The power of police unions is something else, to even try and make that "he tripped and fell" statement with a straight face, in the camera phone era no less, is spectacularly arrogant. All of these incidents just make you ponder what cops were able to get away with in the era without camera phones and body cams. At this point mandatory body cams should be the minimum we see out of this.
I agree and it's why it's completely fair to ask about the Canadian shooting and question the reasons given. It's been clear during this filmed incidents that the police reasons can be lies or exaggerations to justify violence.
No it wasn't...it was about the issues sure but they said almost nothing about him or his life. That was supposed to be a eulogy...shout out to Ludacris
The memorial was way over the top and I feel the funeral this Tuesday will be very politicized especially if Biden is there
Quietly this pisses off a lot of people who want to support this cause. Many people have not been able to have funerals for their loved ones, i know of a couple here in Calgary who were impacted. But yet this thing is going to be huge amid COVID.
In NY they shutdown funerals but now people are being encouraged to hold vigils for Floyd.
Regarding thug - go read threads on Evander Kane vs other players. I guarantee the word thug is used more regarding Kane.
You can question whether it's racist or not, but it is clearly used as a racial stereotype. Similar to the white NFL or MLB player being gritty and smart, or the Dominican baseball player being selfish and a showboat.
These days the only group of people I associate with the word Thug are the police
This video is a day or so old, from Candace Owens, whom doesn’t agree with George Floyd’s martyrdom. I searched her by name in this thread, and nothing returned.
This will be polarizing to many, but provides a perspective from a black American that should be heard.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to cam_wmh For This Useful Post:
This video is a day or so old, from Candace Owens, whom doesn’t agree with George Floyd’s martyrdom. I searched her by name in this thread, and nothing returned.
This will be polarizing to many, but provides a perspective from a black American that should be heard.
Just be aware that this isn't an unbiased commentator. That doesn't mean she may not have valid points.
Quote:
Candace Amber Owens Farmer is an American conservative commentator and political activist. She is known for her pro-Trump activism that began around 2016 after being initially very critical of Trump and the Republican Party, and her criticism of Black Lives Matter and of the Democratic Party. Wikipedia
__________________
"Teach a man to reason, and he'll think for a lifetime"
~P^2
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to firebug For This Useful Post:
Oof that video is making the rounds in conservative social media circles right now yes. Candace “Hitler had some good ideas” Owens isn’t anyone to look to for guidance. She’s a grifter the right likes to trot out as their token black person so That abhorrent things can be said using the cover of “a black American said it, you have to give it validity”. No thank you.
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to ResAlien For This Useful Post:
FYI in case you weren't aware, and I'm not assuming any malice on your part by linking that, Candace Owens is a right-wing grifter who earns her living by making white racists feel better about their racism. Last year's mass-shooting murderer in Christchurch, New Zealand mentioned her by name in his manifesto and wrote that Owens had "influenced him above all".
Edit: beaten by ResAlien
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to MarchHare For This Useful Post:
Appreciate that background on her. Especially the NZ murderer manifesto. Yikes.
Floyd’s incarceration history though is eye-opening, and the drug use.
I’m personally, seeing the Floyd case, beginning to isolate itself to a problem cop, who will get a murder 2 charge, where his colleagues have both during the act tried to get him to withdraw, and post charges, have turned on him.
The BWoS, doing its systemic thing, until a cop has charges, and needs to turn for self preservation.
Honestly as much as I hate things that have been happening, this particular incident to me looks more accidental with catastrophic results than the acts with blatant criminal intent. I feel like this is a case of people reacting to the result, rather than the actions.
This is what I see/hear when I view that video.
- man approaches police
- he is shoved back in the stomach and loses his balance, the shove(s) did not appear to be malicious in nature, but I do think with them coming from two different angles it would cause many to lose balance.
- once the cop that appeared to shove the hardest saw blood he immediately started to go to victim
- he is told to keep going forward because protesters are coming to them now
- the officer that told him to move forward gets on his radio and I swear I can hear the word medic said
- then when pushing the press back they tell them there is an emt on scene.
While I believe this event should lead to disciplinary action in the form of a suspension and write up because results do matter, I do not think this is particularly something that should be getting anywhere near the outrage that it is.
It's a perfect case of why police need to practice more restraint in general. It's why seeing police hit people with clubs, and rubber bullets and random sucker punches and pushing old men is so appalling, particularly in the context of WHY the protests are happening. A random punch to the back of the head can cause death. Rubber bullets can cause death. Forcing a camera into someone's face can cause death.
There's just absolutely no reason for any of those dozen police officers to not just stop, talk to this man slowly approaching them for a second, and see what he's doing.
__________________
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Coach For This Useful Post:
Appreciate that background on her. Especially the NZ murderer manifesto. Yikes.
Floyd’s incarceration history though is eye-opening, and the drug use.
I’m personally, seeing the Floyd case, beginning to isolate itself to a problem cop, who will get a murder 2 charge, where his colleagues have both during the act tried to get him to withdraw, and post charges, have turned on him.
The BWoS, doing its systemic thing, until a cop has charges, and needs to turn for self preservation.
Legitimate question - why does his incarceration history or drug use matter?
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to PeteMoss For This Useful Post:
Jesus. I sat through that Candace Owens video and what a load of garbage. Cherry-picking statistics, victim-blaming, completely rejecting the notion that there is any systematic racism of police in the US.
The only thing that I agree on, even a little bit, is that the black community has a (somewhat understandable) history of promoting some bad actors. But even that point she completely oversells while negating all of the root causes.
__________________
The of and to a in is I that it for you was with on as have but be they
Appreciate the viewpoints of the people groaning that it's Candace Owens. However, do we have good arguments against what she said rather than simply who it's coming from?
She spouted a bunch of statistics about violence against police, violence against blacks by police and the like etc. Are they true or twisted/made up to fit a narrative? I honestly don't know.
The Following User Says Thank You to Cowboy89 For This Useful Post:
FYI in case you weren't aware, and I'm not assuming any malice on your part by linking that, Candace Owens is a right-wing grifter who earns her living by making white racists feel better about their racism. Last year's mass-shooting murderer in Christchurch, New Zealand mentioned her by name in his manifesto and wrote that Owens had "influenced him above all".
Edit: beaten by ResAlien
Looking her up, it looks like she grew up in Connecticut and went to University of Rhode Island. The color of her skin really shouldn't give her opinion on these matters any more weight than a white person who grew up the same. It's way too simple to label all these problem as black vs white, and seems pretty pathetic that she uses her skin color pretend she has some empathy for black people who grew up in a completely different world than her.
Appreciate the viewpoints of the people groaning that it's Candace Owens. However, do we have good arguments against what she said rather than simply who it's coming from?
She spouted a bunch of statistics about violence against police, violence against blacks by police and the like etc. Are they true or twisted/made up to fit a narrative? I honestly don't know.
Well, for one, she says that more whites are killed by police than blacks (which is true) and acknowledges that there are many more white people in America but that the ratio doesn't matter. Then she goes on to say that blacks commit more crime per capita than whites, so all of a sudden the ratio does matter.
She reviews George Floyd's criminal record in detail and the reports that he was on drugs during his arrest. She ignores that a black man in America is much more likely to go to jail for most crimes (especially drug offenses) than a white person.
I mean, she's just not an honest actor looking at all viewpoints. She's a provocateur that makes her living as the token black woman that racists can hold up and say "see, even a well spoken, young, educated black woman agrees with me".
__________________
The of and to a in is I that it for you was with on as have but be they
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Red Slinger For This Useful Post:
Floyd’s incarceration history though is eye-opening, and the drug use.
Genuine question: how? None of that matters one bit to him being murdered by the police. This type of character assassination of the victim is very typical especially when a black man is murdered. Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Trayvon Martin, I can clearly recall the attempts to drag their past actions through the mud as if it means their murders were justified.
Unrelated history is trotted out like somehow it means it was deserved. Nothing in his past means he deserved to be murdered by the police. Nothing he did in his past means it was right that he was murdered by the police. Nothing he said meant he should be murdered by the police. Nothing means he deserved to be murdered by the police.
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to ResAlien For This Useful Post:
Legitimate question - why does his incarceration history or drug use matter?
For the murder, it absolutely does not.
It’s to provide discourse into who he was. I can appreciate that this could be perceived as victim blaming.
Drug use, seems to be the root of his problems, and subsequent criminal activity. His murder was broadcast so vividly to us, that our instincts were policing, and racial injustice.
Should that be ignored? No, but as critical thinkers, we should want to know the full story.
On a separate note all three of the other officers charged in the Floyd case have turned on Chauvin and one is cooperating with the DOJ apparently
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarchHare
How noble of these Little Eichmanns to turn on Chauvin after they themselves were also charged. Too bad none of them had the courage and basic human decency to do the right thing when Chauvin had his knee on Floyd's neck for nine minutes.
News was reporting this morning that one of the officers was on his 3rd day, another on his 4th day on the job. I am not defending them but this would almost certainly play a factor into their efforts to stop the situation.
The Following User Says Thank You to Lubicon For This Useful Post:
I'm conflicted. One of the guys was an officer for four days, asked twice to his superior training officer (Chauvin) if they should turn him over and expressed concern about Floyd entering delirium but was shot down, and would later administer CPR to Floyd in the ambulance. At least that's how his attorney presents it. Of course he helped restrained Floyd while he was ultimately murdered and anyone not wearing blue would be charged with the same thing as this officer (well actually much more) and a man is dead in part because of his actions.
Following orders, deferring to authority, it shouldn't happen in situations like this but we know it does. The Stanford Prison experiment shows how much the average person will defer to authority and abandon their own morals. It's unfortunate, but probably the vast vast vast amount of new officers put with Chauvin that day would have ended with the same result. I'm far from suggesting he shouldn't face consequences for his actions (or inactions) but I also do find myself feeling sorry for him because his life is now ruined.
Absolutely true. That is simply a bad place to find yourself as a rookie police officer. His immediate reaction to the situation unfolding in front of him is just bound to be, "yeah, okay, I went through the training in a classroom, but we're in the field now. Is this just how things are done?" I can think back on my own career, and I've raised plenty of ethical issues that had to be talked through to ensure we were fully complying with the code of conduct. But when I was an articling student, if a senior partner had told me, "we're doing it this way", and I thought to myself, "that seems pretty shady", there is simply no chance that I would have objected out loud. My assumption would have been that there was something I was misunderstanding or missing about the situation, and that I was wrong and the experienced lawyer was right. What I probably would have done was talk to another experienced person later to get their thoughts on the matter rather than confronting the boss. Obviously, a rookie police officer in this situation doesn't have that luxury.
Thomas Nagel's "Moral Luck" is a must-read for... well, for basically everyone. I guess it presumes some pre-existing knowledge about moral philosophy, but it's absolutely apposite here.
Let us first consider luck, good and bad, in the way things turn out. Kant, in the above-quoted passage, has one example of this in mind, but the category covers a wide range. It includes the truck driver who accidentally runs over a child, the artist who abandons his wife and five children to devote himself to painting, and other cases in which the possibilities of success and failure are even greater. The driver, if he is entirely without fault, will feel terrible about his role in the event, but will not have to reproach himself. Therefore this example of agent-regret is not yet a case of moral bad luck.
However, if the driver was guilty of even a minor degree of negligence—failing to have his brakes checked recently, for example—then if that negligence contributes to the death of the child, he will not merely feel terrible. He will blame himself for the death.
And what makes this an example of moral luck is that he would have to blame himself only slightly for the negligence itself if no situation arose which required him to brake suddenly and violently to avoid hitting a child. Yet the negligence is the same in both cases, and the driver has no control over whether a child will run into his path.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
