The truth about these cop killings!

[Sportsaholic]

I'm curious. Should we only arrest people according to the percentages of population, or should we arrest people because they are committing crimes? And if that means the numbers are skewed then what? Should we say we have the proper amount incarcerated and whenever we release one color we can arrest another one of the same color?

What's going to happen is there won't be enough Police willing to do the job to arrest anyone committing crimes......then watch the bitching..........

 

[fatdaddycool]

Curious FDC, do you think zero percent of these shootings were justified???

I guess it would depend upon what the barometer is as it relates to "justifiable homicide". I think there is plenty of reason to believe that law enforcement shoot and kill a disproportionate number of black men illegally and without fear of justice being enforced upon them and certainly not to the degree that those officers exacted upon their victims.
I do not believe that any of the above mentioned killings was anything less than murder. I believe the department used its resources to distort and cover up the evidence in order to protect the officers. All murder doesn't have to be pre-meditated.
In the Rodney King case, the public saw the entire video of what happened as well as the jury. I saw the video and I was much younger then but even at that time there was no doubt in my mind that the video evidence clearly showed excessive force. Upon hearing of the acquittal the statement made to the public as to the reason for the acquittal was that we, the public, didn't see the video frame by frame, therefore we couldn't trust our own eyes but must rest our trust in the justice system that they did indeed see something nobody else did. Fast forward to the Alton Sterling case. The video is very clear. There is no evidence that police asked to speak to, question, or even identify the man. There was no attempt to properly investigate a singular report of a man waving a gun, nor is there any evidence of how Sterling was identified as the accused. There is no evidence of a weapon being brandished, nothing. What is on the tape is the police taser, tackle, and shoot him at point blank range while Sterling questions why they are attacking him. Mysteriously, all three officers at the scene, (yes there were three although some would have you believe there were only two) had somehow lost their body cameras in the fray yet one officer never had any physical contact with anyone. That gives me some serious doubts.
Shortly after Alton was killed, the police force involved in his death leaked his juvenile records which are supposed to be sealed, and his criminal records to the press while publicly stating that the names of the officers involved would not be released out of respect to the officers. They couldn't give a flying suck on a rolling donut about someone's father lying dead in a gutter while they purposely start a smear campaign against him in order to distort and pervert the evidence in the case. Even if I ignore all of that, when the police chief holds a press conference and makes the statement that what every single person can physically see on the only video evidence of the incident isn't what I should believe to be what happened because "what you don't see on the video is that the perps (yes he now referred to him as being guilty of something even though he was never shown due process for the alleged crime) that his right arm was free and that he was reaching for a gun. A gun that nobody had seen prior to that moment. You don't see him brandishing one and neither do police. So basically, I am supposed to accept as fact not what I can physically see with my own eyes, not what several eyewitness reports contain, but accept as fact what the person who shot someone 6 times at point blank range said happened. Just like the Rodney King video.
Look around sports and see how many people easily accept being told "what you don't see is" as fact and now even defend as fact something they never saw. If you saw a man physically kicking a dog to death, could you legally testify in court that the dog bit him several times before you arrived on the scene? No you couldn't. You only know the facts that you can physically attest to seeing. So why is it that so many so easily accept an explanation that is contrary to what you can physically see from the very person doing the shooting? Why is that? How can one say in any discussion going forward that he was fighting back and going for his gun? That isn't what they saw, but they'll sure keep saying it. They'll figuratively deny all the rules of evidence just to believe he deserved it.

So there you go. I don't believe police should have a standing assumption of innocence. I also know the public was very surprised to learn the extent, drpth and size of organized crime when first exposed as they were allowed to operate for years without anyone having any knowledge of its existence. I feel the same way about police and law enforcement. Corruption and criminal activity isn't something new to law enforcement in many other countries, with the advent and promulgation camera phones I believe we are starting to see the extent, depth, and size of the corruption that has been allowed to go unchecked forever.


Now everyone can make fun of my long answer. I prefer to explain myself and answer when asked a question, and some will criticize or deny this or that but the only absolute fact is that video and your eyes. What you see is exactly what happened, what you choose to believe is your own decision. I believe in my own eyesight far more than a cop that just unloaded six rounds to the chest of someone he had pinned and subdued.




Hope this helps,
FDC

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

 

[fatdaddycool]

I'm curious. Should we only arrest people according to the percentages of population, or should we arrest people because they are committing crimes? And if that means the numbers are skewed then what? Should we say we have the proper amount incarcerated and whenever we release one color we can arrest another one of the same color?

No, the point is that police spend more time and effort in policing poor black neighborhoods.
There are more white people using illegal drugs than black people, yet blacks are charged and incarcerated more often, given heavier sentences more often and so on.

There are more white people than blacks in Ferguson, by a sizable number I might add, yet blacks accounted for over 90% of the police department's arrests and citations. The good thing about math is that it's absolute. The numbers don't lie.
It's not because blacks commit more crimes, because they don't, they just got arrested and charged more often.

You may deny those facts as much add you'd like. It doesn't negate them at all, just means you choose to ignore the truth in favor of something less in order to feel better.

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

 

[fatdaddycool]

What's going to happen is there won't be enough Police willing to do the job to arrest anyone committing crimes......then watch the bitching..........

Sure there will. Now there might not be enough people willing to do the job without all the perks of being above the law and have a standing assumption of chivalry, honesty, and heroism even though they're just people like everyone else.

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

 

[Amethyest]

I can't keep silent anymore....

I can't keep silent anymore....

Ummmm, you realize that blacks only make up 13% of our population right? Whites make up a far greater percentile, so of course more whites are shot or incarcerated. The problem is you're 5 times more likely to be shot if you're black than if you're white.
The Ferguson police department was shut down and every single officer fired after Wilson murdered Michael Brown and covered it up due to the fact that more than 90% of all citations and arrests were of the black population or residents which once again was the minority of it'd citizenship.
Yes we have a media problem, tel your brother to quit believing it



Hope this helps,
FDC

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

That is the most ridiculously presumptive editorial I've seen to date.

Several falsehoods presented as factors. Michael Brown was not a suspect in any robbery as the "robbery" this dolt uses the video for was never ever ever reported. Nor was a description of him ever released.
He refers to the Alton Sterling murder as an altercation between officers and states that he, Alton Sterling went for a weapon during the altercation, however there is absolutely zero physical evidence of that in the videos and several eyewitness reports contradicting that very same action which is being alleged by the police that shot him. Police are human too, they lie as well.
Philando Castile, he says police were on "high alert" due to a robbery. Not true, another embellishment of the facts by the ridiculously biased Crowder. The robbery and subsequent BOLO happened three days prior. Police receive several of these daily so being on high alert us again an embellishment used to sway the listener.
He uses a ridiculous clip from maniac cop or some shit to further distort the facts.
He equates a man being shot without reason to an officer being fired from his job.

Here's the deal, some of society is more than willing to accept things as fact if those "facts" are in keeping with their line of thought. However, facts are concrete and cannot be presumed or assumed true based only on police accounts and that is what always happens. The "facts" lie in the numbers. While some may see the death of a black man as deserved once the police that are responsible for his death purposely release his arrest record in order to sway public opinion against the deceased, most fail to recognize that those records and the identities of the victims are generally unknown to the potential murderers prior to their murder. (See how easy it is to change a word in order to seek a desired reaction).
Maybe you can tell me why the Ferguson police department was completely disbanded by the justice department due to rampant racist practices? Or why officer Wilson was allowed to leave the scene of a shooting in which he was the sole suspect, go to a police fraternity and shower, change clothes and then return to the scene and be the only officer to check in any and all evidence from the scene? Why was there no DNA from Michael Brown found anywhere near, or on killer Wilson's weapon, hand or holster if they fought over the weapon when Wilson stated that he "felt his fingers crawling around and over his trying to pull the trigger". Why does Wilson say he was in fear for his life yet when Brown flees after being shot, leaving Wilson in the safety of his squad car, he doesn't call for back up, radio that shots were fired, instead pursues Brown continuing to shoot. Why was Browns body 153' from the open door of the squad car yet Wilson's account that Brown was charging him accepted as factual?


Yeah, I'd say your boy crowder is incredibly misinformed and biased.

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

I guess it would depend upon what the barometer is as it relates to "justifiable homicide". I think there is plenty of reason to believe that law enforcement shoot and kill a disproportionate number of black men illegally and without fear of justice being enforced upon them and certainly not to the degree that those officers exacted upon their victims.
I do not believe that any of the above mentioned killings was anything less than murder. I believe the department used its resources to distort and cover up the evidence in order to protect the officers. All murder doesn't have to be pre-meditated.
In the Rodney King case, the public saw the entire video of what happened as well as the jury. I saw the video and I was much younger then but even at that time there was no doubt in my mind that the video evidence clearly showed excessive force. Upon hearing of the acquittal the statement made to the public as to the reason for the acquittal was that we, the public, didn't see the video frame by frame, therefore we couldn't trust our own eyes but must rest our trust in the justice system that they did indeed see something nobody else did. Fast forward to the Alton Sterling case. The video is very clear. There is no evidence that police asked to speak to, question, or even identify the man. There was no attempt to properly investigate a singular report of a man waving a gun, nor is there any evidence of how Sterling was identified as the accused. There is no evidence of a weapon being brandished, nothing. What is on the tape is the police taser, tackle, and shoot him at point blank range while Sterling questions why they are attacking him. Mysteriously, all three officers at the scene, (yes there were three although some would have you believe there were only two) had somehow lost their body cameras in the fray yet one officer never had any physical contact with anyone. That gives me some serious doubts.
Shortly after Alton was killed, the police force involved in his death leaked his juvenile records which are supposed to be sealed, and his criminal records to the press while publicly stating that the names of the officers involved would not be released out of respect to the officers. They couldn't give a flying suck on a rolling donut about someone's father lying dead in a gutter while they purposely start a smear campaign against him in order to distort and pervert the evidence in the case. Even if I ignore all of that, when the police chief holds a press conference and makes the statement that what every single person can physically see on the only video evidence of the incident isn't what I should believe to be what happened because "what you don't see on the video is that the perps (yes he now referred to him as being guilty of something even though he was never shown due process for the alleged crime) that his right arm was free and that he was reaching for a gun. A gun that nobody had seen prior to that moment. You don't see him brandishing one and neither do police. So basically, I am supposed to accept as fact not what I can physically see with my own eyes, not what several eyewitness reports contain, but accept as fact what the person who shot someone 6 times at point blank range said happened. Just like the Rodney King video.
Look around sports and see how many people easily accept being told "what you don't see is" as fact and now even defend as fact something they never saw. If you saw a man physically kicking a dog to death, could you legally testify in court that the dog bit him several times before you arrived on the scene? No you couldn't. You only know the facts that you can physically attest to seeing. So why is it that so many so easily accept an explanation that is contrary to what you can physically see from the very person doing the shooting? Why is that? How can one say in any discussion going forward that he was fighting back and going for his gun? That isn't what they saw, but they'll sure keep saying it. They'll figuratively deny all the rules of evidence just to believe he deserved it.

So there you go. I don't believe police should have a standing assumption of innocence. I also know the public was very surprised to learn the extent, drpth and size of organized crime when first exposed as they were allowed to operate for years without anyone having any knowledge of its existence. I feel the same way about police and law enforcement. Corruption and criminal activity isn't something new to law enforcement in many other countries, with the advent and promulgation camera phones I believe we are starting to see the extent, depth, and size of the corruption that has been allowed to go unchecked forever.


Now everyone can make fun of my long answer. I prefer to explain myself and answer when asked a question, and some will criticize or deny this or that but the only absolute fact is that video and your eyes. What you see is exactly what happened, what you choose to believe is your own decision. I believe in my own eyesight far more than a cop that just unloaded six rounds to the chest of someone he had pinned and subdued.




Hope this helps,
FDC

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

No, the point is that police spend more time and effort in policing poor black neighborhoods.
There are more white people using illegal drugs than black people, yet blacks are charged and incarcerated more often, given heavier sentences more often and so on.

There are more white people than blacks in Ferguson, by a sizable number I might add, yet blacks accounted for over 90% of the police department's arrests and citations. The good thing about math is that it's absolute. The numbers don't lie.
It's not because blacks commit more crimes, because they don't, they just got arrested and charged more often.

You may deny those facts as much add you'd like. It doesn't negate them at all, just means you choose to ignore the truth in favor of something less in order to feel better.

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

Sure there will. Now there might not be enough people willing to do the job without all the perks of being above the law and have a standing assumption of chivalry, honesty, and heroism even though they're just people like everyone else.

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

FDC....You are truly an amazing, proper individual....This world would be a far better place if more people would at least try to open their minds sight and hearing as to what you are saying....Thank you for all your post's and keep them coming....:0008



Respect from someone properly able to analyze things....:0008:toast:

 

[fatdaddycool]

Thank you very much for the kind words amethyst. I do wish it was easier to explain myself with less words but it's just the way I am I suppose. Cheers!

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

 

[MadJack]

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

You're gonna ruin your eyes. Just sayin'. :0003

I'm gonna go rest mine now. :0008

 

[fatdaddycool]

You're gonna ruin your eyes. Just sayin'. :0003

I'm gonna go rest mine now. :0008

Haha, yeah isn't that the truth. I've started to use reading glasses lately as well, that's not good. I'm headed out to see Uncle Lucious and give the eardrums some much needed attention.

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

 

[MadJack]

Haha, yeah isn't that the truth. I've started to use reading glasses lately as well, that's not good. I'm headed out to see Uncle Lucious and give the eardrums some much needed attention.

Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

:toast:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gjn23]

FDC....You are truly an amazing, proper individual....This world would be a far better place if more people would at least try to open their minds sight and hearing as to what you are saying....Thank you for all your post's and keep them coming....:0008



Respect from someone properly able to analyze things....:0008:toast:

Except most of the stuff you've quote is pure bs or just plain wrong.....i'll just paraphrase the mindless crap that comes to mind

Blacks are 5x more likely to be shot
Blacks are 2.5x more likely to be shot
(Which one is it)

Every shooting is murder (really...about as stupid as each victim deserved it)

Every police department engaged in a cover up
(again, wide ranging assumptive bs)

Police officers should not be allowed innocent until provem guilty
(cant recall is that was fdc or obama or both...actually i can, both)

Police spend too much time policing in black neighborhoods (most police are responding to calls, they go where 911 calls take them)

I believe the point of the original poster was to point out that if you listen to the media, the race pimps like sharpton, farrakan, and jackson and #blm one would believe that cops are racists who shoot innocent black people......when in fact more whites are shot than blacks and if you extrapolate it to what race commits more violent crimes, whites are shot by police at a higher percentage

But hey...all the lazy have to do is say the word racist and it ends the debate (in their mind)

 

[jas4bama]

No, the point is that police spend more time and effort in policing poor black neighborhoods.

FDC,I am not being ugly or smart ass at all. I am just curious as to what you think would happen in these areas if the cops said screw it, we are not going back or limited patrol in the "poor black neighborhoods".Do you think crime would go up or down if they announced this to enhance better relations with blacks.

 

[Amethyest]

....

 

[Amethyest]

Take your time

Take your time

No, the point is that police spend more time and effort in policing poor black neighborhoods.

FDC,I am not being ugly or smart ass at all. I am just curious as to what you think would happen in these areas if the cops said screw it, we are not going back or limited patrol in the "poor black neighborhoods".Do you think crime would go up or down if they announced this to enhance better relations with blacks.

Now go back and reread what you typed....Simpleton

 

[jas4bama]

I don't understand. Please explain it to me. AGAIN, I am serious as to his opinion. Not really sure what I asked was so wrong,but you felt the need to jump in so I will let you speak for FDC.

 

[Amethyest]

Nay!

Nay!

I don't understand. Please explain it to me. AGAIN, I am serious as to his opinion. Not really sure what I asked was so wrong,but you felt the need to jump in so I will let you speak for FDC.

If you feel there is nothing wrong with your previous reply to FDC....Then Your a waste of time....Simpleton



( If and when Spidey joins....I hope he never visits your page )



( Nay that's just mean....Once only )

 

[jas4bama]

wow,but ok. I will step aside and not reply in this thread.I respect FDC opinion on this topic and I truly apologize if my comments was out of line.

 

[hedgehog]

I was shocked to see the truth written about how many white and black men have been killed since the first of the year. My brother who helps as a minister in Houston and gave a talk to his parish last week actually researched it for his talk and wrote me the other day and gave me the facts! He stated that the United states does not have a race problem, what it has is a media problem! The number of black men shot by cops since the first of the year was 128. The number of white men shot by cops since the first of the year, 225. I was shocked to see this as all we hear about is how bad it is for the African American men. But actually the media makes us all believe it is only the black men being shot out there. ONE person shot by a cop who does not deserve it is one too many! Black or white.


ARROW

great post aarow, Thanks sir.

 

[fatdaddycool]

No, the point is that police spend more time and effort in policing poor black neighborhoods.

FDC,I am not being ugly or smart ass at all. I am just curious as to what you think would happen in these areas if the cops said screw it, we are not going back or limited patrol in the "poor black neighborhoods".Do you think crime would go up or down if they announced this to enhance better relations with blacks.

Jas,
That already happens in Chicago which is why you see the high occurrence of gang violence in the west side. Most of the poorest areas of Chicago have been gentrified to high dollar condominiums and neighborhood improvements. The west side hasn't seen the same efforts. Law enforcement does not expend equal resources there to investigate many of homicides of those with known gang affiliations as they will ultimately be solved by retaliatory violence. This isn't an exclusive practice to Chicago or Compton. While it may not be talked about our expressed as an accepted practice it most certainly is the case. It isn't a practice that provides no benefit to the general population either. It serves the public as a demographic to point their fingers at in times of social unrest and allows law enforcement to allocate the majority of their funds to the more affluent neighborhoods. I'm neither advocating nor denying it's existence, merely providing what I think happens in the matter you presented.

Okay back to the show!



Sent from my SM-G928P using Tapatalk

 

[Shleprock]

Most cops around here can't stand him !!

Really now my brother is a milwaukee cop and even though they don't deal with sheriff's department at functions I'm at with many many milwaukee cops they have no problem with him you may be thinking more about flynn? There are alot of critics among union rank and file County workers who don't like his style within the department. I am aretired county worker didn't work under Clark but know many people and there are critics but they are outnumbered I can promise you that.

 

[Shleprock]

He seems like the kind of man that would have a lot of support, interesting.

:0008

I don't buy his statement at all i believe that's more the feeling on the east side of milwaukee. Hammer knows what I mean by that.