Conversation?
OK – Why is “assimilation” a bad word?
I see this over and over again and it never fails to amaze me that so many people don’t get it.
The story in Ferguson was absolutely that a white man (cop= oppressor) shot a black unarmed man! To deny that is proof positive that you have some serious blinders on or have your head buried very far in the sand. If the media truly wanted to hold out of control cops accountable then you would know Dillon Taylor’s name too. The media wanted like hell for Micheal Brown to be an angel and Darren Wilson to be a white supremacist and the majority of the media outlets even tried to stick to the script even after the physical evidence revealed that Wilson was attacked. Only after the coverage, frenzy, and riots did it become more about racial oppression vs. white man killed innocent black kid. They wanted the headlines and the coverage and what it turned into was altogether different when the facts no longer fit the narrative. Did it eventually uncover some hard racial truths in Ferguson and elsewhere? Without a doubt. But don’t pretend it wasn’t sensationalism to begin with.
Moriarty covered it pretty well. And thank goodness, I didn’t really know where to start. It’s kind of a big subject. It’s been in the news, you might hear about it someday.
So it’s black people’s fault?
This is a very strange, almost conspiracy theory level take on how things played out in Ferguson. Michael Brown was shot at noon. A makeshift memorial was set up and people came to mourn his death. Police destroyed the memorial the same evening (there were reports of one cop letting his K9 piss on the memorial but I don’t know if rusty proved true). The next day, people gathered for memorials and the cops showed up in riot gear. A riot predictably broke out. The police reaction was basically to gear up for war and take to the streets to kick ass. They were taunting the public and firing rubber bullets at anything that moved.
The media didn’t go to Ferguson to cover the shooting, they went to cover this explosion of tension. Coupled with the fact that the police weren’t releasing information on the Brown shooting, it certainly looked like something was fishy about it. But there was no need to stir the pot, it boiled over almost instantly on its own. The story was always about this racial tension.
The next story is the murder of two white TV News employees by a black guy (who used to work for the same station). This (being a black-on-white crime, doesn’t have the saleability of the Ferguson case…it will be interesting to see what the Obama propaganda machine does to spin this story.
Why would the Obama administration need to spin anything? The perp published a manifesto that pretty clearly outed himself as mentally disturbed. How is that comparable to Ferguson?
It’s already obvious that Obama is going to spin this crime as another example of the need for gun control… even though the killer bought his gun legally, passed a background check, and wasn’t using any kind of automatic weapon.
This way of thinking creeps me the fuck out.
We need gun control that prevents mentally disturbed fucks like the reporter shooter from getting guns. Surely you can agree with that?
But NONE of the proposed gun control measures I’ve heard would have stopped Bryce Williams from carrying out the same crime.
Ban automatic weapons? Fine, but Williams didn’t use one.
Do background checks? Fine, but Williams had no arrest record and no record of institutionalization, and therefore DID pass a background check.
Until minority communities accept some level of responsibility for the crime in their communities their situations will not improve regardless of all the passion that people exhibit from their keyboards in the comfort of the suburbs.
LOL! Sure, I’m a conspiracy nut. The bias in the media is well documented. If you choose to remain ignorant of that then its on you.
Care to cite that BS? There were also reports that Darren Wilson murdered Chris Brown in cold blood, which definitely turned out not to be true.
Police gather in riot gear after college ball games to keep dumb asses from burning their street’s down too. Its easy to predict when riots may occur based on previous trigger points for past riots. That isn’t racism, its common sense!
As I recall, the officials were criticized for not reacting swiftly enough to prevent the destruction, even giving the riots too much room to “play out”. They didn’t engage in order to prevent “fanning the flames”. Now you are saying that the police presence caused the riots, the looting, and the destruction to the community? Clearly we’ve picked our sides, but to lay all blame on the police for the rioting that took place is ridiculous. I don’t recall the police chanting, “BURN THIS BITCH DOWN! BURN THIS BITCH DOWN!”
Wrong! The media was on scene immediately after the shooting and well before the riots boiled over. What planet were you on when this was taking place?
I live in a place where police shootings happen frequently. The police withhold information until the investigation is complete for a reason. Its called procedure. Ferguson was no different other than the fact that the media spun it as black on white murder before the facts were released.
You’re entitled to your opinion, but again, the media bias is well documented. You go on ignoring it if you want.
Then we need better gun control measures that DO screen these morons out. I am not willing to throw up my hands and say “it can’t be done” just because we haven’t done it yet. I don’t know what the answer is, but that should not prevent us from trying until we succeed, even in the face of gun rights activists that not only oppose any new regulations, they want to roll back the ones we have. The status quo is unacceptable.
Yeah, I meant Michael Brown. Chris is alive and well.
I’m not sure that this is accurate. There are reports that at least 3 memorials to Brown have been destroyed (and that the police callously referred to one as " a pile of trash"), but I don’t think it happened as quickly as you describe. Nor can I find evidence that the police were responsible (as nobody seems to have a suspect).
This sounds more accurate. There were protests right after Brown was killed, and the police did clash with residents (although I can’t verify reports of police “taunting” and “firing rubber bullets at anything that moved.”)
And this is certainly accurate. The city was a hotbed of racial tension, for reasons we’ve already described in this thread (i.e. disproportionate arrests, fines of Black residents). Michael Brown’s shooting didn’t happen in a vacuum. It was a spark that ignited a powder keg already poised to explode. And that, in my opinion, is what drew in the media.
In the context of the OP, though, none of this was instigated by the President or his Attorney General. It was the Missouri Attorney General who had issued a report (prior to the Brown shooting) that found that
And it was a St. Louis County Executive who had called for an investigation into racial profiling following a meeting with the local NAACP (again, prior to Brown’s death).
It may be popular, convenient, or easy to draw a connection between a Black President and Black unrest, but the President doesn’t control all aspects of U.S. society or even have the power (or time) to investigate all such issues of race. It’s overly simplistic, and altogether inaccurate, to believe otherwise.
“Endless harping”. Has one of those authoritative tones to it that belies the fact that it’s completely made up. OP fails at the gate.
The problem is what the media chooses and refuses to cover.
That story; which were the exact same circumstances as the Michael Brown case, barely got media coverage. The unarmed victim was white and the cop was a mix of latino and black.
The media and our president choose to make the Michael Brown circumstances a national debate and platform, but ignore Dillion Taylor’s circumstance furthering the racial divisiveness. Instead of making this a black/white issue, it should be an abusive of power issue by the people in charge.
The media/our president doesn’t cite examples like:
Chris Lane - Chris Lane: Chancey Luna, 17, found guilty of murdering Australian baseballer in Duncan - ABC News
Or the “polar bear hunting” where blacks target white people.
None of this should be made racial, but it should be examined. It’s just unfortunate that the media and our president choose to focus on one (white) race’s violence towards another but choose to ignore the reverse.
Unfortunately until we have a rational conversation, we can’t fix the issue.
I will probably get called a racist for posting our own government’s statistics, but the black population makes up roughly 13 of the populace, but commit 53% of all **KNOWN[/] murders. Those are some INCREDIBLY skewed numbers.
To make this a “whites are killing blacks” issue is ludicrous and frankly an irresponsible statement. What we need to examine is “why do 13% of the population commit 53% of all known murders?”.
It is not the exact same circumstances. For one, there was a body camera on the cop, so there was less ambiguity in what transpired. Secondly, it didn’t occur in a neighborhood where there was already high tension between police and the public, including documentable abuses of power. And, most importantly, it didn’t set off rioting and looting, which would have generated national media coverage and, as a logical consequence, questions to the President about his opinion.
This has nothing to do with police violence, so why would it be an example apropos of Michael Brown? Are you suggesting that the media should make every example of violence in this country a national story? Or that the President should hold a press conference specifically to comment on all such crimes (something he didn’t do in the Michael Brown case, either. It was a story that he was asked about, after it had already become national news)?
The focus has never just been on white violence towards Black people. The focus has been on police violence in the line of duty, which has disproportionally targeted Black people. You are saying this shouldn’t be racial, but yet you are cherry-picking crimes that fit a certain racial profile, while missing the actual point of people’s anger and resentment.
I believe you are mistaken about the use of “known”. There is a category of “unknown” in the chart, which means that, of those murders, the race of the offender was not known. It could have been white. Therefore, you are incorrect in concluding that 53% of all “known” murders are committed by Black people. At best, you can say that, of the murders in 2012 where the race of the perpetrator was known, 53% of the time the race was Black.
Now, to complete the analysis, what percentage of the victims in 2012, whose race was known, were Black?
37.9%, as I read your own link. But don’t let that stop you.
I suppose there’s no absolute proof that was done by police, but I think the residents would have been ripped to pieces if they had done it. There is a MotherJones article quoting Missouri state Rep. Sharon Pace about the incident too, but I don’t like using MJ as a source. Now that I look closer, I don’t see anything about it in “mainstream media”, although I don’t know why you’d accept anything from them if I did.
I didn’t say the police caused the riots, I don’t know where you got that. “Taunting” and “shooting everything that moved with rubber bullets” was a little hyperbole on my part to criticize the police response. I didn’t expect anyone to think I was presenting a fact. They weren’t actually taunting (well, occasionally) but their actions were disrespectful and inflamed the situation. They didn’t shoot “everything that moved”, but they did, on many occasions, fire rubber bullets (and these too!) into crowds of even peaceful protestors in order to disperse them. The criticism of their response should be very well known and I agree with that criticism.
I’m kind of lost as to what you have an issue with on this one and I don’t think you’re understanding anything I say. You were talking about “the majority of the media outlets,” calling them antagonists, said they “[lit] the torch that burned Ferguson down” and said they eventually uncovered some racial problems long after the events. I assume you’re talking about the national media and not some local Ferguson newspaper.
Obviously there was “media” there right after the shooting but it wasn’t a huge national thing. But the unrest started the very next day and it became huge news. My point is that the media didn’t come in and stir up unrest like you claim, there literally wasn’t even time for them to do that if they wanted to. The unrest was already there ready to boil over among the residents.
I’m not talking about releasing everything. It, again, should be well known that the police weren’t exactly cooperative in releasing information. Wilson never even filed an incident report about the shooting until 10 days later and the ACLU sued for the report. What they got was this, which is a joke. That’s just one example of them dragging their feet in regards to basic information. Again, this is another widely accepted criticism, I don’t know why you’re arguing this.
OK, lets try something different instead of countering each others opinion until the end of time.
What would you say needs to change to fix the problems in places like Ferguson? Clearly you believe that the black community’s biggest problem is the victimization and oppression by the white establishment. You can’t exactly remove white people from the equation, but suppose you could create a black utopia with no white people (at least in positions of authority). Would that magically fix all the black community’s problems?
This really is interesting conversation and I appreciate that.
Thank you for these citations. I don’t know why I couldn’t find them reported elsewhere, but they do add some useful insight into the timeline.