薔薇語

The chief of police, asked about the lack of violent response (sorry, "escalation of force") by the riot police, said "there were 13, 14, and 15 year-old kids out there, do you want us to shoot them?" He has a point. Also, escalation of force almost never leads to de-escalation of conflict. It feels reckless and unjust, but waiting it out was a smarter move. Doing what they did very likely saved lives and property and let tonight be a quiet night in my city. If the guys with the truncheons are not beating people, trust that they have good reason to do so. Truncheons love working, and it is hard to hold them at your side without finding something to hit with them.

The police had themselves a very own sugar daddy?

I saw that yesterday. Cops managed to go from finally acting like decent human beings to petty and alienating jerks. Lesson to learn: just like with your boss, let the fat and pathetic cops win. At least he didn't get shot for 'resisting arrest' or other fake charge. Imagine if this kid was at work and got dragged out just satisfy some cop's ego. That could have been the end of his job. Those cops ought to be fired.
 
La Rose.

Taxes on cigarettes are so high that some places sell under the counter cigarettes without tax. The NYPD have made it a priority to raid suspected businesses and cease the money for department use. This cop decided he didn't want to share it with his fellow theives/cops and kept it. The cops also ceased 600 'legally'.
 
La Rose.

I wish you would cease using the word "cease" when you mean "seize."
 
Lucius Alexander
 
I didn't understand what you were saying until a palindromedary explained it to me

Read a story yesterday that Arizona governor has just signed a law that will make it so that assets seized will not remain the police department's property unless a guilty verdict. I can still see ways to abuse, but that should have been the way all along.

/grouphug

Is so. 

First, I agree that the new board system does not allow for great quoting. But Cest la vie. 
 
No one likes admitting they are wrong. But to bring that up as a charge against me, a person who has publicly come out and done so on a number of occasions is an attack on my character that is not justified in the least bit. I do admit when I am wrong and do issue apologies in accordance. So please try to understand why I think that comment was wholly inappropriate and offensive - especially coming from someone who was the benefactor of a public apology not too long ago. 
 
I think the problem here is that you think the corruption is limited to "certain areas" but it doesn't seem to be. We have various state, county, and local police official doing bad things. Forces that represent major metropolitan areas and rural areas like mine. There is no linking theme between corruptions other than 'police'. 
 
The low income black community of Ferguson was subject to wide scale corruption. 
 
The high income college town I am from is subject to it. 
 
The state highway patrol of California (where they steal nude and simi-nude photos of traffic violaters to later be sent out) is subject to it. 
 
The Blue collar, rock and roll loving people of Cleveland are subject to it. 
 
The super lib city of Portland is subject to it. 
 
And of course every major city in the US is subject to it. 
 
This isn't a "well, it is just some isolated groups" kind of thing. It is widespread and doesn't seem to be limited to any particular demographic short of "police". 
 
La Rose. 

E84: "Man, you have to split a lot of hairs to keep your prejudices looking clean. I believe you that most guys don't go raping people. I also believe the vast majority of cops aren't suspect. Clearly you disagree there but I can give you just as many acts of civilian on civilian brutality"

Me: Again, apples to oranges. But feel free to list examples of jerks being jerks. I don't mind. But that isn't the point. The point is that the people we have put into position of authority seem to have a rampant disconnect from the very people they are meant to be protecting. Be it all the instances of harassment, racial discrimination (and other forms), the inclination towards violence, including deadly force, or of actually raping people and all the cover ups that go along with it. In my hometown alone there was a story of the prosecutor dilberately going after a guy and putting him in jail for 25 years with the help of the police because they needed someone to blame and didn't care who. And they KNEW he was innocent. In my hometown alone it was revealed recently that the police had been deliberately expanding on their budget using civil forfeiture for years and actually budget in accordance with the idea they will steal X million dollars a year from people. In my hometown alone we had to institute new regs on police because they were caught tazing old women to death. In my hometown alone we have had issues with cops stealing money from houses when they do crime scene investigations. I can remember when we got a new police chief and he had to rewrite and enforce driving rules because cops would constantly do 20 to 40 miles over the speed limit in their patrol cars even when NOT going to a crime scene. I had plenty of interactions with cops. And with the exception of one guy, they all seemed like overgrown bullies who were a single step away from snapping and had no regard for the laws. And my hometown is a fairly small and liberal college town. For there to be so many instances of police overstepping, corruptions, and generally bad behavior, is a sign that the culture of policing must be in part to blame. 

E84: "And again, even if I had a personal experience with a dirty cop I've had personal experiences with three rape victims (2 female, 1 male) I've had personal experiences with numerous thieves..."
 
Me: And I have had experiences with several rape victims, too. I am thankful that I don't know any rapists or thieves first hand, though. But that has no connection to whether or not police can be trusted. Again, Apples to oranges. 
 
But at least we can both agree that Limp Bizcuit fans are weird. 

La Rose. 

Geez, did he then throw his gun down, rip off his shirt, and give a bellow of victory? Or did he coolly blow the smoke off the muzzle and then twirl the gun as he reholstered? What a badass. /sarcasm.
 
 

Dude's a walking John Woo film.

Vondy: 
 
"My read of your remarks on Ferguson remains that they are largely speculation and guess-work. Why? Because, there is no way to prove your assertions"

No, the Ferguson issue is not speculation. The way the prosecutor handled the situation is public knowledge. Please feel free to look into this a bit more. Among the most dissettling things is the 'info dump' he did on the Grand Jury. He bombarded them with documents without end expecting them to be able to make sense of it all. Why would a prosecutor who's sole job is to present the State's best case do that? Because he doesn't want it to get past the grand jury. He was reportedly soft handed with the officer and harsh on anyone who, you know, would prove his case. Rather than be quick and concise with his proceeding, he dragged it on longer than normal so as to tire out the jurors. He mixed in all competing forensic reports so as to cast doubt on the situation. Basically the man did everything he could to ruin the state's case at the Grand Jury - he purposely failed at his own job! And he has a history of this. 
 
So, Vondy, you will excuse me if I think your out of hand dismissal of me and this position scream of a level of arrogance and close mindedness unbecoming of you. 
 
 
Vondy:

"When its my local / regional news I'll huff and I'll puff and invest in strongly held opinions and take action. In these two cases, its simply not my place. Based on your location information..."

Vondy, I get it, you and I have never met face to face so I can't expect you to remember where I am from. But before you do the laziest of checks to just realize I live in Japan, try and think back a bit more or do the due diligence of asking me. Ferguson is a lazy drive away from my home. Missouri is where I was born and it is the place I love. When there are troubles in Missouri, there are troubles in my back yard. 

Also, might I add that the level of cognitive dissidence you seem to be enjoying while making such statements is a bit disconcerting. An expat who commonly made comments about the US and its internal and external affairs should not be telling others to stick to their own homes. 
 
Moveover, injustice knows no home. It is not something to be left unspoken just because it happens at your neighbor's and not your own home. That is the kind of willful blindness and abhorrent tolerance that leads us to not get involved when people are being slaughtered in other nations. And despite the three monkeys best attempts, choosing to ignore injustice does not make it go away. 
 
 
As to your last point about being a regionalist, it has no connection to what I have said. I believe in regional governership more than most on these boards most likely, but that isn't the point here. I am not staying that the solution to this problem is somehow external intervention. I am saying that there is a problem - a pan-America problem. One that must be talked about. One that must be addressed. And one that must be solved. 

Everyday a cop kills at least one citizen in the US. Cops have taken up this horrid "us vs them" mentality that we even try to train our soldier to not do. Why do we let the people who are sworn to protect the public treat us like the enemy and behave as if they live in a war zone? There are places in the US where death by Cop outnumbers death by gangs for heaven's sake. We have cops who steal our money, molest and rape people, brutalize people, and kill us without repercussion. This is not an acceptable thing. And our only recourse seem to be to rely on a corrupt justice system that favors our occupiers over the citizenry. 

This is an unacceptable situation and it must end. 

La Rose.

Vondy, you clearly don't hold to that view so what inspires it now? Surely anyone could look back on your posts and find you commenting on subject to which your view will have no impact. Thus, that reason is not likely to be a driving rule to guide your decisions on whether or not to comment here.
 
No, we comment to share and belong. We comment because it is human nature to be want to be a member of a group, and part and parcle with that is reflection and commentary on issues relevant to that group.
 
Moreover, I reject your claim that it will have no impact. By airing our griefs we encourage others to do the same by proxy. And it is that discussion that produces change.
 
La Rose.

Probably not all. Then again, I note the unity that police departments present when one of their number commits an egregious offense like murdering someone for selling cigarettes. Blue line indeed. It's remarkable.

I had a different reaction, of eerie familiarity. I think I've read things like this, 30-40 years ago. This kind of piece is not helpful, it provides no insights that the people being complained about might learn from and resolve to become better people or stop something they hadn't recognized was a very common problem. This is an all-Y-are just conflict-oriented jerks puff piece, broad strokes Paint Those People Bad, when what they Really Ought To Do Is Cave In Immediately.
 
Used to be women shut men men down with "insensitive". Happened so often it was a stereotype. One size fits all, play that card and you win the debate, and everyone on your side of the Great Divide nodded and added murmurs of support without having to know anything about the actual personal dynamics of the situation.
 
So (if I have the sense of the complaint right) after two generations, men learned the tactic, found a descriptive word that in a cartoon world globally fit the adversary, and turned the tables on the situation, apparently. Gosh, how unfair and inappropriate You-Must-Stop-That-Immediately.

I'd agree with you but I don't want to get shot.

While we're looking at videos, here's a very recent one which speaks directly to the issue of resisting arrest.
 

 
And another on the subject of dealing with police.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

http://truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/paramilitary-force-alert-nypd-commissioner-bratton-supports-making-resisting-arrest-a-felony/19144-paramilitary-force-alert-nypd-commissioner-bratton-supports-making-resisting-arrest-a-felony

Just when i think i'm too burned out to continue caring, fecal matter of this nature lands squarely at my feet and splashes up to hit me in the face.

Because men in real life dislike shirts!
 

 
And pants, too, apparently!
 

 
Yeah, I always like to open my shirt and strike a pose when I kiss my lady!
 

 
Wait a minute -- that man has no head!
 

 
But the lantern jaw of justice cannot be denied...
 

 
Goose. Gander.

People like sex appeal. Not just us men. Women, too. One of the things that bothers me about this "controversy" is that its all about the male gaze and paints men as "salivating sexist pigs" and women as virginal and almost asexual victims. When I game with women the first thing they ask about male NPCs is what they look like -- with a notable interest in whether they are fit, hot, handsome, distinguished, etc. They want adjectives -- and they want them bodice ripper style. There is also a female gaze.
 
Romance novels have depictions of men that are just as viscerally sexual as any comic cover. Frequently the men;s faces aren't even depicted -- just his broad shoulders, deep chest, ahd hard-cut physique pressed against a gorgeously coiffed and couture'd lady whose face you can see! She's a person -- he's a rutting bull for her pleasure. His face doesn't matter. Talk about objectification.
 
Go to a romance publisher and tell them the depiction of men is sexist and objectifies us and needs to be changed and see what happens. The mostly female editors and publishes will laugh you right out of their offices -- the marketing works and the few men who read them aren't their target market share. But games and comics -- which cater to a predominantly male market -- have to change? Money talks, ideological hot air walks. This entire discussion is rooted in an expletive double-standard. What's good for the goose is good for the gander!
 
Our society -- especially feminist activists -- doesn't like to admit that the ladies are after the same thing in their preferred mediums as the men are in theirs. Evolutionary psychology makes them more selective about who they mate with -- but they do like their beefcake. We like the cheesecake. What's the beef? 'm not starting a tempest in a teapot over the female gaze. The ladies want some titration? More power to them. Life is too short. This is definitively a first world problem.
 
I don't have an issue with female heroines having sex appeal or being depicted as sexual beings. Male superheroes are beefcake in improbably poses, too -- I mean, how many of us guys look like yoga-master guidos posing for a Mr. Universe competition?  I do, however, have a problem with it being badly done and overdone and ridiculously done, which it frequently is. Some taste and context and restraint would be make the "hot people doing cool things" subtext more enjoyable. Let's at least bring our hormones into adulthood!
 
Gamergate and cheesecake comic covers? These are tempests in a teapot that smack of Victorian sexual mores served neat.

Kids aren't scared they will go to jail, they are scared the will go to a morgue.
 
La Rose.

Kids aren't scared they will go to jail, they are scared the will go to a morgue.
 
La Rose.

Grand juror in Missouri police shooting case sues prosecutor by Reuters.
 
This is an interesting little article and situation. 
 
La Rose. 

Kids aren't scared they will go to jail, they are scared the will go to a morgue.
 
La Rose.

Saw this, and I just had to shake my head at how tone deaf it seemed.  What about telling them to be careful about keeping their hands empty and in full view with no sudden movements so you don't just shoot them, officer? should we tell them that?