Police shootings at Dallas BLM protest.

[ajb]

Mad? Perhaps; however, an officer, being human and fearful, can misconstrue noncompliance as a threat and, conceivably, be exonerated by the laws he's sworn to uphold.

What you have said is tantamount to saying that citizens of the US should be in fear for their lives whenever dealing with an officer of the law. That situation is mad and may well have a lot to do with the social unrest we are seeing right now.

[DrmDoc]

What you have said is tantamount to saying that citizens of the US should be in fear for their lives whenever dealing with an officer of the law. That situation is mad and may well have a lot to do with the social unrest we are seeing right now.

 

Indeed, some should be more fearful than other when, statistically, one segment of our populace is involved with more violent encounters with the police than another, whether or not those encounters are justified. America is a nation built by revolution on the shoulders of slavery and the subjugation of a native people over a few short years compared to other nations. America is a land of opportunity but that opportunity comes with challenges its citizens must surmount to obtain.

Edited July 10, 2016 by DrmDoc

[Ten oz]

I don't think the incidents that lead up to this had much to do with race.

A bigger factor was stupidity.

 

If a cop tells you to keep your hands where he can see them, do so. Don't try to show him the license for the gun you are carrying.

He doesn't know what you're reaching for !

You may have been stopped yet again, unfairly just because you're black, but you'll still be alive.

 

If you show a gun to people while selling CDs so that they call 911, don't resist and fight with cops when they show up.

They don't know your intentions and that you're a nice guy. Surrender the weapon and you'll be alive.

 

Last Sunday in Toronto we had our annual Pride parade. It was hijacked by BLM protesters who did not approve of cops marching in the parade. Their bright idea was to throw smoke bombs and fire-crackers in the way of the parade.

This is only a short time after the Orlando shootings !

Luckily cooler heads prevailed, but I'd hate to think how it would have gone down in the US.

 

Like I said earlier, cops don't have a 'quota' of black people to kill. They are just like you and me, so obviously there are some bad ones, and you may be subjected to some abuse.

But unless you do something stupid, you'll live to file a complaint.

Stupidity is not unique to the USA yet the violence is. Whether it is cops killing citizens, citizens killing cops, or citizens engaging in acts of mass shooting there is clearly something different happening in the USA. Even if we subtract all minorities killed by police from the total killed by police per year that total is still greater per capitia than what we see in the UK, Germany, France, and etc. Same goes for mass shootings. Subtract away all the mass shootings done by minorities and the USA still has a serious mass shooting problem. The problem crosses racial lines, religious lines, economic lines, and etc.

 

A look around the country at basically every state in isolation regardless of demographic or population density shows a higher rate of gun deaths and police use of deadly force than other western countries. backgorund checks when buying guns, people not behaving after being pulled over, racial discrimination, terrorism, etc; none of these talking points account for what we are experiencing. We (U.S. citizens) need to stop arguing the merrits of this stuff incident by incident and acknowledge we that all of it is part of the same trend of violence.

[dimreepr]

In England the miners strike has been described as a civil war without guns; the BBC, this morning described the currant situation in the US as a low level civil war, what difference will guns make I wonder?

Edited July 10, 2016 by dimreepr

[MigL]

Its a vicious circle in America.

 

Cops shoot first and ask questions later because they know the high likelihood the person is armed, they are scared also, and want to go home to their families at the end of the day.

People distrust the state and its representatives, the cops, and so, arm themselves and enshrine militias and gun ownership in the Constitution as 'protection' against the state.

 

Guns are a common denominator, and the reason this stuff doesn't happen in other countries.

[DrmDoc]

Stupidity is not unique to the USA yet the violence is. Whether it is cops killing citizens, citizens killing cops, or citizens engaging in acts of mass shooting there is clearly something different happening in the USA. Even if we subtract all minorities killed by police from the total killed by police per year that total is still greater per capitia than what we see in the UK, Germany, France, and etc. Same goes for mass shootings. Subtract away all the mass shootings done by minorities and the USA still has a serious mass shooting problem. The problem crosses racial lines, religious lines, economic lines, and etc.

 

A look around the country at basically every state in isolation regardless of demographic or population density shows a higher rate of gun deaths and police use of deadly force than other western countries. backgorund checks when buying guns, people not behaving after being pulled over, racial discrimination, terrorism, etc; none of these talking points account for what we are experiencing. We (U.S. citizens) need to stop arguing the merrits of this stuff incident by incident and acknowledge we that all of it is part of the same trend of violence.

It required over 230 years of horrific sacrifices, courageous deeds, and brilliant orations to change the heart of our nation to elect our country's first African-American president. As a nation forged by revolution, it will probably require another 200 years of same to change our violent ways.

Edited July 10, 2016 by DrmDoc

[Ten oz]

Its a vicious circle in America.

 

Cops shoot first and ask questions later because they know the high likelihood the person is armed, they are scared also, and want to go home to their families at the end of the day.

People distrust the state and its representatives, the cops, and so, arm themselves and enshrine militias and gun ownership in the Constitution as 'protection' against the state.

 

Guns are a common denominator, and the reason this stuff doesn't happen in other countries.

I disagree. As a country we are just violent. Police are just people and in the U.S. people at all levels are proving themselves to be more violent then people in other similar countries. For example we argue that police shouldn't kill citizens but at the same time the majority of this country supports the death penalty. That may not seem to have an connection but the death penalty is not used in other similar western countries. It is used on more violent countries.

 

Punishment and retribution are not requirements for successful prevention of anything yet seem to make it into the U.S. narrative for everything. Terrorist; we will kill them, defeat them, capture them, torture them, blow up their caves, drone bomb their leaders, and etc. For a political leader to merely speak of prevention is seen as cowardly. Stopping terrorist isn't strong enough we must kill them. We do the same thing with law enforcement. Criminals must be punished, made to behave, subdued, captured, and etc. Simply talking about making things safer is too weak. And our civilian citizens do it to. People have arsenals in their homes an brag that if own tries to break into their homes they will kill them. We have a violent state of mind from the top down.

[dimreepr]

While people have the arsenals you describe, there's very little incentive to tolerate or forgive.

Edited July 10, 2016 by dimreepr

[Moontanman]

While people have the arsenals you describe, there's very little incentive to tolerate or forgive.

 

 

I would say that the number of people with actual arsenals is being inflated somewhat. Most people have a single gun, usually a shot gun, for home protection and the almost non existent shooting of criminals in the act, even home invasions, would seem to indicate that at least most people who are robbed do not have guns or keep them locked up in such a manner that prevents them from using them.

 

I know my closest two neighbors do not have guns, in fact some of them do not even lock their doors when they are away, crazy from my perspective...

 

I know a great many people who have guns but only a few who have military grade weapons and of those they are just the appearance of military grade. They are simple single shot automatics not full auto like a military gun.

 

I would think that in the case of a sniper ambush that a hunting rifle would be far more dangerous that a short barreled military styled weapon. I know I can't hit the side of the barn with a short barreled military style rifle but give me a long barrel hunting rifle and a scope and I can hit pretty much any deer sized target at reasonable distances.

 

I used to have three guns, but I gave up the hand guns and rifles for a shotgun. I would like to think the idiots who carry military style weapons around in public should be given a sanity test, many of my friend who do have many guns agree. Most of them collect guns, in fact a couple of them have several military grade guns but no ammo for them, where would you shoot a 50 cal. sniper rifle here on the coast, even if you shot it toward the ocean you might kill some guy on a boat off shore...

 

I honestly do sometimes wonder where they get these nuts and just how big a percentage of the gun owning population really want to carry long guns in public.

 

Now pistols are a concern of mine but to be honest I've never seen someone who carries a concealed weapon bring it out simply for shock value. Then again I live in a rather peaceful area, shootings are rare and are often gang related but even that is rare. The local sheriffs do a pretty good job of keeping things under control in recent decades...

[dimreepr]

My point isn't the size of the arsenal but the mindset of a gun owner, not all of course, but in general the feeling of power breeds contempt.

[Ten oz]

It required over 230 years of horrific sacrifices, courageous deeds, and brilliant orations to change the heart of our nation to elect our country's first African-American president. As a nation forged by revolution, it will probably require another 200 years of same to change our violent ways.

If the demographics of our electorate were the same as it was 20yrs ago references to the significants of electing our first black president would mean a whole lot more. Romney won 60% of the white vote with a majority of both white males and white females voting for Romney. In 08' McCain received 56% of the white vote win a majority amongst white females and white males. White voters only made up 74% of the electorate in 08' and 72% in 12'. Had the electorate still been over 80% white as if had been in every election up to 04' Obama would have lost. So it was less about a shift in hearts than it was a shift in the demographics.

[Moontanman]

My point isn't the size of the arsenal but the mindset of a gun owner, not all of course, but in general the feeling of power breeds contempt.

 

 

You might be correct, I just don't see it the people I know who own guns.. well most of them, a couple probably shouldn't be allowed a slingshot but that is just my personal opinion...

[DrmDoc]

If the demographics of our electorate were the same as it was 20yrs ago references to the significants of electing our first black president would mean a whole lot more. Romney won 60% of the white vote with a majority of both white males and white females voting for Romney. In 08' McCain received 56% of the white vote win a majority amongst white females and white males. White voters only made up 74% of the electorate in 08' and 72% in 12'. Had the electorate still been over 80% white as if had been in every election up to 04' Obama would have lost. So it was less about a shift in hearts than it was a shift in the demographics.

 

You're not honestly suggesting that Obama won his election without a considerable amount of non-African-American votes? Perhaps Obama drew more non-White voters to the poles than prior elections, which diminished the percentage block of White voters relative to the overall voting electorate; however, hearts had to change to increase the number of non-White votes and bring-in the White votes necessary to elect and keep an African-American President in office for two consecutive terms.

Edited July 10, 2016 by DrmDoc

[swansont]

I would say that the number of people with actual arsenals is being inflated somewhat. Most people have a single gun, usually a shot gun, for home protection and the almost non existent shooting of criminals in the act, even home invasions, would seem to indicate that at least most people who are robbed do not have guns or keep them locked up in such a manner that prevents them from using them.

 

 

Most people owning one gun is true but somewhat misleading.

 

The average gun owner owns 8 guns

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/21/the-average-gun-owner-now-owns-8-guns-double-what-it-used-to-be/

 

So if half own 1 gun, the other half owns an average of 15. If two thirds own 1 gun, the other third owns 20.

 

[A] 2006 study found that the top 20 percent of gun owners owned 65 percent of America's firearms. The top 3 percent of gun owners averaged over 25 firearms each

 

That was when the average was 6 guns, so the overall numbers are larger by a third.

 

So even with a lot owning just one gun, that leaves room for plenty of arsenals.

Class warfare is not racially divided as many seem to think, the powers in charge like to heap the blame on race but ultimately it will be the haves vs the have nots. Any who thinks it's only black people who are vulnerable have no idea how this game is playing out. If a black man can be killed out of hand, it looks superficially like it's because he is black but ultimately it is because he is part of the have nots. Yes white people do seem to get a pass in many instances but it will eventually affect all of the have nots. If one person can be treated as though his life is less valuable then all of us are at risk.

 

Cases recently of the haves getting off with nothing much more than a slap on the hand for crimes that the rest of us, regardless of race, would be put under the jail if we were lucky. Money talks, money gets pass far more than race, if you think your light skin gives you a pass try to get by with a crime of the magnitude of child molestation with just a few months time served, or drive drunk and kill several people and see if you get a pass. The good old boys network is still in force but it is getting much more apparent that it's the good old rich boys network... The fact that the good old rich boys are blatantly racist is covering the real problem, and doing it quite well..

 

This would be convincing if there were statistics to back it up.

 

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0141854

 

The results provide evidence of a significant bias in the killing of unarmed black Americans relative to unarmed white Americans, in that the probability of being {black, unarmed, and shot by police} is about 3.49 times the probability of being {white, unarmed, and shot by police} on average. Furthermore, the results of multi-level modeling show that there exists significant heterogeneity across counties in the extent of racial bias in police shootings, with some counties showing relative risk ratios of 20 to 1 or more

Poverty statistics, OTOH, show that being black makes you about 2.5 times more likely to be poor than if you are white. If race played no part, one might expect those numbers to match up better. So while economics may play a part, race does, too.

 

http://federalsafetynet.com/us-poverty-statistics.html

[Ten oz]

 

You're not honestly suggesting that Obama won his election without a considerable amount of non-African-American votes? Perhaps Obama drew more non-White voters to the poles than prior elections, which diminished the percentage block of White voters relative to the overall voting electorate; however, hearts had to change to increase the number of non-White votes and bring-in the White votes necessary to elect and keep an African-American President in office for two consecutive terms.

I think you misread my post. The majority of whites voted against Obama and the majority of non-whites voted for him.

[arc]

 

Indeed, some should be more fearful than other when, statistically, one segment of our populace is involved with more violent encounters with the police than another, whether or not those encounters are justified. America is a nation built by revolution on the shoulders of slavery and the subjugation of a native people over a few short years compared to other nations. America is a land of opportunity but that opportunity comes with challenges its citizens must surmount to obtain.

 

I was raised in an area of the U.S. where the closest major metropolitan city was considered to have one of the lowest black per capita populations in the country for its size. This time period I'm referring to here is 1966, we lived just 5 km outside the city limits in a unincorporated area between several smaller towns along the river that flowed through the valley. Starting in kindergarten one of my closest friends lived just a few houses away. We spent many hours at each other's home up into high school.

 

My friend's dad was black and his mom was white, they moved here just a few years before we did. We moved from a km away, they came from the deep south, if I recall correctly it was Alabama. His dad worked as an executive for "the" major communication company in the U.S. at the time and transferred here to work at their regional office. My friend's dad was very cordial to me and his son's other friends, and all of the neighbors had the highest regards for him. My parents went to several cocktail parties at their home and would always recount to us kids what great hosts my friend's parents were, and the hilarious quips his dad made. The county D.A. lived across the street from both of our families so the politicking was a favorite subject in these get-togethers, the D.A. had in his earlier law school days traveled to the south and worked on civil rights.

 

But as me and the other boys became older his demeanor towards me and his son's other friends changed, yet he remained as friendly and well liked to our parents as he always had. I started to really not like this man and felt he was completely dishonest in who he really was. Was he that nice guy our parents knew, or the jerk that his son and his friends knew?

 

I didn't figure out this mystery until he had passed away when I was around 30 years old and I had spent the needed time to understand his life. He was born in 1920 in a heavily segregated south, in one of the nation's poorest states where he endured the great depression into and through his adolescent years. He showed his true capabilities when he qualified to be a Tuskegee Airman during WWII and then later became a navigator on Cold-War era B-52 bombers. He was the first black aviator of any nation to fly none-stop around the world.

 

The levels of abuse he had to endure as a highly intelligent black adolescent in a depression era southern state would be akin to walking through a mine field on a daily bases. The abuse would have continued no doubt as he rose through the ranks to become an Air Force major. And most probably into and through out his corporate career.

 

I believe the answer to the mystery about his attitude towards us adolescent boys was that he was not going to be that character he had created to adapt to a heavily racist society, a character that he felt he was required to use to navigate throughout his life, a life that required compromises to his pride and intelligence. We did not deserve that respect that was denied him throughout his life. He was denied the simple act of standing against the abuse he was subjected to during his life.

 

This is where we are at in all this mess in this country. Respect for the law is posed against a suppressed segment of society who's self worth in many ways is weighed in the currency of compromising oneself, for generations, in the face of oppression. And too, the value placed by that segment on, and of, individuals that resist to the point of losing their lives by not simply in many cases following a few basic instructions by police.

 

I suspect my friend's dad felt a certain amount of self loathing, knowing that many in that world he had left behind would view him as a sellout. There has been so much damage done to our society and its segments, that it seems at times to be a hopeless cause.

Edited July 11, 2016 by arc

[CharonY]

It does make me wonder... I mean if you are a black person in the US, you think that all cops are trigger happy and just waiting to kill another black person, then why would you give them the slightest reason to shoot?

 

But then this is my simplistic view - I am not stopped by the police every time I leave my house.

 

Well the few times I got stopped the officer did not even flinch when I reached into the glove compartment to get my registration and insurance papers. So I do not think that following orders is the only thing that matters. Fear, yes. But why and why are there marked differences (and among which lines ?).

[DrmDoc]

I think you misread my post. The majority of whites voted against Obama and the majority of non-whites voted for him.

 

Indeed; however, to my point, there was a time in our country, not too long ago, when a black candidate would not get even a small number of white votes necessary to be a political party's Presidential nominee let alone the President of our nation. When we retrace the 230 or more years of moral growth and experience it took our nation to reach this point, I think we'll find that more than demographics have changed about the nature of our country. The differences between our nation's citizens have narrowed so considerably over the years that no real racial barrier now exist between its citizens and the Presidency. Although a majority of our White citizens may remain suspicious and entrenched against non-White candidates, some have discovered their better nature.

 

I was raised in an area of the U.S. where the closest major metropolitan city was considered to have one of the lowest black per capita populations in the country for its size. This time period I'm referring to here is 1966, we lived just 5 km outside the city limits in a unincorporated area between several smaller towns along the river that flowed through the valley. Starting in kindergarten one of my closest friends lived just a few houses away. We spent many hours at each other's home up into high school.

 

My friend's dad was black and his mom was white, they moved here just a few years before we did. We moved from a km away, they came from the deep south, if I recall correctly i was Alabama. His dad worked as an executive for "the" major communication company in the U.S. at the time and transferred here to work at their regional office. My friend's dad was very cordial to me and his son's other friends, and all of the neighbors had the highest regards for him. My parents went to several cocktail parties at their home and would always recount to us kids what a great hosts my friend's parents were, and the hilarious quips his dad made. The county D.A. lived across the street from both of our families so the politicking was a favorite subject in these get-togethers, the D.A. had in his earlier law school days traveled to the south and worked on civil rights.

 

But as me and the other boys became older his demeanor towards me and his son's other friends changed, yet he remained as friendly and well liked to our parents as he always had. I started to really not like this man and felt he was completely dishonest in who he really was. Was he that nice guy our parents knew, or the jerk that his son and his friends knew?

 

I didn't figure out this mystery until he had passed away when I was around 30 years old and I had spent the needed time to understand his life. He was born in 1920 in a heavily segregated south, in one of the nation's poorest states where he endured the great depression into and through his adolescent years. He showed his true capabilities when he qualified to be a Tuskegee Airman during WWII and then later became a navigator on Cold-War era B-52 bombers. He was the first black aviator of any nation to fly none-stop around the world.

 

The levels of abuse he had to endure as a highly intelligent black adolescent in a depression era southern state would be akin to walking through a mine field on a daily bases. The abuse would have continued no doubt as he rose through the ranks to become an Air Force major. And most probably into and through out his corporate career.

 

I believe the answer to the mystery about his attitude towards us adolescent boys was that he was not going to be that character he had created to adapt to a heavily racist society, a character that he felt he was required to use to navigate throughout his life, a life that required compromises to his pride and intelligence. We did not deserve that respect that was denied him throughout his life. He was denied the simple act of standing against the abuse he was subjected to during his life.

 

This is where we are at in all this mess in this country. Respect for the law is posed against a suppressed segment of society who's self worth in many ways is weighed in the currency of compromising oneself, for generations, in the face of oppression. And too, the value placed by that segment on, and of, individuals that resist to the point of losing their lives by not simply in many cases following a few basic instructions by police.

 

I suspect my friends dad felt a certain amount of self loathing, knowing that many in that world he had left behind would view him as a sellout. There has been so much damage done to our society and it's segments, that it seems at times to be a hopeless cause.

 

Indeed; equality shouldn't have been or continue to be a privilege of skin color but should be a right as a human being.

Edited July 10, 2016 by DrmDoc

[MigL]

Its occurred to me that the title of the OP may be inappropriate.

It makes it seem like I think that the Dallas shootings were the Black community 'retaliating' for the two deaths of Sterling and Castile.

Far from it.

And now that its been confirmed the work of one individual, its even more apparent that he had other issues or 'demons'..

As a matter of fact, I've been reading reports that the Black community in Dallas has a lot of respect for their police force and what they do.

 

But I've gotta ask, what was that other jackass, who was briefly considered a 'person of interest', doing walking about the streets carrying an AR-15 and a camo shirt ? If he hadn't turned himself in, chances are good he would've been shot.

[DrmDoc]

Its occurred to me that the title of the OP may be inappropriate.

It makes it seem like I think that the Dallas shootings were the Black community 'retaliating' for the two deaths of Sterling and Castile.

Far from it.

And now that its been confirmed the work of one individual, its even more apparent that he had other issues or 'demons'..

As a matter of fact, I've been reading reports that the Black community in Dallas has a lot of respect for their police force and what they do.

 

But I've gotta ask, what was that other jackass, who was briefly considered a 'person of interest', doing walking about the streets carrying an AR-15 and a camo shirt ? If he hadn't turned himself in, chances are good he would've been shot.

 

Texas is an open carrier state where a large number of jackasses of all races are allowed to carrying weapons at the most inappropriate times and in the most inappropriate places. We have the NRA and extremely stupid Americans to thank for that dangerously permissive environment. Some people in Texas seem to believe that they are still living in the lawlessly wild west of the 1800s and, frankly, maybe they are.

Edited July 11, 2016 by DrmDoc

[iNow]

Some people in Texas seem to believe that they are still living in the lawlessly wild west of the 1800s and, frankly, maybe they are.

Not lawless. Corrupt and extremely biased.

[swansont]

Texas is an open carrier state where a large number of jackasses of all races are allowed to carrying weapons at the most inappropriate times and in the most inappropriate places. We have the NRA and extremely stupid Americans to thank for that dangerously permissive environment. Some people in Texas seem to believe that they are still living in the lawlessly wild west of the 1800s and, frankly, maybe they are.

And that's the underlying issue here. If you have an open carry law, then that's at odds with the police shooting people with little provocation. If there is some standard for being afraid for your safety, you've legally changed that threshold.

 

So that raises the question, at what point can "I feel threatened" be used as a legal defense? Personally, I would feel unsafe with someone carrying an AR-15 nearby, but the law in Texas (and elsewhere) says that I'm not legally allowed to. The police can't be, either. Does the gun need to be pointing at someone before this kicks in?

[DrmDoc]

 

Texas is an open carrier state where a large number of jackasses of all races are allowed to carrying weapons at the most inappropriate times and in the most inappropriate places. We have the NRA and extremely stupid Americans to thank for that dangerously permissive environment. Some people in Texas seem to believe that they are still living in the lawlessly wild west of the 1800s and, frankly, maybe they are.

 

As a correction to my errors, Texas is an open carry state, where people are allowed to carry weapons. I conceived one thing, then typed another in my haste to record that conception, suffix errors are a plague in my old age.

 

Not lawless. Corrupt and extremely biased.

 

The data I've reviewed appears to confirm your comment.

 

And that's the underlying issue here. If you have an open carry law, then that's at odds with the police shooting people with little provocation. If there is some standard for being afraid for your safety, you've legally changed that threshold.

 

So that raises the question, at what point can "I feel threatened" be used as a legal defense? Personally, I would feel unsafe with someone carrying an AR-15 nearby, but the law in Texas (and elsewhere) says that I'm not legally allowed to. The police can't be, either. Does the gun need to be pointing at someone before this kicks in?

 

I agree; police have to be more effectively trained to react in a more mentally measured and emotionally disciplined manner befitting the authority we give them to use deadly force.

Edited July 11, 2016 by DrmDoc

[Ten oz]

 

Indeed; however, to my point, there was a time in our country, not too long ago, when a black candidate would not get even a small number of white votes necessary to be a political party's Presidential nominee let alone the President of our nation. When we retrace the 230 or more years of moral growth and experience it took our nation to reach this point, I think we'll find that more than demographics have changed about the nature of our country. The differences between our nation's citizens have narrowed so considerably over the years that no real racial barrier now exist between its citizens and the Presidency. Although a majority of our White citizens may remain suspicious and entrenched against non-White candidates, some have discovered their better nature.

 

 

This is true but I believe too much is made of it. We have not nearly come far as we should. We (USA) took longer than our European counterparts to end slavery and then continued segregation until the 60's. We only have 2 black senators, one black Governor, and etc. We are one of the only western nations to have never elected a female head of Gov't. We only have 20 females in the senate and 6 female governors. The overwhelming majority of our governement is white male. We have made progress but are still far behind the nations we consider our peers. So I don't personally think we should congratulate ourselves too much for electing Obama. He was clearly the superior choice. 8yrs of republican leadership had collasped our economy and destablized several countries in the Middle East. Even still the majority of whites voted against him. Now here we are 8yrs after that tolerating a blatant out and out bigot as the presumptive nominee for a major party and he will most likely win the majority of white votes, sadly. We have a very long way to go. Too long of a way to go for us to congragulate how far we have come. Not when we have the highest prison population in the world and overwhelming it is minorities incarcerated in those prisons. Not when we still don't have wage equality. I am more focused how much further we still need to go.

It does make me wonder... I mean if you are a black person in the US, you think that all cops are trigger happy and just waiting to kill another black person, then why would you give them the slightest reason to shoot?

 

But then this is my simplistic view - I am not stopped by the police every time I leave my house.

I do not think the "if blacks are afraid of the police than they should just do as they are told" argument is an effective one. Blacks in the south would still be sitting in the back of the bus and drinking out of separate fountians today had they followed such trains of thought. In a free society citizens should not have to expend mental energy figuring out how best not to be detained or killed by their gov't while going about their day.

[DrmDoc]

This is true but I believe too much is made of it. We have not nearly come far as we should. We (USA) took longer than our European counterparts to end slavery and then continued segregation until the 60's. We only have 2 black senators, one black Governor, and etc. We are one of the only western nations to have never elected a female head of Gov't. We only have 20 females in the senate and 6 female governors. The overwhelming majority of our governement is white male. We have made progress but are still far behind the nations we consider our peers. So I don't personally think we should congratulate ourselves too much for electing Obama. He was clearly the superior choice. 8yrs of republican leadership had collasped our economy and destablized several countries in the Middle East. Even still the majority of whites voted against him. Now here we are 8yrs after that tolerating a blatant out and out bigot as the presumptive nominee for a major party and he will most likely win the majority of white votes, sadly. We have a very long way to go. Too long of a way to go for us to congragulate how far we have come. Not when we have the highest prison population in the world and overwhelming it is minorities incarcerated in those prisons. Not when we still don't have wage equality. I am more focused how much further we still need to go.

 

I agree, we shouldn't rest on our laurels-but you'll have to admit, electing a black person for President--unlikely named Barack Obama--was a particularly monumental fete for a former enslaving nation steeped in bigotry and intolerance.

 

I do not think the "if blacks are afraid of the police than they should just do as they are told" argument is an effective one. Blacks in the south would still be sitting in the back of the bus and drinking out of separate fountians today had they followed such trains of thought. In a free society citizens should not have to expend mental energy figuring out how best not to be detained or killed by their gov't while going about their day.

Well said!