Posts
A few words from Andrew McCarthy about the interactions
between blacks and the police. McCarthy is trying to diminish the hold of today’s
master narrative, the one that sees white policemen as being a hit squad that
was sent out to murder black people.
He writes:
The
elephant in the room, the fundamental to which we must never refer, is
propensity toward criminality. It is simply a fact that blacks, and
particularly young black men, engage in lawless conduct, very much including
violent conduct, at rates (by percentage of population) significantly higher
than do other racial or ethnic groups.
This is
not a matter of conjecture. Crime gets reported by victims; the police don’t
invent it, they investigate it. Overwhelmingly, the victims of black crime are
black people. Indeed, as Heather Mac Donald relates in her essential book, The War on Cops, only 4 percent of black homicide
victims are killed in police interactions. If African-American parents were
really having “the talk” that is pertinent to protecting their children, it
would have to involve the reality that those children are overwhelmingly more
likely to be shot by other black youths. The police are having “police
involved” confrontations with young black men largely because black communities
demand police protection — and understandably so.
One understands that no one much cares about the facts. We
are being subjected to a steady diet of propaganda masquerading as truth. And
we are not allowed to think otherwise. Worse yet, McCarthy notes, by feeding us propaganda and forcing us to believe it culture warriors are depriving us of our rational faculties.
5 comments:
Ideally BLM should accept that police are not intentionally killing innocent blacks while they racially profile them, but are just doing their job and sometimes make innocent mistakes because they're afraid and trying to assert authority in a difficult situation. We can empathize with their plight.
For sensible advice on submission to police, here's one potential list:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUP6gvU493o Tips to Survive Police Encounters for Young Black Males
1. Do not argue with the police. It can not be won on the field.
2. Stay cool and calm, don't raise your voice.
3. Always keep your hands where the police can see them at all times. Ask permission for any movement like reaching anywhere they can't see.
4. Never run from the police.
5. Do not physically resist arrest.
All of these are sensible advice for anyone of any age or race that will avoid conflict with police. Of course its all easy for calm normal people in calm normal situations, while any chaos or distractions, like an ongoing riot, make things even more difficult.
And for hopefully high functioning citizens carrying guns, we need further advice, and how to communicate this information without making the officer feel threatened.
Here's one article, but again, it seems focused on calm encounters where the police START in complete control of the environment.
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/handling-police-and-armed-citizen-encounters/
It always made sense to me that carrying a gun is more dangerous to your safety than not carrying, since you become a threat to others, whether to police, other citizens, or criminals.
And videos like this one show the problems:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMkYVSB6akM Ohio Walmart CCTV captures John Crawford shooting
---
Surveillance footage from an Ohio Walmart store, where police killed a young black man who was holding an unloaded air rifle and talking on his cellphone, shows he was was shot from the side as he moved to run away from advancing officers.
---
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_John_Crawford_III
We can say he made a mistake of running away, but he did drop the gun immediately, and was still shot to death after that. Overall the lesson is that "being black makes you scary", "holding a gun in public makes you scary" and "not paying attention while being scary", like talking on a cell phone, is a risk to your life.
And now we have strange court advice that blacks may be justified in running from police, which isn't the point since its still bad advice, but ideally officers should not assume running means guilt, or even if a suspect is guilty, it need not be something worth being shot dead for.
http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2016/09/21/sjc-black-boston-racial-profiling/
Ideally in my mind, police officers would have a "only shoot back" policy at least until some violent act has been committed, so imaginary guns are not sufficient to justify a police shooting.
p.s. On Suggestion #5: Do not physically resist arrest.
Apparently with the expansion of public cameras, some police are being trained to yell "stop resisting" at regular intervals during any physical action as a defense, whether or not the suspect is currently actively resisting.
Here's a video from a law firm:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbojhwStGq4 Are cops trained to yell "stop resisting"?
---
Many cops are trained to yell "stop resisting" as a pretext to justify using force and violence when arresting a suspect. In this video, a former police officer -- now a California criminal defense attorney -- explains.
---
As a legal defensive tactic, it seems a good one, since no video is perfect, its almost impossible to see exactly how much resistance, if any a suspect is making, so it enables greater physical force to be used with lower risk of legal problems.
But to the person being manhandled or beaten, of any race, it surely will come across as confusing, like if an officer demands instant compliance to do something, and you're just a bit too slow in reacting to police demands, they may justify beating on you in ways that are not justified by your actual actions.
Anyway, if this really is a new tactic, it shows a downside of expanding video by the public, or police cams, which can't show everything, and just encourages more stealth for any officer who wants to express his frustrations at having a bad day.
We are told we need women in more positions, because they understand feelings better and respond with compassion. Then a white female cop shoots someone in Tulsa.
We are told we need more blacks in the police force so that there's not an army of white men in blue acting like predators in our inner cities. Then a black cop shoots someone in Charlotte, and the black police chief begs for calm, and the black city council is nowhere to be seen.
Enough of the politically-correct, theoretical, ideological mumbo-jumbo. People are people.
We have demographic groups seeking social justice when it suits them, and ignoring the real numbers demonstrating a pattern of demographic group antisocial behavior. So it's "Heads I win, tails you lose."
It seems most every problem in modern humanity is blamed on white males and climate change. More Santa Claus beliefs.
Ever wonder why there are riots in Charlotte and not in Tulsa? Look at the electoral map for your answer.
Narratives work until no one believes them anymore.
No justice, no peace.
Meanwhile, in other news, a Turkish immigrant shoots up a mall and kills 5.
We need more social justice.
Trigger Warning said... Trouble is, the "only shoot back" rule invites getting shot. Unless you assume, of course, that black criminals can't shoot straight. Which is racial profiling.
And the other trouble is that a police officer who fails to follow the "only shoot back" rule invites getting either (1) A bad conscience for killing an unarmed person with an imaginary gun (2) A bad outlook that says black people are not human like you can me.
I understand being dead is not that great of an outcome of failing to presume a scary person is murderous, but we also can consider "Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result.", according to Winston Churchill.
Some people are more cowardly than others, and I'd judge it would be better that cowardly people who want to keep a clear conscience don't carry guns or become police officers.
And IAC's examples are fair game - a woman cop in Tulsa, Betty Shelby, and a black cop Charlotte, Brantley Vinson, probably were not good police material to begin with.
THAT, or they were horribly trained, which is also highly likely.
Post a Comment