Shoot First, Ask Questions Later Police Mentality

[Milktoast Bandit]

Dont agree tbat love comes naturally.

What does come naturally?

I remember this one time, a tiny human fetus ever so wetly nestled in its mama's womb. It was just being in there, attached to its mom, fully secure, warm, no worries about anything because it hadn't learned anything, no concepts to contemplate, no thoughts of right or wrong, and not even a trace of a feeling of seperate-ness. All it knew was connected isness. It just was. Then spontaneously as if by magic, the fetus said, "Screw this!" and began thrashing about, frantically pulling and chewing on the umbilical cord in order to separate. Of course, it was just a fetus so it had no strength, or teeth, or finger nails that were strong enough that it could burrow out with. Finally, after tiring out, the fetus decided to wait. And wait it did until the big day.

When mama gave her final push and that baby slid out to much elation and the doctor cut the umbilical cord, that tiny cute (newborns aren't cute) snuggly little bundle of human potential shot everyone. Killed them all. It was a mess I tell ya! For once in that tiny babes life it had what it always desired... total separation, isolation, no connection, independence!

...and there on that cold hard floor, in its murderous ignorance surrounded by the dead bodies of its mama, papa, doctor and nurses, and an olfactory bouquet of gunpowder, sweat, and afterbirth, it lay... screaming... needing help, fed, held, loved. What that ignorant little babe didn't realize was that as bad as it wanted to be "free" and independent it was 100% dependent on the people it had killed. So there is was, screaming, in need, isolated and alone, until it to died...

Stupid baby. It should've known that we are all dependent on each other for our well being.

 

[James]

Dont agree tbat love comes naturally.

[MENTION=8603]Eventhorizon[/MENTION] Perhaps 'love' is a term that doesn't resonate with 'T' types very much, you prefer to look at logic and reason. I would suggest that humans have evolved as a social animal, not just through 'warm fuzzy love' feelings but through an absolutely essential need to cooperate and survive, and of course reproduce.

As such, we probably are born with an instinct to seek some social interaction (even introverts like me) and we form a bond with each, a social contract of sorts.

It's crucial for us to do that, as we are dealing with the most dangerous predator on earth, other humans. I think in psychology we see that it's only when we 'switch off' that recognition of other humans as being part of our group, and see them as prey, that we can engage in violence. A lot of times, this happens at close range, within a 2 metre personal zone of the victim. I noticed with the attacks on the police, even though most were killed at range, one was attacked close up.

I think a lot of what we need to know is not just learned behavior, it is stored in our dna, and we don't just learn it, it was partially or fully there to begin with. You might prefer to think of love as a certain chemical mixture in the brain, but I think it does arrive naturally. Emotions are powerful drivers of human behavior even for fully fledged 'T' types in my experience. Even if they prefer a far more detached non-emotional process of viewing things, which is a perfectly reasonable way to be, to me. Albeit different to my preference.

 

[sassafras]

At the risk of sounding irreverent at a time like this, I think most of humanity's problems right now can be boiled down to the assumptions we make about each other.

That is the middle ground. The No Man's land The violence and chaos is only going to continue so long as we have people hovering on either end of this divide and pointing fingers at who is assuming what about whom and why their assumptions are more justified or correct than the other side.

Ask yourselves who stands to gain from perpetuating this situation. I'm not just talking about the politicians and I'm not just talking about money or power. I'm talking about validation, significance, pride, retribution. All these things are at stake. Look at the groups. Look at all the parties involved--not just whom you perceive as the most in the wrong. Consider the people at the top of all of the major factions involved, including those groups whose agenda whom you perceive is noble, and ask yourselves if the way they're attempting to resolve the issues they stand for is truly about finding peace or if its about something other than what they claim they're about.

I think when we're prepared to look at the whole picture, not just our favourites or what is easily defensible vs. what isn't, will we be closer to figuring this shit out.

 

[just me]

Well said. Be still.

 

[Asa]

Perhaps 'love' is a term that doesn't resonate with 'T' types very much, you prefer to look at logic and reason.

Ahhhh, that isn't fair. INTJs are fully capable of feeling deep compassion and love when it is truly deserved.


(PS: MY SO is an INTJ.)

 

[James]

Ahhhh, that isn't fair. INTJs are fully capable of feeling deep compassion and love when it is truly deserved.


(PS: MY SO is an INTJ.)

@Asa - I truly meant no insult. Of course your INTJ would be that way - he has an INFJ partner ! My father was INTJ, my mother was INFJ, their love was very deep. All I meant was that some 'T' types prefer to look at things in a less feeling or emotional way. Even mentioning love can make some uncomfortable, I've seen it. I don't look at love as a chemical reaction in the brain, but I will imagine quite a few INTJ's will.

It doesn't mean they have no feelings, they just like to rationalize things. I don't see anything wrong with that, just because it's not my preference.

 

[Asa]

<3 You didn't have to explain. I understood. I was kinda poking and teasing you and semi-serious at the same time. I can't wait until we can communicate with tone over the internet.

 

[Night Owl]

 

[invisible]

It is right for black people to talk about issues like this as being a problem of race, it is not just about this particular event. They should be talking about things like how many more black children are tried as adults for the same crimes as white children who are not tried as adults, and they are talking about those things. It's not wrong or racist for them to talk about that, and it's not disgusting for white people to support them in talking about things like that. They are just asking to be treated with the same way as white people. They don't have to go out of their way to be loving of white people when they are doing that, because all they are doing is asking to be treated the same, and to have people actually look at these problems and to accept that there is a problem here, and to try and find a solution. It's not an act of hate to want to talk about inequality and it doesn't hurt or disadvantage anyone to want to talk about that.

 

[invisible]

Police officers explain how they’re encouraged to act in racist ways

 

[Matt3737]

Systemic racism in America is just a byproduct of the class warfare that is being perpetuated in our capitalistic society. Every day it's becoming more and more illegal to be poor in America and we're still reeling from the effects of the global recession. I wish that we would cease focusing on the racial aspect of it because it detracts from the larger issue and it immediately shuts down rational discussion and it dehumanizes those who don't understand the racial aspect of the problem because it makes them out to be like they were merely bulls reacting to the color of red.

America is the country of mass incarceration and it's slowly growing into a debtor's prison as well.

A year-long study released in 2010 of fifteen states with the highest prison populations by the Brennan Center for Justice, found that all fifteen states sampled have jurisdictions that arrest people for failing to pay debt or appear at debt related hearings. The study identified four causes that lead to debtors' prison type arrests for debts:
State laws that attempt to make criminal justice debt a condition of probation, parole, or other correctional supervision with failure to pay resulting in arrest and reimprisonment.
State laws that consider imprisonment as a penalty for failure to pay criminal justice debt. These actions are considered a civil contempt of court charge, thus technically not in violation of state constitutions that prohibit debtors' prisons, but for the same reason those incarcerated must be released immediately if they either pay or prove themselves unable to do so.
Citizens choosing jail time under state programs where imprisonment is a way of paying down court imposed debt.
States that regularly arrest citizens for criminal justice debt prior to appearing at debt-related hearings, leading in many cases to multi-day jail terms pending an ability to pay hearing.
The routine jailing of persons who owe civil debt when such debts are related to child support arrears. Imprisonment for such debt is legally justified by the legal fiction that the incarceration is not for the debt, but rather for not obeying a court order to pay the debt.

The last point is particularly egregious because of how poorly regulated our family law is in America.

Justice has become big business in America. Policing for profit, adjudication for profit, and incarcerating for profit. Poverty is very nearly an outright crime and if you're a racial minority in America then you are also likely to be poor. Systemic racism is an inherent byproduct of this class warfare.

 

[Matt3737]

I should also note that this pressure to pay exacerbates crime rates and becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. You can't pay your legal fees and you might be thrown in jail? Crime might be your only option and then they've further dehumanized you and justified the decision to throw your ass in jail.

In this light, it's not so surprising that Breaking Bad ended up so popular about the idea of turning to crime because of an inability to pay for medical care.

We have a modern day Robin Hood tale where the poor are being unjustly taxed into a life of crime and then imprisoned or outright killed because of it.

 

[Matt3737]

Let's not forget that Bill Cosby is still a free man and OJ Simpson seemingly got away with murder despite being black men in America. Why? Because they had money and fame. Rich people pay for their crimes in money; the poor with their lives. That's how it is in America.

 

[The Ringmaster]

I would just like to say, for the love of god can we stop lumping the innocent man Philando Castile together with the violent felon and sex offender Alton Sterling as if they are both the same situation, other than them both being black men gunned down by white cops, the situations are in no way alike at all.

 

[Matt3737]

I would just like to say, for the love of god can we stop lumping the innocent man Philando Castile together with the violent felon and sex offender Alton Sterling as if they are both the same situation, other than them both being black men gunned down by white cops, the situations are in no way alike at all.

While all situations should be evaluated on their own circumstances, a person's past convictions are not a justification to execute them. Only a conviction for a capital offense is a justifiable reason or if the particular circumstances necessitated it.

You mean to say the people are in no way alike which is fine, but the circumstances (as far as I'm aware; I haven't followed either closely) can very well be similar.

 

[The Ringmaster]

While all situations should be evaluated on their own circumstances, a person's past convictions are not a justification to execute them. Only a conviction for a capital offense is a justifiable reason or if the particular circumstances necessitated it.

You mean to say the people are in no way alike which is fine, but the circumstances (as far as I'm aware; I haven't followed either closely) can very well be similar.

Police are in general far more likely to use deadly force with a suspect reported to be "armed and dangerous" (Sterling) than they are with a routine traffic stop (Castile). Someone known to be violent and aggressive will have police more on guard than they may otherwise be, this was a guy who was convicted of kicking in peoples doors and threatening them at gun point, that's not to say that there should be any kind of double jeopardy in regards to their past convictions, but rather that there is an inherent mistrust in these types of criminals by police, whether that's right or wrong is not up to me to decide. On the other hand Philando Castile who had no serious record (traffic violations and some minor drug abuse but nothing violent. ie. no reason to be any more cautious than normal.) was pulled over for a routine traffic stop, he informed the officer that he was legally carrying and was gunned down in his seat while reaching for his ID, I don't see how the second situation could be anything other than either cold blooded murder or a serious mental disability on the part of the officer. These two situations also take place in different cities, in different states with different police protocols. It's in no way a justification but more of an explanation of how one could have potentially been much more dangerous and therefore more plausible than the other, it sheds better light on how these two scenarios took place and how what happened could have happened. Deadly force is never justifiable unless used to protect yourself or others, that's what's left for the courts to determine.

 

[Eventhorizon]

This thread needs to be closed. Its inflammatory toward police officers in its wording.

 

[dang]

Let's not forget that Bill Cosby is still a free man and OJ Simpson seemingly got away with murder despite being black men in America. Why? Because they had money and fame. Rich people pay for their crimes in money; the poor with their lives. That's how it is in America.

So true. Obviously racism exists. But in this country, you are much more likely to avoid jail as a rich black man than as a poor white man if you commit a crime. There are clearly racial issues, but overlooked are the socioeconomic issues. In poor white neighborhoods, people are often treated in the same manner as poor people in other neighborhoods who are not white. Regardless of your color of skin, if you are poor in America, often you are not treated fairly when it comes to the judicial system. If a Bush is busted for possession of coke he doesn't have to worry about being incarcerated. If a poor black guy gets busted for possession of crack, he is fucked and his future is very limited. They say the USA is a great place to live, unless of course you are poor, old, or sick. Unfortunately, many of us are now at least one of those three, if not all three. They should do a study to determine what percentage of the population is in fact at least one of those three things. I think it would be surprising. That's a lot of people probably not too happy right now.

 

[arbygil]

Let's not forget that Bill Cosby is still a free man and OJ Simpson seemingly got away with murder despite being black men in America. Why? Because they had money and fame. Rich people pay for their crimes in money; the poor with their lives. That's how it is in America.

Although I would say, that though your chances of a favorable outcome are much better, being rich and Black doesn't always get you that free pass. Many prominent Black figures (judges, actors, professors, etc) have also reported being pulled over in traffic stops or stopped by police for no apparent reason, other than (possibly) the color of their skin. Again, it's a first person account so proof is rather one sided. However, realistically and statistically the same things do not happen as often to certain groups.

 

[Matt3737]

So true. Obviously racism exists. But in this country, you are much more likely to avoid jail as a rich black man than as a poor white man if you commit a crime. There are clearly racial issues, but overlooked are the socioeconomic issues. In poor white neighborhoods, people are often treated in the same manner as poor people in other neighborhoods who are not white. Regardless of your color of skin, if you are poor in America, often you are not treated fairly when it comes to the judicial system. If a Bush is busted for possession of coke he doesn't have to worry about being incarcerated. If a poor black guy gets busted for possession of crack, he is fucked and his future is very limited. They say the USA is a great place to live, unless of course you are poor, old, or sick. Unfortunately, many of us are now at least one of those three, if not all three. They should do a study to determine what percentage of the population is in fact at least one of those three things. I think it would be surprising. That's a lot of people probably not too happy right now.

Crack and cocaine may be nearly identical on a molecular level, but people who are charged with possession of just 1 gram of crack are given the same sentence as those found in possession of 18 grams of cocaine.

This 18:1 sentencing disparity is actually an improvement from the previous sentencing gulf of 100:1, thanks to the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, but as new research shows, any disparity unfairly targets crack users, who are more likely to be black, low-income and less educated.

The nation’s coke problem is much larger than its crack problem, with 12 percent of U.S. adults reporting coke use and 4 percent reporting crack use. Yet crack users are still at higher risk for an arrest, or multiple arrests, in their lifetime.

“We wrote this paper to inform the public and Congress about the disparities in the sentencing laws between crack and powder cocaine, which continue to have profound legal and social consequences for users,” said study author Dr. Joseph J. Palamar, an assistant professor of population health at NYU’s Langone Medical Center. “The sentencing laws appear to unfairly target the poor, with blacks ultimately experiencing high incarceration rates as a result.”

http://www.vocativ.com/underworld/drugs/crack-vs-coke-sentencing/

Despite being the same substance, crack cocaine is still regularly regarded differently because it's associated with poverty. This is because it is a more efficient usage of the drug (which would be favored by the impoverished who are forced to efficiently ration what little they can get) whereas snorting lines of cocaine is reflective of conspicuous consumption.