African-American Asphyxiated by Police in Minneapolis - Page 149 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15104513
@wat0n

I do not care what you think of me. If you think I am a horrible person, go ahead and beleive that.

Moving on, we see that police unions are a part of the system of impunity. They have to go.

If you are asking why the evidence for bodycams being a significant deterrent to police brutality is weak, that is because the studies have not been done well, or that bodycams are not a significant deterrent.

When civilians try to justify murder, the cops can investigate and find them wrong or right. When cops do it, there is no investigation and innocent people are killed with impunity, and there is no recourse.

Elijah McCain’s killers are walking free right now, despite having the murder on body cam footage. Where is the recourse? Where is the justice?

And DAs do not get charged or investigated because there is no one who does that. The cops do not. The DAs do not. So Elijah McCain’s killers will walk free because the system would rather protect countless white cops than one black innocent man.
#15104514
@wat0n It is also fine to question the supposed antirracism of those who use this as a political sledgehammer to smash things with.


So you are admitting that racism is a big thing and that one side is fighting it? That is a breakthrough for you.

And yes. When something is anathema for all our country stands for, such as racism, it is just fine to use a political sledgehammer to break it. In fact it is one's civic duty.

The most conservative thinking person of my generation said:

“Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.”


I agree with this.

I do not believe public sector unions should be allowed under any circumstances. And if they are allowed, they should have no voice in disciplinary matters at all.
#15104523
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

I do not care what you think of me. If you think I am a horrible person, go ahead and beleive that.


I don't think I said something like that either.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Moving on, we see that police unions are a part of the system of impunity. They have to go.


But you didn't answer my question above. Why not apply the same standard to all impunity?

Pants-of-dog wrote:If you are asking why the evidence for bodycams being a significant deterrent to police brutality is weak, that is because the studies have not been done well, or that bodycams are not a significant deterrent.


Do you have any evidence to sustain this idea?

Pants-of-dog wrote:When civilians try to justify murder, the cops can investigate and find them wrong or right. When cops do it, there is no investigation and innocent people are killed with impunity, and there is no recourse.

Elijah McCain’s killers are walking free right now, despite having the murder on body cam footage. Where is the recourse? Where is the justice?


The Colorado AG is actually going to investigate the killing of Elijah McCain. Interestingly, and upon reading more about the case, I don't think the bodycam footage allows one to say much about the incident because, although it was on, it wasn't pointing at the cops carrying the arrest out. If intentional, this should also be criminalized as a form of obstruction to justice - yet another legal change that could be implemented to make sure that whatever cops do is caught on footage.

Pants-of-dog wrote:And DAs do not get charged or investigated because there is no one who does that. The cops do not. The DAs do not. So Elijah McCain’s killers will walk free because the system would rather protect countless white cops than one black innocent man.


The DAs don't get charged because the system is built under the basis that the community itself will hold DAs accountable come election time. If you want to change that, then it would be good for you to provide a proposal so we can analyze the pros and cons.

Drlee wrote:So you are admitting that racism is a big thing and that one side is fighting it? That is a breakthrough for you.


As I said earlier, societal racism still exists in the US and I haven't denied something as obvious as that. But institutional one is another matter. It is entirely possible for individuals to be racist without having an overall racist system, and that's the reality in the USA and pretty all Western countries nowadays. Such racism is of course something that needs to be dealt with, but as it happens with all sorts of immoral behavior, it can go undetected.

Drlee wrote:And yes. When something is anathema for all our country stands for, such as racism, it is just fine to use a political sledgehammer to break it. In fact it is one's civic duty.


Sure, but this doesn't mean that one should use false accusations of racism to silence political opponents. Disagreeing with anything so-called antirracists claim doesn't make one a racist.

Drlee wrote:I do not believe public sector unions should be allowed under any circumstances. And if they are allowed, they should have no voice in disciplinary matters at all.


Banning public sector unions is going towards the other extreme. Public sector unions can help balance out a Government monopsony in the labor market that ends up mistreating workers. The case of Cuban doctors is a great example of this.

Unions should have a voice in disciplinary matters to prevent using the disciplinary system for abusing workers, but they shouldn't be forcing Government institutions to cover misconduct up by having them lie when writing reference letters.
#15104527
@wat0n

Your own source said the evidence was weak. If you need more information about why there is little evidence that body cams are a useful deterrent, please read your source.

And the case of Elijah McCain is a good example. The cops claim that it exonerates them and makes the killing legal. Another innocent unarmed black man killed while already restrained, perfectly legal.

The only reason why anyone is looking into that murder again is because of the widespread protests. There was no legal reason to look into this case. The system worked perfectly when it let the cops off for murder. The system itself is the problem.

And this system needs to be abolished and a new system put into place where DAs and cops are actually held accountable. “Reforming the system” just means that there will be slightly less murdering cops getting away with it.
#15104534
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

Your own source said the evidence was weak. If you need more information about why there is little evidence that body cams are a useful deterrent, please read your source.


The source says the early research was weak, but that the evidence that emerged was stronger over time.

Pants-of-dog wrote:And the case of Elijah McCain is a good example. The cops claim that it exonerates them and makes the killing legal. Another innocent unarmed black man killed while already restrained, perfectly legal.


The cops can claim whatever they want, but the fact is that the camera wasn't even pointing at what was going on.

Pants-of-dog wrote:The only reason why anyone is looking into that murder again is because of the widespread protests. There was no legal reason to look into this case. The system worked perfectly when it let the cops off for murder. The system itself is the problem.

And this system needs to be abolished and a new system put into place where DAs and cops are actually held accountable. “Reforming the system” just means that there will be slightly less murdering cops getting away with it.


So I take it you want to end the election of DAs? Because, as I said, as elected officials they can be subject to recall elections (or just be booted out during the normal electoral process).
#15104569
@wat0n

If you read your source carefully, you will note that Mr. White (the researcher) says that the studies before 2014 were more or less useless. After that, you have one study that shows a reduced use of force, but it does not differentiate between justified and unjustified use of force, so you cannot use it as evidence that it reduces unjustified force. It does, however, suggest that the reduction found of force is all the unnecessary force, but that would mean that the average PD uses a significant amount of unnecessary force.

Are you arguing that the cops can claim whatever they want despite the camera footage in the case of Elijah McCain? If that is the case, then we agree that the camera footage was useless in that case.

Do you think the killing of Elijah McCain was justified? It was legal, according to the police and DA. It was justified according to the police and DA. Do you agree?

I see that you agree that the DAs are a part of the system of impunity.
#15104572
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

If you read your source carefully, you will note that Mr. White (the researcher) says that the studies before 2014 were more or less useless. After that, you have one study that shows a reduced use of force, but it does not differentiate between justified and unjustified use of force, so you cannot use it as evidence that it reduces unjustified force. It does, however, suggest that the reduction found of force is all the unnecessary force, but that would mean that the average PD uses a significant amount of unnecessary force.


"One" study?

NIJ wrote:Over time, scientific rigor improved, and studies conducted in U.S. law enforcement agencies produced findings that indicated promising support for body-worn cameras. For example, in 2014, researchers at Arizona State University (funded through the Bureau of Justice Assistance’s Smart Policing Initiative) found that officers with body-worn cameras were more productive in terms of making arrests, had fewer complaints lodged against them relative to officers without body-worn cameras, and had higher numbers of citizen complaints resolved in their favor.[7] Another study conducted with the Rialto (California) Police Department noted similar decreases in citizen complaints lodged against officers wearing body-worn cameras as well as decreases in use-of-force incidents by the police.[8] In addition, Justin Ready and Jacob Young from Arizona State University found that officers with body-worn cameras were more cautious in their actions and sensitive to possible scrutiny of video footage by their superiors. Also, contrary to initial concerns, officers who wore cameras were found to have higher numbers of self-initiated contacts with community residents than officers who did not wear cameras.[9]

Recent randomized controlled trials, which are considered the scientific gold standard for evaluating programs, have also been conducted on body-worn cameras. Of the various scientific methods available, these trials have the greatest likelihood of producing sound evidence because random assignment is able to isolate a specific treatment of interest from all of the other factors that influence any given outcome. In a 2016 global, multisite randomized controlled trial, Barak Ariel and colleagues found that use-of-force incidents may be related to the discretion given to officers regarding when body-worn cameras are activated during officer-citizen encounters. The researchers found decreases in use-of-force incidents when officers activated their cameras upon arrival at the scene. Alternatively, use-of-force incidents by officers with body-worn cameras increased when the officers had the discretion to determine when to activate their cameras during citizen interactions.[10]

In 2017, with NIJ support, researchers from CNA conducted a randomized controlled trial on 400 police officers in the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department. The research team found that officers with body-worn cameras generated fewer use-of-force reports and complaints from citizens compared to officers without body-worn cameras. Additionally, officers with body-worn cameras issued higher numbers of arrests and citations compared to officers without body-worn cameras.[11]


Pants-of-Dogs wrote:Are you arguing that the cops can claim whatever they want despite the camera footage in the case of Elijah McCain? If that is the case, then we agree that the camera footage was useless in that case.


They can claim whatever they want, regardless of evidence. What matters is how courts rule.

Pants-of-Dog wrote:Do you think the killing of Elijah McCain was justified? It was legal, according to the police and DA. It was justified according to the police and DA. Do you agree?


I would like them to explain why they think it was justified. The press reports suggest it was not, but then again since when does the press always tell the truth when reporting crime? Since when is the press impartial in these issues?

Pants-of-Dog wrote:I see that you agree that the DAs are a part of the system of impunity.


I wouldn't say it is a "system" of impunity, but certainly reforms can be made to prevent impunity and other problems from happening. I would like you to state your proposals.

I think the fact that DAs are elected officials complicates things. In particular, this does place a burden on communities themselves to be vigilant of their general behavior and voting them out when they misbehave. Yet on the other hand, this does have the advantage of giving communities a much greater role in how criminal justice works. So I'm not sure about how to address this issue. Maybe when it comes to public officials (not just cops), all documents relating to grand jury indictments could be public?
#15104576
@wat0n

Why did you not quite that text before?

The previously cited text wmntioned one study.

Now you have three. Do those other two have the same limitations as the first one?

Please note that none of the studies look at racism, systemic or otherwise.

Elijah McCain’s case is not going to court, so the cops do not need to show the body cam footage in a trial. The cops decided that the cops did not need to go to trial. The recourse that you speak of is not actually happening.

Again, knowing what you know now, do you think the killing was justified? Was Elijah McCain a threat?

The DA, for example, decided it was justified, and since the DA can be removed from office, the killing of Elijah McCain must be justified, according to your argument. After all, if the DA was wrong, then he or she would not be DA, as the electorate would have voted someone who would have investigated the cops. The system works as you describe: the killing was justified and everyone was held accountable.

One less cop killer on the streets!
#15104579
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

Why did you not quite that text before?

The previously cited text wmntioned one study.

Now you have three. Do those other two have the same limitations as the first one?


I did. The latest ones are randomized controlled trials, as such, they share those pros and cons.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Please note that none of the studies look at racism, systemic or otherwise.


No, they actually consider something broader than that: Performance.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Elijah McCain’s case is not going to court, so the cops do not need to show the body cam footage in a trial. The cops decided that the cops did not need to go to trial. The recourse that you speak of is not actually happening.


?? The State is investigating, why not just wait to see what the AG decides?

Pants-of-dog wrote:Again, knowing what you know now, do you think the killing was justified? Was Elijah McCain a threat?


Since all our information comes from the press, it seems the killing was indeed unjustified. But I think there may be more relevant information we are missing, as it often happens.

Pants-of-dog wrote:The DA, for example, decided it was justified, and since the DA can be removed from office, the killing of Elijah McCain must be justified, according to your argument. After all, if the DA was wrong, then he or she would not be DA, as the electorate would have voted someone who would have investigated the cops. The system works as you describe: the killing was justified and everyone was held accountable.

One less cop killer on the streets!


That's what they believe indeed, but it would be good to have them state clearly why they believe there are no grounds to prosecute. If they cite the footage, then they should explain why does it exonerate the cops given the action can't really be seen. It also seems they will not have the last word, given that the State decided to become involved in the case. And I don't see why this would end at that either, the fact that this case is generating this sort of publicity may also lead the residents of Aurora, CO to vote for a new DA when the time comes, particularly if the State of Colorado decides to indict and even more so if the cops are indeed found to be guilty in court.

What I don't understand is what would your proposal be. Isn't this an example of letting communities exert control over prosecutors? If not, why not? How would communities be able to exert control over these decisions then?
#15104587
@wat0n

So we see some evidence for reduced use of force, but no evidence for reduced use of unjustified force or reduced racism.

If you are saying that we should wait and see if the AG decides to charge Elijah McCain’s killers, note that if the protesters had done exactly what you suggest, there would be no investigation at all and his killers would be walking free. Oh wait, they are.

None of this changes the fact that the recourse that you claim should act as a check on police brutality is not applicable in this case at this point, may never be applicable, and is only possible because of widespread protests.

So you agree that the system let unjustified killers off the hook, when you say that Elijah McCain’s killing was unjustified.

Why do you think the cops or DA should do any of these things that you claim they should? Do they have some sort of legal obligation to do so?

More importantly, did the cops and DA act within the law? At this point, it seems they did everything perfectly legally.
#15104588
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

So we see some evidence for reduced use of force, but no evidence for reduced use of unjustified force or reduced racism.


And reduced complaints, and so on. Presumably people who are discriminated against are more likely to file complaints.

Pants-of-dog wrote:If you are saying that we should wait and see if the AG decides to charge Elijah McCain’s killers, note that if the protesters had done exactly what you suggest, there would be no investigation at all and his killers would be walking free. Oh wait, they are.


They are, but for how long?

Pants-of-dog wrote:None of this changes the fact that the recourse that you claim should act as a check on police brutality is not applicable in this case at this point, may never be applicable, and is only possible because of widespread protests.


Maybe, if so another option is to add the possibility of privately prosecuting public officials for misconduct.

Pants-of-dog wrote:So you agree that the system let unjustified killers off the hook, when you say that Elijah McCain’s killing was unjustified.


Taking the press reports at face value, yes. But why would one do so without ever listening to the DA's reasons for not indicting? Since when are journalists impartial observers when it comes to reporting crime? So far the only information we have is what they decided to share - we do not even know the DA's reasons to avoid indictment.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Why do you think the cops or DA should do any of these things that you claim they should? Do they have some sort of legal obligation to do so?


What would "these things" be?

Pants-of-dog wrote:More importantly, did the cops and DA act within the law? At this point, it seems they did everything perfectly legally.


That's something the AG will need to establish. If they did in fact act legally, I would want to know why.
#15104604
The younger generations are not going to be loving white supremacy. The older ones with racism on the brain are a dying breed. Thank goodness!




What he says about not bothering with these racist old white women is true! Don't bother yourself with trying to convince these idiot women--focus on being successful and organizing around empowering Black people, Latin American people and Native Americans, and huge groups of receptive working class immigrants and blue collar types of all ethnic groups. Focus on the young and the ones who will be there to step into the roles.

I am pleased as can be with the amount of growth the socialist party has recruited in the USA. Tons of young people. It is a good thing.


Last edited by Tainari88 on 02 Jul 2020 20:58, edited 1 time in total.
#15104605
Tainari88 wrote:The younger generations are not going to be loving white supremacy. The older ones with racism on the brain are a dying breed. Thank goodness!

h.


Yes they are loving none white supremacy.... replacing one racism with another, great job! We went from the greatest Generations to the Retarded Generation. Black Lives Matter is a slogan of the extreme left anti white movement, just because the words have a certain meaning their intent is obviously supremacist in nature. These "Allies" will soon learn they are just useful idiots that will hang last as their prize.
#15104609
Oxymoron wrote:Yes they are loving none white supremacy.... replacing one racism with another, great job! We went from the greatest Generations to the Retarded Generation. Black Lives Matter is a slogan of the extreme left anti white movement, just because the words have a certain meaning their intent is obviously supremacist in nature. These "Allies" will soon learn they are just useful idiots that will hang last as their prize.

And if they get into power the French Revolution will look like a subtle disturbance in history. When BLM gets into power they will murder all dissidents. There is simply too much hatred and tribalism.
#15104620
Oxymoron wrote:Yes they are loving none white supremacy.... replacing one racism with another, great job! We went from the greatest Generations to the Retarded Generation. Black Lives Matter is a slogan of the extreme left anti white movement, just because the words have a certain meaning their intent is obviously supremacist in nature. These "Allies" will soon learn they are just useful idiots that will hang last as their prize.



Oxymoron you can scream anti-white racism all you want. The truth of the matter is that the loophole in the 13th amendment has lit a fuse in not only the USA but the world. There were protests about George Floyd's murder all over the world. It is about people dealing with being pressured by a system that doesn't give anybody who is poor and without power true justice.

I will be blunt with you. White artificial shit identities are not about anti racism, they are about fear of sharing power with people who have traditionally been in powerful positions in the USA. You keep pushing at saying Black Lives are an organization that is anti white when it is about social justice for Black Americans in places that are disrespecting their lives with police brutality and false shit incarceration.

Look at Archie Williams? A man incarcerated for 37 years for a crime he never committed. He was sentenced forever for supposedly raping and murdering a white woman. He had three witnesses stating the man was at work and not even present when the crime took place. He was convicted due to not having money to pay for a decent legal defense. Do you think that is some isolated incident? It is not. An organization called The Innocence Project, worked on his case. They freed him. But it took 37 years of his life. A lifetime. In some Angola State Prison in Louisiana. They would throw random black men accused of crimes and condemn them to decades in prison just to be able to close a criminal case. They never picked powerful and wealthy people Oxymoron. They fight back and can avoid jail.

Black lives like Archie Williams do matter. That is the message.

All innocent people caught up in lack of justice situations matter. That is what I believe. You believe what you want. For me? The time will come when the racist old fools will be dying off and new young people will be making a different society. That is coming in another 25 years. For sure. A new world. It is up to them to discard all those old stubborn racist hard headed foolish thinkers. Let them fade like they were nothing in history. For they were just faded old people living in denial of their own histories.




The USA has one fourth of all incarcerated people in the world. It is not about justice.

Their lives matter.
#15104624
Tainari88 wrote:Oxymoron you can scream anti-white racism all you want. The truth of the matter is that the loophole in the 13th amendment has lit a fuse in not only the USA but the world. There were protests about George Floyd's murder all over the world. It is about people dealing with being pressured by a system that doesn't give anybody who is poor and without power true justice.

I will be blunt with you. White artificial shit identities are not about anti racism, they are about fear of sharing power with people who have traditionally been in powerful positions in the USA. You keep pushing at saying Black Lives are an organization that is anti white when it is about social justice for Black Americans in places that are disrespecting their lives with police brutality and false shit incarceration.

Look at Archie Williams? A man incarcerated for 37 years for a crime he never committed. He was sentenced forever for supposedly raping and murdering a white woman. He had three witnesses stating the man was at work and not even present when the crime took place. He was convicted due to not having money to pay for a decent legal defense. Do you think that is some isolated incident? It is not. An organization called The Innocence Project, worked on his case. They freed him. But it took 37 years of his life. A lifetime. In some Angola State Prison in Louisiana. They would throw random black men accused of crimes and condemn them to decades in prison just to be able to close a criminal case. They never picked powerful and wealthy people Oxymoron. They fight back and can avoid jail.

Black lives like Archie Williams do matter. That is the message.

All innocent people caught up in lack of justice situations matter. That is what I believe. You believe what you want. For me? The time will come when the racist old fools will be dying off and new young people will be making a different society. That is coming in another 25 years. For sure. A new world. It is up to them to discard all those old stubborn racist hard headed foolish thinkers. Let them fade like they were nothing in history. For they were just faded old people living in denial of their own histories.




The USA has one fourth of all incarcerated people in the world. It is not about justice.

Their lives matter.


The reason the police are aggressive and our jails are filled, is because of failed war on drugs... this has nothing to do with Black people. What has to do with Black people, is their socio economic plight. A plight brought upon by failed Leftist Ideology....
#15104641
Oxymoron wrote:The reason the police are aggressive and our jails are filled, is because of failed war on drugs... this has nothing to do with Black people. What has to do with Black people, is their socio economic plight. A plight brought upon by failed Leftist Ideology....


This is absurd, mainly because the war on drugs, like the war on terrorism, are not meant to be won, but excuses to imprison or kill poor people of colour. And wasn't it your homeboy Reagan who started the war on drugs anyway?
  • 1
  • 147
  • 148
  • 149
  • 150
  • 151
  • 182
Election 2020

Wait. Doug. You think it is Facebook and Twitter[…]

Thank Goodness for Sane People

You both haven't noticed yet that politically the […]

Joe Biden

LOL how cute, he thinks that spending 5mins in a […]

You can block the airway without physically damag[…]