PDA

View Full Version : To the savages of Baltimore


Southpaw2012
04-27-2015, 09:16 PM
The savages and barbarians in Baltimore who are looting, burning, and attacking the innocent, are not helping their purpose. In fact, they are stirring the pot that will erupt greater than it ever has before. It is sickening that people can't go out nowadays and protest without causing violence. We can all admit that it's not for a purpose other than to get free shit that isn't earned. Obviously with all this shit that goes on day in and day out that they don't have jobs because they have all the time in the world to cause violence to get free stuff that working people created. I understand that 99% of you all on here support the violence because you live in the dark dark basement of your home, but this shit is sickening. They are playing with fire, and it's going to erupt if every time a black person gets killed by a white person there's a violent riot. It seems like something highly illegal occurred that led to the poor black man's death, but it should be led by protests. Protest in the streets, go up to the courthouse and stand outside and hold your signs up, but to destroy the businesses that hardworking people have created is sickening and does not further a movement, but creates a hatred that will create different violence if it's not stopped. Prayers to the good white and black folk of Baltimore who are watching their businesses get destroyed by animals.

eht slat meit
04-27-2015, 09:54 PM
I understand that 99% of you all on here support the violence because you live in the dark dark basement of your home, but this shit is sickening.

Strangely, I don't see anyone on here saying "Hoozah, burn the bitch down!"

/things that make you go hmmm

Zombie Sammael
04-27-2015, 10:14 PM
Strangely, I don't see anyone on here saying "Hoozah, burn the bitch down!"

/things that make you go hmmm

Hoozah, burn the bitch down!

Kimon
04-27-2015, 10:24 PM
The savages and barbarians in Baltimore who are looting, burning, and attacking the innocent, are not helping their purpose. In fact, they are stirring the pot that will erupt greater than it ever has before. It is sickening that people can't go out nowadays and protest without causing violence. We can all admit that it's not for a purpose other than to get free shit that isn't earned. Obviously with all this shit that goes on day in and day out that they don't have jobs because they have all the time in the world to cause violence to get free stuff that working people created. I understand that 99% of you all on here support the violence because you live in the dark dark basement of your home, but this shit is sickening. They are playing with fire, and it's going to erupt if every time a black person gets killed by a white person there's a violent riot. It seems like something highly illegal occurred that led to the poor black man's death, but it should be led by protests. Protest in the streets, go up to the courthouse and stand outside and hold your signs up, but to destroy the businesses that hardworking people have created is sickening and does not further a movement, but creates a hatred that will create different violence if it's not stopped. Prayers to the good white and black folk of Baltimore who are watching their businesses get destroyed by animals.

Do you honestly think any of us would condone this? Perhaps understand the source of their anger, but condone?

I grew up in the suburbs outside Detroit. My paternal grandfather grew up in Detroit. He was however part of that mass exodus from the city, quite accurately termed the white flight, due to the riots that ravaged the city in the 50s and 60s, most devastatingly so in '68 after MLK's assassination. Detroit has never recovered. I think it is safe to assume that we all are sickened and sad when we see what is happening, and very thankful that we are far from Baltimore tonight. Likewise, I think you are likely to find us all supportive of the decision to declare a state of emergency and institute a curfew for the remainder of the week.

Kimon
04-27-2015, 10:35 PM
Do you honestly think any of us would condone this? Perhaps understand the source of their anger, but condone?

I grew up in the suburbs outside Detroit. My paternal grandfather grew up in Detroit. He was however part of that mass exodus from the city, quite accurately termed the white flight, due to the riots that ravaged the city in the 50s and 60s, most devastatingly so in '68 after MLK's assassination. Detroit has never recovered. I think it is safe to assume that we all are sickened and sad when we see what is happening, and very thankful that we are far from Baltimore tonight. Likewise, I think you are likely to find us all supportive of the decision to declare a state of emergency and institute a curfew for the remainder of the week.

Edit: Apparently my memory is faulty - I'm thinking of the '67 riot, unrelated to King's assassination. It's sad how often this happens...

Frenzy
04-28-2015, 12:51 AM
The savages and barbarians in Baltimore who are looting, burning, and attacking the innocent, are not helping their purpose. In fact, they are stirring the pot that will erupt greater than it ever has before. It is sickening that people can't go out nowadays and protest without causing violence. We can all admit that it's not for a purpose other than to get free shit that isn't earned. Obviously with all this shit that goes on day in and day out that they don't have jobs because they have all the time in the world to cause violence to get free stuff that working people created. I understand that 99% of you all on here support the violence because you live in the dark dark basement of your home, but this shit is sickening. They are playing with fire, and it's going to erupt if every time a black person gets killed by a white person there's a violent riot. It seems like something highly illegal occurred that led to the poor black man's death, but it should be led by protests. Protest in the streets, go up to the courthouse and stand outside and hold your signs up, but to destroy the businesses that hardworking people have created is sickening and does not further a movement, but creates a hatred that will create different violence if it's not stopped. Prayers to the good white and black folk of Baltimore who are watching their businesses get destroyed by animals.
you know, if you had just left the bolded crap out, nobody here would disagree with you. You'd've sent everyone into an existential tailspin because there would have been nothing to disagree with you about.

Missed opportunities, sirrah.

Nazbaque
04-28-2015, 02:11 AM
you know, if you had just left the bolded crap out, nobody here would disagree with you. You'd've sent everyone into an existential tailspin because there would have been nothing to disagree with you about.

Missed opportunities, sirrah.

Well his goal is to get banned just so long he can say that he bashed Obama and then got banned. Technically truthful, but he would get the ban for being a troll not for his political views.

(While I often consider the Non Wot board to be the Wild Wild West, and rarely walk its threads, no such threats should be made here.) - Tam

Figbiscuit
04-28-2015, 06:18 AM
FWIW I agree that rioting and looting is no way to protest and I resent the accusation that I wouldn't care because I live in a dark basement. If you didn't get personal about it there might have been room for discussion.

connabard
04-28-2015, 11:36 AM
I find myself in a difficult place to judge the citizens of Baltimore. I'm white, straight, male, I barely even understand the concept of being offended.

Black people, the last 12 months especially, but since the inception of America, have been facing racism unending. Now there are black people being killed by police almost daily, and whether or not all of those are racially based murders or not, I cannot say with certainty that I would keep a level-head about it.

I am also not sure there are other solutions. I have heard people say that peaceful protests are the way, but if I recall Ferguson correctly, that was tried and met with more police resistance.

My gut says that it's wrong to riot, but I cannot bring myself to lay any judgment upon those who have now seen countless black youths and fathers killed with no repercussion. Not even an act to bring these things to a court.

Nazbaque
04-28-2015, 01:27 PM
Damn it Tam you ruined a perfectly evil experiment! Now I don't even know if he read it much less how he reacted or would have reacted. How would he have responded? Would he have responded at all like he usually doesn't? Would he never have posted again?

I was baiting the baiter. A disgustingly delicious past time and you took it away just like that. Damn it all!

The Unreasoner
04-28-2015, 01:44 PM
I was baiting the baiter
Sure you were.

Nazbaque
04-28-2015, 01:53 PM
Sure you were.

I'll have you know that in the art of bating I'm a master.

Frenzy
04-28-2015, 11:08 PM
I'll have you know that in the art of bating I'm a master.

http://i.imgur.com/o6gdpJa.jpg

Ozymandias
04-28-2015, 11:40 PM
Saw a very interesting article today, which I will endeavor to find, which basically made the case, and very well, that race is the only thing that keeps a "celebration" from being a "riot".

As in, people in cities all over the world burn shit down and get arrested and clash with the police, but when its minorities doing it, it is a riot.

And admittedly, most of those examples are in response ot sporting events and not acts of violent bigotry, but I think that previous sentence fragment sort of says enough?

Anyway, will try and find in the morning, thought it was interesting. I honestly only skimmed it but thought that was enough to get the gist.

Daekyras
04-29-2015, 05:44 AM
Saw a very interesting article today, which I will endeavor to find, which basically made the case, and very well, that race is the only thing that keeps a "celebration" from being a "riot".

As in, people in cities all over the world burn shit down and get arrested and clash with the police, but when its minorities doing it, it is a riot.

And admittedly, most of those examples are in response ot sporting events and not acts of violent bigotry, but I think that previous sentence fragment sort of says enough?

Anyway, will try and find in the morning, thought it was interesting. I honestly only skimmed it but thought that was enough to get the gist.

Not sure about the rest of the world but in Ireland a riot is a riot no matter what the igniting factor was.

Religious march ends in burnings- called a riot.

Beloved sports team goes defunct- called a riot.

Gay pride march descends into violence- called a riot.

"occupy" movement gets out of hand - called a riot.

Dalai Lama gets too much of the black stuff- called a riot.

Asylum seekers attempt to escape quarantine- called a riot.

Race or creed matters not. It is disgusting to think it makes a difference in the rest of the world.

Nazbaque
04-29-2015, 06:30 AM
Not sure about the rest of the world but in Ireland a riot is a riot no matter what the igniting factor was.

Religious march ends in burnings- called a riot.

Beloved sports team goes defunct- called a riot.

Gay pride march descends into violence- called a riot.

"occupy" movement gets out of hand - called a riot.

Dalai Lama gets too much of the black stuff- called a riot.

Asylum seekers attempt to escape quarantine- called a riot.

Race or creed matters not. It is disgusting to think it makes a difference in the rest of the world.

My first incling was to say that the riots not called riots are mostly a USA thing, but then I got to thinking that even riots called riots aren't a local thing for me or happen all that much anywhere in Finland. Guess we are just that much more civilized.

Davian93
04-29-2015, 07:14 AM
My first incling was to say that the riots not called riots are mostly a USA thing, but then I got to thinking that even riots called riots aren't a local thing for me or happen all that much anywhere in Finland. Guess we are just that much more civilized.

I turned on Foxnews briefly for about 2 min last night....I was immediately greeted by Sean Hannity telling me that they were getting word of a very troubling alliance brewing between Crips, Bloods, Black Guerillas and the Nation of Islam all to join together and target police.


In lieu of any actual violence last night, I guess they had to come up with something to terrify their viewers.

I did like how the Nation of Islam was thrown in there though...that was a good touch by Hannity.

Davian93
04-29-2015, 07:16 AM
My first incling was to say that the riots not called riots are mostly a USA thing, but then I got to thinking that even riots called riots aren't a local thing for me or happen all that much anywhere in Finland. Guess we are just that much more civilized.

http://rs1img.memecdn.com/rmx-finland-be-very-afraid_fb_310961.jpg

Even Finns know better than to take on other Finns.

eht slat meit
04-29-2015, 12:19 PM
I turned on Foxnews briefly for about 2 min last night....I was immediately greeted by Sean Hannity telling me that they were getting word of a very troubling alliance brewing between Crips, Bloods, Black Guerillas and the Nation of Islam all to join together and target police.

This is why Hannity fails. He takes legitimate information and mixes it in with histrionics. Everything links to Islam in his head, apparently.

That said, the comments regarding that alliance are based on a legitimate press release by the police department. Given that there have been reports of organized violence and 20 cops have been systematically injured over the course of the riots to the what.... zero? of Ferguson, the information appears credible.

Sans the Islam bs, of course.

Davian93
04-29-2015, 12:20 PM
This is why Hannity fails. He takes legitimate information and mixes it in with histrionics. Everything links to Islam in his head, apparently.

That said, the comments regarding that alliance are based on a legitimate press release by the police department. Given that there have been reports of organized violence and 20 cops have been systematically injured over the course of the riots to the what.... zero? of Ferguson, the information appears credible.

Sans the Islam bs, of course.

I know but the Islam part just makes it so awesome for me. I was waiting (in the 2 min before I turned it off) for it to progress to "and we all know why this is happening...why wont Barack HUSSEIN Obama do anything about these muslims? "

eht slat meit
04-29-2015, 12:34 PM
I know but the Islam part just makes it so awesome for me. I was waiting (in the 2 min before I turned it off) for it to progress to "and we all know why this is happening...why wont Barack HUSSEIN Obama do anything about these muslims? "

Personally, I'm down with taking a page from the pro-sports book and starting a new program called "Smack Cam with Toya Graham" featuring rioters getting dressed down by their mothers.

Khoram
04-29-2015, 12:39 PM
Not sure about the rest of the world but in Ireland a riot is a riot no matter what the igniting factor was.

Religious march ends in burnings- called a riot.

Beloved sports team goes defunct- called a riot.

Gay pride march descends into violence- called a riot.

"occupy" movement gets out of hand - called a riot.

Dalai Lama gets too much of the black stuff- called a riot.

Asylum seekers attempt to escape quarantine- called a riot.

Race or creed matters not. It is disgusting to think it makes a difference in the rest of the world.

Same here - although the bold part isn't entirely true here. We have a beloved sports team win a series and riots begin. (Imagine if they were to actually win the championship! :eek:)

Nazbaque
04-29-2015, 02:09 PM
http://i.imgur.com/o6gdpJa.jpg

Ummm... I must admit that I don't know the reference and that confuses me as to what message you wish to convey.

ShadowbaneX
04-29-2015, 05:35 PM
I understand that 99% of you all on here support the violence because you live in the dark dark basement of your home, but this shit is sickening.

http://i.imgur.com/3i7uiTu.gif

Kimon
04-29-2015, 05:51 PM
Ummm... I must admit that I don't know the reference and that confuses me as to what message you wish to convey.

This might help clarify things - it's from Mel Brooks' History of the World Part I. The line that you obliquely uttered that must have drawn Frenzy's notice comes at about the 3:00 mark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kt3745NRxpo

Nazbaque
04-29-2015, 06:56 PM
This might help clarify things - it's from Mel Brooks' History of the World Part I. The line that you obliquely uttered that must have drawn Frenzy's notice comes at about the 3:00 mark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kt3745NRxpo

Figures. You think of a dirty pun and it turns out Mel Brooks did it first.

Ivhon
04-29-2015, 11:22 PM
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Now. I personally might favor prudence. But then again, my people were not separated from their families. Brought in misery to a new continent to be bought, sold, separated from their families like the animals Southpaw likes to reference. Denied economic opportunity. Had their civil liberties suppressed. Lynched from trees. Shot and brutalized by police (there is a long history of uninvestigated brutality by the Baltimore PD that is ignored. Only when a tiny percentage of protesters turn violent are the "savage animals" given any attention. And that only to scare cowards like Southpaw). Etc, etc.

So I dunno. Maybe these protesters are exercising their civic duty in the only way left to them.

eht slat meit
04-30-2015, 01:39 AM
Maybe these protesters are exercising their civic duty in the only way left to them.

If you think that's the only way they believes is left to them, you're crediting them with far smaller minds than any except a common racist of the Stormfront stripe would claim.

Make no mistake, burning and looting is not any form of civic duty. It is lawlessness and lack of governance, and the more brutal the behavior, the closer to accuracy the histrionics of people like Southpaw become.

But then, the truth of the matter is that those involved really aren't the protestors but the same kind of thugs and lawless thugs the said failed governance is meant to protect from.

Nazbaque
04-30-2015, 03:18 AM
If you think that's the only way they believes is left to them, you're crediting them with far smaller minds than any except a common racist of the Stormfront stripe would claim.

Make no mistake, burning and looting is not any form of civic duty. It is lawlessness and lack of governance, and the more brutal the behavior, the closer to accuracy the histrionics of people like Southpaw become.

But then, the truth of the matter is that those involved really aren't the protestors but the same kind of thugs and lawless thugs the said failed governance is meant to protect from.

But aren't they doing exactly what certain people say the second amendment is for?

GonzoTheGreat
04-30-2015, 04:22 AM
But then, the truth of the matter is that those involved really aren't the protestors but the same kind of thugs and lawless thugs the said failed governance is meant to protect from.
But that government does not actually provide such protection. Instead, it simply keeps them bottled up in their ghettos, and when the mood strikes the police 'arrests' some likely suspect and roughs him up a bit. As happened in the very case under discussion here, only the roughing up went a bit farther than perhaps intended at a moment when that was a really stupid thing to do.

Coupling a badge with that kind of stupidity, and what you have is an official bully. Make it into government policy (as it was here, obviously, even if it was not quite openly official), and you have a tyranny.

Thus, the real question is: why should that government be thought to have any legitimacy at all?

Davian93
04-30-2015, 08:12 AM
Now. I personally might favor prudence. But then again, my people were not separated from their families. Brought in misery to a new continent to be bought, sold, separated from their families like the animals Southpaw likes to reference. Denied economic opportunity. Had their civil liberties suppressed. Lynched from trees. Shot and brutalized by police (there is a long history of uninvestigated brutality by the Baltimore PD that is ignored. Only when a tiny percentage of protesters turn violent are the "savage animals" given any attention. And that only to scare cowards like Southpaw). Etc, etc.

So I dunno. Maybe these protesters are exercising their civic duty in the only way left to them.

This is a great point. Is this rioting a good thing? No, most definitely not but lets not ignore the cause of the disease just because we dont like the symptoms.

Baltimore, for those who are unfamiliar, has a very dark and troubled racial history. It is the Deep South when it comes to race relations. People not from there won't believe it but Maryland is very much a Southern state (as is Delaware actually) and they were up front and center in the fight to maintain the status quo during Jim Crow. Their police department didnt even get black officers until the late 1930s and a black cop wasn't allowed to patrol in a white neighborhood until the late 1960s. Think about that for a second and realize how fvcked up a place that is.


"A riot is the language of the unheard."-Dr. King.

yks 6nnetu hing
04-30-2015, 08:35 AM
I understand that 99% of you all on here support the violence because you live in the dark dark basement of your home

you guys! He says he's the 1% :eek::eek:

connabard
04-30-2015, 09:26 AM
If you think that's the only way they believes is left to them, you're crediting them with far smaller minds than any except a common racist of the Stormfront stripe would claim.

Make no mistake, burning and looting is not any form of civic duty. It is lawlessness and lack of governance, and the more brutal the behavior, the closer to accuracy the histrionics of people like Southpaw become.

But then, the truth of the matter is that those involved really aren't the protestors but the same kind of thugs and lawless thugs the said failed governance is meant to protect from.

How's that diet racism working out for you? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdyin6uipy4

The truth is that while rioting is not a good thing, if you seriously think these people have another option, you're kidding yourself. There were quite a few peaceful protests at the time of Ferguson (in more places than Ferguson) and since then more and more unarmed black youths have been killed.

If you want to call them thugs for this, not sorry, but you're racist. They are using what means they have left to be heard. What they wanted was a cop to be brought to justice. That's not asking for much.

Davian93
04-30-2015, 11:42 AM
To be fair, Obama also called the violent rioters "thugs and criminals".

I dont think he's racist.


Source: NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/29/us/politics/events-in-baltimore-reflect-a-slow-rolling-crisis-across-us-obama-says.html?_r=0)

Davian93
04-30-2015, 12:01 PM
Interesting...

In 2004, Jeffrey Alston was awarded $39 million after becoming paralyzed from the neck down as a result of a ride in a Baltimore police van.[1][2][7]

In 2005, Dondi Johnson Sr., a plumber, was arrested in Baltimore for public urination. Apparently uninjured at the time of his arrest, Johnson emerged from the police van paralyzed with a broken neck, and died two weeks later from pneumonia resulting from his injuries. Johnson stated he had been thrown face-first into the interior of the van during a sharp turn. His family sued the Baltimore police and were awarded $7.4 million, which was reduced to $219,000 under a cap imposed by Maryland state law.[1][7]

In 2012, Christine Abbott, a 27-year-old assistant librarian at Johns Hopkins University, was arrested at a party she was hosting at her home in Baltimore's Hampden neighborhood. She was handcuffed and put into a police van. Abbott later sued the officers in federal court, describing her ride as "like a roller coaster", and accusing the officers of braking short and taking "wide, fast turns" which slammed her into the walls. Police acknowledged that Abbot was not buckled in during her ride.[1][2][7]


Yes, its from Wiki but the sources are all legit. This is what we call a "pattern of excessive force".

eht slat meit
04-30-2015, 12:06 PM
Interesting...



Yes, its from Wiki but the sources are all legit. This is what we call a "pattern of excessive force".

Actually, it's what we call "a pattern of criminal negligence"

Davian93
04-30-2015, 12:15 PM
Actually, it's what we call "a pattern of criminal negligence"

It's technically both. You can't really say its just negligence since it's almost certainly a deliberate act on their part to hurt the suspect.

eht slat meit
04-30-2015, 12:20 PM
It's technically both. You can't really say its just negligence since it's almost certainly a deliberate act on their part to hurt the suspect.

It's not "technically both" until you show that it was a deliberate act to hurt the suspect. It's confirmable negligence, because it's part of their job to make secure and safe transit.

So yeah, prove the intent, and I'll agree.

Davian93
04-30-2015, 12:24 PM
It's not "technically both" until you show that it was a deliberate act to hurt the suspect. It's confirmable negligence, because it's part of their job to make secure and safe transit.

So yeah, prove the intent, and I'll agree.

I would say its probable but not beyond a reasonable doubt. Especially given that this is apparently a common practice nationwide among police departments. Negligence, to me, would be simply not hooking them up to the restraints. It crosses into a deliberate act with intent to injure once they start short-stopping (aka screen testing them) and swinging hard around turns, etc.

eht slat meit
04-30-2015, 12:27 PM
I would say its probable but not beyond a reasonable doubt. Especially given that this is apparently a common practice nationwide among police departments.

You're citing 3 cases in Baltimore to establish a pattern nationwide in the other 19,999 police departments? Really?

Negligence, to me, would be simply not hooking them up to the restraints. It crosses into a deliberate act with intent to injure once they start short-stopping (aka screen testing them) and swinging hard around turns, etc.

Criminal negligence :The failure to use reasonable care to avoid consequences that threaten or harm the safety of the public and that are the foreseeable outcome of acting in a particular manner.:

That's what it is, and encompasses deliberate acts, since the outcome is foreseeable.

Davian93
04-30-2015, 12:40 PM
No, not just those 3. There are a ton more if you simply google the term. Sorry about not specifying there.

Ivhon
04-30-2015, 02:08 PM
Interesting how the state imposed a cap on damages (we have one here, too) thereby tacitly condoning the behavior by putting restraints not on police behavior but on state liability for that behavior. In effect saying, "go ahead! Beat those animals/savages/thugs. We'll just make it so the cost to the state is minimal."

Kimon
04-30-2015, 05:00 PM
It's not "technically both" until you show that it was a deliberate act to hurt the suspect. It's confirmable negligence, because it's part of their job to make secure and safe transit.

So yeah, prove the intent, and I'll agree.

It's called a nickel ride (or rough ride, or joyride, depending apparently by region). It's used apparently in cases where the suspect made the cops run, or did something else to piss them off. It's surprising that someone wouldn't have cracked down more on them before this simply to cut down on liability and lawsuits, but awareness and public outcry will likely change that, and at least temporarily curtail the practice.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20150429_By_many_names_-__nickel_ride____rough_ride__-_entrenched_form_of_police_abuse_persists.html

Davian93
04-30-2015, 08:00 PM
It's called a nickel ride (or rough ride, or joyride, depending apparently by region). It's used apparently in cases where the suspect made the cops run, or did something else to piss them off. It's surprising that someone wouldn't have cracked down more on them before this simply to cut down on liability and lawsuits, but awareness and public outcry will likely change that, and at least temporarily curtail the practice.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20150429_By_many_names_-__nickel_ride____rough_ride__-_entrenched_form_of_police_abuse_persists.html

In LA, it's called a "screen test"...get it? It's like a movie reference thing...so funny.

Daekyras
05-01-2015, 02:08 AM
In LA, it's called a "screen test"...get it? It's like a movie reference thing...so funny.

How many cops does it take to change a light bulb?

None. They just beat the room for being black...

Nazbaque
05-01-2015, 02:20 AM
How many cops does it take to change a light bulb?

None. They just beat the room for being black...

Shouldn't the punch line be: "All of them, they get distracted and beat the room for being black."?

GonzoTheGreat
05-01-2015, 04:32 AM
It's called a nickel ride (or rough ride, or joyride, depending apparently by region). It's used apparently in cases where the suspect made the cops run, or did something else to piss them off. It's surprising that someone wouldn't have cracked down more on them before this simply to cut down on liability and lawsuits, but awareness and public outcry will likely change that, and at least temporarily curtail the practice.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20150429_By_many_names_-__nickel_ride____rough_ride__-_entrenched_form_of_police_abuse_persists.html
I've read on another message board that it was just explicitly prohibited in Baltimore a couple of weeks before this incident.

I'll ask why the involved police officers don't get charged with conspiracy to murder. Of course, the obvious answer is: "they have badges, so they can't be convicted of murder", but as that's not a PC answer, maybe someone else can come up with a better alternative.

Davian93
05-01-2015, 07:50 AM
I've read on another message board that it was just explicitly prohibited in Baltimore a couple of weeks before this incident.

I'll ask why the involved police officers don't get charged with conspiracy to murder. Of course, the obvious answer is: "they have badges, so they can't be convicted of murder", but as that's not a PC answer, maybe someone else can come up with a better alternative.


http://www.snakkle.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/keifer-sutherland-a-few-good-men-1993-movie-photo-GC.jpg
"I specifically ordered those men not to touch Private Santiago..."

eht slat meit
05-01-2015, 12:18 PM
I'll ask why the involved police officers don't get charged with conspiracy to murder. Of course, the obvious answer is: "they have badges, so they can't be convicted of murder", but as that's not a PC answer, maybe someone else can come up with a better alternative.

Because apparently "depraved heart murder" is a much better legal term for what they're actually being charged with?

http://news.yahoo.com/freddie-gray-sustained-fatal-head-injury-in-back-of-police-van--report-124521845.html

eht slat meit
05-01-2015, 08:28 PM
I'll ask why the involved police officers don't get charged with conspiracy to murder. Of course, the obvious answer is: "they have badges, so they can't be convicted of murder", but as that's not a PC answer, maybe someone else can come up with a better alternative.

A second response occurs to me.

Probably because all cops are racist against blacks and racists stick together.

Oh wait....

http://www.wbaltv.com/news/a-look-at-the-6-officers-charged-in-freddie-grays-death/32708128

Oops. Nevermind.

Davian93
05-02-2015, 02:00 PM
cops don't like "criminals" and probably felt they were "teaching him some manners" or some stupid thing like that.

Also, if you don't think black people don't hate the "criminal element" black people that "give them all a bad name", i have a bridge I'd like to sell you. Black people tend to hate "those people" even more than racist white people. This guy was a known drug dealer (18 arrests for drugs and associated issues) and they knew that. He ran and was giving them crap so they taught him a lesson.

That's my guess anyway...I bet its pretty close to the truth.

eht slat meit
05-02-2015, 03:12 PM
Also, if you don't think black people don't hate the "criminal element" black people that "give them all a bad name", i have a bridge I'd like to sell you. Black people tend to hate "those people" even more than racist white people. This guy was a known drug dealer (18 arrests for drugs and associated issues) and they knew that. He ran and was giving them crap so they taught him a lesson.


So if a white cop doesn't like black criminals, it's because s/he's racist, but if a black cop doesn't like black criminals it's legitimately because they're criminals?

.... yeah, okay.

The Unreasoner
05-02-2015, 03:49 PM
So if a white cop doesn't like black criminals, it's because s/he's racist, but if a black cop doesn't like black criminals it's legitimately because they're criminals?

.... yeah, okay.
Well...you're hardly the bastion of correct thought.

You really think Obama opposed gay marriage for religious reasons instead of political expediency?

In any case, you should treat racism more like a force and less like a substance. Gravity, not caloric.

eht slat meit
05-02-2015, 04:01 PM
Well...you're hardly the bastion of correct thought.

You really think Obama opposed gay marriage for religious reasons instead of political expediency?


I could speculate on that, yes. I don't recall doing that here, and being that he's Christian and Christianity is based on an insanely homophobic religious text, it wouldn't be surprising if that provided the seeds for his bigoted claims of marriage being man and woman only.

That said, doing it for political expediency rather than for religious reasons doesn't make someone any less a bigot. You cannot deny someone equal rights for political expediency and be anything less than a bigot.

So yeah, if you're going to natter on about "correct thought" please do show some instead of introducing off-topic nonsense in order to make a point.

The Unreasoner
05-02-2015, 04:08 PM
I could speculate on that, yes. I don't recall doing that here, and being that he's Christian and Christianity is based on an insanely homophobic religious text, it wouldn't be surprising if that provided the seeds for his bigoted claims of marriage being man and woman only.

That said, doing it for political expediency rather than for religious reasons doesn't make someone any less a bigot. You cannot deny someone equal rights for political expediency and be anything less than a bigot.

So yeah, if you're going to natter on about "correct thought" please do show some instead of introducing off-topic nonsense in order to make a point.
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/6ybd5rbQ5rU/maxresdefault.jpg
"I think you're missing my point."

Daekyras
05-02-2015, 05:47 PM
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/6ybd5rbQ5rU/maxresdefault.jpg
"I think you're missing my point."

What is that pic from unreasoner? It looks vaguely familiar.

The Unreasoner
05-02-2015, 07:04 PM
It's from the movie Travelling Salesman.

ETA:
An 'L'. I put two at first, but got the squiggly line so I changed it. But it looks like I was right. Any grammar nazis care to weigh in?

Kimon
05-02-2015, 07:19 PM
It's from the movie Travelling Salesman.

ETA:
An 'L'. I put two at first, but got the squiggly line so I changed it. But it looks like I was right. Any grammar nazis care to weigh in?

Is it a British film? Travelling is British, Traveling is American.

eht slat meit
05-02-2015, 07:26 PM
In any case, you should treat racism more like a force and less like a substance. Gravity, not caloric.

Yes, yes, I realize that this was the.... point... you were getting at, and I deliberately ignored it because you were attributed something to me that has no basis in fact.

I treat racism as what it is. An idea, a belief that people of one race possess characteristics that make them superior to other races. That is the definition of the word and what it means. It is neither a force, nor a substance.

It is neither a substance, nor an emotional energy that can be turned into pretty lightsabres.

The Unreasoner
05-02-2015, 07:40 PM
Yes, yes, I realize that this was the.... point... you were getting at, and I deliberately ignored it because you were attributed something to me that has no basis in fact.

I treat racism as what it is. An idea, a belief that people of one race possess characteristics that make them superior to other races. That is the definition of the word and what it means. It is neither a force, nor a substance.

It is neither a substance, nor an emotional energy that can be turned into pretty lightsabres.
My point was that I don't think you really understand racism. You haven't really demonstrated an understanding of it in your posts. It's not only an external idea. Certainly your point that racism isn't a major factor here just because some of the cops involved are black is ridiculous (if that was your point. If not, maybe some clarification is in order).

And I don't know if the movie is British or American. The characters are almost all American, but it takes place in the UK. I don't know about the producer.

ETA:
@eht
I don't know why you need to be so obnoxious. Pretty lightsabres?

eht slat meit
05-02-2015, 07:57 PM
My point was that I don't think you really understand racism. You haven't really demonstrated an understanding of it in your posts. It's not only an external idea.

Disagreeing with me and telling me what it isn't, rather than telling me what it is? ReallY? It seems to me that you're simply attempting to assert some unknown authority over the subject to dismiss what I am saying.

Certainly your point that racism isn't a major factor here

Nobody has asserted that. Are you?

It wasn't a point about this case, but a point about the overuse and abuse of claims of racism whenever there is a case where there is a black victim.

ETA:
@eht
I don't know why you need to be so obnoxious. Pretty lightsabres?

Obnoxious? No more so than posting a massive gif in response to my comment rather than simply having to say what you have to say.

Really, you seem to be under the impression that I'm too new to the internet understand the condescending and obnoxious use of such gifs to mock and demean what others are saying. Perhaps I should post some Picard Facepalms or U Mad Bro? throwbacks to illustrate my point? Maybe a rabbit with a pancake on its head in response to your point about forces and substances?

The Unreasoner
05-02-2015, 08:10 PM
Disagreeing with me and telling me what it isn't, rather than telling me what it is? ReallY? It seems to me that you're simply attempting to assert some unknown authority over the subject to dismiss what I am saying
What are you saying?


Nobody has asserted that. Are you?
Of course not. But I remain puzzled when it comes to your point. Racism can make black on black crimes worse. It can make white cops abuse white civilians. These are subtleties derived from racism you don't seem to grasp.
Obnoxious? No more so than posting a massive gif in response to my comment rather than simply having to say what you have to say.
Was it a gif? If so, my bad. Uncompressed large images are bad form.

But I don't think you can say 'no more so'. You are habitually obnoxious. I occasionally post gifs. This one illustrated a peripheral point I wanted to make as well as the stated one, to anyone familiar with the source. And I wanted to see who got the reference.

eht slat meit
05-02-2015, 08:30 PM
What are you saying?

I'm saying that for someone so intent on disagreeing and being disagreeable, you don't have much to say for yourself.

Of course not. But I remain puzzled when it comes to your point. Racism can make black on black crimes worse. It can make white cops abuse white civilians.

Perhaps you should explain how it makes it worse, because you seem to be trying to illustrate a point without saying what the point is. Is it that you believe people can be racist against those of their own skin color even when you don't have the ability to demonstrably show this?

Was it a gif? If so, my bad. Uncompressed large images are bad form.

See point about obnoxious responses.

But I don't think you can say 'no more so'. You are habitually obnoxious.

Is this where you end on the Nazbaquian note without having really said anything at all and justifying it by claiming you were just trolling all along, when it's pretty clear that your purpose was to take unsubstantiated shots at my personal body of knowledge and behavior?

This one illustrated a peripheral point I wanted to make as well as the stated one, to anyone familiar with the source. And I wanted to see who got the reference.

And yet it was directed at me. Not having seen the movie, I did some looking, and it looks like you weren't just being obnoxious on a surface level. Decided you were talking over my head, right?

The Unreasoner
05-02-2015, 08:43 PM
I'm saying that for someone so intent on disagreeing and being disagreeable, you don't have much to say for yourself.
That's right. I don't really want to get involved in another one of these. But I saw you making lazy arguments and following some very bad thinking, and thought I'd point it out. Essentially, the only thing I'm saying is that you don't have a lot to say for yourself. And you're saying it very loudly.
Perhaps you should explain how it makes it worse, because you seem to be trying to illustrate a point without saying what the point is. Is it that you believe people can be racist against those of their own skin color even when you don't have the ability to demonstrably show this?
Of course people can be racist against their own race. That wasn't my point, and I would hope it's not common. But it's possible.

A simple example of a subtlety you're missing might be a black cop being disproportionately abusive with black suspects, for the reasons Davian noted and others.
See point about obnoxious responses.
That was actually a somewhat sincere apology. I thought you might be on dialup or 3g or something.
Is this where you end on the Nazbaquian note without having really said anything at all and justifying it by claiming you were just trolling all along, when it's pretty clear that your purpose was to take unsubstantiated shots at my personal body of knowledge and behavior?
I'm not trolling. I'm actually almost saying you are.
And yet it was directed at me. Not having seen the movie, I did some looking, and it looks like you weren't just being obnoxious on a surface level. Decided you were talking over my head, right?
I'm not sure what your saying here, but I wasn't insulting you. I think I've always respected your intelligence. Was I wrong to do so?

eht slat meit
05-02-2015, 08:59 PM
But I saw you making lazy arguments and following some very bad thinking, and thought I'd point it out.

There was no argument worth noting. It was simply an off-the-cuff comment with a small point directed at the vitriolic race-baiting on both sides of the Baltimore issue, and that argument place in the scheme of the larger discussion.

Essentially, the only thing I'm saying is that you don't have a lot to say for yourself. And you're saying it very loudly.

Seems like you should be a lot more welcoming of me if that's what you really think. Peas in a pod, and all that.

A simple example of a subtlety you're missing might be a black cop being disproportionately abusive with black suspects, for the reasons Davian noted and others.

That's an element of abuse of job authority, misattributed to racism. If the abuse by cops against their own skin color is as common as its made out to be, while the racism you assert can exist against their own skin color at a much lesser level - it stands to reason by basic mathematics that you also believe that abuse of authority by cops can exist entirely independently of racism by cops, with most abuse being a simple product of violent hugs who think their authority conveys more power than it really does.

That's what I'm getting at, but the asinine back and forth is that it's all about the race any time there is a black victim or unreasonable levels of self-victimization.

That was actually a somewhat sincere apology. I thought you might be on dialup or 3g or something.

If I were still on dialup, I probably would be using four letter words instead.

I'm not trolling. I'm actually almost saying you are.

I'm not, and do not. I have a sense of humor, but not enough of one to indulge in acting like that.

I'm not sure what your saying here, but I wasn't insulting you. I think I've always respected your intelligence. Was I wrong to do so?

Given that I've been here so infrequently on and off over the years, I can't imagine why I stand out among the masses of prior Theorylanders enough in anyone's head to be memorable, let alone seen as obnoxious or intelligent. Certainly, there are those who dwarf me in both aspects.

Frenzy
05-02-2015, 11:53 PM
i have to be honest, i'm surprised nobody's brought up The Wire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wire) yet.

Terez
05-03-2015, 12:02 AM
i have to be honest, i'm surprised nobody's brought up The Wire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wire) yet.
I just finished rewatching season 1 ep 7. On to ep 8...

Nazbaque
05-03-2015, 01:47 AM
Is this where you end on the Nazbaquian note without having really said anything at all and justifying it by claiming you were just trolling all along, when it's pretty clear that your purpose was to take unsubstantiated shots at my personal body of knowledge and behavior?
I'm enjoying this very much. They are trying to out-Naz each other. Such a shame they are so bad at it. Still, I've become the standard measurement for obnoxious intelligence. In your face Gonzo!

Oh and the word is "Nazbaqian", leave out the "u" as well when turning my username into an adjective.

GonzoTheGreat
05-03-2015, 04:10 AM
i have to be honest, i'm surprised nobody's brought up The Wire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wire) yet.But that is just fiction, with no resemblance to reality at all, isn't it?

Still, I've become the standard measurement for obnoxious intelligence. In your face Gonzo!
As everyone here knows, while I am intelligent, I am not in any way at all ever obnoxious. All those who may have thought differently were just simply mistaken, which is of course not my fault.

Nazbaque
05-03-2015, 05:05 AM
As everyone here knows, while I am intelligent, I am not in any way at all ever obnoxious. All those who may have thought differently were just simply mistaken, which is of course not my fault.

And that is why no-one refers to you as "Yoda", which actually has happened to me. One must master both the Light and the Dark side to be a Jedi Grandmaster such as myself.

Still haven't got the piggyback ride from the padawan, though.

GonzoTheGreat
05-03-2015, 06:14 AM
Actually, it wasn't Yoda but Anakin who was supposed to achieve that. But if you want to compare yourself to the character from Star Wars 1-3, then I won't contend that position.

Terez
05-03-2015, 07:43 AM
But that is just fiction, with no resemblance to reality at all, isn't it?
Season 1 ep 13. The drug crew being targeted by the protagocops, they're down on their luck. Another crew moves onto their territory. Interlopers get beat down and chased off with baseball bats. Protagocops are doing a stakeout.

Cop 1: "See, that's why we can't win."
Cop 2: "What?"
Cop 1: "They fuck up, they get beat. We fuck up, they give us pensions."

Later:

Cop 2: "I don't believe it. Five guys got jumped [to sergeant]. Not just you. Four other guys jumped me."
Cop 1: "Hey, I'm sorry man."
Cop 2: "Gotta be all the brutality complaints, which means it ain't never gonna matter how well I do on no fuckin' test..."

Daekyras
05-03-2015, 02:34 PM
i have to be honest, i'm surprised nobody's brought up The Wire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wire) yet.

I meant to do it a bunch of times but felt it may have been tasteless.

*looks at my previous post*

Should have brought up the wire instead.

Nazbaque
05-03-2015, 03:44 PM
Actually, it wasn't Yoda but Anakin who was supposed to achieve that. But if you want to compare yourself to the character from Star Wars 1-3, then I won't contend that position.

Gonzo, are you agreeing with Lucas' opinion on what the prequels should have been like. Midichlorians, pod racing, Jar Jar Binks. You agree with the person who came up with that?

Besides even if by some slim chance he got something right it would just mean that I'm superior to Yoda. The padawans are just a bit unimaginetive and believe Yoda to be as good as it gets.

Daekyras
05-03-2015, 06:11 PM
Season 1 ep 13. The drug crew being targeted by the protagocops, they're down on their luck. Another crew moves onto their territory. Interlopers get beat down and chased off with baseball bats. Protagocops are doing a stakeout.

Cop 1: "See, that's why we can't win."
Cop 2: "What?"
Cop 1: "They fuck up, they get beat. We fuck up, they give us pensions."

Later:

Cop 2: "I don't believe it. Five guys got jumped [to sergeant]. Not just you. Four other guys jumped me."
Cop 1: "Hey, I'm sorry man."
Cop 2: "Gotta be all the brutality complaints, which means it ain't never gonna matter how well I do on no fuckin' test..."

carver is the light brown cop.

herc is the neanderthal looking white dude.

Davian93
05-04-2015, 08:11 AM
So if a white cop doesn't like black criminals, it's because s/he's racist, but if a black cop doesn't like black criminals it's legitimately because they're criminals?

.... yeah, okay.

Um, not exactly...I believe Chris Rock even had a skit about this...Black people hate "those people" even more than racist whites...he didn't use that those quoted words though.

The equivalent would be upper or middle class whites bashing "white trash" or "trailer trash". Its still a form of descrimination or racism if you will...despite the nominal "race" being the same on paper.