• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Police Brutality Thread

@aemetha

If you're not going to bother answering my questions, yet you expect me to read entire studies that you throw at me... you're not being honest.

I don't mean to insult you either.

I'm not suggesting you're lying outright, but you're being selective.

Your whataboutism response to my questions is a good example. We're talking about whether or not Black people commit more crime. I've done you the courtesy of engaging with your argument about drug use, but (as I've said repeatedly now) it doesn't have any bearing on the discussion. Even if Black and white Americans commit drug-related crimes equally, Black people clearly commit more violent crimes. Therefore (overall) they commit more crime.

aemetha said:
I refuted a single statement you made. That's what it's about. Just that.

This makes no sense to me.

The statement you refuted was Black Americans disproportionately commit crime, but you are seemingly unwilling to engage in a discussion about whether or not that is the case beyond drug crimes. If you were refuting a statement I made about drug crimes, your comment would make sense... but I never made any such statement.
 


These cops are bastards

Never taking anything at face value anymore I decided to do some digging.

I found on YouTube yet another choice cut of the same video albeit that it was slightly longer but does provide just a tad more context (link below).

Then I found a full presentation (link below). It appears, though, that it's a different presentation and to the military. It's +3 hours long so I doubt anybody will bother. But maybe it you don't bother: then don't take this shit out of context and pass comment then.

Search YouTube for "Dave Grossman" and it'll become clear where he is coming from. The man in question is Retired Lt. Col. Dave Grossman. His full credentials are given during his introduction in the full presentation mentioned above (link below). He is also the director of the "Killology Research Group" (link below).

His point, as I understand it, in spite of his (arguably) crass method of getting it across, is that police officers should not go beating themselves up should they just happen to kill a perpetrator should it have been necessary. These choice video cuts would have people believe that your average law enforcement officer is being trained to go out and shoot people for the fun and enjoyment of it, then go have a party, and then go home and fuck their brains out. I put it to you that police officers need some backing from the opposite end of the spectrum i.e. to know that it's alright to use lethal force when necessary and when required and that there's no reason for them to beat themselves up about it for the rest of their lives and careers. You think that killing someone is easy for your average person and has no long lasting psychological effects for most? Think again.

I note that your Travis Akers is a (ex?) military man too. Anybody wanna start having that conversation i.e. about the United States Military, their use of force, and their antics? I'm guessing not. But I guess that's different i.e. that's war is it? Well, and from what I understand it, again the caveat being that my only reference points are the (your) mainstream media, it is a war. Law enforcement are not out playing cops and robbers in some Hollywood style fashion. Also no surprise that he (Mr. Akers) appears to be quite the liberal (based on his Tweets anyway).

Also worthwhile noting and the caveat being, once again, that I could be being sold down the river by the (your) mainstream media: the criminal element that law enforcement is up against are not armed with peashooters. Note that the full presentation and training course in question was held in 2015. I don't imagine that things have improved.

Once again: only one half (if that) of the story being told by pundits.








 
Last edited:
Oh here's a good one.

Just came up while I was looking for a copy of the "Do Not Resist" presentation.

Talk about badgering by a Professor? She should lose her fucking job. And listen to the presenter/host! And fuck me: he's black! Go figure!




Just took a look at the dude's video channel.

Here's somebody that actually gets it! This man has more guts than the Chauvin Trial jurors!

Here. Get a look at this one and listen.



His channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUTHDe5Q06S6VWAvkrQZfDA
 
Last edited:
“Killology research group”

huh uh
You did not have enough time to even take a cursory look at what it's all about before making that comment (unless you were already familiar with said group in which case I retract my statement of course and apologize).

Whatever the case: that's the entire point of my spending hours and hours on this thread i.e. to try and present a fuller picture of certain events and happenings and dispel some myths and derail false narratives (racial and other). That's not directed at you personally i.e. not accusing you of the same just by the way.

But I put it to you that it's because of people like him that more don't hesitate and end up six feet under while some violent piece of criminal shit goes about his business unabated. And bearing in mind he doesn't just lecture and train local law enforcement i.e. seems to train most law enforcement agencies as well as the military. That's from my own cursory look before posting i.e. there's an entire week's worth of new stuff to dig into where he is concerned looks like.

Anyway. I realize I have more time on my hands currently than most so I understand.

Worth noting though: of late the number of non-black people being shot by law enforcement is quite something to behold if that police channel (with the collection of police body cam footage) is anything to go by. Funny thing though. When I try cross referencing those videos to press releases etc.: usually the best I come up with is a local media site or local TV station. I wonder how come that is? Strange...
 
I’m not familiar with that group particularly, but that kind of stuff is typical of police training and it’s definitely part of the problem. When you’re a police officer in the United States, you’re not a NATO soldier in Kabul, and the police-military crossover/“police militarization” is a harmful development. Using deadly force is a potential part of the job but it is not the job, and tbh I’m suspicious of anyone who seeks to highlight that part of what a police officer is supposed to do...just seems like more of a deliberate conflation of martial “warrior” aesthetic with the role of public servant whose finger should be on the trigger only as the very last resort. Instead these meatheads are so intoxicated by this killology/sheepdog bullshit that they totally lose the thread...
 
You guys are really going to have this argument again? :D
Looks almost identical to me.

Try to recall the conclusions back then...

Man, I really think you're hurting your argument here, I pulled up a quick study https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/revcoa18.pdf literally my first google result.
If you look at the first page, for arrests and convictions (yes I understand that this is what you're saying), but they say that black people get convicted 3.5 times more (relatively speaking). Of course a whole bunch of factors influence the conviction rate and whatnot, but not to a degree of 250%, that's just willingly ignoring things. To me this is classic cultural leftism, from academic high horses talking around everything, and that is exactly why the left never gets any respect by conservatives. And I don't say it's particularly the black communities fault, just decades of things going really wrong from all sides.

You won't in my country, that is a legit research question. Of course you can go investigate that with the necessary nuances and everything.

I really hate this, the true death of the left, be real I say, don't tiptoe around everything, it's so counter productive.

Look at the study I gave you, for violent crimes that don't include 'other assault', black people are on average 4.5x more likely to be convicted for them! 4.5x, you can start bringing up all external factors you want, this is a crazy amount. Of course some factors like systemic racism and racial profiling have some effect, but not that large, this is extremely obvious to everyone except some. Now what are the real problems? Police brutality and unhealthy environments leading to terrible policy-civilian relationships, social status (where race can also come in), probably some cultural factors (gangs?), so many things... Many people in this thread have brought up excellent points regarding this.

But how can anyone solve a problem when this isn't even recognized?
Firstly, I should say that I believe that Blacks commit more crimes in certain categories than white people. The converse is also true, to the extent that white collar crime is ever prosecuted in America.

Second, I should say I believe very strongly in individual agency (the ability to decide not commit crime) and therefore in culpability and punishment.

However, conviction rates are predicated on any number of factors. In America a big one is the use of plea bargains when an offender is faced with capital punishment, a mandatory sentence, or generally harsh likely punishment and cannot afford proper legal representation.

Police have discretion in what they charge people with. We saw that even in the Chauvin case where people believed it should be either a higher degree of murder on one hand or manslaughter on the other.

To deal with court backlogs and the burden of prosecuting a case it is common practice to charge someone with the most heinous crime and let them bargain it down to a guilty plea on something lesser out of fear and pack of legal resources. Another win for the police and another data point for the statistics.

The evidence suggests this practice overly effects Black people more, though not exclusively so.

Interestingly, I found a recent paper that describes this thread perfectly. Here is the Abstract:


The Numbers Don’t Speak for Themselves: Racial Disparities and the Persistence of Inequality in the Criminal Justice System​

Rebecca C. Hetey, Jennifer L. Eberhardt

Current Directions in Psychological Science, First Published May 3, 2018

Abstract
Many scolars and activists assume the public would be motivated to fight inequality if only they knew the full extent of existing disparities. Ironically, exposure to extreme disparities can cause people to become more, not less, supportive of the very policies that create those disparities (Hetey & Eberhardt, 2014). Here, we focus on the criminal justice system—policing and incarceration in particular. We argue that bringing to mind racial disparities in this domain can trigger fear and stereotypic associations linking Blacks with crime. Therefore, rather than extending an invitation to reexamine the criminal justice system, the statistics about disparities may instead provide an opportunity to justify and rationalize the disparities found within that system. With the goals of spurring future research and mitigating this paradoxical and unintended effect, we propose three potential strategies for more effectively presenting information about racial disparities: (a) offer context, (b) challenge associations, and (c) highlight institutions.
 
Atelier3 said:
I should say that I believe that Blacks commit more crimes in certain categories than white people. The converse is also true, to the extent that white collar crime is ever prosecuted in America.

Agreed. Although white collar crimes are considerably less likely to result in police brutality and/or fatal police shootings.
 
Firstly, I should say that I believe that Blacks commit more crimes in certain categories than white people. The converse is also true, to the extent that white collar crime is ever prosecuted in America.

Second, I should say I believe very strongly in individual agency (the ability to decide not commit crime) and therefore in culpability and punishment.

However, conviction rates are predicated on any number of factors. In America a big one is the use of plea bargains when an offender is faced with capital punishment, a mandatory sentence, or generally harsh likely punishment and cannot afford proper legal representation.

Police have discretion in what they charge people with. We saw that even in the Chauvin case where people believed it should be either a higher degree of murder on one hand or manslaughter on the other.

To deal with court backlogs and the burden of prosecuting a case it is common practice to charge someone with the most heinous crime and let them bargain it down to a guilty plea on something lesser out of fear and pack of legal resources. Another win for the police and another data point for the statistics.

The evidence suggests this practice overly effects Black people more, though not exclusively so.

Interestingly, I found a recent paper that describes this thread perfectly. Here is the Abstract:


The Numbers Don’t Speak for Themselves: Racial Disparities and the Persistence of Inequality in the Criminal Justice System​

Rebecca C. Hetey, Jennifer L. Eberhardt

Current Directions in Psychological Science, First Published May 3, 2018

Abstract
Many scolars and activists assume the public would be motivated to fight inequality if only they knew the full extent of existing disparities. Ironically, exposure to extreme disparities can cause people to become more, not less, supportive of the very policies that create those disparities (Hetey & Eberhardt, 2014). Here, we focus on the criminal justice system—policing and incarceration in particular. We argue that bringing to mind racial disparities in this domain can trigger fear and stereotypic associations linking Blacks with crime. Therefore, rather than extending an invitation to reexamine the criminal justice system, the statistics about disparities may instead provide an opportunity to justify and rationalize the disparities found within that system. With the goals of spurring future research and mitigating this paradoxical and unintended effect, we propose three potential strategies for more effectively presenting information about racial disparities: (a) offer context, (b) challenge associations, and (c) highlight institutions.
Sure! I'm on board the whole way. I'll read the paper later on.
My point was that you have things like socio economic status and general inequality too that have an impact on the amount of committed violent crimes, and I think one should be able to say that. I believe you agree with me there? I'm operating under the assumption that black people are generally lower on the social ladder.
 
I’m not familiar with that group particularly, but that kind of stuff is typical of police training and it’s definitely part of the problem. When you’re a police officer in the United States, you’re not a NATO soldier in Kabul, and the police-military crossover/“police militarization” is a harmful development. Using deadly force is a potential part of the job but it is not the job, and tbh I’m suspicious of anyone who seeks to highlight that part of what a police officer is supposed to do...just seems like more of a deliberate conflation of martial “warrior” aesthetic with the role of public servant whose finger should be on the trigger only as the very last resort. Instead these meatheads are so intoxicated by this killology/sheepdog bullshit that they totally lose the thread...
That's all fair and insightful comment for sure. :)

I guess my biggest issue, really, and as is probably obvious (well hopefully it is) is this cherry picking of information is all. Not by you by the way. In this particular case and my reason for posting initially this morning: that Tweet contains all of 41 seconds of what was, in all probability, a valuable training session and that probably lasted a few hours. And of course the timing of such Tweet is not lost either
 
Sure! I'm on board the whole way. I'll read the paper later on.
My point was that you have things like socio economic status and general inequality too that have an impact on the amount of committed violent crimes, and I think one should be able to say that. I believe you agree with me there? I'm operating under the assumption that black people are generally lower on the social ladder.
Yep. I agree on socioeconomic factors (some of which are in the control of Black communities themselves). Also agree that, generally speaking, Black Americans form a socio-economic underclass.
 
I personally think that having a BLM protester (protested against Chauvin before his trial with a “get your knee off our necks” BLM shirt and accompanying hat at a rally in Washington) on the jury made a fair trial impossible for Derek Chauvin.
It's taken you how long to figure this out now? 🤣 🤣 🤣

Not only that: that one juror that's now become a minor celebrity on the networks is reason enough (maybe it's the same dude?).

And for good measure: somebody send a link to this thread to his fucking defense team! For damn sure we (well SOME of us) would have done a better job I tell you! If nothing else: I'd look smarter and more professional than that fuck. People fall for that shit you know! True story. One day, MAYBE, I'll tell you a little story about being smart and just how far you can get wearing one of those black robes that our lawyers wear here to court! 🤣 What perplexes me is that his lawyer apparently had no less than 12 other attorneys supporting him. Fuck me. I shudder to think THEIR acumen or gift of the gab or presentation (if he was the best they could put out there)!
 
It's taken you how long to figure this out now? 🤣 🤣 🤣

Not only that: that one juror that's now become a minor celebrity on the networks is reason enough (maybe it's the same dude?).

And for good measure: somebody send a link to this thread to his fucking defense team! For damn sure we (well SOME of us) would have done a better job I tell you! If nothing else: I'd look smarter and more professional than that fuck. People fall for that shit you know! True story. One day, MAYBE, I'll tell you a little story about being smart and just how far you can get wearing one of those black robes that our lawyers wear here to court! 🤣 What perplexes me is that his lawyer apparently had no less than 12 other attorneys supporting him. Fuck me. I shudder to think THEIR acumen or gift of the gab or presentation (if he was the best they could put out there)!
We agreed 20 pages ago that this moron was going to want his 15 minutes.

The more I think about the whole trial I realize that it was only a formality. Chauvin and Nelson both knew what the verdict was going to be. Hence him just sitting there like he was at a Frito Lay conference.

Nelson was always going to go at this issue with appeals. The multi million dollar settlement before the trial. The news media and the trial being covered LIVE. The incessant and ad nauseum replay of the video. The jurors taking 9 hours and 29 minutes to reach the verdict. The juror speaking out the next day about the " jury instruction" and the remark about holding Chauvins not testifying against him. Real shitshow, eh !
 
that one juror that's now become a minor celebrity on the networks is reason

i don't like to assume so can you connect the dots for me?

how does a juror receiving media attention after a trial constitute reason to believe there was a lack of fairness in a verdict?

alasdair
 
i don't like to assume so can you connect the dots for me?

how does a juror receiving media attention after a trial constitute reason to believe there was a lack of fairness in a verdict?

alasdair
Well here's two reasons (in the quotes below) just for starters! 🤣

Alright. Maybe I overplayed things with my "reason enough" comment. But still. Put him together with the interviews of the alternate jurors that are floating around and there's no way it was an impartial or untainted jury going in. And I doubt they'll ever be able to put 12 jurors together that are impartial in this case. Not unless they've been living under a rock somewhere.

Begs a good point: don't they have an option between a jury trial and a judge? How does that work (have not looked it up i.e. just came to me now)?

Mind you: I think you'd be hard pressed to even find a judge that'd go against the grain. Not unless it was to be his last case and he'd already made plans to emigrate to some far away place. As to how he'd get from the courtroom to the airport is another story of course! 🤣


Hey look. An anonymous juror in Officer Chauvin's trial! 🤣

That didn't last long now did it. And I doubt very much that he contacted all of the networks offering up his insights. You bet your ass they looked him up to ask him if he'd be prepared to go on camera and be interviewed.

Now I'm sorry I didn't post here i.e. probably typed and then deleted no less than ten posts on a whole bunch of shit here since my last post. One point that I made, and am now finally making, is that anybody that thought for one minute that the identities of the jurors would remain a state secret is using some bad shit and way too much of it to too. You think the jurors didn't know that they'd eventually be identified no matter what? And, well, here we are. In the flesh. And 11 to go.

Conversely of course: had they found Officer Chauvin not guilty on any single one of the charges (let alone acquitted him): they'd not have been able to find this dude for dust nor for love nor money.




Yep. What a character. When he said " the only reason it took us 9 hours to find him guilty is because we had to explain a JURY INSTRUCTION to one of them"
I'm sure the Judge loved that one. Or: We held it against him because he didnt testify. Ummmm. K.

Okey Dokey there bud. The defense loves you.
 
your quotes don't really explain why a juror receiving media attention after the trial implies a lack of fairness in consideration of the verdict during trial. can you break it down?

alasdair
 
Last edited:
Top