Jump to content

Minneapolis is Burning

F250

By F250
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

BigHorn'13
BigHorn'13

Funny to see this. Saw a small group of people protesting at the Kerr county courthouse earlier this evening and was ecstatic. Most looked like Schreiner U students and you could tell they had been ou

Longhorn
Longhorn

Then get the fuck out. Adios mofo. Go find somewhere else to live.

wildcat09
wildcat09

That President and AG tried to take the tiniest steps to fixing the conditions that resulted in the unrest in Ferguson and Baltimore. In response, racist morons like you lost their shit and elected th

Posted Images

NameAlreadyInUse

NameAlreadyInUse 5164

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, EuroHorn said:

https://www.abqjournal.com/1380152/apd-man-shot-by-officers-in-august-was-armed-with-bb-gun.html

And that’s some more bullshit right there. The investigation could take up to a year just to get to the review board?  All the while those murderers will carry a gun around, collecting a taxpayer funded paycheck. There’s fucking video evidence. This is insane!  Lock those motherfuckers up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23699

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

There was a lynching in fucking Houston. I’d hoped we might avoid the far right vigilante bullshit, considering how diverse Houston is, but I guess it’s time to recreate Sherman’s march through all the aggy suburbs.

Do you ever tire of being such an easily manipulated mark for disinformation?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Red Five

Red Five 41595

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

I....... have run out of things to say about these ditchpig monsters.

 

I had someone, an otherwise smart person, tell me awhile back that racism can't exist in America anymore because we elected a black president. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MC Fresh Breath

MC Fresh Breath 4075

Posted
Posted

I guess this has been out for some time, but I had not heard of it before.  Could help someone at some point, so doesn't hurt to repost it:

 

Quote

 

Upon saying “Hey Siri, I’m getting pulled over,” any music that may be playing is paused and the screen’s brightness is dimmed while the phone’s “do not disturb” capability is turned on. The phone then automatically sends a message to a contact the user sets up, letting that person know that the user is being stopped by police, along with providing the user’s location. The front camera is then turned on and the phone begins to record video of what is happening. 

“Once you stop the recording it sends a copy of the video to a contact you specify, puts volume and brightness back to where they were, turns off Do Not Disturb, and gives you the option to send to iCloud Drive or Dropbox,” according to a Reddit post by Petersen. 

Another user on Twitter posted a step-by-step video on how to install the shortcut to an iPhone. 

Petersen told Business Insider that the new shortcut would allow people to have access to "the civilian equivalent" a police body cam.

"It seemed to me that if you're getting pulled over it couldn't hurt to have a recording of the incident," Petersen told the news outlet. "The police these days in many places have body cams, so this could be the civilian equivalent.“

 

 

https://www.fox29.com/news/hey-siri-im-getting-pulled-over-iphone-feature-will-record-police-interaction-send-location

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MC Fresh Breath

MC Fresh Breath 4075

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, mdmost said:

Just because I can't post it on the Gundy thread without people whining:

Wearing a t-shirt that pisses off my Heisman hopeful running back and possibly costing me my job, just to own the libs. 

 

I don't frequent that part of the site much anymore.  So went and checked the thread.  Is "SwanderedTalent" the new SwamForTexas?  Just curious. Also, once again another thread full of right wingers screaming 'no cloak room.'   At least a few gave them some good replies back.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
TXSG8R

TXSG8R 3362

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

Something that struck me watching the killing of the guy in Atlanta.  Why is an arrest so important?  Hear me out.  

The guy was intoxicated in a vehicle.  Clearly a dangerous thing, drunk drivers kill people.  Makes complete sense for LEOs to respond.  

Once the guy is out of the car, the danger to the public is over.  The cops talk to Mr. Brooks for 45 minutes.  They perform a field sobriety test.  They perform a breathalyzer.  The video I've seen is edited, so I'm not sure if he gave the officers identification.  At a minimum he gave them his name at some point, plus they have his car and plates so they presumably know who he is and where he lives.  

So here is where I need help understanding what happens next.  The cops are justified in arresting him.  No argument.  Once he started struggling and overpowering the officers, why was it so important to keep trying to arrest the guy?  Why not step back at that point and let him run?  You have his "weapon" (car).  You have his name and address.  You even presumably know where hes running, since he asked early on to be allowed to walk to his sister's house nearby.  

I'm not arguing that the cops arresting him was wrong or unjustified.  I'm not arguing that the cops should have been lenient and let him walk home, or given him a ride home.  That's their discretion and isn't really part of the math here.  What I'm trying to understand is, why was arresting him at that Wendy's so important?  You have all the evidence you need via body-cam.  You even get to add resisting arrest and whatever else because he whipped your ass and took your taser.  Why was it important enough to chase him and shoot your weapon in a crowded fast food parking lot?  

For LEOs or lawyers.  Is there punishment if you don't make the arrest?  Is there an incentive to arrest people?  Is this just ramped up testosterone or shame once things got physical?  Why was it so important to arrest the guy right there versus letting him run off and arresting him later?  

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 46972

Posted
Posted

The cops knew he was unarmed.  While I understand the idea that it's not always clear what is being aimed at you (in this case, the cop's taser), it's a pretty big stretch to say the cops who were holding their weapons didn't know if the guy was aiming a weapon.

They knew exactly how many weapons were at the scene.  They each had possession of their police weapons.  There was no threat to their lives.  Didn't matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31987

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, TXSG8R said:

Something that struck me watching the killing of the guy in Atlanta.  Why is an arrest so important?  Hear me out.  

The guy was intoxicated in a vehicle.  Clearly a dangerous thing, drunk drivers kill people.  Makes complete sense for LEOs to respond.  

Once the guy is out of the car, the danger to the public is over.  The cops talk to Mr. Brooks for 45 minutes.  They perform a field sobriety test.  They perform a breathalyzer.  The video I've seen is edited, so I'm not sure if he gave the officers identification.  At a minimum he gave them his name at some point, plus they have his car and plates so they presumably know who he is and where he lives.  

So here is where I need help understanding what happens next.  The cops are justified in arresting him.  No argument.  Once he started struggling and overpowering the officers, why was it so important to keep trying to arrest the guy?  Why not step back at that point and let him run?  You have his "weapon" (car).  You have his name and address.  You even presumably know where hes running, since he asked early on to be allowed to walk to his sister's house nearby.  

I'm not arguing that the cops arresting him was wrong or unjustified.  I'm not arguing that the cops should have been lenient and let him walk home, or given him a ride home.  That's their discretion and isn't really part of the math here.  What I'm trying to understand is, why was arresting him at that Wendy's so important?  You have all the evidence you need via body-cam.  You even get to add resisting arrest and whatever else because he whipped your ass and took your taser.  Why was it important enough to chase him and shoot your weapon in a crowded fast food parking lot?  

For LEOs or lawyers.  Is there punishment if you don't make the arrest?  Is there an incentive to arrest people?  Is this just ramped up testosterone or shame once things got physical?  Why was it so important to arrest the guy right there versus letting him run off and arresting him later?  

There is no duty to arrest, or to aid those in peril.

I have the same question pretty often.  We tend to just assume that arresting someone is a vitally important thing.  When you look at crime-solving stats, you realize that a ton of things go "unarrested."  So what's the big deal about another one?

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29556

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

Do you ever tire of being such an easily manipulated mark for disinformation?

My mistake, though an initial report from a Huffpo reporter was that it was a black man. That seems more like a mistake than disinformation. The two recent cases in California still seem suspicious as fuck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MC Fresh Breath

MC Fresh Breath 4075

Posted
Posted (edited)

I have personal stories (pre 9-11) of cops absolutely not arresting when they could have done so.  I'm sure most growing up in small town Texas in the 80's have similar.  My grandfather should have had his license taken away (at minimum, jail time is what he should have got) he drove drunk so often.  Some cops let him go, some gave him tickets that a local attorney was really good at making disappear.  Had a brother caught dead to rights (drunk, speeding) by DPS even, but the trooper happened to know my Dad from Church and followed him home instead of hauling him in.  Of course, everyone involved in these stories was Caucasian so you won't hear those stories from people of color (see the Chappelle sketch) , and even then I'm not sure if the world I grew up in exists post the militarization of the police.

 

Edited by MC Fresh Breath
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 106618

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, trauma babe said:

wtf is their described duty then?

There isn't one.  That's maybe the dirtiest little "secret" of them all about cops: these "heroes," who are the "sheepdogs protecting the sheep," worked diligently, and succeeded, in establishing the legal rule that they actually have ZERO duty to protect or help.  None.  Zilch.  Nada.  A cop can stand there and watch you be raped and stabbed while he eats a donut, and he hasn't breached any duty to you.

2 minutes ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

I have personal stories (pre 9-11) of cops absolutely not arresting when they could have done so.  I'm sure most growing up in small town Texas in the 80's have similar.  My grandfather should have had his license taken away (at minimum, jail time is what he should have got) he drove drunk so often.  Some cops let him go, some gave him tickets that a local attorney was really good at making disappear.  Had a brother caught dead to rights (drunk, speeding) by DPS even, but the trooper happened to know my Dad from Church and followed him home instead of hauling him in.  Of course, everyone involved in these stories was Caucasian so you won't hear those stories from people of color (see the Chappelle sketch) , and even then I'm not sure if the world I grew up in exists post the militarization of the police.

 

The bolded is always key.  Cops have discretion, and they absolutely should have discretion, and should exercise it.  BUT, when they exercise that discretion with white folks 3X as often as they do with black folks, that's fucking bullshit, and gets to the systemic bias that's the problem.  Again, white kid busted with weed on Saturday night most often gets a lecture, talk to the parents, whatever.  Black kid busted with weed on Saturday night -- handcuffs and jail at a much higher rate than with the white kids.  The cops are exercising their discretion, but do so in a wildly disparate and discriminatory fashion.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TXSG8R

TXSG8R 3362

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

The cops knew he was unarmed.  While I understand the idea that it's not always clear what is being aimed at you (in this case, the cop's taser), it's a pretty big stretch to say the cops who were holding their weapons didn't know if the guy was aiming a weapon.

They knew exactly how many weapons were at the scene.  They each had possession of their police weapons.  There was no threat to their lives.  Didn't matter.

Im bracing for the inevitable slap on the wrist of the officer involved.  Unlike the Floyd situation, I think the law is on the cops side here.  Each cop knew they had their own weapons, but they couldn't know if their partner's weapon was missing.  He turned and aimed something at the officer after being in a scuffle with them and taking the taser.  As shitty as it was, I dont see many juries saying they violated the letter of the law.  And maybe thats where the cops heads were.  Maybe he got my partner's gun.  

I guess my question was more about the spirit of the law and how far we have strayed from it.  Initially it seems like the cops tried to be civil.  They spent 45 minutes there talking to him.  Brooks escalated things by resisting.  No doubt.  Without rehashing my post, I guess my gripe is with an officer not being able to let a drunk guy just run.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 106618

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, TXSG8R said:

Without rehashing my post, I guess my gripe is with an officer not being able to let a drunk guy just run.

This is the crucial question.  I think the law is probably going to fall on the cop's side -- he COULD use deadly force in that situation, so he won't face criminal penalty.

But the bigger question is whether he SHOULD have.  He had a fork in the road.  Fork 1) let a big drunk dude with your taser run for a while, hell, maybe even get away....but without his car.  Fork 2) Kill a man.  Man....I gotta tell you, looking at any list of options that includes as option 2 "kill a man," option 1 would have to be really, really, really bad for me to justify going to option 2.  And option 1 here just wasn't that bad.

Edited by Brisketexan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28904

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

I have personal stories (pre 9-11) of cops absolutely not arresting when they could have done so.  I'm sure most growing up in small town Texas in the 80's have similar.  My grandfather should have had his license taken away (at minimum, jail time is what he should have got) he drove drunk so often.  Some cops let him go, some gave him tickets that a local attorney was really good at making disappear.  Had a brother caught dead to rights (drunk, speeding) by DPS even, but the trooper happened to know my Dad from Church and followed him home instead of hauling him in.  Of course, everyone involved in these stories was Caucasian so you won't hear those stories from people of color (see the Chappelle sketch) , and even then I'm not sure if the world I grew up in exists post the militarization of the police.

I was talking to an attorney once who used to work for the Columbus Police Dept. He said it was a lot easier for CPD to recruit from the small rural communities outside of the city because those guys were less likely than a city kid to have a police record precisely because of that dynamic. The cops were more likely to know a kid's dad, or go to the same church, or have a kid who played on the same sports team, so they'd let things go. Those communities tend to be all or mostly white so those recruits have less exposure to racial diversity. That can lead to obvious pitfalls. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ghost of LL

Ghost of LL 15664

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, TXSG8R said:

Something that struck me watching the killing of the guy in Atlanta.  Why is an arrest so important?  Hear me out.  

The guy was intoxicated in a vehicle.  Clearly a dangerous thing, drunk drivers kill people.  Makes complete sense for LEOs to respond.  

Once the guy is out of the car, the danger to the public is over.  The cops talk to Mr. Brooks for 45 minutes.  They perform a field sobriety test.  They perform a breathalyzer.  The video I've seen is edited, so I'm not sure if he gave the officers identification.  At a minimum he gave them his name at some point, plus they have his car and plates so they presumably know who he is and where he lives.  

So here is where I need help understanding what happens next.  The cops are justified in arresting him.  No argument.  Once he started struggling and overpowering the officers, why was it so important to keep trying to arrest the guy?  Why not step back at that point and let him run?  You have his "weapon" (car).  You have his name and address.  You even presumably know where hes running, since he asked early on to be allowed to walk to his sister's house nearby.  

I'm not arguing that the cops arresting him was wrong or unjustified.  I'm not arguing that the cops should have been lenient and let him walk home, or given him a ride home.  That's their discretion and isn't really part of the math here.  What I'm trying to understand is, why was arresting him at that Wendy's so important?  You have all the evidence you need via body-cam.  You even get to add resisting arrest and whatever else because he whipped your ass and took your taser.  Why was it important enough to chase him and shoot your weapon in a crowded fast food parking lot?  

For LEOs or lawyers.  Is there punishment if you don't make the arrest?  Is there an incentive to arrest people?  Is this just ramped up testosterone or shame once things got physical?  Why was it so important to arrest the guy right there versus letting him run off and arresting him later?  

That's among the many questions I've had about this whole thing.  Just let him go.  Maybe shout after him, "bro--we have your car and driver's license."  Worst case, you go and pick him up the next day.  It's a nonviolent crime.  What's the big deal?

I mean, I guess I'm just old and fat and lazy, but there's no way I'm chasing after that guy.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28904

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

That's among the many questions I've had about this whole thing.  Just let him go.  Maybe shout after him, "bro--we have your car and driver's license."  Worst case, you go and pick him up the next day.  It's a nonviolent crime.  What's the big deal?

I mean, I guess I'm just old and fat and lazy, but there's no way I'm chasing after that guy.

He embarrassed the cops by overcoming their double team and absconding with one of their stun guns. All while the people waiting in line at the drive-thru watched. Blindly firing a non-lethal weapon behind him while he was running away gave that cop an excuse to make him pay. 

That's my guess. It would've made sense to just let him go but cops don't like being made to look foolish. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MC Fresh Breath

MC Fresh Breath 4075

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

There isn't one.  That's maybe the dirtiest little "secret" of them all about cops: these "heroes," who are the "sheepdogs protecting the sheep," worked diligently, and succeeded, in establishing the legal rule that they actually have ZERO duty to protect or help.  None.  Zilch.  Nada.  A cop can stand there and watch you be raped and stabbed while he eats a donut, and he hasn't breached any duty to you.

The bolded is always key.  Cops have discretion, and they absolutely should have discretion, and should exercise it.  BUT, when they exercise that discretion with white folks 3X as often as they do with black folks, that's fucking bullshit, and gets to the systemic bias that's the problem.  Again, white kid busted with weed on Saturday night most often gets a lecture, talk to the parents, whatever.  Black kid busted with weed on Saturday night -- handcuffs and jail at a much higher rate than with the white kids.  The cops are exercising their discretion, but do so in a wildly disparate and discriminatory fashion.

 

I of course agree with you, but a good chunk of that systemic bias was also perpetuated by the judges and attorneys who were part of the "good ol boy" network.  And while it very much hurt people of color, I also know of one story in particular involving a white lady drugged up and gang raped at a party that was only attended by those judges and attorneys and somehow there were no witnesses and no case.  (edit: this story has nothing to do with the main point, for some the recent recollection of it is bothering me).

We're on the same page, I'm sure, but the point is the 'system' is much deeper than just the attack dogs.  Have to look at who empowers them.

Edited by MC Fresh Breath
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 106618

Posted
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

 

I of course agree with you, but a good chunk of that systemic bias was also perpetuated by the judges and attorneys who were part of the "good ol boy" network.  And while it very much hurt people of color, I also know of one story in particular involving a white lady drugged up and gang raped at a party that was only attended by those judges and attorneys and somehow there were no witnesses and no case.  (edit: this story has nothing to do with the main point, for some the recent recollection of it is bothering me).

We're on the same page, I'm sure, but the point is the 'system' is much deeper than just the attack dogs.  Have to look at who empowers them.

Oh, you bet.  The dirtiest secret of all is that the system is this way because we (the segment of society that is in charge) WANT it to be that way.  When a great number of us look at a white kid busted with weed and immediately think "hey, he's just a kid having fun, he looks like a good kid, they oughta cut him some slack," vs. seeing a black kid busted with weed and thinking "typical hoodrat".....that's how we end up here.  Some of it's conscious, but so much of it isn't, it's just ingrained in how we think and how we approach the world and other people.

Realizing that we do that, AND that such things have become embedded within our systems, is essential   We can't make much progress until we diagnose the problem we're dealing with.

Edited by Brisketexan
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28904

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Oh, you bet.  The dirtiest secret of all is that the system is this way because we (the segment of society that is in charge) WANT it to be that way.  When a great number of us look at a white kid busted with weed and immediately think "hey, he's just a kid having fun, he looks like a good kid, they oughta cut him some slack," vs. seeing a black kid busted with weed and thinking "typical hoodrat".....that's how we end up here.  Some of it's conscious, but so much of it isn't, it's just ingrained in how we think and how we approach the world and other people.

Realizing that we do that, AND that such things have become embedded within our systems, is essential   We can't make much progress until we diagnose the problem we're dealing with.

That white kid comes from a wealthy family. He has a future. We don't want to mess with that. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 106618

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

That white kid comes from a wealthy family. He has a future. We don't want to mess with that. 

Obviously, that's where we were going...but using those exact words got me thinking.

That white kid has a "future."  He comes from an educated family, we see him as having a future with a nice professional career, country club membership, whatever.

The black kid, who by implication, doesn't have a future....that's fucked up.  So, maybe he's not from a wealthy family, he's not an A student, he doesn't have connections at an Ivy League university.  So what?  Maybe, if we don't fuck it up for him by giving him a criminal record for no good reason, he has a future as an HEB store manager, or a shift supervisor at Amazon, or a million other career paths that are a good, honest living, provide security for himself and his family, and provide a stable platform for his kids to learn, grow, and prosper?  Or shit, maybe he ends up going to Texas State, and finds out he has a knack for teaching, or engineering, or any number of other professional paths?

It's like in the back of our minds, we think we'd be depriving the white kid of an expansive dream with a big house and fancy car....but all we'd be depriving the black kid of is a regular old job and a boring house in Pflugerville, so what's the big loss?

By the way, as someone who grew up as the son of a mother whose life dream was just that - living in an actual house, with a stable paycheck and food regularly on the table, not having to live in fear of it all falling apart at a moment's notice (after her childhood of poverty and abuse), the regular job and boring house in Pflugerville can be a big fucking deal.

Edited by Brisketexan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 106618

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, 4th&Five said:

siap

 

Ummm....as horrifying as that story is, the detail in the SECOND tweet is even more horrifying:

Quote

FBI: The gunman, an Air Force sergeant, and an accomplice went to Oakland "to take advantage” of BLM protests at the courthouse and open fire on officers. The pair were not associated with the protests.

Quote

The gunman charged in the officer killings is the leader of a highly trained US Air Force security team that guards aircraft in high terrorist and high crime areas overseas,

reports

Some of those that work forces......

We have a real fucking problem, people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 106618

Posted
Posted

Oh, and as to the Oakland shooter....he's also the guy who ambushed two other cops.  And has a history of following hardcore rightwing sites.....but he also had a "libertarian" bent, and hated cops.  So, maybe a whole stewpot of fuckery going on in his head, and serving multiple purposes at once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BigHorn'13

BigHorn'13 3480

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, Longhorn said:

Someone should call a social worker ASAP.

Just so you understand, as a staunch independent, things like this is why I've mostly stopped listening to the right. I crave the need to be able to hear and understand both sides to an argument, but it's fucking exhausting trying to discern legitimate vs propaganda with y'all. 

Also @Panchoshould at least get a smile out of this after the bs from last night. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 106618

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, BigHorn'13 said:

Just so you understand, as a staunch independent, things like this is why I've mostly stopped listening to the right. I crave the need to be able to hear and understand both sides to an argument, but it's fucking exhausting trying to discern legitimate vs propaganda with y'all. 

Also @Panchoshould at least get a smile out of this after the bs from last night. 

Yep.  Nevermind the racebaiting bullshit.  What offends me most is the abject fucking stupidity.  The video is actually a good example of the kind of situation that most people in this discussion would say "THAT'S what you need police for."  In an incident of real-time physical violence, you need the cops.  That's the fucking point -- we want police for things like this.....NOT for a jillion other calls that are NOT like this.

So, racist AND stupid and shitty at logical reasoning....that's what makes any effort at conversation with the right these days exhausting.  There's just so little intent or effort at intellectual honesty or good-faith discussion.  It's just not fucking worth it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...