• Lucid Dreaming - Dream Views




    Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
    Results 1 to 25 of 30
    Like Tree15Likes

    Thread: (USA) Civil Rights Moving Backwards? Violent Cops, Racism and Hate?

    1. #1
      Sleeping Dragon juroara's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2006
      Gender
      Location
      San Antonio, TX
      Posts
      3,865
      Likes
      1171
      DJ Entries
      144

      (USA) Civil Rights Moving Backwards? Violent Cops, Racism and Hate?

      I feel like were (USA) slowly losing the civil rights movements the 60s and 70s gave us. Cops are disgustingly violent towards unarmed civilians. Most of you are probably aware of the Ferguson incident. But that is hardly the exception! Its happening way to often. Cops are MURDERING unarmed civilians or completely beating them senseless to near death. Adults, teenagers, and even sometimes children. Its just too horrible to go down the list - and that's only within the past two years!

      The racism surrounding the Ferguson case is disgusting. Just watch one video of the Ferguson community protesting and you'll find the most hateful racist comments down below. That all those black folk are uneducated ignorant trash, who shouldn't be protesting and are just gonna go back to crime doing afterwards. What, what? I can't even comprehend how any american can still harbor that kinda racism and hate.

      No, you see the Ferguson community has it right. It doesn't matter if Brown was a thug committing pity thievery. Being murdered in the middle of the street isn't how the justice system works.

      But its not just racism towards communities like Ferguson. Its woman's rights, gay rights, transgender rights, all of it. Instead of progressing forward were moving backwards? WHY?

      And those cops, THOSE COPS, they scare me. Protesting in mass has been fundamental to moving civil rights forward. But with all those fancy new toys that cops have, with their special privileges to beat you bloody senseless, protesting is scary business.

      I'm just writing this because I'm disturbed. I have no solutions to offer :<

    2. #2
      Diamonds And Rust Achievements:
      Veteran First Class Vivid Dream Journal Referrer Bronze Populated Wall 5000 Hall Points Made lots of Friends on DV Tagger First Class
      Darkmatters's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2009
      Gender
      Location
      Center of the universe
      Posts
      6,952
      Likes
      5837
      DJ Entries
      172
      In the 60's racism was much stronger and institutionalized - racism of actions and law, not just people making stupid comments on the internet. Calling that racism kind of diminishes the power of real racism. Keep in mind people say things on the internet they would never actually say for real too. Of course I'm not saying real racism does't exist anymore - it exists on all sides. But the kind of racism those protests were about in the 60' is a thing of the past for the most part.

      Calling what happened in Ferguson murder is jumping the gun - one side calls it murder but according to the police report it was self defense against attempted murder. We need to wait for the investigation to be completed - find out the facts in the matter before rushing to judgement.

      What makes you think the protesters represent "the Ferguson community"? They're just a small and very vocal subgroup - those who are more moderate and sensible as usual don't get media attention because media thrives on spectacle and extremism.

      One thing that's changed for the worse is the black community used to have an amazing leader in Martin Luther King, but now the top voices are spiteful race hustlers who seem intent only on stirring up violence, again before an investigation is even finished (and sadly these instigators are endorsed by the administration!) How foolish will those magazine covers look if it turns out Brown actually was attacking the police rather than being executed with his hands in the air? We've already learned he was not shot in the back as the early eyewitnesses reported.

      How do the police scare you? What have they done that's wrong? There hasn't been any militarization involved at Ferguson, they've used standard crowd control techniques that are necessary when there's a group of people and violence is a very real possibility. Not only a possibility obviously, but a reality - they were throwing molotov cocktails and bottles at police and some people in the crowd had guns and were shooting - I think it's necessary in conditions like that to use plastic shields and helmets and tear gas to keep the crowd from becoming an angry mob, and it's always been standard crowd control procedure in potentially dangerous situations like this to use big trucks the police can walk behind as moving shields. I was also very pleased to see the effective methods they used in this case - allowing community leaders to speak in between the police and the crowd to calm people down, making the crowd keep moving to eliminate situations where looters and other criminals can capitalize on the chaos to break into stores. I think they handled a potentially very bad situation extremely well, especially considering the Ferguson police had no prior experience in crowd control. Right at first they made some mistakes yes, but I think they pulled it together quickly and did a fantastic job.

      The police did not shut down protests or deny anybody their right to protest at all, they simply kept the peace which is their job. In fact, thanks to the massive media circus (there were frequently more journalists there than protestors) this one very small incident has received a massive amount of nationwide and even worldwide coverage 24/7, something that wasn't even possible a few decades ago.

      I don't see how anyone can even say that minority rights or women's rights have moved backwards since the 60's. There are laws now that make it illegal to discriminate in hiring or education on the basis of race or gender or sexual orientation. These laws have mostly been in effect since the 70's as far as I know, such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972. More and more corporations now are owned and managed by minorities or women. And as feminist groups love to proclaim, women are entering and graduating college now in greater numbers than men.

      I think this video does an amazing job of putting things in perspective, without resorting to the inciting propaganda language of the Left:



      It's the war on drugs that makes thugs, he says, and that also causes young black males to grow up thinking of the police (and by extension white people) as enemies, and that tears apart families and leaves children fatherless in black communities. This is some good common sense realism about the situation, without the political rhetoric. Hm, forgot to mention it, but he also talks specifically about Ferguson.
      Last edited by Darkmatters; 08-25-2014 at 08:45 AM.

    3. #3
      Member Achievements:
      Created Dream Journal 1000 Hall Points Made lots of Friends on DV 3 years registered
      kadie's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2013
      Posts
      579
      Likes
      460
      DJ Entries
      30
      Wow, I think I was watching a different protest then darkmaters. Those vehicles and tear gas and automatic weapons are and have been for the military. Remember, we are not supposed to have a standing army on US soil. Yet here are our police in every city arming themselves with just that. Two of the most basic Constitutional rights in this country are the right to free speech and the right to address the powers that be. Also the rights of the press. I dont think the media should be curtailed to this corner or that corner of the block because the police say so. It only makes them look like they are hiding something.
      I dont know if this situation is all about race or not, but my opinion is that the United States since 911 and in the name of 911 have allowed a far more militarized police than was ever meant to exist on our home soil. I dont believe that true patriots or even everyday citizens should be O.K. with the level of unrestrained violence by our police anymore than they should accept robbery or murder committed by civilians.
      What ever happened to phych evals for our police. Who is looking at their welfare and making sure that they are not working under prolonged stress, post traumatic stress, or being institutionalized by the job they hold. Who is holding them accountable when the blow it? NO ONE! Not the superior officers, not the police unions, because god forbid they should end the career of one of their own. Not the Judges. The Justice department is not doing it and our Senate and State Assembly is surely not addressing it.
      They have too much power and we all know that power corrupts. Anyway, I feel differently than you do. Perhaps my real life experience has something to do with it, but I keep up on the police state in America, because it's only a matter of time before we have no freedoms left. Protesting being on the verge of being a crime already. Reporters being arrested for reporting and video taping the errs of the police. Uggg its is infuriating to me to see day in and day out how controlling and almost psychotic some of the men and women have become. What is worse to me are the "good" decent, fair cops that just keep quiet when they know their fellow officers are doing unthinkable damage to the integrity of job and community they serve.
      snoop likes this.

    4. #4
      Diamonds And Rust Achievements:
      Veteran First Class Vivid Dream Journal Referrer Bronze Populated Wall 5000 Hall Points Made lots of Friends on DV Tagger First Class
      Darkmatters's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2009
      Gender
      Location
      Center of the universe
      Posts
      6,952
      Likes
      5837
      DJ Entries
      172
      I completely agree with you about the problems of police militarization - don't misunderstand me!! But that's about them using inappropriate equipment and methods for jobs that should be done by regular police with their standard gear. Crowd control is a very different matter and can't be handled as if it's just day to day police work. I think crowd control is one situation where it's appropriate to use some of this equipment. You can't really expect police to stand there in their ordinary street uniforms with no shields when bottles full of burning gasoline are being thrown at them. They need to use the right gear for the job. Just like you would dress differently for a cleaning job where you're using dangerous industrial chemicals than for a normal weekly housecleaning operation - you'd want to put on rubber gloves and goggles and possibly even a breathing filter. And I heard the guns were loaded with rubber bullets, or is that wrong? Without the use of teargas I think there were times when violence would have erupted, but it was quelled peacefully with nobody getting shot.

      This method of crowd control is not new since 9-11, but has been in use since at least the 60's. Ad again, I totally agree about the way 9-11 has been used to promote a semi police state in the US. Plus there are private swat teams doing the work that should be done by regular police. I'm completely against that

      I didn't see anybody's right to free speech being curtailed. The protesters were allowed to protest and in fact they were televised and photographed and written up in countless magazines and newspapers, and thanks to the police presence the early looting and rioting was stopped and peace was maintained aside from only a couple of incidents which were quickly gotten under control. In fact even the curfew was lifted, allowing them to protest well into the night. I don't see how anybody can say someone's right to free speech was curtailed in any way.

      And of course they can't just let the press wander around wherever they want. Especially with journalists being there in such massive numbers - they're part of the crowd and need to be kept orderly just like everybody else. I mean, I believe people should be able to record police - especially if they're journalists - but I also believe they shouldn't be allowed to run around however they want in a dangerous situation where they would be in the way and causing chaos.

      Let me add a bit more.

      At first I saw some footage from the protests that was shocking - nighttime shots of clouds of smoke billowing with colored light flashing across them and crazy looking devices whizzing around on the ground spewing sparks and smoke. The way it was shot it looked like a battlefield. At that point I felt exactly the way both of you do - I was horrified and angry. This is what I was referring to when I said there were mistakes made early on. But I also think part of the problem is mainstream coverage, which was probably very selective and I would imagine it presented the protest in a very biased way designed to make the police look bad. At leas that's how it seemed whenever I caught it on any regular network channels. On FOX I saw a very different story unfold, especially after the first few days when the police started to get their act together.

      The first really excellent thing they did was to bring in someone from a different police force (St Louis or something, don't remember) who was actually from Ferguson and used to be on the force there, and he was well known and liked by the community. I don't remember his name. He was put in charge of the effort, and he said anyone with any grievances at all could call him, anytime day or night, and he'd deal with them right then and there. I thought that was excellent, and it made proceedings take a very different turn.

      Then they started the method of allowing local community leaders - ministers etc, to stand with megaphones in a line between the police and the crowd and speak to the protesters, calming them down and talking sense to them. This had an amazing effect - you could feel the tension just melt out of the crowd. This is the first time I've seen a tactic like that, but then I've never really watched protest footage before, so I don't know how new it is. But I thought it was a beautiful thing.

      And then I was even more blown away when the residents (protesters who actually live inFerguson ) formed a human chain and swept through the crowd, driving the outsiders out of the crowd and dispersing them. That was an incredible moment of solidarity and togetherness demonstrated by the community itself and aided by police that struck me as a historical moment.

      So it's clear that, depending on who's showing the coverage and how they're editing it, it can be presented in any way they want. You could cut together a bunch of scenes that just make the police look terrible if that's your narrative, or you can present this as one of the most humanitarian moments in recent history. It contained elements of both. I'm afraid the liberal biased mainstream media has probably chosen to show it as police brutality. That's a tragedy if you ask me. I hope I'm wrong, and that mainstream media can still show some level of objectivity, but I fear it probably isn't the case.
      Last edited by anderj101; 09-03-2014 at 05:00 PM. Reason: Merged 2 posts.

    5. #5
      Member Achievements:
      Referrer Bronze Veteran First Class Tagger Second Class Made lots of Friends on DV 5000 Hall Points
      snoop's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2008
      LD Count
      300+
      Gender
      Location
      Indiana
      Posts
      1,712
      Likes
      1208
      Even though racism used to be institutionalized I think it's important to bring up that the "racism" has really just begun to boil down to class warfare. The classes are not as they were in the past though, with plebians, peasants, serfs, and then nobles and lords and the rich, and then divine rulers. Now that global communication is a thing it is starting to separate into classes divided by personal interest and ways of life. These ever broadening disagreements between said classes is leading to an arms race between those that believe in it and can afford it. The general public is so spoon fed care and money that taking care of yourself is no longer a personal responsibility, someone else can and will do it for you. Not only that, but they want it to be that way at the expense of freedom. Everyone wants more rules because they are afraid, but they don't realize that the more rules there are, the worse things get. Look at the police, look at the equipment they get. You really want to relinquish your rights to guns and trust that the government is going to do the right thing? Living and thriving are an expectation now, people don't realize unless they've been through severe poverty or military training just how much taking care of yourself is pertinent to survival. Society is fragile, it could all be lost in a minute--what can you do then? You should be able to rely on yourself and the people you trust, but many don't recognize the challenges of survival. Now that lawlessness is most of what we know, people will turn to hurting others to live rather than come together to make something happen. As is a popular theme in today's "music", everyone is out to "do them", to get their slice of the cake, and "fuck all the rest".

      If by matter of law-making you keep dividing yourselves between criminals and "honest citizens" then what does that tell others about your trust, about your faith in that humans can be capable of good? That we can live as a community? The more laws, the more you teach your constituents to break the law because it is practically impossible not to. All of a sudden lawlessness and all it entails becomes cool, it's a fad. Now toting guns for the sake of imposing fear, dealing and using drugs, living like a rock star, above the law or simply able to buy yourself out... it's all cool. It's even accepted among large groups of people and required to even be a member, and not just gangs. Fear and loathing start to overwhelm the populace, and rather than doing what's tried-and-true--stopping, analyzing the situation, thinking for yourself, finding a better solution, it's abandoned. Guns used to be a regular part of our lives when America first came to. We have all this nostalgia of "better days" when we could trust our neighbors not to be freaks, sadists, or rapists. If there were any, they were quickly exposed and dealt with. Now, whether that is the reality or not, those freaks, sadists, and rapists all exist in our heads as the very people living next to us, trying to do the same thing as you or me: make a living. They feel, they hurt, they sweat, they bleed, but nobody around them cares about them or their problems, people instead care about "causes" and donation funds. Don't get me wrong, donating to a cause is a great thing, but everyone in the world seems to be getting the shaft here because we don't even wave, say high, make eye contact with, or even acknowledge the existence of many of our human brothers simply because we fear what they might do, at least if you live in the city. In more mid-western and some southern communities this doesn't seem to be as much the case, but it's working its way in there. How can a person believe they can do the right thing if no one else believes in them? It's easy in our rather small circle of life that we feel like the whole world is against us, and it doesn't have to be this way. No one wants to take a stand and be the better person, to show mercy, to be genuinely good when that might really be all it takes. I fail at this myself quite often, but I realize it and am trying to change the kind of person I am. The world may not be any better off because of it, but at least I know what I was doing was what I thought was right. For the longest time I didn't even believe "right" existed, that it could be a thing, but I know now that I am wrong, and if others could see it to, maybe we could all live together someday and not tear each other apart.
      kadie likes this.

    6. #6
      Member Achievements:
      Created Dream Journal 1000 Hall Points Made lots of Friends on DV 3 years registered
      kadie's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2013
      Posts
      579
      Likes
      460
      DJ Entries
      30
      Let me just put this here.
      Land of the Free? 5,000 Americans Killed by Cops Since 9/11 | The Free Thought Project
      it is avery good article.
      also see this...
      Retired Police Captain: Feds Use Provocateurs to Influence Public Opinion | The Free Thought Project
      How about this no knock raid in which no criminal was found and neither were any drugs. Completely innocent family terrorized. And I could go on and on. Baby in Coma After Police ‘Grenade’ Dropped in Crib During Drug Raid - ABC News
      finally, ..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKHOPYlXB-E.
      I could post many many many more, but I think most reasonable people get the point.

      Police have no right to detain a reporter who is working in the capacity of their job (as long as they are not "interfering" with legal police activity) Yet at least 10 reporters were placed in handcuffs or otherwise detained on the whim of officers on the ground in Ferguson.
      http://billofrightsinstitute.org/fou...of-rights/Read the First Amendment. I mean at this point in our History all of the original BILL OF RIGHTS that were afforded us by our forefathers are practically gone. These rights are violated day in and day out.
      Lets be for real here. There is no need for tanks and armored vehicles at a protest. Those are for war! So you make the argument Darkmatters that one should dress accordingly for the job, but they dressed for war. No wonder people are calling it the Militarization of Americas Police or the Police State.
      You may not be ready to see it or you may never believe it. But rest assured, you will be affected sooner or later by this. Whether someone you know or in your town or on your block or even your house. You can use mainstream media including FOX to make your decisions or you can dig up the info from somewhere else, but at least educate yourself on the matter.
      snoop likes this.

    7. #7
      Member Achievements:
      Referrer Bronze Veteran First Class Tagger Second Class Made lots of Friends on DV 5000 Hall Points
      snoop's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2008
      LD Count
      300+
      Gender
      Location
      Indiana
      Posts
      1,712
      Likes
      1208
      The police should be no better armed than citizens, is it any different really than a thug in a gang coming around the block with his excuse for abhorrent behavior in the community to better his own life or impose his will on others strapped to his hip? This fact is made worse simply by the fact that they are federally or state employed and are not under the scrutiny of strict investigations. The police should be the people most watched in the community for illicit behavior because they are the ones that are supposed to enforce the law. If the police don't obey the law, if they aren't the model citizen, why does it even make sense to have federal or state employed police? Why not just form a neighborhood watch? It's guaranteed that if people viewed the authority figures in their community, like the police, as one of them (read: not above the law by magic rules, a real person rather than a symbol), they would be kept under control because they would actually be able to be held accountable for their actions instead of having their wrong doings shrouded by an internal "investigation" by the same separate institution from the people that employs them that gives the community their "findings" at their discretion. How on earth does it make sense to be the way it is? No one can be held accountable, and those who are, are generally not those who are truly at fault, they are merely the guy low enough in the chain of command for the mistakes to be piled and blamed on (you know what I mean if you've been in the military, it doesn't matter what the case is, if you are lower rank, you are wrong). Leaders are no longer held responsible, but the grunts are completely disposable.

      Quote Originally Posted by Darkmatters View Post
      I completely agree with you about the problems of police militarization - don't misunderstand me!! But that's about them using inappropriate equipment and methods for jobs that should be done by regular police with their standard gear. Crowd control is a very different matter and can't be handled as if it's just day to day police work. I think crowd control is one situation where it's appropriate to use some of this equipment. You can't really expect police to stand there in their ordinary street uniforms with no shields when bottles full of burning gasoline are being thrown at them.
      I understand that different approaches have to be taken to control a situation, but have you ever thought that maybe the shields, the military equipment, a lot of the measures they have at their disposal and quite often use, are a good part of the reason bottles of burning gasoline are thrown at them in the first place? Imagine this from a psychological perspective. You are protesting something because it is wrong (or so you believe), and you are met with cops with an overkill of dangerous dispersal equipment, and these figures are well known to abuse their power. Don't you think the response that they are coming up with to handle crowds is part of the issue? Things escalate quickly when one, particularly less violent side of an issue is met with surprising and honestly threatening and disgusting force. People don't all think rationally, especially in those situations. It's easy to see why people start hurling whatever they can at the threat. Handle the situation differently, less violently, and you can expect far less injured and dead (usually on the side of the people rather than police or whatever unjust force). There isn't a reason for it to escalate like it does, but for whatever the reason the government backs this escalation 100% and people are okay with it.
      Last edited by anderj101; 09-03-2014 at 05:02 PM. Reason: Merged 2 posts.
      kadie likes this.

    8. #8
      Member Achievements:
      Created Dream Journal 1000 Hall Points Made lots of Friends on DV 3 years registered
      kadie's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2013
      Posts
      579
      Likes
      460
      DJ Entries
      30
      Well said snoop.

    9. #9
      Member Achievements:
      Referrer Bronze Veteran First Class Tagger Second Class Made lots of Friends on DV 5000 Hall Points
      snoop's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2008
      LD Count
      300+
      Gender
      Location
      Indiana
      Posts
      1,712
      Likes
      1208
      Another psychological issue you can bring up is that, when you dress people up in armor and all kinds of gear, they are instantly less human in the mind's eye. How can you see the cops as people too if you can hardly even see their eyes or gauge their reactions? Facial expressions are rather important in mirror neuron function, that's enough to turn a fellow human being into an automaton armed to the teeth with biochemical weapons, body armor, and lead. It's literally like facing a monster or some menacing figure whose presence is there merely to cut you down. If they spoke to people, the type of people law enforcement officers are supposed to be, people like you and me, maybe they could try and reach an understanding. Maybe there is hope for words to resolve the issue instead of actions. But again, peaceful methods are totally abandoned by the government, and instead they show up in full swat gear with shields and an arsenal that 80% of the entire world doesn't even have access to, and of course people are going to get defensive. You've backed people into a corner.

      This whole thing is as much being able to predict others' actions as it is realizing the implications of doing things like making laws for everything. You cannot let fear decide your actions. Logical, sound thinking should be what drives you. Those calling for gun control, tighter regs on drugs, all of that--the same thing was done with Japanese internment camps during WWII and alcohol prohibition. When people are scared and do not take the time to think, action should not be taken (especially not in legislation). Careful and planned analyzation, studies, etc. should be the correct answer, but are swiftly thrown to the wayside because somebody is afraid of somebody else. Do you realize that the fear reaction comes from the amygdala, a far far older section of the brain than say, the frontal lobes? Fear can literally short circuit the frontal lobes and bypass reason altogether. Ever notice how children make more silly mistakes and act irrationally out of fear than adults? That's because the frontal lobe isn't finished developing or has hardly begun to develop. Why not be adults here and actually make use of our frontal lobes and do some critical thinking, like they teach you in school. As a society we need to mature and learn to control our reaction to fear. I emphasize this so much because having been in the military and in the infantry, it is one of the first things they teach you. You cannot be a leader and make the best decisions you need to in a combat situation unless you can control your bodily functions, or rather your physiology. You are taught to stop when you begin to feel overwhelmed by fear, it clouds your judgement. You must collect your wits about you, and allow a calm to overtake your mind. Now you are ready to make decisions, and good ones at that. It's also why meditation can be so enlightening for some people. They cast off and shed the fear and negativity they normally experience throughout life and suddenly the answer becomes clear.

      Unfortunately, politicians like to prey on this fear reaction and use it to control general populace while they sit above the law with the rest of the elite. Some are that smart, some are actually dumb enough to believe in the shit they tell people, it's a good mixture of both. Regardless, it's really sickening, but until the human race smartens up on a whole it will remain to be this way. You don't even have to have a great conscience to understand what I'm saying makes sense. As I'm sure a few people remember from years ago I admitted I've got a lot of sociopathic tendencies and honestly have all the makings of what others would call an evil human being. However, I do not conduct myself in that way because it does not make logical sense. If you break it down, what does everyone want? Everyone wants to feel good and be loved. Well, if we spend all our time making ourselves miserable it's pretty hard to achieve either of those goals, so the solution isn't to make ourselves more miserable but to lift ourselves above the petty squabbles we have with each other.
      Last edited by snoop; 08-25-2014 at 08:29 PM.
      kadie likes this.

    10. #10
      Sleeping Dragon juroara's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2006
      Gender
      Location
      San Antonio, TX
      Posts
      3,865
      Likes
      1171
      DJ Entries
      144
      Quote Originally Posted by Darkmatters View Post
      In the 60's racism was much stronger and institutionalized
      You're right. I didn't mean to say that we are in the 60's, what I mean is, I feel as if we are MOVING backwards in civil rights, rather than moving forward. For one thing, why's it taking so damn long to legalize gay marriage? That should have been a thing of the past.

      How do the police scare you? What have they done that's wrong?
      I'm a bit busy at the moment to make a long post, but something happened recently with my family that's made me really anxious around any officer. My sister was arrested for an unpaid parking ticket. Now that's her fault. The problem was what happened during the arrest.

      Now sis totally forgot about this unpaid speeding ticket because it was from years back and she had moved from city to city. When the cops pulled her over she asked "why". They do NOT explain why. They ask for her ID. Sis, upset that they aren't explaining why, felt as though she was being harassed. She asks "Why do you need to see my ID?".

      Just about everywhere on the internet tells me that American citizens have the right to ask why an officer needs to see their ID. However, the officer took this as REFUSING to show ID. If you have a warrant out for your arrest, then refusing to show ID is a felony. But my sister did NOT refuse to show ID. She only asked "why". After the officer explains that she has an unpaid speeding ticket - she shows her ID.

      And then they arrest her, for the unpaid speeding ticket AND for refusing to show ID.Which is a lie.

      She gets arrested, we pay a lot of money. They try to slap a felony charge on her. Which is really bad considering at the time she was job hunting and felonies don't look good. After months of going in and out of court (for even stupider BS reasons) the felony charge was finally dropped.

      Short story is, the cop lied. Which caused us to pay a lot of money and months of headaches. You can argue that my sister could have just showed ID without making a fuss, and that's true. But its supposed to be our right to ask "why". Or so I thought.

      Sis told me that this was a lesson on what our rights as americans really are. She found out officers are under no obligation to tell you why you are being stopped or why you are being arrested! Both me and sis assumed the opposite was true....

      Anyways, the reason why cops make me anxious, is because they can say whatever shit they want. Who can prove them wrong? A camera right? Well not everything gets caught on camera. Sis' arrest wasn't on camera. And apparently these days, recording officers gets you arrested. And apparently, officers can arrest you without telling you why.

      And if that's how they handle something petty, an unpaid speeding ticket, then imagine how they handle "big" things. "OH NO! A black man is walking towards my vehicle, this MUST be a life threatening situation! SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT"......
      Last edited by juroara; 08-25-2014 at 11:02 PM. Reason: edit: speeding ticket
      kadie likes this.

    11. #11
      Member Achievements:
      Created Dream Journal 1000 Hall Points Made lots of Friends on DV 3 years registered
      kadie's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2013
      Posts
      579
      Likes
      460
      DJ Entries
      30
      I have a link to an article somewhere that says it better than I can right at this moment, but basically goes like this. The police are not out to protect and serve. They are there to raise revenue. Their revenue helps pay the judges, pay for their pay checks and department upgrades. They are there to be revenue gathers and not much more. The article I remember this from was by a retired COP.

    12. #12
      Diamonds And Rust Achievements:
      Veteran First Class Vivid Dream Journal Referrer Bronze Populated Wall 5000 Hall Points Made lots of Friends on DV Tagger First Class
      Darkmatters's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2009
      Gender
      Location
      Center of the universe
      Posts
      6,952
      Likes
      5837
      DJ Entries
      172
      Ok, I don't want to become the host of this thread and answer every response or anything, but you guys do raise some vey good points.

      Really the reason I posted in the first place was just because I felt like there was some very extremist left wing propaganda and I didn't want to leave it unchallenged. I feel like I've already accomplished that purpose - at least anyone who sees the thread has seen another side now.

      Juroara, That's awful about your sister!! I see your points completely, and as you suggested, I can also kind of see how the police took it as her refusing to comply. I guess it depends on how she said it and what her body language was at the time, but then I think it would only be natural for just about anybody in that situation to sort of draw away and ask why rather than just complying. Bear in mind though, everything I said above was specifically about Ferguson. I've heard a lot of very sensationalistic shouting from the left that the police there were brutal and etc, and while there was definitely a little of that, I also think overall they handled it extremely well considering it began as a violent mob action.

      Very good points Snoop. I was mostly countering the idea that this kind of crowd control is something new that's only been seen since 9-11. And I know if I was one of those cops I wouldn't care to stand in front of a mob that's already been shooting guns and breaking into stores and burning cars without some pretty serious protection and some effective means of quelling violence if it breaks out. You say the police should be as well armed as the people - well in this case we know the people had guns and flammable missiles (molotovs), so it seems to me you can't counter that without certain measures.

      Can you point to any demonstrations with a similar level of violence that have been effectively controlled by police without carrying guns or using shields and teargas? Do you really think the violent members of the crowd would decide NOT to throw whatever is available just because police don't have shields and guns? When you were in the military, did you go up against armed people without carrying weapons yourself? Would you?

      As for the rest of your points - I can't comment on them because I know nothing about them. I'm not quite sure what you're suggesting, about not having government-sponsored police. Are you saying there should be no police and that communities should just police themselves? That sounds a lot like vigilante justice. Would there also be community courts, and who would ensure that whoever is acting as police and judges etc are doing the right thing? I mean, I agree that there's a ton of corruption and incompetence and red tape in our legal and law enforcement system, but what you describe sounds to me like it's basically just lynch mobs in the streets. But really we're getting into completely theoretical territory now. I'm not saying I have any ideas on a system that would work better than what we currently have. I'm just basically saying that, while the protestors may have felt threatened by police, the police were still able to calm the violence and ensure peaceful protests, and that there's been a lot of sensationalizing that I think is unjustified.

      I think our current system used to work a lot better than it does now - like all government related things it's grown out of control and become rife with politicization and corruption etc, but at least there are still some degree of checks and balances and I think a large part of the time the system works better than not having a system at all would. Of course I also think the system would benefit from some pretty serious changes.
      Last edited by Darkmatters; 08-25-2014 at 11:31 PM.
      Shamanite likes this.

    13. #13
      Member Achievements:
      Referrer Bronze Veteran First Class Tagger Second Class Made lots of Friends on DV 5000 Hall Points
      snoop's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2008
      LD Count
      300+
      Gender
      Location
      Indiana
      Posts
      1,712
      Likes
      1208
      In the military we had rules of engagement, and usually they didn't play into our favor, lest you wanted to be tried in a court martial for war crimes. Yes, we were armed, no we were not allowed to just shoot people because they had weapons. As a matter of fact, we couldn't shoot back half the time that they did, and not only were threatening to use them but were. Why? Other than stupid political bullshit, you can't just open up fire in an urban environment because civilian casualties resulting from being caught in the crossfire can't simply be waved off as collateral, even in Afghanistan or Iraq. Investigations, videos going viral on the internet, media reporting on incidents like that... it can't happen. Things like that are taken seriously.

      Look, I understand your point, but without the experience yourself, I wouldn't go there, simply because things are far different in the military than anybody thinks. Back on the subject of police, why should they not be held to the same standard? Detain and neutralize those who are legitimately breaking the law and not just filming the police doing their jobs (likely with undue force), and do it effectively without risking the lives of innocent, honest citizens who find something terribly wrong with this country and want to stand up to do something about it. Appropriate force and precision in squelching the disturbance, violence, looting, whatever really isn't that hard to do, it is a matter of training and the discretion of the individuals responsible for controlling the situation. Forming a long human barricade and launching tear gas grenades at random into a crowd does not count as surgically removing the illegal activity and leaving law abiding citizens out of it. They would rather bully the entire assembly into submission than do their jobs right.

      edit: In response to the rest of your response on my arguments. I am not suggesting at all that we actually form community watches and get rid of the police. I am saying that if the state or federal governments refuse to put cops lives so under the microscope that they are exposed not to be model citizens then why do we have police in the first place? The police are law enforcement officers. If they do not obey the laws they enforce, then there isn't a point! I know of cases even locally in my small town, not just in big cities, of disgusting cover ups and gross overreactions in force from our police, not to mention just how many police officers we have in ratio to our population. I witnessed a cop going at least 60mph in a 35mph speed limit with no lights on or any indication of following anybody t-bone an old ladie's SUV pulling out of a parking lot (killing her in the process), and not only was he not punished at all, but the police covered it up and said he was going the speed limit and she pulled out in front of him without him having a chance to react. I saw the accident, and I saw the damage to both of their vehicles too--it was not possible for vehicles going below 50mph. There was another case locally where the police seized 2 lbs of marijuana and $3,000 or so in cash... or so the story went. Until of course the guy that got arrested admitted to having on him 5 lbs of marijuana and $7,000 cash. If there is any call for the police around here, there are sure to be 4 or 5 cops on the scene when 1 or 2 would do just fine (I live in a town with a population of 4,000 and most live in the country). That is what I am talking about. It's everywhere, not just on the news. It's where we all live.

      So, to reiterate. If the police are above the law, there should not be police. Police should have to respect the law as much as anyone else, be held accountable for their actions on and off the clock, and not get away with being nothing more than bullies and thugs to the public. They are our example to follow. Is it any wonder we act like ingrates and degenerates?
      Last edited by snoop; 08-26-2014 at 07:29 AM.

    14. #14
      Diamonds And Rust Achievements:
      Veteran First Class Vivid Dream Journal Referrer Bronze Populated Wall 5000 Hall Points Made lots of Friends on DV Tagger First Class
      Darkmatters's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2009
      Gender
      Location
      Center of the universe
      Posts
      6,952
      Likes
      5837
      DJ Entries
      172
      Ok, on the much broader subject of policing in general, I don't disagree with you, though I don't believe brutality and corruption is as endemic as you seem to. It certainly exists, and more than a little of it, and I am definitely not in favor of militarization and swat teams as I've said already. One suggestion I've heard that I think is a good idea is to have community police boards that they must comply with and that aren't government run but run by the people themselves. I also like the idea of police wearing cameras on their uniforms - it would keep them honest and also protect them from situations taking place away from dash cams where they might otherwise be accused of excessive force when they actually did nothing wrong.

      But on the Ferguson case in particular - I do see the points you're bringing up, but again, I think you're talking more about theoreticals. Using tear gas and rubber bullets has been standard practice for protests and other crowd control situations for a long time, hasn't it? So it's entirely understandable why they approached it that way - it's standard procedure. Now it's possible that due to the high profile nature of the case it might bring a lot of scrutiny on the standard procedures, and hopefully it can lead to changes in the future. But I don't think anybody can fault them for approaching it the way similar situations have always been approached. Yes, to say those procedures are excessive and need to be changed is one thing, and I would agree with that. But that's for the future (hopefully the near future, and hopefully sparked by the Ferguson protests and conversations like this one happening all over the net).

      "Appropriate force and precision in squelching the disturbance, violence, looting, whatever really isn't that hard to do, it is a matter of training and the discretion of the individuals responsible for controlling the situation. Forming a long human barricade and launching tear gas grenades at random into a crowd does not count as surgically removing the illegal activity and leaving law abiding citizens out of it. They would rather bully the entire assembly into submission than do their jobs right."

      How would that be done, surgically removing the illegal activity? I don't mean that to be smartass in case it sounds that way, I'm actually interested. The only thing I can picture is cops running into the crowd toward where the violence is, which I think would freak a lot of people out and possibly make them react violently. And it seems to me that tear gas is actually a very effective way to quell those sudden mass eruptions of violence that have a way of happening in mob situations. Violence in angry crowds isn't always small and localized, sometimes a big part of the crowd rises up and attacks the police or starts attacking each other. Tear gas puts a quick stop to it with nobody getting hurt badly or shot. Pepper spray wouldn't be nearly as effective because you can only use it on a couple of people at a time - what if 20 people suddenly turn violent? It would take a long time and a lot of pepper spray to get them all. And you certainly can't taze them all. I think if police don't have the right kind of weapons it can actually make things go horribly wrong. Tear gas and rubber bullets are time tested and proven - I don't know of any alternatives that would be as effective.
      Last edited by Darkmatters; 08-26-2014 at 11:54 AM.

    15. #15
      Member Achievements:
      Referrer Bronze Veteran First Class Tagger Second Class Made lots of Friends on DV 5000 Hall Points
      snoop's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2008
      LD Count
      300+
      Gender
      Location
      Indiana
      Posts
      1,712
      Likes
      1208
      I haven't been specifically referring to the Ferguson case in any of my arguments, but you disagree that police brutality is much an endemic as I do. Okay, that's fine, but the fact that you have not seen it for yourself is not evidence that it is not so. Then again, neither are my personal anecdotes, but how many anecdotes do you need? Official investigations have already proven to be weighted in the police force's favor, heavily. Anecdotes are all there are, and they are piling pretty high. Perhaps it is not widespread yet like we believe, does it matter? The fact that it is getting noticed and the problem isn't being addressed or taken care of by officials is enough for protest alone. Police brutality is never okay, even if it only happens here or there. The fact that things get swept under the rug at all should be eye-opening and is deserving of the reaction the public is giving to this gross behavior. I don't deny that good cops exist, and I recognize that there is a definite need for police--I would much rather have police than not. However, if I can keep them from terrorizing me, my family, or my neighbors, I'm going to. For those who truly join the force to serve the public, I applaud them. However, being a public servant means making great sacrifices, which is why you are deserving of the honor afforded you if you are. You must be willing to be held to higher standards than regular citizens, whether you are in the military or law enforcement. I do not continue to post about this because I'm trying to knock their methods per se, or their equipment. I am posting because of their behavior and attitude which does not reflect the integrity required of people in their position. Criticism of the military or the police should never be a bad thing, it should be embraced, accepted, and used to keep those serving the people of the United States honest.
      kadie likes this.

    16. #16
      Diamonds And Rust Achievements:
      Veteran First Class Vivid Dream Journal Referrer Bronze Populated Wall 5000 Hall Points Made lots of Friends on DV Tagger First Class
      Darkmatters's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2009
      Gender
      Location
      Center of the universe
      Posts
      6,952
      Likes
      5837
      DJ Entries
      172
      I'm not trying to defend police in general - as I keep saying, I agree with you on those issues - I'm only defending what I said in my first post above, which was specifically about how they handled the Ferguson protests. That's the only thing I've been talking about on this thread (relating to police).

    17. #17
      Astral Adept Shamanite's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 2011
      LD Count
      10
      Gender
      Location
      Virginia
      Posts
      68
      Likes
      20
      DJ Entries
      19
      I think the situation gets way overblown by the media. Of course on August 11th a white person was shot by a black police officer for readjusting his pants on the ground but there is literally 0 media covering that, so it just goes to show what kind of narrative they are pushing. Let alone the fact he grabbed a man by the neck in the convenience store and stole some swisher sweets, the autopsy report showed he had marijuana in his system, and in his pictures he put up gang signs from the blood gang.

      His juvenile record said he was charged with murder, yet it takes less than a day for these "peaceful protestors" to start burning down random businesses out of blind rage, stealing jordans and rims and selling them on craigslist the next day, and literally trying to start a race war. It is just hilarious how they call him a "gentle giant". These are not protestors rallying for a political cause. These are people that look for any situation to take advantage of and run off with free stuff.police-shooting-missouri.jpg

    18. #18
      Diamonds And Rust Achievements:
      Veteran First Class Vivid Dream Journal Referrer Bronze Populated Wall 5000 Hall Points Made lots of Friends on DV Tagger First Class
      Darkmatters's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2009
      Gender
      Location
      Center of the universe
      Posts
      6,952
      Likes
      5837
      DJ Entries
      172
      Well, to be fair of course most of the looters didn't even come from Ferguson, and they can't be called protesters, they were just opportunists using it as an excuse. Sort of like terrorists hiding among the people. And most of the blame for aggression and violence among the actual protesters has to fall squarely on their so-called 'spiritual leaders', who are really just inciters of violence demanding "justice" before they even know what really happened, which shows that they just believe whatever story makes the police look bad. But yeah, it is sad that so many people listen to that ridiculous stuff and respond exactly the way the race hustlers want them to. I saw many of them being interviewed and they were all adamant that they knew it had been an execution and that Brown had been shot while on his knees surrendering. And when the interviewer asked how they know that they'd just wave it off with some bizarre rationalization, basically they don't care about getting to the truth, they're just blindly pissed off and want revenge against the white police that they've been told are the enemy.

      So, justice means no investigation and no fair trial - really? Just a "vigorous prosecution"? Is that how they'd feel if they were the one on trial?

      I didn't know about his gang affiliation and murder record. In fact I remember some talk about juvenile arrest records and it was waved off saying it was irrelevant and so nobody is allowed to talk about it.
      Last edited by Darkmatters; 08-29-2014 at 11:40 PM.
      Shamanite likes this.

    19. #19
      Astral Adept Shamanite's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 2011
      LD Count
      10
      Gender
      Location
      Virginia
      Posts
      68
      Likes
      20
      DJ Entries
      19
      Yea I definitley agree with that, which kind of just shows that I think maybe african and white people should have separate designated areas. i mean call me crazy but it would actually solve all the problems they complain about. They complain about not being able to get a job, not being able to go to college, not being able to get a house. Then we have to have all these laws like equal opportunity, affirmative action, section 8 housing, etc. It would make much more sense if the US just balkanized, different people went to different parts. Then college acceptance could be based on performance and test scores, not what color your skin is. Using these laws are just being racist the opposite way, its not true equality.

      But yes I agree with Ferguson it is a high crime area and the protestors are really not organized unless looting and burning down stores, so a police state is necessary to mantain order. I would understand if there was an actual protest and they brought in the national guard, then I would be on the protestors side, but the whole time they just proved themselves to be savages, just throwing rocks at reporters and even killing an old white woman just because she was white! This happens in high black populations everywhere, especially in south africa now. White people are outright murdered in their homes by gangs of blacks just for the color of their skin, its really scary out there. Nobody hears about this too because you can't report black on white crime without being called a racist, even though blacks in the US make up 12% of the population yet cause over 56% of all crimes.

    20. #20
      Diamonds And Rust Achievements:
      Veteran First Class Vivid Dream Journal Referrer Bronze Populated Wall 5000 Hall Points Made lots of Friends on DV Tagger First Class
      Darkmatters's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2009
      Gender
      Location
      Center of the universe
      Posts
      6,952
      Likes
      5837
      DJ Entries
      172
      Hmmm, so apparently you're a Nationalist and a Nazi apologist (according to your remarks on the Swastika thread). You claim there's "no evidence of the Nazis committing any atrocities" - when even if we could pretend they didn't massacre Jews, they still put together a huge army and attempted to conquer the countries of Europe. Or were they just being friendly and knocking on the doors of their neighbor countries to say Hi?

      Here's an interesting question… how do you feel about Islamic terrorists? Do you admit there's evidence of their atrocities? Their stated goals are basically the same as the Nazis - Hamas' objective is literally to exterminate the Jews in Israel, and ISIS wants to exterminate all religions that aren't Islam and literally take over the world by force. How do you feel about this?
      Last edited by Darkmatters; 08-30-2014 at 12:09 AM.

    21. #21
      Terminally Out of Phase Descensus's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 2006
      Gender
      Posts
      2,246
      Likes
      831
      A few things I want to correct:

      Let alone the fact he grabbed a man by the neck in the convenience store and stole some swisher sweets
      The shooting itself has nothing to do with the convenience store robbery considering the police already told us that the officer who killed Michael Brown had no knowledge of the robbery.

      the autopsy report showed he had marijuana in his system
      Presence of marijuana doesn't necessarily mean he was high at the time of the robbery or shooting.

      His juvenile record said he was charged with murder
      His juvenile record hasn't been released, so we can't confirm anything yet.
      The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended. - Frédéric Bastiat
      I try to deny myself any illusions or delusions, and I think that this perhaps entitles me to try and deny the same to others, at least as long as they refuse to keep their fantasies to themselves. - Christopher Hitchens
      Formerly known as BLUELINE976

    22. #22
      Diamonds And Rust Achievements:
      Veteran First Class Vivid Dream Journal Referrer Bronze Populated Wall 5000 Hall Points Made lots of Friends on DV Tagger First Class
      Darkmatters's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2009
      Gender
      Location
      Center of the universe
      Posts
      6,952
      Likes
      5837
      DJ Entries
      172
      ^Yep - just looked it up - there's apparently a news-oriented website that has filed a lawsuit for the records to be released, claiming they show a juvenile murder arrest and Crip affiliation. We can't assume these allegations to be true.
      Last edited by Darkmatters; 08-30-2014 at 12:19 AM.

    23. #23
      Astral Adept Shamanite's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 2011
      LD Count
      10
      Gender
      Location
      Virginia
      Posts
      68
      Likes
      20
      DJ Entries
      19
      I don't really think talk about World War 2 belongs in this thread, so If you want to talk about that you can either pm me or start a new thread.

      and to BLUELINE976, I was merely showing the media bias claiming him as a "gentle giant, college going good boy" when reality tells us of a completely different person. The fact is that he did smoke marijuana and he did rob a convenience store, the purpose of me telling that was to show that the media is using propaganda to push their narrative. And yes you are right the homicide and gang affiliation has not been confirmed, but he has had multiple pictures of him taking pictures of himself with gang signs and holding a gun and his middle finger up. So I guess I can't claim for 100% he was affiliated with a gang but you can see what kind of person he was.

      This same media frenzy happened with Trayvon Martin, and it will happen again and again. Furthermore you hear absolutely NOTHING of the white man that was shot by a black cop. I am just exposing the media bias here, not talking about technicalities if the officer knew he was high or robbed a convenience store or anything.
      Last edited by Shamanite; 08-30-2014 at 12:29 AM.

    24. #24
      Diamonds And Rust Achievements:
      Veteran First Class Vivid Dream Journal Referrer Bronze Populated Wall 5000 Hall Points Made lots of Friends on DV Tagger First Class
      Darkmatters's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 2009
      Gender
      Location
      Center of the universe
      Posts
      6,952
      Likes
      5837
      DJ Entries
      172
      Ok, I agree with everything you just said (assuming those pictures actually exist - I should retract what I said until I see them actually). I knew your necro-post was about to get the other thread locked (it is now) which is why I posted that here instead. Not sure I want to start a thread just for that though. Why don't you just say it here?

    25. #25
      Astral Adept Shamanite's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 2011
      LD Count
      10
      Gender
      Location
      Virginia
      Posts
      68
      Likes
      20
      DJ Entries
      19
      Quote Originally Posted by Darkmatters View Post
      Ok, I agree with everything you just said (assuming those pictures actually exist - I should retract what I said until I see them actually). I knew your necro-post was about to get the other thread locked (it is now) which is why I posted that here instead. Not sure I want to start a thread just for that though. Why don't you just say it here?
      I don't know isn't getting off topic just as bad as necroposting? I don't usually post on forums so I have no idea.

      Heres the pictures btw

      mike-brown-with-gun.jpgMichael-Brown-Gang4.jpg

    Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

    Similar Threads

    1. Ugh.... Racism
      By O'nus in forum Extended Discussion
      Replies: 78
      Last Post: 03-08-2009, 11:23 PM
    2. Racism??
      By KalmaH in forum Senseless Banter
      Replies: 17
      Last Post: 03-25-2004, 09:16 AM

    Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •