Ferguson conflict - What is the problem, and how to solve it?

[Ten oz]

Agreed. It shows that people are discriminated against due to racism. But it does not show that personal responsibility is not a factor in some person's or some group's circumstances.

I'd go so far as to say that the majority of people; you, me, or anyone else, could improve our circumstances if we worked harder.

Improving ones situation is relative. Choosing a less violent pimp improves a prostitutes situation. The goal posts are on wheels when discussing a person's ability to improve their life.

[zapatos]

Improving ones situation is relative. Choosing a less violent pimp improves a prostitutes situation. The goal posts are on wheels when discussing a person's ability to improve their life.

Exactly.

[MigL]

So Willie, if these cultural and psychological effects are so deeply ingrained that even leveling the playing field, and removing all discriminatory and racist factors, will not change things, what is the solution ?

[overtone]

Re blaming the victim:

 

Has anyone posting here done that?

Of course - everyone who blamed Brown for acting so badly he got shot, or the black citizens of Ferguson for the behavior of the white police from out of town, or the citizens of Ferguson and elsewhere who had "their own businesses looted and property destroyed" by "rioters" which is held by some here to be self-destructive behavior by the black community of protestors.

 

 

 

 

I'd go so far as to say that the majority of people; you, me, or anyone else, could improve our circumstances if we worked harder.

Most people I know would be better off if they worked less. imho.

 

 

 

 

So Willie, if these cultural and psychological effects are so deeply ingrained that even leveling the playing field, and removing all discriminatory and racist factors, will not change things, what is the solution ?

Nobody here thinks removing all discriminatory and racist factors would fail to change things. That would change a lot of things. Just not everything, overnight, for the best. Edited January 6, 2015 by overtone

[MigL]

Just to be clear ( before Ten oz jumps all over me again ) we are not discussing the assignment of blame, That is for the courts to decide ( or not ).

But if you are saying Brown had no choice in the way things went down you are wrong.

He could have acted to defuse the situation, just as Wilson could have acted differently.

They both made personal choices which, in retrospect, were extremely stupid, as one person lost his life, another's life is ruined and a whole community ( if not the country ) is suffering for those choices made that night.

 

Now the only defense for Brown's actions ( we are not discussing Wilson at the moment ) that night, would be that the systematic mistreatment of black Americans throughout the country ( and certainly that area ), makes them distrust authority and more confrontational.

But when I brought this up, many pages ago, in this thread, I was vilified by everyone as 'blaming the victim'.

 

So again, as a community, how do we go about starting to change things. The ultimate goal is for all to have equal opportunity ( its not just a black thing ), but that could take years, decades ( its taken centuries to get this far ). How do we start building the trust between the black community and police to begin with, so that senseless deaths stop.

Note that that trust has to go both ways.

Police must 'trust' that not all blacks are criminals, and stop treating them as such.

And black Americans must trust that police are there to 'serve and protect', not out to 'get them'.

[zapatos]

Re blaming the victim:

 

Of course - everyone who blamed Brown for acting so badly he got shot, or the black citizens of Ferguson for the behavior of the white police from out of town, or the citizens of Ferguson and elsewhere who had "their own businesses looted and property destroyed" by "rioters" which is held by some here to be self-destructive behavior by the black community of protestors.

Who? Can you be specific?

[Ten oz]

Just to be clear ( before Ten oz jumps all over me again ) we are not discussing the assignment of blame, That is for the courts to decide ( or not ).

But if you are saying Brown had no choice in the way things went down you are wrong.

He could have acted to defuse the situation, just as Wilson could have acted differently.

They both made personal choices which, in retrospect, were extremely stupid, as one person lost his life, another's life is ruined and a whole community ( if not the country ) is suffering for those choices made that night.

 

Now the only defense for Brown's actions ( we are not discussing Wilson at the moment ) that night, would be that the systematic mistreatment of black Americans throughout the country ( and certainly that area ), makes them distrust authority and more confrontational.

But when I brought this up, many pages ago, in this thread, I was vilified by everyone as 'blaming the victim'.

 

So again, as a community, how do we go about starting to change things. The ultimate goal is for all to have equal opportunity ( its not just a black thing ), but that could take years, decades ( its taken centuries to get this far ). How do we start building the trust between the black community and police to begin with, so that senseless deaths stop.

Note that that trust has to go both ways.

Police must 'trust' that not all blacks are criminals, and stop treating them as such.

And black Americans must trust that police are there to 'serve and protect', not out to 'get them'.

Police should not shoot unarmed people and then be able to just get off by saying they were scared. Carrying on about behavior, who could have made what choices, and so on distracts from the issue. People are not protesting around the country because they support Brown's life choices. They are protesting because here in the USA the police kill citizens at a substantially higher rate than the rest of the developed world. The pattern is big and goes far beyond any single persons behavior. Edited January 6, 2015 by Ten oz

[zapatos]

Police should not shoot unarmed people and then be able to just get off by saying they were scared.

What do you think should be the minimum justification for a shooting by police?

 

People are not protesting around the country because they support Brown's life choices. They are protesting because here in the USA the police kill citizens at a substantially higher rate than the rest of the developed world. The pattern is big and goes far beyond any single persons behavior.

I'd like to see some evidence that people are even aware of the rate at which police shoot people in other developed countries.

[iNow]

I'd like to see some evidence that people are even aware of the rate at which police shoot people in other developed countries.

Does Ten Oz' post qualify as at least one entry in the dataset being requested? If so, what do you think should be the minimum number of people confirmed to be aware of this relative difference before the point can be stipulated and we move forward? Add me and you and we're already up to 3...

[MigL]

Not defending Wilson by any means Ten oz, but not being able to claim they were 'scared' ?

Police and firefighters cannot refuse to do their job based on unsafe conditions, like everyone else who's aware of labour regulations can.

In some parts of the country 16 yr old kids ( and I don't just mean black kids ) are better armed than the average police officer. But that's a topic for another discussion.

American law says that if you fear for your life due to the perceived actions of another person you can use force, up to deadly, to defend yourself. Bot that's another topic also.

 

And as iNow is fond of saying, "all police ?".

( and of course, "all black teens ?" )

[Willie71]

Just to be clear ( before Ten oz jumps all over me again ) we are not discussing the assignment of blame, That is for the courts to decide ( or not ).

But if you are saying Brown had no choice in the way things went down you are wrong.

He could have acted to defuse the situation, just as Wilson could have acted differently.

They both made personal choices which, in retrospect, were extremely stupid, as one person lost his life, another's life is ruined and a whole community ( if not the country ) is suffering for those choices made that night.

 

Now the only defense for Brown's actions ( we are not discussing Wilson at the moment ) that night, would be that the systematic mistreatment of black Americans throughout the country ( and certainly that area ), makes them distrust authority and more confrontational.

But when I brought this up, many pages ago, in this thread, I was vilified by everyone as 'blaming the victim'.

 

So again, as a community, how do we go about starting to change things. The ultimate goal is for all to have equal opportunity ( its not just a black thing ), but that could take years, decades ( its taken centuries to get this far ). How do we start building the trust between the black community and police to begin with, so that senseless deaths stop.

Note that that trust has to go both ways.

Police must 'trust' that not all blacks are criminals, and stop treating them as such.

And black Americans must trust that police are there to 'serve and protect', not out to 'get them'.

Brown ran away, and Wilson got out of his vehicle and chased him. The majority of witnesses said Brown was surrendering. What is it he should have done? It seems Wilson escalated right from the get go, aggressively speeding backward to the teens to re-engage them after the initial contact was over. Wilson had at least three chances to regroup, get backup, or de escalate.

 

Spend an afternoon watching the thousands of videos on YouTube showing police abusing citizens, especially blacks, and try to make a case why citizens should trust them. I certainly don't want to see another nation expect complete compliance such as was expected in Nazi Germany, or Fascist Italy. People have a right and expectation to stand up against this type of corruption. The advances of cell phone video gave been the bane of the authorities, and they are trying to ban the videoing of police an several states. They obviously know it's a problem, it's getting harder to blame the victims, but rather than fix the problem, they want to restrict citizens rights. It's disgusting.

 

In academia, there are a number of papers noting the same propoganda has been used by the U.S. recently, as was used in Nazi Germany. It worries me.

[zapatos]

Does Ten Oz' post qualify as at least one entry in the dataset being requested? If so, what do you think should be the minimum number of people confirmed to be aware of this relative difference before the point can be stipulated and we move forward? Add me and you and we're already up to 3...

Well, as I was not one of those protesting around the country you are back down to 2. Assuming of course that you and Ten oz were out there protesting.

 

But to answer your question, I don't think any of the people protesting need be aware of the relative difference to move forward. But Ten oz made a claim as to why they were out there and I find his assertion to be highly questionable, hence my request for evidence. No need to be any less demanding of accurate assertions just because we are on a political thread.

[iNow]

to answer your question, I don't think any of the people protesting need be aware of the relative difference to move forward.

And I agree. It's not really a terribly relevant discussion point. I also suspect many more people are familiar with this relative difference now than ever before, but that's just my opinon.

 

 

[zapatos]

While telling, statistics like that are not as useful as they could be without context. Given the right to keep and bear arms in the United States we should expect that deaths from police shootings would be greater than they are in a country which has stricter controls on gun ownership.

 

I know it is hard to determine how much police violence on its citizens is race based, and frankly I'm not sure it even matters. The goal of the police should be to use the minimum force necessary to maintain order, and every case where force is used should be reviewed to determine if different tactics were appropriate or if the police acted appropriately. Of course that in itself would be a major undertaking.

 

But if half the people blame the blacks and don't see that the system must make accommodations, and half the people blame the system and don't think blacks must make accommodations, then I'm afraid we'll never get anywhere. We'll be just like the Palestinians and the Jews, neither able to forget about the past long enough to achieve a mutually desirable outcome.

[Ten oz]

People are not protesting around the country because they support Brown's life choices. They are protesting because here in the USA the police kill citizens at a substantially higher rate than the rest of the developed world. The pattern is big and goes far beyond any single persons behavior.

 

I'd like to see some evidence that people are even aware of the rate at which police shoot people in other developed countries.

I think it is self evident that if as few people were killed by police in the U.S. as are killed in Canada, Germany, and England we would not see the level of protest we are seeing. Context matters and you are stretching mine a bit. Police in the U.S. kill too people. That is what is being protested. Police violence throughout the country. That is why the militarization of the police, body cameras, police training, and international statistic have become part of the national dialogue . You are commenting on personal choices and behaviors but Brown, Gardner, Rice, and etc are just examples that highlight the problem just as Rosa Parks was just one example. Doesn't matter if Brown was a terrible person anymore than it would have mattered if Parks had been a terrible person. The issue is bigger. The protests are obviously about more than lone individuals.

 

What do you think should be the minimum justification for a shooting by police?

 

There is already a legal minimum:

"In order for deadly force to be justified there must be an immediate, otherwise unavoidable threat of death or grave bodily harm to yourself or other innocents."

"This is judged by what a reasonable person would have done under the circumstances."

http://definitions.uslegal.com/u/use-of-deadly-force/

 

I do not think a reasonable person would judge an unarmed person who is not in act of assualting or otherwise injurying a person(s) as an unavoidable threat of death. If a police officer fears a person might have a gun, shoots that person dead, and it turns out that person was not armed; that police officer was wrong. What they thought was not accurate. That police officer acted to avoid a threat that did not exist. In my opinion life, everyone's life, is a basic right. Someone elses fear of me should not trump my right to continued existence. Police are good killing people who are actively threating their lives. But it is not reasonable to kill people for what you fear they might or could do.

And I agree. It's not really a terribly relevant discussion point. I also suspect many more people are familiar with this relative difference now than ever before, but that's just my opinon.

Departments are not obligated to make reports to the FBI's database. So the 400 plus we know about is the absolute minium killed. The true numbers are higher.

[zapatos]

I think it is self evident that if as few people were killed by police in the U.S. as are killed in Canada, Germany, and England we would not see the level of protest we are seeing.

You are moving the goalposts. That is not what you said before.

 

Context matters and you are stretching mine a bit. Police in the U.S. kill too people. That is what is being protested.

You are moving the goalposts. That is not what you said before. If this is what you meant then this is what you should have said. Don't criticize me for responding to the words you used instead of the words you meant to use.

 

You are commenting on personal choices and behaviors but Brown, Gardner, Rice, and etc are just examples that highlight the problem just as Rosa Parks was just one example. Doesn't matter if Brown was a terrible person anymore than it would have mattered if Parks had been a terrible person. The issue is bigger. The protests are obviously about more than lone individuals.

Everyone knows the protests are about more than those few people. Whoever said it was only about them?

 

 

I do not think a reasonable person would judge an unarmed person who is not in act of assualting or otherwise injurying a person(s) as an unavoidable threat of death.

No one does.

 

If a police officer fears a person might have a gun, shoots that person dead, and it turns out that person was not armed; that police officer was wrong. What they thought was not accurate. That police officer acted to avoid a threat that did not exist.

He was probably also justified in using deadly force. As you said it was a mistake.

 

 

In my opinion life, everyone's life, is a basic right.

I imagine most people feel that way.

 

Someone elses fear of me should not trump my right to continued existence.

And your right to continued existence does not trump my right to continued existence. If I fear you are about to kill me then I have the right to defend myself. If you aren't actually trying to kill me, then please don't do anything that could lead me to believe otherwise. It could lead to a deadly mistake.

 

 

Police are good killing people who are actively threating their lives. But it is not reasonable to kill people for what you fear they might or could do.

Of course it is. How am I supposed to know if you didn't really intend to pull the trigger? Am I supposed to put my life at risk because you didn't really intend to harm me? If you do something that looks to a reasonable person like a risk to life or limb, then you should expect that person to react as if that is really what you are intending to do.

[MigL]

That isn't quite right Ten oz.

The threat can be perceived or real, it doesn't matter, as long as another reasonable person also feels and acts the same way.

That, unfortunately, is one of the reasons kids or teens playing with toy guns, sometimes get shot by police. It is not the officer's fault, do you expect him to calmly walk up and ask to inspect the gun to see if its a toy ? And its not the kid's fault, he's just playing, so who's fault is it ?

 

Maybe instead of finding blame we should be looking for solutions.

Like why aren't this kid's parents telling him not to play outside, after dark, with a toy gun ?

 

I only use this example because of the recent shooting death of a kid with a toy gun

[Ten oz]

You are moving the goalposts. That is not what you said before. You are moving the goalposts. That is not what you said before. If this is what you meant then this is what you should have said. Don't criticize me for responding to the words you used instead of the words you meant to use.

 

It is not a coincidence that the USA has a high rate of police killing citizens while also having protests against police brutality. It is silly that you challange the direct connection between the two.

 

And your right to continued existence does not trump my right to continued existence. If I fear you are about to kill me then I have the right to defend myself. If you aren't actually trying to kill me, then please don't do anything that could lead me to believe otherwise. It could lead to a deadly mistake.

What people believe various greatly. Your suspicions should be provably valid if they are suppose to justify someone's death. And by provably valid I don't mean if or had X, Y, and Z happened at some theoretically point past the time of lethal force.

 

Of course it is. How am I supposed to know if you didn't really intend to pull the trigger? Am I supposed to put my life at risk because you didn't really intend to harm me?

Pull the tigger? This implies a gun is present. I referenced UNARMED people.

[MigL]

How many people were killed by an UNARMED person last year ?

[zapatos]

It is not a coincidence that the USA has a high rate of police killing citizens while also having protests against police brutality. It is silly that you challange the direct connection between the two.

I have never challenged the direct connection between the two. I challenged your assertion that "They are protesting because here in the USA the police kill citizens at a substantially higher rate than the rest of the developed world."

 

I don't think the protesters give a rat's ass what is happening in the rest of the developed world. I think they are worried about what is happening here. But I'm prepared to change my mind if you can provide some sort of citation.

 

 

What people believe various greatly. Your suspicions should be provably valid if they are suppose to justify someone's death.

How does one prove frame of mind? Are you suggesting that I have to PROVE that I feared great bodily harm? How does one do that?

 

Pull the tigger? This implies a gun is present. I referenced UNARMED people.

Fine, then change that to "How am I supposed to know if you didn't really intend to 'choke me', or 'kick me into a bloody stump', or 'poke my eyes out', or 'take my gun and shoot me'?"

[overtone]

 

 

How does one prove frame of mind? Are you suggesting that I have to PROVE that I feared great bodily harm? How does one do that?

You convince a jury of your peers that your fear was reasonable, by describing the circumstances, and they acquit you of wrongdoing.

 

You don't have to prove that you were in fear. You have to prove that your fears and reactions were reasonable - in the case of a police officer, in line with your training and the expectations of your job.

 

You are not allowed to kill people just because you are afraid of them, right?

[iNow]

Nonlethal force should be a requirement in community policing, not a mere concept considered seriously only in ivory towers.

[overtone]

 

 

But if you are saying Brown had no choice in the way things went down you are wrong.

He could have acted to defuse the situation, just as Wilson could have acted differently.

They both made personal choices which, in retrospect, were extremely stupid

Wilson was not making personal choices, but professional ones. He was wearing a uniform, carrying a gun, enforcing the law. His job was to defuse situations, and when his decisions turn out, in retrospect, to have been so stupid that somebody got killed, they have also turned out, in retrospect, to have been incompetent and betrayals of the community he was oath bound to defend and protect.

The idea that Brown here bore some kind of equivalent responsibility to defuse the situation is bizarre - one is an unarmed violent thug teenager, the other is an armed officer of the law on duty.

[DimaMazin]

In academia, there are a number of papers noting the same propoganda has been used by the U.S. recently, as was used in Nazi Germany. It worries me.

Don't worry, Russia will protect the blacks.

 

 

The same was in Ukraine. Russia organised the revolt. Now it protects the rebels.

Empty Siberia waits for them.

Edited January 7, 2015 by DimaMazin

[zapatos]

You convince a jury of your peers that your fear was reasonable, by describing the circumstances, and they acquit you of wrongdoing.

 

You don't have to prove that you were in fear. You have to prove that your fears and reactions were reasonable - in the case of a police officer, in line with your training and the expectations of your job.

 

You are not allowed to kill people just because you are afraid of them, right?

Good. I couldn't agree more. And in the case of Brown/Wilson, that is exactly what happened. But given the controversy of their decision that just highlights the fact that a system that pleases everyone is unlikely.

 

 

Nonlethal force should be a requirement in community policing, not a mere concept considered seriously only in ivory towers.

I don't agree that it should be a requirement. I suspect that if police cannot use lethal force then we will end up with a lot of dead police.

You are not allowed to kill people just because you are afraid of them, right?

If you fear for your life and that is deemed a reasonable fear, then yes you may kill them.

The idea that Brown here bore some kind of equivalent responsibility to defuse the situation is bizarre - one is an unarmed violent thug teenager, the other is an armed officer of the law on duty.

I don't think he said "equivalent". But yes, Brown also has some kind of responsibility to defuse the situation. What is bizarre to me is the number of people who absolve others of personal responsibility. Wilson may have been completely in the wrong and on his way to prison, and Brown completely in the right. but Brown is still dead. Whether or not he thought he should have been expected to act differently, it was in Brown's power to act in a way that would likely have resulted in him being alive today.