General Police Misconduct aka Murdering Black People

[allegro]

I was more pissed that this is ALL that is there. There isn't a trending topic that focuses on how fucked the Ferguson PD and Courts are. They simply focus on Wilson.

If you Google "Ferguson scathing report," you'll get about 10,000 legit hits with interesting articles.

But THIS one was from last year, so we all saw this coming: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_5694364.html

19%
The percentage of Ferguson's general budget that was paid for by revenue from fines and court fees in the 2012 fiscal year. It was forecast to account for an even larger share of revenues (21 percent) in the 2013 fiscal year, which ended June 30 -- making it that year's second-largest source of revenue.

Slate's Jordan Weissman writes that the importance of these dollars has led to a system that has encouraged “for-profit policing,” which itself has fed racial tensions in the region:

When you split a metro area into dozens of tiny local governments (St. Louis County, to be clear, doesn’t include the actual city of St. Louis, which spun off from it in the 19th century), they tend to duplicate each others’ services, which is of course extremely expensive. But raising taxes so that each tiny borough can afford its own police and fire department is a nonstarter, since wealthy residents can always just move one town over. End result: You have police departments that self-fund by handing out tickets. And thanks to the delightful racial dynamics of U.S. law enforcement, black residents are disproportionately stopped and accosted, even though police in Ferguson are less likely to find contraband when they search black drivers than when they search whites.

$99 million

The budget of the St. Louis County Police Department for 2014.

This number doesn't include the value of the Pentagon's 1033 grants, which since 1997 have flooded local police departments with $4.3 billion in gear, including surplus military-grade equipment at wholesale prices. In 2013, the program sent $449 million of military equipment to local law enforcement agencies. St. Louis County received 12 assault rifles, 6 pistols, 3 helicopters and 2 night vision pieces, according to data obtained by the New York Times. (You can find out what exactly your local authorities got from the Pentagon here).

[DigitalChaos]

If you Google "Ferguson scathing report," you'll get about 10,000 legit hits with interesting articles.

I suppose my anger rests with the news people decide to read/share with each other then.

But THIS one was from last year, so we all saw this coming: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_5694364.html

Absolutely. There are quite a few who know about this kind of thing... but it seems... almost fringe. Definitely not main stream and causing massive backlash. Sort of similar to knowledge of government spying before the Snowden leaks.


I don't know. I just get frustrated. We have all these popular rhetorical phrases and perspectives where the public gets outraged about something for a period of time. "take the country back", various angles on racial inequality, police brutality/abuse, etc. There is usually a large group dismissing the outrage when it happens. And now there is a highly detailed report about it at the federal level that can't be dismissed... so where the fuck is the "national conversation"? People should be seeing the exact same issue inside their own local legal system and demanding action. It's not some isolated incident from a poor neighborhood that already had its moment in the news.

[allegro]

I don't know. I just get frustrated. We have all these popular rhetorical phrases and perspectives where the public gets outraged about something for a period of time. "take the country back", various angles on racial inequality, police brutality/abuse, etc. There is usually a large group dismissing the outrage when it happens. And now there is a highly detailed report about it at the federal level that can't be dismissed... so where the fuck is the "national conversation"? People should be seeing the exact same issue inside their own local legal system and demanding action. It's not some isolated incident from a poor neighborhood that already had its moment in the news.

Without any "leader," people are scattered, don't know where or how to take real action, to cause a "movement." The civil rights movement was largely led by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X; without those two, we really wouldn't be where we are today. The only other civil rights leader who's come close to that is Farrakhan, but he's just nuts and too radical (but WOW is he ever a charismatic speaker). In the 60s, we also had strong white civil rights leaders like Bobby Kennedy; we just don't have any real leaders right now. As soon as we get one or two, you'll see radical movements, even against this wide acceptance of police power and brutality.

Neil Young was quoted in an article once not too long ago, and he was absolutely right, about how the youth in the 60s weren't really mobilized against the war etc. until THE DRAFT was instituted; up until that point, politics and world events and, really, even civil rights didn't really affect youth all that much since they were insulated and (understandably) apathetic, until THE GOVERNMENT CAME AFTER THEM; then, you started seeing a huge uprising. There's usually a trigger, and then there's a leader or leaders to lead them in the fight.

[elevenism]

i feel you, @allegro .
a few more of these little "incidents" might pull the trigger though.

i hate it that it's a race thing.
i have been victimized by police.

but with these emails and whatnot, it IS a race thing now i suppose.

[Khrz]

i feel you, @allegro .
a few more of these little "incidents" might pull the trigger though.

Without any leadership, nope, I don't think so. You can multiply the marches and protests, if nobody's here to actual focus that energy into concentrated actions, media representation and an actual discourse, it's just scattered noise from random people. Doesn't really matter how many, a million people are helpless against a government in control.
What that also means is that when/if actual groups and movements step up, they'll have their own politics and agendas, which means that things won't get any less ugly.

[allegro]

i feel you, @allegro .
a few more of these little "incidents" might pull the trigger though.

i hate it that it's a race thing.
i have been victimized by police.

but with these emails and whatnot, it IS a race thing now i suppose.

Civil rights ain't just about race. And when one big movement is led by a powerful, intelligent and influential leader, the change that is demanded is in lots of areas. Look at all the civil disobedience in the 60s. People demanded not only the end to segregation and racism, but also an end to police brutality, stuff like Kent State or the Chicago Democratic Convention ("the whole world is watching"), the ability to protest peacefully, the end to the Vietnam War, etc. The movements were led by very powerful and influential leaders who could not be ignored, who mobilized millions regularly. Guys like Jerry Rubin and Abbie Hoffman who said "Fuck 'Meet The Press,' we wanna do 'Carson' or 'Ed Sullivan' or something people actually WATCH." AND THEY DID do Phil Donohue and all kinds of mainstream TV and made very specific demands related to Vietnam, they were instant folk heroes feared by colleges everywhere because they could gather hundreds of thousands at the snap of a finger. We had Dr. King and that historic march in Selma 50 years ago that sparked a movement. Right now, we have no such leaders.

[elevenism]

well fuck sake, @allegro .

i had wanted to show you this movie...it was free on youtube until VERY recently. As in a few days ago recently.

You HAVE to see it, if you can find it.

kinda funny timing, taking it off youtube now.

it's probably just coincidence, but it makes me wonder.

[Khrz]

Civil rights ain't just about race. And when one big movement is led by a powerful, intelligent and influential leader, the change that is demanded is in lots of areas.

Not only that, but when a movement starts to get really cohesive and efficient, you have a whole bunch of smaller groups that just go full-on remora and attach themselves to it.

The massive student revolts of 1968 in France were at first bubbles of student resistance against disciplinary measures pertaining to political expression and protests, then it grew to include a full-on rebellion against governmental authority, imperialism, then every social and cultural movement joined the movements. Next thing you know, from a bunch of student expelled for being a bit too loud about the evils of capitalism, you got to Paris streets blocked with barricades.

It's also a matter of climate. A strong movement and a good leader are great, but if the socio-political climate is ripe, a whole bunch of smaller groups start to swarm and use that influence to get their voice heard.
Right now, if a movement against racial injustice were to pick momentum, I'd say you could count on a whole bunch of LGBT groups to join the action, feminists, 99%ers if they haven't forgotten wall street, and well, students as usual, they're your grunts in those situations. They're righteous and angry, perfect to fill a crowd.

Of course, the fact that your police looks like they're ready for civil war in some cities means that your movement has to up the ante if they don't want to be crushed too early to have any significant impact, media-wise. If you burn cars for a week, you're just a bunch of thugs. If it lasts a month, then the media starts to really ask questions, interview people, and generate a discussion. Given the aforementioned police war-like gear, that means that your protest has to be extremely angry and violent if it wants to survive. Not sure that you would want that.

[allegro]

[DigitalChaos]

Without any "leader," people are scattered, don't know where or how to take real action, to cause a "movement."

Not only that, but when a movement starts to get really cohesive and efficient, you have a whole bunch of smaller groups that just go full-on remora and attach themselves to it.

That's actually been a huge problem lately. OWS, Tea Party, etc. They all started with a pretty finite reasoning, then got derailed to fuck by all theses fractured groups. With the birth of the "social justice warrior" types, we also have some extremely toxic self-interested individuals who will try to loudly ride a movement.

We also have a media and government is has gotten really good at shutting down any potential leader. Character assassination and/or political staining tend to be really easy in the current environment.

I feel like we are almost post-leader now. How did the Ferguson situation get into the spotlight to begin with? Why isn't that path also carrying the DOJ report and obtaining critical mass?

[allegro]

The government always killed leaders' characters, but a good leader always withstood it. Until they were literally assassinated, anyway.

[Sarah K]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/us/geo...630aVODtopLInk

[aggroculture]

This is a real emergency
a national crisis that needs to be seriously addressed

you can't have police officers killing black people like this all the time

it's an outrage
I know that word has lost meaning
but it's obscene, it's seriously fucked up and needs to stop

[allegro]

you can't have police officers killing black people like this all the time

they're not just killing black people
they're killing whomever they want, the gun is the first line of defense when it used to be the very last resort.

[aggroculture]

My understanding is that they're killing black people at 20x the rate of whites. Is this incorrect?

And yes, the trigger-happy cop who shoots first and gets let off later is a travesty. US citizens needs to step up and say enough is enough, instead of letting these officers walk in grand juries. At least let these cases go to trial.

[allegro]

My understanding is that they're killing black people at 20x the rate of whites. Is this incorrect?

And yes, the trigger-happy cop who shoots first and gets let off later is a travesty. US citizens needs to step up and say enough is enough, instead of letting these officers walk in grand juries. At least let these cases go to trial.

No idea, overall there are more minorities (blacks and hispanics) in jails and prisons than whites, but this is probably due to ghettoization, etc. So far, there is not enough data collected for us to know who is being shot and killed by police. NOBODY has been collecting the data, let alone race data. A new act recently passed by Congress requires data collection, but that just started.

My point is that if you're white, don't think you're safe from being shot and killed by a cop; you're not. We're living in a military state, where cops are protected by the U.S. Supreme Court.

[Sarah K]

There was also this one: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/0...cs&ir=Politics

[allegro]

At least let these cases go to trial.

Juries have consistently sided with police officers, there is a psychological weirdness where Officer Friendly is always "right" in this country and that hasn't changed much. A judge and jury won't bring justice, either.

The only thing that will bring change is HUGE widespread (millions and millions) public outrage that causes the departments to change strategy where their firearm is used as a last resort. Right now, the laws support the police using their guns, and the public supports it too. It's sad, but true. People are brainwashed to believe that if Officer Friendly shot that person, he/she must have "deserved it" or Officer Friendly must have done it "for a good reason" because "his job is really dangerous and he/she puts his life on the line every day for our safety and we should all be grateful."

[aggroculture]

I get that: the average juror sees him/herself as a good citizen, and the officer should have the freedom to help contain these dangerous criminals, even if that means the occasional abuse of force. Better be safe than sorry, etc.

This racialized idea of the "criminal" (or thug or whatever) is a fantasy used to scare people into staying in line and buying into the militarized police state. Because nobody wants to be that criminal other, and as long as the police are keeping those guys over there in line, it's all good. Except those guys over there = us. And by us I mean people, humans just trying to get by and live a decent life. We have to stop demonizing black people (or poor people, or different people) as dangerous and thus expendable.

Same with guns. We're scared of "them" coming into our homes, so we need guns to protect ourselves from them; but it's each other we're killing.

[allegro]

I get that: the average juror sees him/herself as a good citizen, and the officer should have the freedom to help contain these dangerous criminals, even if that means the occasional abuse of force. Better be safe than sorry, etc.

This racialized idea of the "criminal" (or thug or whatever) is a fantasy used to scare people into staying in line and buying into the militarized police state. Because nobody wants to be that criminal other, and as long as the police are keeping those guys over there in line, it's all good. Except those guys over there = us. And by us I mean people, humans just trying to get by and live a decent life. We have to stop demonizing black people (or poor people, or different people) as dangerous and thus expendable.

Same with guns. We're scared of "them" coming into our homes, so we need guns to protect ourselves from them; but it's each other we're killing.

Except this black cop shot and killed this 95-yr-old guy in a nursing home with dementia by firing several rounds at him at close range with a powerful rifle beanbag gun when they could have just locked the old guy in his room.

There was no jury, it was decided by a judge. You'd think that would be good, except the Judge decided the cop was just "doing his job." The huge cop who worked out every day and then there's this little old man and they somehow showed that the huge cop was "afraid" of the little old man so it was okay to shoot him (even though all the nursing attendants said they could just run away from him since the old guy couldn't even walk). Yup, whatever.


Then there's the case of John Geer, which appears to be a giant coverup. Seriously, what the fuck.

[DigitalChaos]

My understanding is that they're killing black people at 20x the rate of whites. Is this incorrect?

And yes, the trigger-happy cop who shoots first and gets let off later is a travesty. US citizens needs to step up and say enough is enough, instead of letting these officers walk in grand juries. At least let these cases go to trial.

Poor people who live in poor neighborhoods. This is who they are essentially enslaving for revenue. They are the ones who can't fight back. Its pretty well documented through testimony and other records. Yes, blacks make up an unequal portion of poor people.

[DigitalChaos]

they're not just killing black people
they're killing whomever they want, the gun is the first line of defense when it used to be the very last resort.

I know what you are saying, but let me widen the scope of your statement. At what point is this situation pushing the citizens into "last resort" territory and justifying the use of guns against them? There have been recent trials where a homeowner was found not guilty for shooting a cop that was raiding his home. One state passed some law making it "ok to shoot cops" a while back and people thought it was insane back when "the country" was focused on guns instead of the police situation.

[DigitalChaos]

Or... Maybe people can follow the lead of some of the towns who are dissolving their police and replacing them with private companies. The result is a near instant drop in crime and a whole lot less use of force.

[allegro]

Poor people who live in poor neighborhoods. This is who they are essentially enslaving for revenue. They are the ones who can't fight back. Its pretty well documented through testimony and other records. Yes, blacks make up an unequal portion of poor people.

What about John Geer? Shot in the chest by a cop for NO reason then left to bleed to death in the doorway of his own home, and the police dept refuses to give any answers? He was a white middle class father of two little girls.

Again, so long as people think this only happens to those "other people," nothing will get changed.

[allegro]

I know what you are saying, but let me widen the scope of your statement. At what point is this situation pushing the citizens into "last resort" territory and justifying the use of guns against them? There have been recent trials where a homeowner was found not guilty for shooting a cop that was raiding his home. One state passed some law making it "ok to shoot cops" a while back and people thought it was insane back when "the country" was focused on guns instead of the police situation.

No this is just dumb, this isn't the civilized solution, either.

[DigitalChaos]

What about John Geer? Shot in the chest by a cop for NO reason then left to bleed to death in the doorway of his own home, and the police dept refuses to give any answers? He was a white middle class father of two little girls.

Again, so long as people think this only happens to those "other people," nothing will get changed.

I don't know enough about it to understand the police motive. There is a huge problem with police going after people just to produce money (Ferguson). There is also the issue where police are constantly escalating their own force that overflows into there routine interactions.

[allegro]

I don't know enough about it to understand the police motive. There is a huge problem with police going after people just to produce money (Ferguson). There is also the issue where police are constantly escalating their own force that overflows into there routine interactions.

Well go read it, I just posted 2 links UP THERE, they aren't long, it will take 2 minutes to read. I'll give you a hint: ZERO POLICE MOTIVE. HE JUST FUCKING SHOT HIM, WHICH IS WHY MOST COPS SHOOT PEOPLE. COPS DON'T SHOOT PEOPLE TO COLLECT MONEY. YOU DON'T GET MONEY FROM DEAD PEOPLE.

[DigitalChaos]

No this is just dumb, this isn't the civilized solution, either.

"Civilized solution" implies possibilities well before "last resort." This issue can get much worse. I'm asking how much worse this situation needs to get before it is to that point. Many in this thread are concerned about the lack of action to fix this. So, what's it look like if we don't act?

Well go read it, I just posted 2 links UP THERE, they aren't long, it will take 2 minutes to read. I'll give you a hint: ZERO POLICE MOTIVE. HE JUST FUCKING SHOT HIM, WHICH IS WHY MOST COPS SHOOT PEOPLE. COPS DON'T SHOOT PEOPLE TO COLLECT MONEY. YOU DON'T GET MONEY FROM DEAD PEOPLE.

It just doesn't make sense. Either it was an accident related to the hair-trigger problem cops now have, or there is some unknown history here and this guy pissed the cops off and was assassinated.

[allegro]

It just doesn't make sense. Either it was an accident related to the hair-trigger problem cops now have, or there is some unknown history here and this guy pissed the cops off and was assassinated.

The cops refusing to say anything, for more than a year, suggests a FUCKUP by a trigger-happy power-hungry stupid cop, and a coverup.

CODE OF SILENCE

All of which currently appears to be the norm.

[allegro]

ugh, what a joke. here is the list of demands from the millions march.
It's mostly nonspecific bullshit and bandaids that completely miss the root. How about we remove the bullshit laws (ex: drug war) that create huge incentives for discriminatory enforcement? How about removing all federal funding to police forces so police fully report to the people?

Gee, these demands make more sense, now, eh?