Two Ferguson, MO Policemen Ambushed: Anyone Surprised?

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
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.
The twin-towns of Walnut and Hoxie, Arkansas got in trouble, finally, back in the mid 90s for doing exactly that. They were going after rich white folks, the nicer the car the more likely you were to get pulled over, like it was money rolling by on wheels.
 

davekc

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Fleet Owner
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

When you see that kind of balance, that is when you have a problem.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
I find it very telling that Barkley doesn't see racist emails [and jokes, no doubt] as being racist if one simply forwards them to others. "Hey, I'm not racist - I didn't write that joke! I merely liked it enough to pass it along to friends/colleagues who could also enjoy it."
Some people can't see racism when it's staring back at them from the mirror.
 

aristotle

Veteran Expediter
What should have happened when Michael Brown charged a police officer? What outcome should emerge from a life or death struggle between a ruffian and a police officer?

No where in this conversation are we seeing the simple truth: everyone has a legal obligation to comply with a police officer's lawful command.


Compliance with a lawful command is not optional. It doesn't matter who you are, where you are, your mood or the time of day. Young people, especially young men, must be taught basic civics about how a civil society works.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
No where in this conversation are we seeing the simple truth: everyone has a legal obligation to comply with a police officer's lawful command.
That's because this conversation isn't about police officers acting lawfully, it's about police officers enforcing a racial bias, sometimes in a brutal way. If the initial contact by the officer is such and has a tone of disrespect and superiority, of barking orders in military or slave-owner fashion, those he contacts will act and react quite predictably, to the point where a police officer can create a situation where it can be easily escalated to where the officer finds himself in a life and death situation, albeit one they themselves created, and one that he's hoping for. If police officers treated citizens in the same manner they themselves demand and expect to be treated, there would be far fewer confrontations, demands to comply, and unarmed dead citizens.
 

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I find it very telling that Barkley doesn't see racist emails [and jokes, no doubt] as being racist if one simply forwards them to others. "Hey, I'm not racist - I didn't write that joke! I merely liked it enough to pass it along to friends/colleagues who could also enjoy it."
Some people can't see racism when it's staring back at them from the mirror.
I didn't even mention the SENDING of an Email. I asked a couple questions about them . I suppose it would suggest that they would be a racist by forwarding the email, but do you know for sure the mindset of the person forwarding the email and their motivation? I asked if they penned it or received it. Thanks though for mischaracterizing my position.
Muttly wrote --
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.
 

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Article:
“Data collected by the Ferguson Police Department from 2012 to 2014 shows that African-Americans account for 85 percent of vehicle stops, 90 percent of citations, and 93 percent of arrests made by FPD officers, despite comprising only 67 percent of Ferguson’s population.”
Those statistics don’t prove racism, because blacks don’t commit traffic offenses at the same rate as other population groups.
The Bureau of Justice Statistics’ 2011 Police-Public Contact Survey indicates that, nationwide, blacks were 31 percent more likely than whites to be pulled over for a traffic stop.
Ferguson is a black-majority town. If its blacks were pulled over at the same rate as blacks nationally, they’d account for 87.5 percent of traffic stops.
In other words, the numbers actually suggest that Ferguson police may be slightly less likely to pull over black drivers than are their national counterparts. They certainly don’t show that Ferguson is a hotbed of racism.
Critics may assert that that “31 percent more likely” figure simply shows that racism is endemic to police forces nationwide.
Hmm: The survey also reveals that men are 42 percent more likely than women to be pulled over for traffic stops. Should we conclude that police are biased against men, or that men drive more recklessly?
In fact, blacks die in car accidents at a rate about twice their share of car owners.
A 2006 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration study found that black drivers who were killed in accidents have the highest rate of past convictions for speeding and for other moving violations. This suggests that there are a lot of unsafe black drivers, not racism.
The Justice report on Ferguson continues, “African-Americans are at least 50 percent more likely to have their cases lead to an arrest warrant, and accounted for 92 percent of cases in which an arrest warrant was issued by the Ferguson Municipal Court in 2013.”
Again, this pretends that a mere difference is evidence of discrimination.
But the report’s statistic doesn’t even look at whether people pay their fine or appear in court — something that makes a big difference in whether to issue a warrant.
Could it be that blacks are more likely to face particularly serious charges?
Since Justice has gone through the case files, it could easily have answered the questions. Perhaps it didn’t like the answers. (Unfortunately, no national data are available for comparison.)
Another major complaint in the Justice report: “Most strikingly, the court issues municipal arrest warrants not on the basis of public-safety needs, but rather as a routine response to missed court appearances and required fine payments.”
If you think that this is unique to Ferguson, try not paying your next speeding ticket.
As for the anecdotal evidence Justice offers to bring home this complaint, well, here’s an anecdote from Washington, DC — a town with a black mayor and black-majority city council.
Megan Johnson, a black DC woman, recently failed to pay 10 parking tickets within the allotted 30 days. The city doubled her fines from $500 to $1,000, then booted, towed and sold her car — and charged her $700 for towing and impounding it.
DC sold the car at auction for $500 and won’t even credit that amount to what she owes. It’s now attaching her tax refunds.
Justice’s Ferguson anecdotes no more prove racism than Megan Johnson’s experience proves the DC government is racist.
Finally, for “direct evidence of racial bias,” the report describes seven emails from Ferguson police officers from 2008 to 2011 that Justice describes as offensive to blacks, women, Muslims, President Obama and his wife, and possibly people of mixed race.
But this begs some big questions: Did only one or two of the 53 officers send the emails? Did the objectionable emails end in 2011 because those officers no longer worked for the department or were told to stop?
The Justice Department’s report reads as a prosecutor’s brief, not an unbiased attempt to get at the truth, with evidence carefully selected and portrayed in the strongest possible light.

Ferguson fake-out: Justice Department?s bogus report | New York Post
 
Last edited:

skyraider

Veteran Expediter
US Navy
Sometimes one needs to get away. I just got back from 5 days in Pensacola camping and basically watching the world go by. Never heard one person mention Ferguson, ISIS, and so on. Can't go back and fix slavery,Indians,WW1 or WW2, just go fishing, IMHO.

 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
What should have happened when Michael Brown charged a police officer? What outcome should emerge from a life or death struggle between a ruffian and a police officer?

No where in this conversation are we seeing the simple truth: everyone has a legal obligation to comply with a police officer's lawful command.


Compliance with a lawful command is not optional. It doesn't matter who you are, where you are, your mood or the time of day. Young people, especially young men, must be taught basic civics about how a civil society works.

Another simple truth that isn't acknowledged: all the teaching in the world won't matter when one is overcome by panic.
PS Compliance with lawful orders didn't do much for Rosa Parks. I, for one, am glad she finally refused to comply with lawful orders.
 

aristotle

Veteran Expediter
Another simple truth that isn't acknowledged: all the teaching in the world won't matter when one is overcome by panic.
PS Compliance with lawful orders didn't do much for Rosa Parks. I, for one, am glad she finally refused to comply with lawful orders.
Michael Brown had just robbed a convenience store and roughed up a clerk. He was hardly a Rosa Parks.
 
Last edited:

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
"Vigilante justice" is a bit of an oxymoron, considering that it is indeed "extrajudicial" criminal activity - not "punishment" - without regard to law and order...
Regarding the aforementioned vigilante activity, it's clearly ILLEGAL.

...The only thing I and others pine for is swift hard justice against any criminals that take the law into their own hands and destroy lives and property when they're not satisfied with the results of the judicial process.
The above also refers to ILLEGAL acts.

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.
The above clearly refers to the criminals who shot the two cops; that was ILLEGAL. It also clearly refers to the criminals who burned other people's businesses and stole their property; that also was ILLEGAL.

Granted, there are may be one or two individuals with authority issues among the occasional posters on this forum who were rubbing their clammy little hands with glee upon hearing two of the Ferguson cops got shot, thinking "goody - they got what was coming to them". Most probably think there are more effective ways to protest and implement changes to a corrupt town and legal system than resorting to actions that are ILLEGAL, EXTRALEGAL or EXTRAJUDICIAL on the state and federal level. It's really a pretty simple concept.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
Michael Brown had just robbed a convenience store and roughed up a clerk. He was hardly a Rosa Parks.

I wasn't referring specifically to Micheal Brown, although, he may have had a lot of the same mindset: "I've had enough of being treated like trash because I'm not white." If you recall, the Officer didn't know about the robbery when he initially told Brown to get out of the road.
What I meant was, there are many reasons for a refusal [or what appears to be] to comply, including panic, confusion/altered mental state due to drugs [legal or otherwise] or mental illness, and none of them merit a death sentence.
Recall the woman who was killed by the Capitol Police, for driving into, then out of, a DC checkpoint? She was confused and panicked, and in her place, I might be too. She did not pose a deadly threat, but the Capitol Police also shot first, and asked questions later. That is what needs to stop.
LEOs need to recall that there are ways to subdue a person that don't end a life, and use them first. Especially when their own life is in no immediate peril, as was the case with Micheal Brown.
 

paullud

Veteran Expediter
Another simple truth that isn't acknowledged: all the teaching in the world won't matter when one is overcome by panic.
PS Compliance with lawful orders didn't do much for Rosa Parks. I, for one, am glad she finally refused to comply with lawful orders.

The one thing I don't like is that Rosa Parks gets so much credit for refusing to move but many others had done it before. Jackie Robinson got into trouble while serving in the military for refusing to move to the back after a driver told him to move apparently under the belief that Robinson was talking to a white woman. I would encourage you to read the letter he wrote at the top of the link. It's believed that his attitude displayed by refusing to move and the one seen in the letter was one of the reasons he was chosen to break the color barrier. https://www.awesomestories.com/asset/view/Jackie-Robinson-Refused-to-Move-to-the-Back-of-the-Bus
 

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
LEOs need to recall that there are ways to subdue a person that don't end a life, and use them first. Especially when their own life is in no immediate peril, as was the case with Micheal Brown.
This was not the case with Michael Brown and this myth has been proven wrong emphatically by eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence gathered by not only the MO state authorities but also the Feds. Brown was a large and dangerous adult thug that ignored a law officer's instructions and physically attacked him. Had he not done so he would still be alive.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
This was not the case with Michael Brown and this myth has been proven wrong emphatically by eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence gathered by not only the MO state authorities but also the Feds. Brown was a large and dangerous adult thug that ignored a law officer's instructions and physically attacked him. Had he not done so he would still be alive.

Brown would also still be alive if the officer hadn't shot him when he was neither close enough to inflict damage, nor clearly attempting/intending to do so. The shooting occurred only after the physical altercation, when Brown was not close enough to attack, and not doing anything that threatened the officer. None of the eyewitness testimony or forensic evidence contradicts that definitively. In fact, much of the eyewitness testimony contradicts other eyewitness testimony - as usual.
Ignoring an officer's instructions isn't reason to shoot. A physical attack might be - if the shooting occurred during the attack, but this one didn't. Being a "large and dangerous thug" isn't sufficient reason either, even though you seem to think it is.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
The one thing I don't like is that Rosa Parks gets so much credit for refusing to move but many others had done it before. Jackie Robinson got into trouble while serving in the military for refusing to move to the back after a driver told him to move apparently under the belief that Robinson was talking to a white woman. I would encourage you to read the letter he wrote at the top of the link. It's believed that his attitude displayed by refusing to move and the one seen in the letter was one of the reasons he was chosen to break the color barrier. [url]https://www.awesomestories.com/asset/view/Jackie-Robinson-Refused-to-Move-to-the-Back-of-the-Bus [/URL]

You're probably right, in that Rosa Parks wasn't the first, but still, she is the one whose name is instantly connected to civil disobedience that got results. Sometimes, that's the only thing left to try, so I can understand the mindset of people who feel pushed to that degree.
 

jamom123

Expert Expediter
If you think that the people protesting in Ferguson are practicing civil disobediance, then your as clueless as they are. The majority of the people protesting in Ferguson NOT ALL are troublemakers wanting to be troublemakers. Rosa Parks was a hero same with MLK JR. Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson only like to stir racial tension because it's what makes them money. There will always be racism in every culture of humanity, but for people like Al and Jessie and Holder to run around saying that racism exisists everywhere all the time, is a blatant lie.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using EO Forums mobile app
 

JohnWC

Veteran Expediter
Yes I'll agree that one time in America stuff was totally wrong But we've come a long way. The same government who comes up with these reports is the same one who says unemployment drops because people ran out of time on their employment. Not all people are bad. But their are some who live in the thought that the world is against them could Mike brown been one of them.
 
Top