South Carolina Police Officer Charged With Murder In Death of African-American Man
Thanks to one civilian with a camera, a police officer is facing charges in what appears to clearly be an improper shooting.
A South Carolina police officer has been charged with murder in the death of an African-American man and, if it weren’t for one civilian with a camera he likely would’ve gotten away without even being charged:
WASHINGTON — A white police officer in North Charleston, S.C., was charged with murder on Tuesday after a video surfaced showing him shooting and killing an apparently unarmed black man in the back while he ran away.
The officer, Michael T. Slager, 33, had said he feared for his life because the man took his stun gun in a scuffle after a traffic stop on Saturday. A video, however, shows the officer firing eight times as the man fled. The North Charleston mayor announced the state charges at a news conference Tuesday evening.
(…)
The shooting unfolded after Officer Slager stopped a Mercedes-Benz with a broken taillight, according to police reports. The driver, Walter L. Scott, 50, ran away, and Officer Slager chased him into a grassy lot that abuts a muffler shop. He fired his Taser, an electronic stun gun, but it did not stop Mr. Scott, according to police reports.
Moments later, Officer Slager reported on his radio, “Shots fired and the subject is down. He took my Taser,” according to police reports.
But the video, which was taken by a bystander and provided to The New York Times by Mr. Scott’s lawyer, presents a different account. The video begins in the vacant lot, apparently moments after Officer Slager fired his Taser. Wires, which carry the electrical current from the stun gun, appear to be extending from Mr. Scott’s body as the two men tussle and Mr. Scott turns to run.
Something — it is not clear whether it is the stun gun — is either tossed or knocked to the ground behind the two men and Officer Slager draws his gun, the video shows. When the officer fires, Mr. Scott appears to be 15 to 20 feet away and fleeing. He falls after the last of eight shots.
The officer then runs back toward where the initial scuffle occurred and and picks something off the ground. Moments later, he drops an object near Mr. Scott’s body.
The South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, the state’s criminal investigative body, is investigating the shooting. The F.B.I. and the Justice Department, which has opened a string of civil rights investigations into police departments under Mr. Holder, is also investigating the shooting.
The Supreme Court has held that an officer may use deadly force against a fleeing suspect only when there is probable cause that he “poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others.”
(…)
Police reports say that officers performed CPR and delivered first aid to Mr. Scott. The video shows that for several minutes after the shooting, Mr. Scott remained face down with his hands cuffed behind his back. A second officer arrives, puts on blue medical gloves and attends to Mr. Scott, but is not shown performing CPR. As sirens wail in the background, a third officer arrives later, apparently with a medical kit, but also not seen performing CPR.
Mr. Stewart, a lawyer for Mr. Scott’s family, said the coroner told him that Mr. Scott was struck five times — three in the back, one in the upper buttocks and one in the ear. It is not clear whether Mr. Scott was killed immediately. (The coroner’s office declined to make the report available to the Times.)
The local newspaper, The Post And Courier has a more detailed description of what’s on the video:
The three-minute clip starts out shaky, but it levels off as Slager and Scott appear to be grabbing at each other’s hands.
Slager has said through his attorney that Scott had wrested his Taser from him during a struggle.
The video appears to show Scott slapping at the officer’s hands as several objects fall to the ground. It’s not clear what the objects are.
Scott starts running away. Wires, presumably from Slager’s Taser, stretch from Scott to the officer’s hands.
With Scott more than 10 feet from Slager, the officer draws his pistol and fires seven times in rapid succession. After a brief pause, the officer fires one last time. Scott’s back bows, and he falls face first to the ground near a tree.
After the gunfire, Slager glances at the person taking the video, then talks into his radio.
The cameraman curses, and Slager yells at Scott as sirens wail.
“Put your hands behind your back,” the officer shouts before he handcuffs Scott as another lawman runs to the scene.
Scott died there.
Given the fact that Scott was running away at the time he was shot, a fact seemingly confirmed by the fact that a majority of the shots entered at the rear of his body, and the officer’s claim that Scott had stolen his Taser seems to be clearly refuted by the the video. At the most, what appears to have happened is that Officer Slager deployed the Taser, unsuccessfully, and when it didn’t work he got into a physical altercation with Scott in an attempt to subdue him. Obviously, in an ideal world one can say that Scott should have complied with the officer, should not have engaged him physically, and most assuredly should not have tried to flee. However, the fact that Scott was trying to flee does not, in and of itself, justify the use of deadly force and the circumstances of this case seem to make clear that Officer Slager’s use of deadly force in this situation was not justified.
At the very least, though, one has to wonder how something that supposedly started as a traffic stop over a broken taillight ended up like this. Unfortunately, the video evidence that we have doesn’t show anything before the incident with the Taser so we don’t know what may have happened between Scott and Officer Slager that set this chain of events in motion. The fact that Scott generally doesn’t have a violent criminal record outside of an assault charge from nearly 30 years ago makes it seem unlikely that Scott initiated anything, but even if he did it doesn’t seem as though it would justify what unfolds on the video. In any case, it is worth remembering that Officer Slager is entitled to the presumption of innocence of the charges against him until he’s proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and that’s true even though he seems to have denied those same rights to Walter Scott.
Obviously, this case is likely to revive many of the debates that ensued in the wake of the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, the death of Eric Garner in New York City, and the failure of Grand Juries in both jurisdiction to indict the officers involved for even the most minimal of offenses. Very quickly, both of those cases and the manner in which they were handled by the justice system became symbolic of long-standing resentments among minorities in many parts of the country regarding what they see as unfair and unequal treatment by the police and by the legal system. Even when it became clear, for example, that the shooting in the Michael Brown case had unfolded in a manner other than the way that the initial popular reaction had thought and that the shooting was, at least as far as the law was concerned, entirely justified, the protests that the shooting had sparked continued both in Ferguson and in other parts of the country because of what they had come to symbolize. The death and apparent murder of Walter Scott falls within that narrative quite well. The only unusual thing about it is that there was independent video evidence of the shooting and that the Officer in question has actually been charged with a crime.
One final note to keep in mind is the fact that none of this would be happening, and none of us would know who Walter Scott was or what happened that day, if it weren’t for one civilian with a camera who had the presence of mind, and the fortitude , to continue shooting even as all of this unfolded in front of him. Indeed, one has to wonder how many incidents like this have happened where there were no witnesses and, most importantly, nobody with a camera, nearby. At the very least, it strikes me that this closes the cases on the wisdom and propriety of requiring police officers to wear body cameras, and to have dashboard cameras in their cars, that are operating at all times during the course of a traffic stop. At the very least, such video evidence will go a long way toward revealing the truth of what happens in encounters like this, and hopefully it might actually cause officers to think twice before they act in the manner that Officer Slager did. After all, when you know that what you do is being captured on video that could potentially be seen by a future Grand Jury, acting like an out of control thug may just be a little less likely.
Indeed, otherwise this particular police officer would have gotten away with murder, like so many others whose activities weren’t recorded…
The American south is a dangerous place to be black.
Don’t be so smug about how things are in the North.
Like in Cleveland, Ohio.
@Tony W: Eric Garner and Tamir Rice’s families would want a word with you..
@Doug Mataconis:
Would you rather be a black guy living in New York, or a black guy living in Mississippi?
Just saying … 😀
That having been said, I’m glad video of this sequence of events existed, and glad the authorities in North Charleston are reacting appropriately (based on initial impressions) to the officer’s conduct in this incident.
@HarvardLaw92:
They’re only acting appropriately because Scott’s lawyer released the video. It doesn’t seem like the police were into the ‘investigating’ thing here.
@HarvardLaw92:
Neither. Even Chris Rock doesn’t feel safe when he’s pulled over (frequently) by the police in NJ.
Whenever I hear about the police shooting an unarmed man, I picture something similar to this video. Police have the benefit of the doubt, benefit of the law, benefit of the District Attorney – only a clear video like this makes an indictment likely – and I still wouldn’t bet on a conviction..
@Doug Mataconis:
North….South.
The West is the best.
Saw video of this on CNN. I bet Officer Slager was very surprised to find that you cannot shoot a fleeing suspect in the back.
FTFY
Just unbelievable. His first response isn’t to chase or radio the direction the guy is running. It is just to shoot the guy. In the back. I don’t see how he gets away with it, but I’ve thought that about the last three or four years worth of these cases.
The fact that Scott generally doesn’t have a violent criminal record outside of an assault charge from nearly 30 years ago makes it seem unlikely that Scott initiated anything, but even if he did it doesn’t seem as though it would justify what unfolds on the video.
This applies to Michael Brown and Garner as well. Nothing in their lives suggests that they were out to kill cops or presented threats worth killing. Compare them to Ismaaiyl Brinsley, who killed two officers in Brooklyn. He was a violent dangerous man who terrified his own family. Michael Brown’s family was mocked because they called him a ‘gentle giant.’ This is the continuum that black men live in–at any moment, they become homicidal, regardless of what came before.
This is the dumb mayor of this town:
“When you’re wrong, you’re wrong,” Mayor Keith Summey said of the shooting during the news conference. “And if you make a bad decision, don’t care if you’re behind the shield or just a citizen on the street, you have to live by that decision.”
The North is as bad as the South, obviously, but way way more moral. What kind of human being thinks of shooting an unarmed man in the back as a bad decision?
So, he lied about that
And they lied about that
And we never will, because the only other person who was there is the lying cop who murdered him
Indeed, because absent that video, all of the police reports indicated that he had complied with proper procedure
@humanoid.panda: But you know their names. That makes my point. There are countless thousands of black folks in the south that have suffered the same fate and remained nameless statistics.
Drive through rural Virginia any day of the week and look at who gets pulled over for “speeding”, etc. Driving While Black is a real thing.
I have lived my entire life west of the Mississippi river. This will not be my most popular post but it’s my experience. When I visit the Old South on business I see things that perhaps people from that region don’t see anymore. The typical Black person there behaves differently than the black people I know out West. They look down at the sidewalk – not at me. They call me Sir. They stay out of my way and act deferentially. It’s a weird and discomforting feeling and I visit as seldom as possible. Jim Crow may be “over”, but it’s not over for the folks living in the South.
Your article blurb on the front page calls this an “Improper Shooting”?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
@Tony W:
I lived a total of 34 years in Georgia, Virginia and Texas. I went to school with black kids, I worked with black people, I had black customers and did business with black businesspeople. That description is a caricature. It’s what people who don’t live in the South want to believe. When I went to college in Minnesota, I had an argument with someone who insisted that black people had to get off the sidewalk to let white people pass. Nice to know these myths persist.
In reality, many black people moved back to the South after living in the north. The worst race riot in the country was in Oklahoma. Other very bad ones occurred in LA, Detroit, Newark and Chicago. The worst red-lining in history was in Chicago.
@Neil Hudelson: Well, murder certainly isn’t a “proper shooting”
@Tony W:
Demonizing the South won’t be a popular post? Color me surprised, what with all the sentiment about letting the Confederacy secede and being done with it I’ve seen around here. 🙂
@Hal_10000: Don’t forget the riots in New York during the Civil War. Started as a draft thing, turned into a race riot.
@Hal_10000: Because Chicago, and Detroit, etc., kept records of people who applied for loans. When your entire state supports de facto redlining, nothing even needs to go on paper. Have you not heard of “sundown towns”? No redlining needed: no blacks would apply for loans for houses in the areas where they weren’t “supposed” to live. They wouldn’t even dare to venture to those towns after dark, let alone try to get a mortgage there.
Are you aware of what happened to whites and blacks during the effort to register blacks to vote in, say, Mississippi in 1964? Maybe you should educate yourself before you feed us this revisionist narrative. Do you know what happened to blacks who helped the activists? Whites who were perceived as sympathetic were threatened, shunned, run out of business, or even burned out. Blacks were beaten and/or murdered.
So take some time out of your busy schedule and read Charles Payne, I’ve Got the Light of Freedom: The Organizing Tradition and the Mississippi Freedom Struggle (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995). You’d also benefit from reading David Blight’s Race and Reunion: The Civil War in American Memory (Harvard University Press, 2001). It’s particularly chilling in that it outlines how we’ve come, as a nation, to believe the Lost Cause narrative and to forget what the Civil War was really fought over.
No one is excusing the systemic racism that exists in all parts of the country. But that racism was – and still is – endemic in many parts of the South. Your whataboutery is disingenuous and disgusting.
White cop, black man?
The guy with the camera will go to jail.
@Blue Galangal:
Yes, you can climb down off that high horse before you break something. I’m not ignoring the South’s history. I grew up there. I saw racism first hand, not in books. I’m responding to Tony’s claim that black people in the South act subservient. And pointing out that racism was — and is — endemic everywhere.
@C. Clavin:
The guy with the camera is lucky he wasn’t arrested or shot on the scene. Rest assured officers in that department won’t make that same mistake in the future
@Tony W:
Utterly bogus – you can certainly tell you don’t visit much. I’ve lived my entire life in the South, and visited frequently all over our fair region – what you are talking about just doesn’t anymore. As Hal_1000 says, it’s a caricature. Maybe you were looking to fulfill your obviously preconceived notions? It’s exactly what outsiders want to see when they think like you do.
The South is no worse today than any other region of the country. There may be small pockets where prejudice is still rampant, but in my experience the worst offenders are the places that have a clear majority of one race (like North Alabama, East Tennessee) or the other. That’s just as true in the north. After a recent visit to Detroit I was struck how rigid the segregation is there. It was a more shocking divide than crossing the tracks in any Southern city.
More to the issue at hand – this is a clear-cut case. I ran over to The Blaze and when even 90% of those nutjobs are clearly condemning it, it’s pretty uniquely terrible. Ultimately this case really isn’t going to be worthy of protests, however, unless the cop gets acquitted. Thanks to the video, the system is working, and the guy is being held accountable for his actions. It certainly is worth discussing in the media how the video really might be the difference from other cases where the same thing has happened and been covered up, but we can’t really know how far that goes.
All that said, I still believe the single best case for having conversations about implicit bias and inequities in policing (i.e. “Black Lives Matter” – although I think the term alienates potential white supporters) is the Tamir Rice case. The way the whole thing went down just doesn’t sit right. And we’re talking a kid instead of an unsympathetic”thug” (which has become a racist code-word) – that is, criminal miscreant – like Michael Brown. Furthermore, even self-satisfied White America ought to be able to see a 12 year old white-boy likely would have been given precious seconds longer before the cop unloaded, allowing them to deal with the situation differently.
I finally was able to get through the entire video. It’s just awful. As someone pointed out on Twitter, the remarkable thing is that he plants the evidence in front of another cop. The shooter isn’t the only one that should be under investigation.
Boy Tony W really stepped in it, talking about the south as an outsider. It can’t be possibly be true. All of these outside meddlers coming into the south to unsettle good honest folk and so on…
On Detroit, yes it’s very segregated. Read Thomas Sugrue’s The Origins of the Urban Crisis to get a good look at exactly how criminally blacks were screwed in the 40s and 50s in comparison to whites in housing and in jobs.
My grandparents used to take my brother and me to the Detroit Country Club. This was in the mid-eighties. We swam in the pool. They had a couple of cocktails. Charming place–I think it was integrated in 1989. Meanwhile, to the north, Grosse Point was totally restricted. Mitt Romney didn’t seem to mind though. I never once heard him talk about Michigan and Detroit in a way that showed a bare flicker of recognition of what had happened. Oddly enough, by 2012, a man of that level of greed and oblivion carried the south and that’s about it.
I’m not saying the north is better. But you can talk about Boston, Chicago, Detroit, and New York without having to deal with the maudlin sentiments that most southerners seem to emit in constant waves when discussing the south.
@Hal_10000:
It’s like they can’t accept that the Democratic Party doesn’t run the South anymore. Jim Crow died when the FBI pushed the Klan out of being the Democrats paramilitary arm. Moderate Democrats did continue to get elected, but in the interest of continuing economic growth, the Republicans and Yankees have been moved in are electing more Republicans.
As to the case at hand, it does appear that imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury would have been hard to justify even without the video. The “taken” taser was hardly justification from that distance in the back. That he sought to “adjust” the scene so quickly seems to negate the idea of heat of passion after the scuffle. In any case, the officer should have been trained in the SCOTUS decision on using deadly force against fleeing suspects.
@Hal_10000:
Oklahoma, which I know well, ain’t exactly the North, now is it?
@JKB:
Or maybe, the officer should just have the moral sense not to murder someone?
@JKB:
Ah, that explains the dynamic economies of Louisiana and Mississippi. Probably also why the uber-liberal, perennial Democratic SF bay area is a depressed economic wasteland.
@JKB:
He shot a man in the back eight times for no reason, then lied about it. You can’t train someone to have character. What we have here is a criminal with a badge and a gun.
@HarvardLaw92: Well my Yankee friend, if a man must choose betwixt feces sandwiches and a T-bone steak–I don’t buleave that would be any choice at’all–Which would be why more negroes live in the Great State of Mississippi than the overpriced tax prison that is New Yawk. I’m appalled at how many commenters here support Lawlessness. The boy was obviously high on PCP which is why he wouldn’t submit to tasing…. who knows what havock a perp in this frame of mind could unleash. Legal Shoot.
@Colonel Cheetum: Stormfront is thataway —>
@Tony W: That South died 20+ years ago when the generation of pre-civil rights Blacks started dying off. None of the subsequent generations is having anything to do with Uncle Toming like that. Except for Clarence Thomas….
What hell Doug! From what I recall, the forensic evidence was indifferent to both sides of the account. And the only account that was obviously taken seriously was that of the officer in question. Then it should be of no surprise that the shooting in Mike Brown’s case was assumed to be justified according to law. There is no video in Ferguson to reflect what actually occurred.
Had there been no video in SC, these two accounting of events would have been eerily similar to one another from both officer’s perspectives. Police stops black guy. A struggle unfolds. Black guy goes after officer’s weapon. Black guy gets away from the officer. Shots are fired. Black guy is dead. Officer says he feared for his life. Officers gets the benefit of the doubt. The only difference between the two shootings is that there is video in the SC case.
At the very least, what happened in SC should open your eyes to the real possibility that officer Wilson is the same lying sack of sh#t the officer in SC is.
@anjin-san:
It’s true, you can’t train people to character. Take Ted Kennedy, he left a young woman to die while he worked with a publicist to control the damage to his career from drunk driving murder. Yet, thankfully, Democrats are forgiving and elected him to Congress for another 40 years.
@aFloridian:
As someone who grew up in the deep South, that matches my experience. There is certainly still more than its share of racism, overt and otherwise, but that characterization is BS.
That is pure, unadulterated BS. I grew up in the Deep South, moved to Hawaii, back to the West Coast and have bounced around all of those places and Europe as an adult. The Deep South is different with regards to racism. The racism is more overt and the white christian privilege much more deeply ingrained. There is certainly systemic racism and segregation all through California from the bay to the boarder, but it pales in comparison to even Birmingham or Atlanta, much less the rural areas of the South East. The South has changed a lot for the better over the past 30 years, but it still has a long way to go to catch up with the rest of the country and the rest of the country has a long way to go before it gets where it should be.
@JKB:
You revised the hell out of that history. You should be writing text books for the great state of Texas.
@JKB:
Funny, you are outraged over Kennedy and one death, but seem to loose no sleep at all over Cheney/Bush and 100,000 dead. How much blood money did Cheney and his pals collect?
Really JKB, why don’t you just man up and say “I’ve got nothing.”
I’ve spent the last five years of my professional life in Georgia, Lousiana, Texas, and Florida. Racism in the South is still alive and well. Get 30 miles outside of Atlanta in any direction and it’s only slightly better than it was 40 years ago. Same with Shreveport, Baton Rouge, Orlando, Dallas, and Houston.
If you’re from the south you don’t see it, but if you come from a place like Los Angeles, you notice that while places are “integrated”, they’re not really. Here’s a test. Next time you’re in a restaurant Atlanta, Birmingham, Mobile, Shreveport, Houston, Charleston, etc, look around. What you’ll see if white folk at one table, and black folks at another table. You RARELY see integrated groups having dinner together. The one exception in every city? The universities. In Atlanta, the kids from Georgia Tech, and Georgia State are fully mixed. Black, White, Asian, Homo, Straight, Indian, Hispanic, doesn’t matter. The college kids don’t give a fVck. But the grown ups? Still racist. They can’t help it.
Step 40 miles outside of Atlanta, in places like Covington, GA, where ni**er is tossed around by whites as often as “Hello” and “Goodbye”. It’s sad to me. It’s the same in Birmingham, Mobile, Memphis, etc, etc.
So, yeah, it’s not a stereotype, because I’ve seen and heard it first hand. Too many times and too many places for it to be an aberration.
@Keith: Really? These cases? This case is separate from all the others. I don’t remember any others discussed here at OTB where someone fleeing was shot in the back. Maybe I missed one. This one seems to pretty clearly be murder, and it looks like the cop has been charged.
@Colonel Cheetum:
African-American population of Mississippi: approximately one million.
African-American population of New York: approximately three-four million.
@Colonel Cheetum: I might be the only person here who got the joke. Well played sir, well played.
And, apparently just as important, like Cleveland and unlike Ferguson, it didn’t surface until after the officer had filed his report.
@LaMont: Doug, like so many others, thinks a lack of sufficient evidence to sustain charges is the same as exoneration. They want to believe deep down that our system of justice is not deeply corrupt and broken. This delusional belief of theirs is what is behind their apparent insistence that Darren Wilson did absolutely nothing wrong in his confrontation with Michael Brown…. While existing as an integral part of a corrupt and racist municipal police/court system the likes of which we have not seen since…
Let’s just say it comes straight out of Jim Crow.
@aFloridian:
Says the white man who doesn’t face racism every single day of his life.
@Hal_10000:
Amen
Now THIS is unjustifiable homicide, murder whatever. I’m not a lawyer. Unlike all the crazy shit being said about the cop in Furguson, this simply has no defense or mitigating fact.
@OzarkHillbilly :
This, I think, is the fundamental break in opinions on issues like obedience/deference to the police. Losing trust and faith is a terrible thing the human psyche instinctively shies away from. Have you ever seen a small child’s face when they’ve been told there’s no Santa and they finally get it? It’s the death of a dream; you can’t go back to that blissful state of acceptance all is right in the world. People need to believe in their ideals and will often prefer being blind and denying terrible truths to stay away from that final break.
If the system is corrupt, America isn’t as great as they think. If the system is actively hunting and screwing over citizens, not only is it broken but it’s broken on their watch and they’ve done nothing. Suddenly there’s guilt and responsibility and profound social change and moral quandaries so it’s easier to live in “Yeah But”-land. “Yeah, this cop is crooked but the rest of the dept might not be!” “Yeah, he blatantly committed murder but it’s a one-off thing!”
“Yeah But” is how someone with a heart/brain who wants to believe in American Justice ignores how America really practices “justice” so they can sleep at night.
One clarification – I was too broad in my earlier comment. The South is a big place. In Dallas I don’t see the problem – feels just like California. But riding MARTA in Atlanta, and visiting Charlotte, NC – you bet I do.
I have not been to North Charleston, SC, so I can’t speak of that city’s ‘feel’.
I love when a thread vindicates my opinion.
@EddieInCA:
You know, that matches my experience in restaurants up in Pittsburgh, New York City, Boston, and Baltimore. Funny that. 🙂
@Tony W: That’s because Charlotte is horrible in general. I can say that, I live in the Triangle. We all hate Charlotte. Our current governor made his name as the mayor of Charlotte, and let me tell you: hearing that one fact was enough for some to vote against him.
@Tony W:
I don’t know…I lived in Dallas in ’90-’91 and I felt like it was the most segregated place I’d ever been. It always felt like it was on the verge of exploding. Maybe it’s changed in the past 25 years. Hope so…otherwise it’;s a great city.
I don’t see this as a southern thing. IMHO It’s a cops and blacks thing.
If not for the video, every right wing media outlet in America would be shrieking that Slager was a “thug” who tried to kill a cop and got what he deserved. And the usual suspects (who are nowhere to bee seen at the moment) would be in here echoing what they were told to think at the top of their lungs.
@anjin-san:
Right…but the video of the Garner guy clearly showed him saying he couldn’t breath and in a choke hold and the cop still got off and the wing-nuts still called Garner a thug.
They will get around to calling this guy a thug too. They just haven’t been told why to think that yet. It’s coming. Wait for it…..
@Tillman: What I generally see are families eating together, which mostly denotes the same race (I would think in most areas). In the northern Detroit area you do see interracial families frequently, but not necessarily in great numbers. In Houston, the only other major area I spend much time in I’ve seen pretty much the same, but I haven’t spent much time there, and not any time at all in the center of Houston.
@C. Clavin:
One thing that seems to be entirely missing from the conservative viewpoint is the whole “even criminals have rights” thing. Hence if a low level criminal like Garner is killed by cops, it’s really no big deal. He brought it on himself.
@Hal_10000:
Hal, I have to agree with Tony. When I attended the Academy in Glynco, GA, it was incredible how Black folk were so deferential to everyone, but especially to White folk. It was as Tony described: heads down, no eye contact, very kowtowing posture. That was 1994-1995. About ten years later, I asked an agent who worked for me (he’s Black and from Glynco) about this. He simply said, “Yeah, that’s just the way it is down there.” And he was a very humble, respectful guy. I never heard him raise his voice or seen him angry.
This is not to say that it’s like that everywhere in the South; but, I’ll bet you go to those small towns, you’ll find it like that more than not.
@OzarkHillbilly:”I might be the only person here who got the joke. Well played sir, well played.”
I wasn’t sure. I thought calling a 50 yr old black man “boy” was either completely clueless, or a prank.
@aFloridian:
You know, that tirade is rich, coming from Florida and all …
Just for laughs, here’s the original report on the shooting http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20150406/PC16/150409558/1268/north-charleston-police-say-officer-who-fatally-shot-man-pulled-him-over-because-of-brake-light&source=RSS Heroic cop defends himself in life and death situation.
@anjin-san: @C. Clavin: Check your privilege. I said from the get go in the Garner incident that the police were wrong. I provided 2 scenarios in the Ferguson/Brown case indicating either Wilson or Brown could be in the wrong.
This case looks to be another one where the victim (Scott) did not display the proper obedience/deference/boot licking to Slager in the initial stages of the stop, Slager becomes enraged that a mere citizen will question his “authoritay” and escalates.
What all of the recent cases have in common is the inability or unwillingness of police to de-escalate. Determining whether an officer acted lawfully as has already been determined in the Brown, Garner, Kelly Thomas cases, or as yet to be resolved in the Rice/Scott case does not get to the heart of the matter. Police have a responsibility to de-escalate and do not have the right or authority to treat citizens as dogs to be ordered to sit, stand, lay down, shut up, let me search, tell me where you are going, tell me what you are doing, at an officers will
Lawful or not, the question that should be asked is: “Is this the right outcome?” Are we willing, even complicit when we allow police to continue to use deadly force where none should have occurred? Are police “Use of Force Policies” that allow an officer to simply state, after the fact and after reviewing any 911 calls, and after reviewing any dash cam footage, and after meeting with counsel, that “I was in fear of my life”, or “The suspect made a furtive movement”, or “His hands were going towards his waist” to be sufficient excuses when shown after the fact that the victim did not have a weapon, was not making a furtive movement, and did not deserve to be shot/killed?
Until policies are addressed and police put in check, these killings will continue unabated.
@Jack:
Damn, Jack. This is the first time I’ve every agreed with a comment of yours. That was succinctly and objectively stated. Maybe you’ve just been trolling us the whole time …
Unless this video evidence (unlike Eric Garner) is truly a bridge too far, by nightfall Walter Scott will be “a thug who deserved what he got” in Screaming Monkey Land and the battle lines will be drawn.
But this may well be the incident that will be too hard, too graphic, too craven, too effed up to ‘splain away.
There are inflection points in public perception. Witness the reaction to Indiana’s RFRA. Things build slowly and then in an instant the status quo, the way things have always been, becomes unacceptable. People, even unengaged people, even privileged people, start to see. 1964 proved that police dogs and billy clubs and water hoses get really real when idealistic white kids get popped and their bodies thrown in the dirt.
Perhaps things will change when people see this video.
I can hope, at least.
@Jack:
Well said,. Thank you.
@dennis: I’ll take that compliment.
My concern for the rise of the police state and the attitude officers show towards anyone not in law enforcement and the unwillingness of grand/petite juries to hand down a decision against officers that, on video, display obviously wrong behavior as was shown in the Kelly Thomas and Eric Garner case is well established.
Policing policies need to change. Nowhere should “stop and frisk” without reasonable articulable suspicion ever be a law enforcement “tool”. Nowhere should an officer be able to demand ID from someone walking down a street who did not/is not/not intending to commit a crime proper police work. While SCOTUS has said that DUI checkpoints are legal, the combined DUI/Safety/paperwork/drug stops that are prevalent today, and are policy practically nationwide, need to go the way of Jim Crow laws.
Being a police officer is not a right, it’s a privilege, and police should be held to higher standards than everyday citizens, not lower standards.
@Jack:
I’ll get on the band wagon. Yes, thank you for that.
Eh… Let me know when a cop actually gets convicted.
@de stijl:
“Well said,. Thank you.”
Seconded. It’s a tragedy that de-escalation skills are not more frequently taught to everyone growing up. In the case of police, it seems inconceivable that they are not. And yet…
@Jack:
Apparently you got you meds into balance overnight.
Well put.
Thank-you.
@C. Clavin:
I think the dead man’s family and lawyer should have done a Breitbart and held on to the video until after the Bluetongues had fully defended/excused Slager.
Police union talking point I can’t believe people are railroading/witchhunting Officer Slager using illegally obtained wiretapping/eavesdropping evidence from a anonymous criminal .
That is why we need to Support the law enforcement bill of rights.
The key element here, for me, is the taser. The cop says that the suspect took the taser away from him after the taser failed to stop the suspect, and that was a significant concern for the cop.
The problem is, the taser is a one-shot weapon. Once it’s been used, it’s useless until it’s reloaded, and that takes time, calm, and a reload cartridge. So the guy’s running away with a discharged taser? It’s marginally more dangerous than a bullet casing. (Getting beaten with a discharged taser will hurt more than being beaten with a bullet casing.)
That fact alone makes the cop look guilty. The video where he apparently picks up the taser from the ground where he was standnig, carries it over to the dying suspect, and drops it at the suspect’s feat is damning. That shows that the cop knew it looked very bad for him, and was trying to fake evidence to make himself look less guilty.
To sum up: the cop said two incorrect things. First, that the suspect took his taser and was fleeing with it. Second, that the taser was still a dangerous weapon. Even if one were to say that the cop, in the adrenaline rush of the struggle, was simply mistaken on both parts (he didn’t see the taser fall to the ground, and that he didn’t make the connection that the taser was no longer useful), his moving the taser to the suspect’s feet shows… I believe the legal term is “consciousness of guilt” and damns him.
This is the kind of case that should be used to go after systemic police misconduct. Not the Michael Brown case, which was based on a single self-serving lie. (“Hand up, don’t shoot!”) This one should be the cudgel.
@Paul L.: That “bill of rights” is pure weapons-grade stupid. It’s all snark and stereotype, worthless for real discussion, and has only two functions: amusing those who agree with you, and angering those who disagree with you.
@Paul L.:
Because police officers are special (read above) citizens and deserve their own unique set of judicial/legal rules because only other officers know what it’s like to be an officer. Can the actions of an officer truly be judged by someone other than another officer? Isn’t this why we allow (and unions urge) law enforcement to perform “Internal Investigations” that typically clear officers of wrong doing?
With that mindset, presumably terrorists should only be judged by other terrorists.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
I’m guessing a charge of “Tampering with Evidence” will also accompany the Negligent Homicide or Manslaughter charge.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
It is based on arguments and statements from police, police union officials and prosecutors.to justify police misconduct..
#8 is based on Dallas police policy and the Maryland’s Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights
#9 based on The Thin Blue Line of Entitlement
Forgot this one.
@Jack: In the big picture, that isn’t as important as the murder charge. But yeah, I sure as hell hope that it’s included.
The chief in this case just announced that they’re getting body cameras for all on-duty cops. Good move. Dash cams and cop cams are wonderful devices for law enforcement. And they don’t just expose bad cops, they protect good ones.
Part of these cams, though, should be a policy that disabling the cameras is a major — if not fireable — offense for cops.
I also support a federal law recognizing that people have a right to record the police when they are conducting their official duties. There have to be exceptions — compromising undercover officers and investigations, compromising tactical situations and the like — but those need to be very limited. The cops are doing our work, on our dime, and we have every right to know what they are doing when acting in our name.
@Paul L.:
From the link:
I’m not convinced that post is serious, but if you take it seriously, I urge you to destroy your internet connection, lock yourself in your house, and never come out. Stupidity this potent shouldn’t be allowed out in public.
@Jack:
@Paul L.: It is based on arguments and statements from police, police union officials and prosecutors.to justify police misconduct..
“Based on” is a good term. It recognizes that it has, at best, a tangible relationship to reality.
But if you’re looking for me to defend the conduct (or even the existence) of public sector unions, you’re in for a disappointment there. Half the time, I think Governor Walker didn’t go far enough.
@CB: The “Bill Of Rights” is a parody. Paul seems to think that it’s a particularly biting one, and thinks that he’s making points by “pulling a Colbert” and presenting it as if it was serious, with a straight face.
If you’re asking him to break character and acknowledge that, I think you’re doing so in vain. He’s got his angle, and he’s going to ride that sucker like Slim Pickens and his H-Bomb.
At the mayor’s news conference, some idiot just started yelling “NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE!”
The cop has been arrested and charged with murder. What the hell else can they do at this point?
@CB:
Police never claimed or argued that .
Except when the NYPD shot 7 bystanders or the LAPD shot up a truck with 2 women,
What Happens After the Police Shoot Innocent Bystanders?
@Paul L.: I’ll be damned. You actually broke character there.
Admit it. You did it just to prove me wrong, didn’t you? My statement took the fun out of it for you, and you did that just to get back at me.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
The 1st Amendment already exists. Laws are written telling people what they cannot do, not what they can. Taking photographs/video of things that are plainly visible from public spaces is a constitutional right – and that includes federal buildings, transportation facilities, and police and other government officials carrying out their duties.
SCOTUS has already refused to hear the Illinois eavesdropping statue case despite an appeal by the Cook County attorney general to do so, indicating that photography/video in a public space is a clear cut freedom of speech issues. Additionally, Glik v. Cunniffe held that a private citizen has the right to record video and audio of public officials in a public place, and that the arrest of the citizen for a wiretapping violation violated the citizen’s First and Fourth Amendment rights.
There should be no exceptions to this as the exception will then become the rule. “… compromising undercover officers and investigations, compromising tactical situations and the like…” Every police officer from a rookie on day one will claim to one day want to be an undercover cop, so therefore you cannot film them. Additionally, any tactical situation that I can see, and it doesn’t compromise the situation, then me filming it also does not compromise the situation.
I can think of no limited or otherwise situations, to include police parking lots and private police vehicles in those parking lots that should be excluded from the public place standard.
@C. Clavin:
Am I misremembering, or do you live in LA. LA is one of the more segregated places (racially and economically) that I’ve ever lived.
@Jack: I was very careful in my phrasing — I was paralleling the US Constitution. I didn’t say the law would grant the right, but recognize it. I think the right already exists; I’d just like it codified as such.
Also, I’m not qualified to hash out the fine print of the exceptions, just acknowledging that they exist. One concrete example from very recently was the Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris. Specifically, the hostage situation at the kosher market. If the police had been filmed live during that, it could have endangered the hostages. (Hell, one media outlet announced that there were civilians hiding in the freezer.) I’d also let the cops turn off the cameras when in bathrooms or locker rooms or other places where a certain level of privacy is expected.
I’m thinking carrot-stick. Be reasonable when the cops can make a good case for not being recorded, but Zero Tolerance for screwing around with the cameras in any other circumstance. Hell, toss in a “presumption of guilt” — should a cop be involved in an incident with the camera off when it should have been on, that can be considered as the cop possibly knowing they were in the wrong.
If the cop in this case had had a body cam, there’s almost no chance he’d have (allegedly) moved to plant the taser. And that second cop on the scene would have probably caught him at it, too.
@Jack:
I’m pretty sure you don’t know what that term means.
I agree with the rest of your comment.
@Grewgills:
I did live in LA…a beach town south of LA, actually…while I was doing graduate work at UCLA, which is a pretty diverse institution. My impression of LA is admittedly skewed by the environs I was exposed to.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Ok, I couldn’t quite believe it was real, but who the hell knows at this point. Faith in humanity restored, just a little bit.
It’s going to be fascinating watching society changing as our interconnected technological environment becomes even more a part of daily life.
Two things:
1) Have you noticed how all the UFO’s disappeared once we all had cameras in our phones? You’d think the number of photos would have exploded. Nope. Ditto Sasquatch, Nessie, etc…
2) Have you noticed what thuggish aszholes cops are to black people? It’s getting harder and harder for racism deniers.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Any place where privacy is expected is already a given under current law. Public bathrooms, locker rooms, etc., are already covered in those circumstances. Police, specifically in Chicago, have already tried to prohibit filming of police in public because they “might be having a conversation with a confidential informant” or in “might keep people from coming forward to make a complaint or speak to an officer”. These are excuses to try to prohibit “all photography/video”.
I can agree with restricting the “broadcast” of certain information on a case-by-case basis, but it cannot preclude the actual photography/video as the tactical situation evolves.
These are the same cops that make good decisions when shooting innocents, molesting children, and committing DUIs?
I’m just glad that the video is sparing us the kangaroo court theater of a grand jury.
@Grewgills:
I also lived in S. Florida for about 15 years. A fabulous, exciting, vibrant melting-pot. The stratification there was mostly by wealth, and then, at the poorest levels, sub-divided by ethnicity. But again…that was last century…perhaps it has changed.
I’ve been living in one of the most lily-white parts of Connecticut for the last 15 years. Some good friends were adopting a boy from Ethiopia, and were warned about the potential issues that might cause in this area. Good for them…they went ahead anyway…and I am unaware of any issues.
@Grewgills:
I used that phrase specifically because I believe this issue crosses the liberal/conservative, democrat/republican, north/south labels that we use for ourselves and others (an I count myself among them) use as pejoratives.
This is one issue we can all get behind and strive to correct despite our affiliations.
@Jack: I’m neither interested or qualified to discuss the fine print on the exceptions. However, I am glad we both agree that there do need to be some, but quite limited.
You didn’t say, but from your tone I think you also agree with my “stick” of being positively draconian when cops break those rules.
@michael reynolds: 1) Perhaps they’re sneakier than we thought.
2) With police body cameras it will also make it harder on false racism claimants
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Agreed.
@rodney dill:
I’m glad videos will help to dismiss false racism claims. Of course the assumption by conservatives had been that all such claims were false.
Now that we are getting more and more direct proof that cops do often discriminate against, brutalize and even murder black males, conservatives need to re-think their past idiocy on this score. They need to realize that what they are only now coming (reluctantly) to accept as real has been absolutely real to black people since forever. Just as the video of a woman subjected to constant harassment demonstrated that what women have been saying was true.
Nah. Just kidding. Conservatives won’t learn or re-adjust or have an ah hah moment where they recognize that everything they’ve believed about race relations and gender relationships was utter bullsh!t. They’ll just go right on living in their bubble.
I mean, conservatives utterly fouled up the middle east and are now trying to pin the blame on Mr. Obama. So why would they suddenly start caring about the truth?
@Jenos Idanian #13: I can even agree to something less that “presumption of guilt”.
If an officer involved in an incident had a camera available and it was off when it should have been on, said officers testimony would be inadmissible without corroborating video evidence.
@michael reynolds: You couldn’t leave our Kum Ba Yah moment alone could you? If there is some way to divide us along ideological lines you will dig it up.
@Jack:
It’s sweet that you and Jenos have finally come to accept what absolutely anyone who’s been paying any attention with an open mind figured out, oh, I’m going to say 200 years ago. Welcome to a tiny slice of reality here in the US of A.
My policy is always to welcome the newly-enlightened now matter how astoundingly dumb they’ve been. So welcome, welcome, welcome.
Is that better?
@michael reynolds: Yet me repeat my earlier link: cop cams also protect good cops from false accusations of racism, racially profiling, and the like.
Also, the men in that video are remarkably ethnically diverse. And the city in question is remarkably, reliably blue. Just how is that video condemning of conservatives?
@michael reynolds:
It’s all about getting the meds in balance.
@Jack: @rodney dill: @Jenos Idanian #13:
Here’s another glimpse at reality:
So guns are great! Guns are safe! More guns = More safety.
But not at the NRA convention. Right.
Church? Yes! School? Yes! Bars? Yes! NRA convention? God no!
I hope that doesn’t overload the sensors. Try sitting down, dropping your head between your knees and breathing deeply while imagining a peaceful meadow. Look: a butterfly! (No, don’t shoot the butterfly.)
@michael reynolds:
Prove to me that all conservatives had held that all such claims were false. I doubt the lack of any real proof will prevent you from responding, however.
What I have seen lacking from this thread is the usual liberal mantra used when real evidence is lacking — ‘You know the cop is guiltly, you know he’s lying because…. racism.”
I haven’t seen too much denying that racism exists by anyone at OTB (If you think you have any examples show me otherwise). I have seen some push back when claims of racism as proof of guilt are used in lieu of any real evidence.
This case seems pretty obvious that the officer is guilty, but I thought the Garner case against the cops behavior should’ve been just as obvious. There’s a current case in the Detroit area that should go against the cops. (White cops in Inkster pulled a black man out of his car and beat him because of a traffic violation) The big benefit of the technology is when it shows the guilty party, even when it is the law enforcement side.
I think any actual racism deniers are fewer in number that you think they are, though you seem to want to paint all conservatives that way.
@michael reynolds:
You make it sound like I am just now coming around to the fact that police abuse their authority. I have routinely, on just about every post Steve or Doug have made, been critical of police when it comes to unlawful/unjust policing policies, unlawful detainment, unlawful shooting, unlawful killing of innocents or criminals, and their routine violations of the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 14th amendments. Police are not judges or juries, their job is to arrange a meeting between offenders and the judge/juries—not arrange a meeting between offenders and coroners.
Despite my well known displeasure with current policing policies I am also a realist and understand that these cases rarely occur between Asians and police. Why is that? Is it because Asians in the US make up less than 8% of the population or is it because Asians commit less than 1% of violent crimes?
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-43
@michael reynolds: Christ, you’re smarter than this, michael. You are parroting a third-hand account just because it agrees with you.
From the NRA convention’s own web site:
The owner of the venue is imposing that rule, and the NRA is agreeing to abide by that rule. Private parties have the right to impose rules on their own property.
You’re usually better at these diversions, michael… hitting the sauce a little early today?
@michael reynolds: That’s hilarious.
@Jack: I think a more appropriate response to michael would be with returned condescension:
“Way to go, michael! You kept yelling about bad cops and racists, and now you finally had your ‘broken clock’ moment when you actually found one! After you made an ass of yourself over and over again, like the Ferguson case, you actually have one now where it looks like, after all this time, you just might be right! We’re so proud of you!”
@rodney dill: It’d be even funnier if it was true.
@rodney dill:
Oh, aren’t you cute, Rodney, trying to limit the search to OTB commenters. Because of course you know I can turn up a thousand instances on the web.
Here’s regular OTB commenter Drew/Guarneri/Red Barchetta over at Glittering Eye:
So, All Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and Barack Obama are the true racists. As you know perfectly well, the “Al Sharpton is the true racist” meme is everywhere. It’s a commonplace among conservatives. As you know perfectly well.
@Jenos Idanian #13: Awwwww snap!
@Jenos Idanian #13:
So, is it your theory that this is a completely isolated incident that just happened by amazing chance to be recorded? What percentage of shootings are captured on video?
10%? 5%? 1%? What’s your guess? Mine would be less than 1%. But hey, let’s go nuts and pretend that 10% are. That would make this police murder one of a likely 10. Right?
See where the math is going to go on this? You either have to assert that this is the most incredible statistical long shot or you have to admit it’s likely much more common.
See how black people have been saying this all along? See how you’ve dismissed their testimony out of hand? You know what that is, that tendency to simply dismiss the opinions of an entire race of people?
@michael reynolds: You’re the one taking one incident and extrapolating it over a bunch of others.
By that principle, why don’t we look at the Duke Lacrosse and Rolling Stone/UVA stories and conclude that there’s no such thing as rape on campus?
One example shows the truth about one example. You don’t get to “play the odds” and make blanket assumptions.
Well, you do, obviously, because you are, but you shouldn’t. And no one should follow your example.
@michael reynolds: You’re really off your mark today. I’ve never claimed that there aren’t race deniers, or that there isn’t racism. I’m sure you can find thousands of racists and deniers out there on the internet. You can find thousand of race baiters as well, as pedopiles, and numismatists, or whatever you’re looking for. You just won’t find your proof that all conservatives think all racism claims are false.
I see a lot of evidence that racism exists today in society, I just choose not to see it under every rock, or to use it to justify preconceived agendas. I’ve got you to do that for me. So go ahead flail away.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Then shouldn’t the NRA have refused to rent that venue? And instead picked a venue owned by a company that respect their god given rights?
Shouldn’t NRA members boycott the NRA convention since the organization agreed to literally disarm those visiting?
Lets say that a prominent anti-gun organization would have found out that the owner of the venue it was going to rent required that people visiting must be allowed to carry guns into the venue.
Does anyone actually think the organization would have agreed to that?
One of the things thats always gotten me about rape deniers or those who deny that racism is still a large part of America’s past, present and future is that they convince themselves that someone other than a crazy person would go through the drama of falsely claiming to being raped or racially discriminated against. Do they really think anything positive comes from claiming either of those things?
After the initial spotlight fades you alone have to live with your claims, you have to live with others judging you on those claims. I ask everyone reading this to think, can you name 10 people, shit 5 people in your life who are strong enough emotionally and mentally to make either of those claims and then follow them up publicly to their end point. The stigma attached to both claims are such that most people shy away from even thinking about it, yet we have the deniers on this site thinking false claims are made regularly enough that legitimate claims should be dismissed out of hand unless their is video evidence.
PLEASE IGNORE James P. He’s been banned by Joyner, and since this guy is too rude to take the hint, Joyner has been deleting his comments. So responding to him in any way is likely to leave you looking like you’re talking to air.
@<@dennis: a href=”#comment-2008248″>Nikki:
What’s the irony about Florida? Trayvon Martin? I’m in the Panhandle – it’s as culturally Southern as anywhere.
Because of my family situation, I face and discuss these issues with more depth and nuance than any other white person I know. I understand very keenly how black women are treated, and black men to a lesser extent, as much as anyone can be without wearing the skin himself. I’ve listened to black voices, been to black worship, black family gatherings, black trailers and ghettos, more than any other non-black I know. I’m not using the “I have black friends” line – I can think racist thoughts sometimes, just like anyone. And I still believe that black males DO commit VIOLENT crimes at higher rates, whatever the cause (poverty and ignorance) which most of you will dispute. But I speak plainly and black people respect it – I look them in the eye and treat them as equals. Not as a people who I try to “act cool” around or “jive talk” with or otherwise worry about offending – some of the most embarrassing traits many white people do that they don’t even realize. And I speak in those terms. People of Color is one of the most offensive, divisive terms I have heard, and I refuse to use it. It’s meant to unite non-whites against whites in some sort of shared experience, which just isn’t right or helpful. My experiences don’t give me clairvoyance, but I think I get the gist of why blacks are upset. Because I’m a white man from the South, I get painted into a box, which is it’s own type of bias which you who utter it should face. I am VERY aware of my own biases – I understand why the average white person feels the way they do, just like I understand why black people are so disturbed by these events in a way most white people just can’t understand.
The South is not what it once was. I can defend the South of today without being a Lost Cause extremist. I’m not sure what I got so many thumbs-downs for other than refusing to excuse the dysfunction of the rest of the country by demonizing a single region with a troubled past.
I really don’t think we will get solid progress until two things happen: 1) white people acknowledge the role subjugation, violence, and terror played in the status we currently enjoy as the preeminent and most materially wealthy race in America and 2) black people acknowledge the failings of their own kind while simultaneously pushing for reforms in policing, education, etc. Pretending that the Michael Browns of the world didn’t bring their trouble down on themselves by their behavior, failing to call out criminals who fight with police or who partake in a criminal subculture, ruins their credibility with the majority, who could be their staunchest allies if these two approaches began to gain widespread currency. No amount of political reform is going to solve the critical issues in the black community without a major push from within that community AND from the government – family instability/lack of fathers, education deficits, healthcare and housing shortages, and a media culture of violence and “street cred” which is rapidly spreading into mainstream white culture as well. It’s not as simple as “take responsibility” but it would definitely help if it felt like the black community was more supportive and initiating of efforts to improve their own neighborhoods and lot in life.
Really do tell – what in the substance of my message do you dispute – besides the fact that you all despise the South and I don’t – what about the racial message? Just more white male patriarchy because I refuse to engage in self-loathing?
@Jack:
That, I can wholeheartedly support. It is nice to occasionally find common ground. Sad, that it has to come at such a cost though.
The term has a specific meaning and that isn’t it. The rest of your point stands and you have been consistent on police abuse from all I have seen.
@michael reynolds:
That is priceless. Thanks for sharing.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
You would think the NRA would have chosen a gun friendly venue.
@aFloridian:
Go on brother, like haters got hate, bigots got to bigot, right.
@aFloridian:
I don’t think I down-voted, but the objection I have to your statement is that the South is the same as the rest of the country when it comes to racism. Certainly the entire US has a problem with systemic racism, but the South and rural areas have a larger problem with racism than the North, the West, and urban centers. Pretending that divide has evaporated because the South has made progress is bs. The divide is still there, systemic racism is more overt and more oppressive in the South and rural America. Casual racism is also more prevalent. I have more relatives and acquaintances from AL, MS, TN and GA than I care to admit that will casually say something as racist as, “I don’t have a problem with the blacks, it’s the ni&&ers I have a problem with.” I have never heard that outside of the South, despite living more than half of my life outside of the South. I can give anecdotes all day. I can dig up statistics to support my case and others have pointed out some upthread, but I think you get my point. The South isn’t the same. It isn’t as different as some on the other coasts like to think, but it is not the same.
Speaking of racism….
(The stupid is strong in this one. Lady, if you don’t want to be called a racist, don’t do racist things. And no, those “jokes” aren’t funny except to a racist, so you’ve already pigeonholed yourself.)
Oh great. Now getting fired for having sent around racist emails is like getting raped.
The stench of self-pity is also strong in this one.
Tiniest violin EVAH.
@grumpy realist: Mary Ann Twitty?! That’s really her name?
@aFloridian:
I think this, the bold part especially, has little to do with a black failure to engage in political activism. It is a response to a system that is clearly rigged against you. It’s spreading to white culture because capitalism is colorblind and screws over laborers of all races.
You have to imagine this from a generational perspective to really get it. Political activism among blacks was highest arguably in the late ’60s and the ’70s, and the children who grew up then saw two leaders assassinated, the first female black candidate for Congress dodge three(?) assassination attempts on her life (by the way that was in New York), not to mention the piecemeal efforts at integration across the country since then. I’m not surprised a generation or two, seeing that crap, would just resign itself to what it could get and try living with it.
@Grewgills:
Well that covers ~95% of the land area. 🙂 Like I said, we’ve got guns here in the city, but I don’t know how long we could hold off the ruralites and their old-fashioned “values.”
For the people who’ve seen subservient blacks in the South: having never encountered this myself (I have anxiety issues so usually I’m the one not making eye contact or acting subservient), I have to ask how old these people were in general. I’ve never met a black dude my age or younger who acted subservient in this town.
I mean, I’ve met plenty of asshole whites, but…
@gVOR08: Really. I would have thought I had lifted an article from the Onion except for the stench of self-pity.
@Grewgills:
Like this officer in the Northwest stopping two apparent Hispanic teens?
Video uploaded 7 Apr 15
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqTelihgPnM
The video starts out with the officer proclaiming how stopping these teenagers on the last day of the month, just helped him reach his quota.
“This is the last day of the month. I get every stat I need just off of you guys,” says the officer as he begins his rights violating confession.
“So you guys gotta make quota, huh?” asks the detained teen.
“We don’t have a quota. We have expectations. And what that means is, you will make so many arrests a month, you should write so many tickets a month, and you should haul so many dumbasses to jail a month. If we’re gonna pay you (meaning the officer) $100,000 a year, we should expect something back from you, shouldn’t we?” says the officer.
When the man replies, ‘yes’ that he understands what the officer just said, the cop then asks, “Would you like to be part of my quota tonight?”
The young man then asks the cop, “On what grounds [would you arrest me]?”
To which the cop replies, “‘On what grounds?’ Oh, I don’t know, I’ll think of something. How about aiding and abetting reckless driving?”
The officer basically admits that he will simply make up any charges he wants, just to make an arrest.
“Fair enough,” says the man, trying to prevent himself from being kidnapped by this officer for no reason.
“You better wipe that smile off your face brother, or I’ll show ya,” says the officer.
It doesn’t stop there, this officer then exposes himself for the true power-tripping tyrant that he is.
“Now, let me tell you what the difference between being a smart guy and a dumbass is. You sit there with that shit-eating grin on your face, let me see some id!” says the tyrant officer.
The young man then replies as he’s going to show the officer his ID, “It’s cool I got a clean record.”
That’s when the officer becomes brutally honest about how he can abuse his power to ruin innocent lives.
The officer replies, “Yeah, but you know what? I’m the guy that can make that record look dirty.”
At this point the officer then admits how the entire system is funded through this type of shakedown and extortion racket.
“You are a guy that’s gonna end up giving the city a lot of money,” says the officer explaining how the state aggressively pursues poor people to pay their exorbitant salaries.
The officer then proceeds to massively flex his authority as the teen isn’t bowing down fast enough, screaming, “Shut up! Shut up!”
The teen filming then asks the officer for his name, to which the officer yells, “Be Quiet! Or you’ll have my name on a police report and your ass will be on the way to juvi for aiding and abetting! Understand that?”
To top it all off, the officer then attacks the teen’s First Amendment right, by telling him that he did not give him permission to film.
“I didn’t give you permission!” says the officer as he yanks the phone from the teen’s hand.
The video then ends.
This officer and his leadership need to be fired—today!
@Loviatar: So you just blanketly equate rape to racial discrimination? Do very many women agree with you”
@Rodney Dill: More “denial of widespread rape” to “denial of widespread racism.”
@Jack: I think we’ve got a) power-hungry police officers b) picking on people he thinks can’t fight back. Which, if you’re a minority, is usually true.
@grumpy realist:
Agreed. Now, where did he get the idea this was OK?
This certainly doesn’t help.
http://www.ips-dc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/IPS-The-Poor-Get-Prison-Final.pdf
The report refers to a state-by-state investigation by National Public Radio into the fines, which found that since 2010, 48 states have increased criminal and civil court fees as governments passed many of the costs of running the criminal justice system on to defendants.
“…If a person is not able to afford the full amount of the fine or debt, they are permitted to make monthly installments. But on top of this, they often face additional fees linked to privatized probation services,” said the report.
These costs could include payment for a public defender, room and board during lock up, probation and parole supervision, and even the cost of an electronic monitor.
“When they are unable to pay, they are often placed in jail or prison with additional fines levied. It is an endless and vicious cycle targeting an already victimized sector of the population,” the report adds.
The report said the NPR investigation found that in 1991, 25 percent of inmates reported owing court-imposed costs, restitution fines and fees. By 2004, that number increased to 66 percent. Currently it is estimated that 80 to 85 percent of inmates leave prison with this kind of debt.
And here I thought SCOTUS scuttled debtors prisons.
@Jack: I recently got a ticket for going 75 in a 70 on the interstate. $87 fine, the actual ticket cost $25, $2 tax and $60 court fee for a court date we all knew neither I nor the trooper would show up for. Why did I get pulled over for 5 over on the interstate? Because I had a rental car while my car was in the shop and it had out of state plates. Thankfully I could pay it off. The one time I asked for a payment plan for a fine they had 20% interest on the payment. I threw it on a credit card because I would rather pay them interest than the city.
@aFloridian:
I was raised part of my life in the Panhandle – Niceville, near FWB. It was in Niceville that my family was threatened by the Klan for having black kids over at the house.
But that was in the early 60’s. So, long time ago. However, I also lived in Richmond, Virginia, much more recently. Richmond is a city that still prominently displays statues of “heroes” of the Confederacy. The last time I heard the word “ni–er it was in Richmond. My brother-in-law’s ex-wife was explaining that she didn’t want to use a diaper service that catered to blacks. That would have been in the 90’s.
That said, there’s an interesting poll here. It’s a bit hard to read on my browser, and in general it’s very hard to poll on race – people put on their civilized face for pollsters. But they asked an interesting question on whether or not you have been “called names.” It’s broken down by race and again we run into problems because there is no white equivalent with a tenth of the wight of “ni–er.”
But here’s what you’ll find interesting. They broke it down by southern black and non-southern black, and the numbers are essentially identical. So score on for the south.
@Grewgills: You would think the NRA would have chosen a gun friendly venue.
It is a bit amusing, but hardly the grand hypocrisy michael seems to think it is.
The NRA doesn’t want the government imposing those kinds of rules on people. They don’t have any problem with property owners exercising that kind of control over their own property. That’s basic property rights, and basic courtesy.
Just as a wild-ass guess, I suspect the NRA picked their convention city, lined up venues, and found that they couldn’t avoid using this one venue for part of the event. They probably asked them to waive their rule just this once, were told no, and shrugged and said “sure, your house, your rules.”
Again, what would be a productive use of this atrocity would be to push for more copcams. A LOT of problems would be reduced (if not go away entirely) if we camera’d up cops.
@michael reynolds:
If you’re coming down I-95, the south starts somewhere around Fredericksburg. Northern Virginia is nothing but suburbs and government. Fairfax, Loudon, Arlington and Prince William counties are some of the wealthiest in the nation.
While a red state for a long time, Richmond and the rest of the state of Virginia… is on its way to turning solidly blue.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Given the responses to restaurants and stores asking patrons not to bring guns to their establishments, I’m not so sure that is true.
On that we agree.
It’s fine to talk about “cop cams”, but the reality is that cops often simply disconnect monitoring equipment – with tacit approval from the department brass.
http://articles.latimes.com/2014/apr/07/local/la-me-lapd-tamper-20140408
http://www.scpr.org/news/2014/12/05/48504/lapd-finds-that-patrol-car-dash-cameras-are-no-pan/
What’s the old saying -“If you’ve got nothing to hide, you’ve got nothing to worry about”
@aFloridian:
Yo, Flo-Rida; take a pill, dude. It was meant mostly as a joke, in reference to all the ratchety-azzed stuff that comes out of – wait for it – Florida!
And I’m not even talking about Trayvon. I was referring to ALL the crazy stuff that happens in Florida, perpetrated by Blacks, Whites, Hispanics, Asians – the whole RANGE of crazy Florida!
So, relax. Phew.
@Tillman:
Till, like I wrote, this was in ’94-’95. Now that you mention it, though, it was within a broad age range I saw this occurring. But you know who I remember NOT seeing act like this? Black women. They looked you straight in the eye, and talked even straighter. But the Black man – young and old – in Glynco, GA? Kowtow is the best word I can come up with.
I’m from Boston, but even before I could even say a word, do you know what rhetorical question I would get several times a week? Yep, you guessed it! “You’re not from around here, are you?” Hmm …
@anjin-san: You really need to do your homework before you open your mouth. If you’d bothered to read the thread, you might have noticed that I said that the penalties for disabling a copcam should be quite severe, even to making it a fireable offense.
Make a couple examples of cops who “accidentally” forget to turn it on, or “accidentally” deactivate it, or “inadvertently” leave it off after a bathroom trip, and they’ll realize we’re serious.
BTW, apparently there’s dashcam video of the incident, too…
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Well gosh, if you said so, I am sure all the police departments in the US will get started on compliance with your demands first thing Monday morning.
Meantime, in the real world, cops already have a track record of disabling recording devices, sometimes with the tacit approval of the brass. So that has to be figured into any attempt to implement dash and/or body cams.
We could not even make an example of the cop who chocked Eric Garner out on video while he was saying “I can’t breathe.”
Have you ever been involved in an attempt to make a cultural change involving entrenched behavior in an organization? Much less thousands of organizations?
And then there are the folks on the right, who have been telling us that cops must simply be obeyed, regardless of the circumstances. Who supported the whitewash grand jury in Ferguson. Who have been supporting the presumption that all black men are “thugs”, – basically ready to become homicidal maniacs at the drop of a hat.
I sure hope that the North Charleston police officers don’t turn their backs on the mayor or residents who might be critical of Officer Slager’s conduct. We wouldn’t want people to be critical of any police offcer.
@anjin-san: At this point, you’re just being an a-hole. And having just gotten out of surgery, I ain’t got time for that crap.
There’s an old journalistic saw: “If your mother says she loves you, check it out.”
Is there any evidence at all that the motive for this shooting was racial? Or is that conclusion simply based on the cop being white and the dead guy being black?
I’ve known quite a few bad people who were pretty much even-handed jerks…
@Jenos Idanian #13:
I’m not sure why anybody would draw such an inference?
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Shorter Jenos.. “I can’t make a compelling argument, so it’s time for some name calling”…
@dennis: So you mean it wasn’t due to your driving? (grin)
@Tillman:
Furthermore, black people all over the country are actively involved in efforts to improve their own neighborhoods and lot in life. You could name almost any major city with a significant black population, and a quick Google search would probably turn up several anti-violence and/or anti-gang efforts taking place there that are spearheaded by African-Americans. It is a pernicious myth that black people don’t care or are as a whole actively involved in violence or other dysfunctions, or at least tolerate it.
Not only is that untrue, but African-Americans have made significant improvements in their lives since the end of the Civil Rights Movement. The black murder rate has dropped significantly since 1960 (there was a spike around 1988-1990, height of the crack area). The black poverty rate has dropped from 75% to about 28% since that time, and the black high school graduation rate has done the reverse, increased from about 25% to about 75%. College graduation rates have increased exponentially. Even the much-lamented black out of wedlock rate has dropped significantly in the last 20 years. In virtually every arena, black people have improved their lives and are continuing to do so.
It’s the bottom of a long thread that’s starting to get stale, but nonetheless, it bears repeating:
Folks, PLEASE IGNORE James P. He’s been banned by Joyner, and since this guy is too rude to take the hint, Joyner has been deleting his comments. So responding to him in any way is likely to leave you looking like you’re talking to air.
@anjin-san: OK, i’m out of surgery (that stupid sensor on my rihg finger made it a bear to type) and I’m home after a night in the hospital. Sill pretty weak and tired, but it doesn’t take much energy to smack this one around.
Dude: I called you a name because you raised an objection I had already addressed.
Your objection: Have you ever been involved in an attempt to make a cultural change involving entrenched behavior in an organization? Much less thousands of organizations?
My proposed solution: make disabling the cam a fireable offense. And fire a few who disable the cams.
The biggest problem isn’t the right-wingers who tend to support the cops, it’s the cops’ unions that will fight it — and public sector unions tend to have a lot more support from the left-wingers.
I also suggested a carrot-and-stick approach. Set up rules where they can turn off the cams, and maybe some other concessions — but the “you turn it off without a damned good reason, and you’re fired” is non-negotiable.
I don’t know if you didn’t actually read it, or if you’re just so fundamentally dishonest that you pretended I didn’t say it and hoped no one else would notice, but it was there.
And I repeat: is there anything that supports that the shooting was racially motivated, besides the races of the two parties? The cop simply could be an a-hole who didn’t like that the suspect didn’t respect his authoritah.
A couple of examples of racial animus, a history of race-based complaints, just a little something that shows that he wasn’t just a general a-hole, but a racist a-hole.
It is truly pathetic that people are trying to make a racial issue out of this.
It is a question of someone murdering a human being in cold blood. There is no racial angle – it’s a murder case, pure and simple.
I give all the props in the world to the Scott family. They told Al Sharpton to stay away. They don’t want this turned into the Al Sharpton show.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Right. Well, rub that magic lamp, and maybe your wish will come true. Meanwhile, choking someone out on video while that gasp “I can’t breathe” with their dying breaths is not a fireable offense.
Not surprisingly, you are more interesting in scoring political points than actually addressing the problem.
Yes, you repeat what Fox has been repeating. Well, we don’t really expect any original thinking from you.
Well, I did read it. I just did not take it seriously. Are you not aware that almost nothing you say here is ever taken seriously?
Hey Jenos, how many Ebola deaths have there been in the US anyway? Have we run out of body bags yet?
@anjin-san: You’re all over the map today, ain’t ya?
1) The copcams: it’s called “making it mandatory.” If we can force every single person to buy insurance whether they want it or not, we can force cops to wear the cams. All it takes is a governing body willing to say so.
1.5) Oh, yeah, the guy who was choked to death by the police. That was bad.
Oh, that’s right, that was the overweight asthmatic guy with a pre-existing heart condition who chose to resist arrest, and later died of a heart attack. As someone who has a few very serious medical conditions myself, I’m always careful to not get into situations that could put me more at risk than an average person.
2) Oh, you’re protesting because I scored a political point back? “It all started when he hit me back!” Even for you, that’s pathetic.
3) Thank you for the excuse to say something I’ve been wanting to say for a while.
When a white person commits a violent act against a black person, is that racially motivated?
To a lot of leftists (like you, I suspect), yes, it is.
To other leftists, it is until proven not racist.
To me, it’s just a violent act until there’s at least a shred of evidence that it was racially motivated.
In this case, it’s looking more and more like this was just a bad cop who snapped and killed a guy who had disrespected his authoritah. Not first degree murder, but 2nd degree or manslaughter. Definitely a bad shooting and a crime.
4) Ebola? If you’re gonna pull all sorts of random stuff out of your ass to throw at me, PLEASE warn me ahead of time so I can get the Purell handy. And a tarp.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
It doesn’t matter. Either way, this is an opportunity to shine a light on many, many racially motivated acts whose existence are routinely and categorically denied by the right. Never squander a crisis, maybe we can fix something here if there is enough outrage.
@Tony W: …and if they have to just plain make up some things and smear some people in the process, so be it. Eggshells, omelets. The Agenda must be advanced. It’s For The Greater Good.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Are you talking about yourself and Treyvon Martin again?
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Ah, I’m a “leftist” now? Tell me, how do you define the word?
Except it’s not random. It’s an example of one of the many times you have been wildly, terribly wrong in your commenting. You basically spent three weeks hysterically parroting the hysterical folks at Fox, all at high volume – the whole time screeching that anyone who disagreed with you was an uninformed idiot.
In other words, its an example of why you are not taken seriously. But your unwillingness to defend your track record as a commenter is noted. And understandable.
Uh, yea. That’s all it takes. Kind of a steep hill to climb.
Well no. Shooting and scoring are different things. But thanks for playing.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Thank you for answering my question from the food stamp thread here.
In Jenos world if it is alleged that poor people abuse food stamps to buy surf and turf, then people on the left need to try and understand and sympathize with why right wing people would think that. That there are no facts in evidence that this is actually happening isn’t relevant. It is disrespectful to dismiss their argument and not proper form.
If, however, a black cop guns down a black man in cold blood, it is entirely unreasonable to assume a racial component in the crime. It is entirely appropriate to dismiss that there is a racial component out of hand and not at all incumbent on you or others doing so to try to understand and sympathize with why they would think so. It is almost as if your standards for what is appropriate argument stem entirely from what side of the debate you are currently on.
There a long history of racist policy in the US, a long history of racist treatment of black men by the police in this country, and continuing racist disparity in treatment of black men by police (and others) in this country. Somehow you seem to be ignorant of this and so can’t understand why people would think that yet another instance of a white cop gunning down an unarmed black man has a racist component. You refuse to sympathize with the people that see this in any way. To quote the person that most respects your opinion on this site, “Lemme know how that grand strategy works out for you.”
I believe he brought that up as an example of your record of being completely and utterly wrong while parroting right wing talking points, then disappearing without once admitting that you were completely and utterly wrong. I remember several long threads where I and others explained to you why your stated fears about ebola were unfounded and why they were unfounded. They were based on right wing talking points more concerned with damaging Obama than with public safety. This is a pattern with certain parts of the right and you seem to glom on to that more often than not.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
To be more clear, since you can’t (or won’t) seem to wrap your head around this, yet another instance of a white cop killing an unarmed black man that poses no threat to him is part of a pattern of racist treatment of black men by police (and other authorities) in this country. Even if there was no racist intent by the cop* it remains part of the pattern of racial disparity in the way that the police treat black black men in this country. Because of this it is entirely appropriate to discuss this event in terms of race in police enforcement. If you can’t see this your partisan blinders really need to come off.
* That seems a stretch in rural South Carolina
@Grewgills:
This.
There is simply no ignoring the staggering numbers of black males shot/shot & killed by police in this country – unless you are ignoring it via willful ignorance and ideological blinders.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Oh, and it takes thousands of governing bodies…
@Grewgills: To be more clear, since you can’t (or won’t) seem to wrap your head around this, yet another instance of a white cop killing an unarmed black man that poses no threat to him is part of a pattern of racist treatment of black men by police (and other authorities) in this country.
This case is an example of that. Agreed.
But the biggest case prior to this, the Ferguson shooting, was not. We now know that the whole “hands up, don’t shoot” was a deliberate lie.
Or the campus rape epidemic. The three most prominent examples of the past few years were the UVA gang rape, the Duke Larosse gang rape, and the case of Columbia’s Emma Sulkowicz. And all three accusations fell apart.
Here’s a little hint: if you’re going to argue that such and such a thing is emblematic of a much bigger problem, you probably should make certain that the other examples are actually real.
In math, one point determines nothing. Two points determine a line, three a plane, and four a space. Likewise, there’s an aphorism: once is an accident, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action.
You need more than one solid example to prove a trend. And when you put up series of false examples as “proof,” then you’re actually making an argument that the real trend is false incidents.
Let’s look at four examples of white cops killing or injuring unarmed black males that all made national news in the past year or so.
1) Michael Brown, Ferguson, MI: Initial reports of him being shot in the back while fleeing proven false, ruled by numerous authorities as a “clean shooting.”
2) Eric Garner, NYC: Initial claims were that he was choked to death by police. Autopsy results show that he was a grossly obese asthmatic with a heart condition; died of a heart attack
3) Levar Jones, South Carolina: cop demands Jones show his license and registration, then shoots Jones repeatedly when he reaches back into his vehicle to produce them. Cop is immediately fired and charged.
4) This case. Guy with outstanding warrants starts running from cop, cop shoots him repeatedly in the back. Cop is immediately fired and charged.
In those four cases, we have one case where it was clearly a bullshit charge of racism, one ambiguous one, and two where the involved cops were immediately fired and criminally charged. So it looks like if there is a problem, it’s being addressed quite effectively.
And in each case, there’s no obvious indication that there was a racial component.
In each case, the encounter started off with an entirely justified “stop” by the officer. And in three of the four cases, the suspect reacted inappropriately. Brown attacked the cop. Garner swatted the cop’s hands away and backed off. And Scott ran off. So an argument can be made that the cop in question overreacted, but they didn’t choose to escalate the confrontation.
(Oddly enough, the only survivor — Jones — was also the only one who was acting entirely appropriately. But that’s just a coincidence — he was shot at repeatedly, and it’s only the cop’s poor aim that left him with a single, non-fatal wound.)
Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof. And if you’re going to argue that there is a major problem that requires drastic action, you need to be prepared to show several very solid examples that demonstrate the problem.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
You need more than one solid example to prove a trend.
Unarmed People of Color Killed by Police
I will note that when Cliven Bundy’s armed supporters aimed weapons at law enforcement officials, they were unmolested, they were not arrested, and the right cheered for them.
Unarmed Black Men Shot by Police
@anjin-san: Interesting list. But by previous standards established here, all I need to do is find a single flawed example to discredit the whole thing, right?
Totally one-sided presentation of the facts, with quite a few highly relevant facts omission. Brown attacking Wilson while Wilson is strapped in his cruiser is reduced to “an altercation that happened inside Wilson’s car.” No mention of numerous witnesses saying that Brown was charging a retreating Wilson, and how the physical evidence backed that up. No mention that Eric Holder’s Justice Department investigated and also found no evidence that the shooting was unjustified.
But let’s look further.
Yvette Smith: officer indicted for murder.
McKenzie Cochran: killed by similarly-unarmed mall cops.
Miriam Carey: wasn’t carrying a gun, but driving a two-ton car and had already hit one cop.
Larry Eugene Jackson, Jr.: Cop indicted for Jackson’s death.
Deion Fludd: Hit by a train while fleeing police.
Ervin Jefferson: Shot by private security guards, who have been charged with impersonating police officers.
Rekia Boyd: officer fired and charged with manslaughter, among other charges.
Wendell Allen: officer pleaded guilty to manslaughter, now in prison.
Nehemiah Dillard: This one needs a full quote — I can’t possibly summarize it fairly. Dillard was admitted to Meridian Behavioral Healthcare after “displaying strange behavior” in a stranger’s yard. He allegedly struck a member of the hospital’s staff, who called police. Officers shot him twice with tasers after he allegedly attacked them. After being handcuffed, the Tampa Bay Times reports, “a staffer at the facility injected him with drugs” and Dillard died soon after from cardiac arrest.
That’s just from the first half of your list. I think at this point I’m going to invoke the Mercy Rule and stop running up the score.
After this, I think I’ll just assume that any link you post is one that you didn’t actually read, because this is hardly the first time you’ve presented doesn’t say what you said it did.
Alternately, I could just assume that you did read that list (you actually trusted Gawker? Or thought others might?), but hoped no one else would. Where the hell did you get the impression that I’d simply take your word on this — or anything?
@anjin-san: I accidentally scrolled down on that list, and here is the very next one:
Dante Price: Security guards ordered Price out of an apartment complex. They told him to leave his car, but instead he decided to drive away, so they fired 17 shots at him. Aftermath: Justin Wissinger and Christopher Tarbert pled guilty to involuntary manslaughter and abduction. They were sentenced 3 to 11 years in prison.
Yet another example from your list of “Unarmed People of Color Killed by Police, 1999-2014” where the cops weren’t even involved.
How much more humiliation do you want, annie? Should I keep going through your list? I mean, you cited it, so you obviously endorse it.
What the hell were you thinking? Seriously, what the effing hell were you thinking?
@Jenos Idanian #13: 12 year old Tamir Rice, playing with a toy gun in a park. Shot within seconds of police arrival. John Crawford, holding an air rifle he picked up off the shelf at Walmart. He’s talking on the phone, holding the gun pointed at the ground. Shot within seconds of police arrival at the scene. Aside from the fact that neither was being a threat to anyone and neither one had a real gun, both of these happened in Ohio, an open carry state. Why were these cops so quick on the trigger? Why was Crawford smeared in the media, and Rice’s dad? As per usual, the cops lied about what happened until a video emerged. They also harassed Crawford’s girlfriend and Rice’s 14-year-old sister, in order to place the blame on the victims.
Ummm no.
Are you permanently disqualify yourself from commenting on OTB because of your hysterical Ebola nonsense that was wrong, wrong, utterly wrong? About being totally wrong about Bengazi? Wrong according the the GOP’s own finding? Oh wait, you are refusing to talk about your Ebola Waterloo. Therefore, it does not exist.
Not really. But I did know you would put your heart and soul into dissecting it, searching for that flaw so that you could do your sad little victory dance 🙂 Dude, try not to be so predictable and easy to manipulate.
In the meantime, it is very, very clear that there is a systemic problem with cops shooting unarmed people of color.
Feel free to prove me wrong.
@Jenos Idanian #13: Did you watch the entire Garner video? He was NOT stopped justifiably. He had been stopped in the past by police for selling loosies, but the day he died, he was not doing that. The police come up on him and surround him, and he asks why they’re bothering him because he’s not doing anything. And yes, he died of a heart attack, but it was a heart attack that was precipitated by the police chokehold.
@Monala: Addendum: the cops in the Crawford case were not charged. The Tamir Rice case is awaiting a grand jury decision about whether charges will be filed.
@Monala: I didn’t say the list was completely bogus. I’m saying that a very large number of them were bogus.
I went through the first 36 examples (well, 35 examples and 36 people) and found 11 of them were BS. That’s a really, really, really percentage. Especially since I only had to do the most cursory research on each — either the BS element was right there in the synopsis, or the synopsis was weaselly enough that I clicked through to the link offered and read the details. (The only exception being the Michael Brown case, where I knew the details already. And that was the one that made me suspicious enough to keep looking.)
So, going by that article, I am tempted to extrapolate and say almost 1 in 3 of such complaints are BS. But that’s not fair. However, I am willing to extrapolate and say that 1) about 33% of anything Gawker says is BS, and 2) anjin-san is so stupid, so dishonest, or both, that one should just assume that any link he posts is BS.
Hell, I’ll go so far and say that pretty much anything anjin-san posts, links or otherwise, is BS.
Oh, look, annie! There goes your credibility! It’s running away! Go and try to catch it, quick!
@Monala:
It’s worth noting that even obese black men have rights under the constitution. Many of the incidents in question start with nothing more than police seeing a black/brown man and deciding to screw with him a bit, get a little of that dominance/submission, “you will respect mah authority” in…
How the police treat people of color:
Example #1
Example #2
@anjin-san: So, after not only admitting that you lied with your link, but taking pride in it, you actually expect me to go on attempting an actual sincere discussion with you?
Right now I’m sincerely torn. Which is a more appropriate response — “GFY” or “DIAF?” The former is less violent, but the latter is less vulgar.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Well, no. But since you obviously are in need of a way to save face here, I guess that will work. Catch you next time, Sir Robin.
@anjin-san: Just horrifying.
@Monala: I’m done with annie, but I’m not giving up on the discussion. So I’ll ask you this, and I am absolutely serious and sincere here: no snark, no snidery, no rhetorical trick:
What is your goal on this? What do you want to achieve?
Do you want the situation taken seriously? That is already happening, to a good extent. I dismissed several of the examples annie tried to present by pointing out that the cops (or, in some cases, non-cops) involved were criminally charged. That’s totally “taking it seriously.” It’s not helping the innocents who were killed, but it is getting them justice, and it’s sending a message that this sort of crap is NOT acceptable. Which I think is a good thing.
We will always have bad cops. People aren’t perfect. We can’t prevent ever having bad cops doing bad things.
What we can do is come down like a ton of bricks on those who act badly. But that must be balanced with NOT coming down on cops where it’s not clear that they did act improperly.
Darren Wilson has been exonerated by two separate investigations, one of them by a party (Eric Holder’s Justice Department) that was highly motivated to find SOMETHING he did wrong. But he’s out of his job, his career, and will spend the rest of his life tainted for something that he didn’t do.
That’s why I am pushing so hard for copcams. That will get rid of a lot of the ambiguous cases. And if the bad cops realize that they can’t get away with being bad cops, then they might end up bad cops who find that they can’t act like bad cops, and will behave themselves.
And good cops will be exonerated when they are falsely accused of misconduct. That should be a huge selling point in imposing these on cops.
To me, copcams will put an end to these endless pointless arguments. Which will free us all up for other pointless arguments, of course, but at least this one will be put to rest.
@Monala: Here are some aspects about those two examples of annie’s examples that might make you feel better. In the first case, a dashcam recorded the incident, showing the cop lied, and she has been placed on administrative leave (and stripped of her gun and badge) pending a full investigation. In the second, the cop has resigned and is facing criminal charges.
So they are being treated seriously. And considering the attention they’re getting, I’m fairly certain that these will not be swept under the rug.
@Jenos Idanian #13: I agree that cop cams are a start, but they do no good if there is no accountability. For example, why weren’t the cops in the Crawford case charged?
@Monala: In the Crawford case, the cops were responding to a complaint that flat-out lied and said that Crawford was pointing the gun at other people. I’d like to see that caller charged with felony murder, or something that represents “murder by cop.” And I’d like the cops to face some serious accounting, too.
And I have never said that there wasn’t a problem. I see two possible actions that could help, especially if done in conjunction. The first is copcams; the second is coming down like a ton of bricks on bad cops caught acting badly.
Even if the Crawford case wasn’t racially motivated, it showed astonishingly bad judgment by the cop. Crawford apparently didn’t point the airgun at anyone, and didn’t have time to drop the airgun before being shot. And while a grand jury has declined to indict the cop, he remains on desk duty. I strongly suspect his cop career is over.
@Monala:
Good question. Don’t expect an answer.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
To begin with the end
That is exactly the opposite of your standard with regard to poor people misusing EBT cards. Why are your standards so different in these two cases?
To your examples:
1) Did you read the Justice Department report? Clearly the Fergusen PD acted on a systemically racist way. How can you say that there was no justification for viewing the Fergusen case as an example of systemic racism?
2) He died of a heart attack because he was put in a choke hold and forcefully held down over a situation where police use of force was not justified. The choke hold was against department policy as well.
Assuming you mean Fergusen, there was clearly shown systemic racism. There wasn’t provable denial of civil rights by federal statute and the VERY GENEROUS to police governing use of force by police and a DA that didn’t want to prosecute much less convict do not exonerate officer Wilson of racism.
Forced to the ground and choked for maybe selling loosies is not ambiguous to most people.
We will see if they are convicted
Only if you think each of these four cases in isolation are the entirety of the problem. Only if you ignore the disparity in overall treatment of black men by police that you have been shown repeatedly.
Only if you try really hard to not see it.
Not finding enough evidence to convict on federal civil rights legislation is not the same as “no evidence that the shooting was unjustified.” They looked for one, not the other.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Yet a lot of folks on OTB find me credible, and you not. You should ponder that for a while.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
He is facing a charge of third degree assault. For a brutal, totally unprovoked attack on a grandfather who was going about his lawful business. An attack that left his victim with very serious injuries he may never fully recover from.
“Hold out your wrist officer, and receive your punishment.”
A proud moment indeed for American justice. The system (according to Jenos) is working.
This just in:
http://www.thenation.com/blog/203937/so-nypd-just-broke-nba-players-leg#
@Grewgills: That is exactly the opposite of your standard with regard to poor people misusing EBT cards. Why are your standards so different in these two cases?
Go back and read that thread again. At no point did I say that was my viewpoint. I was presenting what I’ve seen and heard that reflected the mindset that prompted the original proposed law.
I didn’t endorse it, I didn’t justify it, I certainly didn’t embrace it. And you should know by now that unlike, say, annie, I have no problem expressing my opinions and taking stances here. If I held those beliefs, I’d say so.
I offered that to give folks a little insight into the thoughts and beliefs that motivate such laws. I foolishly thought that it might be useful.
Shoulda known that would be (deliberately) misconstrued. Dunno why the hell I expected anything different.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Dude you posted it, that means you endorsed it.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Some quotes from you on that thread
Here you express sympathy to the (unsupported) view that there is widespread EBT abuse, sympathy you apparently don’t feel towards those who see racism in the actions of white cops killing unarmed black men and children.
Here you say that there is some truth in the claim of rampant EBT misuse by the poor.
Here you argue that we should sympathize with the people that feel that poor people are rampant misusers of EBT, despite there being no evidence of this. On the other hand you have no patience or sympathy for those who see racism in yet another killing of an unarmed black man or child despite the history of police abuse and the continuing disparate treatment of black males by the police. You argue that
The claim that EBT abuse is a real problem that requires action is entirely unsupported other than by anecdotal claims. They haven’t even pointed to one actual person buying lobser or crab legs with their EBT cards. Despite this you are sympathetic to their claim. You don’t argue that their claims need to be supported, rather you argue that their emotional position needs to be respected.
Here you are saying that there is a real problem at hand re poor people misusing EBT cards, or perhaps the perception by some that they are misusing their EBT cards. This is markedly different than your approach to racism and police killing unarmed black men and children.
Back atcha.
@Grewgills: Sympathy for the people? Absolutely. They’re hard-working, honest, decent, responsible, and proud. They take pride in supporting themselves, of not taking handouts that they see as reserved for the truly needy and helpless.
Sympathy for their opinions? Not necessarily. They often (sincerely and honestly) hold opinions that are just wrong. Hell, some of them even voted for Obama, and some even did it TWICE.
But they’re still our fellow citizens. They aren’t demons. They have other priorities in their lives than relentlessly applying politics to every aspect of reality. (OK, there I go beyond sympathy and into envy.)
Along with that pride, though, comes a healthy dose of stubbornness. Which means when they have a wrong opinion, they won’t listen to anyone who lectures them, who insults and mocks them, who condescends to them. They expect to be treated with respect, and won’t waste their time on anyone who starts the discussion with insults.
I try that approach here. Yes, there are a few whom I will cheerfully open up discussions with insults, but that’s because I’ve gotten to know them a bit first, and manners are wasted on them. (Three in particular come to mind.) Plenty of others I will approach each discussion as new, and start off each discussion civilly. (You’re among that group.)
That’s why JamesP was banned, in my opinion, and I haven’t been. He treated pretty much everyone he disagreed with rudely. I saw him do that and shook my head. Yes, he was arguing some of the same points I do, but he was doing it in ways I saw would alienate more than it might persuade. Plus, on a purely selfish basis,I could tell he was probably going down in flames, and I had no desire to be part of the collateral damage.
So yeah, I’m sympathetic with the people whose views I passed along. I think that those views have a grain of truth to them, but it’s a far more complex issue than they reduce it to.
OK, now I’m just free-associating now, but I think it’s tangentially related. This might also tie in with how conservatives tend to be more generous towards charities than liberals. With charities, they get the impression that the providers tend to be a bit more… responsible with their funds than government employees. Government employees see their job as to give away as much as possible; their pay is based on how many people they help, how much they give out. Private charities know they have finite resources, are often involved in raising those resources, and know that their future funding is based on how well responsible they handle the funds they are given.
Plus, giving to charity is a voluntary act; one can feel a certain pride and virtue in giving to help others. Public assistance is not voluntary, and there isn’t any virtue in simply doing what you’re ordered to do under penalty of law. (I don’t boast of how many people I don’t kill driving to work). And you don’t get credit for making others do what you think is virtuous, with the full force of the government behind you to impose your values on them.
I have an ability to understand and sympathize with people whose beliefs I don’t share. It saddens me that it’s not a more common ability, as it would avoid a lot of really stupid and unnecessary conflicts. (This site is a GREAT place to find examples.)
Yeah, that was a bit long-winded. But I think you’re worth enough of my respect to go into this kind of detail.
I love the saying “you can’t polish a turd.” I’ve taken that as a credo, taking it as “don’t waste your time on worthless causes.” It’s why I’m regularly dismissive towards at least three of the regulars here — efforts on engaging them would be futile.
But some of the others here… we might be able to come to a meeting of the minds. I might persuade them to at least understand my perspective, and I might better understand theirs.
@Jenos Idanian #13: Hey Jenos — Are you willing to admit now that you were completely and totally wrong on Ebola? You keep yapping about how you are the great truthteller around here, and yet everything you wrote on that subject, as well as on Benghazi, has proven to be either wrong or lies. And yet when called on it, you just blithely continue to play your little rhetorical games. (“He wasn’t choked to death — after the police choked him, his heart stopped beating, but that doesn’t mean they choked him to death!”)
Tell us, little baby boy, that you were totally wrong about Ebola, or why you were actually right all along despite everything you said being 180 degrees from reality.
@Jenos Idanian #13: Here’s a terrifying thought: Imagine if this is really how Jenos sees himself. If so, that’s a level of dissociation not normally seen outside of a ward for the criminally insane.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
Really? Are they clones? Clones of some idealized middle American circa 1954? Maybe they are clones of Ward Clever’s somewhat less successful brother that we never met.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
One of the ironies is that the vast majority of Americans receive government funds at some point–be it unemployment or food stamps during hard times, government grants or guaranteed student loans to go to college, government-backed loans for small businesses or home-buying, etc. And a majority of adults on food stamps are working. “Get your government hands off my Medicare!” is a meme because there’s far too many people who accept benefits, don’t recognize that those benefits are paid for with tax dollars, and then turn around and sneer at (or worse, try to eliminate) such benefits for other people. The problem with your example of the man who is angry at the woman on food stamps in front of him is that more than likely: a) he’s also benefited from government funds at some point in his life; and b) the woman in front of him is likely to be just as hard-working and responsible as he is.
@Jenos Idanian #13:
A few points:
1) “conservatives give more to charities than liberals” has been debunked. When you eliminate charitable giving to one’s house of worship, giving to charities that benefits others is equal, and liberals give more to secular charities that benefit the poor. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/10/21/study-conservatives-and-liberals-are-equally-charitable-but-they-give-to-different-charities/
2) Most government funds set aside for helping the poor, outside of direct transfer payments (TANF, food stamps, Social Security), are given to charitable organizations. The government administers very few programs for the poor. Instead, they give the tax money they receive to nonprofit organizations to do the work. Thus, the accountability private charities feel for how they use their funds is accountability to the government. (I say this as someone who works for a nonprofit. When we receive grants, there is often an agreement form we must sign that reminds us that these funds were provided by tax dollars collected from our fellow citizens, and therefore we need to use them responsibly). In addition, because of the significant amount of dollars that many, many charities receive from the government, if we eliminated the tax revenue that made those grants possible, many of those charities would have to close their doors. Private giving does not make up for it.
@Monala: And what right wingers, Bible thumpers, and narcissists like Jenos never can seem to understand is that the purpose of charity is not to make the giver feel good about himself — it’s actually about helping the person in need.
Jesus didn’t say “help the poor, but don’t do it through collective action via your democratically elected government which serves as the will of the people, but randomly donate to whichever charity makes you feel the most special about your generosity.” Although they all seem to think he did…
@Jenos Idanian #13:
You exhibit that in spades* when it is people suspicious of poor people misusing EBT, or people afraid that the government is going to take their guns, or people that were afraid that ebola would be epidemic in the US, or people that think Benghazi is a huge conspiracy. All this despite little to no evidence in support of those positions and considerable evidence against. You argue that the people with those positions need to be given respect and discounting those positions because there is no evidence for them is disrespectful to the people that hold them. You spend considerable time and pixels arguing those points.
The thing is, when the issue is police killing yet another black man or child and people argue that this demonstrates the racism inherent in the system you show virtually none of that respect for their positions. You argue about the dishonesty of the protesters in Fergusen, despite the DOJ report showing systemic police abuse particularly aimed against African Americans. You discount the positions of the people that see racist elements in the police killings of black men and children. You spend no pixels (and apparently little to no time) respecting the opinions of the African American people that communicate that they feel racism directed at them by authorities on a daily basis.
In short, you are always quick to defend the positions of people on the right (regardless of evidence**) and you seem to be equally quick to discount the positions of people that you perceive to be on the left, particularly when they involve race. Why it is that you are so concerned that certain people’s opinions are respected while you are so quick to discount the opinions of others?
* or perhaps you agree with them
** EBT, Ebola, etc
In this episode, an wealthy man in his 70s who apparently gives a lot of money to a sherifs dept. in Oklahoma was allowed to play cop, gun and all. The result is yet another black man killed by police.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/video-shows-tulsa-man-shot-deputy-meant-stun-article-1.2181787