White Privilege at MU

[GGGG]

Most people disregard law & order in our society, especially in cases where it applies to them for some matter they feel is trivial.  There are many examples.

Right.  And 4ever thinks that unless someone immediately does everything that the Police ask you when you commit trivial acts, they should be tased and thrown to the ground.  Otherwise we are living in a society with complete disorder.  Comical..

[4everwarriors]

Next time someone intentionally drives thru a red light because they have determined that law doesn't apply to them, I'm hoping you're not on the receiving end of the collision.

[tower912]

If they do, they should be ticketed.    Not tased.   

[GGGG]

Next time someone intentionally drives thru a red light because they have determined that law doesn't apply to them, I'm hoping you're not on the receiving end of the collision.

LOL.  No one said that Brown shouldn't have received a citation for parking in a handicapped spot.

Man who would have thought the nonsensical crap you normally say here would be the most intelligent stuff you post?

[Galway Eagle]

Next time someone intentionally drives thru a red light because they have determined that law doesn't apply to them, I'm hoping you're not on the receiving end of the collision.

I agree most of those offenses all can have big negatives consequences but aren't you sortve making a false equivalency? Nobody was going to die from Browns poor parking choice... if someone can find an instance where an individual died from the extra walk I'll eat my words

[Babybluejeans]

Next time someone intentionally drives thru a red light because they have determined that law doesn't apply to them, I'm hoping you're not on the receiving end of the collision.

I understand your point that laws matter. But the issue here is that the Constitution matters more, and the Constitution (which, generally speaking, outlines the limitations of what the government can do against the people) forbids the use of force in such petty, non-violent circumstances. I know you said you agree the police acted inappropriately. And really, the analysis should end there. If the police broadly used violence in situations like it was used against Brown — in the name of law and order or otherwise — would mark a dark moment for America, and would mean our rights under the Constitution, subject to whims of the government, are meaningless. 

[4everwarriors]

Don't try to equate breaking the law with excessive punishment. Did Sterling Brown break the law when he parked horizonally across 2 handicapped parking spaces? Simply answer, aina? Next simple question: Would the police have even stopped to investigate an incident had Sterling Brown parked within the lines of Walgreen's parking lot? So, even a dude who works at a US News lowly ranked college, should be able to deductively reason that Sterling Brown could have avoided the entire fiasco, hey?

[GGGG]

Don't try to equate breaking the law with excessive punishment. Did Sterling Brown break the law when he parked horizonally across 2 handicapped parking spaces? Simply answer, aina? Next simple question: Would the police have even stopped to investigate an incident had Sterling Brown parked within the lines of Walgreen's parking lot? So, even a dude who works at a US News lowly ranked college, should be able to deductively reason that Sterling Brown could have avoided the entire fiasco, hey?

Well the entire incident could have been avoided had the Police decided to ignore an illegally parked car at a Walgreens at 2:00 AM.

But that's not the point.  The point is that Brown illegally parked, the Police investigated, and the Police escalated the situation unnecessarily.  Brown didn't.

Brown should have been cited.  That's it.

[4everwarriors]

To my knowledge no one has agrued otherwise.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

Don't try to equate breaking the law with excessive punishment. Did Sterling Brown break the law when he parked horizonally across 2 handicapped parking spaces? Simply answer, aina? Next simple question: Would the police have even stopped to investigate an incident had Sterling Brown parked within the lines of Walgreen's parking lot? So, even a dude who works at a US News lowly ranked college, should be able to deductively reason that Sterling Brown could have avoided the entire fiasco, hey?

Duh, it's Walgreen's fault. If Walgreen's wasn't in business, Brown couldn't have illegal parked there in the first place. Simple, aina?

[GGGG]

To my knowledge no one has agrued otherwise.

Well then you shouldn't be blaming Brown for what occurred afterwards.

[mu03eng]

Next time someone intentionally drives thru a red light because they have determined that law doesn't apply to them, I'm hoping you're not on the receiving end of the collision.

False equivalency. The worst case of Sterling Brown's actions were to significantly inconvenience a disabled person who needs to get into Walgreens and park in the handicap spot. Intentionally driving through a light could cause thousands of dollars of damage and/or series injury/death.

Nearly everyone, every day "breaks the law" to the same degree as Sterling Brown did...if the consequence of that action is the potential to be tazed this is the very definition of a police state and a state of being I refuse to accept in this country.

[forgetful]

Don't try to equate breaking the law with excessive punishment. Did Sterling Brown break the law when he parked horizonally across 2 handicapped parking spaces? Simply answer, aina? Next simple question: Would the police have even stopped to investigate an incident had Sterling Brown parked within the lines of Walgreen's parking lot? So, even a dude who works at a US News lowly ranked college, should be able to deductively reason that Sterling Brown could have avoided the entire fiasco, hey?

You imply that the answer to the bolded is no, without any basis for it.  Everyday black people are stopped for "looking suspicious".

He very likely would have been questioned as to what he was doing in the Walgreens parking lot at 2 AM, if parked legally...we will never no, so your assumption that by parking legally he could have avoided it, is assumption not fact. 

Given the treatment of him by the cops, it may be a bad assumption.

And their assault of Brown is also a crime, but you don't seem to be advocating for them to be arrested.

[mu03eng]

You imply that the answer to the bolded is no, without any basis for it.  Everyday black people are stopped for "looking suspicious".

He very likely would have been questioned as to what he was doing in the Walgreens parking lot at 2 AM, if parked legally...we will never no, so your assumption that by parking legally he could have avoided it, is assumption not fact. 

Given the treatment of him by the cops, it may be a bad assumption.

And their assault of Brown is also a crime, but you don't seem to be advocating for them to be arrested.

Honestly it's not relevant. I get your point but arguing what ifs is kind of masturbatorial  rhetorically when the what actually happened was so bad and is inarguable as acceptable. You're route is just gonna get a "you don't know that" and achieves nothing.

[MU82]

Don't try to equate breaking the law with excessive punishment. Did Sterling Brown break the law when he parked horizonally across 2 handicapped parking spaces? Simply answer, aina? Next simple question: Would the police have even stopped to investigate an incident had Sterling Brown parked within the lines of Walgreen's parking lot? So, even a dude who works at a US News lowly ranked college, should be able to deductively reason that Sterling Brown could have avoided the entire fiasco, hey?

To my knowledge, no one has argued otherwise.

But once the "entire fiasco" wasn't avoided, the cops needlessly escalated the situation, making it 100% on them.

They broke the law numerous times, they assaulted one of the citizens they had sworn to protect, they tried to cover it up, they mocked the "rule of law" by cracking jokes as they committed illegal acts, several of them publicly exposed the racism that they had kept more private, and hopefully every one of them gets the jail time he deserves.

4ever, despite your schtick I always thought you were an ethical guy. But with the way you have blamed the victim here ... eye gess knott.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Maybe this isn't you, but I love the folks that scream "the government needs to leave X thing/right alone" while simultaneously saying "just follow exactly what the government has told you to do and you won't get beaten/tazed/murdered".

Similar to these brainiacs.

[mu03eng]

Similar to these brainiacs.

Unfortunately I think the majority of our populace is now these types of brainiacs.

[forgetful]

Honestly it's not relevant. I get your point but arguing what ifs is kind of masturbatorial  rhetorically when the what actually happened was so bad and is inarguable as acceptable. You're route is just gonna get a "you don't know that" and achieves nothing.

True.  Good point.

[Babybluejeans]

Don't try to equate breaking the law with excessive punishment.

Huh? Excessive force is unlawful ya bobo.

[brewcity77]

Unfortunately I think the majority of our populace is now these types of brainiacs.

Just because they yell the loudest does not make them a majority.

[naginiF]

Just because they yell the loudest does not make them a majority.

#truth

[rocket surgeon]

Right.  And 4ever thinks that unless someone immediately does everything that the Police ask you when you commit trivial acts, they should be tased and thrown to the ground.  Otherwise we are living in a society with complete disorder.  Comical..

everything seems so simple in your life...especially looking backwards-nice .

  first let me preface this, looking backwards-what the police did to brown was way out of bounds, unacceptable, broke the law and should be used on how NOT to finish off an interrogation. 

    now, what 4ever and i are trying to convey however is that police do have a protocol to go through- a paradigm to follow.  the whole scope of the situation must be kept in perspective here.  2:00am, the area of town which has been noted to have a higher than average rate of prostitution among other crimes.  mr brown was with an unknown female at the time as well.  ok, double parking in the handicap section set everything in motion, then browns behavior.  this is where the paradigm kicks in-what if brown pulls his hands out of his pockets, has a gun and shoots a police officer(s)?  one could say that brown, by not immediately heeding the officers commands was being either intentionally provocative, altered state of mind, activist or just plain dumb.  police have a sequence of scenarios they must go thru and so far mr brown was not helping out anyone's cause. was the female being held against her will, 2 involved in any of the probable number of issues that i am sure these cops were on surveillance of as well.  were they getting ready to rob the walgreens...so many things could have been in play here.  the police need information before than can just walk away or let mr brown go just as they did with michael bennett in las vegas if any of you shall recall.  i believe this whole incident could have been defused very early

  that all being said, the police over-reacted.  yes i know, the under statement of the year. but remember, this is looking back.  i'm sure many other police watching this now can see where they went wrong.  but our point is, if not for a group of rogue cops, there are so many other directions this scene could have taken.  i have seen scenes where the police will briefly handcuff a subject until they can deem the situation safe-they never got to that point with mr brown.  there were just too many variables going on here for them to just what?  walk away?  once they engaged mr brown, the situation had to be assessed.

  that is where the cops went wrong-having 8 cops, there should not have been the need to exercise the amount of force they exhibited.  these guys either missed this part of clearing an area to be safe,questioning and detaining a suspect or were just bad people.  i am sure their training shows alternatives to this behavior-a little more diplomacy perhaps.  it is of utmost importance that these police be vetted properly before sending them out into the real world.  either these guys weren't ready for this situation or they became cops for the wrong reasons, but whoever cleared them to take on their present duties should be demoted or fired as well. 

bottom line, there were too many moving parts here to come to a knee jerk reaction.  it was a bad beginning and it was a very bad ending.  let's just be thankful that no one was killed and this incident may help show other cops of what NOT to do during the course of their assessments

[Galway Eagle]

everything seems so simple in your life...especially looking backwards-nice .

  first let me preface this, looking backwards-what the police did to brown was way out of bounds, unacceptable, broke the law and should be used on how NOT to finish off an interrogation. 

    now, what 4ever and i are trying to convey however is that police do have a protocol to go through- a paradigm to follow.  the whole scope of the situation must be kept in perspective here.  2:00am, the area of town which has been noted to have a higher than average rate of prostitution among other crimes.  mr brown was with an unknown female at the time as well.  ok, double parking in the handicap section set everything in motion, then browns behavior.  this is where the paradigm kicks in-what if brown pulls his hands out of his pockets, has a gun and shoots a police officer(s)?  one could say that brown, by not immediately heeding the officers commands was being either intentionally provocative, altered state of mind, activist or just plain dumb.  police have a sequence of scenarios they must go thru and so far mr brown was not helping out anyone's cause. was the female being held against her will, 2 involved in any of the probable number of issues that i am sure these cops were on surveillance of as well.  were they getting ready to rob the walgreens...so many things could have been in play here.  the police need information before than can just walk away or let mr brown go just as they did with michael bennett in las vegas if any of you shall recall.  i believe this whole incident could have been defused very early

  that all being said, the police over-reacted.  yes i know, the under statement of the year. but remember, this is looking back.  i'm sure many other police watching this now can see where they went wrong.  but our point is, if not for a group of rogue cops, there are so many other directions this scene could have taken.  i have seen scenes where the police will briefly handcuff a subject until they can deem the situation safe-they never got to that point with mr brown.  there were just too many variables going on here for them to just what?  walk away?  once they engaged mr brown, the situation had to be assessed.

  that is where the cops went wrong-having 8 cops, there should not have been the need to exercise the amount of force they exhibited.  these guys either missed this part of clearing an area to be safe,questioning and detaining a suspect or were just bad people.  i am sure their training shows alternatives to this behavior-a little more diplomacy perhaps.  it is of utmost importance that these police be vetted properly before sending them out into the real world.  either these guys weren't ready for this situation or they became cops for the wrong reasons, but whoever cleared them to take on their present duties should be demoted or fired as well. 

bottom line, there were too many moving parts here to come to a knee jerk reaction.  it was a bad beginning and it was a very bad ending.  let's just be thankful that no one was killed and this incident may help show other cops of what NOT to do during the course of their assessments

I think that's where you essentially explained white priveledge. The immediate suspicion of prostitution etc are all things that just don't happen with white folks

[GGGG]

I think that's where you essentially explained white priveledge. The immediate suspicion of prostitution etc are all things that just don't happen with white folks

Exactly.  Thank you.  Rocket wants to explain away the fact that these cops, one of which was overtly racist on social media, very likely treated Brown different than they would have a white guy because of his skin color.

[StillAWarrior]

I think that's where you essentially explained white priveledge. The immediate suspicion of prostitution etc are all things that just don't happen with white folks

Actually, you didn't even have to read that far.  Note his prefatory comment:

first let me preface this, looking backwards-what the police did to brown was way out of bounds, unacceptable, broke the law and should be used on how NOT to finish off an interrogation.

Interrogation?  For parking illegally?