The use of the word "robbery" is bullshit. I have seen bar fights and fights as a teen between white people, where police show up and no one dies. I worked at a 7-11 and saw WHITE PEOPLE shoplift. One WHITE GUY stole several cartons of cigarettes and got physical with our store manager while trying to escape.

I did stupid shit when I was a teen myself. I drank beer, smoked pot, and even in college saw plenty of physical confrontations and no one died. I even stupidly smashed private property for fun. If I had been caught I would have deserved to be punished but death?

No matter what you saw on that tape, it still does not justify shooting an unarmed person after they put their hands up That was shoplifting, and that shove, if done by a white person, wouldn't have even been called felony assault.

The fact remains that blacks on average will be judged more harshly for the same similar actions than whites. I have seen far worse done by whites than what you see on that video.

Now here is the truth, if we as a collective society don't want it to be about race, then we as a society should fact it is a race issue. There is a disparity in how minorities are economically impacted and viewed by law enforcement . Blacks do have to worry about being black in public. If anyone thinks they only have themselves to blame they are assholes and are ignoring our nation's history of institutionalized deep seeded bigotry.

Race is where republicans, and the rich want the conversation to be. It is also where the gun industry wants the conversation to be. Maintain the economic disparity between the top and bottom, you can gett hurting white and poor republicans to point the finger at blacks instead of pointing it at the right enemy, greedy assholes pitting us against each other.

Like I have said, as a teen and young adult, seeing my white friends do far worse, to know that this video is bullshit and is merely race baiting and still would not excuse the cop from murdering an unarmed teen.

Now the other aspect of this is, if you rightfully recoil at the overly armed police AND I AGREE, that is also a product of big industry writing law for us so they do what they want regardless of how it harms the rest of us. You cannot have it both ways. You cant have a free for all market where the public is armed to the teeth then stupidly expect law enforcement not to be able to be safe. If they have to constantly fear an armed society, they are going to be trained to fear the worst and assume the worst. If we do not want that then we have to consider ourselves the AMOUNT of guns floating around.

I am sick of people blaming blacks and even any poor person in general. I am sick of republicans and libertarians and Ayn Rand assholes claiming that "get government out of the way" helps. None of our social ills can be fixed by allowing one class of people write laws while blaming everyone else for the flood of money they pump into politics to pit working people against each other.

I am also tired of quoting RICH people and companies that AGREE WITH ME. The bottom line is that this kid did not deserve to die. The only way to take race out of the issue is to fight the real enemy, economic disparity, and that is affecting more and more white middle class and white poor people as well.

Why are you conflating Libertarianism and the Republican Party? Also, the statement you make directly following that odd choice does not describe Libertarianism or any of its related Anarchist cousins.

Quote:I am sick of people blaming blacks and even any poor person in general. I am sick of republicans and libertarians and Ayn Rand assholes claiming that "get government out of the way" helps. None of our social ills can be fixed by allowing one class of people write laws while blaming everyone else for the flood of money they pump into politics to pit working people against each other.

Underlining mine.

Anarchism and Libertarian ideals work for a world with a very small government or no government, and work for a non-existent or highly simplified legal system. So please tell me, how exactly does NOT "getting the government out of the way" achieve a unification of the classes and a lowering of "money the pump into politics to pit working people against each other"? Government is a class of its own, with the people in it dictating laws and fucking everyone else over. Stealing our money under the guise of "taxes" and fighting a "War on Drugs" to do what? Keep us from getting a little high? On a drug that's been shown to be far less dangerous than anything currently legal?

Fuck labels, you do not need a fucking political word to understand reality. "Anarchism" is still a bullshit word because it is merely a label that no matter what like anything humans do, can be subject to utopia bullshit to the point of abuse like any other label

1. Humans are diverse, thus government has to accept and protect that diversity.

2. GOVERNMENT will happen, to say it shouldn't exist or that we can police ourselves without it is ABSURD.

3. AND MOST IMPORTANT, is a ban on monopolies of power, be they political, religious or business, public or private.

YOU DO NOT need to us a fucking label to state our natural human behavior. You simply cannot slap a simple label on a complex species. One size does not fit all so the only thing you can do is protect people from monopolies of power.

"Government is a class of its own".

NO government is not the enemy, the enemy is when WEALTH gains a monopoly in any sector of society. Humans run everything, and everything humans run require money to gain power. Private and public, religious or political, to gain power all collect money and use it to get power.

There is not one government in the world, that does not invest in the global market. The issue is not more government vs no government, or no private sector. The issue is monopolies of power by any sector of society because all require money to keep and maintain.

(August 16, 2014 at 9:44 am)Brian37 Wrote: Fuck labels, ....

You do realize that words are labels, right?

(August 16, 2014 at 9:44 am)Brian37 Wrote: 2. GOVERNMENT will happen, to say it shouldn't exist or that we can police ourselves without it is ABSURD.

Wait, wait, wait. How can a government serve the purpose of "being a government" if its members are composed of humans who are apparantly incapable of "policing ourselves without it"? Who governs the governors? Who governs those who govern the governors? Ad infinitum.

(August 16, 2014 at 9:46 am)Cato Wrote:

(August 16, 2014 at 9:44 am)Brian37 Wrote: Fuck labels, ....

You do realize that words are labels, right?

Take it in context please. No words are not going to go away, I am under no illusions. But humans stupidly in our species history make those labels the priority rather than the evolutionary fact that we are not a separate species.

The "fuck labels" is more a demand that we put the individual first and accept we are not a separate species. It should be more important what we have in common as a species.

(August 16, 2014 at 8:59 am)Brian37 Wrote: No matter what you saw on that tape, it still does not justify shooting an unarmed person after they put their hands up That was shoplifting, and that shove, if done by a white person, wouldn't have even been called felony assault.

The guy was shot because he attacked an armed policemen, not because he was black or because he stole some cigars.

The video is pertinent not because it shows a committed property crime, but because of the behavior observed in the crime of extreme belligerence.

Attacks on armed policemen don't turn out well for any social group in the USA. It's a STUPID thing to do, and your claim that it is somehow less stupid and more accepted when done by white criminals is laughable, and certainly needs some citations.

So, are you advocating that the police force should create an affirmative action policy where black perps are to be allowed 25% more offensive violent struggle time with a policeman before he shoots? Is that your goal for solving the problems in Philadelphia? Would that help the black portion of society?

(August 16, 2014 at 10:26 am)Brakeman Wrote:

(August 16, 2014 at 8:59 am)Brian37 Wrote: No matter what you saw on that tape, it still does not justify shooting an unarmed person after they put their hands up That was shoplifting, and that shove, if done by a white person, wouldn't have even been called felony assault.

The guy was shot because he attacked an armed policemen, not because he was black or because he stole some cigars.

The video is pertinent not because it shows a committed property crime, but because of the behavior observed in the crime of extreme belligerence.

Attacks on armed policemen don't turn out well for any social group in the USA. It's a STUPID thing to do, and your claim that it is somehow less stupid and more accepted when done by white criminals is laughable, and certainly needs some citations.

So, are you advocating that the police force should create an affirmative action policy where black perps are to be allowed 25% more offensive violent struggle time with a policeman before he shoots? Is that your goal for solving the problems in Philadelphia? Would that help the black portion of society?

BULLSHIT, he would not have done that in a white middle class neighborhood much less a rich neighborhood.

There were several witnesses who said the cop pulled him into the car. The only one claiming that the cop went for his gun was the cop. Regardless after he was free he was running away UNARMED, and was still shot several times, including with his arms up.

Again, I have seen, whites do far worse in bars, in domestic disputes than what this teen is accused of in that video. Now if the story from the PO is that the cop did not know then that means the mere act of harassing the kid over jaywalking is absurd.

Shoplifting and jaywalking either way does not constitute that cop doing what he did.

---

(August 16, 2014 at 10:26 am)Brakeman Wrote:

(August 16, 2014 at 8:59 am)Brian37 Wrote: No matter what you saw on that tape, it still does not justify shooting an unarmed person after they put their hands up That was shoplifting, and that shove, if done by a white person, wouldn't have even been called felony assault.

The guy was shot because he attacked an armed policemen, not because he was black or because he stole some cigars.

The video is pertinent not because it shows a committed property crime, but because of the behavior observed in the crime of extreme belligerence.

Attacks on armed policemen don't turn out well for any social group in the USA. It's a STUPID thing to do, and your claim that it is somehow less stupid and more accepted when done by white criminals is laughable, and certainly needs some citations.

So, are you advocating that the police force should create an affirmative action policy where black perps are to be allowed 25% more offensive violent struggle time with a policeman before he shoots? Is that your goal for solving the problems in Philadelphia? Would that help the black portion of society?

NO ASSHOLE, no one is allowed to be "violent", your sucking the dicks of cops is why society doesn't trust them. Our country ignoring the disparity of who is more likely to be treated worse under the same circumstances is the problem.

The vast majority of urban poor who are non violent still outweigh violent people. Idiots like you look at the looting and burning of the one gas station, ignoring the majority of peaceful protesters and ignoring the video OF BLACK PEOPLE protecting the same gas station where the video of the shoplifting took place from looting.

BLACKS have much more to fear when even being pulled over for traffic violations, even with no felony record or criminal record. Blacks are still more likely to get punished more harshly for non violent crimes.

Crime between races is on average occur at the same rate, but blacks are punished at a higher rate and more severe rate than whites.

You are not going to bate me into the bullshit argument "look at what they do". Non violent people outweigh violent people in every race. Crime is also a ratio in every race as well.

I have worked low pay jobs all my life, I was a teen myself and did all sorts of stupid shit, seen all sorts of assaults by whites, witness vandalism by whites, and not once did I see a white person get shot, or even assaulted by cops even when they were called over physical assault.

How is it a white guy can take a machine gun into a movie theater and murder dozens of people and still make it to prison alive, but one guy jaywalking ends up dead over what?

You have your fucking head in the sand using that cop out excuse "look they get violent too".

That is exactly where republicans and the rich want whites to be. In fear of blacks so that they can get even the hurting middle class and poor whites to focus on race instead of wallet issues.

(August 16, 2014 at 10:57 am)Brian37 Wrote:

(August 16, 2014 at 10:26 am)Brakeman Wrote: The guy was shot because he attacked an armed policemen, not because he was black or because he stole some cigars.

The video is pertinent not because it shows a committed property crime, but because of the behavior observed in the crime of extreme belligerence.

Attacks on armed policemen don't turn out well for any social group in the USA. It's a STUPID thing to do, and your claim that it is somehow less stupid and more accepted when done by white criminals is laughable, and certainly needs some citations.

So, are you advocating that the police force should create an affirmative action policy where black perps are to be allowed 25% more offensive violent struggle time with a policeman before he shoots? Is that your goal for solving the problems in Philadelphia? Would that help the black portion of society?

BULLSHIT, he would not have done that in a white middle class neighborhood much less a rich neighborhood.

There were several witnesses who said the cop pulled him into the car. The only one claiming that the cop went for his gun was the cop. Regardless after he was free he was running away UNARMED, and was still shot several times, including with his arms up.

You didn't answer any of the questions, you just went on a racial rant.
Calm down and answer these questions.

1. Did he attack an armed policemen?
2. Is it a good idea to attack armed policemen and should society push to make it safer for all races to attack armed policemen, or do we need an affirmative action so that it is only safer for huge black men to attack policemen?
3. According to the reports I've read, the perp was shot once inside the door of the cop car and additional times in the street. So is it your gripe that he was shot the additional times or that he was shot in the initial struggle?
4. Do you think the witnesses you cite are more trustworthy than the police? If so, Why?
5. Do the black members of the same police force share your opinion? Why or why not?
6. What bothers black society more, that black criminals might be treated more harshly than white criminals, or that there is more black public indignation on the treatment of back criminals than for the causes of the existence of black criminals?

Speaking as a white man, If the coming month showed a huge uptick of black police officers shooting white criminals attacking them, it wouldn't bother me at all provided they weren't innocent. Hell, in most cases I'd buy the black cop a drink, and cheer to his health. I might even be persuaded to protest the lack of police shootings of white criminals. Yet I wouldn't attack my neighbor. I do have some compassion for the criminals, but they made the first move against society and refused to become a productive and abiding member.

It is a good argument that the cop's purported action of shooting the man after he had moved away and was no longer a direct threat was a mistake and could even rise to the level of a crime, but considering that he had already been attacked and he had already fired his gun, the adrenaline in the heat of the moment certainly mollifies the required motive.

If we as a society are going to hold a cop strictly accountable for an adrenaline soaked action, when are we going to start the prosecutions of all of the American soldiers of foreign wars that killed so many innocent civilians?

FOR THE LAST FUCKING TIME,

It does not matter what he did, the fact that he was approached at all for either jaywalking or petty theft with a presumption on the cop's part of any guilt is the problem. It still does not change that after he started running away he was shot several times. The presumption of guilt is what blacks face every day.

The guy he was with, SAID that it was about them being in the middle of the street, confirmed by the county official that the cop did not know about the theft at the time of approach.

The witness with him said it was sudden and that the cop with no warning started pulling him into the car. You jump anyone like that they are going to react. I do not believe the cop at all that the "suspect" went for the gun, I think he did what any normal person would do when suddenly assaulted.

And several witnesses besides the guy with him said the cop continued to shoot at an unarmed man.

If you are going to accuse Brown of anything wrong, it shows that you know absolutely nothing about he police state blacks have to endure every day. Blacks are presumed guilty and because of that, also fight back even when they don't want to and run even if they don't want to because of cops presuming their guilt. You get that story even from blacks that do not run.

WHY because idiots like you do not want to face that race is an issue in how cops approach blacks. You would know that if you talked to enough blacks who live in those communities.

Take your pick?

Presumption of guilt for jaywalking, or presumption of guilt for petty theft? That kid died because of profiling and presumption of guilt and bad police training.