Hands Up Don't Shoot!

[Cow Poke]

I didn't say that Wilson anyone out for racist purposes, so...what's your point?

How bout making a cogent statement first.

Okay, I don't know the exact percentage. Just like I don't know how it's relevant to anything that I said in this thread, and am still patiently waiting for an explanation.

Blacks have a HUGE problem within their own community, and are in FAR more danger from other blacks than from white policemen. Pinko commie liberals aren't nearly as concerned about dead blacks unless they can put a racial aspect on it. It's dishonest and hypocritical.

[fm93]

It seems to me that non-violent protests in Ferguson were "right for the wrong reasons". That is, it was fine to protest a pattern of civil rights issues in the community, but they were rallying around the wrong case. It made me a bit sick to see all those "hands up, don't shoot" demonstrations. I would have been more supportive of the civil rights issues if people hadn't been focused on that one extremely flawed case.

This is a fair, level-headed assessment. Would that certain conservative posters would do this.

I guess you could say the protestors kept sight of the forest but lost sight of a specific tree.

[fm93]

You seem to have a lot of trouble getting your head around the idea that a cop can arrest a black man without legal justification and without being racist.

It isn't happening to non-black people at particularly high rates.

Of course it's "problematic" It's obvious Ferguson whites and blacks don't like each other (and the black community in Ferguson is the chief instigator, but nobody wants to talk about that).

Er...both sides probably have degrees of guilt in the existence and maintenance of the racial tension, but how would you possibly know "the black community is the chief instigator" of it?

I didn't miss it. Without crime rates it's useless, except that it tells us one thing: if they stop blacks twice as often but blacks were only 26% less likely than the whites stopped to not having anything shows that the cops' instincts were actually pretty good.

Hang on. It says black people who are stopped by police are found with contraband 26% less often than white drivers, not that the total number of stopped black drivers with contraband is 26% less than the total number of stopped white drivers with contraband. If one baseball player has more than twice as many at-bats as another baseball player but gets a hit 26% less often than that other baseball player, you can't say that the second player is actually worse than the first player.

Yes, some were. That does NOT mean that Wilson singled out poor little Darren just because he was black.

I didn't say that Wilson singled anyone out for racist purposes, so...what's your point?

So, you don't know. It's OK - you can just say that.

Okay, I don't know the exact percentage. Just like I don't know how it's relevant to anything that I said in this thread, and am still patiently waiting for an explanation.

[Cow Poke]

The real issue is the lie of "hands up, don't shoot". The motivations of the department are wholly inconsequential to that being a lie. The left made this lie a full on national phenomenon. Now, when the lie was exposed, the goal posts shift to "well it had the POTENTIAL to have happened given the climate in the town"...

Yes, and Al Sharpton milked this for all it was worth. He is shameless in his own self promotion.

[Cow Poke]

It seems to me that non-violent protests in Ferguson were "right for the wrong reasons". That is, it was fine to protest a pattern of civil rights issues in the community, but they were rallying around the wrong case. It made me a bit sick to see all those "hands up, don't shoot" demonstrations. I would have been more supportive of the civil rights issues if people hadn't been focused on that one extremely flawed case.

It would have also helped if a bunch of the local (and imported) hoodlums hadn't burned down their own local businesses and rioted.

[Yttrium]

The real issue is the lie of "hands up, don't shoot". The motivations of the department are wholly inconsequential to that being a lie. The left made this lie a full on national phenomenon. Now, when the lie was exposed, the goal posts shift to "well it had the POTENTIAL to have happened given the climate in the town"...

It seems to me that non-violent protests in Ferguson were "right for the wrong reasons". That is, it was fine to protest a pattern of civil rights issues in the community, but they were rallying around the wrong case. It made me a bit sick to see all those "hands up, don't shoot" demonstrations. I would have been more supportive of the civil rights issues if people hadn't been focused on that one extremely flawed case.

[Bill the Cat]

The real issue is the lie of "hands up, don't shoot". The motivations of the department are wholly inconsequential to that being a lie. The left made this lie a full on national phenomenon. Now, when the lie was exposed, the goal posts shift to "well it had the POTENTIAL to have happened given the climate in the town"...

[Cow Poke]

As I've pointed out multiple times from the report, there are clear instances in which some of these arrests and citations of black people were NOT justified. Obviously not all police in the world are racist, but it seems clear that in this case, some officers in the department were.

Yes, some were. That does NOT mean that Wilson singled out poor little Darren just because he was black.

Probably a high percentage, but 1) that applies to murders within all races, and 2) what does that have to do with anything?

So, you don't know. It's OK - you can just say that.

[Darth Executor]

These policemen heavily insult and mock the intelligence, moral character and human worth of the very community whom they're supposed to serve and protect. You don't find anything problematic about that?

Of course it's "problematic" It's obvious Ferguson whites and blacks don't like each other (and the black community in Ferguson is the chief instigator, but nobody wants to talk about that). The emails are nowhere near "horrifying" though. They're trivial.

Oh, right. But then it appears that you missed this line directly before that:

African Americans are more than twice as likely as white drivers to be searched during vehicle stops even after controlling for non-race based variables such as the reason the vehicle stop was initiated

I didn't miss it. Without crime rates it's useless, except that it tells us one thing: if they stop blacks twice as often but blacks were only 26% less likely than the whites stopped to not having anything shows that the cops' instincts were actually pretty good.

Also:

The racial makeup of the city was 67.4% African American, 29.3% White. There's more than twice as many blacks, so they really should be stopping more than twice as many blacks. It seems to me that they racially profiled... whites. Of course I don't accept the retarded methodology where crime rates are completely ignored, but under the typical liberal methodology all they've really proven is what I've been saying all along, which is that cops tend to go slightly easier on blacks, probably due to fears of being called racist.

And I'm not sure what you mean by the latter part. Isn't possessing contraband a crime? If more black people are checked for contraband but are found to have it at a lower percentage, that implies that black people are less likely to commit that crime. Unless it's merely a few black people being checked over and over again, but that's rather implausible.

No, it doesn't mean that. Quite the opposite (as I explained above).

Are you confident that that sort of treatment is administered at similar rates to non-black people?

I don't know, but [s]data[/s] select anecdotes from Eric "my people" Holder isn't gonna sway me.

[Darth Executor]

As I've pointed out multiple times from the report, there are clear instances in which some of these arrests and citations of black people were NOT justified. Obviously not all police in the world are racist, but it seems clear that in this case, some officers in the department were.

You seem to have a lot of trouble getting your head around the idea that a cop can arrest a black man without legal justification and without being racist.

[fm93]

Yes, if more crimes are committed by blacks per capita (as I have proven multiple times from the FBI UCR website), then the police are NOT doing their jobs if they do NOT arrest or stop more blacks than whites.

As I've pointed out multiple times from the report, there are clear instances in which some of these arrests and citations of black people were NOT justified. Obviously not all police in the world are racist, but it seems clear that in this case, some officers in the department were.

And, do you have any idea what percentage of blacks who are murdered are victims of other blacks? Or other violent crimes?

Probably a high percentage, but 1) that applies to murders within all races, and 2) what does that have to do with anything?

[Cow Poke]

Because fewer white people are from the backgrounds and conditions that tend to breed violent crimes.

And, do you have any idea what percentage of blacks who are murdered are victims of other blacks? Or other violent crimes?

[fm93]

It's hilarious watching you twist yourself into knots like this.

Repeating what's been said all along (that it's far more probable that some witnesses were mistaken, rather than that they all conspired to lie) = twisting into knots. Bizarre logic, but okay.

[fm93]

No, I'm speaking generally.

And I was speaking in the specific context of drug-related crimes.

And yes blacks do commit more crimes. Do you see drive by shootings in white neighborhoods?

For instance :Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, whites commit 69.2% of the crimes, and blacks 28.4%. Whites are 72.4% of the population and blacks 12.6%. So percentage wise blacks commit more murders and manslaughter.

Because fewer white people are from the backgrounds and conditions that tend to breed violent crimes.

[Mountain Man]

Except that you didn't provide anything saying "not a single credible witness" supported the narrative. You just said that some of the witnesses who were found to be credible contradicted the narrative. That doesn't mean that literally zero witnesses who thought he might've been surrendering were found to be credible. And even if that was the case, the point was that some of those witnesses were probably genuinely mistaken, not that literally all of them conspired to lie.

It's hilarious watching you twist yourself into knots like this.