don't have any hate in my heart.  I actually thought this thread might go into some ideas about how to improve the situations you describe.  You don't seem to have any, nor do you seem interested in thinking through constructive solutions.  I must say that it's very disconcerting that people are ok with this continuing without an end game.

Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster... for when you gaze long into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you. -Friedrich Nietzsche 

If I had a nickel (okay maybe a dollar) for every white person who told me 'you seem very angry' when in reality they were simply caught off guard by a challenge and/or lacking in the courage or humanity to have a conversation that didn't always center their needs- I'd be a millionaire.  I do understand that equality can feel like oppression when you're accustomed to privilege. So I guess directness could also feel like anger if you're not accustomed to being challenged.

What those people have in common is the belief that my insistence on not making it easy to shirk responsibility for or feign ignorance of a barbaric system that they've benefited from their entire life is 'anger'. It's simpler for these folks to diminish me for my reaction to racism than to take responsibility for or to even acknowledge the existence of racism much less their role in perpetuating it. 

You wanted a solution?  Here's one for racism:

The solution for racism is a total and immediate dismantling of the concept of whiteness and white supremacy. The total and irrevocable destruction of any and all social institutions that have at their core a structure that devalues persons based on the color of their skin. An immediate restructuring of American society from one that relies on the centuries-old practice of creating advantages for privileged white Americans by constructing barriers and impediments to full citizenship for Black and brown Americans.

(From here we would address reparations for enslavement, Jim Crow era disenfranchisement, exclusion from the GI Bill and early Social Security benefits, state-sanctioned terrorism, convict leasing, redlining, etc etc.)    

Scary business isn't it? Definitely easier said than done right? Sounds a whole lot like a revolution that would upend the very fabric of American life and pretty much end it as we know it. It would. Bottom line is that you're not ever going to go for that and neither are most of the people who post on this board. 

So, since for you, revolution is out of the question- what are your ideas? All of this was set up for your benefit, so your access to and influence on this system is greater than mine. If as you say, there's no hate in your heart and you actually believe that all men are created equal- what's your plan. What do we do?  How do we start?

Another set of solutions for extrajudicial slayings: 

---- Cops lose five years of pension for every fatal shooting of an unarmed American (that's for everybody Black, brown, white- everybody). And for officers in municipalities that count overtime as time worked toward retirement, every shooting of an unarmed American would deduct one thousand hours of OT.

---- Court-ordered awards to civilians assaulted or killed by law enforcement would be paid from the police union's bank account- and not the municipality's tax revenue.

---- Municipalities of less than 75,000 would lose all military materiel. No tanks for small towns. 

----- Municipalities who do not equip and enforce the wearing and use of body cams by their LE staff will have any federal monies reduced by fines levied daily.

There's more- defunding, ending qualified immunity... 

Just some rough ideas, I'm supplying these because you seemed to really be emotional about not having solutions presented by anyone. 

One important thing and this is the hard part. 

Don't debate me on my solutions-    Give Me Yours

Lastly- Nietzsche was a pro-slavery racist. No doubt undone by those very monsters he's always going on about.  

Here are better ideas from folks who slew monsters on a regular basis.

"...If you can only be tall because somebody is on their knees, then you have a serious problem. And my feeling is that white people have a very, very serious problem and they should start thinking about what they can do about it. Take me out of it."       - Toni Morrison

“Well, if one really wishes to know how justice is administered in a country, one does not question the policemen, the lawyers, the judges, or the protected members of the middle class. One goes to the unprotected – those, precisely, who need the law’s protection most! – and listens to their testimony. Ask any Mexican, any Puerto Rican, any black man, any poor person – ask the wretched how they fare in the halls of justice, and then you will know, not whether or not the country is just, but whether or not it has any love for justice or any concept of it. It is certain, in any case, that ignorance, allied with power, is the most ferocious enemy justice can have.”        - James Baldwin

 Thank you for making some suggestions.  I do think we need ways to foster greater accountability by the police which you touch upon.  We also need to remove incentives to unnecessarily enforce nonviolent activity.  Here are some suggestions I have.  I wouldn't say this list is exhaustive 

• End or drastically scale down the War on drugs.  Simplify the regulatory system.
• Scale back qualified immunity.  I think there would need to be some parameters where the police lose their immunity(person unarmed, excessive force, etc).  Other police on the scene that let some of this behavior we have seen occur should also be liable.  Perhaps, there could be a review board made up of police and community members to review incidents
• Funding gained from enforcement of the law(civil asset forfeiture,  traffic tickets, etc.) Should leave the police department and really the government.  We need to end enforcement quotas etc.  But we really need to look at civil asset forfeiture 
• End the programs where the Pentagon arms local police.  There are very few municipalities that require military equipment
• identify alternatives to jail for certain types of crimes.  Allow for people to get second chances
• Weaken the power of police unions to protect officers who display the types of behaviors that lead to violence.  Get them off the force before they become an issue whenever possible
• No more no knock raids

DaveSchmidt said:

I wouldn’t describe flimbro’s comments as angry any more than I’d call terp’s fiery.

 But polite!

drummerboy said:

You posted a case where someone was killed while assaulting an officer? And that's supposed to prove that racism doesn't exist in police shootings?

Do you realize how many times you post examples that don't make you look too good?

 There is a whole thread of them.  Some seem more understandable that they were met with police violence than others.  Some seem really avoidable.    These situations are much more complex than people give them credit for.  

We have police making snap judgements when they percieve a threat.  That is not to defend them, but more an effort to understand.  A big part of this is to reduce the number of these types of encounters to the point where they occur only when needed to protect the public.

Meanwhile, looks like Trump is insisting on traveling to Kenosha, despite the governor and other local officials saying "stay away".

terp, you asked earlier (this thread?) about what Trump is doing to instigate the violence.

Do you think his trip to WI is some kind of attempt to calm down the violence?

Now Trump is calling the protesters - terrorists.  I can't find it - but what is Trump's response to Kyle Rittenhouse?

drummerboy said:

Meanwhile, looks like Trump is insisting on traveling to Kenosha, despite the governor and other local officials saying "stay away".

 Will Trump meet with the families of Anthony Huber and Joseph Rosenbaum while he's in the area?

terp said:

Again, there is no evidence that the police violence was racially motivated. This person looked further into the numbers and may explain some of the disparity in the topline numbers.

Imagine you’re someone who’s arguing that American law enforcement is structurally racist. Now imagine your reaction when Leonydas Johnson rebuts you with arrest totals and passes off each arrest as proof of an individual violent criminal.

terp said:

 Please point out where I said that there isn't a problem.  I have stated that there was a problem.  Since we are on a violent path, I'm asking why has it become violent all of a sudden(with at the least tacit support from most here), and to what ends.  

One person kills or paralyzes your child. And society says your child deserved it. 

You're fairly certain your child didn't deserve it. The witnesses who were there said your child didn't deserve it. 

But it doesn't matter. The record states your child deserved it, and your child's attacker is free to continue living their life without consequence.

What do you do? And to what ends?

sprout said:

terp said:

 Please point out where I said that there isn't a problem.  I have stated that there was a problem.  Since we are on a violent path, I'm asking why has it become violent all of a sudden(with at the least tacit support from most here), and to what ends.  

One person kills or paralyzes your child. And society says your child deserved it. 

You're fairly certain your child didn't deserve it. The witnesses who were there said your child didn't deserve it. 

But it doesn't matter. The record states your child deserved it, and your child's attacker is free to continue living their life without consequence.

What do you do? And to what ends?

 Odd example. Blake's mother made statements condemning the destruction and violence.

drummerboy said:

Meanwhile, looks like Trump is insisting on traveling to Kenosha, despite the governor and other local officials saying "stay away".

terp, you asked earlier (this thread?) about what Trump is doing to instigate the violence.

Do you think his trip to WI is some kind of attempt to calm down the violence?

 If he doesn't go, he doesn't care.  If he does go he's instigating violence.  I'm  quite sure he's not going there to release his "goon squads"

terp said:

drummerboy said:

Meanwhile, looks like Trump is insisting on traveling to Kenosha, despite the governor and other local officials saying "stay away".

terp, you asked earlier (this thread?) about what Trump is doing to instigate the violence.

Do you think his trip to WI is some kind of attempt to calm down the violence?

 If he doesn't go, he doesn't care.  If he does go he's instigating violence.  I'm  quite sure he's not going there to release his "goon squads"

"If he doesn't go, he doesn't care."

No. No one said he has to make personal appearances, (against the wish of local government), to do or say something constructive about the violence.

If he decides to go, against local wishes, what is his purpose, other than to stir things up?

I don't know why you have a blind spot towards Trump, but you're really failing to see the obvious.

terp said:

 Please point out where I said that there isn't a problem.  I have stated that there was a problem.  Since we are on a violent path, I'm asking why has it become violent all of a sudden(with at the least tacit support from most here), and to what ends.  

terp said:

sprout said:

One person kills or paralyzes your child. And society says your child deserved it. 

You're fairly certain your child didn't deserve it. The witnesses who were there said your child didn't deserve it. 

But it doesn't matter. The record states your child deserved it, and your child's attacker is free to continue living their life without consequence.

What do you do? And to what ends?

 Odd example. Blake's mother made statements condemning the destruction and violence.

You didn't read the question. It's not an example, it's a scenario. 

What would you do? And to what ends?

drummerboy said:

terp said:

 Please point out where I said that there isn't a problem.  I have stated that there was a problem.  Since we are on a violent path, I'm asking why has it become violent all of a sudden(with at the least tacit support from most here), and to what ends.  

Where do you get the idea that the violence has "at least tacit support from most here"? Because we don't focus on it the way you do? Because we think the causes are perhaps more complicated than you seem to think?

 Because you don't comment much on it and when you do it is in defense of the behavior or you make excuses for it.

sprout said:

terp said:

sprout said:

One person kills or paralyzes your child. And society says your child deserved it. 

You're fairly certain your child didn't deserve it. The witnesses who were there said your child didn't deserve it. 

But it doesn't matter. The record states your child deserved it, and your child's attacker is free to continue living their life without consequence.

What do you do? And to what ends?

 Odd example. Blake's mother made statements condemning the destruction and violence.

You didn't read the question. It's not an example, it's a scenario. 

What would you do? And to what ends?

The issue isn't what people are doing for their kids.  I would not attack innocent people.  If I had an issue with the police, I would take it up with the police.  I certainly wouldn't punch out a 70 year old store owner and burn down his store.

terp said:

sprout said:

terp said:

sprout said:

One person kills or paralyzes your child. And society says your child deserved it. 

You're fairly certain your child didn't deserve it. The witnesses who were there said your child didn't deserve it. 

But it doesn't matter. The record states your child deserved it, and your child's attacker is free to continue living their life without consequence.

What do you do? And to what ends?

 Odd example. Blake's mother made statements condemning the destruction and violence.

You didn't read the question. It's not an example, it's a scenario. 

What would you do? And to what ends?

The issue isn't what people are doing for their kids.  I would not attack innocent people.  If I had an issue with the police, I would take it up with the police.  I certainly wouldn't punch out a 70 year old store owner and burn down his store.

 How would you take it up with the police?

terp said:

The issue isn't what people are doing for their kids.  I would not attack innocent people.  If I had an issue with the police, I would take it up with the police.  I certainly wouldn't punch out a 70 year old store owner and burn down his store.

Can you tell us the % of peaceful protesters vs rioters, looters and arsonists?  Has anyone on this board endorsed this method of protest? 

sprout said:

terp said:

sprout said:

terp said:

sprout said:

One person kills or paralyzes your child. And society says your child deserved it. 

You're fairly certain your child didn't deserve it. The witnesses who were there said your child didn't deserve it. 

But it doesn't matter. The record states your child deserved it, and your child's attacker is free to continue living their life without consequence.

What do you do? And to what ends?

 Odd example. Blake's mother made statements condemning the destruction and violence.

You didn't read the question. It's not an example, it's a scenario. 

What would you do? And to what ends?

The issue isn't what people are doing for their kids.  I would not attack innocent people.  If I had an issue with the police, I would take it up with the police.  I certainly wouldn't punch out a 70 year old store owner and burn down his store.

 How would you take it up with the police?

 I don't really know.

jamie said:

terp said:

The issue isn't what people are doing for their kids.  I would not attack innocent people.  If I had an issue with the police, I would take it up with the police.  I certainly wouldn't punch out a 70 year old store owner and burn down his store.

Can you tell us the % of peaceful protesters vs rioters, looters and arsonists?  Has anyone on this board endorsed this method of protest? 

 I don't know the percentage, but my guess is that the percentage of peaceful protesters has been declining over time.

terp said:

 I don't know the percentage, but my guess is that the percentage of peaceful protesters has been declining over time.

 so pretty much it's probably a bunch of opportunists taking advantage of the situation.  Similar to how the 2nd amendment militias have started answering the call.

jamie said:

terp said:

 I don't know the percentage, but my guess is that the percentage of peaceful protesters has been declining over time.

 so pretty much it's probably a bunch of opportunists taking advantage of the situation.  Similar to how the 2nd amendment militias have started answering the call.

 Ha.  Look man.  Believe what you want to believe.

terp said:

 Thank you for making some suggestions.  I do think we need ways to foster greater accountability by the police which you touch upon.  We also need to remove incentives to unnecessarily enforce nonviolent activity.  Here are some suggestions I have.  I wouldn't say this list is exhaustive 

• End or drastically scale down the War on drugs.  Simplify the regulatory system.
• Scale back qualified immunity.  I think there would need to be some parameters where the police lose their immunity(person unarmed, excessive force, etc).  Other police on the scene that let some of this behavior we have seen occur should also be liable.  Perhaps, there could be a review board made up of police and community members to review incidents
• Funding gained from enforcement of the law(civil asset forfeiture,  traffic tickets, etc.) Should leave the police department and really the government.  We need to end enforcement quotas etc.  But we really need to look at civil asset forfeiture 
• End the programs where the Pentagon arms local police.  There are very few municipalities that require military equipment
• identify alternatives to jail for certain types of crimes.  Allow for people to get second chances
• Weaken the power of police unions to protect officers who display the types of behaviors that lead to violence.  Get them off the force before they become an issue whenever possible
• No more no knock raids

 Thanks for the list- good ideas here. Particularly the war on drugs and civil asset forfeiture. Since the war on drugs was in large part a federally funded war on Black and brown people what kinds of ideas do you have about disassembling structural racism?

terp said:

sprout said:

 How would you take it up with the police?

 I don't really know.

While trying to figure our what you would do, you would probably grieve. 

The second stage of grief is anger. This expression of grief has been your primary focus in this thread. Would you get angry? Bargaining is also getting screen time, but the other stages of grief are less telegenic (though you do seem somewhat drawn to those in stage 1: 'denial'). 

Grief is being experienced and expressed for the needless punishment and death of our brothers and sisters, cousins, children... and even parents.

The root of the problem is not that grief includes anger. It's that the grief didn't need to occur in the first place. And without addressing the root cause, the grieving will happen again. 

'To what end'? 

No more needless grief.

sprout said:

terp said:

sprout said:

 How would you take it up with the police?

 I don't really know.

  

While trying to figure our what you would do, you would probably grieve. 

The second stage of grief is anger. This expression of grief has been your primary focus in this thread. Would you get angry? Bargaining is also getting screen time, but the other stages of grief are less telegenic (though you do seem somewhat drawn to those in stage 1: 'denial'). 

Grief is being experienced and expressed for the needless punishment and death of our brothers and sisters, cousins, children... and even parents.

The root of the problem is not that grief includes anger. It's that the grief didn't need to occur in the first place. And without addressing the root cause, the grieving will happen again. 

'To what end'? 

No more needless grief.

 @sprout for the win

"The root of the problem is not that grief includes anger. It's that the grief didn't need to occur in the first place. And without addressing the root cause, the grieving will happen again.

'To what end'?

No more needless grief."

Trump just said that he saw a plane fill up with thugs, rioters, looters and arsonists!  WOW!

Trump said this when asked about peaceful protests.  He said there's a lot of people at home who don't protest on the street that support the police and don't want to be raped or murdered.  Please vote!

I have to say - Trump can pass up an "American Carnage" photo op.  What's the over/under for the number of days this makes it into a campaign ad?  1 day? 2 days?

sprout said:

terp said:

sprout said:

 How would you take it up with the police?

 I don't really know.

  

While trying to figure our what you would do, you would probably grieve. 

The second stage of grief is anger. This expression of grief has been your primary focus in this thread. Would you get angry? Bargaining is also getting screen time, but the other stages of grief are less telegenic (though you do seem somewhat drawn to those in stage 1: 'denial'). 

Grief is being experienced and expressed for the needless punishment and death of our brothers and sisters, cousins, children... and even parents.

The root of the problem is not that grief includes anger. It's that the grief didn't need to occur in the first place. And without addressing the root cause, the grieving will happen again. 

'To what end'? 

No more needless grief.

 I would clearly grieve.   But I wouldn't go down and burn your house down.  And you wouldn't make excuses for me if I did.

terp said:

sprout said:

terp said:

sprout said:

 How would you take it up with the police?

 I don't really know.

  

While trying to figure our what you would do, you would probably grieve. 

The second stage of grief is anger. This expression of grief has been your primary focus in this thread. Would you get angry? Bargaining is also getting screen time, but the other stages of grief are less telegenic (though you do seem somewhat drawn to those in stage 1: 'denial'). 

Grief is being experienced and expressed for the needless punishment and death of our brothers and sisters, cousins, children... and even parents.

The root of the problem is not that grief includes anger. It's that the grief didn't need to occur in the first place. And without addressing the root cause, the grieving will happen again. 

'To what end'? 

No more needless grief.

 I would clearly grieve.   But I wouldn't go down and burn your house down.  And you wouldn't make excuses for me if I did.

Are you saying that there is no amount of oppression that would cause you to raise arms?

Really? Cause I doubt it.

drummerboy said:

terp said:

sprout said:

terp said:

sprout said:

 How would you take it up with the police?

 I don't really know.

  

While trying to figure our what you would do, you would probably grieve. 

The second stage of grief is anger. This expression of grief has been your primary focus in this thread. Would you get angry? Bargaining is also getting screen time, but the other stages of grief are less telegenic (though you do seem somewhat drawn to those in stage 1: 'denial'). 

Grief is being experienced and expressed for the needless punishment and death of our brothers and sisters, cousins, children... and even parents.

The root of the problem is not that grief includes anger. It's that the grief didn't need to occur in the first place. And without addressing the root cause, the grieving will happen again. 

'To what end'? 

No more needless grief.

 I would clearly grieve.   But I wouldn't go down and burn your house down.  And you wouldn't make excuses for me if I did.

Are you saying that there is no amount of oppression that would cause you to raise arms?

Really? Cause I doubt it.

 Oh no.  I would raise arms.  But I would like to think I'd have the character to raise arms against my actual oppressor rather than my less threatening neighbors.