bbauska

You can try to conflate this into a racial issue. To me, it is not one. I don't care what color Wilson or Brown is. I just want to have justice done.
One man and a police officer had an altercation and the man died. Now lets find out what happened

.
If you don't know what happened how do you know its not a racial issue?

I presume by your attitude, you don't think that there is a racial bias in the way policing is done in most of the US?
The numbers don';t seem to agree. We could look at the disproportionate numbers of blacks who serve prison time after being charged with drug offences versus the percentage of whites who seve time for similar charges . We could look at the disproportionate number of "stops" done on blacks versus white...
This case in Missouri revolves directly about the disproportionate number of blacks shot by police...And there's a lot of evidence that indicates that it isn't blowing things out of proportion to suggest that black men are at risk in encounters with police.

Previous attempts to analyze racial bias in police shootings have arrived at similar conclusions. In 2007, ColorLines and the Chicago Reporter investigated fatal police shootings in 10 major cities, and found that there were a disproportionately high number of African Americans among police shooting victims in every one, particularly in New York, San Diego, and Las Vegas

.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... -black-men

bbauska

He did want a color blind society, but did not live to see it. Sadly we are not there, but continuing to take race as a major reason for your actions is not a way to make strides to what Reverend King dreamed of.

You can't ignore reality and expect things to change. The first thing you have to accept is that there is discrimination occuring before one can begin to take steps to change.
Because King made an incredible speech, and the US elected a black president doesn't mean that discrimination has died.
Its all well and good to want to wait for the results of an investigation....for this one incident. But if the overwhelming evidence is then ignored and the situation continues, how should black people react? In Missouri thir first nonviolent protests were met with violence from the police similar to what the freedom riders experienced.
Think the Missouri cops were thinking about Kings word's then?

You'll note also BBauska that I think that thre are two other issues other than race involved. The biggest problem is the prevalence of guns. The third problem is the militarizarion of the police and the substandard training of police for community polciing and dealing with the mentally ill.
I suppose I'm blowing those out of proportion too...
Its been a week since the shooting. In most instances there would be charges laid by now, if the evidence pointed to culpability. With police shootings these things don't happen often.
Perhaps having police wear video/audio recording devices that record every moment of their patrol would change some behaviours that lead to violent confrontations. ...
http://alumni.berkeley.edu/california-m ... aring-body

I am not saying the residents are turning or not turning this into a race issue. I am saying that you and Danivon have, and I do not intend to make it one. What others chose to think is their choice.

As for militarization of police departments, I have said that I agree with Rand Paul's position on that. Perhaps you missed that as you were skimming what others write.

bbauska wrote:Not claiming any high ground. Just asked a question that you chose to avoid. Let me re-ask it.
"Who is more concerned with race?"

Ask it all you like. It's the wrong question.

As for Reverend King;
He did want a color blind society, but did not live to see it. Sadly we are not there, but continuing to take race as a major reason for your actions is not a way to make strides to what Reverend King dreamed of.

And ignoring it completely when it's still an issue is just naive.

danivon wrote:Not saying it is true just that is the basis of the dichotomy.

It's not really true, at least not from what I've seen. Teachers may only be seen to work school hours but do have to do a lot before and afterwards. And most teachers I know (admittedly it may be cushier in the US) also work summertimes as well.[/quote]

I know how much teacher's work during the school year. I am married to one.

However, teachers do not work during the summer. The starting salary for a first year teacher in my home school district (not the one my wife works) is $40,000 a year. The salary for a person teaching 15 years can make $95,000 a year. They get paid year round. So there is no need for them to take a summer job anymore.

While some might go in a few days during the summer to prep their classroom for the next year, they do not work anything close to full time schedules.

There is also the thing about striking. I do not think there is a state that allows the police or fire to strike. If there is a contract dispute, it is handled via binding arbitration. By contrast, I believe there are a number of states that still allow teachers to strike. I know PA does but NJ does not. Teachers strikes do nothing but create parent enmity because now you have to find child care or take the time off if you are unable to find anything.

Archduke Russell John wrote:However, teachers do not work during the summer. The starting salary for a first year teacher in my home school district (not the one my wife works) is $40,000 a year. The salary for a person teaching 15 years can make $95,000 a year.

Ha! That's chicken feed: Take a look at this list of public employees in suburban NYC, sorted by salary. Just keep scrolling. Most of the top pay are police and fire and you'll see you've got to go a long way down to get to 95K per year.

http://data.newsday.com/new-york/database/?pid=461

Police unions aren't shy about asking, and they pretty much get what they want, as you can see in the link.

A quote from that transcript is pretty much why I'm not reallt as interested in.yhe incident itself, but the reaction and counter-reactions:

"None of this is to be taken as fact"

In a sense it is mundane whether the shooting was justified or not. We are all in a Shroedinger's Cat situation in that either could be true and we won't know which until we do. But we can see how people are protesting, and rioting, and what the police doing in response.

I will not give any of my opinions. Just statements of others.

Yes, there is looting/rioting and an over-reaction of the police. That has been stated before.

bbauska wrote:Yes, there is looting/rioting and an over-reaction of the police. That has been stated before.

Yeah, but do you think anything could have been done to prevent or mitigate them. For example, do you think racial segregation in the St Louis area, combined with heavy handed policing from a less diverse force, are problems?

danivon wrote:

bbauska wrote:Yes, there is looting/rioting and an over-reaction of the police. That has been stated before.

Yeah, but do you think anything could have been done to prevent or mitigate them. For example, do you think racial segregation in the St Louis area, combined with heavy handed policing from a less diverse force, are problems?

Ask it all you like. I will not give my opinion, as it does not matter what I think or what factual reality is. Apparently it only matters what people's perceptions are who are in the midst of this struggle.

Ask them.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/08/19/im-a-cop-if-you-dont-want-to-get-hurt-dont-challenge-me/?tid=pm_pop

Sound very similar to what I said earlier about complying with a police officer.

bbauska

Sound very similar to what I said earlier about complying with a police officer

In the US today, your attitude to compliance is sensible.
from your quoted article

I know it is scary for people to be stopped by cops.

is it really acceptable that citzens should fear their police force?

The cause of that fear? The fear that police have when they encounter the people they police. And that fear is a result of the prevalence of guns.
Police know that they could be risking their lives at any time because anyone could be armed and dangerous.
Is that the aim of the 2nd amendment? To ensure fear reigns. To contribute to a situation where police and policed do not, and cannot trust each other.

rickyp wrote:bbauska

I know it is scary for people to be stopped by cops.

is it really acceptable that citzens should fear their police force?

Yes. It is. I have done law enforcement maritime boardings. I want compliance. If that comes with fear, so be it. This is not a 2nd Amendment issue any more than it is a black or white issue. It is about a man who may or may not have done something to cause the police officer to fear for his life and the police response.

bbauska

. It is about a man who may or may not have done something to cause the police officer to fear for his life and the police response.

The prevalence of guns makes police fear for their lives every time they encounter a civilian. Not just in "take down situations" like the marine boardings you reference...
Every traffic stop, every stop of a pedestrian, comes with risk assumed.
If you need to prepare yourself, for the sudden presence of a firearm in order to ensure your own safety .... the relationship between polcie and citizens is inherently wrong.
Respect, is not born of fear. And for police to be most effective they need civilians' respect.

In 2012 British cops fired guns 3 times. And no one died. The basic reason, the absence of guns,
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democrac ... med-police

rickyp wrote:bbauska

. It is about a man who may or may not have done something to cause the police officer to fear for his life and the police response.

The prevalence of guns makes police fear for their lives every time they encounter a civilian. Not just in "take down situations" like the marine boardings you reference...
Every traffic stop, every stop of a pedestrian, comes with risk assumed.
If you need to prepare yourself, for the sudden presence of a firearm in order to ensure your own safety .... the relationship between polcie and citizens is inherently wrong.
Respect, is not born of fear. And for police to be most effective they need civilians' respect.

In 2012 British cops fired guns 3 times. And no one died. The basic reason, the absence of guns,
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democrac ... med-police

You are speaking out of your butt again. I never said take down boardings. I have been in peaceful safety stops, and hostile drug stops. I want compliance with both.