Police Chief came out and said that he still believes that these officers are still heroes and that they acted in good faith. edit: upon closer examination of the article, he said that the other officers who participated in the raid were heroes. Not the ones who fabricated evidence.
Parents of the Costco shooting victim have finally spoken out. "Russell and Paola French, who were both severely injured in the June 14 shooting in Corona, east of Los Angeles, spoke publicly for the first time since their son Kenneth, 32,was fatally shot by Los Angeles police officer Salvador Sanchez. Sanchez maintains he opened fire after he was knocked down with his infant son in his arms. Russell French, who was shot in his chest and abdomen and lost a kidney, said at a news conference Monday that he "begged" Sanchez not to fire. "I told him we had no guns and my son was sick." Paola French, who was shot in the back and ended up in a coma, said she "was pleading for my son and our lives." "What threat did I pose to him?" she asked. Her son was a "peaceful and loving soul" who was never aggressive, she said. No one in the French family was armed at the time of the shooting." https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...costco-said-they-begged-duty-officer-n1046726 Also, guy shoots 3 unarmed civilians, gets to come back the next day to see the evidence so he can tailor his statement. The fuck is this? "The brother also expressed outrage that authorities let Sanchez leave the scene without detaining him. The officer also returned to the store the next day and was allowed to watch the surveillance video before making his statement to authorities" I mean, if the parents are lying, there would be a real easy way to find out. Release the fucking video.
Ring Doorbell Cameras have quietly forged partnerships with ~400 police stations across the US, granting them access to user camera footage. https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Doorbell-camera-firm-Ring-has-partnered-with-400-14383981.php
Police have to request the footage, and it says you can decline the request. Title makes it sound a lot worse than it is. Plus, I'm sure there's an illegal backdoor that grants law enforcement agencies access to live footage anyway.
The actual facts are that a lot of white people get killed in these types of interactions as well. We just don't hear about them, so they don't really happen. Also lots of black and white people who are not killed by police after committing crimes and even murdering people and not complying.
There is no value in showing white people being killed by cops. That white people are immune to police violence and killing is a factually inaccurate position. knowing that and continuing to push an alternative narrative is just being dishonest.
What the fuck are you talking about? You can’t possibly believe this bullshit, the media undervalues white people? The same media who’s constantly seeking the opinions of Trump voters but never sought the opinions of black Obama supporters when Obama was president? The same media who give credence and air time to the blue lives matter and all lives matter narrative? I seriously hope this is a character you’re playing on this board and you’re not this stupid in real life.
The media doesn't make as much of a white person being killed by cops bc unarmed white people aren't killed by cops at a disproportionate rate. If a little white kid was murdered on video by cops bc he was playing with a plastic gun alone in a park, it'd be a massive story. If a white guy was choked to death for selling cigarettes, it's be a huge story. Those stories don't exist though. That's why they aren't talked about.
well I didn't say the media undervalues white people, I said there is no value in it. Tell me the headline of a murder or a shooting and I can tell you the race of everyone involved. You'll never....well I won't say never, but very rarely see a headline: cops shoot unarmed white man. When a white guy is shot or killed by cop, it's just a man. The race is irrelevant. now if it's the same exact situation, same cops, same everything, but an unarmed black man, every headline will be a bout cops shooting an unarmed black man. Race will always....ok, again, not always, but nearly always be in the headline. The one recent time that defied this was when a white guy was attacked by a black man in a parking lot. The black guy shoved the white guy to the ground, then the white guy pulled out a gun and killed the black guy. The white guy was recently convicted of murder, I believe. But he headlines didn't mention race, at all. Typically it would be: white man shoots black man. That's what gets the clicks, that what's gonna rile you up. But it wasn't the headline. Strange, right? Then I looked at the video, where they interviewed the white guys girlfriend who he was at the store with when this happened. Ah ha! ah ha! She was black. It's really difficult to push a "racist white guy shoots black man" narrative when the white guy's girlfriend is black. Had he been alone, or with a white girl, without a doubt the race gets mentioned it he headline. So that's really what I'm talking about. I don't think I'm nearly as stupid as you think I am. If that helps.
This is precisely what I mean. Those stories do in fact exist. You just don't hear about them. We did this before, but how many white people can you name who have been killed by cops? Any? 1? 3?? Even if it's disproportionate, the raw numbers are that more whites are killed by cops than blacks. You don't hear about them not because they don't happen, but because they are not news-worthy, they do not play into the narrative, and they do not get the clicks.
76% of the country is white. Only 13% of the country is black. Of course more whites are killed by cops. Saying "Even if it's disproportionate" shows you can't comprehend why blacks being killed by cops is covered so much. That's literally why it is. Cops killing people isn't the issue. That's going to happen and most are justified. When one race is being killed while being unarmed at a disproportionate rate, that's a fucking problem and that's why the media covers it so much.
Cops encounter blacks, in confrontational situations, at a much higher rate than whites. if cops encounter blacks in volatile situations at proportions higher than that of whites, of course more blacks will be killed by cops. Right?
Ahh now we're blaming those pesky black people. It's their fault!!! You're one ignorant motherfucker. Shame on me for hitting show ignored.
and again, let's highlight that you are wrong about those stories not existing. They do exist. Your premise here seems to be, hey, cops just don't kill white people like that, so that's why we never hear about it, because it never happens. That's not true. You understand that, right? You don't hear about it because when it does happen it's not typically front page news, if it's news at all.
Yea, this is when you become completely disingenuous. Statistically cops interact with blacks more frequently. statistics do not blame anyone for anything, they are facts used to help explain things. like when you used population statistics to explain why cops shoot more white people than blacks. Were you blaming white people?? Of course not. Don't be dumb.
If you don't control for amount of interactions with the police, shooting statistics don't tell the entire story. The problem as identified above is African Americans have disproportionately high amounts of police contact. Thats the racism part. Per police interaction, I believe the bad shooting rates are the same. Its the other part that is the problem.
Incidentally, I'm curious how you explain the Asian bias? Black men have a 1 in 1,000 chance of being killed by police in their lifetime. White men 1 in 2,500. Asian men 1 in 5,000. Why in the world are black men killed by police at 5 times the rate of Asians??
How many times has it been explained to you that the discrepancy in interactions is by design? This has been explained so many times and yet here you are spouting this bullshit, so I guess you believe the discrepancy in interactions is because people of color are more predisposed to commit crimes?
So it would be fair to say that the difference in the frequency of police killing Asians vs. blacks is due to discrepancy in interactions, and that discrepancy is by design to favor Asians? Is that right? Your explanation works. But it only works if you are comparing blacks and whites. If you compare Asians to either group, your explanation falls apart. Using your logic, you either have to conclude that police are racist against whites in favor of Asians (whites are twice as likely to be killed by police), or REALLY racist against blacks in favor of Asians (blacks 5 times more likely to be killed by police). So could it be that your explanation is not a great or accurate explanation??
So it’s fair to say that you believe that there are more interactions between poc and cops because you believe that those people are biologically wired to commit more crimes then whites and Asians? There’s nothing racist about that, at all. Do you honestly believe this is a valid argument, at all? At the end of the day you believe that blacks interact with police more because they are biologically driven to commit crimes. Stop the dog whistling, it’s not fooling anyone.
I'm not talking about what I believe, I'm using your logic here. This is what YOU believe. If statistics show an imbalance in the number of people of a specific race killed by police, and a corresponding imbalance in the number of interactions the police have with people of that race in order to explain that imbalance in the killings, then the conclusion is, according to you, that the system is set up to create that imbalance in interactions in order to kill more people of that race. The discrepancy in interactions is by design. It's done on purpose to target people of a specific race. When you apply that to whites and blacks, it works beautifully. it indicates institutional racism in favor of whites, against blacks. Perfect. But, when you apply that same exact logic to blacks and Asians, the conclusion you must draw is that police are really racist against blacks in favor of Asians. Police favor Asians even more than they favor whites. So at the end of the day do you believe whites interact more with police than Asians because whites are biologically driven to commit more crimes than Asians?
Correct, and the studies show this. Not just interactions, but instances of violence (short of shootings), frequency of arrest, severity of punishment, etc.
So this explains the discrepancy in whites vs. blacks vs. Asians interacting with the police and the frequency of each being killed by police?
I’m not reading all this nonsense because it’s just a poor attempt at you trying to deflect from the fact that you believe blacks are biologically driven to violence. I prefer racist who are unapologetic about what they believe.
no, it's an attempt to show that the logic your using only applies to blacks and whites. When you apply it to Asians, it falls apart. unless you believe whites are more biologically driven to commit crime than Asians OR that police are biased against whites in favor of Asians.
right, but the police interact with blacks on purpose, right? It's designed that way, so that they can arrest, beat, kill, etc. more blacks. That's the idea, right? So how does that apply to Asians and whites? The theory, when applied there, would be that police are racist against whites in favor of Asians, so the system is set up to allow for more police interactions with whites, which results in more arrests, physical confrontations, and killings of whites?
You reject the fact that the system is designed to have more interactions with blacks so what would you say is the reason for the increase interaction?
Well first, do you agree that if you apply your logic that you'd have to conclude that the system is biased in favor of Asians?
I haven't seen a study on interactions between Asians and police officers. However the answer absolutely could be yes. It very well could be for racist reasons that cops don't see Asians as a threat.
If that were true, cops would be racist against whites when determining a threat level as compared to Asians. That is...interesting.
Why do police interact with whites more than Asians? I'm not sure. My guess would be that there is a larger percentage of whites who live in poverty than Asians. For round about reasons, that puts more white people in contact with police than Asians, who are wealthier, on average, than whites.
I have seen studies on this as well, as it pertains to the NYPD and their interactions with Asians and Hasidic Jews, but it’s pointless to argue because all he’s trying to do is deflect because he’s a bigot who believes blacks are biologically wired to commit crimes.
Like I said, I haven't seen data on Asians but Last year, the NYPD stopped and interrogated people 532,911 times, a 448-percent increase in street stops since 2002 – when police recorded 97,296 stops during Mayor Bloomberg’s first year in office. Nine out of 10 of people stopped were innocent, meaning they were neither arrested nor ticketed. About 87 percent were black or Latino. White people accounted for only about 10 percent of stops. https://www.nyclu.org/en/press-rele...fectiveness-nypd-stop-and-frisk-program-links Thats not an accident. After accounting for age, gender, and location, we find that officers ticket, search, and arrest black and Hispanic drivers more often than whites. For example, when pulled over for speeding, black drivers are 20% more likely to get a ticket (rather than a warning) than white drivers, and Hispanic drivers are 30% more likely to be ticketed than white drivers. Black and Hispanic motorists are about twice as likely to be searched compared to white drivers. https://openpolicing.stanford.edu/findings/ That is not an accident
That wasn’t the question you racist piece of shit, you can deflect all you like but it’s obvious what you believe, your dog whistling fools no one.
Interesting. I think traffic stops are very often used as a convenient excuse to pull suspicious people over. On a side note, it always blows my mind when I've seen cops pull over a car with a broken tail light and the guy has garbage bags of weed in the trunk. If I were transporting drugs, I'm fixing my damn tail light. Why would you give cops any excuse to pull you over? I thought the stop and frisk laws were intended to be directed at gang members. It would stand to reason that mos of the people who they stopped and frisked, then, would be black and Hispanic, as the huge majority of gang member are black and Hispanic, right? I'm frankly surprised that 10% were white. And i agree, that's not an accident, that's targeting a group. But I think the group is gang members. Interesting that Hispanic drivers are 10% more likely than blacks to get a ticket when pulled over for speeding. I wonder what those numbers break out into when you look at men vs women. Or old vs. young. What sort of bias we'd find there.
Yes and thinking random black and hispanic people are criminals because of their race is.....wait for it.......racism!
I'm sorry, what? You asked me what the reasons for the increase in interactions is. I answered. I'm sorry that you don't like my answer, but that doesn't make me any more racist against blacks or guilty of dog whistling than you are against Asians (apparently?), while you dodge my questions.
boom! So I think, and I'm not totally sure, but, there may be other distinguishing factors beyond race that identify someone as a probable gang member, right? So for example, among these people, can you identify which might be a gang member? If you were a cop, who might you stop and frisk? And would that make you racist?
I know you’re a racist but I don’t believe you to be that big of an idiot, you know my question had nothing to do with the red herring you brought into the conversation. But no need for an answer you’ve made your position known, you believe blacks are biologically wired to be criminals.
I’ve literally been held at gun point in my car by like 5 different cops at the same time because they thought I was a threat. I’m certainly more Will smith than the guy throwing up the gang signs so you can suck my dick.
I'm sorry that happened to you, but anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. We were talking about stop and frisk laws being aimed at gang members.
There is no red herring here. There are only facts and statistics that discount your premise, or put you in a predicament of having to claim white people are more genetically predisposed to commit crime than Asians. You are not racist against whites, are you??
Cool you can still suck my dick. You’ll never have to worry about that happening so of course you say shit like “but anecdotal evidence is anecdotal”