No single post of yours would really capture your descent into mental illness the way reading the entire thread would. What I remember from that thread was you becoming increasingly erratic while people went from arguing with you to imploring you to seek medical help or to please reach out to family members to check your delusion. Speaking of delusional, I can’t imagine a single reason you would encourage people to read that thread other than your delusion regarding how it went.
If you’re expecting me to argue who the liar is here, I won’t. I don’t think you’re a liar. I think you’re stupid.
**mhendo **got tired of arguing with you because you were too stupid to understand the points he was making.
I have repeatedly requested from you a cite that Shelby knew Crutcher was on PCP prior to the shooting, and you have repeatedly ignored my request. In fact you repeatedly cut my request out when responding to my posts. I used to think that you did that because you were a dishonest piece of shit, but I now realize that you are genuinely too stupid to understand what I was asking for. So I think I’m going to stop asking.
You know perfectly well there’s a difference between telling someone that the information they want is contained within a thread they are already participating in and should have already read vs. you saying “It’s somewhere over there in this thread from five years ago. Go find it yourself…or ask the guy I’m lying about what he really said.”
This really hasn’t gone the way you hoped, has it?
Yeah, except it isn’t. And I would have called you a lying piece of shit for claiming that it was. But I’ve come to the realization that you are genuinely too stupid to recognize that it isn’t, so I forgive you, you poor stupid man.
A study looks into use of force by police in Austin, TX, and finds that even when controlling for crime in a particular area, police are more likely to use force in black and Hispanic neighborhoods than white neighborhoods.
Does it say anything about controlling for those instances where force is necessary in those neighborhoods?
If, due to various cultural circumstances, blacks and Hispanics are perhaps more inclined to resist arrest, then the fact that force is more often used in those neighborhoods says nothing about racist attitudes being the reason for it.
Of course they use more force in those neighborhoods, those guys are a bunch of thugs. It’s in their culture. Racist attitudes have nothing to do with it. :rolleyes:
This would tend to indicate that, at least for arrests subsequent to traffic stops, there was some factor present that meant that force is used more often even while traffic stops are not more common.
So stops for Driving While Black is not a thing, but Using Force in Being Arrested While Black is. One wonders why racist cops are not more prone to petty harassment, and do not disproportionately stop minority drivers so as to indulge in racist use of force. It seems like a funny line to draw. “Sure, I like to beat n*ggers up. But not pull them over for traffic violations.”
Culture and race are not the same thing, although they can become intertwined. It’s not only possible but fact that when minority groups are economically and socially deprived, excessive criminality results. It’s not the fault of the criminals that they grew up in circumstances that lend themselves to a high crime rate, but at the same time we can’t give them free rein to commit whatever crimes they like because they grew up in unfortunate circumstances. Hence these communities have a higher rate of people who have warrants out or illegal drugs or weapons in their car or on their person. Thus as a percentage these people have more reason to resist arrest as it’s likely they’ll be off to jail or prison for some time once they are. So therefore a greater percentage of the time it’ll be necessary to use force to bring them under control and effect an arrest. This isn’t to say racism on the part of the police doesn’t exist, but it does mean that there are perfectly valid non-racist reasons why it might be necessary to employ force more frequently in minority neighborhoods.
The same thing comes into play in regard to shootings. There are some who believe certain people join the police force just so they can legally kill people. Yet we don’t see a lot of shootings that appear to be just for the hell of it. In virtually every case some sort of provocation has taken place, and the number of officers who kill more than one person in the course of their entire career is vanishingly small. In fact, the number of police officers who kill even one person during their time on the force is vanishingly small too and many never even draw their guns.
So the idea that the police are just wantonly shooting black guys right and left for no good reason is not supported by the facts
The article didn’t mention violation of policies. What are you referring to?
Would they get fired for allegations of lewd behaviour? Would the testimony of someone that got expelled or suspended by that teacher be enough to get them fired?
Its not a conviction.
Happy? Why would I be happy? I certainly want more evidence before I hang these guys. I would put them on desk duty but I wouldn’t fire them yet.
Yo! Sis! Slow yo roll and listen to what I’m saying. Noone is talking about at-will employment but you (and maybe k9).
Sure, most employers CAN fire anyone in an at-will state. But the argument isn’t whether these police officers CAN be fired (and I doubt they can be for a mere accusation), the argument seems to be whether they SHOULD be fired. Or were you merely asking whether these police officers COULD be fired if they lived in an at-will state and IF they were not actually police officers but supermarket cashiers instead.
The one where we’re cops.
The fact that the argument has shifted from an argument of whether two cops should be fired for losing a civil case to one of whether two random employees in an at will state can be fired at will makes me think that you didn’t realize that this was a civil when you first posted the link.
Now some sloppy phrasing on my part opened the door to your ability to make this shift but I submit that you could have read my posts to be consistent with the post it was replying to instead of reading it as casting doubt on the concept of at-will employment.