• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

AfTer Ferguson: Stop deferrring to the cops

shrubnose

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
19,463
Reaction score
8,732
Location
Europe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
The case of Michael Brown shows that America is far too protective of those who have been entrusted to enforce order.

Read the article here: After Ferguson: Stop deferring to the cops - The Week

None of us were on the scene when Officer Wilson killed Michael Brown so we don't know exactly what happened.

But we do know that there is a huge problem in the USA between white law enforcement officers and young black males.

Until that problem is sorted out there will be more situations like Ferguson.

Who wants that?
 

I think you are absolutely right, that the problem is much wider than this cop that shot that kid. I am not at all sure, what we can do about it. But the occurrences of the past days indicates that the problem is large and has the potential of doing our society huge harm. It also seems very clear, that more shootings will not solve it.
 

White racists.
 
"Deferring" to the cops? "Incorrigibly pro-cop"?
 
A lot of White people don't understand that the police treat Black (and Hispanic) Americans differently. From their point of view, the main or only reason police would use force on someone is if that person did something wrong. That's the lens that they view cases like Michael Brown through. That's why they accept Darren Wilson's story without question. That's why they don't consider that Michael Brown, if he were alive, might tell a completely different story worth listening to. They are deeply invested in their just-world narrative of the fair police officer because that is the sort of relationship that they, as White people, have had with police historically.

Now, there are many White people who reject this just-world narrative of cops. They are critical enough to see that treatment is not equitable. These are the people who will be on the "right side" of history because these are the people who were able recognize and reject injustice towards a group that they do not belong to.
 

Honestly.... Wtf?
Black cops shoot black people more frequently as well. Black people commit more violent crimes than other races. They are told from a young age that the police discriminate, which helps to encourage them to react violently when arrested.
This has nothing to do with "white people hating black folk."
If we stop claiming race as a motivator for every unfortunate thing that happens, we WILL move past this.
 

This case shows that there a lot of completely delusional conspiracy theorists who want to believe the black 18 yo was the victim of a coldblooded execution as he was shot in the back and the head by a racist cop who just wanted to go out and kill himself a [racial slur] that day, then had his racist chief cover it up, then a racist DA used a racist grand jury process to get him off, all under the view of Eric Holder, who must also be racist or something, but I digress.

The facts don't fit this conspiracy theory. In actuality, they demonstrate that Mike Brown robbed a store, then attacked a cop inside his police car, then charged forward at that same pursuing officer who had a gun pointed at him and told him to stop. Forensic evidence on site and autopsy results paint a very, very clear picture. The final and only lethal shot was in the top of the head at close range. Blood on the scene shows Brown turned and approached the officer. We can only logically conclude that he was charging at the officer as claimed, with his head down. "Hands up, don't shoot" never happened.

I don't believe in "deferring to the cops," but the Mike Brown shooting is not the hill you want whatever cause this is to die on. Valid shoot in self-defense, no way in hell with that evidence this would have gone to trial as there is no way in hell it would ever lead to a conviction nor should it have. Killing in self-defense does not warrant a trial.
 
Last edited:

Michael Brown didn't die because he was black and the cop was white. There need to be no more Fergusons, agreed, but this means preventing thugs looking for entertainment and opportunities to damage property and to loot from doing this. These too are criminal activities and cannot be tolerated by a just society.
 

Are you kidding me? What makes you believe that the St. Louis GJ accepted Wilson's "story" as opposed to comparing other witness testimony to the physical evidence? Holding Wilson responsible for the actions of other police officers is every bit as much "profiling" or "discrimination" as treating all blacks or Latino's differently because of the actions of other blacks or Latinos.

Your use of "historically" tells me that you will never accept that any police officers (or white folks in general) are not always going to be defined as part of the problem. Brown was not alone when he encountered Wilson yet nobody talks much about why only Brown was shot and his (also black) companion was not harmed in the least. They also do not object to that companion telling lies about what actually occurred even though he was present from start to finish.
 

I would agree.

Black Americans are precious little flowers that deserve special protections due to their unique place in American culture. It's been working well for them ever since reconstruction.
 
From the Walter Williams article I cited on the preceding page:

Coupled with the dramatic breakdown in the black family structure has been an astonishing growth in the rate of illegitimacy. The black illegitimacy rate in 1940 was about 14 percent; black illegitimacy today is over 70 percent, and in some cities, it is over 80 percent.

The point of bringing up these historical facts is to ask this question, with a bit of sarcasm: Is the reason the black family was far healthier in the late 1800s and 1900s that back then there was far less racial discrimination and there were greater opportunities? Or did what experts call the "legacy of slavery" wait several generations to victimize today's blacks?

The Census Bureau pegs the poverty rate among blacks at 28.1 percent. A statistic that one never hears about is that the poverty rate among intact married black families has been in the single digits for more than two decades, currently at 8.4 percent. Weak family structures not only spell poverty and dependency but also contribute to the social pathology seen in many black communities -- for example, violence and predatory sex. Each year, roughly 7,000 blacks are murdered. Ninety-four percent of the time, the murderer is another black person. Though blacks are 13 percent of the nation's population, they account for more than 50 percent of homicide victims. Nationally, the black homicide victimization rate is six times that of whites, and in some cities, it's 22 times that of whites. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, between 1976 and 2011, there were 279,384 black murder victims. Coupled with being most of the nation's homicide victims, blacks are also major victims of violent personal crimes, such as assault, rape and robbery.

To put this violence in perspective, black fatalities during the Korean War (3,075), Vietnam War (7,243) and all wars since 1980 (about 8,200) come to about 18,500, a number that pales in comparison with black loss of life at home. Young black males had a greater chance of reaching maturity on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan than on the streets of Philadelphia, Chicago, Detroit, Oakland, Newark and other cities.
 
I'm trying to figure out what you think I said because you're responding to arguments I didn't make.
 
Maybe that white liberal guilt isn't productive? And that black America needs to put the fire of its own house out?
 

Much of this family breakdown (which is not limited to blacks) is directly because of the "safety net"; if the public assistance being offered exceeds the earnings of the "baby daddy" then his presence is a liability instead of an asset. What has occurred is that the level of "safety net" benefits has been increased far faster than the level of pay for many "entry level" jobs (not just those at the MW).

That is because if you need $X in order to live comfortably it matters not what portion of $X comes from paycheck; getting subsidized housing, SNAP and other "poverty perks" makes the need for a slightly larger paycheck disappear. It is true that a much larger paycheck would beat the "safety net" coupled with a McJob but most folks do not go from entry level to middle management or master tradesman rapidly so they see that going from $10/hour (with lots of public assistance) to $15/hour (with less public assistance) only means the 50% more (and harder?) work nets you little, if any, increase in your standard of living; the lesson learned is to keep an entry level (relatively easy) job and demand that the gov't makes that choice workout.
 

WE do indeed no exactly what happened. Every second of the encounter was documented through witnesses and evidence.
 

Don't get me started on why there's no need for a real daddy when the government is willing to fill that role.
 

I'm curious. Why is the evidence in this case rejected? I get the rest of the feelings and emotions, but in this case, as with so many others, the evidence seems to mean nothing?

Why is that? Is it also included in the conspiracy against blacks belief?
 
ThePlayDrive said:
I'm trying to figure out what you think I said because you're responding to arguments I didn't make.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. You clearly stated that folks simply accepted Wilson's "story". Trying to deny that, rather than trying to defend it, only makes you look foolish.
 
Seems to me that from the beginning and the tall tale-telling of Dorian Johnson that the attitude was, "Don't bother me with facts; my mind is made up."
 
nota bene said:
Don't get me started on why there's no need for a real daddy when the government is willing to fill that role.
Click to expand...

That is much of the, ever elusive, "root cause" but many choose to ignore (deny?) it.
 
I don't get the impression that "the evidence" means nothing or has been rejected. For me, the issue is that the evidence was never given a chance to be evaluated in a trial and my impression is that this is the issue most critics of the events in Ferguson have. I also don't get the impression that most of those critics believe that there is a conspiracy against black Americans.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Nonsense. You clearly stated that folks simply accepted Wilson's "story". Trying to deny that, rather than trying to defend it, only makes you look foolish.
Click to expand...
I stated that "A lot of White people ... accept Darren Wilson's story without question." This is what I believe. If you think that I am denying this or that I believe something other than what I have stated, then I'm sorry that you've misunderstood me and I guess I'll just have to live with your poor opinion of me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…