paullud
Veteran Expediter
I thought he had a strong reaction to it and did a great job addressing it. I'm not sure he could go much further without someone jumping on his back and screaming that he was unprofessional.
Two Ferguson, MO Policemen Ambushed: Anyone Surprised?
- Thread starter Pilgrim
- Start date
I thought he had a strong reaction to it and did a great job addressing it. I'm not sure he could go much further without someone jumping on his back and screaming that he was unprofessional.
You haven't read the DOJ report, have you? If you had, there's no way you could draw the conclusion that "the agitators" caused any harm to that police department at all. That police department caused their own problems without any help from any agitators.
paullud
Veteran Expediter
It's clear that there were many problems in the police department and the way they dealt with the community. This shooting may actually be something that brings that community together and helps them heal. The vigil at the police contained people of all races and many if not most were protesters that showed up to support the end of the nonsense going on in that community.
That's the argument in favor of the status quo, where those in power make the laws in order to dispense their own version of justice, regardless of how corrupt their version of justice might be.
Obviously, the changes aren't big enough and they're not happening fast enough to satisfy those who have had to live under the tyranny. The whole, "Hey! We got rid of the most egregious and visible perpetrators of racism in Ferguson. We've put a brand new coat of paint on the racist regime. You should be happy!" thing isn't cutting it. The people of Ferguson want actual justice, the administration of deserved punishment within the confines of what is morally righteous and just. They've been systemically discriminated against and brutalized, and they want retribution for the wrongful acts of a corrupt criminal justice system.
Seriously? A corrupt judicial process that is blatantly racist against black people should be protected with swift, hard "justice" against these uppity criminals that would defy the corruption? Wow. That's a Holy Crap Moment right there.
tknight
Veteran Expediter
Maybe I should have put in a sarcasm disclaimer in my post as it was totally sarcastic! Sorry to have mislead you.....
I said irreparable harm. Like whatever changes the Ferguson PD made wouldn't be sufficient to satisfy them. Even if whatever problems they had were eradicated from the Dept. and corrected, it wouldn't be enough. So instead, might as well disband the Dept. altogether because nothing they would do would matter at this point. They would be viewed, like you, as just putting a fresh coat of paint on it.
BTW it's interesting to see that you've accepted the DOJ report as the final distillation of truth. The irony isn't lost on me. Given their track record I would be a bit more skeptical of their findings and conclusions.
I'll give a couple observations though.
It appears that, like many municipalities, they are using their PD as revenue grabbers by enforcing a multitude of ordinances at their disposal. Given the racial makeup of the citizens and the PD, it created a misconception that they were targeted because race. No, they were targeted to enforce laws in the community and to a large degree to feed cauffers of their local government.( this is done in many communities especially in the suburbs btw) Doing so, created a perception that the Dept was racist because of the racial makeup of the citizens and the PD. The perception is also exacerbated by political 'leaders' who continually fan the flames of racial disharmony. Pitting one race against the other and blowing out of proportion whatever small amount of racism that does exist. (One example below)
City Manager: Ferguson Cop Shootings 'Complete Setup' by Cops - Breitbart
Regarding the Ferguson PD, yes their were some racist emails found on computers. Were they actually penned by the persons in the dept? Or were they received in a chain email?There is a distinction, so it would be interesting to know for sure. Either way,the emails are still racist and shouldn't be on a police dept computer, but their is a difference between writing one themselves and receiving one from some idiot.
There was approximately seven of them over a period of several years by a handful of people in department which amounts to about 5% of the personnel. One is too many, but not proof positive of a widespread racial problem in the department.
BTW did you read the articles I posted?
Let me post a hypothetical for you. Say you are tasked ( as a detective in a police dept in Detroit) with investigating and apprehending perpetrators of ONLY carjackers for a whole year. After a year, you were ordered to produce statistics of the racial makeup of your arrests. If the large majority of your arrests happened to be black, would you be guilty of racism?
Last edited:
witness23
Veteran Expediter
I got the sarcasm T.
witness23
Veteran Expediter
Holy hell, he asked you if you read the report, you then quote his post asking you if you had read the report and you write the above without a mention that if you did or did not read the report. So exhausting.
So, did you read the report?
That's not what I posted, but since we can't draw pictures here maybe restating the point will work: swift, hard justice should be brought down on criminals who would take extra-legal measures, using deadly force (in this case firearms) against law officers who are doing their assigned duty protecting public property. This justice system should also apply to arsonists and robbers.
Reparable or irreparable, the police department did it all themselves.
I would, as well, except their findings and conclusions aren't in a vacuum. The conclusions and findings aren't based on unsubstantiated allegations, or rumor, or wishful thinking, they're based on verifiable evidence which corroborates and confirms the many, many too many disparate and diverse allegations made by too many people over too many years.
No, not really. The percentage of the population of Ferguson that is white is 29.3, and blacks make up 67.4 percent. If 67.4 percent of the stops were black folks, then a much higher percentage of stops would obviously be for black folks, and it would be a misconception to think that 67.4 percent was too many and out of proportion. However, if the percentage of black folks stopped is higher than 67.4 percent, then it's not a misconception, it's a reality.
On top of that, according to Ferguson PD's own statistics, illegal drugs and other contraband is found in white vehicles in Ferguson at a substantially higher rate than that of black vehicles, which means they have justification to stop an even higher percentage of white vehicles than the 29.3 percent of the population. So really, the percentage of vehicles stopped by Ferguson police should be in the low to mid 50s for blacks and the mid to upper 40s for white. Instead, black stops are in the mid 80s percent, which cannot be defended as a misconception.
Turns out they're not fanning the flames of racial disharmony as much as they're screaming the truth.
However, once you forward a received e-mail to someone else, the distinction dissolves.
But even the racist e-mails don't necessarily show a racial bias in the justice system there. What does show it, however, are the non-racist e-mails which proscribe handling white and black individuals differently within the system. Whites were handled in one way, usually with lesser charges or dropped charges and lighter sentences, whereas blacks had charges dropped less often, received more serious charges, and linger sentences. That shows a systemic institutional racial bias.
I did not. I have found that over the years most of the articles you post are rarely little more than opinion pieces served up because the opinion agrees with yours. Reading them is usually an exercise in redundancy.
If the large majority was a disproportionate percentage, yes. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, nationally, 56% of carjackers are black and 37% are white/Latino/Asian. If 90% of my arrests were blacks, I'd have to show cause as to why I can only manage to find and apprehend black suspects and cannot apprehend very many of other races. Granted, the percentages of the perpetrators change with geography, time of day, and with the local population at large, so the percentages would necessarily need to be adjusted accordingly.
Well, gee, maybe you should draw pictures and post them, because in your "restatement" you didn't restate the point, you reworded it to mean something different than the original. Your new point is to enact swift justice on those who act against law officer who are doing the assigned duty protecting public property. That's a premise that hardly anyone can disagree with.
However, your original statement was a very different premise, as it was to enact swift justice against anyone that takes the law into their own hands and destroy lives and property when they're not satisfied with the results of the judicial process.
If the judicial process is corrupt and racially biased, reacting against that is a far different thing than reacting to cops protecting property.
Also, in your zeal to reword things, you used the term "extra-legal" as to have the same meaning as extrajudicial. They mean very different things. Extrajudicial is a punishment carried out without due process, as in vigilante justice, frontier justice, street justice, mafia justice, etc. "He killed my paw so I'm gonna kill him," is extrajudicial.
Extra-legal is something that is beyond the scope and authority or province of law in the first place, something either not permitted by law or something outside the scope of the law that the law doesn't address in any way. Criminals using deadly force against police officers performing their assigned duties in protecting property is certainly not beyond the scope and authority of law, as there are laws on the books which that illegal, so such an action would not be extra-legal. One example of extralegal would be an oversize or overweight truck, as the size or weight exceeds the legal limits of the law. Until relatively recently, half the things on the Internet were extralegal because there were no laws that addressed or applied to them.
They do not. They are synonymous, especially considering the context but I'm used to the symantic nit-picking. (bold emphasis mine)
A large part of the problem is you have bloated city governments with expensive budgets. With the stagnant economy the past few years and revenue from property tax revenue decreased, local governments are giving marching orders to their PD's to be more aggressive in writing tickets and keep the money coming in.
That is probably true to some degree but if there is a racial component, that is a separate issue.
Why? Because if it is just revenue, logic would pursue the white crowd under the premise they have more money. Of course if things are too trumped up, many might have the resources to fight it.
That would prove out statistically just about anywhere you look.
Based on the current reports, I think race is a driving issue as to how they police and pursue convictions.
It is true that blacks generally commit more crimes in that area. The difference percentage wise should be reflected in arrests and convictions. When they exceed that balance, you then know you have a problem.
Why? Because if it is just revenue, logic would pursue the white crowd under the premise they have more money. Of course if things are too trumped up, many might have the resources to fight it.
That would prove out statistically just about anywhere you look.
Based on the current reports, I think race is a driving issue as to how they police and pursue convictions.
It is true that blacks generally commit more crimes in that area. The difference percentage wise should be reflected in arrests and convictions. When they exceed that balance, you then know you have a problem.
No profit in that.
That would involve a real job,,,lol
paullud
Veteran Expediter
This article gives the numbers that show the police were clearly targeting blacks. You can't have a disparity like that for jaywalking because in a city it's rare to find people that don't do it regardless of race.
"Ferguson, Mo., is a third white, but the crime statistics compiled in the city over the past two years seemed to suggest that only black people were breaking the law. They accounted for 85 percent of traffic stops, 90 percent of tickets and 93 percent of arrests. In cases like jaywalking, which often hinge on police discretion, blacks accounted for 95 percent of all arrests."
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/03/...essive-force-in-ferguson.html?referrer=&_r=0
"Ferguson, Mo., is a third white, but the crime statistics compiled in the city over the past two years seemed to suggest that only black people were breaking the law. They accounted for 85 percent of traffic stops, 90 percent of tickets and 93 percent of arrests. In cases like jaywalking, which often hinge on police discretion, blacks accounted for 95 percent of all arrests."
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/03/...essive-force-in-ferguson.html?referrer=&_r=0
Sorry, but that's simply wrong, especially in the context in which you are trying to use them. The criminals in your statement did not take extralegal measures, they took explicitly illegal extrajudicial measures to met out a punishment without due process.
While both terms may be used as synonyms for illegal, as both can indeed be illegal in certain contexts, you will find neither in no thesaurus on the planet extrajudicial or extralegal as being used as synonyms for each other.
'Extra' is a prefix meaning "outside," "beyond," freely used as an English formative. Extrajudicial is simply something outside the judicial process. That's why you find "judicial" as part of the word. Extralegal is something outside or beyond the province of the law itself.
According to your little quoted snipped from Infoplease (the authority of the English language lexicon, I'm sure), and your reasoning, since those listed words are synonyms for each other, then the following two statements have identical meanings:
"Swift, hard justice should be brought down on criminals who would take smuggled measures, using deadly force (in this case firearms) against law officers who are doing their assigned duty protecting public property."
and
"Swift, hard justice should be brought down on criminals who would take mislabeled measures, using deadly force (in this case firearms) against law officers who are doing their assigned duty protecting public property."
Yet they don't mean the same thing at all. Words can be synonymous when meant in certain senses, even if they are not synonymous in all of their senses. In this case, while smuggled and mislabeled are both synonyms for "illegal," they are not synonyms for each other, just the same as extralegal and extrajudicial care synonyms for "illegal" yet are not synonyms for each other.