Police shootings, vigilante shootings, and Black Lives Matter

AbusesToilets

rossie1977 wrote: »

We have been over and over this on this thread..

Those are convictions not offences. A black man is far far more likely to be convicted and sent to prison for doing the exact same thing as a white person.

Just look most recently. Look at the police reaction towards James Blake who was unarmed and towards Rittenhouse who walked back up the street after murdering people rifle in hand. It does not get any starker than that..

James Blake, who had just sexually assaulted a woman sleeping in her bed with her child, and stole her car keys.

AbusesToilets

everlast75 wrote: »

That sentiment was fermented by the NRA over decades. I am saying that years ago, the idea that the NRA would be gone would have been crazy.

We are in different times. I am not saying that the struggle to disassociate guns from America will be easy or that it will be quick, but it will happen.



I beg to differ. Police having itchy fingers lately is partly caused by the proliferation of firearms. If a cop didn't think that every person reaching into their jacket had a gun, things may be quite different than they are today.

The proliferation of illegal firearms, in the hands of criminals. Without wanting to re-argue the merits of firearm legislation for the umpteenth time on this forum, the issues of firearm related deaths aren't caused by a lack of laws.

Tell me how

AbusesToilets wrote: »

James Blake, who had just sexually assaulted a woman sleeping in her bed with her child, and stole her car keys.

The police are not judge and jury. The crimes that Blake are alleged to have committed did not pose a threat to the police present.

Riffenhouse had just killed two people and was let walk away and go home and sleep in his own bed.

No one is excusing Blake, they are saying that his alleged crimes do not warrant lethal force being used and in many cases this is used to quickly by police. That is why the system needs to change. The Riffenhouse situation just underlined the prejudice which exists.

Startled Earwig

AbusesToilets wrote: »

The Civil Rights movement was far removed from the exploitative sham that BLM represents. BLM is the monetisation of victomhood writ large. There might have been violence, but it wasn't a deliberate, organised effort, with a view to undermine social structures. As to apartheid, Nelson Mandela commited acts of terrorism.

You can support an idea without supporting a group or their actions. I support an equal, just society. I don't support BLM as an organisation, nor do I support many of their stated goals, or outright racism that they display towards white people.

There's no difference between the Civil Rights movement and Black Lives Matter in terms of demands - they are a protest group who demanded racial justice.

White supremacism modified itself in the 1960s after the Civil Rights Act and has been evolving ever since to ensure that black people in the US remain an undercaste. Racial justice does not exist today.

There was of course violence which happened during the Civil Rights movement and during the anti-apartheid movement which was aimed at undermining "social structures". The "social structures" were the problem! As they are now!

If you don't support Black Lives Matter, you don't support justice or an equal, just society - you're taking the side of police brutality and white supremacism run amok, as we've seen in your open defence of the white supremacist terrorists in Kenosha. You're saying "no change"!

You say that Black Lives Matter is openly racist towards white people, yet it's obvious you believe they zero point when they talk about state sanctioned violence and institutional racism. In other words, you believe anti-white racism, not anti-black racism, is a problem. That's an obviously bad faith position.

What aims of Black Lives Matter that you disagree with?

https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/

Everything you say about Black Lives Matter was said by white people about the Civil Rights Movement and anti-apartheid protestors.

Your narrative is a typical white bread one.

GreeBo

Steve012 wrote: »

This is going to sound bad , "and god forgive me" the people who shoot most at police down through the years in the states are black. I'm sorry to say it folks but it true/fact.

Its almost like the black community has more of a reason to attack the police than the white community, go figure!

AbusesToilets

Tell me how wrote: »

The police are not judge and jury. The crimes that Blake are alleged to have committed did not pose a threat to the police present.

Riffenhouse had just killed two people and was let walk away and go home and sleep in his own bed.

No one is excusing Blake, they are saying that his alleged crimes do not warrant lethal force being used and in many cases this is used to quickly by police. That is why the system needs to change. The Riffenhouse situation just underlined the prejudice which exists.

Blake's actions after the police attempted to detain him, are what caused his death. Period.

AbusesToilets

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Blake's actions after the police attempted to detain him, are what caused his death. Period.

The civil rights case which has been opened will determine the actions of the Police officers was legal so it's not half as clear cut as you're making it out to be.

Tell me how

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Blake's actions after the police attempted to detain him, are what caused his death. Period.

He's not dead.

AbusesToilets

Startled Earwig wrote: »

There's no difference between the Civil Rights movement and Black Lives Matter in terms of demands - they are a protest group who demanded racial justice.

White supremacism modified itself in the 1960s after the Civil Rights Act and has been evolving ever since to ensure that black people in the US remain an undercaste. Racial justice does not exist today.

There was of course violence which happened during the Civil Rights movement and during the anti-apartheid movement which was aimed at undermining "social structures". The "social structures" were the problem! As they are now!

If you don't support Black Lives Matter, you don't support justice or an equal, just society - you're taking the side of police brutality and white supremacism run amok, as we've seen in your open defence of the white supremacist terrorists in Kenosha. You're saying "no change"!

You say that Black Lives Matter is openly racist towards white people, yet it's obvious you believe they zero point when they talk about state sanctioned violence and institutional racism. In other words, you believe anti-white racism, not anti-black racism, is a problem. That's an obviously bad faith position.

What aims of Black Lives Matter that you disagree with?

https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/

Everything you say about Black Lives Matter was said by white people about the Civil Rights Movement and anti-apartheid protestors.

Your narrative is a typical white bread one.

A post saying I support white supremacy, capped off with a racist insult. That's top drawer stuff in fairness.

Why is the only valid path to supporting equality and justice through BLM? Would you have said the same to someone from the North who supported the SDLP over Sinn Fein? BLM don't want to year down the social ladder, they want to place Black people at the top. They are supremacists themselves, more interested in enriching themselves than improving their own communities. How many of the millions of dollars that BLM has received has gone towards initiatives in their communities, as opposed to their management and political donatiostto the Democratic party?

AbusesToilets

Tell me how wrote: »

He's not dead.

You're correct, my mistake

Startled Earwig

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Blake's actions after the police attempted to detain him, are what caused his death. Period.

You got Blake's name wrong (you called him James), you erroneously think he's dead and you've already convicted him of sexual assault on no evidence despite participating in a narrative that the Rittenhouse couldn't be a murderer, despite him shooting two people dead was entirely caught on camera, because he hasn't faced trial yet.

I think we can see what's going there as regards your motives for saying such, it's really rather obvious.

Startled Earwig

AbusesToilets wrote: »

A post saying I support white supremacy, capped off with a racist insult. That's top drawer stuff in fairness.

Why is the only valid path to supporting equality and justice through BLM? Would you have said the same to someone from the North who supported the SDLP over Sinn Fein? BLM don't want to year down the social ladder, they want to place Black people at the top. They are supremacists themselves, more interested in enriching themselves than improving their own communities. How many of the millions of dollars that BLM has received has gone towards initiatives in their communities, as opposed to their management and political donatiostto the Democratic party?

Believing that social structures shouldn't change, as you do, is white supremacism.

The social structures in the US as regards policing, accountability and the criminal justice system in general are white supremacist. America is still a white supremacist society. It has never not been.

Your portrayal of Black Lives Matter's motives are laughable.

You complain about me accurately calling out your racism and then turn around and aim laughably mendacious claims of racism at Black Lives Matter - I'm surprised at that because in your previous post you made it clear that you didn't like accusations of racism - but then you made it clear you actually do.

Your Sinn Fein/SDLP comparison is laughable.

You also use the classic fascist narrative of mendaciously turning questions of fact into questions of motive, which Hannah Arendt wrote about.

It's not my problem if you're offended at my lack of political correctness. I see no need to be so about your obvious views. Please don't try and shut me down.

AbusesToilets

Startled Earwig wrote: »

You got Blake's name wrong (you called him James), you erroneously think he's dead and you've already convicted him of sexual assault on no evidence despite participating in a narrative that the Rittenhouse couldn't be a murderer, despite him shooting two people dead was entirely caught on camera, because he hasn't faced trial yet.

I think we can see what's going there as regards your motives for saying such, it's really rather obvious.

I'm basing my claim of sexual assault based on the police call of the woman who's car he was trying to steal. I've already stated my error with respect to his name and status, mea culpa.

The victim, who is only identified by her initials in the paperwork, told police she was asleep in bed with one of her children when Blake came into the room around 6 a.m. and allegedly said, “I want my sh-t,” the record states.

She told cops Blake then used his finger to sexually assault her, sniffed it and said, “Smells like you’ve been with other men,” the criminal complaint alleges.

https://nypost.com/2020/08/28/this-is-why-jacob-blake-had-a-warrant-out-for-his-arrest/

Quin_Dub

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Blake's actions after the police attempted to detain him, are what caused his death. Period.

First off , he's not dead , just paralysed from the waist down.

Secondly - He was shot 2 minutes after the police arrived.

In that time , they tasered him twice and shot him seven times.

The 1st Officer reports that he has arrived on scene at 5:13:47PM , fractionally over 2 minutes later at 5:15:50PM an Officer reports "Shots Fired"

That doesn't sound like they really tried to resolve anything peacefully.

Like a huge amount of the problems with US Policing - They all think they are SWAT or a squad of Marines taking down insurgents in Fallujah. They are no longer policing , the are acting like a military occupying force.

I get it, Blake was being argumentative and uncooperative , but shot 9 times (Tasters and bullets) inside 2 minutes of the Police arriving??

Does that sound like a measured response , Does that sound like they tried to resolve it peacefully??

How many times have the Gardai (or pretty much any European police force) arrived to an almost identical "Domestic" and not shot or tasered a guy inside 2 minutes???

AbusesToilets

Startled Earwig wrote: »

Believing that social structures shouldn't change, as you do, is white supremacism.

The social structures in the US as regards policing, accountability and the criminal justice system in general are white supremacist. America is still a white supremacist society. It has never not been.

Your Sinn Fein/SDLP comparison is laughable.

You also use the classic fascist narrative of mendaciously turning questions of fact into questions of motive, which Hannah Arendt wrote about.

It's not my problem if you're offended at my lack of political correctness. I see no need to be so about your obvious views. Please don't try and shut me down.

I would reject your claim that the US is a white supremacist society. There are many areas in need of reform, the legal system being one. The US was over 90% white until quite recently, hardly surprising that social structures would reflect that. Do you suppose Europe is a white supremacist construct also, given your reasoning?

Do please expound on how you feel the SDLP/ Sinn Fein comparison is laughable. Shouldn't be difficult if it's such a mendacious point.

juice1304

Have any of you bothered to actually look at the fbi crime statistics they compile every year?
Last year 9 unarmed black men were shot by police 5 of them went for the officers gun.
19 white unarmend people were killed by police.
The NRA although to leftists seems like some big boogie man gun rights group are actually a bunch of fudds who are responsible for the majority of restrictions on firearms in america of which there are over 35,000 they litterally wrote much of the law. Including supporting the banning of full auto firearms etc. They dont care about gun rights they only care about money.
Klye acted in self defense he was shot at first chased by a convicted pedolife who was throwing objects at him, he turns and shoots him then trys to evade the violent mob who continue to chase him and violently attack him one of whom was holding a pistol and happens to be a convidted violent fellon wih illegal weapons charges. he then attemps to immedietly hand himself in to police. all of his actions were completely justified. Should a 17 year old have been there to protect the bussiness no he isnt mature enough. However he was not out to shoot people. Nor is he a white suppremicist there is no evidence of that at all.
And to think his charges arent politically motivated you would have to be pretty braindead. He is charged with first degree murder which means they have to prove he went out that night to specifically kill people not only that that he intended to kill the specific people he did. who also happen to be the only people who physically attacked him, its a farce.
But continue to read the daily mail instead actual factual statistical data.

AbusesToilets

Quin_Dub wrote: »

First off , he's not dead , just paralysed from the waist down.

Secondly - He was shot 2 minutes after the police arrived.

In that time , they tasered him twice and shot him seven times.

The 1st Officer reports that he has arrived on scene at 5:13:47PM , fractionally over 2 minutes later at 5:15:50PM an Officer reports "Shots Fired"

That doesn't sound like they really tried to resolve anything peacefully.

Like a huge amount of the problems with US Policing - They all think they are SWAT or a squad of Marines taking down insurgents in Fallujah. They are no longer policing , the are acting like a military occupying force.

I get it, Blake was being argumentative and uncooperative , but shot 9 times (Tasters and bullets) inside 2 minutes of the Police arriving??

Does that sound like a measured response , Does that sound like they tried to resolve it peacefully??

How many times have the Gardai (or pretty much any European police force) arrived to an almost identical "Domestic" and not shot or tasered a guy inside 2 minutes???

Did he resist/ fight police trying to detain him? Did he continue to move towards the vehicle despite clear instructions to stop, from officers with guns drawn?

The police report says there was a weapon present, however I will wait until the investigation to judge that.

Startled Earwig

AbusesToilets wrote: »

I'm basing my claim of sexual assault based on the police call of the woman who's car he was trying to steal. I've already stated my error with respect to his name and status, mea culpa.



https://nypost.com/2020/08/28/this-is-why-jacob-blake-had-a-warrant-out-for-his-arrest/

And yet the defence of Rittenhouse against him being called a murderer is that he hasn't faced trial yet.

Strangely enough my experience of the sort of people who are against Black Lives Matter is that they are the same type of people who are usually very particular about not maintaining the innocent until proven guilty status of men accused of sexual assault.

However that particularity generally falls away when its a black man who is the accused, as it does here.

AbusesToilets

Startled Earwig wrote: »

And yet the defence of Rittenhouse against him being called a murderer is that he hasn't faced trial yet.

Strangely enough my experience of the sort of people who are against Black Lives Matter is that they are the same type of people who are usually very particular about not maintaining the innocent until proven guilty status of men accused of sexual assault.

However that particularity generally falls away when its a black man who is the accused, as it does here.

Any chance you'd expand on your previous statement, or are we only going to graced with anecdotes from your personal life, interspersed with the of racist insult

Brian?

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Well, that gentleman in Portland most recently. How many were shot in the CHAZ?

Yeah. Clever deflection from the point at hand again.

AbusesToilets

Brian? wrote: »

Yeah. Clever deflection from the point at hand again.

What deflection? Are you claiming BLM supporters haven't brought guns to these cities and shot people? Or are you trying to say that firing off rounds into the air poses no threat?

Brian?

AbusesToilets wrote: »

What deflection? Are you claiming BLM supporters haven't brought guns to these cities and shot people? Or are you trying to say that firing off rounds into the air poses no threat?

Firing shots into the air doesn’t pose a threat.

Unless you’re a bird. Or , I suppose, flying a hand glider.


It’s a stupid thing to do. That’s it. Rittenhouse felt threatened because he was a kid in a volatile situation, overreacted and killed 2 people. Murder. Plain and simple.

AbusesToilets

Brian? wrote: »

Firing shots into the air doesn’t pose a threat.

Unless you’re a bird. Or , I suppose, flying a hand glider.


It’s a stupid thing to do. That’s it. Rittenhouse felt threatened because he was a kid in a volatile situation, overreacted and killed 2 people. Murder. Plain and simple.

Gravity disagrees with you

https://blogs.bcm.edu/2019/12/31/what-goes-up-must-come-down-the-dangers-of-celebratory-gunfire/

A study by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention shows that, on average, two people die and
25 more are injured on New Year’s Eve in Puerto Rico, where celebratory gunfire is common. These injuries happen all across the United States and in many other parts of the world as well. Unfortunately, it is also common here in Houston.

Other notable injuries and deaths due to celebratory gunfire include that of Armando Martinez, a Texas State Representative who was hit in the head with a stray bullet on Jan. 1, 2019.

Two years before that, 43-year-old Javier Suarez Rivera was struck and killed by a bullet just minutes after ringing in the new year when he stepped out of his home in Houston.

On New Year’s Day in 2013, a 10-year-old girl, Aaliyah Boyer, died of injuries she received after being hit by a falling bullet in Maryland. Sadly, there are many more of these tragic stories.

droidus

juice1304 wrote: »

Have any of you bothered to actually look at the fbi crime statistics they compile every year?
Last year 9 unarmed black men were shot by police 5 of them went for the officers gun.

What are you talking about? 40 of the 270 black people killed by police in 2019 were either unarmed, or it is unclear if they were armed.

https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/nationaltrends

Thats 17%, a larger share than any other racial group and about 1.3 times more than the average of 13%.

But continue to read the daily mail instead actual factual statistical data.

Quite.

Quin_Dub

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Did he resist/ fight police trying to detain him? Did he continue to move towards the vehicle despite clear instructions to stop, from officers with guns drawn?

The police report says there was a weapon present, however I will wait until the investigation to judge that.

Do ALL of those things not happen in Ireland or any other country?

The point here is about the level of response , not necessarily the actions of Blake.

He needed to be arrested , I'm not convinced that he needed to be tasered and shot 9 times to complete that arrest.

everlast75

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Any chance you'd expand on your previous statement, or are we only going to graced with anecdotes from your personal life, interspersed with the of racist insult

Would you accept that there is a direct correlation between poverty and crime?

AbusesToilets

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Do ALL of those things not happen in Ireland or any other country?

The point here is about the level of response , not necessarily the actions of Blake.

He needed to be arrested , I'm not convinced that he needed to be tasered and shot 9 times to complete that arrest.

I'm not entirely convinced either, but Blake's actions in response to the police drove the outcome. If he had simply stopped as commanded, at any point, he likely doesn't get shot.

everlast75

AbusesToilets wrote: »

I'm not entirely convinced either, but Blake's actions in response to the police drove the outcome. If he had simply stopped as commanded, at any point, he likely doesn't get shot.

I noticed the way you cannot be certain on that point...

2Mad2BeMad

Quin_Dub wrote: »

He needed to be arrested , I'm not convinced that he needed to be tasered and shot 9 times to complete that arrest.

I agree he needed to be arrested,

I seen a short video of the shooting (yes most likely edited)
But as many people know police in America generally draw there weapons when a person is refusing to cooporate.
The man refused and they tried to taser him, when that didnt work they shot him,
but in there "slight defence" the lad opened his car door and reached in.
9 Shots though was overkill imo.

I've seen videos of police officers just randomly pulling a car over and then getting shot at.
The country is nuts for fire arms, and thats why they act the way they do.
The lad shouldn't of leaned into is car, it does look as if hes going to grab something. And if its your life or his, your gonna pull the trigger.

Again I only saw a short video of it and most likely edited.

AbusesToilets

everlast75 wrote: »

Would you accept that there is a direct correlation between poverty and crime?

Absolutely, don't believe I've ever argued against it. That doesn't remove responsibility for criminal actions. There's a choice there, same as for anyone else.