- Joined
- Aug 1, 2014
- Messages
- 26,719
- Reaction score
- 6,278
- Location
- California
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
No one will deny the police should be bringing law-breakers to justice.
But the problem is: Are the police selectively placing attention on those they feel threaten them (even through just cause)?
I think it would be naive to believe that coming forth with criminal evidence against the police does not subject one to intense scrutiny at the least, and perhaps even worse.
But this does not happen if one does not come forward.
So it seems to me undebatable that this increased scrutiny is not selective on their part.
Derogatory???
First let's make sure we have the same video.
If it's this one, there's no words spoken besides the crying & shock of the killing.
This video is exactly why the police came after him - it wasn't you or me - it was one of theirs:
The private citizens can do whatever they lawfully would like, but they can't use police powers or police systems to their ends (for obvious reasons - they're not cops).
But the police sure did here, and that's the issue.
Exactly!
If they're using their powers to investigate and pursue those otherwise exercising their 1A to the police's displeasure, and once again that's selective enforcement/selective investigation.
This is pretty basic stuff.
There's some truth to that, but only some.It's important to remember that many people who feel that the police are out to get them are people who commit crime regularly and blame it on other people.
That's the real issue here.
People who want to break the law and pay no consequence are exploiting these handful of cases . Look who started the Rodney King riots, it was the CRIPS gang. They didn't care about Rodney King, they just used him as an excuse to commit crimes and attack people.
It's not my fault you composed a misleading post. Was that intentional?
I took the quote from the article as required by forum rules.
Then, you didn't read the article, either.
How exactly is this video derogatory, Tres?Yes, that's the same video. You don't think it's derogatory towards the police? What would you call it...a positive, heartwarming, complimentary video?
Yes, I have a problem with the police selectively enforcing or investigating! Don't you?You have an objection to the PD using their rights to investigate whatever they want, just like the man had a right to post his video. Why do you object to the police exercising their rights?
More than you did, I'm afraid. Your desperate attempts to make me look bad only make you look even more pathetic.
Given the timing someone certainly ran his name because of his post. He wouldn't have gotten tagged had he kept his mouth shut. Whether that makes it retaliatory or not is in the eye of beholder. It is certain to make others think twice before posting something that calls cops into question and that is unacceptable.
Given the timing someone certainly ran his name because of his post. He wouldn't have gotten tagged had he kept his mouth shut. Whether that makes it retaliatory or not is in the eye of beholder. It is certain to make others think twice before posting something that calls cops into question and that is unacceptable.
Selective enforcement is wrong.
There's some truth to that, but only some.
The guy shot in Minnesota seems crime free as far as we know, and it seems he was wasted for exercising his 2A rights by carrying.
I'm no criminal myself, but I personally feel the air tinged here with what I perceive as institutionalized police over-empowerment, and a little too much license to shoot first.
But the big picture is we've got to get the vast majority in the country to feel fully enfranchised, or this divide may keep growing.
Something seems off in a society that accepts this much death and imprisonment.
Happens more often that you'd guess. I'm just waiting for them to bring back debtor's prisons. Probably won't be long.
Um, the message is clear. If you have outstanding warrants, don't do anything to bring attention to yourself.
The cops don't spend days running down people with outstanding warrants for parking and driving tickets. There aren't enough hours in the day to do it. They hope to catch those people the next time they commit a malfeasance. Did you seriously not already realize this? Have you ever read a police blotter and see how many people are arrested/pulled over for "x" violation or were even sitting in a car driven by someone else who had done something wrong and were ultimately arrested because of a bench warrant?
Like Beau said, there is no message, no conspiracy, no coincidence here. He wanted everyone to know who he was when he posted that video. He made himself available and he invited this.
I think this is a reasonable comment. Thanks.If a better and more fairer model exists in the world for including people of color, I'm not aware of it.
We often think that we're the only ones in the world experiencing these issues, we're not.
The same claims of police injustice and disenfranchisement exist in every multicultural society in the first world.
Life choices determine one's destiny. There are thousands of black Americans who decided to become police officers, or pursue higher education, or learn a trade. And these are the people who rarely complain about the US being unfair to them, or voice feelings of disenfranchisement.
They seem to have made exception for this guy, and for one reason: He implicated their fellow officers.There are plenty of things wrong in the world, why is this case wrong? Are you arguing that if they can't get everyone, then they should try?
They seem to have made exception for this guy, and for one reason: He implicated their fellow officers.
And that type of selection is wrong.
We should be encouraging evidence of possible criminality by the authorities, not dissuading them.
All it does is make people that have outstanding warrants think twice before making yourself a national figure in the media. There are dozens of people that put videos about cops on the internet almost every day, and they don't get arrested for outstanding warrants, because they don't have any outstanding warrants.
He had outstanding warrants. Period.
How exactly is this video derogatory, Tres?
It seems to accurately capture the actions the officers took against the man they killed.
Yes, I have a problem with the police selectively enforcing or investigating! Don't you?
The police have no "right" to investigate anyone in anyway they chose! They're given the public trust to perform their duties, and one of them is not to harass or attempt to suppress evidence that may be used against them.
But since you seem to think the police have this "right", what do you think about this women's 250 investigations?
Sun-Sentinal: Donna Watts
Were these thugs just exercising their police "rights" too, as you claim above?
I am amazed that you could know what the individual was thinking when he posted the video.
Sorry, but anyone with a brain knows this was indeed retribution. There are no cops in any jurisdiction dedicated to parking violations.
further, the actions in this regard are unprofessional to say the least. They lie to the military police about "assault" then turn around and hold him illegally for tickets.
I volunteer with the VPD, I know policing and this is everything it looks like. Some uniformed thugs sending a message "don't **** with us", the same way the Hell' Angel's trash your pad when they want to send a message.
There is no difference here.
Why should people who witness what they believe to be government malfeasance have to think twice? Is that really the government we want?
You believe it's derogatory, whereas I see it as evidentiary.It appears you don't know what the meaning of the word "derogatory" is or why I'm using it. I've used it repeatedly in many contexts. This is a derogatory video. It makes the police look bad. It is why they ran a background check on the man who posted it instead of running background checks on me when I post pictures of my dogs. It's why some men would go after another man who made a derogatory comment about his wife and wouldn't go after a man who made a positive comment about his wife.
Yes, police have the right to investigate anyone they want. They can check your driving record. They can check for outstanding warrants. They can check your arrest record. Or did something change and I missed it?
They seem to have made exception for this guy, and for one reason: He implicated their fellow officers.
And that type of selection is wrong.
We should be encouraging evidence of possible criminality by the authorities, not dissuading them.
Why should people who witness what they believe to be government malfeasance have to think twice? Is that really the government we want?
He had outstanding warrants. No one "created" those so they could go after him. He brought this upon himself.
If you feel so sure there was retribution here, then file a civil rights complaint with the US DOJ.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?