Are we now going to have protests every time a black criminal is killed?

[Derec]

Must be nice to have so much time on one's hands.

This time protesters blocked a freeway in Oakland because an armed robber named Joe Bart got himself killed after he tried to carjack another vehicle.
Oakland police officers involved in shooting, suspect dead

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Are we going to have a thread for every one of these?

 

[laughing dog]

Must be nice to have so much time on one's hands.

This time protesters blocked a freeway in Oakland because an armed robber named Joe Bart got himself killed after he tried to carjack another vehicle.
Oakland police officers involved in shooting, suspect dead

Probably until the trust of the police improves.

Look on the bright side - it gives another reason for the bootlickers of authority and bigots to start discussions about the uppity, thuggish blacks protesters.

 

[repoman]

The protestors look like white whacked out hipsters. What the hell is going on?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

The protestors look like white whacked out hipsters. What the hell is going on?

Knee-jerk reaction protest.

 

[bilby]

If suspects are being killed without trial on a sufficiently regular basis for the protests this causes to become tiresome, then that suggests that you don't have enough popular outrage.

In the civilised world, the police apprehend suspects; they don't just kill them on the streets.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Are we going to have a thread for every one of these?

So long as there are enough people who will defend someone just because they are black.

 

[laughing dog]

Are we going to have a thread for every one of these?

So long as there are enough people who will defend someone just because they are black.

This thread was started one of your fellow members of the "defend any police office as long as the victim is black" club.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Must be nice to have so much time on one's hands.

This time protesters blocked a freeway in Oakland because an armed robber named Joe Bart got himself killed after he tried to carjack another vehicle.
Oakland police officers involved in shooting, suspect dead

Probably until the trust of the police improves.

Look on the bright side - it gives another reason for the bootlickers of authority and bigots to start discussions about the uppity, thuggish blacks protesters.

The trust won't improve so long as agitators keep stirring the pot.

- - - Updated - - -

So long as there are enough people who will defend someone just because they are black.

This thread was started one of your fellow members of the "defend any police office as long as the victim is black" club.

So, all you are showing is that we agree on this.

 

[bilby]

Probably until the trust of the police improves.

Look on the bright side - it gives another reason for the bootlickers of authority and bigots to start discussions about the uppity, thuggish blacks protesters.

The trust won't improve so long as agitators keep stirring the pot.

The trust won't improve so long as the police kill people as a matter of course.

Police are supposed to arrest, not execute.

'Agitators' would have nothing to protest about if the cops simply stopped killing people, and started doing their job instead.

 

[Terrell]

Not all suspects are engaging in behavior that justifies the use of deadly force. Even if unjustified shootings, or shootings that are perceived, rightly or wrongly, as unjust ended tomorrow, it wouldn't solve the problems. Policy changes and the general treatment of civilians has to improve as well as accountability, in the criminal courts, for those officers who abuse their power.

Policies like strop and frisk are inimical to trust between the police and the community. Such policies can result in the stopping of many people who don't have anything illegal on them, such as in NY. Said trust may take years, if not generations, to build.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/08/about-90-percent-of-new-yorkers-stopped-and-frisked-were-innocent-says-nyclu/

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/stop-and-frisk-leads-mistrust-cops-study-article-1.1460528

 

[Crazy Eddie]

The protestors look like white whacked out hipsters. What the hell is going on?

Pretty sure you just answered your own question.

Also, I'm not really sure to what extent this isn't just a spontaneous Michael Brown protest inspired by a police shooting a bunch of them heard about on twitter. Seems there were only about 50 people involved in the "protest" and it dissipated within about half an hour.

- - - Updated - - -

Probably until the trust of the police improves.

Look on the bright side - it gives another reason for the bootlickers of authority and bigots to start discussions about the uppity, thuggish blacks protesters.

The trust won't improve so long as agitators keep stirring the pot.

"Agitators" were not the cause of this problem, and their silence will not bring about the solution.

You cannot stop people from having opinions about the police, nor can you stop people from expressing those opinions. You CAN, however, render those opinions unpopular by creating an environment where the police have more credibility than your "agitators" do.

 

[Ford]

If suspects are being killed without trial on a sufficiently regular basis for the protests this causes to become tiresome, then that suggests that you don't have enough popular outrage.

In the civilised world, the police apprehend suspects; they don't just kill them on the streets.

Yeah, but this guy was black, so he had it coming. #blackcriminalslivesdon'tmatter

 

[laughing dog]

Probably until the trust of the police improves.

Look on the bright side - it gives another reason for the bootlickers of authority and bigots to start discussions about the uppity, thuggish blacks protesters.

The trust won't improve so long as agitators keep stirring the pot.

Why? Protesting is not illegal. But the police are going to need to earn back that trust. And if their view is reflected in your observation, it will only get worse.

So, all you are showing is that we agree on this.

Not it isn't. But thanks for proving my point.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The trust won't improve so long as agitators keep stirring the pot.

The trust won't improve so long as the police kill people as a matter of course.

Police are supposed to arrest, not execute.

'Agitators' would have nothing to protest about if the cops simply stopped killing people, and started doing their job instead.

Sometimes people don't want to go to jail, though.

Sometimes this is explicit--they'll attack the cops in a fashion they know is hopeless (for example, with a replica weapon.) I'm finding estimates from 10% to 25% of police shootings are suicide by cop.

Sometimes it's just trying to escape. Criminals generally live in a culture where you must show strength or get walked all over--but when they use that same behavior on the police it's prone to getting them shot.

- - - Updated - - -

The trust won't improve so long as agitators keep stirring the pot.

Why? Protesting is not illegal. But the police are going to need to earn back that trust. And if their view is reflected in your observation, it will only get worse.

So what if it's legal? That doesn't mean it's not a source of trouble.

 

[laughing dog]

So what if it's legal? That doesn't mean it's not a source of trouble.

Actually, it does mean it is not a source of trouble. The notion that legal protest is a source of trouble is one of the reasons that police are losing trust.

 

[Frikki]

So long as there are enough people who will defend someone just because they are black.

This thread was started one of your fellow members of the "defend any police office as long as the victim is black" club.

More of a klan rather than a club.

 

[bilby]

The trust won't improve so long as the police kill people as a matter of course.

Police are supposed to arrest, not execute.

'Agitators' would have nothing to protest about if the cops simply stopped killing people, and started doing their job instead.

Sometimes people don't want to go to jail, though.

Sometimes this is explicit--they'll attack the cops in a fashion they know is hopeless (for example, with a replica weapon.) I'm finding estimates from 10% to 25% of police shootings are suicide by cop.

Sometimes it's just trying to escape. Criminals generally live in a culture where you must show strength or get walked all over--but when they use that same behavior on the police it's prone to getting them shot.

Criminals act tough everywhere in the world. People commit suicide everywhere in the world.

Police in the developed world are trained to deal with this; they set the agenda in their interactions with suspects, so the desire of a suicidal person to be shot by police is not indulged; and the desire of some wannabe tough guy to act the big man is not taken as an excuse to kill him. In short, we in the civilised world expect our police to be professionals, who think first, and understand the difference between a suspect and a criminal.

Suspects have the same rights as every other citizen. The ONLY way a person can go from being a suspect to being a criminal is conviction in a court of law; The police have a duty to ensure that suspects get their day in court, and have a duty to protect suspects from harm until that day arrives.

That's the difference between a police service and a gang. You blur the distinction at your peril.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

This thread was started one of your fellow members of the "defend any police office as long as the victim is black" club.

More of a klan rather than a club.

In case some here are slow, the above is not just a burn but an

 

[fast]

Suspects have the same rights as every other citizen. The ONLY way a person can go from being a suspect to being a criminal is conviction in a court of law; The police have a duty to ensure that suspects get their day in court, and have a duty to protect suspects from harm until that day arrives.

A person that is guilty of a crime is a criminal. One does not need to be convicted and found guilty of a crime in a court of law to be guilty. Notwithstanding the possibility of a wrongful conviction, I would not be found guilty in a court of law unless I were already guilty.

If I am suspected of a crime, then I am a suspect, and if you do not know that I am guilty of a crime, you should not say that I am a criminal, but if you suspect me of a crime and learn that I am guilty of a crime, then I am a criminal long before I ever the see the light of day in a courtroom.