Ferguson: Police Kill 18yo Black Male; Fire Gas/Rubber Bullets Into Protesting Crowds

Status
Not open for further replies.
I hope something positive comes out of all of this like maybe treating police officers like citizens that are not above the law and cannot shoot and kill innocent people without consequences. That bs has happened way too much and I am tired of them getting off on the "technicality" of they were just doing their job. Maybe if they did their jobs better innocent people would not die.
 
It seems like the State Troopers are making things a lot better, but I haven't been following this as closely as I should have. Are there worries that this might lead to more brutality or violence?
 
Valhelm said:
It seems like the State Troopers are making things a lot better, but I haven't been following this as closely as I should have. Are there worries that this might lead to more brutality or violence?
Click to expand...

Ferguson had the biggest protest yet tonight, but no violence. Based Captain Johnson in charge now.
 
There just ain't enough wars in the world to have all this crap.

The 1033 program has transferred more than $4.3 billion worth of military equipment to law enforcement since its inception in 1997 – including more than $449 million in 2013 alone, according to the Defense Logistics Agency's Law Enforcement Support Office, which administers the program.

Foreign militaries also receive surplus gear and weaponry from the Pentagon, but a review of the Defense Security Assistance Agency's databases show that only Israel, which requested $328 million in excess defense articles this year, comes close to receiving as much. Morocco, with $90 million of surplus military equipment, is next on the list.
Click to expand...

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/mi...pients-pentagons-surplus-gear-weapons-n181091
 
Sorry guys, but I stopped following this when I got to work, can someone update me on what happened? Something about the State Troopers taking over?
 
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...harrell_just_three_examples_of_why_i_don.html

This is a really good piece to read as a white guy. Will always think twice about involving the cops with an incident involving a non-white person that's not a danger to anyone.

This is the sharp edge of my explanation for why as a white person, if I have a choice about whether to involve the police in the life of a black person, I will try to choose not to. I’m not saying that I won’t call 911 and pray as hard as I can for the police to come if someone, whatever race, breaks in to my house. But much of the time, our choices are made in a far hazier gray area. To go back to the story of Debra Harrell and her daughter, who wound up respectively, getting arrested and going into foster care: If I saw a 9-year-old black girl alone in the park, and she said her mom was at work, I would not call the police. I would ask that girl if she was OK and try to talk to her mom. Because, once the wheels of the bureaucratic state start to turn, they can grind people up. Maybe the police want to help but don’t have discretion. Maybe “the law is an ass,” as my colleague David Plotz put it on the Gabfest. Whatever the cause, I would rather stay away from bringing its weight to bear on someone else, especially when I know that person is likelier to get an unfair shake.
Click to expand...
 
Every state should have a Captain Johnson, because the protests are gonna be more if the cops from NY decide to do their usual stuff.
 
Secret Fawful said:
Me either. I think you misread my post? I'm saying that her post on her blog is indicative of a really awful, self serving attitude amongst police and police families as a whole.
Click to expand...

Well, she is clearly ignorant of events and perspectives outside of her little bubble. There is a well documented reason for minority anger against the police. If she can't see that she is either ignorant or an idiot.
 
Heysoos said:
Sorry guys, but I stopped following this when I got to work, can someone update me on what happened? Something about the State Troopers taking over?
Click to expand...

I'll sum it up in a picture.
9vNFgs8.jpg
 
APKmetsfan said:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...harrell_just_three_examples_of_why_i_don.html

This is a really good piece to read as a white guy. Will always think twice about involving the cops with an incident involving a non-white person that's not a danger to anyone.
Click to expand...

You should. Good.

The problem with the piece, well. It's not so much a problem with the piece as it is the problem with people, is that most people don't honestly believe that black people aren't getting a fair shake. :(

If they did, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion right now, because things would be different.
 
Nanashrew said:
As a white person I share the sentiment and rational of the writer. I have always, always thought twice about calling the police.
Click to expand...

I never though about it at all (white privilege!). I've also only called the police once on a missing person
that wasn't actually missing
 
I appreciate her viewpoint in that article. honestly I would hesitate to call the police on anyone this day and age unless it was absolutely needed.

Been enough stories of even families calling because a child is out of control and when the police come the kid does something stupid and next thing the family knows they are burying their child.
Police Militarization has made it so no one is safe though those who suffer the most is disproportionately minorities
 
The change in today's police presence vs. last night is exactly why the people with talks of "(armed) REVOLUTION" are a bit misinformed*. At the end of the day, the police changed the way they were behaving because of the PRESS. In countries that necessitate revolutions, there is no press, or even worse, the government says 'well, fuck you' and refuses to change despite public pressure. When people were scoffing at non-violence, this is what we were talking about. The nonviolent act of reporting and citizens displaying anger and disapproval at the tactics of police made them slow their roll. If we, as some were hoping, starting 'fighting back' and killing police, things would get worse.

*edited for civility.
 
vas_a_morir said:
The change in today's police presence vs. last night is exactly why the people with talks of "REVOLUTION" are a bit misinformed*. At the end of the day, the police changed the way they were behaving because of the PRESS. In countries that necessitate revolutions, there is no press, or even worse, the government says 'well, fuck you' and refuses to change despite public pressure. When people were scoffing at non-violence, this is what we were talking about. The nonviolent act of reporting and citizens displaying anger and disapproval at the tactics of police made them slow their roll. If we, as some were hoping, starting 'fighting back' and killing police, things would get worse.

*edited for civility.
Click to expand...
Absolutely.

I'm glad there hasn't been any violence tonight. It really distracted from the overall message and wasn't fair to the vast majority of people who want justice for this case who are peaceful., especially the parents, who don't deserve their tragedy to be associated with violence.

I feel the real focus was getting lost in all the focus on rioting and Molotov cocktails. Yet the most powerful demonstration was showing people protesting with their hands up, peaceful. Who could argue with that? Shows most people simply want an end to police brutality, not more bloodshed.
 
vas_a_morir said:
The change in today's police presence vs. last night is exactly why the people with talks of "REVOLUTION" are a bit misinformed*. At the end of the day, the police changed the way they were behaving because of the PRESS. In countries that necessitate revolutions, there is no press, or even worse, the government says 'well, fuck you' and refuses to change despite public pressure. When people were scoffing at non-violence, this is what we were talking about. The nonviolent act of reporting and citizens displaying anger and disapproval at the tactics of police made them slow their roll. If we, as some were hoping, starting 'fighting back' and killing police, things would get worse.

*edited for civility.
Click to expand...

To be fair, the police changed their tactics for two primary reasons.
1. Who was in charge.
2. Their former tactics are well known and documented to be counter-productive.

The change in leadership was absolutely due to the press and social media shining light on what an unbelievably shitty job the former leadership (or lack thereof) was doing.
 
Trouble said:
To be fair, the police changed their tactics for two primary reasons.
1. Who was in charge.
2. Their former tactics are well known and documented to be counter-productive.

The change in leadership was absolutely due to the press and social media shining light on what an unbelievably shitty job the former leadership (or lack thereof) was doing.
Click to expand...

Change in leadership is sometimes necessary. The truth of the matter is, the local police were too close to the situation. It was dumb to have them there. Their presence could only ever escalate things, as they were the targets of the protest. They could never hope to keep the peace.
 
vas_a_morir said:
The change in today's police presence vs. last night is exactly why the people with talks of "REVOLUTION" are a bit misinformed*. At the end of the day, the police changed the way they were behaving because of the PRESS. In countries that necessitate revolutions, there is no press, or even worse, the government says 'well, fuck you' and refuses to change despite public pressure. When people were scoffing at non-violence, this is what we were talking about. The nonviolent act of reporting and citizens displaying anger and disapproval at the tactics of police made them slow their roll. If we, as some were hoping, starting 'fighting back' and killing police, things would get worse.

*edited for civility.
Click to expand...

I use a different definition of revolution than pointless, violent clashes.
 
vas_a_morir said:
The change in today's police presence vs. last night is exactly why the people with talks of "REVOLUTION" are a bit misinformed*. At the end of the day, the police changed the way they were behaving because of the PRESS. In countries that necessitate revolutions, there is no press, or even worse, the government says 'well, fuck you' and refuses to change despite public pressure. When people were scoffing at non-violence, this is what we were talking about. The nonviolent act of reporting and citizens displaying anger and disapproval at the tactics of police made them slow their roll. If we, as some were hoping, starting 'fighting back' and killing police, things would get worse.

*edited for civility.
Click to expand...
Revolution doesn't have to be violent. Otherwise, I agree. Violent revolution creates more problems than it solves. The system can only be fixed by unyielding, continuous, non-violent pressure.
 
lednerg said:
I use a different definition of revolution than pointless, violent clashes.
Click to expand...

lol, you are different than some. Some people were getting popcorn ready for the People's Party to take over. Saying some really dark and violent things. (not even necessarily talking about GAF, but in a lot of different places)
 
vas_a_morir said:
The change in today's police presence vs. last night is exactly why the people with talks of "REVOLUTION" are a bit misinformed*. At the end of the day, the police changed the way they were behaving because of the PRESS. In countries that necessitate revolutions, there is no press, or even worse, the government says 'well, fuck you' and refuses to change despite public pressure. When people were scoffing at non-violence, this is what we were talking about. The nonviolent act of reporting and citizens displaying anger and disapproval at the tactics of police made them slow their roll. If we, as some were hoping, starting 'fighting back' and killing police, things would get worse.

*edited for civility.
Click to expand...

The state putting on a human face doesn't change social relations. The underlying problems are still going to persist as long as the system is structured the way that it is. I think one poster said it nicely earlier in this thread when they said that the murderer may get justice done to him for once to "appease the masses".

Nobody wants violence to occur, most of all because innocent oppressed people would die in the conflict. What I and others were saying is that if people in Ferguson decided to strike back, there would have been nothing wrong with that. Peaceful protest can be a very good strategy but it is not the only viable strategy and there will be times when it fails.
 
vas_a_morir said:
Change in leadership is sometimes necessary. The truth of the matter is, the local police were too close to the situation. It was dumb to have them there. Their presence could only ever escalate things, as they were the targets of the protest. They could never hope to keep the peace.
Click to expand...

Oh definitely. This shit would have continued to spiral with the Ferguson or St. Louis cops running things.
 
Cat said:
I'm glad things are so much better in Ferguson tonight too.

Since I saw so many people liked the photo this is based on...

BvDCw-JIMAAfmFU.jpg:large


Found it here: https://twitter.com/BallinInHD/status/500113705376698368/photo/1
Click to expand...

I love that the guy is holding that bag of chips. That's an iconic image. And I hope "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" becomes a new rallying cry.

vas_a_morir said:
The change in today's police presence vs. last night is exactly why the people with talks of "(armed) REVOLUTION" are a bit misinformed*. At the end of the day, the police changed the way they were behaving because of the PRESS.
Click to expand...

The press definitely stepped up, but only because they were actively targeted by the police. If not, they would have done their typical presenting "both sides" coverage.
 
sphagnum said:
The state putting on a human face doesn't change social relations. The underlying problems are still going to persist as long as the system is structured the way that it is. I think one poster said it nicely earlier in this thread when they said that the murderer may get justice done to him for once to "appease the masses".

Nobody wants violence to occur, most of all because innocent oppressed people would die in the conflict. What I and others were saying is that if people in Ferguson decided to strike back, there would have been nothing wrong with that. Peaceful protest can be a very good strategy but it is not the only viable strategy and there will be times when it fails.
Click to expand...
In what way? If the people of Ferguson started killing officers, that would be the worst thing to improve social relations.
 
adamsappel said:
The press definitely stepped up, but only because they were actively targeted by the police. If not, they would have done their typical presenting "both sides" coverage.
Click to expand...

That is unfortunately the harsh reality. There have been similar protests in the past and it didn't explode in coverage or immediate action because the press wasn't involved as a target by the police.

I think tonight was good for letting off steam and just calming down, bringing a little bit of sanity back into the discussion. But a more cynical side of me fears that this "police are being friendly" feel-good story is going to give the press an opportunity to write a happy ending and forget about Michael Brown and the cover-up that caused all this in the first place. The Ferguson PD still needs to answer to the shitshow that was his murder and their response to the protests.
 
The push now needs to be for demilitiarization of police in general, especially when it comes to police culture.

That's the biggest problem.
 
sphagnum said:
The state putting on a human face doesn't change social relations. The underlying problems are still going to persist as long as the system is structured the way that it is. I think one poster said it nicely earlier in this thread when they said that the murderer may get justice done to him for once to "appease the masses".

Nobody wants violence to occur, most of all because innocent oppressed people would die in the conflict. What I and others were saying is that if people in Ferguson decided to strike back, there would have been nothing wrong with that. Peaceful protest can be a very good strategy but it is not the only viable strategy and there will be times when it fails.
Click to expand...

How acquainted are you with actual urban combat? "Striking back" whilst in the midst of children and unarmed civilians gets them killed, you killed and a giant black boot up your demographic's ass for eons to come. "Striking back" means people die, real people. I get it, La Guerra de Guerrillas gets your juices flowing but firebombs and targeted assassinations will do more harm than good. Unless you actually want the logical conclusion which is open rebellion.

sphagnum said:
Thanks for reading my sentence before the one you highlighted.
Click to expand...
The two contradict one another. You don't want violence but violence is ok in this case.
 
If the Police chief is fired AND the asshole is locked up for life, I'll be satisfied.

Not necessarily happy, but satisfied at bare minimum.

ANYTHING less is pure injustice.
 
BeerSnob said:
How acquainted are you with actual urban combat? "Striking back" whilst in the midst of children and unarmed civilians gets them killed, you killed and a giant black boot up your demographic's ass for eons to come. "Striking back" means people die, real people. I get it, La Guerra de Guerrillas gets your juices flowing but firebombs and targeted assassinations will do more harm than good. Unless you actually want the logical conclusion which is open rebellion.
Click to expand...

Thanks for reading my sentence before the one you highlighted.
 
EatinOlives said:
That is unfortunately the harsh reality. There have been similar protests in the past and it didn't explode in coverage or immediate action because the press wasn't involved as a target by the police.

I think tonight was good for letting off steam and just calming down, bringing a little bit of sanity back into the discussion. But a more cynical side of me fears that this "police are being friendly" feel-good story is going to give the press an opportunity to write a happy ending and forget about Michael Brown and the cover-up that caused all this in the first place. The Ferguson PD still needs to answer to the shitshow that was his murder and their response to the protests.
Click to expand...
I'm really hoping that if this almost becomes the case people will rally against it until proper justice is dealt to all who deserve it. If everyone, especially in Ferguson, let's bygones be bygones because the cop who started it all gets what he has coming to him I'll be very surprised.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Poll
Do you have an electric or gas stove?
2
50
339
GulfCoastZilla replied
Don't Run from the police
2
74
751
Mexen replied
Amazon Fire Sticks Recommendations
42
376
Darkmakaimura replied
Black Phone 2 | Official Trailer | Black Phone Meets A Nightmare on Elm Street?
14
158
spookyfish replied
These MLB hats are FIRE!
28
2K
ManaByte replied
Top Bottom