I repeat: Police that use unlawful force should obviously be arrested and prosecuted, as they have in many cases. Who's saying otherwise?
"Law and order are a very important part of our Republic."
Cops beating the shit out of and/or murdering citizens isn't law and order, sorry.
I am not suggesting anything. I am being led where the facts take me.
It's documented that blacks are committing murder and other violent crimes at the highest per capita rate of any racial demographic in the US. This leads to a much higher degree of interaction with police in regards to violent crimes for black communities. More police interaction for violent circumstances = more chance for police use of force (generally lawful, but also unlawful).
You can adjust for socio-economic groups, that's fine, please do so. I am sure the overall violent crime rate on Sullivan's Island per capita is way less than in North Charleston. But then we need to stop talking about race as if it's a causative factor. It's clearly not.
@Cid95: Yes, there are studies that suggest violent crime rates among whites and blacks are similar when comparing equivalent socio-economic groups. But, rather than go down the rat hole of the quality of such research papers, let's just say we don't know.
Set that aside; are you suggesting that the police are only stopping blacks who are in actuality violent offenders, and that they knew this a priori? Is that what was happening with stop-and-frisk in NYC? A complaint in the black community is that everyone is looked at as a violent criminal and treated as such.
It sounds like your position is that the police have a greater chance of having a violent encounter when approaching blacks than whites. There are many in the black community that believe precisely the same thing: that they have a greater chance of being beaten, tasered, or shot than whites whenever they have any encounter with the police. What is going to change that? More aggressive policing?
I applaud the two men and all who work to bring about environmental justice. They are heroes. Don't give up, keep on fighting the good fight for it and a healthier place to live for those citizens. Really good that Mr. Mikell and all who helped will get the green space and not another industrial site.
Police that use unlawful force should obviously be arrested and prosecuted, as they have in many cases. Who's saying otherwise?
Mat - Again, for the umpteenth time, small-government * liberty =/= Mad Max. Law and order are a very important part of our Republic.
Aldoraine - No, we don't know those things. Or, at least, I am not aware of any real data on them. Are you?
Regardless, this article, and the comments about it that I am commenting on, are related to accusations that blacks are being treated unfairly, apparently solely because of the color of their skin. Certainly, every murder arrest in the UCR reports is a contact with police relating to a violent incident by a suspected violent offender. Certainly they happen at a much higher rate per capita for blacks than other races as the Census data combined with the UCR data clearly shows.
Does it not stand to reason to you that this confirmed higher incidence per capita of police contact related to violent offenses by violent offenders will increase the chances of unlawful violent interactions with police resulting in lawful police use of force in response?
@Cid95: "We do absolutely know that blacks commit violent crimes at the highest rate per capita of any racial demographic in the US (US Census + FBI Uniform Crime Reports). Thus, we know that violent incident engagement with the police (arrests and others) is highest for blacks per capita."
The second sentence does not necessarily follow from the first. But, regardless, do we know that affluent blacks commit violent crimes at a greater rate than affluent whites? Do we know that poor blacks commit violent crimes at a greater rate than poor whites? Should police consider all blacks they stop as potentially violent? The trouble with racial profiling is that it goes against the grain of Constitutional ideals: equal protection under the law and presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
Some of you are actually arguing that A) cops are equal opportunity skull crackers and B) you're totally OK with that because "law and order", is that about right?
And you're the small-government, "don't tread on me", liberty and freedom folks too, right?
So, truthrus, the article above has no meaning, right? Because those folks are guilty of being poor and black, so... fuck 'em, right? If they weren't so damned poor, they'd be in a great neighborhood, and if they weren't so black, they'd be in an even better neighborhood. But, as it stands, tough shit, blacks. Suffer quietly, please, our white ears are EXHAUSTED of hearing you complain.
Um... something something fix it yourself black on black your problem not mine something something taxes something something 'Murica!
lee minor,,,fact check time on the disproportionate use of force by cops vs. blacks vs.whites. using your way of thinking, law breakers choose to participate in difficult, dangerous and potentially lethal work so que sera sera.
Lee - You feel things about black males being met with disproportionate force. You assume things. You believe things. These do not, however, constitute "the truth" (outside of your own mind). Do you have any data beyond anecdotes?
You're like Stormfront or the KKK - listing anecdotal incidents of racial violence committed by blacks against whites as "the truth" of a race war.
We do absolutely know that blacks commit violent crimes at the highest rate per capita of any racial demographic in the US (US Census + FBI Uniform Crime Reports). Thus, we know that violent incident engagement with the police (arrests and others) is highest for blacks per capita. It is logical that this would result in the highest amount lawful violent police use of force against blacks.
There are clearly incidents of unlawful and excessive use of force against citizens, some of whom are black.
"I am aware of all those shootings, btw. White people are shot too--doesn't make the point less valid." Are you? Might want to Google it, because Ronald Hamilton isn't white, nor was he shot.
Lee, you need to realize that every situation is different. Different cops involved and different people they're dealing with. Using blanket statements about police officers is no better than making blanket statements about blacks, or Muslims, or any other demographic. Sometimes they mess up when making split second decisions. So do doctors. It sucks, but bad decisions are likely to be made in situations where decisions need to be made fast.
You brought up the Bundy situation. There's one where the decision wasn't made in haste. And as a result, at least in the NV standoff, NOBODY DIED. It seems like that disappoints some people, but what was the other way of handling it? Shoot at the ranchers? Then they shoot back, and because they already have rifles and advantageous positions a bunch of federal agents get killed?
BTW, it's pretty unfair to use George Zimmerman in an attempt to impugn actual police officers.
I am aware of all those shootings, btw. White people are shot too--doesn't make the point less valid.
The Bundy assholes threatened violence against LEOs and POINTED WEAPONS AT THEM SEVERAL TIMES. It took a chase, and two reaches toward a weapon for ONE of them to be shot (LaVoy Finnicum). Roof was taken alive. Holmes was taken alive. Dear was taken alive.
Do you really want me to list the unarmed black males killed by cops in the last three years? I'm not sure I have the time...it is substantial. Tamir Rice, Walter Scott, John Crawford, Eric Garner....all unarmed and killed for absolutely no fucking reason. Trayvon Martin was stalked by a pseudocop and shot to death for defending himself.
Cops die in the line of duty. They take an oath to protect people and put their lives on the line for citizens. It is sad when they die, but it is also not their place to disproportionately apply force.
"The truth is that black males are met with disproportionate force. It is a fact. And it needs to stop," he wrote on the very same day that Greenville PD Ofc. Allen Jacobs was shot to death while his gun was still snapped into its holster as he was chasing a known gang member. Further, he wrote this seemingly unaware of the cases of Ronald Hamilton in VA or Zachary Hammond right here in SC.
In a society where nearly every white male mass shooter (that doesn't commit suicide) is taken alive, but Tamir Rice is shot dead for the crime of playing guns in a park before the police cruiser stops moving, I think its safe to say we should reevaluate procedures for evaluating/deescalating situations.
The truth is that black males are met with disproportionate force. It is a fact. And it needs to stop.
Come on, you're not even trying anymore Lee! It's right there - "VIOLENT illegal activity."
Obviously, the act of stealing a beer from a 7-11 doesn't mean you deserve to die. Stealing a beer from a 7-11 and then fighting with the cops when you are arrested means you chose violence and are putting yourself at risk of being lawfully injured or killed by the police response.
I deal in facts. Only and always. So, I have no data on police response to mass murder incidents (which could be found) vs police response approach to unarmed black males (which cannot).
My anecdotal impression though, for whatever it's worth, is that police would absolutely fire upon any mass murder suspect that shot at them or didn't otherwise immediately surrender with hands up. Many commit suicide right when that happens or starts to happen, it seems. Further, since black males are arrested for violent crime at a disproportionately high rate, there are clearly lots of contacts with the police. However the overwhelming majority of them don't result in the suspects being shot.
The problem, Cid, is that you and I disagree on one principle: simply being a criminal does not mean you deserve to die.
Furthering the point, how many armed white mass shooters are taken into custody peaceably while unarmed black men are approached in a shoot-first-ask-questions-later manner?
Being unarmed but engaged in violent illegal activity is a good way to get killed. "Hands, fists and feet" are used in more murders in the US each year than so-called "assault weapons."
You need to rephrase it as "Cops killing peaceful, law-abiding citizens, however..." if you want to have a point.
"Leemajors, what exactly is the point you're trying to make there?"
That cops dying in the line of duty will happen because law enforcement is inherently dangerously.
Cops killing unarmed citizens, however.....
"Law enforcement officers choose to participate in difficult, dangerous and potentially lethal work."
Leemajors, what exactly is the point you're trying to make there?
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2016,
Charleston City Paper