The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age
    Michael Maiello's picture

    White Uncollared Crime

    By Michael Maiello on Fri, 12/05/2014 - 9:29pm | Politics

    I have a fun party story about a road trip that went through Texas, way too fast, wound up in a kind of high speed pursuit and ended with a very reasonable ticket.  The punch-line is that the story would have been tragic had the trooper searched my car.  What also makes the story kind of funny is that while I was driving way too fast I was in total control of my vehicle, on an empty straight-away in the Texas panhandle.  My crime was victim free, as speeding cases go.  That the punishment was light was, in the end, appropriate.  Had the trooper found the contraband in my car, it would have been an out of proportion bad luck tale.

    As I grew up I would lament the days when cops gave warnings and the like and I realized I was talking about bygone days almost exclusively enjoyed by white people.  Really, only white people talk about "when you used to get a warning instead of a ticket," and probably only non-poor white people at that.

    This is called "white privilege," which is a term I object to in this context.  I don't think it's a privilege to get a warning for a minor offense.  I think everybody deserves such leniency.  It's not a privilege, it's how things should work but don't for too many.  The #crimingwhilewhite hashtag is full of stories about white people skirting the law with impunity.  I hope that people are sharing these stories in the proper spirit, which should be, and I will bold this:

    "Everybody should be able to get away with minor mischief."  

    To view this through the lens of privilege is really problematic because a very real potential solution for ending that privilege is in the hands of law enforcement.  Police could very simply offer leniency to no one.  This is already embodied in all sorts of ticket quota systems (whether acknowledged or denied) and the like around the country.  It would be very easy for a city police chief or mayor to say, "you see it, you cite it or bring them in."  It would be very easy for the police to let the courts sort out everything, even if it results in mass dismissals of petty cases.

    It's definitely a problem that some people in our society get away with things and others get face severe consequences for the same actions.  Heck, this Nation article talks about how even when police officers are convicted for killing people they get lighter sentences than civilians who committed lesser crimes.

    But we need to take care in our discussion of how law enforcement should work because  ost of the people voicing opinions seem to have never been on the wrong end of a badge or assume that they never will be.  They are thus willing to inflict a whole lot of damage on the "lawbreakers."

    But this is a complicated country we have built with a lot of laws at a lot of levels and many points of authority and prosecution.  That white people get away with crimes that black people are arrested over is definitely a problem.  Let's just make sure that the solution is to stop needlessly arresting black people, not to start arresting whites in greater numbers.

    Topics: 
    Politics

    Comments

    1st Onlooker "Look at all these protestors, how can they be out here every day and night, Don't these people have jobs to go to? 

    2nd Onlooker: No they're receiving government assistance. 


    by Resistance on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 6:46am

    Grow up, resistance.  (I had another suggestion but decided not to print it. at least growing up is humanly, if not "resistancely" possible)


    by CVille Dem on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 9:09am

    but decided not to print it.

    I suspect that is probably a first, from someone usually uncivil.

    Republicans have already warned, they will use the purse to control . 

    So get your head out of ......the sand.

    The majority is tired of these protests. 

    Who doesn't know?  If you resist arrest, things don't work out so well for resisters.

    While the Media is focused on the troubles in the black communities; 5 to 15 million workers are going to take the jobs, members of the black community need, but someone else will be doing. Things are not going to get  better for them

    If the amount of people who will become welfare recipients increases, things will definitely get worse. 

    What do you not know about Republicans; who will not increase spending, and a majority agreeing with them; especially when they see the problems created by the protestors. 


    by Resistance on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 12:16pm

    I thought this blog was about the Panhandle.

    Oh, well here's a Panhandle Protestor joke:

    Why do protestors in Amarillo piss down the sewers?

    Answer: The protestors down in Lubbock need the water.


    by Oxy Mora on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 2:25pm

    We New Mexicans had Espanola jokes.

    Why does Santa Fe have a northerly wind?  Because Espanola sucks.


    by Michael Maiello on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 2:46pm

    Well, your blog was spot on. It's simply a different universe for white kids than black kids. Oddly enough, the area in the N.Dallas suburbs is one of the most integrated and diverse I know of. White kids are not always in the majority and the public schools are good. The main occupation of the cops is to collect revenue by issuing tickets for minor traffic offenses.

    In smaller towns, in earlier times, the cops knew your family, maybe were in the Elks or Masonic Lodge with your Dad. The cops would let you go, but when you got home, Dad already knew about it, and you just handed him the car keys.(That can really cool off a budding romance). 

     


    by Oxy Mora on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 4:46pm

    I wonder about the earlier times thing.  I imagine that such an option was not available to brown kids who were pulled over.  My big fear was that my parents paid my car insurance and if my rates skyrocketed because of a ticket, they would not.


    by Michael Maiello on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 5:20pm

    The demonstrations on the streets of America today are not about warnings, or "lots of laws at a lot of levels and many points of authority and prosecution" or arresting white vs. black people. It's about cops killing on video and getting away with it due to the perverse use of the grand jury system. CSM:

    Rooted in history as a skeptical check on the crown, the American grand jury – a secret panel of 12 citizens – has become largely a prosecutor’s rubber stamp. Grand juries almost always return an indictment, except in one specific instance: when it comes to cases involving a police officer. 

    Grand juries were instituted to protect average citizens from the defamation of prosecution by the King, they are now routinely used as a tool to, in secret, prevent open public trials of cops who commit homicide. The DA needs cop testimony and cop gathered evidence to be successful, he has every incentive to let cops deceive jurors, and let them get by with murder.


    by NCD on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 10:58am

    Jodi Arias' defense has cost taxpayers $2.7 million, and tab keeps rising

    Taxpayers

    If the President can exercise "prosecutorial discretion"  then why not everyone else in positions of authority?

    The prosecutor in the Arias trial doesn't care how much money it costs the taxpayers.

    Just because some feel they want a show trial, who do they suppose is going to pick up the tab?  YOU 

    Spend millions to have a trial, trying to convict an officer, who claims he felt threatened and you saying he didn't feel threatened.  


    by Resistance on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 11:56am

    So in Resistance in your calculating little bigoted mind huge expenditures for the public prosecution and trials of homicides by cops is a threat to the American taxpayer? Any examples?

    Oh and the President is not exercising 'prosecutorial discretion' for cases of murder. Staten Island DA Donovan did that, which is why your 'unemployed untermenchen' are in the streets.... get your head out of your #*@ buddy.

    Resistance, how about the legal expense for actions of bad cops? If cops were held accountable for abuse of power, maybe that bill wouldn't be so huge.


    by NCD on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 1:00pm

    little bigoted mind 

    I thought you were mature enough to resist name calling? 

    maybe that bill wouldn't be so huge.

    Maybe?  One thing is for certain, the tax revenue collected is insufficient to address all the wishes of the people

    So who do you suppose is paying for the bill, because someone dies, because they resisted arrest  or the officer felt threatened

    The unemployed? Those on welfare?.

    Get vocal enough and maybe  the Republicans will cut welfare benefits so you all; can have unlimited money for prosecutions.

    What programs are you going to cut if you want more money redirected for the prosecution of civil servants, who will most likely receive a defense from local and State funds for claiming a defense against liability, while engaged in serving local governments. 

    If a good defense is not presented the City or State gets sued for millions?

    Why would a prosecutor who works for a municipality go through the expense  of a trial knowing the defense of an officer will prevail.

    Easy for others to say YOU pick up the tab.

    Maybe Police officers, rather than the possibility of death or charges being filed against them  just decides to stay out of certain areas, unless the municipalities come up with more money to pay the bills, for the defense attorneys of the officer?


    by Resistance on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 3:25pm

    Garner didn't die for resisting arrest, he died because he was the victim of a choke hold that the NYPD has declared out of bounds years before.  There were other, less violent ways to subdue his minor resistance and the arrest for such a petty infraction was pointless in the first place.


    by Michael Maiello on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 5:29pm

    I  and others saw the video, nowhere did we see Garner turn around, face against the wall with his hands behind his back, nor did  we see Garner put his hands out to be cuffed.

    He was resisting arrest, so it took many officers to bring him into submission. 

    Submission;

    "submission to authority"

    yielding, capitulation, acceptance, consent, compliance

    Something Garner wasn't about give to the authorities, for if he had, this unfortunate incident would not have occurred. 


    by Resistance on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 7:30pm

    You would not yield to authorities if they came after your guns.


    by rmrd0000 on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 7:32pm

    My, My, My, how the tables have turned. 

    When I was protesting against the authorities coming for the guns, in violation of the Second Amendment, with some Dagbloggers viciously ridiculing my viewpoint.

    Now when it appears, some have got skin in the game, they're all ready to protest and riot, one step away from anarchy, against the authorities and you wonder why I support gun ownership as you attack and destroy the faith in authority.

    Just as I said was eventually going to happen. No respect for the law or authority with less respect for the individual. 

    When some folks are finished with their attacking the police, there will be less police protection and then every person for themselves.

    Ferguson chaos and destruction on a much grander scale.

    I am sure glad our forefathers had the insight, to preserve the right of self protection against mob rule .


    by Resistance on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 8:05pm

    Resistance, take a deep breath. The tables have not turned. You said Civil Rights activists were in error as were the abolitionists. You reserve for yourself the right to protest. You are a hypocrite. 

    Just as you saw the end with Ebola and ED78 and probably SARS before that, you see anarchy now. Asking for a trial to present a rationale for way an unarmed man was killed by police is not anarchy. People want the legal system to work.

    Our forefathers fought a rebellion against a King, something you say is an error because they rejected the person put on the throne by God.


    by rmrd0000 on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 8:57pm

    More of your twisting of words to deceive others.

    You said Civil Rights activists were in error as were the abolitionists

    Our conversations was about Christian not getting involved in the Civil war as some abolitionist promoted.

    Some Civil rights leaders didn't accept Jesus's command either.

    Instead they and you, are working for the desires of the flesh. 

    Jesus did not take up arms or resist against the Superior Authorities,even up to his death nor did he teach his disciples to war against them or others 

    Christians can abhor slavery, but they wait upon their Lord and King to take action. 

    Again YOU work against the Truth, because you want to believe your lies serves the Greater plan.

    As though God directed you and others to do, what Jesus commanded Christians not to do? 

    Does your head hurt from all the swelling?


    by Resistance on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 11:17pm

    Christians can abhor slavery, but they wait upon their Lord and King to take action. 

    And to think, Nietzsche used to call Christianity a slave's religion.


    by Michael Maiello on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 11:27pm

    Everyone slaves for a master.whether they want to face the reality or not

    Christians are no different, but they disown themselves not seeking their own desires; instead they slave for Christ. He rewards his slaves with compassion and generously gives them gifts

    But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.… 

    Does mans ruler ship and government give these things to it's slaves? 


    by Resistance on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 11:46pm

    Corinthians 7:21-24 notes that the person called to Christ as a slave should not care for the enslavement. The next statement is that if you can be made free, choose freedom. Run. Escape. The instruction is to head for freedom, because you were bought for a price and should not be slave to any man.

    Those are the first words to the slave in Corinthians. Most Christians were poor and many enslaved. The slave had no obligation to remain a slave because it inhibited the bigger connection to God. It was only if you had no source of escape that you should remain in human bondage. In the South, there were laws restricting reading that made it impossible for the slave to read and interpret the Bible. This religious abomination made the Underground Railroad necessary. The Southern slave-holder blocked the religious practice of his slaves. The use of the lash and the rape of slave women by slave-owners solidifies the unbiblical nature of Slavery in the United States.

    And your faith says do nothing while you fill you belly and warm your feet at the fireplace.


    by rmrd0000 on Sun, 12/07/2014 - 2:33pm

    You are spreading a misconception Taking the scripture out of context  

    How many more times will you reject the truth of that particular text?

    The text was about Bondservants. 

    Do you even understand the difference between a slave and a bondservant?  

    +++++++++++++++++

    Do I need to remind you?

    Twice the God of Israel, let his people be taken into captivity as slaves. 

    Yet it did not deter faithful Daniel, from serving God while in captivity in Babylon

    Nor did it stop Joseph who was sold into slavery by his brothers. Joseph become second in command of all things in Egypt  in service to Pharaoh, because of his fine conduct and faith in God to deliver him. .

    24 So, brothers,3 w in whatever condition each was called, there let him remain with God.

    1 Corinthians 7:19-24

    All of the violations of the Bibles commands dealing with slave /owner relationships  should have been charged against the wicked slave owners. 

    I will add further evidence to support the Bibles viewpoint on slavery, when I return.


    by Resistance on Sun, 12/07/2014 - 5:51pm

    You have embarrassed yourself by saying that you like the Southern Baptists would have supported slavery. Now you embarrass yourself by doubling down. You continue your snippet view of the Bible, ignoring the words that came before that instruct the slave to.escape.

    I really do hope you do return with snippets that justify your belief system about slavery. We don't have to look at the words of John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist Church. We do not have to look at the writings of Christians and abolitionists of the day. We don't have to review the arguments made by the different factions of the Baptists and Methodists of the day. We just have to read the snippets supplied by Resistance.

    I really did not think that you were bigoted enough to go down this ridiculous rabbit hole. You cannot help yourself. You are exposing your true nature. Let everyone see what a man who would let innocent children starve at our border.

    You have a truly warped head and heart. Rant away. Show your Westboro Baptist nature.


    by rmrd0000 on Sun, 12/07/2014 - 6:37pm

    I have no migraines  or vertigo, but I do worry about your head. You assume that you are an acceptable of theological thought, you are not. I am amazed by how easy it is to be faithful to the religion you espouse. Pray, pay no attention to suffering, or do nothing to alleviate suffering, and criticize.

    While you would have been on the sidelines during slavery, churches took a stand. The Baptist church split, with the Southern Baptists remains pro-slavery and pro-Jim Crow. It took over a century for them to admit error. Methodists took a stand that slave-owners could not belong to the church. There went the Southerners.

    We have seen you criticize abolitionists and Civil Rights activists. They are in error according to you. Therein lies the problem, it is your opinion. You will likely provide some Biblical snippets to support your narrow-minded point of view, but that is of no importance because their are other messages in the Bible that will counter yours. The Westboro Baptist Church also uses snippets to justify their vile religion.

    You are fearful of Ebola, ED78, and protests. You see the end times around the corner, yet you turn a blind eye to those suffering around you. Jesus spent a great deal of time with the poor. You lash out at the poor. They are on Welfare, and not part of the working poor according to you. You are an elitist. The poor should expect a choke-hold for allegedly selling loose cigarettes  to other poor people who can't afford to buy a pack. You turn a blind eye to suffering children at our border. Sad. Continue trembling and get ready to grab your guns to protect from the next virus. You are the one focused on the flesh. You love your well-fed comfortable lifestyle so much, you cling to your creature comforts and harden your heart to the suffering of others.

    You are no theological authority, just like Westboro Baptist is not a theological authority.


    by rmrd0000 on Sun, 12/07/2014 - 11:27am

    There are Biblical instructions on how to deal with false prophets who ridicule the poor rather than care for them. These instructions also apply to those who would let children on our borders starve. They also apply to who sit with full bellies and warm homes who say that nothing should be done about people held in bondage within our own borders. These false prophets have convinced themselves that they are hearing the true word of God, when the true source of their message comes from elsewhere 

    Sometimes these false prophets are so fearful of losing earthy flesh that they cling to guns and see the apocalypse around every corner. Why are they so fearful? Why do they fear the end times? These false prophets are in fear because they know that their jumbled and confused message is incorrect. They fear judgment. Jesus instructed us to care for the poor. Beware the person who rejects that message.


    by rmrd0000 on Sun, 12/07/2014 - 12:32pm

    Would you have fought to save the Christians from the arena? If so you'd have worked against those of Christian faith,who know that the suffering of innocent Christians  is what brings judgment against the rulers and their supporters.

    During the Christians times of trials and tribulations. GOD sends his Holy Spirit to comfort them.

    It is you that wants to whine and portray yourself as some one who knows all about the suffering of mankind  and so you foment and agitate others to take action .

    Yet you and others who foment discord against the Superior authority, violate Christ's and the apostles commands. 

    Because of yours and others lack of submission to the Superior Authority,namely Christ. you look for relief outside of the arrangement God provides. You deal with the injustice all around us according to your desires and plans. Not Christ's plan 

    You don't see any benefit from obeying the Spirit, instead you and others seek comfort from rebellion against not ony the spirit, but against the fleshly governments. 

    Then you come here crying about the suffering, not availing yourself of the comfort the spirit gives to the downtrodden, so they and you can endure the trials and tribulations/persecution. 

    You are not willing to humble yourself before any Superior Authority  You are unable to accept the most fundamental understanding of being a follower of Christ. " They persecuted me. they will persecute you"  "I will send a helper" 


    by Resistance on Sun, 12/07/2014 - 12:39pm

    Your faith says that you do nothing. Faith without works is dead. Would I have worked with the Underground Railroad? Yes. Would I have taken up arms against the Confederacy? Yes.

    Rahab, a prostitute, was aware enough to know that she could not do nothing. She defied the law and hid the spies. What happened next in the town of Jericho? There is judgment for doing nothing when others are persecuted. The Bible supports taking action.


    by rmrd0000 on Sun, 12/07/2014 - 1:13pm

    I notice you conveniently made no distinction between OT and NT 

    Rahab, a prostitute, was aware enough to know that she could not do nothing.

    She acted on the knowledge that the Hebrew God could and did deliver his people from Pharaohs' army. so she knew enough to act, by currying favor to save her family and her own skin from destruction.   Hers was not a lesson that Christians should act in disharmony with Christian faith,

    Finally, e be strong in the Lord and in f the strength of his might.11 g Put on h the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against i the schemes of the devil. 

    12 For j we do not wrestle against flesh and blood,

    but against k the rulers, against the authorities, against l the cosmic powers over m this present darkness, against n   the spiritual forces of evil o in the heavenly places. Ephesians 6:10-12

    All of your previous comments on this matter suggest to me, all your talk of seeking justice;  is no more than you seeking vengeance for perceived wrongs committed.  A fleshly desire not a spiritual one.

    9 Beloved, m never avenge yourselves, but leave it 1  to the wrath of God, for it is written, n “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” Romans 12:19

    I can't stop you or others if they want to serve fleshly desires; the Great judge will determine how closely you adhered to HIS laws that promote harmony.

    For he is a God of Order, not disorder.

    Fomenting and agitating discord against the Superior authority; Rioting / Destruction does not originate from GOD, no matter how fleshly humans rationalize their conduct.


    by Resistance on Sun, 12/07/2014 - 4:08pm

    IT is laughable tag you argue about OT versus NT given your past Biblical arguments. It is hilarious that you argue about respect for Superior Authority give your statements about the need for guns and your rants against background checks. Your comments about the President and your ability to "understand" why someone would want to harm the President has exposed your true heart. You arguments are hypocritical. 

    You have your opinion about meaning found in the Bible and you have a free speech right to express it. But a person who excuses doing nothing in the face of injustice is practicing a dead faith, so rant on you have no authority to speak about Authority. Your words are like those of Jim Jones, David Koresh, and Westboro Baptist. Your opinions have no power.

    You are like the Southern Baptists and the Southern Methodists who realized their collective errors, although it tok them over a century. I don't expect you to be as swift in realizing your errors.

    While you sit on the sidelines, the is pressure for changes in the justice system. Enjoy the view from the bleachers. Prosecutors and police departments have lost respect. They will have to change.

     


    by rmrd0000 on Sun, 12/07/2014 - 5:04pm

    There will never be justice for you, only vengeance will satisfy you .

    Everyone is wrong but you; the police, the prosecutor, the Grand Jurors, those who oppose your opinions  Your vengeance has blinded you and others


    by Resistance on Sun, 12/07/2014 - 5:16pm

    respect for Superior Authority

    The Superior Authority in the context of that discussion was the Constitutions Bill of Rights; Second Amendment.  The Law of the Superior authority.  

    Another example, of your constant assaults on the Superior Authority. You want to trample upon, by fomenting agitation in an effort to overthrow.the intent of the founding fathers who foresaw a possible need for the Right or otherwise why consider it in the first place. 

    Just because you lack the ability to understand why the forefathers did, why they did, what they did  when they wrote it.

    American citizens weren't going to have to defend against the ignorant, every time some group  believes they want to change things to suit their fancy, their desires.  Their selfish desires.

    What is your next attack on the Superior Authority; Religious Freedom, because you disagree with aspects of the Law? 


    by Resistance on Sun, 12/07/2014 - 5:50pm

    You've become unreasonable.  

    People want the legal system to work.

    Who doesn't 

    But your living in some fantasy world, you're dreaming.

    It's never going to happen, no government of man has ever achieved that goal in 5,000 years of recorded history.   

    That is why Christians pray the Lords Prayer  "Let your Kingdom Come" 


    by Resistance on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 11:33pm

    Something Garner wasn't about give to the authorities, for if he had, this unfortunate incident would not have occurred. 

    Laughable.  He didn't throw a punch.  He didn't grab anyone.  He didn't kick.  He told the officers to leave him alone and... they should have left him alone.  They were accusing him of a minor crime.  They could have issued a citation with a requirement that he appear in court and, if he did not, then they could have issued a bench warrant.  If he had gotten away with selling loosies on the street, society would have found some way to go on.


    by Michael Maiello on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 8:07pm

    All prosecutors use discretion on a daily basis.  It's not as if the law is applied by formula.


    by Michael Maiello on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 2:16pm

    Resistance, protests are part and parcel of American lives. People have put there livelihoods at risk for progress. Blacks who marched faced the wrath of White employers who could fire them. Women suffragettes faced the earth of husbands and employers. Labor who agreed with Debs faced police forces that sided with the employers. In each case, the majority either remained silent for sided with the so-called Authority. By your standard, Debs should be rejected because the majority disagreed with his philosophy.

    You are inconsistent. You harp about obeying the Authority. You say that God places Kings on their thrones and that is wrong to object to the King's Authority. Yet the United States was formed by rejecting the orders of the King of England. Was the formation of the United States something that was in error?

    Some religious people believe that the rule should be for Authority and the rule of law. Other religious people believe that Justice is the goal. Many who focus on Authority condemn, those who focus on Justice. These Authority focused people can be identified by having full bellies and pleasant homes. It is easy for them to sit in judgment of those with empty bellies and homes in poor condition. The poor are judged to be poor because of bad behavior. The Authority focused can ignore abusive police a rigged legal system, and other societal deficits.

    The Authority focused tell others just bend to the will of and unjust system. The Authority focused sit in the heated homes shaking their heads at why people fight against the Authority. The Authority focused believe in submitting to the Authority until the Authority touches their personal nerve. Some Authority focused people become very prickly when the Authority suggests we need background checks for guns or a gun registry. When the Authority threatens something that the Authority focused considers near and dear to them, the Authority focused reject the idea that they have to obey authority. The Authority focused reject the desires of the majority of people in the country when their issue is under assault.

    The Authority focused believe that they are different fro everyone else, but they are not. The difference is that the Authority focused can sit with full bellies in warm homes and ignore suffering until something directly effects them. They have closed their hearts and minds.

    The Justice focused can have full bellies and warm homes and still react to the suffering around them. The majority of people rarely form the initial group pushing for change. There will always be pushback when change is needed. The British did not meekly agree with the Colonists who wanted change. Slaveholders did not meekly release humans from bondage. Men did not meekly give women the vote. Corporate robber barons did not meekly agree to the demands of workers.

    We have to realize the cold-hearted nature of those who give priority to Authority over Justice. Many of them are hypocrites who will rapidly reject Authority. The Authority focused will only do this when they have a personal stake in an issue. Otherwise, they will tell what is wrong about others complaining about injustice.


    by rmrd0000 on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 1:04pm

    The Authority focused tell others just bend to the will of and unjust system. 

    And then... nothing changes ever.


    by Michael Maiello on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 8:08pm

    Segregation is at the root of the problem you are addressing. My comment on Staten Island on Flavius' thread brought that to my mind, especially where barefooted replied that "it really isn't about where." But it is about where where there are segregated communities. In mixed communities, it's not. Staten Island is basically made up of segregated neighborhoods, even by ethnicity as well as race.

    The assholes and a few assorted nice guys of the 50th precinct pick on all of us equally in Kingsbridge in the Bronx for seat belts and broken tail lights (especially when quota deadline time is looming), they harass all of the kids of all colors hanging in big groups after the huge JFK high school lets out in the afternoon. Skin color is far too varied here for them to profile for it, a thousand shades.

    Simple reality is that If you have a rainbow hood, profiling by color of skin doesn't get the cops anywhere, it's futile. They do it by clothing or demeanor or class.

    The issue of race will eventually disappear as mixed race grows as a percentage of the population, but the issue of police brutality will not. Someone always has to police the police and others invested with government authority. Prosecutors are both the cause and solution of the problem, as they are invested with the authority to terrorize anyone they want to as well as seek justice for society.

     


    by artappraiser on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 3:30pm

    But not even a white guy can mouth off to a cop. Couple of weeks ago two Sheriff deputies steamed onto the farmette in black SUV's on a Sunday morning. (these are the only deputies in a county where the Sheriff covers a lot of small towns who can't afford their own police) A woman down the road was trying to get a restraining order on a guy and had told them he lived down the road a ways, has a blue barn. So was I Larry so and so. Never heard of him, I said and so on. I had guests and we all just stood around. So he asks my friend something and turns to me and asks, "Are you two married". I said no, she lives in Dallas. So he said, "I know, I just ran her plates." At that point I was getting a little annoyed and I really felt like asking, "What the hell difference does it make if we're married or not?" I also knew the county was stretched for funds so I thought this was a useless overtime exercise, driving around with no real information looking for a guy of no identification given by a demented woman. However, this was one of the several occasions in my life that I was able to clamp it. In fact I went overboard the other way, knowing that I might have to call them one day if Larry showed up around here.


    by Oxy Mora on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 5:21pm

    Right.  This is the problem.  We need the system reformed so that you can say,quite rightly, "why are you asking questions you have no business asking?" and "why are you running plates on my guests when you are knowingly in the wrong place?"  We need a system where, if your legitimate questions like that are not answered to your satisfaction, that you can believe that the officer will be meaningfully disciplined.


    by Michael Maiello on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 5:27pm

    Then we'll  all "live happily ever after" 


    by Resistance on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 7:36pm

    Well, yes.  Because we'd still have police but not excess "authority."


    by Michael Maiello on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 8:03pm

    The Constitution provides for redress of our grievances through the courts, not through mob rule. 

    If people feel the victims rights were denied Due Process, then appeal any decision to a higher court for review,

    But at some point their has to be closure. 


    by Resistance on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 8:10pm

    This is a great point. Ferguson is seemingly a majority black community policed by a white police force and so race is the issue.  In NYC, where the police force is diverse, as our many neighborhoods, you see that the problem is bigger than race.  Black cops abuse civilians too. The problem is the "monopoly on violence," mixed with post 9-11 authoritarianism and security theater.  They are all enjoying their rights to act out their violent impulses with impunity.


    by Michael Maiello on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 5:24pm

    There was a Black female Sargeant on the scene (watch the video noting the lax behavior of the (EMTs) as Eric Garner lay dying. In order to wear the uniform you have to conform to the way the NYPD operates.


    by rmrd0000 on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 5:40pm

    This is an interesting point---about the cohesion of a work group and what goes into it. The cop it turns out had a couple of prior instances where it appeared he abused people. Now, we all know from school yards the kinds of dynamics that are going on. Here's a guy who has survived a couple of serious complaints, so he's running the group. How many examples do we need of this behavior. This guy will continue to escalate his behavior until it results in a much worse situation. (I realize the conjecture here).


    by Oxy Mora on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 5:51pm

    More than violent tendencies, it's fear. And no training or guidelines can overcome that in the heat of the moment if the person wearing the badge is consumed by it. There's an inherent tendency in people of all races to be afraid of black men. Add a large, imposing frame to the skin color, and hearts beat faster. When some police officers feel that illogical, exaggerated fear, they react with illogical, exaggerated force. They're scared and mad at themselves, and by extension the suspect, for it. Firing a gun stops the threat -- real or imagined. A group of police officers, (a gang by any other measure), pile on to eliminate the threat. Mob mentality.

    Self defense laws are grounded in the idea that you have the right to defend your life. The gray area of "reasonable fear" is where the water gets bloodied. Police officers are given an even wider benefit of the doubt than Stand Your Ground laws give civilians.


    by barefooted on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 6:46pm

    Isabel Wilkerson. The author of "The Warmth of Other Suns", points out that the rates of killings of unarmed Black men by police appears to be close to the rate of lynching of unarmed men in days past. Suspected or minor crimes were used to rationalize lynching then just as they are being used to justify lynching then just as they are being used to justify shooting now. The goal is control of the Black community. People need to know their place. The majority of the public refuses to indict the police just as citizens of the past were reluctant to prosecute those who lynched Black people.

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/25/mike-brown-shooting...

     


    by rmrd0000 on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 7:13pm

    So the seemingly "cleaner" execution by police has replaced  the barbarism of the branch and rope.


    by Michael Maiello on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 8:13pm


    by rmrd0000 on Sat, 12/06/2014 - 7:33pm

    Resistance, I'm breaking this off. Post your snippets about slavery. Shout to the rooftops how we should let children starve because they belong to others. You are locked in your snippets. Feel free to expose yourself to everyone. Fred Phelps would be proud..

    I really did not think that you were really this twisted.

    Edit to add:

    You might find support for your views on Christian Identity websites. Just a suggestion.


    by rmrd0000 on Sun, 12/07/2014 - 10:29pm

    Your opinions don't accord with the facts. 

    I thought you already broke this off hours ago ?  After I proved your scriptural reference was both misleading and taken out of context.

    How crooked of you, to tell servants, who got passage paid to the New World by someone else and you telling them to escape / to run at the first opportunity.  Breaking the trust or compact;  Rebellion?   

    To finish up, you spread lies about what I said or meant 

    I never said let the children starve, I felt it was the Churches responsibility, for they receive generous tax relief from the government, already at taxpayers expense, to perform this work.  

    I do not believe the Taxpayers who have already given to the Church or charities should be asked to not only try to support their own (with after tax dollars) and  they choose to support whomever in their charitable works.

    But instead you insult others for not serving YOUR desired relief effort.

    Who gives you the right, to tell others "Support and sacrifice  to this or that cause or charity"

    I surely told YOU, and others to support whoever they/ you like. I didn't tell you or others to let them starve. 


    by Resistance on Mon, 12/08/2014 - 12:32am

    so the children show up at the border and border patrol calls the local churches or the national church office. Which denomination gets called? Your idea is ridiculous. Like Pontius Pilot, you wash your hands of ge matter.


    by rmrd0000 on Mon, 12/08/2014 - 8:34am

    Call the Church that provided the support for the Underground Railroad 2.0 

    These unaccompanied children had help getting to the border.

    The Church should have provided support,.... but oh  I guess they don't have any money left because they've spent it on defending Pedophiles, no wonder they shifted their responsibility onto someone else.

    Jesus didn't tell the poor go to Caesar, he'll feed you  

    Christ told the Church to feed the hungry and poor, he didn't presume to impose that responsibility onto Caesar and his Taxpayers. 

    If the Church doesn't to want to do the Job, take away their Tax Exempt status and collect the taxes they escape paying  and then maybe those funds will support children. 

    The church should have sold some of their mass land holdings/property or gold leaf they've adorned their churches with, to do the job, Christ told the Church to do. Not American taxpayers, who can hardly provide for their own.

    You'd reach into their pockets/steal their money to support YOUR causes.that just happen to coincide with the churches plan to shirk away from their responsibilities.


    by Resistance on Mon, 12/08/2014 - 1:22pm

    Insanity

    And if their was no church who told the children to come?


    by rmrd0000 on Mon, 12/08/2014 - 2:16pm

    Your suggestion is not for me. Your true intent is to remove the restraint against your lawlessness and rebellious agitatation, whose purpose is to fan the flames of civil unrest

    I look for a peaceful solution  and you support unrest and wont be satisfied unless there is war against the authorities.


    by Resistance on Mon, 12/08/2014 - 4:11am

    Resistance, you are the one standing with the Southern Baptists, Southern Methodists and the Christian Identity movement that is why you are upset. You are so twisted that you chose the snippet of Corinthians that agreed with your dam heart. You are the one who skips over the command to gain freedom rather than be bound to some flawed human. Slave trades are among the scorned. You overlook things that disagree with your bigoted argument.


    by rmrd0000 on Mon, 12/08/2014 - 6:56am

    Your head will swell if you attempt to answer this.

    Was slavery in the United States Biblical based according to your interpretation of the Bible and the way slave-owners functioned in the South?


    by rmrd0000 on Mon, 12/08/2014 - 8:29am

    .


    by Resistance on Mon, 12/08/2014 - 1:34pm

    You look for no solution. You sit at home on your Gluteus Maximus and let other people do the work. While you are fearful of every infection that comes along, others fight for the justice you say is impossible.

    http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2014/12/black_churches_convene_t...

    Galatians 5:1
    Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage

    Luke 4:18

    The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised.


    by rmrd0000 on Mon, 12/08/2014 - 11:32am

    ToS warning rmrd, for this comment and others ad homs upthread.


    by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 12/08/2014 - 2:06pm

    Understood 


    by rmrd0000 on Mon, 12/08/2014 - 2:17pm