Racial Truths and Untruths and the Search for Justice while Doing Justice (previously titled To Infinity and Beyond)
-
@mayjay I’m not trying to insult you buddy but logically cargo shorts don’t seem to fit the mold for jogging and I’ve literally never seen anyone jogging in them. Maybe it’s a northern thing but in Kansas or Georgia with the humidity you had best have a ton of gold bond power down there or it ain’t gonna feel too good lol.
-
https://twitter.com/statesman/status/1270086447664631808?s=21
There are so many of these we just don’t know about. I’d never heard of this until just now and I live very close to Williamson county. It was filmed by a documentary crew…
The reason for the stop: failure to dim lights to oncoming traffic.
-
@benshawks08 said in Racial Truths and Untruths and the Search for Justice while Doing Justice (previously titled To Infinity and Beyond):
@FarmerJayhawk said;
So I guess we’re putting people who commit violent felonies in detention? If a white kid rapes a girl, do we send him to therapy? There are so many unanswered questions that they have zero clue how to think through or come up with a coherent answer.
Let’s start with how the current system handles “a white kid rapes a girl.”
What happens first? Well a majority of the time absolutely nothing as most rapes go unreported. But let’s say she goes to hospital to get help and is even able to identify the culprit (most people are raped by people they already know). It is still unlikely that she will press charges because as she reports it to the police she will be told, “most of these cases come down to he said, she said so there really won’t be much of a case.” So she goes home and faces the arduous task of dealing with just about the most traumatic injury that can happen to a person knowing nothing will happen to the person she sees regularly. She will be forced to make drastic changes to her normal routine and likely lose many friends and people who support her because they won’t believe her especially because she didn’t press charges.
In this scenario, sending a white kid to therapy would be a win for me. You?
Now, what if she doesn’t know who committed the rape and does want to press charges. Clearance rates for these cases is horrendously low and likely her rape kit will be stuck in a giant line of rape kits that have yet to be evaluated. And all the stuff that happened to the girl in the first scenario still happens and now she also adds the fear of knowing her rapist (whom she can’t identify) is still out and about without anyone addressing the issue.
So that is from her perspective.
Now let’s look at it from the rapist’s perspective. White kid rapes girl, nothing happens. What incentive or motivations are there for him to not do it again. In the current system, he raped a girl knowing that if caught he would go to prison (though not for as long as his black friend if he were caught doing the same thing). Knowing that he’d be labeled a sex offender for the rest of his life. But for him that didn’t happen the first time (because it rarely does). What does that do to the fear of punishment (remember that originally wasn’t enough to prevent him from raping in the first place)? Is he now more afraid or less? Is he more likely, or less to rape again?
Even if he is caught, if he is charged and if he is found guilty (three pretty big ifs if you’ve been paying any attention to the goings on in America), his rate of recidivism is still very high and he is likely to rape again within his lifetime.
Unfortunately, as has been proven over and over again, punishment is not the best way to shape human behavior. Our entire system is built on a false pretense. You may want revenge, and seeing someone punished might make you feel better, but it doesn’t change behavior.
This is without even getting into the ridiculous race disparities in these punishments. And just to throw this out there, for every 9 people put to death by the state for crimes committed, 1 is set free due to new evidence proving their innocence or demonstrable evidence that justice and rule of law was not upheld during their original conviction.
Next let’s take this one: “Nobody to respond to a break-in? Becomes more attractive to break into that Apple store for a Mac upgrade. Or: Apple hires private security at night and goes off half-cocked and kills a dumb kid for breaking in because well-trained police weren’t available.”
A. Trained cops kill dumb kids for breaking in at a higher rate in this country than any other comparable democracy.
B. Apple, the mall, and everyone else who can afford it, already hire private security at night, during the day, when they are open and when they are closed.
THIS is the system you are upholding and claiming there is no alternative to. I think we can do better and it would be immoral not to at least try.
So in that first scenario, who A) arrests the guy and B ) ensures he sticks to the program and C) what penalties are there and how do we enforce them if not? Being incarcerated is a pretty big incentive to not assault anyone again. That’s most of the reason we do it. With child predators, we incarcerate then warehouse them if deemed a continual threat to society. We can more easily mandate things like therapy when the dude is locked up. And again, if he does reoffend, who then takes him into custody? Like a violent felon is just going to be like “yeah, ok, you got me” to a non-police officer who isn’t armed?
Yes, and I’ve made suggestions on training police. Eliminating them doesn’t change the calculus there. Does your small mom and pop shop have to hire private security as well if they get robbed during the day? Go all vigilante and smoke the robber with a 12 gauge? Who investigates that crime? Do we just take every victim’s word for it? Do prosecutors have to contract out all investigations? Do we just have a team of unarmed investigators without the police power to enforce subpoenas? That seems pretty legally dodgy and shortsighted.
I oppose the death penalty, but believe some level of force is required to deal with violent crime. It’s unsavory and gross, but I really don’t see the alternative (and frankly, nobody else does either at their own admission.)
-
@kjayhawks I agree it doesn’t seem logical, but think of how many people you might have seen wearing sweats on summer runs. And actually I am in SC!
-
Is five years long enough?
https://twitter.com/loneberrywang/status/1270087421531652104?s=21
-
More reading if you are tired of hearing about it from me and are looking for a more knowledgeable and practiced writer:
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/police-brutality-cop-free-world-protest-199465/
-
@benshawks08 said in Racial Truths and Untruths and the Search for Justice while Doing Justice (previously titled To Infinity and Beyond):
@Texas-Hawk-10 It’s all part of the same criminal justice system. I was just addressing the situation @FarmerJayhawk brought up?
I agree judges are yet another piece of that system needed major overhauls. I like term limits. What does “appointing on merit” look like?
Also, (note this is highly in jest and not meant to offend) what happened to no easy fixes?
Different aspects of the criminal justice system. Law enforcement generally deals with 4th and 5th amendment aspects of due process and the court system deals with the 6th and 8th amendments. Different areas of the system require different fixes.
To your last point, I never said anything about easy fixes. I said they wouldn’t happen overnight which is not the same thing.
-
@benshawks08 said in Racial Truths and Untruths and the Search for Justice while Doing Justice (previously titled To Infinity and Beyond):
Is five years long enough?
https://twitter.com/loneberrywang/status/1270087421531652104?s=21
That post gives zero context to those numbers so they’re not usable to support any position because it doesn’t break the numbers down by race/gender/jurisdiction of any other way to make a determination about anything. Did a city like St. Louis or Baltimore see a decrease in that 5 years because of changes made in the wake their incidents while another city saw an increase for some other reason? Those numbers are useless without context.
5 years is a good time frame to evaluate how effective reforms have been. Evaluate what’s worked, what hasn’t worked, what just needs slight tweaking to become effective and make appropriate changes to keep moving forward.
-
@benshawks08 said in Racial Truths and Untruths and the Search for Justice while Doing Justice (previously titled To Infinity and Beyond):
Is five years long enough?
https://twitter.com/loneberrywang/status/1270087421531652104?s=21
In short, this evidence is not causal at all and is subject to all sorts of interpretations. How well did individual officers adhere to new guidelines? Were there sanctions if officers didn’t follow the rules? Did the unions gain power during that time? We have 1000 possible confounds that make a causal interpretation impossible since we only have really two variables: policymakers saying new guidelines exist, and police shootings. We know nothing else about either variable from this tweet.
This is basically where my mind is at: https://reason.com/1969/11/01/the-cops-heroes-or-villains/ . We need a retaliatory force to correct acts of coercion criminals impose on victims. For example, if someone stole something of yours, there should be justice. This justice could be in terms of utility, the criminal steals my car, he goes to jail for as long as it takes for me to get a new one (in terms of utility). Or could be retribution, we as a society decide how long a car thief should be deprived of freedom for said act. If we attribute those same guidelines to cops (use coercion initiating violence) the officer should be held accountable. We expect our police (and courts) to act as the corrective force, that is to even the field between victim and perpetrator. Like it’s not a coercive act to take my car back from a car thief since it wasn’t the thief’s right to take my car. You can only be coerced if you had the right to the thing in the first place (like me and my car.)
-
I’m a little confused how canceling shows like cops and live PD are helping this cause. I don’t watch much tv but I enjoy those shows. If we continue to treat all cops as if they are bad and continue to cut funding, it will only make matters worse. Less training hours and low pay won’t fix anything. I read they are considering canceling Paw Patrol for having good cops, yes teaching all children cops are evil will pay dividends smh. There is little common sense or logic these days…
-
@kjayhawks wow, that’s dumb.
-
That’s just crazy, especially the Paw Patrol part. My 3 year old son is obsessed with the show and the toys…
-
@kjayhawks Like most things that create such reactions by Ted Cruz and company, the Paw Patrol cancellation is manufactured speculation. It is based on a NYT critic’s recounting of satirical comments made on the show’s website (the cop puppy is a “species traitor”?). She used those as a way to launch into a larger attack on TV cop shows (her commentary is a whole different level of overwrought, IMO). There is no announced plan to cancel it, and it did just get renewed.
https://decider.com/2020/06/11/is-paw-patrol-being-cancelled-protests/
-
Also:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-paw-patrol-get-canceled/
Surprise, Eric Trump & Dana Loesch are another source of the false rumor.
-
@kjayhawks said in Racial Truths and Untruths and the Search for Justice while Doing Justice (previously titled To Infinity and Beyond):
I’m a little confused how canceling shows like cops and live PD are helping this cause. I don’t watch much tv but I enjoy those shows. If we continue to treat all cops as if they are bad and continue to cut funding, it will only make matters worse. Less training hours and low pay won’t fix anything.
On the issue of TV shows, those shows were problematic because the police department that they filmed got to decide what got aired and how the video was cut. As a result, they could manipulate how they were being portrayed, and even had a say in whether or not things aired. It wasn’t as “real” as the shows advertised themselves to be.
As far as defunding, its really shifting funding away from police and into community redevelopment and mental health. Police Departments do not do a good job handling people that are mentally ill. All of the research says that. Most law enforcement groups agree. They are not designed to handle people with mental health issues because the whole idea of law enforcement is based on people understanding actions and consequences. If that isn’t present, law enforcement is not designed to respond.
There have been numerous incidents where police have injured or killed someone that was mentally ill because that person did not understand the officer’s commands, or even that the officer was law enforcement. While those situations are not the officer’s fault, it shows how much the system can fail if law enforcement tries to engage on mental health. It simply cannot work.
Moving law enforcement funds to mental health funding actually could save even more money because now you are treating people rather than just arresting them and having them in jail, where they injure themselves and others, require extra monitoring, damage property, etc.
Putting funds back into community development and youth programs can make a huge difference in deterring kids away from some of those initial issues like trespassing and vandalism that are typically the result of bored kids out running around. Again, this could result in savings because instead of having to imprison and monitor, you just have programs that kids and young adults can participate in.
The funds that get moved could end up being twice as effective as just leaving them in the police budget. There is research out there that early childhood and youth programs cut crime rates later by a significant percentage. If that is true, every dollar you spend on early childhood saves you money later on. So dumping $100M into those types of programs now may result in $5-$10M in savings in the future (i.e., money not spent on additional programs or policing later). That is a huge benefit for society overall. And your taxes may go down, too.
-
@mayjay said in Racial Truths and Untruths and the Search for Justice while Doing Justice (previously titled To Infinity and Beyond):
Also:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-paw-patrol-get-canceled/
Surprise, Eric Trump & Dana Loesch are another source of the false rumor.
That’s what I hate most about liberals. Everything about them is a lie.
Edit: This was meant to be a play on words, but I realize it sounds too much like an illogical fallacy someone might actually use. Oh well. Imagine, some day returning to a place where we can agree on what is absurd.
-
@justanotherfan you bring some fair points about a mental health team and I think that’s a good idea but their is plenty of police brutality that doesn’t involve folks with mental issues. It’s like the guy Home Depot not knowing crap about home improvement because he makes $8 an hour and has no training. Leading police down that same path will only make matters worse. Acting as if all police officers are bad is the same as someone saying all white people are rednecks and all African Americans all gangsters. We cant judge people by race, religion, occupation and sex. All kinds of people are evil my friend. In term of the cops and live pd, of coarse it’s edited. But I still have no idea how it helps the cause in this case. I think helps show people some of the issue police face in the field.
-
-
@mayjay could be untrue here is one article from New York Times https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/10/arts/television/protests-fictional-cops.html
-
@kjayhawks That is the article I referenced as using the satire about Paw Patrol to attack TV cop dramas (and Brooklyn 99 for that matter). She does NOT say PP is cancelled.
-
@mayjay right, it was just some info on it and I wasn’t meaning it was canceled but rather people are supposedly calling for it to be.
-
The argument is not that police are all bad. As you very correctly point out, that type of broad generalization is quite silly. The argument is that the system is flawed.
Let’s move to a sports analogy to make that point. Referees are required to enforce the rules of the game. If the rule is bad, then even if a referee makes the correct call, they may put a player or team at a disadvantage not because they themselves are biased, but because the rule is flawed.
We have seen the issues the NFL has had with the catch/no catch ruling for years as they have defined and re-defined what a catch is. Because of this, there have been a lot of issues with those rulings over time, often resulting in a disadvantage as a result of rule application.
We have seen the same thing with slow motion review of targeting, which has caused a few ejections at the NCAA level based on the slow motion review, even though no penalty was called on the field because of the speed of the play. The referee in those cases wasn’t biased. They just didn’t see targeting, so they didn’t call it, but the technical, by the book application of the rule when put in super slow motion required that a player be ejected. Happened to KU last season. The official wasn’t out to get KU. But that rule requires that application, and because it is reviewable, you can get that result. That is a systemic flaw. No matter who you get as an official, you cannot change that result without changing the underlying rule because the RULE is the problem, not the way it is being enforced.
The same issue exists with law enforcement. There are foundational, systemic flaws. Even if we eliminated or mitigated every personal bias in the individuals that are officers, we would still have problems because the system itself is biased and flawed.
-
https://www.foxnews.com/us/nyc-shoving-suspect-woman-92
I’m sure racism caused this.
-
-
-
@Crimsonorblue22 Another version, if accurate, might give context to why the officer took the approach he did:
-
@mayjay that is my problem with the media, they push whatever they can regardless if it’s half the story or even true. The media continues to attempt to divide us.
-
@mayjay that wasn’t out there when I read it. I saw a video of a male officer talking to them where it happened and where the BB gun was found. I thought he did a good job of trying to teach them how much that BB gun looked like the real thing and they could’ve been hurt really bad.
-
@kjayhawks I don’t think so. This version came out after all the angry posts reacting to the bystanders’ video. The police released their version quickly. But the media there published it quickly, too. I see no manipulation by the media. This story was driven by social media.
In the past, police never felt much need to give their version, and if a video was provided it was often delayed for months and edited. Only with the prevalence of cell phone cameras have we started seeing versions other than the official ones.
The media are not at fault for the suspicions of the police. That is on the cops, the prosecutors, and police unions that reflexively protect even murderous cops
-
@Crimsonorblue22 His feeling of vulnerability while waiting for backup unfortunately kept the situation highly charged because he kept his weapon out without any explanation, and it looked like if the kids made a mistake by moving improperly another tragedy would have occurred. A good reason cops should not patrol alone.
-
@mayjay the guy I saw was at the Lil convenience store.
-
@mayjay was that a gal or a guy? I don’t want to watch it again.
-
@mayjay if you go down further on the comments there’s a video at the convenience Store.
-
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1231189
Warped and ridiculous.
-
Those mobs of roaming white kids … oh wait, 13% of the population but nearly every time this happens, well, BLM. Yet so we’re not racist, we should act as if groups of black kids aren’t threats. Even though we see repeated incidents of this.
“I don’t know what else I could do," he told KTRK-TV. “The fifth one at the end came out of the store after purchasing goods, and came up to me and kicked me in the face and said, ‘Black Lives Matter, [expletive].’”
https://www.foxnews.com/ I us/group-brutally-attacks-customer-outside-texas-convenience-store-video-shows
-
A succinct summary of some of the cases giving rise to the current protests:
-
Sad, but also sad that other races suffer the same fate.
Obviously … except to the leftist … if police were not forced to have high numbers of police in inner city black areas, then the contact between blacks and the police would be less, per capita.
But the leftist sees only racism and not a broader view of cause and effect.
-
@HighEliteMajor Well one this is for certain: We are going to have a whole radically new pile of data to analyze shortly.
-
@approxinfinity True … this is insanity. https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/29328113/oklahoma-state-mike-gundy-accused-using-racial-slur-1989-game
Heck, 31 years ago? This is the lead story at ESPN.com. The lead story.
And we see the further movements to tearing down monuments to HISTORY? I mean the NEGRO league hall of fame remains open. No name change. Why? It’s HISTORY. We can’t change history. Doesn’t mean certain things are celebrated. They are remembered, good, bad, indifferent.
Should we hold a long stranding grudge against the Japanese because they thought they were superior to us, bombed and killed thousands of Americans, and started the pacific war?
Well, if we hold that grudge or an old World War II vet might still call them Japs, well he’s an old racist that can’t let things go. I heard a discussion on that a while back.
-
@HighEliteMajor said in Racial Truths and Untruths and the Search for Justice while Doing Justice (previously titled To Infinity and Beyond):
@approxinfinity True … this is insanity. https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/29328113/oklahoma-state-mike-gundy-accused-using-racial-slur-1989-game
Heck, 31 years ago? This is the lead story at ESPN.com. The lead story.
And we see the further movements to tearing down monuments to HISTORY? I mean the NEGRO league hall of fame remains open. No name change. Why? It’s HISTORY. We can’t change history. Doesn’t mean certain things are celebrated. They are remembered, good, bad, indifferent.
Should we hold a long stranding grudge against the Japanese because they thought they were superior to us, bombed and killed thousands of Americans, and started the pacific war?
Well, if we hold that grudge or an old World War II vet might still call them Japs, well he’s an old racist that can’t let things go. I heard a discussion on that a while back.
Yes, we should tear down monuments to traitors who decided America wasn’t good enough because you couldn’t keep another man as your property. We don’t have a monument to the pilots who bombed Pearl Harbor. And we shouldn’t have monuments to traitors that weren’t built until the most racist President we may have ever had’s(Wilson) administration.
-
@FarmerJayhawk I like your limited thinking there. I think your reply defines the difference between rational debate and idiocy.
We can debate General Lee. And monuments. But I ain’t debating George Washington.
And I ain’t cancelling Dukes of Hazard because blacks or leftist are offended by a flag on a car.
Idiocy vs. reasonable discussion.
-
@HighEliteMajor said in Racial Truths and Untruths and the Search for Justice while Doing Justice (previously titled To Infinity and Beyond):
@FarmerJayhawk I like your limited thinking there. I think your reply defines the difference between rational debate and idiocy.
We can debate General Lee. And monuments. But I ain’t debating George Washington.
And I ain’t cancelling Dukes of Hazard because blacks or leftist are offended by a flag on a car.
Idiocy vs. reasonable discussion.
Where did I mention Washington? That’s one of my favorites in DC. I specifically said CONFEDERATES. We shouldn’t glorify people who fought a war over whether you should be able to own people. Full stop. I protested and advocated Silent Sam on UNC’s campus to come down since it glorified the Confederacy and was financially a big drain on the university. You can say whatever you want and call me a leftist (which is a lie) but I don’t see what’s controversial about taking down monuments to traitors.
-
I dont think we should have statues up that are reminders to 10.3% of the population that their ancestors were brought here as slaves, and that they and their descendents have been treated as subhuman by many.
Replace it with something less offensive. The reasoning to keep them up at this point is weak. This isn’t a slippery slope. Let’s get past the past.
-
Regarding the negro league hall of fame, sure… take the statues down and throw them in a museum. I’m all for that. They don’t need to be prominently displayed in downtown Richmond.
I think re: your point @HighEliteMajor , a museum is a more appropriate venue for contemplating the good and bad of history. Monuments are for heroes.
-
It is highly encouraging to see that some people have come so far in their understanding, shaking off the virulent hatred of their childhoods. A testament to human potential.
“George Wallace’s daughter reflects on current racial unrest: ‘America is hurting’” https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/18/politics/peggy-wallace-kennedy-bash-intv/index.html
-
Ja Morant recently asked Murray, KY where he played his college ball at to remove a statue of Robert E. Lee in town. My first reaction was why did that town even have a Lee statue to begin with. For those unaware of US history, Kentucky was one of four states where slavery was legal, but voted against secession from the US and remained part of the Union during the Civil War. The other 3 states were Delaware, Maryland, and Missouri. A group of counties in northwestern Virginia refused to follow the rest of the state also voted against secession from the United States and created the new state of West Virginia and fought on the side of the Union during the Civil War.
Why would a state that sided with the Union during the Civil War vote to put up a statue of a man who committed treason against them?
Tear the statues down and put them in museums somewhere to teach the true history of the south in the Civil War, not the bastardized version that southern states try to teach. Most states, including Texas still try to push the narrative of States’ Rights being the biggest factor in secession which is an absolute lie. Specifically, southern states didn’t want the federal government making laws restricting slavery which obviously pissed the south off and so they went and tried and failed to gain their independence from the US.
-
@Texas-Hawk-10 said:
Specifically, southern states didn’t want the federal government making laws restricting slavery…
And not just in the South. With the Fugitive Slave Act and the Dred Scott decision, the southern states obtained the power to force free states to return escaped slaves, and for slavers to take their slaves wherever they wanted. Effectively exporting slavery throughout the nation, and severely curtailing free states’ own state sovereignty.
-
@mayjay Don’t get me going on Roger Taney and the Dred Scott case. That was the absolute worst ruling our Supreme Court has ever made.
Lincoln is also the most overrated president to me. Not enough people understand Lincoln’s views on black people and he probably would not be viewed as favorably as he is if it was more well known he wasn’t an abolitionist, initially he just wanted to contain slavery to states it ready existed in and had no plans to abolish slavery initially. Not enough people also realize the Emancipation Proclamation was purely a political ploy to get reelected because of how unpopular the Civil War was in the north and that it didn’t actually free anybody. It only freed slaves in territories considered to be in rebellion (Confederate held areas) and didn’t apply to slaves in the Border States of Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, or West Virginia who all stayed with the Union or to parts of the Confederacy the Union had already gained control of such as Tennessee and a big chunk of Louisiana.
Lincoln also didn’t believe black and white people could ever coexist and was a big proponent of the Liberia Plan which was a plan to send freed blacks to a colony created for freed slaves in Liberia.
-
@HighEliteMajor none of this happens now without the backdrop of COVID. The Gundy story wouldn’t be on the frontpage because there would be sports going on, but also because the Black Lives Matter resurgence is reigniting in a tinderbox moment.
My point is ESPN doesn’t have a whole lot more relevant sports material right now, unless you want them all in on Bundesliga (I’m game). It would be great if going after Zion didn’t conflict with their own interests.
If you’re saying ESPN is garbage, I’m with you. They have been garbage for years. Fat and lazy. I’m just curious what you think should be on the front page.
-
@approxinfinity I eat lunch from 11:30 - 12:30 most days, and usually I eat out. Before all this started, ESPN was constantly regurgitating their hero Kaepernick. It was constant on the TV during this time … Bob Ley or some other host. Constant. They got stupid stuff like the “Undefeated” where all they do is talk about racial B.S. constantly. ESPN is garbage.
@Texas-Hawk-10 You don’t know much about the Supreme Court. And it’s just foolish to talk about Lincoln like that. Really idiocy. Lincoln’s actions preserved the nation. Get that? You hear that? PRESERVED THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. I don’t care whether he really thought this, or something was a political ploy, etc. It all pales in comparison to perhaps the greatest achievement a president has accomplished.
Most overrated? Perhaps the most stupid thing I’ve seen posted in while. Please take it back.
It’s like saying Franklin Roosevelt was overrated. Heck, folks say he was racist. Didn’t invite Jesse Owens to the White House, while inviting others. But guess what … the guy won WW II. Lincoln saved the country as well.
http://new.wymaninstitute.org/2019/07/facing-up-to-fdrs-racism/
