Probably somewhere more severe than throwing a harmless object. Something worse than an empty plastic bottle.
Sometimes, that might be lethal. It doesn’t seem worth it, to me, for lethal force, in response to an empty plastic bottle; especially considering that would vastly increase the risk of harm to a police officer.
So simple question. The grand jury has received far more evidence in this case than the prosecutor has ever put forward to a grand jury in his career. We do not know specifics since it’s a grand jury, but this isn’t a typical grand jury hearing. They’ve received essentially everything out there (the prosecutor’s words, were to the effect of "I’m showing them everything.)
If a group of people who have had the law explained to them, and then received all of the actual evidence (the public has received only a small portion of the total evidence), decide not to indict, how is it reasonable to riot over that? Wouldn’t that instead suggest the case against the police officer simply didn’t merit an indictment? Do we not want grand juries being dispassionate arbiters of facts and law?
But racism.
Who says rioting is reasonable?
I am guessing if there are riots, those persons who riot would argue they behaved reasonably, but maybe not. So you’re right, maybe no one will believe the rioting is reasonable. A more perhaps apt question is, “Why riot?” Reasonable or not in their motivations, I’m curious as to what they would be here.
Has anyone here suggested it is?
Are we back to “I understand why” is essentially the same as “Yeah riot!!!”?
CMC fnord!
Why riot? Hopefully it won’t happen. If it does, it will be from a combination of frustration/anger and opportunism – frustration and anger from feelings about unfair and disparate treatment, and opportunism from those who want chaos in order to loot or otherwise take advantage of mayhem. In my view, one of the primary goals of the Ferguson PD should be to prevent anything that might lead to increased frustration and anger – so it might be prudent to ignore any harmless objects that might be tossed around, for example. Arresting the thrower of an empty plastic bottle doesn’t seem worth an escalated risk of a riot, it seems to me.
That will only be the case if people commit further crimes, far beyond throwing a plastic bottle. There will only be risk of injury or death to anyone if the suspect resists arrest, or others attack the policemen.
Hence why I say that, if you’re a genuine, innocent protester, and you see someone attacking the police, get the fuck away from them. If not, you run the risk of an officer legitimately thinking you’re a threat, and acting accordingly. I expect the police to arrest those who use violence against them, and to use whatever force necessary to do that.
Yeah, the police probably deserved it because of what they were wearing. They should just put up with minor harassment, it doesn’t do anybody any harm… How is that not the same victim blaming bullshit that gets criticised all the time here?
The only difference, of course, is the police can actually do something to stop it.
But hey, keep painting the petty criminals the police are catching, either for driving illegal cars or having warrants out for them, as victims. You’re wrong, as any sensible person can see, but I’m sure it’ll make you feel better.
Or if a policeman, in the moment, uses excessive force, or there’s a big misunderstanding, or someone doesn’t realize that it’s a cop who is manhandling them, or a million other things that can go wrong.
Crowds are chaotic. Most of the protesters won’t see what’s happening 10 feet away from them, and won’t be able to “get the fuck away” from anyone. And cops are taught to balance risks. If there are 40 cops and 20 protesters, then the risk is much lower for something going badly then if there are 40 cops and 4000 protesters, for example.
??? Who said the police “deserved it”??? Where did I say something about what they were wearing??? Straw man alert!
More straw man crap. No idea who you’re arguing with.
I believe he’s referring to the “she was asking for it” argument brought up in some rape cases regarding what the victim was wearing.
DinoR has done the math for you, in the post above this one. If you would rather holler about racism you can.
Regards,
Shodan
Thanks to DinoR for going much more in depth than you did. He makes a good case that there’s a significant bias against the poor by the Ferguson PD, as well as some possible additional remaining bias against black people. The first is troubling in itself, and the second would indicate the need for more data.
Good discussion.
The “hints” of racial bias that DinoR alludes to seem to me to be more than just “smaller pieces” of the overall picture, not that they are certain. Moving violations account for nearly half of all the reasons for stops, and black motorists are still significantly more likely than the demographics suggest to be stopped for a moving violation.
No, I’m not making this up.
Shouldn’t that read “St. Louis County Police Chief Rip van Winkle”? I’m guessing he must’ve gone to sleep before 1974, because he left out the Symbionese Liberation Army.
I assume he means the New Black Panthers.
Yeah, all five of them. :dubious:
Given the reference to Commie activists, I think the original Black Panthers would be more consistent.
Equally threatening, I guess.
I’m wondering why the “C” in “communist” isn’t capitalized? An editing error, or an effort to be deliberately vague?