You can always find something to charge someone with, even if you have to make it up.
Resisting arrest is always a crowd pleaser. You don’t even have to justify the reason for the original arrest, just that they “resisted”. And when resist can be as little as pulling away your shoulder when they come up behind you and grab you, and assualt can be as little as you contacting any part of their body with any part of yours, then it becomes very easy to justify arresting anyone you feel like arresting.
Proactive policing is simply terrorism and oppression of minority neighborhoods.
It also, of course, increases the statistical crime rate in those neighborhoods, justifying even more draconian policing measures.
I’m not suggesting they don’t try. I’m suggesting they don’t murder.
In this particular case they knew who the person was. They knew where he lived. They had vehicles of their own. They could have follewd him to wherever he went or just meet him at his house. If the number of cops they used the first time was insufficient, get more.
It’s not that hard. Don’t murder. It’s one of the tenets if our society.
And here’s my pet peeve. By classifying different types of killings, you give credence to the idea that it’s acceptable to kill sometimes.
IT’S NEVER NOT MURDER WHEN YOU TAKE ANOTHER PERSONS LIFE BY YOUR DIRECT ACTION.
By that definition, the most clear-cut case of killing in self-defense would be murder—and that’s ridiculous.
Pfffft. We are not talking about a randomly selected Black man here. We’re talking about one who was just violent to the police and continues to shrug them off and reach into his car where a knife is waiting.
Bullshit strawman.
Although Black men commit a much greater number of violent crimes per capita than than white men do, it’s still true that the vast majority of Black men do not commit violent crimes, and no one should individually be held culpable for being born into a group with immutable characteristics they cannot change.
This is in fact quite analogous to the fact that men in general, of any race, commit a lot more violent crimes than women of any race do. In fact a much greater percentage of white men are violent criminals than of Black women. But I as a man should not be treated implicitly as a violent criminal just because I am a man, without regard to my own personal actions.
At the same time, though, we should not be shocked and outraged if men are killed by police in much higher numbers than women are. We should look at how their rate of being killed by police corresponds to the proportion of violent crimes they commit, compared to women. That doesn’t justify each individual case, of course, but it cuts against any argument that the disproportionate rate of police shootings by gender is due to sexism rather than by where the violent criminals are located genderwise.
The exact same calculus should be performed when examining statistics of shootings by police of Black men and white men. If, relative to the numbers of violent criminals in each population, there is no disparity, then you can’t make this broad, statistics-based argument about racial targeting of shootings. Or you can make it, but it won’t stick.
So let’s look at the actual stats rather than keeping it in the realm of the hypothetical.
Blacks commit about 35% of all violent crimes (“crimes against persons”), including about 46% of criminal homicides, and make up 31% of those killed by police.
Whites commit about 57% of all violent crimes (“crimes against persons”), including about 41% of criminal homicides, and make up 52% of those killed by police.
Looks to me like it’s pretty proportional compared to violent crime rates in each race overall, but a “better deal” for Blacks than whites if you look only at homicides. I just don’t see the data supporting the fundamental argument of BLM.
As for the idea that if we just get rid of police on the streets we will have a utopia with no crime, I can’t even engage something so naïve which has been contradicted by recent direct experience in Minneapolis, Seattle and elsewhere. It’s pointless to argue in any case, because it will never happen. You’re 10,000 times more likely to get the GND and MFA (which are not very likely) than abolition or significant defunding of police across the country. in fact, you are unlikely to get it even locally for more than a few months, or a couple years at most, before the population revolts.
And, that’s really the problem with cops. They see black men and boys as some sort of super-criminal, with super-human strength and speed, and the desire to kill cops. That’s why they’re thrown to the ground, shot in the back, etc., while white people with actual weapons are given lots of leeway.
Yeah, if your son calls you a racist to your face, imagine what he really thinks about you. Might be an opportunity for you to pause and reflect on your attitudes and what kind of man and father you’ve become.
If there’s a better example of the bootlicking worship of authoritarian principles than someone complaining that citizens need to learn how to quietly be arrested (rather than that cops need to learn how to make an arrest without shooting someone seven times in the back), I have not seen it.
No, we are talking about a person who had just had violence perpetuated on him by the police and was trying to escape from those who were harming and threatening him.
And yet, they do, as you quite eloquently explain in your next few paragraphs justifying racial bias in police and justice systems.
Of course you don’t.
Talk about strawman. This is just an out and out lie on your part that anyone has advocated for such.
But, lying is one of the best ways to justify racism, so you do you man.
Of course the statistics regarding the proportion of blacks and whites that commit violent crime are actually the percentages of those brought in and arrested for violent crime. So any bias that the police have against blacks will also raise this value.
It’s also weird because there are plenty of professions where people are expected not to straight up murder people, and even to tolerate disrespect from customers. If a high schooler working at McDonalds for minimum wage is expected to deal with someone shouting at them without shouting back (much less using firearms, chemical weapons, choke holds, and the like on them), I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect the same from people with a higher level of training, authority, and pay. Does Slackerinc think there are a lot of six figure jobs out there where people are allowed to beat, torture, and even straight up murder people without real consequences that ‘police’ is competing with? What jobs are they, exactly? And if there are so many of these well-paying, “don’t take shit from anyone” jobs, why don’t people who currently work in crappy retail jobs where they have to put up with crap from the general public to keep their job switch over to these higher paying, ‘can kill anyone you want’ jobs that don’t even require a degree?
You can’t just look at the tweet. The images in a tweet are basically large thumbnails. You have to click on each of them to see the whole thing.
What he actually said is “You have to admit, some of the things you say sound kind of racist”. And he also constantly texts me asking me to watch his favorite anime series, comparing rankings of our favorite films, and shooting the shit about the NFL. So I think we’re good.
This is very poorly aimed. You will not find a stronger advocate of the rights of the accused (to free, high quality legal representation, to a speedy and fair trial, to not be compelled to incriminate themselves, to not have improperly seized evidence used against them) and for the convicted and imprisoned (to be free from cruel and unusual punishment, to be safe from health risks like Covid-19, to have access to exercise, decent nutrition, fresh air, reading materials of their choosing, etc.) than I am. But you have to do it properly through the justice system. If police are making an improper arrest, you submit to the arrest itself quietly and then immediately ask for a lawyer. You don’t try to fight them off! Jesus. Amazing that I even have to say this.
Actually, no. That’s why the “unknown race” category is so small for violent crimes (where there are usually witnesses) and so high for property crimes (where there are often not). These are for all reported crimes.
And you can’t use FBI crime statistics selectively to try to show racial bias, then dispute their accuracy when the whole picture is shown.
Bogus comparison. A high schooler working at McDonalds does not literally have a job where people on a little radio he carries tell him to go intervene where people are acting disruptive or violent. If someone acts that way in the restaurant, his role is to retreat to the back room and call the police so they can come in and deal with the person who is being disruptive or threatening. That’s literally the police’s role, to come in and deal with this shit that no one else wants to have to deal with (and we don’t want them to deal with it themselves, otherwise you get shit like the 17yo vigilante in Kenosha).
Oh, I thought you were talking about the other chart. Yeah, IDK: maybe that portion of the FBI’s website takes the “Hispanics can be of any race” tack (which has truth to it but is generally not helpful in these kinds of analyses).
It makes that chart pretty meaningless, then. Are they lumped in with whites? We don’t know. There are too many hispanics to have been included in the Unknown category, so where are they? If they are lumped in with whites, that skews your narrative considerably from what you’re claiming.
It would be helpful if they didn’t lump them in with whites. But it doesn’t make it “meaningless”. Blacks are the same either way, and it therefore means this very key sentence in my comment remains true:
Blacks commit about 35% of all violent crimes (“crimes against persons”), including about 46% of criminal homicides, and make up 31% of those killed by police.
I can find plenty of people who do not blame the victims of police brutality for police brutality, so there are a lot of people who are actual advocates for the right of the accused instead of apologists for police brutality. When you argue that people should be trained in ‘how to be arrested’ instead of that police should be trained in ‘how to arrest’, you really show your true colors.
When you use euphemisms like ‘improper arrest’ it doesn’t help you. If police are making an improper arrest, then they are acting either illegally or what should be illegally, and anyone who’s an actual advocate for the rights of the accused would support arresting the police who act illegally instead of supporting the police shooting the victim of their crimes. Amazing that I even have to say this, but it’s just more demonstration of your worship of authoritarian principles.
I think it’s very telling that people like you think that holding police to the standards we have for a high schooler working at McDonalds is ‘bogus’. I also notice that you didn’t list any of these jobs that require no college degree and allow you to kill and beat people with impunity that the police are going to flock to if they’re expected to not kill people but are paid less than $200k per year. Somehow I think that claim was just made up…
