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

[MigL]

" I don't get to make jokes, so nobody quoting me does either."

 

You're right, maybe you should lighten up.

I say, JOKINGLY !

[Ten oz]

 

I generally agree. In the Michael Brown case there were people on this site implying the officer was guilty long before the evidence was in. There were protests in the streets demanding his indictment and prosecution. While those voices seemingly didn't have much of an influence on the workings of the justice system, I agree that there is the appearance that many people want a vigorous approach to these cases that goes beyond what is objectively even handed.

 

We talked for 30 pages about how to treat minorities fairly, I don't think it is unreasonable to spend a small amount of time to ensure that we remember to treat everyone fairly.

Moderate appeals always seem fair. Bothsides are have a point so bothsides deserve a voice is a position that is hard to argue against. However in this case the call clouds reality. No one was unduly sentenced or charged in the Brown case. As mentioned the protests and demands had no influence. So the obviously time was spent to treat the police fairly. So you are making an appeal to for something that is already well established. We have talked for 30 pages because it is a bit insane that unarmed citizens can be killed by police and nothing happen. Why is investigating someone being killed a political hot potato? Killing someone is a really big F'ing deal and we have gotten to this strange place where it is treated as a formality; we error on the side of killers.

 

Obviouly in all cases like Brown's the police are not guilty of wrong doing but we (sociaty) should still investigate. If a jet crashes whether by pilot error or not an investigation happens and looks at everything. Treating whomever fairly is secondary to getting to the bottom of what happened. Ensuring it never happens again trumps all else. Same should apply to people being killed on our streets.

[zapatos]

Moderate appeals always seem fair. Bothsides are have a point so bothsides deserve a voice is a position that is hard to argue against. However in this case the call clouds reality. No one was unduly sentenced or charged in the Brown case. As mentioned the protests and demands had no influence. So the obviously time was spent to treat the police fairly. So you are making an appeal to for something that is already well established.

You've taken my statement out of context. I am NOT asking that we treat the police fair in the Michael Brown case. That case is over. I was responding to MigL's statement that we should be careful not to mistreat others in an attempt to ensure fairness for minorities. I was agreeing with his sentiment and using the Michael Brown case as an example where some people were letting emotion cloud their judgement.

 

We have talked for 30 pages because it is a bit insane that unarmed citizens can be killed by police and nothing happen. Why is investigating someone being killed a political hot potato? Killing someone is a really big F'ing deal and we have gotten to this strange place where it is treated as a formality; we error on the side of killers.

 

Obviouly in all cases like Brown's the police are not guilty of wrong doing but we (sociaty) should still investigate. If a jet crashes whether by pilot error or not an investigation happens and looks at everything. Treating whomever fairly is secondary to getting to the bottom of what happened. Ensuring it never happens again trumps all else. Same should apply to people being killed on our streets.

That is the exact sentiment that I am suggesting we have to guard against and it scares me that people like you are proponents.

It is completely at odds with the concept of Blackstone's Formulation that "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer",

[overtone]

I was responding to MigL's statement that we should be careful not to mistreat others in an attempt to ensure fairness for minorities. I was agreeing with his sentiment and using the Michael Brown case as an example where some people were letting emotion cloud their judgement.

That's the problem: You were wrong about that. The Brown case is no such example, and your false statement about the posting in this thread illustrates that.

 

It also illustrates the inherent falsehood and bad faith in the MigL's posting. There is absolutely no visible danger of Ferguson, or any other such bigotry-poisoned town, swinging the pendulum too far toward unfairly abusing its police force. For example: The established evidence justifies disbanding the entire force,laying off every officer on it, and excluding anyone who lives in the surrounding white areas from applying to replace them. Anything short of that, for starters, is favorable and forgiving and voluntarily tolerant handling of the Ferguson police.

 

 

It is completely at odds with the concept of Blackstone's Formulation that "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer",

If your police force is home to ten guilty persons due to the kind of slack oversight visible in the Wilson case, the suffering of many innocents is guaranteed. Edited March 21, 2016 by overtone

[zapatos]

That's the problem: You were wrong about that. The Brown case is no such example, and your false statement about the posting in this thread illustrates that.

No, the problem is that you believe that you are NEVER wrong, and that only you really understands. You let emotion get in the way of logic. Bullying others only adds to the problem. The world is not so simple as you think it is which means by default you often miss the subtleties.

[Ten oz]

 

That is the exact sentiment that I am suggesting we have to guard against and it scares me that people like you are proponents.

It is completely at odds with the concept of Blackstone's Formulation that "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer",

I said "Treating whomever fairly is secondary to getting to the bottom of what happened. Ensuring it never happens again trumps all else". Applying guilt or innocences is not the goal or point. Ensuring it doesn't happen again doesn't equal someone having to suffer. Perhaps it means body cameras, more police hired from within a community, changes in various laws, more de-escalation training, or etc. Why do you assume it means innocent people would suffer?

[zapatos]

Why do you assume it means innocent people would suffer?

Because that is what happens when you don't treat people fairly.

[Ten oz]

Because that is what happens when you don't treat people fairly.

So what happens when you hyper focus on treating everyone fairly (killer and killed equally) and don't take an objective look at what has happened? By definition being objective doesn't inculde a caveat for treating anyone a certian way.

[overtone]

Because that is what happens when you don't treat people fairly.

Such as the people of Ferguson, whose long suffering under the racial bigotry and abusive behavior of their police force was highlighted by not only the event itself, but also the unfair handling of it by the officials charged with representing them, when Officer Wilson killed a local thug.

 

When Wilson was protected, coddled, coached, and excused without trial, the residents of Ferguson were not treated fairly by their police, their DA, or their other elected officials. Neither was Brown, of course, but he was neither innocent nor alive at the time of Wilson's travesty of a hearing.

Edited March 21, 2016 by overtone

[zapatos]

So what happens when you hyper focus on treating everyone fairly (killer and killed equally) and don't take an objective look at what has happened?

Not being objective is bad, no matter what the reason.

 

By definition being objective doesn't inculde a caveat for treating anyone a certian way.

I don't think I mentioned treating anyone a certain way except for treating them fairly. 'Objective' and 'Fair' are synonyms. If you are not treating people fairly, you are not being objective. By definition.

Such as the people of Ferguson, whose long suffering under the racial bigotry and abusive behavior of their police force was highlighted by not only the event itself, but also the unfair handling of it by the officials charged with representing them, when Officer Wilson killed a local thug.

I agree that the people of Ferguson have been treated unfairly for a long time.

 

 

When Wilson was protected, coddled, coached, and excused without trial, the residents of Ferguson were not treated fairly by their police, their DA, or their other elected officials. Neither was Brown, of course, but he was neither innocent nor alive at the time Wilson's travesty of a hearing.

A good argument can be made to support your assertion, although as usual you make it sound like every member of the police force and all of their officials were unfair. I doubt you could support that if that is indeed what you are implying.