Goodell Admits NFL Was Wrong Not to Listen

[FireChans]

5 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said:

This will be my one, and only post to you. If you truly have no idea of what systemic racism means, or what the concepts of white privilege are, then I'm going to assume a certain amount of willful ignorance on your part. But, to answer your assertion of "no evidence of systemic racism," here are several links, which took me all of ten seconds to find:

https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020-06-04/Numbers-behind-anger-U-S-racism-inequality-in-stats-R39PKBLwty/index.html

https://inequality.org/facts/racial-inequality/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2018/09/18/theres-overwhelming-evidence-that-the-criminal-justice-system-is-racist-heres-the-proof/

https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/un-report-on-racial-disparities/

 

Honestly, considering the tone of your posts, I don't expect you to take a single one of these seriously. But, I didn't want your cherry-picked, context-lacking "evidence" to be anywhere near the last word, just for the sake of the otherwise rational discussion that has been occurring on this thread.

This is an aside, but I gotta be honest. I REALLY REALLY hate the use of relative risk in all statistics. 

 

3.7 times more likely can easily mean 1/100000 and 3.7/100000. Which is a disparity but doesn’t sound quite as stark as 3.7 x more likely. 

 

It’s the same kinda nonsense the drug companies push on drugs that are really only mildly more effective.

1 minute ago, GoBills808 said:

Isn't it hard to argue that it's just 'a few bad cops' ruining the rest's reputation when 57 of them from one unit resign in solidarity with the two who shoved the guy to the ground?

What % of cops do you believe are bad?

[GoBills808]

4 minutes ago, FireChans said:

What % of cops do you believe are bad?

117%

[Sig1Hunter]

4 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said:

This will be my one, and only post to you. If you truly have no idea of what systemic racism means, or what the concepts of white privilege are, then I'm going to assume a certain amount of willful ignorance on your part. But, to answer your assertion of "no evidence of systemic racism," here are several links, which took me all of ten seconds to find:

https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020-06-04/Numbers-behind-anger-U-S-racism-inequality-in-stats-R39PKBLwty/index.html

https://inequality.org/facts/racial-inequality/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2018/09/18/theres-overwhelming-evidence-that-the-criminal-justice-system-is-racist-heres-the-proof/

https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/un-report-on-racial-disparities/

 

Honestly, considering the tone of your posts, I don't expect you to take a single one of these seriously. But, I didn't want your cherry-picked, context-lacking "evidence" to be anywhere near the last word, just for the sake of the otherwise rational discussion that has been occurring on this thread.

My tone? Seriously? I’m sorry I hurt your feelings too I guess. 
 

However, I appreciate the rest of your post. Interesting that you aren’t willing to further discuss the evidence you provided, but That’s the country we live in. I’m not trolling. I’m open to discussion / debate. I haven’t called anyone names. I’ve been respectful ( as far as I can tell). My only crime has been going against the flow of the majority in this thread. 

 

 I haven’t read through all of your links yet, but I will agree that there are portions of the larger CJ system that disproportionately effects minorities. I’ve seen with my own two eyes how poor suspects convicted of crimes tend to get much harsher penalties than do suspects with more money. Poor suspects are often stuck with an over loaded public defender bent on clearing his docket, while more well to do suspects can afford a private attorney that is willing to devote time to actually defend them. Those private attorneys also have personal relationships with judges (most of whom were also private attorneys before being judges) and those relationships can lead to lighter sentences, it seems to me. We all know that minorities tend to have a lower overall income than whites. This is where I think the conversation needs to start. Why is this? In my view, lower income tends towards a higher probability of criminal behavior. A higher probability of criminal behavior would seem to mean a higher probability of search and arrest. 
 

 

 

[FireChans]

16 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

117%

I liked you better when you were from Dallas.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, HamSandwhich said:

Shouldn’t be here

 

I guess whatever floats your boat, but to me it's a bit much to tell the guy who supports and runs the board what should or shouldn't be here.

Scott's house, Scott's rules.

[Happy]

27 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Isn't it hard to argue that it's just 'a few bad cops' ruining the rest's reputation when 57 of them from one unit resign in solidarity with the two who shoved the guy to the ground?

 

You know the guy the Buffalo cops shoved to the ground was an Antifa member and professional agitator...right?  Details are often left out of agendas.

[K-9]

1 hour ago, Sig1Hunter said:

Ok. So no evidence of systemic racism. I gave you evidence that directly refutes the idea that blacks are even contacted more by law enforcement.  I gave you direct evidence that blacks commit more violent crime than other races.  I gave you direct evidence that this boogeyman that you keep referencing of unarmed black men getting gunned down on the street does not actually exist. And, you have nothing. Got it. Keep marching!

 

Night night!

You seem to enjoy pissing contests more than anything else as your refusal to address my other points suggests. Like the historical context I mentioned for instance. 

 

Have unarmed black men been gunned down or not? Was excessive force used against black men or not? Recently? Ever? Do people have a legit reason to be suspicious because of our history or not? Spouting numbers as a defense against those abuses does little to bolster your case. Seems more like a deflection in an attempt to avoid the subject.
 

You can spout all the statistics you want, but the stink of systemic oppression of black people is still in the air. No direct evidence to be sure, but the circumstantial evidence overwhelms. The stench is inescapable. 
 

Your posts suggest these protesters have no legitimate reason to complain. Why? I suspect it’s personal with you given your previous post referencing black people having their feelings hurt when being pulled over only because they’re black. Has a black person actually said that to you when you pulled them over? Have they said worse things? Did they provoke an outrage in you that you had to choke down?

 

38 minutes ago, Sig1Hunter said:

So cops during your grandfathers and uncles time are now the model? Those were the racist cops from the Jim Crow era that you referenced earlier in your argument that centered around the belief that “cops were racist 60 years ago, so they have to be racist now”. Which is it? Or is everything just subjective belief? 
 

These are just rhetorical questions for you to ponder.

The model my grandfather and uncles represented is still the model to strive for today. They were as far from Jim Crow cops as can be. Serving in Buffalo, they weren’t subject to Jim Crow era laws, anyway. They served and protected in the communities they lived in. Took pride in their jobs and enjoyed being positive role models in the community. 
 

Your bullcrap attempt at conflating their era to today is pitiful. Insult me all you want, but there was no need to insult them or their fine records as police officers. 
 

 

Edited June 7, 2020 by K-9

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, Beast said:

I don’t think it is some secret that Universities across this country are breeding grounds for tomorrow’s Liberals,  so that examination shouldn’t be shocking to anyone.

The interesting stat I take out of that is the more experiences one has in life the more likely they were to vote for Donald Trump.

 

Just a little note that there will still be some guidelines and that general political discussion outside the context of the current protests, NFL reactions etc will be politely escorted to PPP

[SDS]

25 minutes ago, Sig1Hunter said:

My tone? Seriously? I’m sorry I hurt your feelings too I guess. 
 

However, I appreciate the rest of your post. Interesting that you aren’t willing to further discuss the evidence you provided, but That’s the country we live in. I’m not trolling. I’m open to discussion / debate. I haven’t called anyone names. I’ve been respectful ( as far as I can tell). My only crime has been going against the flow of the majority in this thread. 

 

 I haven’t read through all of your links yet, but I will agree that there are portions of the larger CJ system that disproportionately effects minorities. I’ve seen with my own two eyes how poor suspects convicted of crimes tend to get much harsher penalties than do suspects with more money. Poor suspects are often stuck with an over loaded public defender bent on clearing his docket, while more well to do suspects can afford a private attorney that is willing to devote time to actually defend them. Those private attorneys also have personal relationships with judges (most of whom were also private attorneys before being judges) and those relationships can lead to lighter sentences, it seems to me. We all know that minorities tend to have a lower overall income than whites. This is where I think the conversation needs to start. Why is this? In my view, lower income tends towards a higher probability of criminal behavior. A higher probability of criminal behavior would seem to mean a higher probability of search and arrest. 
 

 

 

You didn’t vote the source of your numbers. It has been debunked. 
 

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jun/05/larry-elder/larry-elder-mislabels-statistics-fatal-shootings-p/

 

I can not find a source that makes any of the claims you made. It also doesn’t address all those interactions that do not include death. This stuff has been studied to the moon and back. They have tried to compare outcomes of similar crimes between whites and minorities. I have yet to see a serious study, that takes an honest look at the situation, that suggests what you claim. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

12 minutes ago, Happy said:

 

You know the guy the Buffalo cops shoved to the ground was an Antifa member and professional agitator...right?  Details are often left out of agendas.

 

Actually I know of no evidence that Martin Gugino is an "Antifa member" (whatever does that mean anyway?) nor "professional agitator".

He's retired (no surprise age 75) and self describes as a "peace activist".

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/05/martin-gugino-pushed-ground-buffalo-police-known-peaceful-man/3160820001/

https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/buffalo/human-interest/2020/06/05/-more-than-an-injured-protester----martin-gugino--an-activist

there's a TBN article but every time I try to get the link it asks me to log in again ?‍♂️

 

Anyway I find no evidence that he's an "antifa member", which seems to have become a convenient bucket to use to discredit anyone at a protest.

I suppose you could call him a "professional agitator" but what makes a protestor, someone who is passionate about causes and likes to exercise his constitutionally guaranteed free speech rights, distinct from a "professional agitator" - professional usually means paid, what is the evidence of that.

[Sig1Hunter]

10 minutes ago, K-9 said:

You seem to enjoy pissing contests more than anything else as your refusal to address my other points suggests. Like the historical context I mentioned for instance. 

 

Have unarmed black men been gunned down or not? Was excessive force used against black men or not? Recently? Ever? Do people have a legit reason to be suspicious because of our history or not? Spouting numbers as a defense against those abuses does little to bolster your case. Seems more like a deflection in an attempt to avoid the subject.
 

You can spout all the statistics you want, but the stink of systemic oppression of black people is still in the air. No direct evidence to be sure, but the circumstantial evidence overwhelms. The stench is inescapable. 
 

Your posts suggest these protesters have no legitimate reason to complain. Why? I suspect it’s personal with you given your previous post referencing black people having their feelings hurt when being pulled over only because they’re black. Has a black person actually said that to you when you pulled them over? Have they said worse things? Did they provoke an outrage in you that you had to choke down?

 

The model my grandfather and uncles represented is still the model to strive for today. They were as far from Jim Crow cops as can be. Serving in Buffalo, they weren’t subject to Jim Crow era laws, anyway. They served and protected in the communities they lived in. Took pride in their jobs and enjoyed being positive role models in the community. 
 

Your bullcrap attempt at conflating their era to today is pitiful. Insult me all you want, but there was no need to insult them or their fine records as police officers. 
 

 

Insulting them? I love them! I was just trying to get a grasp on the seemingly duplicitous nature of your post. 
 

And yes, of course I’ve been accused of being a racist cop...for the sole reason that I’m white and I’m a cop. The same way that you are doing directly and indirectly. I attempted to educate those people in the same way I am trying to educate you...by engaging in dialogue and showing them that I’m not racist, and neither are the overwhelming majority of my law enforcement brethren. It’s funny that almost every time I had similar discussions with minorities I’ve gotten much less vitriol than I have from you. I also got a much more well thought out response to why it is they they feel/felt the way to do/did.

 

And, I’ve addressed every single one of your “points”. You just don’t like my responses, and keep replying with “but, they feel this way...” or some other such nonsense. As if feelings matter more than actual fact. 
 

As far as the protesters, protest. No issue. My issue lies with the mob mentality where dissenting voices are shouted down and people are expected to blindly follow the narratives spoonfed to them by their media and political overlords. That is why I initially responded to your post. 
 

Ive repeatedly acknowledged that unarmed black people have died at the hands of law enforcement officers. You keep saying that, and I keep acknowledging it. 1 is “too many” and things can certainly get better. My point is that there are so few of these incidents that it does not go anywhere near showing that there is systemic racism in law enforcement. Chauvin is not an example of cops - including your relatives, including me (despite your nasty - yet not unsurprising - attempt at intimating that I’m a racist) and including those cops that are getting bottles of urine, bleach, and burning fuel thrown on them or at them. 
 

PS if you believe that racist cops only existed in the south during the 60s, you need to go read a history book. 

[Sig1Hunter]

14 minutes ago, SDS said:

You didn’t vote the source of your numbers. It has been debunked. 
 

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jun/05/larry-elder/larry-elder-mislabels-statistics-fatal-shootings-p/

 

I can not find a source that makes any of the claims you made. It also doesn’t address all those interactions that do not include death. This stuff has been studied to the moon and back. They have tried to compare outcomes of similar crimes between whites and minorities. I have yet to see a serious study, that takes an honest look at the situation, that suggests what you claim. 

Debunked? Debunked because the WaPo only collects info on shooting? Interesting that the WaPo is now adjusting those numbers since the riots have begun to redefine what unarmed means. Media overlords indeed...I would be interested to see what “new facts emerged”. Did a gun the suspect was holding turn out to be fake? That’s considered “unarmed” by the WaPo. 
 

As far as where I’ve gathered my numbers here:

 

https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/chi-fact-checker-police-killings-20150110-story.html

 

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpp15.pdf

 

 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 hours ago, Sig1Hunter said:

Hell, I’ll take almost any evidence. Just so long as it isnt based solely on the color of ones skin. Do you have any evidence? You are making the claim that it exists. In 2015, there were 53,469,300 law enforcement - civilian contacts which is 21.1% of the total population. Whites were contacted 37,334,200 times, which is 22.7% of the white population. Blacks were contacted 6,146,600 times, which is 19.8% of the black population.  So, white people are more likely to be contacted by police. I’ve already quoted the statistics for unarmed law enforcement deaths. Nine unarmed black people were killed last year. 7 were actually attacking the officer, grabbing for the officers  gun, or trying to run the officer over with a vehicle. 2 officers were criminally charged.

 

I'd appreciate the source on the 2015 "contacts" thing.  Thanks.

 

With regard to the statistics for "nine unarmed black people", I think you're not properly qualifying that number.  Per WaPo, that is 9 unarmed black people who were shot by active-duty police officers.  The "mapping police violence" project gives the number of unarmed blacks shot by police officers as 23.  If we included the categories "allegedly armed" (not necessarily proven) or "unclear", the number jumps to 232 police shootings

 

And here we are, protesting the death of a man because a police officer knelt on his neck for 8 minutes.  So if we included "beaten/restrained, taser, vehicle, and other" it rises to 259.

 

Again all just last year. 

 

I'm afraid saying only nine unarmed black people were killed last year is true only if one places a large number of caveats: the person was proven to be unarmed, not "unclear" etc, the cause of death is limited only to shooting, officer on active duty (not simply acting in a LE capacity)

 

Essentially, it's limiting the definition of what counts until there are very few cases, and then saying "look! very few cases", which is chill I guess if you're out to support a point, but not so much if you're trying to get an accurate picture of what's actually happening?

Here's some more information on the sources of data "mapping police violence" uses.  It does not include data from security guards or civilian militias

 

 

[SDS]

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I'd appreciate the source on the 2015 "contacts" thing.  Thanks.

 

With regard to the statistics for "nine unarmed black people", I think you're not properly qualifying that number.  Per WaPo, that is 9 unarmed black people who were shot by active-duty police officers.  The "mapping police violence" project gives the number of unarmed blacks shot by police officers as 23.  If we included the categories "allegedly armed" (not necessarily proven) or "unclear", the number jumps to 232 police shootings

 

And here we are, protesting the death of a man because a police officer knelt on his neck for 8 minutes.  So if we included "beaten/restrained, taser, vehicle, and other" it rises to 259.

 

Again all just last year. 

 

I'm afraid saying only nine unarmed black people were killed last year is true only if one places a large number of caveats: the person was proven to be unarmed, not "unclear" etc, the cause of death is limited only to shooting, etc.

 

Essentially, it's limiting the definition of what counts until there are very few cases, and then saying "look! very few cases", which is chill I guess if you're out to support a point, but not so much if you're trying to get an accurate picture of what's actually happening?

Here's some more information on the sources of data "mapping police violence" uses.

 

 

That was sort of my point. That Fox news commentator is not discussing things in a serious manner. He’s just a guy manipulating things to appease the audience.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 minutes ago, SDS said:

That was sort of my point. That Fox news commentator is not discussing things in a serious manner. He’s just a guy manipulating things to appease the audience.

 

I appreciate that. 

 

I thought it was useful to provide a source and some data.

 

I suppose I wish to add that the whole armed/unarmed thing - as far as I know, the civilian is counted as "armed" if he has a firearm in his possession, not drawn or pointed at the police.  For example, in 2011, Anthony Lamar Smith would be listed as "armed" even though there's question as to how the gun got in his car; Philando Castile was listed as "armed" although he was reaching for his license and registration and simply acknowledged being licensed to carry a weapon; etc etc.

[Sig1Hunter]

9 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I'd appreciate the source on the 2015 "contacts" thing.  Thanks.

 

With regard to the statistics for "nine unarmed black people", I think you're not properly qualifying that number.  Per WaPo, that is 9 unarmed black people who were shot by active-duty police officers.  The "mapping police violence" project gives the number of unarmed blacks shot by police officers as 23.  If we included the categories "allegedly armed" (not necessarily proven) or "unclear", the number jumps to 232 police shootings

 

And here we are, protesting the death of a man because a police officer knelt on his neck for 8 minutes.  So if we included "beaten/restrained, taser, vehicle, and other" it rises to 259.

 

Again all just last year. 

 

I'm afraid saying only nine unarmed black people were killed last year is true only if one places a large number of caveats: the person was proven to be unarmed, not "unclear" etc, the cause of death is limited only to shooting, etc.

 

Essentially, it's limiting the definition of what counts until there are very few cases, and then saying "look! very few cases", which is chill I guess if you're out to support a point, but not so much if you're trying to get an accurate picture of what's actually happening?

Here's some more information on the sources of data "mapping police violence" uses.

 

 

I linked it in my response to SDS. I noticed that the stats include death by vehicle in your post. Is that to say that if a cop accidentally crashes into a black person and kills them, that is included? I mean, we can all agree that traffic crashes are one of the major killers of innocent people in this country. But is it an indicator of racist police?  What are the numbers for other races? 

Edit: I see the answer to my question in your link.

 

Edited June 7, 2020 by Sig1Hunter

[FireChans]

7 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I'd appreciate the source on the 2015 "contacts" thing.  Thanks.

 

With regard to the statistics for "nine unarmed black people", I think you're not properly qualifying that number.  Per WaPo, that is 9 unarmed black people who were shot by active-duty police officers.  The "mapping police violence" project gives the number of unarmed blacks shot by police officers as 23.  If we included the categories "allegedly armed" (not necessarily proven) or "unclear", the number jumps to 232 police shootings

 

And here we are, protesting the death of a man because a police officer knelt on his neck for 8 minutes.  So if we included "beaten/restrained, taser, vehicle, and other" it rises to 259.

 

Again all just last year. 

 

I'm afraid saying only nine unarmed black people were killed last year is true only if one places a large number of caveats: the person was proven to be unarmed, not "unclear" etc, the cause of death is limited only to shooting, officer on active duty (not simply acting in a LE capacity)

 

Essentially, it's limiting the definition of what counts until there are very few cases, and then saying "look! very few cases", which is chill I guess if you're out to support a point, but not so much if you're trying to get an accurate picture of what's actually happening?

Here's some more information on the sources of data "mapping police violence" uses.  It does not include data from security guards or civilian militias

 

 

The Philly police study had a neat little category for TPF, which meant threat perception failure. Basically, anybody who reached for their waistband or something similar, but didn’t actually have a weapon, counted. I’d like to see that level of categorization used more often.

 

 

[Happy]

22 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Actually I know of no evidence that Martin Gugino is an "Antifa member" (whatever does that mean anyway?) nor "professional agitator".

He's retired (no surprise age 75) and self describes as a "peace activist".

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/05/martin-gugino-pushed-ground-buffalo-police-known-peaceful-man/3160820001/

https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/buffalo/human-interest/2020/06/05/-more-than-an-injured-protester----martin-gugino--an-activist

there's a TBN article but every time I try to get the link it asks me to log in again ?‍♂️

 

Anyway I find no evidence that he's an "antifa member", which seems to have become a convenient bucket to use to discredit anyone at a protest.

I suppose you could call him a "professional agitator" but what makes a protestor, someone who is passionate about causes and likes to exercise his constitutionally guaranteed free speech rights, distinct from a "professional agitator" - professional usually means paid, what is the evidence of that.

 

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/06/06/buffalo-officials-duped-by-professional-antifa-provocateur-arrest-and-charge-two-police-officers-righteous-police-team-stand-together-and-walk-out/

 

This is a conservative media link, because the mainstream media won't cover it honestly; they do not want it disclosed that these protests are ripe for far left organizations to infiltrate and use for a completely different purpose than what was intended.  Look at his twitter profile, which is linked in the article and pretty telling.

[Sig1Hunter]

2 minutes ago, FireChans said:

The Philly police study had a neat little category for TPF, which meant threat perception failure. Basically, anybody who reached for their waistband or something similar, but didn’t actually have a weapon, counted. I’d like to see that level of categorization used more often.

 

 

Suicide by cop. 

[JoPoy88]

7 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

Do you have anything specious mind?

 

[Edit: did you mean, "do you have anything specific in mind?"  -Talking paperclip]

I don’t and as a white person I would not even attempt to try because it’s not my place to determine appropriate responses to this issue. Goodell and the league need to work with its black players and leaders to determine what’s appropriate.

[FireChans]

2 minutes ago, Sig1Hunter said:

Suicide by cop. 

Honestly, I feel really bad for cops. There are a lot of thankless jobs in the world, but that’s one you couldn’t pay me a million a year to do. You see fellow officers err on the side of caution and get shot. You make a split second decision and discharge your weapon and get called a murderer.

 

Man, ***** all that.

[Sig1Hunter]

9 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Honestly, I feel really bad for cops. There are a lot of thankless jobs in the world, but that’s one you couldn’t pay me a million a year to do. You see fellow officers err on the side of caution and get shot. You make a split second decision and discharge your weapon and get called a murderer.

 

Man, ***** all that.

Yeah. Tonight I’m reminded of the officer.. in San Diego maybe(?)...in the McDonald’s. A young boy who happened to be black was trying to order some food, but didn’t have enough money. The cop saw what was going on and bought the meal for the kid. Not long after finishing his meal and leaving the restaurant, the officer was shot and killed. When he bought that young man his meal, he had no idea that he was on camera doing that. He didn’t do it for fame or notoriety.  99% of cops that I know would do that same thing if they were in the same circumstance. This trouncing of law enforcement is ridiculous and sickening. “Racist police” is a term that is thrown around without any resistance in a lot of places, and its disgusting to me. 
 

Edit:  it bugs me that I can’t remember that cops name, but everyone knows who Michael Brown is.

Edited June 7, 2020 by Sig1Hunter

[BarleyNY]

6 hours ago, Happy said:

 

I see.  It's ok then for people to pay $100+ for a ticket to get into a game, in addition to paying an exorbitant amount for food and drinks all for the privilege of being educated, made to feel uncomfortable, etc by people who take it upon themselves to voice (including their actions) the misdeeds of a small amount of American police forces?  Imagine if any other business got into customer's faces about <name the issue> and expected the customer to come back; won't happen.  Same with the NFL, and no, it is not too big to fail.  Careful about what you're proposing.

First of all, I’m not proposing anything. I am explaining what happened in this case as well as many before it.  That’s how protest work.

 

I get that you don’t want your leisure activity to include a demonstration.  Okay.  But the other side sees an America where they are second class citizens.  They see black people die at the hands of police over and over and nothing done about it.  They see the few incidents caught on video where the offending officers are held accountable as the rare exceptions, not the rule.  The biggest factor in how people view this issue is whether they see the recent deaths of black people at the hands of police as isolated incidents or as something systemic.  It’s as simple as that.  The people protesting definitely see it as systemic.  Protesting in that case seems pretty justified to me.

 

If the murder of George Floyd hadn’t been recorded, then he’d be just another statistic.  Does anyone honestly think that anyone would be held accountable?  We’ve heard the officers say he was resisting and seen the videos that show he wasn’t.  But without those videos who’s questioning the story of the police?  Personally I can’t see how some momentary discomfort at a football game outweighs the outrage of that.  I’ll just ask that you think about the position of people who live every day like that and I’ll leave it there.

[Sig1Hunter]

Found it. Jeremy Henwood. Ambushed by a criminal POS and shot in the head with a shotgun, McDonald’s food still warm in the bag next to him in his car.

 

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-surveillance-video-shows-officers-final-moments-2011aug16-story.html

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 minutes ago, Happy said:

 

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/06/06/buffalo-officials-duped-by-professional-antifa-provocateur-arrest-and-charge-two-police-officers-righteous-police-team-stand-together-and-walk-out/

 

This is a conservative media link, because the mainstream media won't cover it honestly; they do not want it disclosed that these protests are ripe for far left organizations to infiltrate and use for a completely different purpose than what was intended.  Look at his twitter profile, which is linked in the article and pretty telling.

 

I'm sorry, but I don't find that to be a credible source and I think it's a stretch to call it a "conservative media link":
"QUESTIONABLE SOURCE

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence"
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/07/websites-post-fake-satirical-stories/  describes it as follows:

Theconservativetreehouse.com posts conservative-leaning stories that sometimes include misinformation. It has a lengthy description on its “About Us” page, including:

“Fear is at the core of liberalism, and love/trust is at the core of conservatism. Liberalism is about control. Conservatism is about self-empowerment.”

The site is registered through Domains By Proxy, a company that hides the identity and location of the owner of the website.
 

Nor do I find blanket discrediting of all mainstream media to make sense.

Sources like AP are required to verify everything with two independent sources.  Mainstream media has credibility on the line.  The owners are public record.  The reporters are public record.  The sources must be identified in some way and vetted by the editors.

 

You got you a site there with no sources, a hidden owner and location, and a track record of having included misinformation in the past, and you find that more credible than a well-identified wire source or media outlet with a well-known, accountable owner and location that verifies sources?  I"m sorry, that strikes me as gullible, I can't find a better word.   Wooo woo, the owner isn't identified, the location isn't identified, the motives are unknown, and the sources aren't given so Whoop whoop yep that sure makes it more credible than the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Buffalo Snoose, AP, Guardian, BBC, etc etc.

On Mr Gugino's Twitter Feed, I see that he supports Black Lives Matter, that he appears distressed by videos showing apparent police excessive force, that he disagrees with President Trump characterizing Antifa as a terrorist organization, and that he believes the First Amendment should be interpreted to mean that curfews do not apply to peaceful protests. 

 

He also supports a number of causes that would be typically identified as "liberal" such as seeking due process or closure of Guantanamo, fair treatment of Palestinians etc.  He is clearly a "Bernie Bro" and kind of far left in his politics. None of this makes him an "antifa".

 

Protests are always ripe for extremists of all stripes to infiltrate and subvert from the intended cause.  Twitter just removed accounts purporting to be Antifa that were actually started by known White Supremicist groups, not?

[FireChans]

1 minute ago, Sig1Hunter said:

Found it. Jeremy Henwood. Ambushed by a criminal POS and shot in the head with a shotgun, McDonald’s food still warm in the bag next to him in his car.

 

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-surveillance-video-shows-officers-final-moments-2011aug16-story.html

@GoBills808

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 minutes ago, Sig1Hunter said:

Found it. Jeremy Henwood. Ambushed by a criminal POS and shot in the head with a shotgun, McDonald’s food still warm in the bag next to him in his car.

 

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-surveillance-video-shows-officers-final-moments-2011aug16-story.html

 

That's horrid

 

We've had some horrid cases here in StL as well.  Officer waiting at a red light in a marked police car, POS drove up next to him and shot him 2x in the face.  He survived, but changed his life forever.  All for what?

[GoBills808]

Terrible story and unsure why tagged

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, Sig1Hunter said:

PS if you believe that racist cops only existed in the south during the 60s, you need to go read a history book. 

 

Truth

 

7 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Terrible story and unsure why tagged

 

He brought it up in a previous post and couldn't remember the officer's name.  He made a new post instead of editing the original.  All good.

 

The  thing is, I don't think there are any of us (I suppose I could be wrong) who would deny that there are many police who do fair and honorable job, and who are killed or severely injured in the line of duty.  And it's horrid just as police having to endure having bottles of noxious fluid and rocks thrown at them is wrong.

 

The problem is, if an officer is killed or injured, typically no stone will be left unturned to identify the perpetrator and the full weight of the law will come down on him or her. 

 

If a police officer in the line of duty kills or severely injures someone, many times there is not an independent investigation and the police officer does not face justice, or the justice they face seems like a squib.  The ready availability of video-capable phones is changing things, but police accountability for just treatment should not have to depend upon whether or not there's a video running.

[FireChans]

8 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Terrible story and unsure why tagged

117%

[GoBills808]

Just now, FireChans said:

117%

I guess I should have added a 'haha' at the end

[Sig1Hunter]

7 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

That's horrid

 

We've had some horrid cases here in StL as well.  Officer waiting at a red light in a marked police car, POS drove up next to him and shot him 2x in the face.  He survived, but changed his life forever.  All for what?

That last question is at the essence of my disgust at what is going on now. If the narrative is false, and people are getting whipped up in to a tizzy, they will take that out on cops - like we are seeing during these “protests”. Can things get better in LE - yes. The silver lining in the horrible killing of George Lloyd should have been a catalyst for that. Everyone is behind that it was wrong. What practices allowed Chauvin to be hired? And to be retained? Why couldn’t we take a look at those things and work towards fixing those? Instead we’ve been terribly divided into opposing camps. As such, I’m scared there will be many more cases like that in the near future. 

[FireChans]

Just now, GoBills808 said:

I guess I should have added a 'haha' at the end

Only if you wanted to let me know you were kidding!

[LABILLBACKER]

19 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

First of all, I’m not proposing anything. I am explaining what happened in this case as well as many before it.  That’s how protest work.

 

I get that you don’t want your leisure activity to include a demonstration.  Okay.  But the other side sees an America where they are second class citizens.  They see black people die at the hands of police over and over and nothing done about it.  They see the few incidents caught on video where the offending officers are held accountable as the rare exceptions, not the rule.  The biggest factor in how people view this issue is whether they see the recent deaths of black people at the hands of police as isolated incidents or as something systemic.  It’s as simple as that.  The people protesting definitely see it as systemic.  Protesting in that case seems pretty justified to me.

 

If the murder of George Floyd hadn’t been recorded, then he’d be just another statistic.  Does anyone honestly think that anyone would be held accountable?  We’ve heard the officers say he was resisting and seen the videos that show he wasn’t.  But without those videos who’s questioning the story of the police?  Personally I can’t see how some momentary discomfort at a football game outweighs the outrage of that.  I’ll just ask that you think about the position of people who live every day like that and I’ll leave it 

I realize that most cops are great amazing people who would do the right thing. But the problem is alot of people say it's only 1% who are bad(racist). Just a few "bad apples". There are 16,000 police departments in the US. And there are 16,000 different ways these officers are trained. I'm afraid the amount of so called bad officers is higher than 1%. There were 4 cops on that George Floyd call and 100% of them chose to commit a heinous act. We have to vet police candidates better. We need some type of federally mandated training without choke holds and knee drops. But most importantly we need systemic racism to end forever. We need to recount the apples.

[K-9]

21 minutes ago, Sig1Hunter said:

Insulting them? I love them! I was just trying to get a grasp on the seemingly duplicitous nature of your post. 
 

And yes, of course I’ve been accused of being a racist cop...for the sole reason that I’m white and I’m a cop. The same way that you are doing directly and indirectly. I attempted to educate those people in the same way I am trying to educate you...by engaging in dialogue and showing them that I’m not racist, and neither are the overwhelming majority of my law enforcement brethren. It’s funny that almost every time I had similar discussions with minorities I’ve gotten much less vitriol than I have from you. I also got a much more well thought out response to why it is they they feel/felt the way to do/did.

 

And, I’ve addressed every single one of your “points”. You just don’t like my responses, and keep replying with “but, they feel this way...” or some other such nonsense. As if feelings matter more than actual fact. 
 

As far as the protesters, protest. No issue. My issue lies with the mob mentality where dissenting voices are shouted down and people are expected to blindly follow the narratives spoonfed to them by their media and political overlords. That is why I initially responded to your post. 
 

Ive repeatedly acknowledged that unarmed black people have died at the hands of law enforcement officers. You keep saying that, and I keep acknowledging it. 1 is “too many” and things can certainly get better. My point is that there are so few of these incidents that it does not go anywhere near showing that there is systemic racism in law enforcement. Chauvin is not an example of cops - including your relatives, including me (despite your nasty - yet not unsurprising - attempt at intimating that I’m a racist) and including those cops that are getting bottles of urine, bleach, and burning fuel thrown on them or at them. 
 

PS if you believe that racist cops only existed in the south during the 60s, you need to go read a history book. 

The only reason why you thought I was being duplicitous is because you carelessly read my post referring to the Jim Crow era. I never suggested today’s cops were like Jim Crow era cops. I SAID that, based on that history of systemic oppression/racism of black people, can you understand why people would still be leery of it today? It is fairly recent history after all. It’s a legit question. Especially because we both know, just as black people know, that all of that ingrained racism didn’t magically leave the hearts and minds of those that practiced it for generations just because the laws were changed. 
 

If I were going to call you a racist, I would call you a racist. You like putting words in people’s mouths. I was asking if your previous reference to blacks being resentful for being pulled over just for being black pissed you off or not. That’s a fair question given your take on all this and the fact that your brought it up. I was wondering if that experience lent itself to a bias that shapes your view on these matters and it’s perfectly understandable if it does. Just as a protestor’s bias might shape theirs. 

 

I find your dismissive attitude about “feelings” naive. You sound as if just pointing out statistic after statistic should automatically convince people they just need to be rational because they wouldn’t be so upset if they only knew the statistical facts. Or that people should feel better simply because there are “so few” of these incidents. Really? Even when you yourself acknowledge that one is too many? 
 

Regarding your snide advice to go read a history book, I have to laugh. Let’s just say I’m confident in my knowledge of certain historical events given the years I’ve spent studied them. But you’re right. Sundown laws, for example, were certainly emblematic of institutionalized racism in many other areas around the country. And again, that history lends itself to current day worries by the black community that those sentiments (feelings, I know) still exist, even if not in official codified practice. If it were my people, I’d be leery, too. 

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

3 hours ago, Shamrock said:

The NFLPA boss is a long time multiple re-elected Lawyer- though, don’t think he was a player? But he’s done it for a long time- players voting obviously feel he’s doing good. Is Lorax on some NFLPA as well? From memory wasn’t Trace Armstrong, Troy Vincent and then Kevin Maewae all player heads of the NFLPA. Not sure current or recent though, those guys were around when I was younger... pre kids... If guys keep getting re-elected year after year is that an indication that the players feel they’re doing a good job? I definitely remember when Troy Vincent was a President, that part hasn’t been lost to Minecraft and Paw Patrol!

Is there a big difference in the basketball at that union level. Maewae was a superstar. Or is there more, volume in the basketball. Maybe it’s a team list size thing? I don’t follow basketball.

 

1) consider that the NBA exec team over the last few years has had Chris Paul, LeBron, Carmelo, and steph curry. Those are superstars. I don’t think comparable NFL players, like your Tom Brady’s of the NFL, have served in similar positions in the NFL. Very good players have served, but not your “faces of the league.”

 

2) Put differently, how effective would the paw patrol be without Ryder? ?

[Happy]

14 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

https://www.factcheck.org/2017/07/websites-post-fake-satirical-stories/  describes it as follows:

Theconservativetreehouse.com posts conservative-leaning stories that sometimes include misinformation. It has a lengthy description on its “About Us” page, including:

“Fear is at the core of liberalism, and love/trust is at the core of conservatism. Liberalism is about control. Conservatism is about self-empowerment.”

The site is registered through Domains By Proxy, a company that hides the identity and location of the owner of the website.
 

Nor do I find blanket discrediting of all mainstream media to make sense.

Sources like AP are required to verify everything with two independent sources.  Mainstream media has credibility on the line.  The owners are public record.  The reporters are public record.  The sources must be identified in some way and vetted by the editors.

 

You got you a site there with no sources, a hidden owner and location, and a track record of having included misinformation in the past, and you find that more credible than a well-identified wire source or media outlet with a well-known, accountable owner and location that verifies sources?  I"m sorry, that strikes me as gullible, I can't find a better word.   Wooo woo, the owner isn't identified, the location isn't identified, the motives are unknown, and the sources aren't given so Whoop whoop yep that sure makes it more credible than the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Buffalo Snoose, AP, Guardian, BBC, etc etc.

 

I mentioned it was a conservative site because none of the vaunted, msm outlets either bother to disclose information that is contrary to their agenda, or are too lazy to dig deeper.  CTH has been around for years and runs articles based on current events, including those that more traditional outlets cover.

If that strikes you as gullible, well I guess that is your problem.  Again, they have been covering events for years and digging deeper into events than WP, WSJ, NYT, etc, etc. and are typically not inaccurate.  The story broke today, so more should come to light in the next few days.

The site is privately owned, why do they need to disclose ownership?  All they have to do is report accurately, which they do.

Interesting that your factcheck.org link only seems to list more conservative leaning sites as containing 'misinformation.'  No left leaning sites that I can see....hmmm.  You mentioned gullible and bias?

 

Getting back to the original issue, why did 57 Buffalo cops resign from the Emergency Response Team, and risk their careers, if these two cops did indeed harm an 'innocent' 75 year old protestor?  Could it be that they know something that isn't being reported by msm outlets?

 

[Sig1Hunter]

8 minutes ago, K-9 said:
 

If I were going to call you a racist, I would call you a racist. You like putting words in people’s mouths. I was asking if your previous reference to blacks being resentful for being pulled over just for being black pissed you off or not. That’s a fair question given your take on all this and the fact that your brought it up. I was wondering if that experience lent itself to a bias that shapes your view on these matters and it’s perfectly understandable if it does. Just as a protestor’s bias might shape theirs. 

 

I find your dismissive attitude about “feelings” naive. 

Oh? Is that all you said? I swore I read where you suggested that I would choke someone who dared call me a racist. Those were your words, not mine. Because I’m a cop and I happen to be white that makes you feel like you are justified in making such a ridiculous and disgusting statement. 
 

Regarding my “dismissive” attitude: people can have all the feelings they want. When those feelings start directly effecting the lives and property of others (others who are perfectly innocent in the situation), that’s where their right to have their feelings hurt end. 
 

I thought you were going to bed. 

[Nuncha]

2 hours ago, TroutDog said:

Perhaps you should read AND comprehend the US Constitution. Just a thought. 

I understand the constituion clearly - maybe YOU should try to undersand why dishonoring your country to raise awarness is unacceptable to alot of people. 

[K-9]

9 minutes ago, Sig1Hunter said:

Oh? Is that all you said? I swore I read where you suggested that I would choke someone who dared call me a racist. Those were your words, not mine. Because I’m a cop and I happen to be white that makes you feel like you are justified in making such a ridiculous and disgusting statement. 
 

Regarding my “dismissive” attitude: people can have all the feelings they want. When those feelings start directly effecting the lives and property of others (others who are perfectly innocent in the situation), that’s where their right to have their feelings hurt end. 
 

I thought you were going to bed. 

Again, you didn’t carefully read what I said. I said did the black guy you pulled over piss you off so much that you had to choke down your anger. Nothing about choking anyone else. It would certainly piss me off and that would certainly lend itself to a bias that might shape my opinion on these matters. Please read more carefully before putting words in my mouth that I didn’t even think of let alone say out loud. You’ve done that a couple times now. 
 

Dismissive is the word that comes to mind when you seem to ignore the many reasons people have to “feel” the way they do. It’s regrettable that vandals, looters, and other bad actors have stained the 99% of peaceful protestors looking for redress. Just like Chauvin et al stain the 99.9% of the good cops out there. It’s not fair to paint with such a broad brush, is it? 

 

I was going to disengage from this give and take, but I couldn’t let your insult of my grandfather and uncles go unanswered. 

 

After all our discourse, I think I have an idea of where you stand and why. And I respect where that position comes from. Time to move on.