Race in America - Riots Explode in Chicago

[MDlaxfan76]

I'd agree with that...our "delusional right wingers on this forum" have relatively limited delusions...it would be a truer statement of the generalized form...eg "many" or "some delusional right wingers"...

Our FanLax "right-wing" cohort by and large are simply stubborn and too easily and too often deluded by right wing propaganda...youth's stubborn refusal to distinguish between the official document and position and what one citizen said is a case in point.

But "cops can do no wrong" would not be in youth's lexicon, I believe.

Yes, I found the link from social media, but the article is from the city govt' of Racine, Wi, where the bright orange sign said what it said. Seems you are unwilling to recognize that they, the Racine Gov't, called out avoiding ex-military as potential hires, shame on you. I guess in your world, military are just peons and killing machines, un-educated with no discipline, lack qualifications, incapable of tolerance or hell....even being a police officer.

Sorry, you've again made the same error...that part of the report is the community feedback, not the actual recommendations. Yes, someone in the community (I'd be surprised if lots of citizens didn't agree) made that suggestion...but it's not part of the City's or its consultants actual recommendations.

You're simply wrong to attribute that to them.

BTW, I hadn't offered any opinion as to whether ex-military should be included or excluded in hiring the next batch of officers in Racine or anywhere else. I personally tend to be highly disposed to hiring ex-military folks in business.

As a citizen, I'm a bit more concerned about the necessity for screening personality types when hiring police. I think at least some military personnel could be overly attracted to the 'gun' and 'force' rather than the 'service'. But then again, I'm concerned about that regardless of whether the applicant has a military service background or not. So, excluding military seems to me to be the wrong approach to solving the problem of power hungry, violence prone police officers.

[Typical Lax Dad]

I'd agree with that...our "delusional right wingers on this forum" have relatively limited delusions...it would be a truer statement of the generalized form...eg "many" or "some delusional right wingers"...

Our FanLax "right-wing" cohort by and large are simply stubborn and too easily and too often deluded by right wing propaganda...youth's stubborn refusal to distinguish between the official document and position and what one citizen said is a case in point.

But "cops can do no wrong" would not be in youth's lexicon, I believe.

Yes, I found the link from social media, but the article is from the city govt' of Racine, Wi, where the bright orange sign said what it said. Seems you are unwilling to recognize that they, the Racine Gov't, called out avoiding ex-military as potential hires, shame on you. I guess in your world, military are just peons and killing machines, un-educated with no discipline, lack qualifications, incapable of tolerance or hell....even being a police officer.

Sorry, you've again made the same error...that part of the report is the community feedback, not the actual recommendations. Yes, someone in the community (I'd be surprised if lots of citizens didn't agree) made that suggestion...but it's not part of the City's or its consultants actual recommendations.

You're simply wrong to attribute that to them.

BTW, I hadn't offered any opinion as to whether ex-military should be included or excluded in hiring the next batch of officers in Racine or anywhere else. I personally tend to be highly disposed to hiring ex-military folks in business.

As a citizen, I'm a bit more concerned about the necessity for screening personality types when hiring police. I think at least some military personnel could be overly attracted to the 'gun' and 'force' rather than the 'service'. But then again, I'm concerned about that regardless of whether the applicant has a military service background or not. So, excluding military seems to me to be the wrong approach to solving the problem of power hungry, violence prone police officers.

I have no problem with additional screening...particularly in light of DHS reports on the nexus between extremists, ex-military and law enforcement. Military experience should not be an automatic disqualification, however.

[Brooklyn]

Delusional right wingers on this forum still believe cops can do no wrong.

Could you provide some more insight/proof on this claim you keep repeating?
I don’t think I’ve seen anyone post anything that reflects this. At all. Most people understand that there are bad cops and none are infallible.

Haven't we gone over this enough times? One example:

viewtopic.php?p=152858#p152858


Petey and his pals continue to insist that it's black radicals and Dems who are exclusively responsible for unrest. In this post I proved that it is the cops who are. What is Petey's response? "Brook and most Democrats were trying the test balloon of the ‘white supremists and Russians did it’ until they saw Biden’s staff bailing out the thugs. Also, no one bought the imbecilic conspiracy since our eyes are perfectly good."




Another example:

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 2:53 pm




''100% the good cops are now paying the price. It is a travesty that so many have to pay such a severe price for the actions of a few of their own.''



My reply:

''Sadly, those "good" cops (assuming there are any) fail to stand up and take corrective action when necessary. For cops to openly hug others when the cameras are rolling is no solution to the problems we have today. Had they stopped the bad cops and prevented the needless death (and others) we would see see this violence and social disorder on TV.

Tell those "good cops" if you know any, take preventive action NOW - stop the vicious attacks BEFORE they take place. Not tomorrow when the cameras are rolling.''



All those "good cops" suffer for the evil actions of the few? Heck, 100% of the cops remain silent because of their omerta which means they are every bit as responsible for the problem because of their silence.

There are plenty of other examples which we don't need to go through again.




The right wingers need to stop blaming Dems, Biden, and innocent blacks who are the real victims here. Further, they need to condemn police omerta and their conspiracy of silence and collaboration with the criminal elements in their forces.

[kramerica.inc]

Delusional right wingers on this forum still believe cops can do no wrong.

Could you provide some more insight/proof on this claim you keep repeating?
I don’t think I’ve seen anyone post anything that reflects this. At all. Most people understand that there are bad cops and none are infallible.

Haven't we gone over this enough times? One example:

viewtopic.php?p=152858#p152858


Petey and his pals continue to insist that it's black radicals and Dems who are exclusively responsible for unrest. In this post I proved that it is the cops who are. What is Petey's response? "Brook and most Democrats were trying the test balloon of the ‘white supremists and Russians did it’ until they saw Biden’s staff bailing out the thugs. Also, no one bought the imbecilic conspiracy since our eyes are perfectly good."




Another example:

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Sun May 31, 2020 2:53 pm




''100% the good cops are now paying the price. It is a travesty that so many have to pay such a severe price for the actions of a few of their own.''



My reply:

''Sadly, those "good" cops (assuming there are any) fail to stand up and take corrective action when necessary. For cops to openly hug others when the cameras are rolling is no solution to the problems we have today. Had they stopped the bad cops and prevented the needless death (and others) we would see see this violence and social disorder on TV.

Tell those "good cops" if you know any, take preventive action NOW - stop the vicious attacks BEFORE they take place. Not tomorrow when the cameras are rolling.''



All those "good cops" suffer for the evil actions of the few? Heck, 100% of the cops remain silent because of their omerta which means they are every bit as responsible for the problem because of their silence.

There are plenty of other examples which we don't need to go through again.




The right wingers need to stop blaming Dems, Biden, and innocent blacks who are the real victims here. Further, they need to condemn police omerta and their conspiracy of silence and collaboration with the criminal elements in their forces.

No, you made a baseless claim. No one said ALL cops are good.

And reiterating YOUR claim that ALL cops are BAD (even the good ones) is actually just as useless as your (unproven) claim.

[CU77]

Sorry, you've again made the same error...that part of the report is the community feedback, not the actual recommendations. Yes, someone in the community (I'd be surprised if lots of citizens didn't agree) made that suggestion...but it's not part of the City's or its consultants actual recommendations.

You're simply wrong to attribute that to them.

Thank you MD, that's what I've been saying for several posts.

YA, read the paragraph just below the "Training and Hiring" that you circled in red.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Sorry, you've again made the same error...that part of the report is the community feedback, not the actual recommendations. Yes, someone in the community (I'd be surprised if lots of citizens didn't agree) made that suggestion...but it's not part of the City's or its consultants actual recommendations.

You're simply wrong to attribute that to them.

Thank you MD, that's what I've been saying for several posts.

YA, read the paragraph just below the "Training and Hiring" that you circled in red.

His bias has him blinded or has heightened his sensitivity.

https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/614389/

[Brooklyn]

No, you made a baseless claim. No one said ALL cops are good.

And reiterating YOUR claim that ALL cops are BAD (even the good ones) is actually just as useless as your (unproven) claim.

I'm specifically referencing those cops who engage in those crimes, those who succumb to their omerta, and those who defend them or who deny that these crimes exist. Anyone who denies that is full of fertilizer.

[DocBarrister]

The removal of a Confederate statue sends as much of a message as putting it up in the first place was, one made possible by the combination of cultural and political evolution. The battle over whether we should continue to honor traitors who waged war against the United States of America to preserve their right to enslave other human beings is one the right is emphatically losing. This debate will be part of the coming right-wing backlash that will help shape our politics in the next few years.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... -backlash/

DocBarrister

[jhu72]

Trumpnista clowns like Kilmeade are hypocrites and morons. They have no reasoning ability, NONE! He seems the prototype for the Trump base and supporters.

[seacoaster]

Pretty thought-provoking:

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/sp ... nity-race/

"A growing body of research supports the perception that police unfairly target Black Americans. They are more likely to be stopped, searched and arrested than their white compatriots. They also are more likely to be killed by police.

The aftermath of each of the three incidents examined for this article followed a common pattern. The officers who killed Stewart and roughed up Dobbins and Howse said the force they used was appropriate because the men ran, resisted or otherwise didn’t follow orders. The officers – all of them white – were cleared of wrongdoing by their departments. Local prosecutors brought no charges against them.

But Stewart’s family, Dobbins and Howse all felt wronged and hoped to hold the police accountable. The men didn’t comply, they said, because they had no idea why police engaged with them in the first place, and as Black men, they were justifiably frustrated or afraid or both. As Stewart’s mother, Mary, put it: “Luke wasn’t doing anything illegal, and now he’s dead … It was racism. It was police brutality.”

She and the others sued the police, accusing them of excessive force, a civil rights violation. The lawsuits they filed were made possible under an act of Congress passed 150 years ago for the purpose of protecting Black Americans from abuses by state and local authorities in the post-Civil War years.

Yet judges tossed out all three claims — before any jury had a chance to review the evidence — because the police involved were protected by a once-obscure legal doctrine that has become a flashpoint in this year of racial unrest: qualified immunity.

Crafted by the U.S. Supreme Court half a century ago, qualified immunity was meant to protect officials from costly and frequent litigation. In the view of critics across the political spectrum, it has evolved into a powerful defense that shields police from being held accountable for excessive force.

In effect, they say, qualified immunity denies Black people the recourse to justice provided by the 1871 law and enables violent police behavior that has a disproportionate impact on them.

Civil rights laws are meant “to protect Black people specifically or just people who are marginalized more generally, so the burden of qualified immunity will fall more heavily on those groups,” said Scott Michelman, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington, D.C. “If there was accountability, that might act as a significant check on police behavior. Qualified immunity prevents that.”

Michelman recently represented a homeless Black man whose claim that cops used excessive force when they set a police dog on him after he surrendered was thrown out based on qualified immunity.

In May, Reuters revealed how qualified immunity has made it harder in recent years for plaintiffs to win excessive force lawsuits, even when courts determine police actually used such force. The main reason: the Supreme Court’s directive that police be granted immunity unless the specific circumstances of the incident were “clearly established” as illegal in a previous case, regardless of whether police actually violated the plaintiff’s rights. Lack of such precedents is what sank the Stewart and Howse lawsuits.

Law enforcement professionals and political conservatives argue that qualified immunity is essential for police to make quick decisions in dangerous situations. Without it, they say, police couldn’t do their jobs. Data on policing, they say, doesn’t show racial bias, but rather, law enforcement’s focus on areas with higher crime rates, which also happen to have larger minority populations.

“I do not support any contention there is systemic bias in policing,” Jim Pasco, executive director of the National Fraternal Order of Police, the largest U.S. police union, told Reuters. “Unfortunately, because of the historic racism within government in the United States, we have gotten to a point where the economic disparities between white America and Black America are dramatic. With the poverty that’s sadly part of the Black experience in many parts of the United States comes a higher level of criminal activity.”

A 2016 study by the Center for Policing Equity at Yale University, however, showed that police use force disproportionately on African Americans even after taking racial disparities in crime into account. And in a Pew Research Center national survey of police in 2016, 92% of white cops said the country had done enough to ensure equal rights for Black people, compared to 57% of whites overall who said so.

The steady stream of headlines about Black Americans killed by police has fueled demands for broad reforms, including ending or revising qualified immunity. So far, reform initiatives have stalled in Congress amid partisan gridlock, and the Supreme Court has batted away several cases challenging qualified immunity. In the absence of action, lower-court judges, legally bound by the doctrine, have become some of its most vociferous critics — particularly for its effect on the Black community.

In August, Judge Carlton Reeves of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi tore into qualified immunity in a scathing 72-page opinion that began by listing George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and other Black Americans recently killed by police. He was ruling on a lawsuit against an officer who pulled over a Black man in a Mercedes, detained him for nearly two hours while tearing up the car in a fruitless drug search, and then left him on the side of the road.

Reeves granted immunity to the cop because no precedent clearly established his actions as illegal, but the judge made it clear that he felt the doctrine was unjust. “Just as the Supreme Court swept away the mistaken doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ ” – the concept the court used for decades to justify racial segregation laws – “so too should it eliminate the doctrine of qualified immunity,” Reeves wrote. “Let us waste no time in righting this wrong.”

[Brooklyn]

"A growing body of research supports the perception that police unfairly target Black Americans. They are more likely to be stopped, searched and arrested than their white compatriots. They also are more likely to be killed by police.

Right wingers in their delusionalism always pretend this is just a fairy tale. But for those of us who live in the world of reality, we know it is and always has been true.

Even Republican Suffolk county (as always, Republicans claim to be ever so principled and unprejudiced) is no exception:


https://www.newsday.com/long-island/inv ... 1.50041710


Newsday analysis: Suffolk police stopped, searched minority drivers at higher rates



The Suffolk County Police Department subjected Black and Hispanic drivers to tougher enforcement actions than white motorists over the past two years, stopping and then searching the minority drivers and their vehicles at higher rates than experienced by whites, a Newsday analysis of police data has found.

Officers pulled over Black drivers almost four times more often than white drivers, and Hispanic drivers twice as often, when matched against the size of the driving age population of each group in the area patrolled by the Suffolk Police Department.

More tellingly, after stopping drivers, police searched Blacks over three times more frequently than whites, and Hispanics 1.7 times more frequently, Newsday’s analysis revealed.



more at link ...



As always, it's the cops who are the problem.

[Matnum PI]

Midwin Charles, Esq.@MidwinCharles
17 hours ago
Just thinking about how George Floyd was accused of passing a bad $20 bill and a police officer decided he had to die for that on the day several rich white men - who were found guilty of lying to FBI, bank fraud, tax fraud - get pardoned.

[Brooklyn]

White supremacist sticker spotted on a vehicle owned by a cop in St Paul:


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/st-pa ... d=msedgntp


As always, the department stands up for the crook. No surprise, none whatsoever.

[FannOLax]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/educatio ... rc404=true

Long article, but this is a Virginia state school that has long venerated the Confederacy... and how one Black Hispanic student-athlete experienced VMI.

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/educatio ... rc404=true

Long article, but this is a Virginia state school that has long venerated the Confederacy... and how one Black Hispanic student-athlete experienced VMI.

Thanks for posting that. Many people don’t understand just how insulting the whole reverence of confederate soldiers is. It would be akin to revering British soldiers. My great great grandfather fought in some battles in Virginia and North Carolina. He fortunately lived to tell about it. The confederate flag is offensive.

[Brooklyn]

A permit has been approved for a "white-only" church in Minnesota.



Tweet text:
Travis Akers
@travisakers
A permit has been approved for a "white-only" church in Minnesota.

After permit approved for whites-only church, small Minnesota town insists it isn't racist
City leaders said if they had turned down Asatru Folk Assembly, they would have faced an expensive legal battle.
nbcnews.com
8:22 AM · Dec 23, 2020



https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/af ... s-n1251838




seriously doubtful that the Great Jewish liberal in the sky would approve:





some folks in town definitely don't:

https://theweek.com/speedreads/956835/r ... nly-church

[Typical Lax Dad]

A permit has been approved for a "white-only" church in Minnesota.



Tweet text:
Travis Akers
@travisakers
A permit has been approved for a "white-only" church in Minnesota.

After permit approved for whites-only church, small Minnesota town insists it isn't racist
City leaders said if they had turned down Asatru Folk Assembly, they would have faced an expensive legal battle.
nbcnews.com
8:22 AM · Dec 23, 2020



https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/af ... s-n1251838




seriously doubtful that the Great Jewish liberal in the sky would approve:





some folks in town definitely don't:

https://theweek.com/speedreads/956835/r ... nly-church

MAGA

[Farfromgeneva]

Trumpnista clowns like Kilmeade are hypocrites and morons. They have no reasoning ability, NONE! He seems the prototype for the Trump base and supporters.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YqDlmrB9qRI

[youthathletics]

A permit has been approved for a "white-only" church in Minnesota.



Tweet text:
Travis Akers
@travisakers
A permit has been approved for a "white-only" church in Minnesota.

After permit approved for whites-only church, small Minnesota town insists it isn't racist
City leaders said if they had turned down Asatru Folk Assembly, they would have faced an expensive legal battle.
nbcnews.com
8:22 AM · Dec 23, 2020



https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/af ... s-n1251838




seriously doubtful that the Great Jewish liberal in the sky would approve:





some folks in town definitely don't:

https://theweek.com/speedreads/956835/r ... nly-church

Not that I agree with them, but did you read the article?

The headline of the article is very misleading because they did not capitalize the word church. They also predate Christ.

[DocBarrister]

A permit has been approved for a "white-only" church in Minnesota.



Tweet text:
Travis Akers
@travisakers
A permit has been approved for a "white-only" church in Minnesota.

After permit approved for whites-only church, small Minnesota town insists it isn't racist
City leaders said if they had turned down Asatru Folk Assembly, they would have faced an expensive legal battle.
nbcnews.com
8:22 AM · Dec 23, 2020



https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/af ... s-n1251838




seriously doubtful that the Great Jewish liberal in the sky would approve:





some folks in town definitely don't:

https://theweek.com/speedreads/956835/r ... nly-church

Not that I agree with them, but did you read the article?

The headline of the article is very misleading because they did not capitalize the word church. They also predate Christ.

You begin your post by stating, “Not that I agree with them,” and then proceed to defend a whites-only racist cult.



DocBarrister