or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › WTF over-zealous police?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

WTF over-zealous police? - Page 356

post #5326 of 6076
I continue to be puzzled by which incidents trigger outrage and riots and which do not. I say this as it seems many of the trigger point incidents are truly poorly chosen examples to claim the moral high ground over. I think anyone that's been reading my posts knows I feel strongly race is a factor in likely treatment by the police, and that blacks generally get the short end of that stick, but I think rioting over a guy that was shot in a highly justifiable way like this does nothing to further any reasonable agenda.
post #5327 of 6076
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnoldh View Post

Sylville Smith's ( the deceased ) Dad speaks out and makes some sense,

http://fox6now.com/2016/08/14/father-of-23-year-old-man-shot-killed-by-police-near-44th-auer-identifies-him-as-sylville-smith/

also,

MILWAUKEE -- The father of a man shot and killed by a Milwaukee police officer Saturday afternoon, August 13th has identified him as 23-year-old Sylville Smith, as did Milwaukee Police Chief Ed Flynn Sunday afternoon.

Court records show in February of 2015, Smith was charged with one felony count of first degree recklessly endangering safety and one misdemeanor count of possession of THC. The charges were dismissed by prosecutors in November.

In August of 2015, Smith was charged with felony intimidation of a witness/person charged/felony. That charge was dismissed by prosecutors in September.

In July of 2014, Smith was charged with carrying a concealed weapon -- a misdemeanor charge. He pleaded guilty in November, and was sentenced to serve one day in the House of Correction.

In July of 2013, Smith was charged with felony retail theft -- intentionally taking $500 to $5,000 as party to a crime. Prosecutors dismissed the charge in October.


This kid must have had lawyers that are better than Johnnie Cochran.

No, he's a very typical case. Prosecuting people and locking people up is expensive, and if they did it to everyone who deserved it the prisons couldn't hold them. After seven or eight arrests they'd probably have put him on probation. Maybe they did already.

This is a good illustration of why the claims of "mass incarceration" and the like are all BS.
post #5328 of 6076
A no true scotsman argument isn't really appropriate here.

BLM itself does have some semblance of organization. There are chapters and affiliated groups (such as BYP100) that are very well organized. There are other factions that disagree with various tactics and aren't organized.

Sure, there are people at this riot who have participated in BLM actions in the past. Sure there are probably people who consider themselves part of BLM at this riot...but that hardly makes it a BLM event.

Easy to put on a T-Shirt that says BLM or Hands Up Don't Shoot...doesn't make you an official spokesman.

I can't say for sure, but I'd imagine anyone in charge of a group would prefer to step back from an armed felon criminal getting shot with a gun in his hand by a black cop. Lord knows many of the heavily protested examples in the past weren't exactly law abiding citizens--but most of us can agree that they didn't deserve to bet shot and the cops weren't really in danger--we'll see how this one looks as the facts come out, but from what has been said so far, it sounds like an acceptable shoot. The people in charge of some of these groups know this...they may still blame society's treatment of the black population for the situation (like that deray mckesson tweet did), but no way are they going to incite riots over this.
post #5329 of 6076
And no way are they going to be running around suggesting violence against white people. I think they value their white allies quite highly.

Maybe there are other groups out there that just want black power, but most intelligent people are going to realize that fighting racism with racism or taking out your anger on innocent white folk isn't going to win over anyone.

also, LOL that the guy running around telling everybody to beat up whitey is just filming things and not actually doing anything himself. Probably just trying to get his 15 minutes of fame when he gets a viral video.
post #5330 of 6076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post


No, he's a very typical case. Prosecuting people and locking people up is expensive, and if they did it to everyone who deserved it the prisons couldn't hold them. After seven or eight arrests they'd probably have put him on probation. Maybe they did already.

This is a good illustration of why the claims of "mass incarceration" and the like are all BS.

 

Perhaps we could arrest fewer people committing victim-less crimes to save space for those who steal or intimidate witnesses.

post #5331 of 6076
The perfect end to that "beat up all white people" video would have been for Chuck Liddell to come flying in from off camera and drop the screamer.
post #5332 of 6076
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

Perhaps we could arrest fewer people committing victim-less crimes to save space for those who steal or intimidate witnesses.

Fun fact: only a tiny percent of people in prison are there for drug possession.

And I'd bet dollars to dimes that most of them have long arrest histories like our dearly departed. It's easier to prosecute shooters for drug possession because you don't have to convince some other gang banger victim to testify.
post #5333 of 6076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

Fun fact: only a tiny percent of people in prison are there for drug possession.

And I'd bet dollars to dimes that most of them have long arrest histories like our dearly departed. It's easier to prosecute shooters for drug possession because you don't have to convince some other gang banger victim to testify.

You do realize these two statements are somewhat contradictory?
post #5334 of 6076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post


Fun fact: only a tiny percent of people in prison are there for drug possession.

And I'd bet dollars to dimes that most of them have long arrest histories like our dearly departed. It's easier to prosecute shooters for drug possession because you don't have to convince some other gang banger victim to testify.

 

According to the Wisconsin Department of Corrections, 19% of people are in jail for drug offenses or "public order" crimes. That's 4300 people in Wisconsin.

post #5335 of 6076
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post
 

 That's 4300 people in Wisconsin.

Isn't that everyone in wisconsin?

post #5336 of 6076
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

According to the Wisconsin Department of Corrections, 19% of people are in jail for drug offenses or "public order" crimes. That's 4300 people in Wisconsin.

And? You don't break down drug offenses into possession versus distribution, but I'm sure it's skewed toward the latter. Do you consider dealing drugs a victimless crime?

I don't know what they consider public order offenses so it's hard to say, but googling suggests that public order offenses aren't all "victimless" crimes. http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/947.pdf
Quote:
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC PEACE, ORDER AND OTHER INTERESTS
947.01 Disorderly conduct.
947.011 Disrupting a funeral or memorial service.
947.012 Unlawful use of telephone.
947.0125 Unlawful use of computerized communication systems.
947.013 Harassment.
947.015 Bomb scares.
947.017 Threats to release chemical, biological, or radioactive substances.
947.019 Terrorist threats.
947.02 Vagrancy.
947.04 Drinking in common carriers.
947.06 Unlawful assemblies and their suppression.
947.07 Causing violence or breach of the peace by damaging or destroying a U.S.
flag.
947.20 Right to work.
post #5337 of 6076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

I continue to be puzzled by which incidents trigger outrage and riots and which do not. I say this as it seems many of the trigger point incidents are truly poorly chosen examples to claim the moral high ground over. I think anyone that's been reading my posts knows I feel strongly race is a factor in likely treatment by the police, and that blacks generally get the short end of that stick, but I think rioting over a guy that was shot in a highly justifiable way like this does nothing to further any reasonable agenda.

I think it's erroneous to peg these events to "choice," especially the riots. They don't spawn because a group of organizers sat down in committee and voted. They start because the community was already pissed off and that event served as a spark. The details don't really matter that much in context, the community just hears "another police shooting" and the lids gets blown off. The more pissed off a community, the more likely any particular shooting will start something.


People like to blame BLM, but they didn't create this sentiment. They're responding to it. I'd say it's better to have some kind of organization giving people a channel for expressing these sentiments in a civil fashion than to just have a wave of spontaneous riots. We could have another summer of 1968.
post #5338 of 6076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post

People like to blame BLM, but they didn't create this sentiment. They're responding to it.

And it's just a coincidence that riots and police assassinations started happening after BLM came about.
post #5339 of 6076
What you say sounds reasonable but goes against what's actually happened. First, let's go back to the formation and its impetus. Three deaths, Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, and Eric Garner are listed as the crux of the BLM forming. Martin had nothing to do with the police, systemic racism, etc. Brown, even I'm going to say that shooting sounded legit and he was not the "gentle giant" being portrayed as evidenced by that video of him roughing up the tiny store clerk just prior. Now, Garner I'll give the nod to that incident, in that while he was non-compliant, the video clearly shows a small crowd of overly zealous cops.

As I said, flash point incidents seem to be haphazard. Tamir Rice? Now, if one is wanting to riot, I'd say that would be a really good reason. That one just springs to mind.

I get what you're saying about the community being pissed and the smallest spark setting them off. I agree this is what happened and am saying it's not helpful in the least to make one's stand over this incident (based on currently known reports of the incident.)

FWIW, I'm not blaming anything on BLM, in fact, I didn't even mention them in what you responded to. I agree it's not like they're in charge of communities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post

I think it's erroneous to peg these events to "choice," especially the riots. They don't spawn because a group of organizers sat down in committee and voted. They start because the community was already pissed off and that event served as a spark. The details don't really matter that much in context, the community just hears "another police shooting" and the lids gets blown off. The more pissed off a community, the more likely any particular shooting will start something.


People like to blame BLM, but they didn't create this sentiment. They're responding to it. I'd say it's better to have some kind of organization giving people a channel for expressing these sentiments in a civil fashion than to just have a wave of spontaneous riots. We could have another summer of 1968.
post #5340 of 6076

The assassination of Archduke Ferdinand ,shit happens

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › WTF over-zealous police?