6 ms·

What happened to Floyd is horrible and police abuse is a real thing. I never understood why police officers in the US have no common sense. I recall many incide

What happened to Floyd is horrible and police abuse is a real thing. I never understood why police officers in the US have no common sense. I recall many incidents where they shoot and kill people trying to escape (so no threat to them). I'm happy the public is doing something about it. However, I'm also annoyed by the stupidity of many people who blindly yell racism. Not so long ago there was a naked black male (Harvard student) walking down the streets of Cambridge, MA. Police came and arrested him. He refused arrest so they have to use force, but it was reasonable force required to arrest someone who is refusing arrest. People filmed the incident and next day many accused the police for racism. WTF!? I watched the film and there was nothing out of the ordinary. We should support good police officers and not assume all are bad and racist. They risk their life to defend us and our communities (white and black and everyone else).

tom_ 6y ago
The more usual term for an adult human male is a "man".
0xddd 6y ago
Yes, what a heroic display we're commenting on here. What exactly is your point and how is it relevant to this unsettling video? Just the platitude that not every interaction is necessarily racist?
Miner49er 6y ago
Police don't defend normal people or communities, that's not their job. Their job is to enforce the law, no matter how unjust the law is. > We should support good police officers and not assume all are bad and racist. There is no such thing as a non-racist or good police officer. The police system as a whole is racist. Anybody who chooses to participate in and support that system everyday of their lives is racist.
- tinyhouse 6y ago
  What drugs are you on? What's the alternative you're suggesting then? Are you saying we don't need police and everyone can just own a gun and defend themselves when they need to?
  - Miner49er 6y ago
    I'm just pointing out facts. The police's purpose is not to protect people. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia Anytime a police officer tries to fight the system they are a part of, they always cease to become a police officer. They're forced out. The system doesn't allow "good" police to exist.
    - tinyhouse 6y ago
      You're ignoring the question. You said you cannot be not racist if you're part of the police system. Yet you don't offer any alternatives.
      - Miner49er 6y ago
        It would require massive fundamental change to society, but one idea is eventually citizens could "police" themselves. The majority of people could go through training and work together to provide security and protection in their own communities when need be.
        tinyhouse 6y ago
        Well, that's what I thought you're suggesting... I know some places around the world that operate like that. I suggest you go and live there before suggesting something crazy like that. Good luck.
    - pwillia7 6y ago
      Similar to many of the other 'machines' that exist in our society. You can only be a cog in it serving its greater will or you are cast out.
- 101404 6y ago
  > Police don't defend normal people or communities, that's not their job. Their job is to enforce the law, no matter how unjust the law is. That's the difference between calling them "police" or calling them "law enforcement". I think that it is no coincidence that Americans were "trained" to say "law enforcement". Call them police, because a police officers first duty is to the community.
- banads 6y ago
  >The police system as a whole is racist. Anybody who chooses to participate in and support that system everyday of their lives is racist. What about all the Democrats and Republicans who are ultimately responsible for the laws governing the police system and who have for years tacitly or explicitly supported the war on drugs?
  - Miner49er 6y ago
    Yeah also racist.
  - UncleMeat 6y ago
    Of course. Anti-racist activists have long been extremely critical of the lawmakers. The dems tend to be better than the republicans, but both participate in and contribute to a system that ultimately is racist at its very core.
    - banads 6y ago
      It seems like most people (especially mainstream news such as CNN) focus the majority of their criticism on the police, while ignoring the politicians of both parties that are the root cause.
josephorjoe 6y ago
that is some bizarre and creative whataboutism
st1ck 6y ago
I wonder if it's also a sexism. Public exposure is usually more acceptable for women than men.
- tinyhouse 6y ago
  That's true but I'm not sure it would've been the same if a woman did that. The main difference is how the public would react.
kindatrue 6y ago
Fun Fact: A court determined it was legal for the NYPD to discriminate against hiring police officers that had IQs too high. https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/story?id=95836 https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/st...
- non-entity 6y ago
  Anecdotal of course, but I was discussing this with someone who told me their cousin, despite being bipolar (although currently treated) and a raging racist online was being recruited by local police offices.
- bruceb 6y ago
  Yes because they would leave the police force quickly. Training officers takes time and money. Most businesses will try to avoid hiring someone that is going to leave right away.
acobster 6y ago
How does nakedness justify escalating the situation to voilence? "The law is the law" is just an excuse. When people talk about systemic racism they're talking about how the system operates as a whole. As I've commented elsewhere, people need to educate themselves about systemic racism in this country. "So You Want to Talk about Race" by Ijeoma Oluo or "Me and White Supremacy" by Layla Saad are good places to start.
- tinyhouse 6y ago
  Thanks for the book recommendation. > How does nakedness justify escalating the situation to voilence? "The law is the law" is just an excuse. Are you suggesting every person to decide what's allowed and what's not to the best of their judgment? I agree not all illegal activities are equal. If you use common sense then indeed you should try your best to avoid violence in illegal activities that don't put anyone in danger. But at the end of the day, when all fail and the person in front of you is not cooperating and refusing to put cloths on, then the police has no choice and arrest the person against their will. (If you disagree that nakedness should be illegal that's a different story and has nothing to do with the police)
  - acobster 6y ago
    You're welcome! > If you disagree that nakedness should be illegal that's a different story and has nothing to do with the police I do question the logic of nakedness being illegal (in many cases anyway), but I agree that's a different story. :) > Are you suggesting every person to decide what's allowed and what's not to the best of their judgment? I'm assuming the case you mentioned at Harvard was this one: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/04/cambridge-police-punched-naked-black-harvard-student-they-were-arresting.html https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/04/cambridge-police... So who gets to decide what "reasonable force required to arrest someone who is refusing arrest" is? You really think that repeatedly punching someone for being naked and on drugs is reasonable? Why? Why not just detain him and work on getting him to a safe place? Why does the situation warrant violence at all? Just because it's common in this country does not mean it's justified or ethical. What if they had shot him, or knelt on his neck and killed him? Would that be "reasonable"? Where, then, is the line? Right now, cops basically have 100% discretion to decide where that line is. Because they are not actually accountable to anyone but themselves, they just act and draw the line after the fact. The only difference between this and the murder of George Floyd is degree. That's what I meant. > If you use common sense then indeed you should try your best to avoid violence in illegal activities that don't put anyone in danger I agree in the abstract, but unfortunately there's a racial element to this "common sense." In the US, black people especially must use a different kind of common sense, and must always remember that any kind of transgression - up to and including "looking suspicious" - is grounds for detention, which can escalate arbitrarily to execution on the spot. So there's really no "avoiding violence" when your mere existence is grounds for murder with no consequences. And again, just because you can have a "reasonable" expectation of violence from the cops does not mean that violence is justified. > the police has no choice Well, they had a choice to not become cops in the first place, to not enter a system that lacks accountability. They have a choice to not enforce unjust laws, especially in situations where no one's in danger. They have a choice to challenge their colleagues to justify their actions, whether that's kneeling on someone's neck or punching them in the stomach. They have a choice between violence and deescalation. But they choose violence and escalation with alarming frequency in this country. And the system protects them.

tom_ 6y ago

The more usual term for an adult human male is a "man".

0xddd 6y ago

Yes, what a heroic display we're commenting on here. What exactly is your point and how is it relevant to this unsettling video? Just the platitude that not every interaction is necessarily racist?

Miner49er 6y ago

Police don't defend normal people or communities, that's not their job. Their job is to enforce the law, no matter how unjust the law is. > We should support good police officers and not assume all are bad and racist. There is no such thing as a non-racist or good police officer. The police system as a whole is racist. Anybody who chooses to participate in and support that system everyday of their lives is racist.

tinyhouse 6y ago
What drugs are you on? What's the alternative you're suggesting then? Are you saying we don't need police and everyone can just own a gun and defend themselves when they need to?
- Miner49er 6y ago
  I'm just pointing out facts. The police's purpose is not to protect people. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia Anytime a police officer tries to fight the system they are a part of, they always cease to become a police officer. They're forced out. The system doesn't allow "good" police to exist.
  - tinyhouse 6y ago
    You're ignoring the question. You said you cannot be not racist if you're part of the police system. Yet you don't offer any alternatives.
    - Miner49er 6y ago
      It would require massive fundamental change to society, but one idea is eventually citizens could "police" themselves. The majority of people could go through training and work together to provide security and protection in their own communities when need be.
      - tinyhouse 6y ago
        Well, that's what I thought you're suggesting... I know some places around the world that operate like that. I suggest you go and live there before suggesting something crazy like that. Good luck.
  - pwillia7 6y ago
    Similar to many of the other 'machines' that exist in our society. You can only be a cog in it serving its greater will or you are cast out.
101404 6y ago
> Police don't defend normal people or communities, that's not their job. Their job is to enforce the law, no matter how unjust the law is. That's the difference between calling them "police" or calling them "law enforcement". I think that it is no coincidence that Americans were "trained" to say "law enforcement". Call them police, because a police officers first duty is to the community.
banads 6y ago
>The police system as a whole is racist. Anybody who chooses to participate in and support that system everyday of their lives is racist. What about all the Democrats and Republicans who are ultimately responsible for the laws governing the police system and who have for years tacitly or explicitly supported the war on drugs?
- Miner49er 6y ago
  Yeah also racist.
- UncleMeat 6y ago
  Of course. Anti-racist activists have long been extremely critical of the lawmakers. The dems tend to be better than the republicans, but both participate in and contribute to a system that ultimately is racist at its very core.
  - banads 6y ago
    It seems like most people (especially mainstream news such as CNN) focus the majority of their criticism on the police, while ignoring the politicians of both parties that are the root cause.

josephorjoe 6y ago

that is some bizarre and creative whataboutism

st1ck 6y ago

I wonder if it's also a sexism. Public exposure is usually more acceptable for women than men.

tinyhouse 6y ago
That's true but I'm not sure it would've been the same if a woman did that. The main difference is how the public would react.

kindatrue 6y ago

Fun Fact: A court determined it was legal for the NYPD to discriminate against hiring police officers that had IQs too high. https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/story?id=95836 https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/st...

non-entity 6y ago
Anecdotal of course, but I was discussing this with someone who told me their cousin, despite being bipolar (although currently treated) and a raging racist online was being recruited by local police offices.
bruceb 6y ago
Yes because they would leave the police force quickly. Training officers takes time and money. Most businesses will try to avoid hiring someone that is going to leave right away.

acobster 6y ago

How does nakedness justify escalating the situation to voilence? "The law is the law" is just an excuse. When people talk about systemic racism they're talking about how the system operates as a whole. As I've commented elsewhere, people need to educate themselves about systemic racism in this country. "So You Want to Talk about Race" by Ijeoma Oluo or "Me and White Supremacy" by Layla Saad are good places to start.

tinyhouse 6y ago
Thanks for the book recommendation. > How does nakedness justify escalating the situation to voilence? "The law is the law" is just an excuse. Are you suggesting every person to decide what's allowed and what's not to the best of their judgment? I agree not all illegal activities are equal. If you use common sense then indeed you should try your best to avoid violence in illegal activities that don't put anyone in danger. But at the end of the day, when all fail and the person in front of you is not cooperating and refusing to put cloths on, then the police has no choice and arrest the person against their will. (If you disagree that nakedness should be illegal that's a different story and has nothing to do with the police)
- acobster 6y ago
  You're welcome! > If you disagree that nakedness should be illegal that's a different story and has nothing to do with the police I do question the logic of nakedness being illegal (in many cases anyway), but I agree that's a different story. :) > Are you suggesting every person to decide what's allowed and what's not to the best of their judgment? I'm assuming the case you mentioned at Harvard was this one: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/04/cambridge-police-punched-naked-black-harvard-student-they-were-arresting.html https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/04/cambridge-police... So who gets to decide what "reasonable force required to arrest someone who is refusing arrest" is? You really think that repeatedly punching someone for being naked and on drugs is reasonable? Why? Why not just detain him and work on getting him to a safe place? Why does the situation warrant violence at all? Just because it's common in this country does not mean it's justified or ethical. What if they had shot him, or knelt on his neck and killed him? Would that be "reasonable"? Where, then, is the line? Right now, cops basically have 100% discretion to decide where that line is. Because they are not actually accountable to anyone but themselves, they just act and draw the line after the fact. The only difference between this and the murder of George Floyd is degree. That's what I meant. > If you use common sense then indeed you should try your best to avoid violence in illegal activities that don't put anyone in danger I agree in the abstract, but unfortunately there's a racial element to this "common sense." In the US, black people especially must use a different kind of common sense, and must always remember that any kind of transgression - up to and including "looking suspicious" - is grounds for detention, which can escalate arbitrarily to execution on the spot. So there's really no "avoiding violence" when your mere existence is grounds for murder with no consequences. And again, just because you can have a "reasonable" expectation of violence from the cops does not mean that violence is justified. > the police has no choice Well, they had a choice to not become cops in the first place, to not enter a system that lacks accountability. They have a choice to not enforce unjust laws, especially in situations where no one's in danger. They have a choice to challenge their colleagues to justify their actions, whether that's kneeling on someone's neck or punching them in the stomach. They have a choice between violence and deescalation. But they choose violence and escalation with alarming frequency in this country. And the system protects them.