The Goat Pen

I don't doubt that some will suffer a disproportionate response and I hope they survive the encounter - but in the bigger picture, they'll add fuel to the cause - its time for a policy change that addresses police interaction with the public - and if it requires a federal response, so be it (just don't let Obama do it, he'll fuck it up as sure as the day is long).

My biggest problem with cops right now is not that they got off - that is a matter of policy and a sympathetic legislative branch, but there are too many innocent people dying and the worst part is the police show little remorse. In their eyes, when it comes to defending a fellow cop, there are no innocent victims.

Garner, the kid holding a bb gun, the dude shot in the stairwell, the guy at walmart - in the eyes of the police, everyone of them did something to contribute to their death - and people are going to start demanding that they say "our actions contributed to their death". Right now they won't even do that and I agree it has to be maddening for the black community to see it every day. Unfortunately for the black community for every cop that kills an innocent there are probably 50 black on black violent crimes that result in death that somewhat marginalizes the impact of the event.

My wife and two of my kids are roaming the streets of manhattan today and tomorrow. I'm guessing this tension is not happening around Broadway...

A former Baltimore policeman weighs in.

-------

"When I was a police officer in Baltimore, I would drive around and put out one brush fire after another. It would have been easy to be overwhelmed by the lives broken by repeated bad choices, by the mentally ill, the children who grow up without hope, another murder victim, the literal stink of society's least wanted and the sheer magnitude of human idiocy.

As to police danger, it shouldn't be overstated (police officers are paranoid enough as is), but the danger isn't just in the small though real risk of being attacked and killed. What screws with your head is the constant occupational demand of hyper alertness -- of having to engage with and confront danger, and always on danger's terms.

When I cleared a drug corner, sometimes I couldn't help but wonder why the dealers didn't just jump me. Effective compliance is as much earned as ordered, but I don't think they obeyed me because they liked me (at least I hope not). Bluster aside, my job and safety depended on respect and deference to my authority"
------------------


Felons arrested in the course of a year outnumber active duty police in New York 14:1

What keeps chaos from ensuing is not the thin blue line - its the idea that the American public will support the thin blue line in their actions to keep that line in place.

Are we close to a tipping point? I don't think so, but I believe we are very close to substantial policy change that police will feel limits their ability ro maintain order while at the same time increasing their chances of being hurt or killed on the job - and they will fight it - and the public will perceive it as the police seeing themselves not as part of the civilian population but as a military force who holds the public in contempt.

sardis wrote:My wife and two of my kids are roaming the streets of manhattan today and tomorrow. I'm guessing this tension is not happening around Broadway...

Not for them nor about them, that's for sure.

The funny thing is, the rates of police being killed in duty is the lowest since 1887 (2013 stats). Also, this year (DeBlasio's first year as Mayor) NYC has a lower crime rate than the year prior (Bloomberg's final year as Mayor).

The PBA narrative is not lining up with reality...but narratives have always been stronger than reality. The only time it has not been is with math. No one believes math, though.

"My wife and two of my kids are roaming the streets of manhattan today and tomorrow. I'm guessing this tension is not happening around Broadway..."

The MIF and I are going up the day after Christmas for a long weekend as well. Thing is, there was a time, and not too long ago, that you could get a hooker or any manner of drugs very easily on Broadway (around 42nd St.) and that wasn't really even the "bad" part of town (lower east side was a bunch of burned out shells that would make a bad neighborhood in Detroit seem fancy). And most white folks wouldn't dream of venturing into Harlem (as James Bond found out in Live and Let Die). I'm sure there are many factors that account for the transformation of Manhattan in a relatively short period of time, and while a drug and whore tourist like myself may be somewhat ambivalent about it, I bet most of the locals prefer the adult Disney World of today to the Beruit of just 30 or 40 years ago...

This isn't the scene I was thinking of, Harlem doesn't look too bad here, but this scene does illustrate the point that Live and Let Die was basically a blaxploitation movie - actually a blaxploitation movie that also manages to sass southern rednecks as well. Pretty nice trick...

[youtube]UdjwKKDPpUU[/youtube]

in all instances the police were clear in what they wanted the subject to do and in all instances the subjects refused/did not comply

not complying with the law will get you shot/hurt/arrested etc

and thats the way it needs to be. without our police having these liberties we have anarchy.

sad part is the media will tire of the 2 cops deaths long before it tires of mentioning garner, young and rice

There are a couple of good scenes in Sid and Nancy as well that depict the lower east side in all its glory, circa 1979...

crashcourse wrote:in all instances the police were clear in what they wanted the subject to do and in all instances the subjects refused/did not comply

not complying with the law will get you shot/hurt/arrested etc

and thats the way it needs to be. without our police having these liberties we have anarchy.

sad part is the media will tire of the 2 cops deaths long before it tires of mentioning garner, young and rice

Tamir Rice. John Crawford III. What compliance did they not adhere to? It's on film. 2 seconds on the former, less than that on the latter before shots fired. It's statements like that teach me a lot about the mindset of people, so that is helpful, in a way.

"not complying with the law will get you shot/hurt/arrested etc

and thats the way it needs to be. without our police having these liberties we have anarchy."

Well, the police are certainly counting on that kind of attitude from the public. But the fact is, they are supposed to be public servants, not some "force" that is supposed to be automatically obeyed no matter what they see fit to ask or do. They are supposed to be protecting a citizens rights against, e.g., unlawful search and seizure, not abridging them. If they are asking you to do something that they are manifestly not legally mandated to ask you, you have every right to refuse. The idea that everyone should automatically obey anything a cop asks of you is just not right. I won't go so far as to say that such an attitude would lead to a communist police state, but at the same time, I think it is a gross overstatement to say that questioning or not obeying cops in every situation will lead to anarchy...

^This

crashcourse wrote:in all instances the police were clear in what they wanted the subject to do and in all instances the subjects refused/did not comply

not complying with the law will get you shot/hurt/arrested etc

and thats the way it needs to be.

wrong

I will only read crashcourse's writings in their original German.

I dont know about crawford but Tamir Rice was asked to show his hands three times and did not. tamir rice was identified on a phone call as waving a gun scaring people on the 911 phone call. garner was told to put his hands on his ahead and all he did was resist

are you telling me what garner did was ok? should he have been shot--no and he wouldnt have if he would have complied

are you telling me what the Tamir Rice did was ok? should he have been shot--no and he wouldnt have if he would have complied

are you telling me what michael young did was ok? should he have been shot--no and he wouldnt have if he would have complied

each of those three instances was immedately siezed on by the press and the last 3-4 months have been nothing but racial inflammation and cops have been villainized

most of you know 99.8 % of public/police interactions is fine. the other .2% goes into the gray area when the subjects dont do what the police ask/tell them to do. without the respect and yes even some of the intimidation police have to use you drift into anarchy. just like you respect and are sometimes intimidated by your father i think you do the same with the police.

1,163,146 violent crimes in this country last year and all we are concentrating on is villifying those who are in charge of protecting us

there are some very bad hostile drug addicted mentally ill people who everyear take 50 plus cops lives in the line of duty.

I'd like to see any of you do any better

Garner was selling "loosies" - something that happens on every single street corner in an urban area. 99.99% of cops do a "move along" if they do anything at all. The fine is the same one they issue for having an illegal lemonade stand.

Garner wasn't gonna run away if you want to arrest him. And if the cops decide to go all "RULES ARE RULES!" on him, an outlawed chokehold to the pavement is like using a nuke on a jaywalker.

Son, we live in a world that has streets, and those streets have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. BKLYN/Hodge? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Garner, and you curse the police. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Garners/Youngs's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that street, you need me on that street. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post.

And the issue with the police that we're talking about is with these specific cases. Not being outraged about these actions because the majority of cops are better than these misses the point. Everyone knows you'll get a bad actor in any sufficiently large group. The issue is that people who brush off actions, won't indict, let the police investigate their own abuses, then brush it under the rug, and proudly proclaim that we should all mind our overlords in blue.

NPR had a nice piece on a case that illustrates the above. I'll see if I can find it.

I'm not saying they didnt fuck up with garner

I am saying the entire garner/young has led to a media crucifixion of our police and those 2 cops were killed in direct response joining 50 other cops who died vilently at the hands of another last year. there have been 3 cops killed within 15 miles of my work in the last 2 years. 2 in a grocery store parking lot ambush and one on a routine traffic stop by a crackhead refusing to ever go back to jail

all garner had to do was put his hands on his head like he was asked. do you believe he should have not done that even if it was making a ,mountain out of a molehill?

Here is the NPR piece, which gets to the crux of the problem for all. Worth a listen: