baltimore

[Spexxvet]

They rioted, and 5 were killed by authorities. Then they entered a business and destroyed goods that were intended for them to buy. Then they violently attacked the authorities.

What a bunch of a-holes, right Henry?

[xoxoxoBruce]

I wonder why?

Since 1935, nearly every so-called race riot in the United States—and there have been more than 100—has been sparked by a police incident, Muhammad says. This can be an act of brutality, or a senseless killing. But the underlying causes run much deeper. Police, because they interact in black communities every day, are often seen as the face of larger systems of inequality in the justice system, employment, education and housing.

[henry quirk]

Toad,

Obviously, we have very different ideas of what constitutes a statement of (my) philosophy.

As you like.

#

Lamp,

“We disagree.”

Yes, we do.

#

Spexx,

“That's crazy, right Henry?”

When you trash your own neighborhood cuz you’re pissed at the cops: yeah, crazy as a shithouse mouse.

Now, when you trundle in from outside the neighborhood, involve yourself in a matter that’s not your concern, trash that neighborhood with no consideration given for the folks who live there and who may depend on the businesses trashed, then you’re asshole.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by henry quirk

Spexx,

“That's crazy, right Henry?”

When you trash your own neighborhood cuz you’re pissed at the cops: yeah, crazy as a shithouse mouse.

My description was of the actions of the Sons of Liberty.

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by henry quirk

Toad,

Obviously, we have very different ideas of what constitutes a statement of (my) philosophy.

It's not necessary for me to accurately describe any aspect of your philosophy in order for us to discuss this matter. If the word philosophy is troubling here then you may substitute "thinking" or "belief" or whatever meaning you might take in order to advance the conversation.

If I have your belief incorrect you may certainly correct me, and I would have to accept that; and then we move forward, which would be great. In the meantime, all we have is a semantic evasion of my point. You should avoid that. My point stands.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

I wonder why?

What do you wonder, xoB? The quote in your post doesn't come from the article you linked to.

do you wonder why black americans and white americans see the police differently?

do you wonder why so many "race-riots" have been sparked by a police incident?

or do you wonder about something else? your post is ambiguous to me.

[henry quirk]

Spexx,

"the Sons of Liberty"

Who are they?

[henry quirk]

V,

"do you wonder why black americans and white americans see the police differently?"

I wonder why folks insist on grouping themselves (or others).

Ain't no monoliths as far as I can tell.

[henry quirk]

Spexx,

Looked 'em up.

You believe the Boston Tea Party is synonymous with what happened in Baltimore?

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/related/sons.htm

Doesn't seem the same at all to me.

[Lamplighter]

Originally Posted by henry quirk

Lamp,

What it is about being a cop that insulates him or her from a bullet to the head?
What is about being a cop that insulates his or her house from burning?
Nuthin' and nuthin'.
I suspect your respect for (or fear of) law enforcers has you thinkin'
they're better, bigger, smarter, stronger, than they are.
Cops are just people.
Just ask the families and friends of cops killed on, and off, duty.

And: I'm not the one "changing the basic issue of (my) thread".
Go back to my first post, read what follows from others, point
(and wag) your finger at them (and yourself).

Sure, cops are human beings that can be hurt/killed
... but not "Nuthin' and nuthin'"

What insulates your neighbor cop who has harmed your family is multi-fold:

1) Primarily the governmental and social structures that protect
and make each individual cop and law enforcement overall
"better, bigger, smarter, stronger" than you.

2) Your self interest of not being killed/harmed/imprisioned by other cops

3) Your self interest for your family being harmed or ostracised by society

4) Your ethics and moral code to maintain your family and property

So repeating myself in slightly different terms...
You, HQ, can not settle your grievance with this neighbor cop who
has harmed you/your family, without in some way of engaging others
who "aren't party to the insult or injury", or relying on laws/rules of society...

And now add this:
5) or, having your nephew say: "But that is crazy, Uncle"

I think I am presenting your own arguments to say the isolated individual
is impotent against the misdeeds of law enforcement.
Otherwise their action is "crazy"
... until they gain a tool or power over something of value to law enforcement.

For those without $ or political resources, this turns out to be
"breaking the peace" (riots) and destroying "sh#t".
So for them in their world, they are not being "crazy"

[henry quirk]

Spexx,

“What a bunch of a-holes, right Henry?”

I never said that (and I didn’t imply it either).

#

Happy Monkey,

“universal condemnation”

That hasn’t come from me, not directly or by implication.

#

Lamp,

“You, HQ, can not settle your grievance”

Underlining it don’t make it so.

Your laundry list of ‘why you can’t’: each, all, easily navigated (as illustrated by the number of unsolved police deaths).


“I think I am presenting your own arguments to say the isolated individual is impotent against the misdeeds of law enforcement.”

I’m sorry you feel impotent (as an individual), Lamp. Explains a lot, though.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

They rioted, and 5 were killed by authorities. Then they entered a business and destroyed goods that were intended for them to buy. Then they violently attacked the authorities.

What a bunch of a-holes, right Henry?

Originally Posted by henry quirk

Spexx,

“What a bunch of a-holes, right Henry?”

I never said that (and I didn’t imply it either).

"'But that's crazy, Uncle!'

'Yes, Beast, it is.'"

That's crazy, right Henry?

[xoxoxoBruce]

God Damn Right.

[Lamplighter]

Today in history... April 29, 1992

In 1992, rioting resulting in 55 deaths erupted in Los Angeles after a jury in Simi Valley, California,
acquitted four Los Angeles police officers of almost all state charges in the videotaped beating of Rodney King.

.

[gvidas]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

God Damn Right.

TL;DR: White Americans have a different relationship with the police than black Americans do. So however glib your comment and that captioned picture are there's some merit to the idea. We ask the police to solve too many of our societal problems.

Ta-Nehisi Coates, again and always:

There are many problems with expecting people trained in crime-fighting to be social workers. In the black community, there is a problem of legitimacy. In his 1953 book The Quest For Community, conservative Robert Nisbet distinguishes between "power" and "authority." Authority, claims Nisbet, is a matter of relationships, allegiances, and association and is "based ultimately upon the consent of those under it." Power, on the other hand, is "external" and "based upon force." Power exists where allegiances have decayed or never existed at all. "Power arises," writes Nesbit, "only when authority breaks down."

African Americans, for most of our history, have lived under the power of the criminal-justice system, not its authority. The dominant feature in the relationship between African Americans and their country is plunder, and plunder has made police authority an impossibility, and police power a necessity. The skepticism of Officer Darren Wilson's account in the shooting of Michael Brown, for instance, emerges out of lack of police authority—which is to say it comes from a belief that the police are as likely to lie as any other citizen. When African American parents give their children "The Talk," they do not urge them to make no sudden movements in the presence of police out of a profound respect for the democratic ideal, but out of the knowledge that police can, and will, kill them.

But for most Americans, the police—and the criminal-justice system—are figures of authority. The badge does not merely represent rule via lethal force, but rule through consent and legitimacy rooted in nobility. This is why whenever a liberal politician offers even the mildest criticism of the police, they must add that "the majority of officers are good, noble people." Taken at face value this is not much of a defense—like a restaurant claiming that on most nights, there really are no rats in the dining room. But interpreted less literally the line is not meant to defend police officers, but to communicate the message that the speaker is not questioning police authority, which is to say the authority of our justice system, which is to say—in a democracy—the authority of the people themselves.

full article:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...reform/390057/