I'm not asking about it only in the context of this incident. I'm asking about the concept or term 'black on black' crime generally, which certainly predates this and which is common speak.
__________________
The great CP is in dire need of prunes!
"That's because the productive part of society is adverse to giving up all their wealth so you libs can conduct your social experiments. Experience tells us your a bunch of snake oil salesman...Sucks to be you." ~Calgaryborn 12/06/09 keeping it really stupid!
For those of you who are convinced that the grand jury came to the correct conclusion based on the evidence, please take a look at this accounting of the evidence from a lawyer who went through all the transcripts. Pretty damning stuff, and in my mind its pretty clear that a trial was necessary to test and potentially impeach Wilson's testimony.
How come when the criminal and victim are black, it is "black on black" crime? Is there an unspoken presumption that blacks are racially targeting only other blacks that I am unaware of? Why isn't it just crime like with whites (I've never heard of "white on white" crime)?
To some degree, it's a retort to the black people feeling victimized about the crime statistic. The argument is that you don't have much of a leg to stand on if it's the supposed "black on black" crime, i.e. doing it to "yourself" type of thing. Bottom line is that 5% of black people are in jail and less than 1% of white people are, so black people have got a problem whether it's pink on black on green on purple or what.
Interesting, though I still don't see why black-on-black crime is a thing, but white-on-white crime isn't. So the reasoning is that black people really ought not to complain about what their government and its institutions do because black people are disproportionately incarcerated?
__________________
The great CP is in dire need of prunes!
"That's because the productive part of society is adverse to giving up all their wealth so you libs can conduct your social experiments. Experience tells us your a bunch of snake oil salesman...Sucks to be you." ~Calgaryborn 12/06/09 keeping it really stupid!
Interesting, though I still don't see why black-on-black crime is a thing, but white-on-white crime isn't. So the reasoning is that black people really ought not to complain about what their government and its institutions do because black people are disproportionately incarcerated?
And I'm sure none of the violence in black communities stem from America's history of racism and segregation or present-day structural problems. Nah, these guys just need to pull up their bootstraps and work hard to get ahead, just like white people. We're not benefiting from years of systemic advantages and oppression of other races. It's all hard work and a can do attitude.
The Following User Says Thank You to rubecube For This Useful Post:
The lesson to be learned is don't act like a thug or a gangster. So much of the black culture is around acting like a thug and it's silly, the people in the black community should start condemning their own for acting like tough gangsters.
It doesn't solve anything and just further propagates the socioeconomic problems in the first place. The government clearly isn't going to solve their problems so maybe they should take a look at the values and norms of their young people, if you look, act, talk and live like a thug the police will probably treat you like one regardless of skin color. I'm not saying he should have been harmed at all just that there should be a culture change and expecting the government to do anything about it is futile. I was on the side of the protesters at first but seeing all the looting, crime and ridiculous destruction makes it apparent there is a problem with the culture itself.
The lesson to be learned is don't act like a thug or a gangster. So much of the black culture is around acting like a thug and it's silly, the people in the black community should start condemning their own for acting like tough gangsters.
When was the last time, in the U.S., there was a Hispanic riot? Or an Asian riot? Just curious why the systemic racism appears to be limited to blacks?
the looting, the violence, the nonsensical destruction. If they are they aren't doing it enough. I've seen Rick Ross' work trying to turn kids against the thug life but clearly the problem is significant.
the looting, the violence, the nonsensical destruction. If they are they aren't doing it enough. I've seen Rick Ross' work trying to turn kids against the thug life but clearly the problem is significant.
Yeah it's significant, but they're trying. I don't think black Americans (the remainder, those who aren't starting riots and killing each other) much enjoy being the thesis of what's wrong with the United States. But as we know, getting stuff done in terms of mass cultural change in the US is next to impossible, even more so in black culture... quite a stubborn bunch on top of the aforementioned socioeconomic difficulties.
I understand his emotions are running high but it's really too bad he went that route. Credit to Michael Brown's biological father for asking for peaceful protests.
For those of you who are convinced that the grand jury came to the correct conclusion based on the evidence, please take a look at this accounting of the evidence from a lawyer who went through all the transcripts. Pretty damning stuff, and in my mind its pretty clear that a trial was necessary to test and potentially impeach Wilson's testimony.
she talks about profanity, and that he had a red mark on his face. Oh and the cigars, but if those cigars were still wrapped in plastic and he switched them to his non punching hand its not for sure that they would break and end up in the car.
She's right and I said it that there wasn't a strong cross examination, but I've read on some other Grand Jury discussions and the prosecutor usually doesn't do a heavy cross examination because of how often they indict. The prosecutor saves his cross examination for trial in case the defendant takes the stand.
I'm not saying that the prosecutor did a great job. But there was enough doubt created by poor witnesses and forensics and the audio recording of the shots that there was no indictment
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Interesting, though I still don't see why black-on-black crime is a thing, but white-on-white crime isn't. So the reasoning is that black people really ought not to complain about what their government and its institutions do because black people are disproportionately incarcerated?
It gets pointed out because out of black-on-black; black-on-white; white-on-white; white-on-black, black-on-black is statistically by far the most common. It is interesting for a few reasons. One of them being that whites are not nearly as likely to be victimized by black people as they think they are. Another is that black people living in poor, predominantly black communities, are most likely to commit crimes against other people living in those communities.
Another reason it gets brought up is because when gun control debates heat up, they are often focused on an incident where a white person kills other white people. And then the debate is based on ways to stop similar crimes with with proposed policies based on the overall United states gun violence statistics. But the policies proposed to curb the odd white on white spree killing do nothing address the far more common black on black and domestic hand gun crimes.
If you want to curb violence in the US, then the place to start is to look at policies that can curb the most common type of crime. And to ignore that the most common type is poor black people victimizing other poor black people is not going to help anyone. It should also be noted that this is far more than a skin colour issue. I'd imagine a black person living in a middle class suburb is statistically no more likely to commit a crime than a white person in the same area.
she talks about profanity, and that he had a red mark on his face. Oh and the cigars, but if those cigars were still wrapped in plastic and he switched them to his non punching hand its not for sure that they would break and end up in the car.
She's right and I said it that there wasn't a strong cross examination, but I've read on some other Grand Jury discussions and the prosecutor usually doesn't do a heavy cross examination because of how often they indict. The prosecutor saves his cross examination for trial in case the defendant takes the stand.
I'm not saying that the prosecutor did a great job. But there was enough doubt created by poor witnesses and forensics and the audio recording of the shots that there was no indictment
Fair enough, the stuff about the cigars was negligible. But there were some very obvious issues with consistency and why Wilson did the things he did that needed to be fleshed out further. Any prosecutor worth their salt can bring these forward without necessarily tipping their hand for the entire case.
This article discusses GJ indictments, and notes that one of the most frequent fact scenarios where an indictment fails to materialize is that involving a police shooting. http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/f...darren-wilson/
At the end of the day, I think it's incredible that the prosecutors handled this the way they did. I'm not a "tin foil hatter" or a conspiracy theorist by any stretch, but the whole process - from shooting until decision not to lay charges - really brings to light some serious procedural failures IMO.
So who are all these black people voting for? Who have they been voting for the past 50 years? Democrats? Republicans? The system wasn't created overnight.
If you want to change the world, change yourself first. Continuing the cycle of violence will not solve a single problem regardless of how you've been wronged.
The Following User Says Thank You to Azure For This Useful Post:
And I'm sure none of the violence in black communities stem from America's history of racism and segregation or present-day structural problems. Nah, these guys just need to pull up their bootstraps and work hard to get ahead, just like white people. We're not benefiting from years of systemic advantages and oppression of other races. It's all hard work and a can do attitude.
Of course it does. And I don't know who is arguing otherwise. The point is if you are going to commit more crimes, you are going to run into more problems with the police. It is also not nearly as simple as a skin colour issue.
I used to live in an area that was a middle class, mostly white neighbourhood. We had neighbouring communities that were poor neighbourhoods that were 100% black. There wasn't much trouble at all between the two neighbourhoods, but the police officers I knew who patrolled both neighbourhoods would give us their cards and tell us when there was gang activity ramping up and ask us to call them if we saw anyone from the other neighbourhood on our streets. The police officers who did this were all black people. I am not saying that it is ok, but just saying that it is not nearly as simple as saying it is just a skin colour thing either.
Well, it is obviously not as easy as saying just work harder or such to someone who grew up in such a neighbourhood, it is also not just as easy to say to a police officer to just ignore the fact that all the crime in their area is committed by one particular segment of the community. It is an incredibly complex problem to resolve.
Fair enough, the stuff about the cigars was negligible. But there were some very obvious issues with consistency and why Wilson did the things he did that needed to be fleshed out further. Any prosecutor worth their salt can bring these forward without necessarily tipping their hand for the entire case.
This article discusses GJ indictments, and notes that one of the most frequent fact scenarios where an indictment fails to materialize is that involving a police shooting. http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/f...darren-wilson/
At the end of the day, I think it's incredible that the prosecutors handled this the way they did. I'm not a "tin foil hatter" or a conspiracy theorist by any stretch, but the whole process - from shooting until decision not to lay charges - really brings to light some serious procedural failures IMO.
I'm torn, if I read the testimony and look at the inconsistency of witnesses and if Brown did act as its laid out then this is a fairly clean shoot, it he did keep moving towards the cop and put his hand under his waist band under his shirt I can see where the cop thought he was going for a weapon, especially after Brown had shown himself to be violent and fearless and enraged.
I do think that vest and dashboard cameras have to become a must thing.
I don't think that the Grand Jury got it wrong based on what they were given to work with.
Even if there was an indictment it probably wouldn't have gotten past pre trial and that might had made things just as bad violence wise.
The big loser is that community, the riots didn't hurt the government or the cops. It probably cost people jobs and cash. It certainly will perpetuate the stereotype that some have that black communities are scary and violent places, and that can't help in terms of attracting businesses and money.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
The Following User Says Thank You to CaptainCrunch For This Useful Post:
)
