Tyre Nichols beaten to death by 5 Memphis police officers

[Captainant 27311]

The Onion never misses

[royiv 9131]

4 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

my opinion are my own, so im not concerned whether/who else might think similarly. if you were intellectually honest, you shouldnt care about that either. 

all the things you mentioned are *bad*. fortunately, theyre pretty much all gone. when theres a situation thats racially unjust, we should be able to debate about it honestly.

when a black police chief fires black police officers for killing a black guy…and people in this thread point to race as a factor, theyre displaying some seriously perverted pathology. 

 

hitting too close to home? 

"intellectually honest" 

Lololol. That's rich.

 

[High Plains Drifter 10970]

2 hours ago, smwhorn said:

Truthfully can't decide if I want to watch this video.  I have zero desire to watch an innocent and defenseless man beaten to death by criminals acting under the authority of law enforcement officers.  On the other hand, I sort of feel "obligated" (don't know if that's the right word but only one I can think of as I type) (1) to watch it for his family to attempt in some small way to try to understand what they've been through and (2) to watch it as a member of society/human being because we "owe" it to HIM to see what he had to endure.  

 

Everyone should have to watch it. If you want your tax return, to be able to vote, to get your license renewed, you should have to watch it. Small children excepted.

 

 

on NPR this am, they were interviewing a local (black) pastor who has been active in police reform in Memphis. He said he is hopeful that the riots won't be as bad as they might be because 1) the cops were promptly fired, and 2) they have already been charged with murder (or manslaugther or something I forget exactly what).

 

 

 

[hayden_horn 11360]

3 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

my opinion are my own, so im not concerned whether/who else might think similarly. if you were intellectually honest, you shouldnt care about that either. 

all the things you mentioned are *bad*. fortunately, theyre pretty much all gone. when theres a situation thats racially unjust, we should be able to debate about it honestly.

when a black police chief fires black police officers for killing a black guy…and people in this thread point to race as a factor, theyre displaying some seriously perverted pathology. 

see, but you do care enough to post and share your opinion.

look, i'm just warning you that you sound like a racist rationalizing his beliefs. you don't care that i think that, great. but it's how you are coming across, and i like to think of myself as fairly reasonable. but when you start using coded racist language, i get annoyed. "there's less racism now than ever before" is a racist loser argument. there's always work to be done. yesterday's improvement over "deplorable" doesn't mean we cannot make an improvement tomorrow to somewhere north of "terrible."

and i am convinced that you are trying not to see race here. like, that you are a racist, whether or not you are intentionally is another argument altogether.

here's a small challenge: do you agree that the behavior of this female black police chief firing 5 male black police officers for killing a male black person (i would go further and put in the descriptor BEATING HIM TO DEATH but whatever) in the timeline she did it was appropriate?

i actually say it should be quicker. i would argue that if i and four friends of mine went and BEAT SOMEONE TO DEATH, we wouldn't be waiting weeks for justice.

why has it taken so long to release the video?

but, for the sake of exercise, let's plsay pretend for a minute and take race and gender out of everything i said above: do you agree that the behavior of the police chief firing 5 officers for BEATING A PERSON TO DEATH in the timeline done was appropriate? 

yes? why isn't it done so quickly in other cases? would race have something to do with it? especially the race of the officers and the chief? 

whose race do you deem more important here: the victim or the perpetrators or the chief or the community being policed or what?

[Brian Fantana 6654]

9 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

when a black police chief fires black police officers for killing a black guy…and people in this thread point to race as a factor, theyre displaying some seriously perverted pathology. 

A) This statement along gives away that you assume black people are a monolith, which is a self report by itself.

B) A black police chief and a group of black cops are still agents of a system that is built on white supremacy, despite the color of their skin. When they perform their jobs as cops in America, their race is much less of a factor than the fact they are cops in America.

C) The fact that all 5 cops in this situation are black most certainly makes it easier for the higher ups to throw them under the bus immediately and get ahead of the PR disaster that is looming. If you think the POLICE UNIONS would be this silent in a case involving 5 white officers, regardless of the heinousness of their crime, you are kidding yourself. That in itself is essentially unprecedented. 

All that said, that doesn't mean what they did isn't unfathomably awful and that the circumstances involved aren't also a factor in how quickly justice is seemingly being dispensed here. There are many factors at play.

[Brisketexan 104465]

47 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

of course there is racial animus in america. there’s racial, ethnic, religious, class, and tribal animus everywhere on earth. the ingroup/outgroup has and will always be present. 

my position is that (1) theres less of it in america than ever before; (2) it is *NOT* the key driver of every scenario and event [as suggested for entire accident]; and (3) the supposedly-progressive people who link race to every situation because they are obsessed with race… are ipso facto racist 

Men beat women/their wives all around the world, in a variety of country and cultures.

"We beat our wives less than people in country X, and less than we used to" is not quite the "attaboy on the domestic violence front" that you seem to think it is.

Is race the key driver in every scenario and event?  Of course not.  Hell, that was my thesis point in one of my first posts on this thread -- cops vs. the rest of us is its own overriding problem; race is often a factor or enhancement (shitheel cop would be abusive powerlord over white boy, is even worse when it's over a black kid).  The problem with your approach is that it is used as a carte blanche denial of all racism, both specific and institutional.  It's the response given regarding functionally every incident, and if we don't have a video recording of a cop yelling "I'm beating the shit out of you because you're black," then the apologists decry race being part of the conversation at all.

I can't believe we still have to have this conversation, when it's widely known and exposed that many law enforcement agencies have open and admitted racism in their ranks and institutions.

Correct, that doesn't mean that EVERY bad cop action is race-related.  But not nearly as many are excused as you would like to be. 

And it also is a SEPARATE issue from how cop apologists/defenders view things, and the overlap on the most vocal cop defenders and racists is pretty damn heavy ("thugs," "that boy shoulda just complied," "he was on drugs," etc.).

Race isn't the driver of everything that happens.  But the vigor with which folks like you try to divorce it from any given incident is eyebrow raising indeed.

32 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

I have also lived around the globe, nice countries and shitholes. 

We need to be better. I do not want our police being compared to Haiti, Afghanistan, or even Dubai's. 

This shit needs to stop. Once you put on blue you serve and protect all of us, not just your brethren. 

And a whole lot of this.  We're the land of the free, violent gestapo cops is anathema to that.

[52-80 19066]

27 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

3 is a disingenuous framing of the argument. You're using your belief that "supposedly-progressive people" link every situation to race, to justify denying that any one particular situation involves race. It also isn't racism to link systemic problems with race. Words have meanings, and the word "racism" doesn't fit what you're trying to describe.  

The platonic/ideal condition is to be impartial and race-blind in conduct and belief.

What do you call it when people regularly and steadfastly insist every situation is motivated by race?

[Brisketexan 104465]

4 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

The platonic/ideal condition is to be impartial and race-blind in conduct and belief.

What do you call it when people regularly and steadfastly insist every situation is motivated by race?

EVERY situation?  It's not credible.

Which is the same way I view people who are hyper-eager to divorce race from every situation.

It is a factor.  Sometimes it's in play, sometimes it's not, sometimes the degree varies.  Depends on the actors and the situation.  But when it comes to our American law enforcement apparatus, we KNOW that it has a deep and long history of embedded racism, and CURRENT resistance to calling it out and reform it (cops will be dragged kicking and screaming to the right outcome).  The eagerness of people to respond to functionally all bad cop actions with "why do you have to bring up race?" is it's own problem, just as absurd as people who allege that every bad situation involving a black person is racism in action.

[closetohumping 17380]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

EVERY situation?  It's not credible.

Which is the same way I view people who are hyper-eager to divorce race from every situation.

It is a factor.  Sometimes it's in play, sometimes it's not, sometimes the degree varies.  Depends on the actors and the situation.  But when it comes to our American law enforcement apparatus, we KNOW that it has a deep and long history of embedded racism, and CURRENT resistance to calling it out and reform it (cops will be dragged kicking and screaming to the right outcome).  The eagerness of people to respond to functionally all bad cop actions with "why do you have to bring up race?" is it's own problem, just as absurd as people who allege that every bad situation involving a black person is racism in action.

They’ll probably fire the black chief as well

[alincoln 2364]

8 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

What do you call it when people regularly and steadfastly insist every situation is motivated by race?

Surly Horns

[Brew 3044]

1 hour ago, DaysOff said:

If fedex and Elvis pulled out the whole city would collapse.

No it wouldn’t. There are a number of large corporate headquarters based in Memphis, commercial space availability is as low as it’s ever been, development is running wide open right now especially with the Ford deal, etc. Memphis has its issues especially with safety in the central district area, but it is night and day different than it was 15 years ago. I’m in and out of Memphis a lot and I would rather go to Memphis at this point than Nashville.

[wildcat09 29187]

1 hour ago, hayden_horn said:

sometimes i wonder about posters like you.

do you stop and actually think about what you post? or have you staked out your position and by god, that's all there is to it.

like, for example, i read your post and you seem hellbent on there being no racial animus here. why?

of course there is racial animus. this is fucking america.

I think some guys like this are probably on the autism spectrum.

[hayden_horn 11360]

7 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

The platonic/ideal condition is to be impartial and race-blind in conduct and belief.

What do you call it when people regularly and steadfastly insist every situation is motivated by race?

no.

that's also a racist red-herring.

the platonic/ideal condition, as i've been trying to learn, is to be impartial as possible, race-conscious, culturally aware, and try to use that information to make the best decision you can.

by race-conscious, i mean that in a positive context, but it can also make me weirdly self-conscious in a way that i'm still not comfortable with, but that's okay.

i used to say "i don't see color" or similar shit like that. it was racist. of course i saw color. of course people see my whiteness. of course i see that hot girl over there and the sweathog dude on the harley. we make judgments every day. 

the key, i'm learning, is mindfulness. asking yourself critical questions all the time. it sucks and it's hard. i get tired of doing it.

that's why i asked you if you think before you post. i haven't always thought before posting, and this is definitely the board to shoot from your hip, so i get it. 

but where you fall down is looking at a work in progress, seeing an improvement, and declaring it done. 

race relations will never be done. black people have shit to think about also. we all have shit to think about. that's part of being a human. 

also part of being human, sadly, is the casting out, either metaphorically or literally, those who look or act or believe differently than you.

i'm just telling you that is what you are doing even if you do not realize it. like knows like. i used to do it all the time.

[Clintonaldo 2570]

I will not watch the video. I hope Memphis surprises people with no riots. It’s almost like some people want it to happen to validate their opinions. I think the city has done a great job of being proactive and his mother is stressing peace. I feel horrible for the family. 

[YGIFS 19449]

Thoughts and Prayers to Rex Kramer and Johnny Sack's dicks tonight as they furiously jerk off to this footage and any possible ensuing violence.  

[hornbri 1367]

I love surly, everyone’s panties in a wad and I don’t think anyone actually defended anyone in this thread. Old men yelling at clouds. Should be our motto. 

[Brisketexan 104465]

Just now, Clintonaldo said:

I will not watch the video. I hope Memphis surprises people with no riots. It’s almost like some people want it to happen to validate their opinions. I think the city has done a great job of being proactive and his mother is stressing peace. I feel horrible for the family. 

Good post.  I too hope that there are no riots.  The purpose of "social action" is to spur official action.  Here, the city has fired the cops and EMTs, charges have been filed, and the video is being released relatively promptly.  This is how we want the process to go, so society should provide positive feedback when that is the case.  And the mother stressing peace is good, and important.  Communities should take direction from the family -- they aren't the end-all be-all, but they are important voices in the process, and should be respected.

I hope that peace prevails, and that justice is done.

[hayden_horn 11360]

Just now, Clintonaldo said:

I will not watch the video. I hope Memphis surprises people with no riots. It’s almost like some people want it to happen to validate their opinions.

when people are uniformly angry and act out en masse against power, is it their fault? 

my kid throws a tantrum at the store because they haven't eaten for 6 hours. is it their fault? some of it. some of it is mine. some of it is unfortunate timing.

but my child's distress is real and he's not just having fun at my expense.

sometimes, i think many of yall view race relations the same way. like black people are just having a go at white people. that they invent reasons to get angry and it doesn't have to do with generations of systemic oppression.

OF COURSE THEY ARE FUCKING PISSED.

 

[hayden_horn 11360]

i know i'm repeating myself but i'm going to post this THIRTY-FIVE YEAR OLD song:

 

and again, for reference, these issues are still very manifest today. take a couple minutes and actually LISTEN to the lyrics and THINK for a goddamn minute about why they are saying these things THAT ARE STILL HAPPENING TODAY.

for reference, 35 years prior to this song's release, it was 1953. right around the time of brown v boe. 

just for reference.

[Brisketexan 104465]

Just now, hayden_horn said:

when people are uniformly angry and act out en masse against power, is it their fault? 

my kid throws a tantrum at the store because they haven't eaten for 6 hours. is it their fault? some of it. some of it is mine. some of it is unfortunate timing.

but my child's distress is real and he's not just having fun at my expense.

sometimes, i think many of yall view race relations the same way. like black people are just having a go at white people. that they invent reasons to get angry and it doesn't have to do with generations of systemic oppression.

OF COURSE THEY ARE FUCKING PISSED.

 

Also true.  But for the sake of advancing the ball, I hope for what I said above: that peace prevails, and that justice be done.  It takes so much thunder away from the "back the blue" crowd that will almost always excuse the cops because "look at what those thugs are doing!  Cities are burning!", and they will turn the narrative completely away from the genesis incident and frustration behind it, and turn it into more "wink wink, see I told ya we can't count on...those people...being civilized members of society.  Can't blame the cops now, can ya?"

You know, the exact shit we heard after George Floyd was murdered on camera, and people rioted.

[Clintonaldo 2570]

2 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

when people are uniformly angry and act out en masse against power, is it their fault? 

my kid throws a tantrum at the store because they haven't eaten for 6 hours. is it their fault? some of it. some of it is mine. some of it is unfortunate timing.

but my child's distress is real and he's not just having fun at my expense.

sometimes, i think many of yall view race relations the same way. like black people are just having a go at white people. that they invent reasons to get angry and it doesn't have to do with generations of systemic oppression.

OF COURSE THEY ARE FUCKING PISSED.

 

If they want to honor this young man and his family there will not be riots. I am sure some will come strictly to agitate who are probably on the other side and will want to do it to cause chaos. I don’t really understand your last paragraph. Of course they have a right to be angry. 

[hayden_horn 11360]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Also true.  But for the sake of advancing the ball, I hope for what I said above: that peace prevails, and that justice be done.  It takes so much thunder away from the "back the blue" crowd that will almost always excuse the cops because "look at what those thugs are doing!  Cities are burning!", and they will turn the narrative completely away from the genesis incident and frustration behind it, and turn it into more "wink wink, see I told ya we can't count on...those people...being civilized members of society.  Can't blame the cops now, can ya?"

You know, the exact shit we heard after George Floyd was murdered on camera, and people rioted.

 

1 minute ago, Clintonaldo said:

If they want to honor this young man and his family there will not be riots. I am sure some will come strictly to agitate who are probably on the other side and will want to do it to cause chaos. I don’t really understand your last paragraph. Of course they have a right to be angry. 

i know, i know, but you can only hit your dog so often before it bites you or somebody else. and that bite might actually manifest sometime when you aren't hitting the dog. but guess what? the dog thought you were going to hit it again and it's sick of your shit.

 

[Clintonaldo 2570]

Just now, hayden_horn said:

 

i know, i know, but you can only hit your dog so often before it bites you or somebody else. and that bite might actually manifest sometime when you aren't hitting the dog. but guess what? the dog thought you were going to hit it again and it's sick of your shit.

 

You aren’t wrong. 

[Brisketexan 104465]

1 minute ago, hayden_horn said:

 

i know, i know, but you can only hit your dog so often before it bites you or somebody else. and that bite might actually manifest sometime when you aren't hitting the dog. but guess what? the dog thought you were going to hit it again and it's sick of your shit.

 

Acknowledged.  Truly.  "Riots are the voice of the unheard," etc.  Just like any of us blow up with our spouse when they do the same bullshit thing over, and over, and over.  It's not about the specific incident - it's about the fact that it keeps happening, even though your spouse knows it's absolute bullshit and royally pisses you off, yet they KEEP DOING IT.  FOR FUCK'S SAKE, STOP DOING IT!  That's what the big fight y'all had was actually about.

But again, I hope that in this case, the community doesn't give the critics -- who are waiting to pounce -- ammo for discrediting their anger and feelings.

[hayden_horn 11360]

5 minutes ago, Clintonaldo said:

If they want to honor this young man and his family there will not be riots. I am sure some will come strictly to agitate who are probably on the other side and will want to do it to cause chaos. I don’t really understand your last paragraph. Of course they have a right to be angry. 

 

1 minute ago, Clintonaldo said:

You aren’t wrong. 

i think it's important to note that my poist wasn't directed as a rebuttal to yours. i get what you are saying. i'm sorry if it seemed like i was coming at you - that was not my intention.

i agree with you 100%, and i hope there are no riots, just peaceful marches and candlelight vigils. 

i really hope we can get to a point where cops are only accidentally killing people rather than BEATING THEM TO DEATH.

[52-80 19066]

17 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

and i like to think of myself as fairly reasonable.

[1]but when you start using coded racist language, i get annoyed. "there's less racism now than ever before" is a racist loser argument. there's always work to be done. yesterday's improvement over "deplorable" doesn't mean we cannot make an improvement tomorrow to somewhere north of "terrible."

and i am convinced that you are trying not to see race here. like, that you are a racist, whether or not you are intentionally is another argument altogether.

[2]here's a small challenge: do you agree that the behavior of this female black police chief firing 5 male black police officers for killing a male black person (i would go further and put in the descriptor BEATING HIM TO DEATH but whatever) in the timeline she did it was appropriate?

[3]i actually say it should be quicker. i would argue that if i and four friends of mine went and BEAT SOMEONE TO DEATH, we wouldn't be waiting weeks for justice.

[4]why has it taken so long to release the video?

[2]but, for the sake of exercise, let's plsay pretend for a minute and take race and gender out of everything i said above: do you agree that the behavior of the police chief firing 5 officers for BEATING A PERSON TO DEATH in the timeline done was appropriate? 

yes? why isn't it done so quickly in other cases? would race have something to do with it? especially the race of the officers and the chief? 

[5]whose race do you deem more important here: the victim or the perpetrators or the chief or the community being policed or what?

1. if you profess to be reasonable, a good start is explaining how praising the *fact* of improved race dynamics is a racist statement/“code” per se. it is a prima facie mindblowingly stupid accusation….(but not unexpected in convos of this nature)

2. the timeline which has literally not been discussed in this thread and i dont know (saw headline first today)… my answer is, as a material of procedure: 3-5 days. immediate suspension of gun/badge (for anything homicide), 1 day to pull and view evidence, 2-3 to discuss with IA/DA/HR to process and serve firing papers. then locked up because of normal bureaucracy. 

3. you and your friends would be locked up. you wouldnt be convicted (the “justice”) and sentenced for a while because of normal bureaucracy. is that wrong?

4. decision of the chief/department. also the same procedure/timeline with virtually every police homicide in the country; why do you think this one is different or relevant to race?

5. whose race do *you* suggest is more important?  for me, none. if you want to accuse the police’s action of being racially motivated, you review their history and their conduct at the stop, and add it to their conviction. if you think the chief, you investigate and lobby the charge. 
 

why do you think it should be any different - that suddenly and reflexively 1 party’s race takes precedence?

[hayden_horn 11360]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

Acknowledged.  Truly.  "Riots are the voice of the unheard," etc.  Just like any of us blow up with our spouse when they do the same bullshit thing over, and over, and over.  It's not about the specific incident - it's about the fact that it keeps happening, even though your spouse knows it's absolute bullshit and royally pisses you off, yet they KEEP DOING IT.  FOR FUCK'S SAKE, STOP DOING IT!  That's what the big fight y'all had was actually about.

But again, I hope that in this case, the community doesn't give the critics -- who are waiting to pounce -- ammo for discrediting their anger and feelings.

hey, man, i told her to stop calling me.

[Jameslaw121 4445]

So what are they waiting on the release the video?

[BrazilHorn 6576]

I think Memphis burns a bit tonight. For the cops to be this fucking proactive this video must be horrific. They fired and indicted these dudes before the video was released. That NEVER happens (at least not that I can recall)

I will watch this video as I think we all need to be reminded of the culture that police departments have enabled within their rank and file. I will show it to my kids as well (13/15) so they know also not to trust cops. You need these kind of videos to combat all of the bullshit pro-police cartoons and tv shows that are served up all the time.

 

[Clintonaldo 2570]

3 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

 

i think it's important to note that my poist wasn't directed as a rebuttal to yours. i get what you are saying. i'm sorry if it seemed like i was coming at you - that was not my intention.

i agree with you 100%, and i hope there are no riots, just peaceful marches and candlelight vigils. 

i really hope we can get to a point where cops are only accidentally killing people rather than BEATING THEM TO DEATH.

Lol at first I was like what the hell man. It’s all good. 

[YGIFS 19449]

Sometimes, and brace yourself white people living off the access roads of Texas suburbs, people get upset when members of their community are murdered in cold blood. 

[Dahobbs 17420]

22 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

The platonic/ideal condition is to be impartial and race-blind in conduct and belief.

What do you call it when people regularly and steadfastly insist every situation is motivated by race?

I disagree with the first premise. Hayden touches on it, but being race-blind would result in an inability to see race-based systemic problems. The solution to prejudice isn't just to "not be prejudice," but rather to be aware of and countermand those base responses. 

As to your second question, your extreme hyperbole ("every situation") muddles your argument. I don't know anyone that does that. But, for sake of argument, let's say there is someone that sees "every situation" as motivated by race. The question is whether that is an example of racism or something else? Is that person's belief motivated by a race-based prejudice against individuals/groups? If not, if instead it is motivated by, for example, a universal judgment (e.g., all people have a bias against people that look different), then it isn't racism. It is still almost certainly an example of flawed reasoning. But it isn't racism. 

[52-80 19066]

23 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

EVERY situation?  It's not credible.

Which is the same way I view people who are hyper-eager to divorce race from every situation.

we can easily narrow it down to manageable specific: this situation. 

you were basically the first person to bring it up.  what makes you credible in pulling that card when theres no information pointing to one way or another?

[Brew 3044]

15 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

when people are uniformly angry and act out en masse against power, is it their fault? 

my kid throws a tantrum at the store because they haven't eaten for 6 hours. is it their fault? some of it. some of it is mine. some of it is unfortunate timing.

but my child's distress is real and he's not just having fun at my expense.

sometimes, i think many of yall view race relations the same way. like black people are just having a go at white people. that they invent reasons to get angry and it doesn't have to do with generations of systemic oppression.

OF COURSE THEY ARE FUCKING PISSED.

 

I would say in this instance, they would be wrong to go any direction other than peaceful protests/marches. The department response has to play some part in the response that takes place.

[Dahobbs 17420]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Just like any of us blow up with our spouse when they do the same bullshit thing over, and over, and over.  It's not about the specific incident - it's about the fact that it keeps happening, even though your spouse knows it's absolute bullshit and royally pisses you off, yet they KEEP DOING IT.  FOR FUCK'S SAKE, STOP DOING IT!  That's what the big fight y'all had was actually about.

Been talking to Beard recently, huh? 

[Brisketexan 104465]

1 minute ago, 52-80 said:

we can easily narrow it down to manageable specific: this situation. 

you were basically the first person to bring it up.  what makes you credible in pulling that card when theres no information pointing to one way or another?

1 -- I did not bring it up with respect to the motivation of the cops in this situation.  I expressly said that the dominant factor was surely "blue vs. everyone else."

2 -- I DID bring it up as a potential factor in the fact that the usual "back the blue" crowd has thus far remained uncharacteristically silent in this incident.

So, nothing about the cops being racist in this case.  And yep, a definite question about the typical cop defender crowd being racist.  That you can't separate the two in this conversation (or really, you casually conflate them to serve your own purposes) reveals plenty.

[Brisketexan 104465]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Been talking to Beard recently, huh? 

I mean, it's a terrible example, but it may well be an accurate example.  Response in the moment disproportionate to the specific event, because he wasn't reacting to the specific event.  He was reacting because he has had enough of her bullshit.  Not an excuse for it (in both this specific example or in the analog of rioting).  Just noting where it comes from.

[jimmyjazz 45513]

49 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

B) A black police chief and a group of black cops are still agents of a system that is built on white supremacy, despite the color of their skin. When they perform their jobs as cops in America, their race is much less of a factor than the fact they are cops in America.

This is where I am.  Thank you for articulating it better than I was considering trying to do.  

I'm a white dude.  There are PLENTY of white dudes I find deplorable.  It doesn't make me a racist.  Black cops beating a black man to death doesn't mean they are individually racist, but it's possible they are the product of a system that trains them to assume black men are more likely to be guilty of a crime than others.  And, it's very possible they are selected for training and subsequently hired BECAUSE they don't have a problem with that kind of assumption.  They fit the mold.

[Celery Man 20874]

it seems like we need to state explicitly that

• saying there will be rioting is different than saying that there should be rioting
• understanding rioting as a consequence of a problem is not the same thing as hoping or rooting for rioting

 

[Caver60 395]

1 hour ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

Everyone should have to watch it. If you want your tax return, to be able to vote, to get your license renewed, you should have to watch it. Small children excepted.

 

 

on NPR this am, they were interviewing a local (black) pastor who has been active in police reform in Memphis. He said he is hopeful that the riots won't be as bad as they might be because 1) the cops were promptly fired, and 2) they have already been charged with murder (or manslaugther or something I forget exactly what).

 

 

 

It was a very good interview. The same pastor said, at the end (paraphrasing) "I'm not going to watch it, and I hope that people stop seeing black death as theatre."

Made me think. I'm still thinking about that statement.

[ztejas 43244]

 

 

[hayden_horn 11360]

Just now, 52-80 said:

1. if you profess to be reasonable, a good start is explaining how praising the *fact* of improved race dynamics is a racist statement/“code” per se. it is a prima facie mindblowingly stupid accusation….(but not unexpected in convos of this nature)

hh: this honestly could be a whole other thread, but if you don't understand racist codespeak, that's on you. i'm trying to explain it to you and you are now coming across as being obtuse. intentionally. in a discussion about a black man being BEATEN TO DEATH BY COPS, your first go-to is "it can't be about race. we have better race relations now than ever before." do you not see how that is akin to "ok, now we got the fever down. symptom, treated. forget about the cancer unless the fever comes back. you're healthier now than yesterday!" 

woohoo. still got cancer. yay. we have less racism now. COPS BEAT A BLACK MAN TO DEATH. just take some ibuprofen for that fever.

2. the timeline which has literally not been discussed in this thread and i dont know (saw headline first today)… my answer is, as a material of procedure: 3-5 days. immediate suspension of gun/badge (for anything homicide), 1 day to pull and view evidence, 2-3 to discuss with IA/DA/HR to process and serve firing papers. then locked up because of normal bureaucracy. 

hh: the timeline probably does not need to be discussed in the thread ABOUT THE THING UNDER DISCUSSION because i would imagine that anyone with intellectual curiosity would at least look up the facts of the case upon which they are about to opine; but here:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/26/us/tyre-nichols-timeline-investigation/index.html

i would quote it, but i think you could do the bare minimum and click the link and read the article and see the facts before declaring opinions about the case? i dunno. it's like people who get on a movie thread to say they haven't seen the movie but the star sucks. okay? great. thanks for nothing.

3. you and your friends would be locked up. you wouldnt be convicted (the “justice”) and sentenced for a while because of normal bureaucracy. is that wrong?

hh: me and my friends would be locked up that very night if the police knew where we were. it just so happens that after this beating, police knew where the officers wh did the beating were. because they were still there. after BEATING A MAN TO DEATH. but it still took weeks for perp walks and mugshots. weird. this has more to do with blue than black.

4. decision of the chief/department. also the same procedure/timeline with virtually every police homicide in the country; why do you think this one is different or relevant to race?

hh: i think this one is different on timeline and relevant to race for several different reasons. 1) the community policed is largly minority, 2) the chief is black, 3) the officers are black, 4) the victim is black. this is also not a simple one-off situation. this is part of a decades long conversation in this country - how police treat young black men. once again, they BEAT A YOUNG BLACK MAN TO DEATH - this is an ongoing problem. race may be a factor for many reasons, not limited to a) this is NOT the same procedure/timeline (wait, how do you know that this procedure and timeline are the same as every police homicide in the country? nevermind, maybe i'm starting to get it), b) these officers were named, disciplined, fired, charged, and the video will be release all in the same calendar month as the incident. this is unprecedented. sometimes it takes years for a video of cops KILLING AN UNARMED PERSON to be released. in this case, we seem to have reached firing/charges/video release rather rapidly, and people are wondering if that might have something to do with the race of the officers. any thoughts on that? i still think it took too long, but it's a laughably short timeline compared to other police brutality examples in this country. i would argue this has more to do with black than blue.

5. whose race do *you* suggest is more important?  for me, none. if you want to accuse the police’s action of being racially motivated, you review their history and their conduct at the stop, and add it to their conviction. if you think the chief, you investigate and lobby the charge. 

hh: i don't think any race is more important. i think plausible deniability is the key to any successful racist operation. hoods, codespeak, and situation ethics all come into play and it's a very important thing to have a discussion about race. you don't want to discuss it. it's weird to me. why not? it's clearly an important part of this story for many different reasons.
 

why do you think it should be any different - that suddenly and reflexively 1 party’s race takes precedence?

hh: i don't think it should. but cops seem to kill a lot of unarmed young black men in this country, so it's pretty fucking important, wouldn't you say?

fair enough to ask questions - lord knows i've asked enough in this thread. i answered in line above.

[FartingMonk 3606]

The ones that are asking for a justification for rioting.  It's 2023.  I think people are way beyond justification for anything.  People will use this an excuse to burn stuff and loot stuff.  

[hayden_horn 11360]

9 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

This is where I am.  Thank you for articulating it better than I was considering trying to do.  

I'm a white dude.  There are PLENTY of white dudes I find deplorable.  It doesn't make me a racist.  Black cops beating a black man to death doesn't mean they are individually racist, but it's possible they are the product of a system that trains them to assume black men are more likely to be guilty of a crime than others.  And, it's very possible they are selected for training and subsequently hired BECAUSE they don't have a problem with that kind of assumption.  They fit the mold.

agreed 100% - and you did a great job of what i was trying to say.

race is nevertheless inescapable in this instance. it is impossible to overlook. you have to put in some real effort to  be race-blind to this issue.

[hayden_horn 11360]

4 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

Cops don't operate as individuals in their capacity as cops. They operate as a demonstrably violent, armed extension of the state. You're using the wrong typecast, it's oppressor vs. the oppressed. And their skin color doesn't make a shit, when you're on duty as a cop, you're a cop and thus operating as an agent of an organization built on white supremacist ideals.

It's not a big stretch at all to assume the city of Memphis is using the fact that all of the offending cops are black to actually treat rogue cops in the way they actually should be treated, rather than the way they're usually treated by the American legal system.

and i missed this post. great fucking post.

[closetohumping 17380]

You people valuing property over civil rights disgust me

[52-80 19066]

25 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

i used to say "i don't see color" or similar shit like that. it was racist. of course i saw color. of course people see my whiteness. of course i see that hot girl over there and the sweathog dude on the harley. we make judgments every day. 

the key, i'm learning, is mindfulness. asking yourself critical questions all the time. it sucks and it's hard. i get tired of doing it.

that's why i asked you if you think before you post. i haven't always thought before posting, and this is definitely the board to shoot from your hip, so i get it. 

but where you fall down is looking at a work in progress, seeing an improvement, and declaring it done. 

race relations will never be done. black people have shit to think about also. we all have shit to think about. that's part of being a human. 

also part of being human, sadly, is the casting out, either metaphorically or literally, those who look or act or believe differently than you.

i'm just telling you that is what you are doing even if you do not realize it. like knows like. i used to do it all the time.

again, another completely wrong assumption.

racism is not done.  human in/out-group sociology can never be "done".  therefore it can always be improved.

what does not improve it is this current trend of reflexively characterizing everything as racist/discriminatory.  so even when situation does not support it, it paints a group as a victim, and as corollary another as oppressor.  that is NOT good relations.

im a minority.  i know when something happens to me is a consequence of my identity, or whether its just how things happen.  when a kid calls another kid a 'retard' on the playground, maybe its a genuine insult on his intellect.  maybe its just a throwaway insult.  you can recognize the difference, and call out the kid on his ignorance.  but its probably very fruitful to label him an ableist and declare a pandemic of ableism.

on this very website, ive pointed out sinister police conduct (eg daniel shaver).  ive pointed out hateful and racist conduct (eg daniel figurelli). but with some people you need to be wholly-aligned on all issues all the time.  youre a cop hater or a defender, nothing in between. its reductive, binary toxicity, and its many of the same folks all the time.

[Bama Chick 28596]

i think it's important to note that my poist wasn't directed as a rebuttal to yours. i get what you are saying. i'm sorry if it seemed like i was coming at you - that was not my intention.
i agree with you 100%, and i hope there are no riots, just peaceful marches and candlelight vigils. 
i really hope we can get to a point where cops are only accidentally killing people rather than BEATING THEM TO DEATH.

White Americans should be fucking pleased as punch that Black Americans only want equality and justice and not revenge.

[SHOOTER12 8787]

5 hours ago, Pancho said:

Just giving this its own thread since the video comes out today and the word is the video is the same or worse than Rodney King.

Memphis police basically saying they are waiting so late to release the video because they believe it to be so bad, they want the chance for kids to get home from school and people to get home from work so they are safe. 

Wholly crap...if that's the real reason, then they/we all are in for unprecedented violent protests.

[52-80 19066]

33 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

2 -- I DID bring it up as a potential factor in the fact that the usual "back the blue" crowd has thus far remained uncharacteristically silent in this incident.

So, nothing about the cops being racist in this case.

You asked verbatim, knowing the main difference to other publicized case being the race of the police, "I wonder what's different".  That's not a thinly-veiled insinuation.  It's a transparent accusation of the race of the cops being why they were fired and/or not defended.

It's obviously why nobody has 'backed the blue'.  (1) the heinous shit they did is virtually unpardonable.  (2) the 0.001% chance of exoneration that is in video, has not been made available for people with which to defend them.

Therefore no one has. You present only these paths:  (a) if you defend this, you're obviously wrong [duh].  (b) you don't defend this, because the cops are black [the "difference"].

Sounds a lot like "if you float, you're a witch".

I'd say you unintentionally laid a kafka trap.  But that you're a lawyer, probably you knew it, but were just dishonest.