Louisville Will Erupt!

[SunsetBengal]

(09-25-2020, 07:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: All the black people with george floyd were not killed because an officer did not choke all of them to death.  So what is your point?

The officers should have returned fire, but that does not have anything to do with with the possible racism involved in targeting Breonna Taylor.

The DA did not obtain the search warrant.

From now on can you please just make the point you want to directly and simpley instead of going through these obtuse questions that don't even address the points I am making?

Obviously, being you are a legal professional, you know that statement isn't true.  Continuing a false narrative is bad juju.

[*bfine32*]

(09-25-2020, 10:25 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Obviously, being you are a legal professional, you know that statement isn't true.  Continuing a false narrative is bad juju.

You really didn't expect a forthright answer to the question did you? 

[Dill]

(09-25-2020, 06:02 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Wanna bet?  As a grown man, and so has my wife in her work environment, found ourselves in situations where each of us has felt the hatred toward us, because of our race.  I know that you're a smart and educated individual, pretty good at argumentation and debate and all, but you should stick to factual topics.    

Sunset, I spent much of my adolescence on the Crow Indian Reservation in Montana. Doubtful that anyone here has heard "Hey white boy" more often than I.  And of course some of my neighbors made a point of telling me they hated whites. And at least three times I can remember, people physically attacked me because I was white. So I was in an environment where I felt hatred as fists. Plus a thrown bottle thrown at me once. (Or maybe that one was more about a girl. It was 50 years ago.)

Yet all that time (and even now) I never considered "racism" (if that's what it was) of Native Americans directed towards whites to somehow be a bigger problem than white racism (which mostly was racism) directed toward Native Americans. I didn't feel aggrieved if no one acknowledged how the white kids were treated on the rez. I mixed well despite the hatred of some, made lifelong friends. 

I wasn't forced to go through their education system or forced to learn their language. I wasn't forced to obey Crow law, as they were white law. (But if I were forced to do all that, and my life's success depended upon how well I did that, I fear I might "hate" Crows.) The only time I didn't have an employment advantage was when the movie Little Big Man was filmed there and the director needed lots of NA extras.* I had little to fear from white police off the reservation--not so my NA friends. Getting into college wasn't going to be a problem for me, or even getting through HS. I could date both white and NA girls. Again, not so my NA friends. 

Anyway, that's how I was introduced to race relations in the US,  from on top, lower middle class of the dominant culture, looking down from massive white privilege I was only beginning to realize I had. Racism has never made much sense to me as something "individuals from all groups do" regardless of race and social position. It has always been deeply implicated in the structural (legal, political) dominance of some groups over others, and by the history of that dominance. As an "old man" now, if a group of black kids kicked the crap out of me because I was white, I doubt my urge would be to cry "Blacks are racist too!"  Doubtful if I would see their actions as the mirror image of white supremacists, or just "individual". Doubtful if recognizing "racism in all its forms" could amount to much of anything separated from these structural/historical considerations already mentioned. 

So I have never disputed that white people may have "hatred" directed towards them, or that some Blacks will pick on whites where they can. I just continue think that as social problems go, "black racism" is by far the lesser evil. Take care of what SSF called "institutional racism," and some of that "black racism," maybe a lot, will begin to ebb.

This post is getting too long. Someone needs to raise the issue of black Americans who use race to "get over" and I'll continue.

PS how are "argumentation and debate" separable from "factual topics," or vice versa? 
*Just remembered--actually there was an NA hiring preference for tribal jobs. My sister was a nurse at the Crow Agency hospital for decades, but was eventually laid of when an NA could do her job. She hated losing the job but did not see herself as a victim of "racism."

[*bfine32*]

Proud of my homies on all sides over the weekend. Protest were abundant, well attended, and mostly peaceful. Police and local government demonstrated a stern, but fair approach. Cannot say I'm overly happy about many using a church as a way to "message" the curfew, but it all worked out.

Of course there's always idiots:

https://www.wave3.com/2020/09/27/louisville-man-federally-charged-after-alleged-threats-shoot-lmpd-officers-facebook-live/

Quote:A criminal complaint said Edwards had started a livestream on Facebook September 23, holding in his possession an AR variant pistol firearm. The video allegedly shows Edwards requesting to be paid $30,000 to “shoot Louisville Metro Police Department officers on scene" for a disturbance on the street in front of his home, according to a release from the ATF.

[fredtoast]

(09-25-2020, 10:25 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Obviously, being you are a legal professional, you know that statement isn't true.  Continuing a false narrative is bad juju.

(09-25-2020, 10:29 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You really didn't expect a forthright answer to the question did you? 

This is what happens when people refuse to say what their point iis and instead play question games.

At first I assumed that Bfine was saying that the killing was not based on race because all of the other black people there were not killed.  When I responded to that with the "you did not answer my question" game.  So then I gave a correct factual answer to his question and he accuses me of not being "forthright" when he has yet to even state what point he was trying to make in the first place. 

It is fine to ask a question to prove your point as long as you state what your point is.  Otherwise it just turns a legit debate into a sully "question game".

So can one of you please tell me how the fact that not every other black person there was choked to death by an officer proves that he would not have choked to death a white person?  

[*bfine32*]

(09-28-2020, 03:08 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is what happens when people refuse to say what their point iis and instead play question games.

At first I assumed that Bfine was saying that the killing was not based on race because all of the other black people there were not killed.  When I responded to that with the "you did not answer my question" game.  So then I gave a correct factual answer to his question and he accuses me of not being "forthright" when he has yet to even state what point he was trying to make in the first place. 

It is fine to ask a question to prove your point as long as you state what your point is.  Otherwise it just turns a legit debate into a sully "question game".

So can one of you please tell me how the fact that not every other black person there was choked to death by an officer proves that he would not have choked to death a white person?  

It proves Floyd was not chocked simply because he was black or else, all the black folk would have been chocked; it's just race baiting.

[fredtoast]

(09-25-2020, 04:12 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: No it's not.  Do individual officers sometimes engage in a tactic that could fall under the definition of racial profiling, sure.  Is it systemic in law enforcement no.  So, not a fact.

Actually there is a lot of proof that it is actual policy carried out by entire agencies instead of just individuals.


The most famous case is in New York City where Mayor Bloomberg admitted that his "stop and frisk" policy targeted minorities and were not based on any probably cause.  The lack of probable cause was born out by the fact that 85% of the stops resulted in no criminal charges.  90% of the people stopped were minorities while they only made up 54% of the population of the city.

Police officers in St. Louis County admit to the department racially profiling blacks at a local mall back in 2013.

In 1999 New Jersey's Chief of Troopers was fired after admitting that drivers were racially profiled because "most drug dealers are minorities"

In 1985 Florida Dept of Highway Safety issued guidelines for making traffic stops based on "ethnic groups associated with drug trade"

In 1986 as part of Operation Pipeline the DEA issued guidelines to use pretext stops to target minorities.

In 1995 Eagle County paid $800,000 in damages in 1995 to black and Latino motorists stopped on Interstate 70 solely because they fit a drug courier profile. The payment settled a class-action lawsuit filed by the ACLU on behalf of 402 people stopped between August 1988 and August 1990 on I-70 between Eagle and Glenwood Springs, none of whom were ticketed or arrested for drugs.

In Avon, Connecticut former police officers corroborated the existence of the long-rumored "Barkhamsted Express," a slang term for the routine stopping of black and Hispanic motorists traveling through town from Hartford to the Barkhamsted reservoir.

In 1993 the chief of the all white police force  of Trumbull Connecticut issued a memo for officers to target minorities.

An analysis by the Raleigh News and Observer found that a highway drug unit ticketed black men at nearly twice the rate of other police units. In most cases the drivers were charged with minor traffic violations and no drugs were found.


In Texas, a 1995 analysis of more than 16 million driving records by the Houston Chronicle found that minority drivers who strayed into the small white enclaves in and around the state's major urban areas were twice as likely as whites to be ticketed for traffic violations. The study found that Hispanics were ticketed most often, though blacks overall faced the sharpest disparities, particularly in the suburbs around Houston where they were more than three times as likely as whites to receive citations. Bellaire, a mostly white city surrounded by southwest Houston, had the widest disparity in ticketing minorities of any city statewide, with blacks 43 times more likely than whites to receive citations there.

While Hispanics comprise less than eight percent of the Illinois population, and take fewer than three percent of the personal vehicle trips in Illinois, they comprise approximately 30 percent of the motorists stopped by ISP drug interdiction officers for discretionary offenses such as failure to signal a lane change or driving one to four miles over the speed limit.


I have a lot more if you want to see them.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-28-2020, 03:13 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually there is a lot of proof that it is actual policy carried out by entire agencies instead of just individuals.

Quote:The most famous case is in New York City where Mayor Bloomberg admitted that his "stop and frisk" policy targeted minorities and were not based on any probably cause.  The lack of probable cause was born out by the fact that 85% of the stops resulted in no criminal charges.  90% of the people stopped were minorities while they only made up 54% of the population of the city.

What percentage of the population were minority in the areas of the city target by the program?  The overall ethnic makeup of the city is irrelevant when targeting a high crime area.

Quote:Police officers in St. Louis County admit to the department racially profiling blacks at a local mall back in 2013.

So, individual officers, like I said, not a policy.

Quote:In 1999 New Jersey's Chief of Troopers was fired after admitting that drivers were racially profiled because "most drug dealers are minorities"

Was this a policy or instruction?  I'd like to see a link please.

Quote:In 1985 Florida Dept of Highway Safety issued guidelines for making traffic stops based on "ethnic groups associated with drug trade"

So 35 years ago.  Are we talking about law enforcement or taking a history class?

Quote:In 1986 as part of Operation Pipeline the DEA issued guidelines to use pretext stops to target minorities.

So 34 years ago.  Are we talking about law enforcement or taking a history class?

Quote:In 1995 Eagle County paid $800,000 in damages in 1995 to black and Latino motorists stopped on Interstate 70 solely because they fit a drug courier profile. The payment settled a class-action lawsuit filed by the ACLU on behalf of 402 people stopped between August 1988 and August 1990 on I-70 between Eagle and Glenwood Springs, none of whom were ticketed or arrested for drugs.

So 25 years ago.  Are we talking about law enforcement or taking a history class?

Quote:In Avon, Connecticut former police officers corroborated the existence of the long-rumored "Barkhamsted Express," a slang term for the routine stopping of black and Hispanic motorists traveling through town from Hartford to the Barkhamsted reservoir.

When?  Also, was this routine throughout the department or confined to some officers?

Quote:In 1993 the chief of the all white police force  of Trumbull Connecticut issued a memo for officers to target minorities.

So 27 years ago.  Are we talking about law enforcement or taking a history class?

Quote:An analysis by the Raleigh News and Observer found that a highway drug unit ticketed black men at nearly twice the rate of other police units. In most cases the drivers were charged with minor traffic violations and no drugs were found.

What is "most cases"?  Also, when was this?

Quote:In Texas, a 1995 analysis of more than 16 million driving records by the Houston Chronicle found that minority drivers who strayed into the small white enclaves in and around the state's major urban areas were twice as likely as whites to be ticketed for traffic violations. The study found that Hispanics were ticketed most often, though blacks overall faced the sharpest disparities, particularly in the suburbs around Houston where they were more than three times as likely as whites to receive citations. Bellaire, a mostly white city surrounded by southwest Houston, had the widest disparity in ticketing minorities of any city statewide, with blacks 43 times more likely than whites to receive citations there.

So 25 years ago.  Are we talking about law enforcement or taking a history class?

Quote:While Hispanics comprise less than eight percent of the Illinois population, and take fewer than three percent of the personal vehicle trips in Illinois, they comprise approximately 30 percent of the motorists stopped by ISP drug interdiction officers for discretionary offenses such as failure to signal a lane change or driving one to four miles over the speed limit.

When?  Also,, in this instance, you concede they were stopped for other, legitimate reasons.

Quote:I have a lot more if you want to see them

Quote:.

Any of them more recent than twenty-five years old?

[GMDino]

(09-28-2020, 04:27 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: What percentage of the population were minority in the areas of the city target by the program?  The overall ethnic makeup of the city is irrelevant when targeting a high crime area.



So, individual officers, like I said, not a policy.



Was this a policy or instruction?  I'd like to see a link please.



So 35 years ago.  Are we talking about law enforcement or taking a history class?




So 34 years ago.  Are we talking about law enforcement or taking a history class?




So 25 years ago.  Are we talking about law enforcement or taking a history class?



When?  Also, was this routine throughout the department or confined to some officers?




So 27 years ago.  Are we talking about law enforcement or taking a history class?



What is "most cases"?  Also, when was this?





So 25 years ago.  Are we talking about law enforcement or taking a history class?



When?  Also,, in this instance, you concede they were stopped for other, legitimate reasons.


Any of them more recent than twenty-five years old?

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-28-2020, 04:30 PM)GMDino Wrote: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Very true. Seeing as my original point was that no department is engaged in racial profiling (which Fred apparently disagrees with, citing several decades old cases) it appears we have learned from the past in this instance.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

Sole witness who claimed police announced themselves changed his story.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/sole-witness-heard-cops-announce-215316031.html

Ballistics report doesn’t support KY AG’s claims.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/v7gw7y/initial-police-report-didnt-conclude-breonna-taylors-boyfriend-shot-a-cop-in-the-leg

[fredtoast]

(09-28-2020, 03:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It proves Floyd was not chocked simply because he was black or else, all the black folk would have been chocked; it's just race baiting.

So now I can finally go back to my original comment.

Based on this argument the fact that not every black person in the south was lynched proves that the KKK was not racist.

Your logic fails because you are talking about the reason Floyd was taken down instead of the fact that he was choked to death after he was taken down.  The question is not if Chauvin would have taken sown a white person on that situation.  The question is if he would choke a whiote person to death who was begging for his life.

[GMDino]

(09-28-2020, 04:32 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Very true. Seeing as my original point was that no department is engaged in racial profiling (which Fred apparently disagrees with, citing several decades old cases) it appears we have learned from the past in this instance.

Bold statement.  Can you defend it?

[fredtoast]

(09-28-2020, 04:32 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Very true. Seeing as my original point was that no department is engaged in racial profiling (which Fred apparently disagrees with, citing several decades old cases) it appears we have learned from the past in this instance.

When did Joe Arapio learn this lesson?

He was just convicted of contempt for failing to end his racial profiling practices THREE YEARS AGO.


BTW you are welcome for the history lesson.

[fredtoast]

(09-28-2020, 03:13 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Police officers in St. Louis County admit to the department racially profiling blacks at a local mall back in 2013.

(09-28-2020, 04:27 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: So, individual officers, like I said, not a policy.

"Department" is not the same as "individual officers".  St Louis County Police Lt Patrick Hayes ordered officers to racially profile and arrest blacks at South County Center Mall and a local Walmart.

And note that this was in 2013.

Again, you are welcome for the history lesson.  

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-28-2020, 08:01 PM)GMDino Wrote: Bold statement.  Can you defend it?

Since you can't prove a negative (which is a basic principle of logic btw), no.

(09-28-2020, 08:06 PM)fredtoast Wrote: When did Joe Arapio learn this lesson?

He was just convicted of contempt for failing to end his racial profiling practices THREE YEARS AGO.


BTW you are welcome for the history lesson.

OK, three years ago.  How does that dispute what I said about the present day?  I'll give you credit though, you worked your way up from thirty- five years ago to only three.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-28-2020, 08:21 PM)fredtoast Wrote: "Department" is not the same as "individual officers".  St Louis County Police Lt Patrick Hayes ordered officers to racially profile and arrest blacks at South County Center Mall and a local Walmart.

And note that this was in 2013.

Again, you are welcome for the history lesson.  

Seven years ago.  That is a nice bridge between 35 and 3.

[fredtoast]

From 2016

By analyzing data from 4.5 million traffic stops in 100 North Carolina cities, Stanford researchers have found that police in that state are more likely to search black and Hispanic motorists, using a lower threshold of suspicion, than when they stop white or Asian drivers

https://news.stanford.edu/2016/06/28/stanford-researchers-develop-new-statistical-test-shows-racial-profiling-police-traffic-stops/

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-28-2020, 08:24 PM)fredtoast Wrote: From 2016

By analyzing data from 4.5 million traffic stops in 100 North Carolina cities, Stanford researchers have found that police in that state are more likely to search black and Hispanic motorists, using a lower threshold of suspicion, than when they stop white or Asian drivers

https://news.stanford.edu/2016/06/28/stanford-researchers-develop-new-statistical-test-shows-racial-profiling-police-traffic-stops/

That's not the same as racial profiling.  Implicit bias can account for such a disparity with out any knowledge on the part of the officer engaged in it.  Also, four years ago.

[fredtoast]

2015

In San Francisco, “although Black people accounted for less than 15 percent of all stops in 2015, they accounted for over 42 percent of all non-consent searches following stops.” This proved unwarranted: “Of all people searched without consent, Black and Hispanic people had the lowest ‘hit rates’ (i.e., the lowest rate of contraband recovered).” In 2015, whites searched without consent were found to be carrying contraband at nearly two times the rate as blacks who were searched without consent.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/07/data-police-racial-bias