deadscreensky
Member
"I'm from New York so I can't be racist" is almost as funny as his thread complaining that Google AdSense is giving him advertisements about dating women from China and this is somehow GAF's fault.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Why did race relations deteriorate so much in the last decade? And how do we fix it?
- Thread starter pramod
- Start date
Autoignition
Member
That's literally not what the OP says. It says that the 90s and early 2000s were harmonious. They weren't if you weren't white.
D
Deleted member 713885
Unconfirmed Member
Their is no utopia.
People are tribal, be it skin color, religion, sex etc..
As human as we are we are still animals. People will form groups starting with race and sex, how it is and how it always will be.
The level of harmony we have is the best its ever been but dont expect perfection.
And lets be honest, nobody wants equality.
Black dont want to be equal with whites, feminist dont want to be on the same level as men...
Everyone wants to be king of the hill.
Pushes for equality arent ever about climbing up to the heights of the 'top dog' its about pulling the king off his hill by any means necessary.
People are tribal, be it skin color, religion, sex etc..
As human as we are we are still animals. People will form groups starting with race and sex, how it is and how it always will be.
The level of harmony we have is the best its ever been but dont expect perfection.
And lets be honest, nobody wants equality.
Black dont want to be equal with whites, feminist dont want to be on the same level as men...
Everyone wants to be king of the hill.
Pushes for equality arent ever about climbing up to the heights of the 'top dog' its about pulling the king off his hill by any means necessary.
I would say they really have no choice but to pull at anything they can grab onto when the king is repeatedly kicking them in the face to make sure they can't get off the ground...
Phoenix RISING
Banned
There's an entire book about this. I recommend it over The New Jim Crow, which is also seminal.
This is such a strange deflection considering nobody has said this.
Also, holy wow at bangs getting taken to school on the last page and a half. Bravo.
Autoignition
Member
This is it. This is the whitest, malest post I've seen in Off Topic so far.
Go outside, fam. If you do, you might find out that what people of color want is:
+ to stop being shot indiscriminately in the streets
+ to not be passed over for job opportunities
+ to be paid for the same work as their white male counterparts
+ to stop being scapegoated for society's ills/forced into incarceration rates way, way, way higher than their white male counterparts
And what women want is:
+ to stop being harassed, stalked, raped, and murdered
+ autonomy over their own bodies
+ to not be passed over for job opportunities
+ to be paid for the same work as their white male counterparts
No one's "tearing you down" from your hill. Living in a society is not a zero sum game; this notion that there's winners and losers based on "tribalism" is alt-right Nazi rhetoric at its finest.
Last edited:
prag16
Banned
Come on. I'm not gonna say this is all personally Obama's fault, but race relations absolutely got worse under his presidency, and at times he definitely did engage in subtle and not so subtle race baiting. This is a fact.
The problem as you point out is tribalism, you further go on to categorize ideals based on a set of people furthering the tribalism.
While I can understand the sentiments it is important to understand that equality is a true and noble pursuit and the actions of those who would corrupt the pursuit of equality to further empower themselves detracts from that pursuit. Their is legitimate needs for equality while there will always be those who seek to take advantage of the movement. Judging and entire race or movement on a subset of those who seek to further their own standing does not take away from the real and true ideal of equality being pursued.
The same as I stated above applies here. The creation of and the persistence of the us/them divisions will always resort to cyclic banter. The best methods for discussion is to identify those abusers on both sides and deal with them not as representations of a larger body but as the individuals they are.
Autoignition
Member
They got worse because racist white people lost they damn minds at the idea of being represented by a black man and took it out on other people of color, which then prompted those people of color to speak up more loudly about things that have been going on in this society since before Obama was even born. It's not like we're talking quantum physics here.
Last edited:
No I quoted the right post. My post shows the research behind white flight. Your argument was that you claimed economics were the primary cause which you stated without evidence. I countered this with actual evidence and no reply of any intellectual merit was received. White flight is a continuous phenomenon not defined by any particular decade, I would happily discuss more academic research if you are mentally up to the task.
Hello and good morning, I am particularly interesting in seeing these facts you speak of?
prag16
Banned
If you're going to claim Obama never engaged in any race baiting of any kind, then we don't really have much to talk about, and you may be more comfortable on the new site.
But what makes me happy is that a discussion is actually being had in this topic. This thread is higher quality all around than anything that we would see on old-gaf or the new site. Even if BANGS may be going slightly overboard, at least now the discussion takes place and some of us learn some things. Instead of the alternative of BANGS getting immediately banned to make room for a circle jerk inside an unsullied echo chamber.
I never said such a thing, I’m engaging you on good faith that what you say happened actual exists and I’m asking you to show me for intellectual reasons in the course of proper discussion. You’re diverting into something that was never said and I’m only asking you for examples which I presume exist because I wouldn’t think you would have a reason to lie about it.
Last edited:
Kibakahn
Member
We don't need forum wars or talking about the other site. Lets just keep things on topic and civil everyone please.
If its fact then you should have no trouble finding examples from reputable sources
prag16
Banned
I'm on mobile, but as I said if you have to ask, I'm pretty sure nothing I could cite would convince you. But to just list a few, there's the "police acted stupidly" beer summit, comparing Trayvon Martin to his theoretical son (in these first two situations, speaking before the facts were known), mischaracterizing the Arizona immigration laws to make it sound like random people of hispanic descent could be stopped on the street and asked for ze papers (not true), equated the targeted murders of those white Dallas police officers with killings by police under unclear circumstances (and overall tried to sow distrust in cops any chance he got, even if a lot of it was deserved), having Al Sharpton as a race ambassador, or race relations advisor, of whatever they called it, and so on and so forth.
I'm guessing you'll have your spin for each of those points as to why they don't qualify as race baiting, and at that point I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I'm not trying to be inflammatory. But we can't have an honest discussion if some here can't acknowledge that Obama made missteps on this topic.
Last edited:
dude abiding
Banned
This might be trite, but you have to consider just how vast and diverse humanity is. What are we at now, seven billion people? Even if by some miracle 99% of them stopped being racist, that would still leave millions of assholes. It can never be stamped out fully, unfortunate as that is.
What we can do is push for systemic forces to be less racist, and that alone is a massive uphill struggle. All we can do is the best we can do at any one time. As long as you're doing your bit - challenging bullshit, trying to be inclusive - you should hold your head high.
What we can do is push for systemic forces to be less racist, and that alone is a massive uphill struggle. All we can do is the best we can do at any one time. As long as you're doing your bit - challenging bullshit, trying to be inclusive - you should hold your head high.
While Obama certainly did make missteps I’m unclear on many of these items you’re referring to in terms of how they are race baiting. Just as an example here is Obama’s full speech and what I think you were alluding to in regards to the Dallas shooting: http://time.com/4403543/president-obama-dallas-shooting-memorial-service-speech-transcript/
“Faced with this violence, we wonder if the divides of race in America can ever be bridged. We wonder if an African American community that feels unfairly targeted by police and police departments that feel unfairly maligned for doing their jobs, can ever understand each other’s experience.“
So again, I am not denying your claims but you have to show me why you specifically feel that is race baiting? Or any of the other examples because It seems you examples are coming third hand and filtered rather than directly from the sources. I’m willing to learn about your perspective on the raw context.
Last edited:
manfestival
Member
I know other people give you a hard time for not immediately providing a source but I remember this. I remember how tense things were even before the election race began.
It was non-stop on right wing radio/tv/blogs/twitter, so if he was exposed to this, and chooses to believe just 1% of it, he's going to think some of it was true. Do you really think this dude is going to read the actual speech? There is not a single controversial line in it.
Mod edit: inflammatory non value text removed
Last edited by a moderator:
Mobile Suit Gooch
Grundle: The Awakening
>How do we fix it?
Stop focusing on someone's race and start viewing them as humans.
Stop focusing on someone's race and start viewing them as humans.
Nightstick10
Neo Member
As a non-white person part of an older generation that has lucid memories of the Los Angeles Riots being triggered by the brutal beatdown of Rodney King, the "welfare queen" comment, etc., I echo the sentiments of all older generations in thinking to the extent race relations have deteriorated, the blame lies exclusively on the heads of those who propagated militant identity politics to millions of young and impressionable kids leaving the nest for the first time.
It boggles the mind how young kids can say with a straight face that racism is a huge problem today. By every objective metric, equality under the law has been achieved, and it was achieved years, if not a couple decades, ago. The younger millennials violently squawking and shrieking about racism today will never see the pervasive, actual racism that was present in older generations of whiteys. The dragon has been slayed, Bob, it's time to rebuild the village.
Endless minging about the "Bamboo Ceiling" or "Implicit Bias" or "Micro-aggressions" or whatever mummer's dragon is eliciting reams of essays and spoken word poetry will never change the fact that if people won't give you respect, you can MAKE them respect you, and the way you make them respect you is through success.
If a racism is a sacred calf to one and endlessly griping about it every day is mandatory, at least try to find some way to make money doing so, or at least multitask so that one is ranting about race relations during a break for studying for the MCATs or something.
It boggles the mind how young kids can say with a straight face that racism is a huge problem today. By every objective metric, equality under the law has been achieved, and it was achieved years, if not a couple decades, ago. The younger millennials violently squawking and shrieking about racism today will never see the pervasive, actual racism that was present in older generations of whiteys. The dragon has been slayed, Bob, it's time to rebuild the village.
Endless minging about the "Bamboo Ceiling" or "Implicit Bias" or "Micro-aggressions" or whatever mummer's dragon is eliciting reams of essays and spoken word poetry will never change the fact that if people won't give you respect, you can MAKE them respect you, and the way you make them respect you is through success.
If a racism is a sacred calf to one and endlessly griping about it every day is mandatory, at least try to find some way to make money doing so, or at least multitask so that one is ranting about race relations during a break for studying for the MCATs or something.
Autoignition
Member
If you blind yourself to a person's skin color, you erase all of the cultural and societal experiences they have that makes them part of who they are.
Embrace color, don't ignore it.
Last edited:
prag16
Banned
Classy, talking about me like I'm not here. And here I thought on the "reborn" gaf there might be a chance for some productive and respectful discussion. I guess not everybody got the memo. Nothing was "false" about what I mentioned; the question is only in how each of us defines "race baiting" which I suppose will vary. Anyway, if this is how you choose to address me, I will not be engaging your nonsense any further. If you decide to take that as me admitting defeat, go right ahead.
But for the benefit of the other guy who actually DOES seem to be at least pretending to try to engage in good faith, yeah, the speech (which I'm familiar with thank you very much) after the Dallas shooting wasn't necessarily outrageously controversial. But a lot of people didn't like how much he talked about the two guys that the shooter was supposedly "avenging" while standing over the caskets of the five deceased officers. Some of the other instances I found as more blatant though, personally.
I don't think we're going to agree. I just find the contention that Obama never played race cards, to be kind of outrageous. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I don't think we need to agree at all. The point of discussion should be to obtain viewpoints and information not previously seen.
In regards to the actual speech, there seems to be an emphasis on the empathy and understanding rather than of division. The references were for context of ideology, something that the speech addresses needs to be extinguished that can only be done through mutual understanding. What I see is a speech which has been weaponized for political gain. The speech stressed the officers who died, died protecting the very people who were protesting against them. They died upholding the constitution and basic freedoms. The events did not transpire in isolation and thus context was given. Ignoring the circumstances devalues the tremendous sacrifice those officers make. Why would anyone choose to devalue that solely to score political points? The speech emphasized the need to look beyond what we claim to know as fact and move beyond.
I can understand if looking through a lens which seeks failure how this speech could be particularly offensive. But why seek failure in something which was crafted to unite and honor? I'm willing to hear your views on how this is race-baiting and which parts in particular. As for the other examples I am willing to hear those as well. Can you point me to articles, news reports, something to give me context of why you feel the way you do? I'm am more than willing to listen to what ever evidence you present.
While I 100% agree that this is the case for a small subset. The problem is that subset is so vocal it sounds like a majority. This subset is further exponentially magnified with the advent of social media. These individuals were always there and always existed but were never so visible in everyday society. Turning off social media seems to suddenly make far right and left personalities disappear as if by some dark magic
. But the 80s and 90s were certainly marked by substantial racial progress when compared to previous decades, and even today racial tensions or rather race related incidents have not increased in frequency. What has increased is public consciousness on the topic. It drives news and thus drives $$. It is an unfortunate side-effect of capitalism. The thing that sells will be what is sold the most. So to really answer this thread. The racial incidents are actually in significant decline and likely would further progress. However, social media has made seemingly co-opted the actual factual statistics. The only way to fix this would be to fix social media, but this is unrealistic.
Blood Borne
Member
It detoriated because Obama is a race baiting scumbag and the left went far left thus delving deeper in their disgusting identity politics.
Examples of racebaiting?
Vicetrailia
Banned
Huh? The New Jim Crow, Ferguson, Charlottesville, "99.9% of poor don't have refrigerators", Shelby County v. Holder being no longer necessary despite manifesting in other ways, NYPD stop and frisk, "welfare queens", Trayvon Martin, Terrence Crutcher, and so much more. All of these things are still real despite not holding a candle to the things my grandparents went through.
Enforcement and outcomes shed a different light. Just because we have made tremendous strides does not mean that racism is gone. Government, institutions and society has much to improve upon. You seem to perceive the prevalence of racism differently from young generations due to your unique situation. My mom remembers segregation, but still hasn't lost touch today.
The only thing you said that makes any sense, even if it is imperfect.
Last edited by a moderator:
Its just expectation: the right expected Obama to not mention racism because in their mind racism is only a minor impact social construct/personal feeling(along with other -isms) that has no bearing in real life thus by him mentioning race at all=baiting, adding fuel to the fire.
Meanwhile on the left there was a hope he would use his platform to confront what they feel are structural racial issues but outside of some of the higher profile DOJ cases they left *rimshot*sorely disappointed.
Its funny reading this post, the “beer summit” was brought up one of the right leaning guys in the post as a race bait moment, while on the left it was the exact opposite...they were mad he explicitly didn’t bring up racism and just made it a cops mistake with no acknowledgement of bigger cop vs black racial issues, just one “dumb” cop.
Last edited:
Blood Borne
Member
He race baited the hell out of the Trayvon Martin case. He also endorsed BLM by inviting them to the white house.
In addition to that, when the racist hate group, New Black Panthers were threatening, intimidating and yelling racial slurs at non black voters at a voting booth, Obama and his AG didn't persecute them but supported them and called them "my people"
Last edited:
Source?
Nightstick10
Neo Member
Your list of examples illustrates my point that the dragon is slain.
Felon disenfranchisement is not something that applies only to one race of felons. Ferguson shined a light on how much police transparency has improved since the days cops could beat the shit out of the Rodney Kings of the world with impunity and be acquitted, causing mass riots. Compare and contrast with the much more transparent investigation of potential police brutality in Ferguson, the nuanced reactions when people realized it was not simply an indiscriminate shooting, and the peaceful demonstration by a coalition of all colors in Los Angeles, a city a mere generation removed from the 92 Riots. Your microgeneration might not realize the gravity of how you saw amazing things happen when NYPD's "stop-and-frisk" was deemed UNCONSTITUTIONAL, removing a source of racial friction since the late 60s. Shelby County is another signpost for how far things have come when the very idea of a polltax seems so unrealistic that the Court ruled the way it did. By every objective metric, police brutality versus black and brown communities has improved to an extent unimaginable in the 80s and 90s. More than anything, Charlottesville showed how anemic modern white supremacy groups are, as not only were they absolutely dwarfed by counter protestors, they were universally denounced by the local communities.
De jure equality and equality of opportunity has been secured all across the board; what else is there to secure? Short of thoughtcrime legislation, enforced quotas, etc. what more can we reasonably ask for?
Source? I’m not going to debate you on what you consider racebaiting but I’m definitely going to need some sourced content.
BANGS is the epitome of what happened when you tried to debate with certain parts of old GAF and when they got banned, people would come in and scream "omg freespeeeaach leftist sjws." He/she has been thoroughly schooled by multiple posters itt and the dude just completely ignores or dismisses studies/evidence as leftist propaganda. Although, I actually think it's better to leave the shitposts up so everyone can see how intellectually bankrupt they are. The rest of the discussion in here has been pretty solid otherwise.
I think racism today is a very different beast than what it was in the old days and we have not really made the switch when it comes to fighting it. Racism in the old days was more intentional, overt and codified in society. Racism today is much more emergent and insidious. To further explain: in the old days, most cops harassed you simply because you were black. Today, most cops harass you because you live in a poor neighborhood/high crime area to a greater degree than they do just because you are black. Of course, you're WAY more likely to be black and living in these kinds of neighborhoods as a product of historical racism and generational wealth destruction. To that end, I think deteriorating race relations today are a directly linked to and magnified by things like income inequality and the overall destruction of the low and middle class. The only way things are going to get better is to reverse those trends.
I think racism today is a very different beast than what it was in the old days and we have not really made the switch when it comes to fighting it. Racism in the old days was more intentional, overt and codified in society. Racism today is much more emergent and insidious. To further explain: in the old days, most cops harassed you simply because you were black. Today, most cops harass you because you live in a poor neighborhood/high crime area to a greater degree than they do just because you are black. Of course, you're WAY more likely to be black and living in these kinds of neighborhoods as a product of historical racism and generational wealth destruction. To that end, I think deteriorating race relations today are a directly linked to and magnified by things like income inequality and the overall destruction of the low and middle class. The only way things are going to get better is to reverse those trends.
Last edited:
I think you are conflating institutional racism with prejudices. Prejudice will never be extinguished, however education and activism are protections against the re-emergence of institutional discrimination. The "dragon" of racism and prejudice will never be extinguished so long as humanity lives, this is the nature of the beast. Thoughts that the "dragon" has been slain allows the institutional prejudices to seep in, the dragon has merely had its teeth removed and by all measures it has worked across the board this is truth. But claiming that prejudice has been extinguished is beyond disingenuous. There is no question that thought should not be policed and that freedoms of speech and thought should prevail. But it should also be that ideas which do not reflect the the ideals of the legal moral framework and engaged and discussed. Racism has not vanished and never will. No law to extinguish it. Yes, civil liberties are protected at an unprecedented level than before. The decline in hate crimes reflects this. However, claims that the dragon of racism and prejudice as a whole has been slain are hollow, ill-informed, illogical, ignorant, and anti-fact based.
prag16
Banned
I mean, Blood Borne and I were alive from 2008 through 2016. We experienced his presidency, and observed his words and deeds. We think how he handled these various situations constitutes race baiting, and you apparently don't. There's not much more to debate since you don't want to tackle what constitutes race baiting. (I will note though that I'll stop short of calling Obama a "scumbag" or the like. I'd say you can be a race baiter without being a fundamentally awful person.)
I don't think singling out a user is productive in the overall conversation. There is no need to dog-pile and if their content is as intellectually bankrupt as stated than it stands to reason that once engaged on the merits of their arguments it will dissolve as we have seen. There is no need to provoke on a lower level, the conversation benefits when we engage disinformation with fact based research.
While I agree with you on this, I think you might be making the mistake of thinking that it is safe to rebuild because the dragon has been slain. I think we still need to put out its fires. It's just that some are trying to put out fires with swords.
I disagree. I wasn't trying to dogpile, but I think it is absolutely important to call out irrational actors that do not respond to fact-based research. Otherwise, you keep playing their game, they keep trolling unabated and soon the thread is derailed. I'll leave it at that though.
Last edited:
I was also alive during this time. What I'm point out in both the speech and here is that Obama made clear that two different perspectives should seek to understand and empathize with one another which seems to be the opposite of what is claimed. As I said, if you point it out to me specifically rather than some generalization then I'm inclined to look at it. I am trying to understand your perspective and the best I'm given is I think such and such was said but when investigating it it doesn't seem to support your claims so I am asking for more context. I am not attempting to agree with you but as Obama said, looking for perspective and understanding. Do you simply not believe in finding common ground and understanding? Isn't this what you wanted or did you just want a platform to complain on? If you are willing to discuss on this level, I'm willing to discuss in good faith rather then generalized statements.
Vicetrailia
Banned
You did not diminish my points one bit. The recency and existence of them diminishes yours (nothing to see here young people), and thats just a single drop in the ocean. Equality of Opportunity is not secured if people are losing opportunity just because of their gender or race. You gotta think about what you are saying.
You are off point on everything you said, especially about Ferguson and Jim Crow other than the fact that our grandparents had it much worse.
Do you want to know what black CEOs today say about success?
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm genuinely curious. What is race baiting to you and why is it so bad? Can you list some examples of speeches and/or other communications released by Obama that constitute race bating and can you explain why you think they were bad? I really want to get where you guys are coming from with this.
Super Mario
Banned
How do people say this kind of stuff with a straight face?
Terrence Crutcher refused to obey police commands, and reached into his vehicle. That is a threatening action. Had this been a story about a cop getting shot by a black person, no one would care. (Like this story for example https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/d...cross-u-s-over-police-shootings-black-n605686 one that NFL players were not allowed to honor) Cops who die "signed up to be shot." Black people who can even attack officers, like Michael Brown, should never be shot. Got it?
They tried so hard to make Trayvon look like a little boy that was shot for being black on his way to buy skittles. He obviously attacked Zimmerman. If Zimmerman would have died there, you whould have never heard of this story. Black people can attack and threaten cops, and it's a national tragedy that demands sweeping reform. If non-black people get murdered by black people, no one cares. Where is the injustice again?
Ferguson? Let's talk about it http://www.nationalreview.com/corne...ct-increases-homicides-ferguson-and-elsewhere
The little city of 21,059 already had a disproportionately high crime rate, as anyone observing the behavior of Michael Brown before he was fatally shot by Ferguson officer Darren Wilson in August 2014 would have guessed. In 2014, Ferguson’s violent-crime rate was 545 violent crimes per 100,000 residents, considerably above the 2014 national average of 362. But in 2015, the number of violent crimes in Ferguson surged 65 percent, from 115 to 190. Ferguson’s violent-crime rate in 2015 was 790 per 100,000 residents, over two times the national average of 373 in 2015. By comparison, the FBI estimates that the absolute number of the nation’s violent crimes rose nearly 4 percent in 2015, and the nation’s violent-crime rate rose 3 percent.
Ferguson’s residents, in other words, and above all its black residents, faced a greatly elevated chance of being victimized by violent crime in 2015, as officers backed off from proactive policing under the Ferguson effect. Naturally, the federal consent decree that the Obama Justice Department foisted on the Ferguson police department this year made no mention of rising crime. But the costs of complying with that decree will make it even harder to bring the city’s crime rate down, by taking officers away from street patrol and redirecting them to superfluous report writing.
So what's the problem here? Do we police it? Not police it? It's unfair either way, right?
We can spread fear that officers are running amok, wanting to kill all black people. That is what your favorite comedians, athletes, and celebrities are telling you, it must be true! So let's institute body cameras. That will changes things, right?
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dc-police-body-camera-study_us_59ee1bace4b003385ac11440
Nope. Yet again, false flag. No change in behavior. That means we have all this new footage of black people being oppressed right? Wrong again.
Yes they do.
Vicetrailia
Banned
Super Mario, you are wrong about Trayvon and Crutcher, especially because Tray was followed just because he was black, and Crutcher was shot with both hands up out of fear of the big scary black man.
The nationalreview is not a credible source. Find someone else.
But let's see what the The Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice has to summize about their own research:
This isn't even the worst of it, as their motive is pillaging black people for profit.
The nationalreview is not a credible source. Find someone else.
But let's see what the The Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice has to summize about their own research:
This isn't even the worst of it, as their motive is pillaging black people for profit.
Last edited by a moderator:
So what do you think about the DOJ investigation that found that, among other things, the Ferguson police routinely discriminated against black people? Also, don't you think you are being intellectually bankrupt when you frame a serious issue such as police discrimination/brutality against minorities as "Black people can attack and threaten cops, and it's a national tragedy that demands sweeping reform. If non-black people get murdered by black people, no one cares. Where is the injustice again?" By and large, the reason cops brutalizing minorities is an issue that demands "sweeping reform" is because cops have gotten away with it historically. No one even questions when a non-black person gets murdered by black people because more often than not they get arrested and sent to prison (and rightfully so). The need for sweeping reform is because it's actually so bad that black people get arrested by racist cops/society for murders they didn't even commit! This is a fact. Like, what the fuck are you even trying to say here with this post? I don't get it.
Last edited:
I appreciate your sources and I would like to counter with my own.
Terrence Crutchers- https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/20/us/oklahoma-tulsa-police-shooting/index.html
It shows the Crutchers scene from multiple angles of simultaneous footage. His behavior was strange and non-compliant. However this is where experience and training become paramount. It's been an incredibly common issue. The officer made a poor judgement decision as does happen, there is no question about this. What needs to be addressed is the amount of training policy which is used. For instance, using deadly force, even accidentally should not be a first response. Taser and non-lethal equipment should be the first defense unless a lethal weapon is drawn. If you set the precedent that any act of non-compliance justifies an officer to fire potentially lethal equipment it harms the general populace.
Michael Brown - I will not debate the merits of whether Michael Brown should have been shot as the officer must act in self defense. However what I take issue with is the police having no means to defend themselves beyond a gun itself. Officers should always carry both a lethal and non-lethal form of defense and policy should be to use non-lethal means first against unarmed assailants. Again, this is a policy issue.
Trayvon Martin - Your statement says that Trayvon Obviously attacked Zimmerman. What we do know. Zimmerman was told he was not needed to follow Martin. Zimmerman continued. An altercation ensued to which Zimmerman was forced to use his gun to deadly result. I believe the charge should have been manslaughter as the incidence was a result of Zimmerman's negligence and irresponsibility while in possession of a firearm. As to the evidence of Martin attacking, https://www.cnn.com/2013/02/25/justice/florida-zimmerman-5-things/index.html
"When they do, they'll delve into mounds of evidence, key elements of which emerged well after the initial hubbub erupted.
For example, did Martin handle the gun he was ultimately shot with? No, according to test results made public last May, which showed evidence of Zimmerman's hands on the firearm, but not those of the teenager he killed. And an analysis showed that scrapings from underneath the teenager's fingernails did not contain any of Zimmerman's DNA, as may rub off in a prolonged struggle."
Ferguson: - The crime statistics are irrelevant to the treatment of individuals. Having elevated crime in a specific area is not license to use possible excessive force in a specific are. It is unconstitutional to do so. Communities can be policed while staying within the bounds of the law. In Michael Brown's case I do not fault the officer personally, but I question the policies. As I stated, this should be reviewed.
As to the body camera, the body camera is not necessary for the citizens protection as it is for the institution of police officers. It is a protection mechanism for officers and should be used as such. No officer should be against empirical evidence which shows their evidence. I so no reason to be concerned of the police cameras as its purpose should be to invoke trust more so than catching wrong doing.