NYPD killed another unarmed black man, cop claims he was "startled"

[Spiritual Stratocaster]

How does that even matter. If all black people could vote in 1964, even more would have voted for LBJ. Your point has nothing to do with anything I just said, and doesn't weaken my argument in the slightest.

Come back when you can do more than the same tired ass Marcus Camby emoticon when you have nothing relevant to say.

The point being, in my opinion, his policies are all noticeably detrimental to the black community, yet he's picking up more black voters than the man who passed the Civil Rights Act.

If all black people could vote in 1964, even more would have voted for LBJ.

Thus proving my point...why are you wasting time bringing up how Obama has more black voters than LBJ. There are too many factors that lead into Obama having more black voters. Thus you're entire post is pointless....

 

[LV Koopa]

Snoop at it again with that oatmeal logic.

"Zimmerman allegedly (rofl seriously?) beat a woman AFTER the Trayvon Martin case and had no criminal background" - and? How does this refute the assertion that he was not only at fault but a person with violence problems? What you think he developed these tendencies after killing that boy?

 

[CAC Dogg]

Only unrealistic for a government that can't or won't identify the real issue. If they can fund bailouts, defense & space projects at the rate they do, they can certainly fund the development of one of the most important public servants in the country.

Many criminals, violent or otherwise need to be understood. Situations need to be analyzed. At best, police know threatening actions. They have no understandin' of people, their behavior... nothin' really. They're mistakin' deaf folks for defiant ones, ailments for threatenin' behavior, etc. Any & everything can be interpreted as violent by an untrained officer.
.

I agree that they should fund police and spend more money training police. But the idea that you can pay to stop situations like Michael Brown with better police training is completely unrealistic. Stopping situations of alleged police brutality or insensitivity to blacks is only going to be accomplished by redefining police's role in society to one favored by anarchist libertarians: only police violent crime and respect the bill of rights IE get a warrant, no unreasonable searches etc.

I think you are completely underestimating how hard it is to be a cop, given what they are asked to do IE police nonviolent crime like drug use, domestic disputes and basic gun ownership. You seem to have this idea that 'if they were as smart as me, nothing bad would happen' that is bullshyt, you try being a cop and risking your life for random people who hate you. didn't think so

Money plays a roll in elections AND policy. The system is designed to keep the powers that be in power. Hell, national government is made up of mostly well off folks. Even ignoring the power of those outside of the government, why would national government officials act against their own interest?
JFK was assassinated bruh.
And there are checks & balances from branch to branch. A president can't do as he pleases.
And I doubt the integrity of any government official above city council. If the government is for the people, why are the majority of the people in such desparate need? Why is nothin' bein' done about the inequality of wealth? From level one, why are schools funded by property taxes, puttin' the poor at an immediate disadvantage? Why is advanced education so expensive? Are you sayin' the citizens have elected the wrong officials in every election?
IMO, the system is accomplishin' exactly what it's design to

so whats your solution, roll over and accept you are getting fukked, but as a compensation prize at least you voted for someone with similar amounts of pigment in their skin? Yes the system is designed to favor the powers that be, but the powers that be have constantly shifted throughout history. Evil people win when good people do nothing, and your lethargic 'third party candidates cant win cuz it takes more than me voting once every 4 years and pretending I contribute to democracy' attitude contributes to that greatly.

JFK was assassinated and he also essentially saved humanity from Nuclear Holocaust and paved the way for an enlightened society that was necessary to give us any of the freedoms we have today.

Checks and balances are a good thing. The president has huge influence though, and Obama refuses to use any of it for good when hes not gaining more power from it.

If you doubt the integrity of Ron Paul you aren't paying attention. The government ISN'T for the people, that's the problem, and people like him have been trying to limit the governments power so corrupt wealthy scum can't fix the system, hes been attempting to fix inequality of wealth for thirty fukkin years and are finally making some progress. Again, 90% of wealth inequality is caused by the Federal Reserve with quantitative easing, google the inflation tax.

Yes citizens have elected the wrong officials in recent elections. Before the 1950s the people themselves were the problem, not that officials didn't properly represent those people, IE the people had disrespect based on races, sexes, sexualities etc.

The system can change and it will because of the increase in information achieved by the internet. It is just taking some time for people to comb through all the bullshyt and misinformation and realize voting for either major party candidate has been a mistake since JFK and maybe Carter.

 

[CAC Dogg]

Thus proving my point...why are you wasting time bringing up how Obama has more black voters than LBJ. There are too many factors that lead into Obama having more black voters. Thus you're entire post is pointless....

my point is that there were rational reasons for black voters to pick LBJ.

you haven't explained how voting for Obama benefitted the black community, you just assumed it was true, I've put forth probably 10 points about the drug war, minimum sentencing, privacy rights, racial profiling, gun crime and military costs that you can't debate for 10 seconds, that show voting for Obama was actually precisely the opposite of beneficial for blacks.

take your own advice

 

[CAC Dogg]

Snoop at it again with that oatmeal logic.

"Zimmerman allegedly (rofl seriously?) beat a woman AFTER the Trayvon Martin case and had no criminal background" - and? How does this refute the assertion that he was not only at fault but a person with violence problems? What you think he developed these tendencies after killing that boy?

sorry dawg im actually a law student, you are the one with a two-year olds grasp on logic. you actually just said "rofl seriously" to a concept as simple and widely accepted as as 'innocent until proven guilty'.

Stop putting words in my mouth, I never said he was a great guy with no problems, I said there was no way the court could rule any differently, you haven't done anything to dispute that, if you could i'd imagine you would be a lawyer yourself and not a social justice internet warrior spouting racist nonsense on a hip hop forum.

 

[mrken12]

Snoop at it again with that oatmeal logic.

"Zimmerman allegedly (rofl seriously?) beat a woman AFTER the Trayvon Martin case and had no criminal background" - and? How does this refute the assertion that he was not only at fault but a person with violence problems? What you think he developed these tendencies after killing that boy?

He attacked 2 police officers on 2 separate occasions and allegedly molested a relative before the Trayvon Martin situation. And also had a restraining order against a woman before the incident because of domestic violence issues. So this guy was more of a "thug" than Trayvon ever could have been.

 

[LV Koopa]

sorry dawg im actually a law student, you are the one with a two-year olds grasp on logic. you actually just said "rofl seriously" to a concept as simple and widely accepted as as 'innocent until proven guilty'.

Stop putting words in my mouth, I never said he was a great guy with no problems, I said there was no way the court could rule any differently, you haven't done anything to dispute that, if you could i'd imagine you would be a lawyer yourself and not a social justice internet warrior spouting racist nonsense on a hip hop forum.

And this is relevant because?

Actually my logic is pretty air tight. "Innocent until proven guilty" doesn't mean that a no trial = innocence. As a law student you should be familiar with our system that allows Type 2 errors aka false negatives through the cracks. No idea where you are studying but that's probably one of the first things you learn since you know, it's basic logic to a 9th grade grader.

I mean come on...
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/20...ult-charges-dropped-against-george-zimmerman/

Law enforcement just dropped assault charges against George Zimmerman, who allegedly threw a wine bottle at his girlfriend two weeks ago. According to the Associated Press, Zimmerman’s girlfriendrecanted her statement, continuing a cycle of accusations against Zimmerman followed by recantations that are typical of domestic violence cases.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/geor...in-second-domestic-violence-case-against-him/

“While it is clear that the officers had probable cause to arrest Mr. Zimmerman … the subsequent recantation by the victim of her initial statement … precludes my office from proceeding further,” State Attorney Phil Archer said in a statement announcing that no charges would be filed against Zimmerman.

Sounds like even the prosecution knew what was up.

No idea what you're talking about with that other stuff since I never referenced anything regarding a court ruling.

 

[mrken12]

This thread is a classic example of why letting white people post at black forums is a terrible idea.

 

[BaldingSoHard]

Let's be real here, a vote for a third party candidate is a wasted vote

I never understood this way of thinking and IMO it defeats the purpose of having democracy.
The way I see it, we all have one vote and it should go to the candidate who earns it. This last election, I voted for Gary Johnson, knowing full well Barack Obama was going to win. Why? Because elections shouldn't be about "picking the winner" or "the lesser of two evils" it's about holding politicians accountable for their actions and choosing the candidate which most closely resembles your values. I voted for Obama in 2008 because he ran on a platform decrying the Patriot Act (something I'm strongly against). After he was elected, I didn't hear a single word about the Patriot Act until he was extending it. So the way I see it, I hired Obama to do a specific job, a job he said he was going to do... and then he didn't do it. So I wasn't gonna vote for him again. And I sure as hell wasn't gonna vote for Mitt Romney () and looking at the Libertarian platform, we had a lot of ideals in common. So that vote made sense, even though I knew he wasn't gonna win.

Everyone complains about the two-party system, but most people are afraid to do something about it.

 

[BezO]

I agree that they should fund police and spend more money training police. But the idea that you can pay to stop situations like Michael Brown with better police training is completely unrealistic. Stopping situations of alleged police brutality or insensitivity to blacks is only going to be accomplished by redefining police's role in society to one favored by anarchist libertarians: only police violent crime and respect the bill of rights IE get a warrant, no unreasonable searches etc.

I think you are completely underestimating how hard it is to be a cop, given what they are asked to do IE police nonviolent crime like drug use, domestic disputes and basic gun ownership. You seem to have this idea that 'if they were as smart as me, nothing bad would happen' that is bullshyt, you try being a cop and risking your life for random people who hate you. didn't think so

I do believe situations would be handled differently. Cops would be dynamic, intelligent individuals with a basic understandin' of psychology, culture, politics & self defense, amongst other things. Diminishin' their role isn't going to accomplish that.

And what is a violent crime? Is robbery by intimidation violent? Do we allow folks to get robbed if there's no weapon or battery?

Is threatenin' behavior violent? How do cops intepret it?

Is defiance a punishable offense? How do cops intepret that?

I have common sense & I know 3 cops personally. They've explained how difficult it is. Part of what makes it difficult is perceived danger, expectations & the lack of preparation & information. Every loud word & movment from anyone fittin' the description is a threat. They're respondin' to things like: armed robbery, suspect is black male, 5'9-6'0, dark clothin'. That's damn near every dude in the hood. How do they interact with & interpret the words & actions of every black male they come across with only 8 weeks of trainin'?

so whats your solution, roll over and accept you are getting fukked, but as a compensation prize at least you voted for someone with similar amounts of pigment in their skin? Yes the system is designed to favor the powers that be, but the powers that be have constantly shifted throughout history. Evil people win when good people do nothing, and your lethargic 'third party candidates cant win cuz it takes more than me voting once every 4 years and pretending I contribute to democracy' attitude contributes to that greatly.

My solution is to get right. Start with self, family/friends & community. Learn the system and accumulate the collective wealth necessary to influence/change it.

I'm not into politics. I voted for Obama for social reasons, not political.

Not sure what you mean by the powers that be have shifted. Wealth tends to be handed down & shared. There will always be a few new additions for show. Wealth is still dominated by what, 1%? That's not goin' to change by votin' for someone that's operatin' under the same system that's been in place from day 1.

JFK was assassinated and he also essentially saved humanity from Nuclear Holocaust and paved the way for an enlightened society that was necessary to give us any of the freedoms we have today.

Checks and balances are a good thing. The president has huge influence though, and Obama refuses to use any of it for good when hes not gaining more power from it.

Obama is doin' what every other politician is doin', workin' for his interest & bowin' to the power's that be.

Agree on international policy, but school me on the enlightment & freedoms FJK paved the way for? Are you talkin' about allowin' Blacks to join white society?

If you doubt the integrity of Ron Paul you aren't paying attention. The government ISN'T for the people, that's the problem, and people like him have been trying to limit the governments power so corrupt wealthy scum can't fix the system, hes been attempting to fix inequality of wealth for thirty fukkin years and are finally making some progress. Again, 90% of wealth inequality is caused by the Federal Reserve with quantitative easing, google the inflation tax.

Yes citizens have elected the wrong officials in recent elections. Before the 1950s the people themselves were the problem, not that officials didn't properly represent those people, IE the people had disrespect based on races, sexes, sexualities etc.

The system can change and it will because of the increase in information achieved by the internet. It is just taking some time for people to comb through all the bullshyt and misinformation and realize voting for either major party candidate has been a mistake since JFK and maybe Carter.

Please school me on the great wealth accumulated by the common citizens under Ron Paul's leadership.

I disagree with you on the reasons of wealth inequality. The Fed Res is not a government agency. It funds the government.

I have a basic understandin' of the inflation tax & quantative easin'. That's where knowin' the system comes in. Folks need to act accordingly. Money is in invested assets, not savings accounts & jobs. When capital is cheap, folks need to take advantage. But the government & the powers that be don't teach how to make money & never will. They teach you how to obtain trainin' for jobs.

 

[CAC Dogg]

This thread is a classic example of why letting white people post at black forums is a terrible idea.

yeah cuz when you aren't left alone with like-minded retards who agree with you simply because your skin tones match (fags), you sound like an idiot. how bout you stop riding black dikk and think for yourself

 

[CAC Dogg]

I do believe situations would be handled differently. Cops would be dynamic, intelligent individuals with a basic understandin' of psychology, culture, politics & self defense, amongst other things. Diminishin' their role isn't going to accomplish that.

And what is a violent crime? Is robbery by intimidation violent? Do we allow folks to get robbed if there's no weapon or battery?

Is threatenin' behavior violent? How do cops intepret it?

Is defiance a punishable offense? How do cops intepret that?

I have common sense & I know 3 cops personally. They've explained how difficult it is. Part of what makes it difficult is perceived danger, expectations & the lack of preparation & information. Every loud word & movment from anyone fittin' the description is a threat. They're respondin' to things like: armed robbery, suspect is black male, 5'9-6'0, dark clothin'. That's damn near every dude in the hood. How do they interact with & interpret the words & actions of every black male they come across with only 8 weeks of trainin'?

My solution is to get right. Start with self, family/friends & community. Learn the system and accumulate the collective wealth necessary to influence/change it.

I'm not into politics. I voted for Obama for social reasons, not political.

Not sure what you mean by the powers that be have shifted. Wealth tends to be handed down & shared. There will always be a few new additions for show. Wealth is still dominated by what, 1%? That's not goin' to change by votin' for someone that's operatin' under the same system that's been in place from day 1.

Obama is doin' what every other politician is doin', workin' for his interest & bowin' to the power's that be.

Agree on international policy, but school me on the enlightment & freedoms FJK paved the way for? Are you talkin' about allowin' Blacks to join white society?

Please school me on the great wealth accumulated by the common citizens under Ron Paul's leadership.

I disagree with you on the reasons of wealth inequality. The Fed Res is not a government agency. It funds the government.

I have a basic understandin' of the inflation tax & quantative easin'. That's where knowin' the system comes in. Folks need to act accordingly. Money is in invested assets, not savings accounts & jobs. When capital is cheap, folks need to take advantage. But the government & the powers that be don't teach how to make money & never will. They teach you how to obtain trainin' for jobs.

A bunch of people didn't just get in a room on "day 1", start "a system", then made sure they kept it rigged so no one else could make any wealth. People risked their lives to come here and built phenomenal businesses for their kids. Some of those businesses now lobby the government for beneficial treatment, some of them were owners by racists in the past and some still own them today, that doesn't mean it is impossible for anyone to get any wealth in the country or to elect leaders who will give the average person who isn't from old wealth a fair deal.

The federal reserve being a government agency or not is semantics and irrelevant. The fact of the matter is they use the treasury to increase the money supply, that money goes to federal reserve banks at 0% interest, and devalues the average persons money. That's why shyt is so expensive from gas, to house prices to groceries, to stocks. Telling people to invest when capital is cheap has nothing to do with the fact that the government is artificially devaluing people's capital. In other words, even if you bought cheap, then prices went up, you wouldn't make as much as you think because the money was just printed.

It's not hard to imagine how Ron Paul would benefit the average person. I have been listing countless issues in this thread that would help average innocent people. LIke not being arrested for non-violent crimes, paying for needless wars or flawed economic models like the poverty producing welfare state that just leaves people dependent on the government for help.


Anyway you are nitpicking what I am saying too much. My original point stands, it makes no sense to vote for Obama over Ron Paul as an average black man concerned with police's role in society, yet they still do simply because he smiles and says nice things and gives out ribbons.

 

[LV Koopa]

The federal reserve being a government agency or not is semantics and irrelevant. The fact of the matter is they use the treasury to increase the money supply, that money goes to federal reserve banks at 0% interest, and devalues the average persons money. That's why shyt is so expensive from gas, to house prices to groceries, to stocks. Telling people to invest when capital is cheap has nothing to do with the fact that the government is artificially devaluing people's capital. In other words, even if you bought cheap, then prices went up, you wouldn't make as much as you think because the money was just printed.

Whoa easy there. The Feds being a private agency is actually a big deal but that's a discussion for another time. Secondly, lowering interest rates to increase borrowing and spending isn't always a bad thing - in fact it doesn't actually decrease the average person's money assuming they don't have everything in a savings/checkings account. Things are expensive for a variety of reasons and the Fed Reserve's policy isn't always the main reason. Especially in regards to gas. No idea why you mentioned stocks being expensive since that statement doesn't make sense. Not only because expensiveness is relative to each stock but lower interest rates would be good for a stock investor (because companies are able to borrow cheaply) and bad for bond buyers because the price of bonds would go up.

If capital is cheap (to borrow) then as an investor you aren't threatened so much by "the devaluing of capital" as long as hyperinflation is avoided. Prices don't just uniformly jump at the same rate for all commodities.

 

[CAC Dogg]

Whoa easy there. The Feds being a private agency is actually a big deal but that's a discussion for another time. Secondly, lowering interest rates to increase borrowing and spending isn't always a bad thing - in fact it doesn't actually decrease the average person's money assuming they don't have everything in a savings/checkings account. Things are expensive for a variety of reasons and the Fed Reserve's policy isn't always the main reason. Especially in regards to gas. No idea why you mentioned stocks being expensive since that statement doesn't make sense. Not only because expensiveness is relative but lower interest rates would be good for a stock investor (because companies are able to borrow cheaply) and bad for bond buyers because the price of bonds would go up.

If capital is cheap (to borrow) then as an investor you aren't threatened so much by "the devaluing of capital" as long as hyperinflation is avoided. Prices don't just uniformly jump at the same rate for all commodities.

I didn't say it was always a bad thing, but because humans are unpredictable actors other humans cannot accurately predict their economic actions. Trusting the government to set the interest rates not only opens a way for corruption (fed reserve banks getting the printed money and the ONLY 0% interest loans), it is a counterproductive attempt to accomplish what the free market would accomplish better on its own.

I like the way you just casually brushed off people's savings/checking accounts have been devalued, as if the average person doesn't know what a checking account is.

If you took $1000 dollars in 2000 and bought an ounce of gold, you could buy about 500 gallons of gas, if you took that same gold coin in 2013, you could buy about 500 gallons of gas. If you kept the $1000, (that you could of bought 500 gallons with in year 2000), you could buy only 250 gallons of gas. The prince increase came primarily from the inflation caused by increasing the money supply by trillions of dollars, this is common sense.

There are other factors that play into the price of gas, but the situation I just described proves inflation is the primary reason these commodities like gas are described as "expensive".

The point is the stock market is based on a speculative bubble that is produced by cronyism via printed money and not money accumulated through competition in the free market.

 

[LV Koopa]

There are negatives to the Federal Reserve (some really evil shyt) but the central banks getting 0 interest loans isn't one of them. They don't do anything but lend money to the investment banks anyway. But this statement "trusting the government to set interest rates" is more about the reserve system itself and not really the government. Remember, the government doesn't want it's currency devalued. I think what your getting at is the specific people who are in control of policy and their agendas can be different from what the government (the citizens) really want.

I didn't brush off the savings and checkings account. Read it again.

If you took $1000 dollars in 2000 and bought an ounce of gold, you could buy about 500 gallons of gas, if you took that same gold coin in 2013, you could buy about 500 gallons of gas. If you kept the $1000, (that you could of bought 500 gallons with in year 2000), you could buy only 250 gallons of gas. The prince increase came primarily from the inflation caused by increasing the money supply by trillions of dollars, this is common sense.

Well, this doesn't even make sense for two reasons. First, no one is buying anything with gold, especially gas, because that would be exceedingly stupid. Gold isn't used as a form of currency anywhere in the world and hasn't been for 50+ years in the US. The next issue is that what you really are trying to say, $1000 in the year 2000 had more purchasing power than $1000 in 2013 doesn't work in relation to gas. Gas prices have dropped and it isn't mainly because of our interest rates - the oil oligopolies in the Middle East are getting an increase in competition from us and other countries pumping oil. Price is primarily influenced by supply and demand for a specific commodity. Interest rates have an indirect influence on price because not all goods are affected the same way by it.

The point is the stock market is based on a speculative bubble that is produced by cronyism via printed money and not money accumulated through competition in the free market.

The stock market isn't only made up of speculators.