Looting and Rioting in St. Louis (Merged)

RustyNut · 18-08-2014 04:13PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

I know, but shot in the back none-the-less. Look back over the thread at how many times posters have said that being shot in the back is a bad thing just for being shot in the back.

How about shot while unarmed?
(Start at about 6:25)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdL9dqkyjhM

In the meantime, the Guard are coming out. Presumably the first wave will be military police, mainly to give local law enforcement a break. If necessary, the MOARNG has two infantry battalions, but the catch with using infantry is that they don't have sidearms. It's rifles or sticks. In any case, expect the security services to start to get aggressive: Calling out the Guard is expensive, and they won't want to have these guys on orders any longer than they have to. Chances are the Guard won't want to either, many of them get paid a lot more by their civilian employers than the military, and would like to get back to their day jobs. But, of course, they'll take their orders from the State Troopers.

What civilised country sends its military to war on its own citizens?

Hazys · 18-08-2014 04:23PM

Must watch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUdHIatS36A

darkpagandeath · 18-08-2014 04:37PM

So If this turns out to be a legitimate action by the police officer in the first place. Will this be a case of trial by social media again, jumping to completely the wrong conclusion. Causing unrest without any facts, Going on somewhat bias testimony of witnesses. Seems like a cluster Fu*k to me. A lot of people jumping on the band wagon, Looting rioting. All for what ? Seeing all those people on the news holding their hands up, I have no idea how one runs away with their hand up in the air like that. Seemed all very far fetched to me.

wes · 18-08-2014 04:49PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Going on somewhat bias testimony of witnesses.

How is there testimony biased exactly?

Little CuChulainn · 18-08-2014 05:00PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So If this turns out to be a legitimate action by the police officer in the first place. Will this be a case of trial by social media again, jumping to completely the wrong conclusion. Causing unrest without any facts, Going on somewhat bias testimony of witnesses. Seems like a cluster Fu*k to me. A lot of people jumping on the band wagon, Looting rioting. All for what ? Seeing all those people on the news holding their hands up, I have no idea how one runs away with their hand up in the air like that. Seemed all very far fetched to me.

The social unrest was not caused by the shooting. It was just a handy excuse for some looting and smashing. Even if the cop had gunned down the kid while he was begging on his knees it wouldn't have justified rioting.

Karl Stein · 18-08-2014 05:09PM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Even if the cop had gunned down the kid while he was begging on his knees it wouldn't have justified rioting.

The police shooting unarmed people will have consequences regardless of whether they're 'justified'. We should know that by our own experiences here on this island.

InTheTrees · 18-08-2014 05:26PM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Even if the cop had gunned down the kid while he was begging on his knees it wouldn't have justified rioting.

The problem is that peaceful assembly to protest is perfectly legal.

But you add over zealous paramilitary cops to the mix and things get incendiary.

InTheTrees · 18-08-2014 05:29PM

Karl Stein wrote: »

The police shooting unarmed people will have consequences regardless of whether they're 'justified'. We should know that by our own experiences here on this island.

Add obvious racial injustice to that too.

Egginacup · 18-08-2014 05:34PM

porsche959 wrote: »

A critique of militarised policing in the US from a surprising source, the neo-conservative blogger and writer Mark Steyn:

http://www.steynonline.com/6524/cigars-but-not-close

And if you point out the German statistics to so many on here they'll find any excuse to explain away the need to fire 200 bullets at a guy in a car or 26 at a dog. They'll come up with some parallel universe scenarios like "the guy in the car could have had super powers that allowed him to absorb 199 bullets without injury or he could have had a bomb planted and was reaching for the switch, or the dog might have been a werewolf on angel dust and the cop was taking no chances"

:pac:

Manic Moran · 18-08-2014 05:38PM

RustyNut wrote: »

What civilised country sends its military to war on its own citizens?

If you discount your deliberately antagonistic terminology, pretty much all countries have such provisions. In the Irish context, the Army calls it "Aid to the Civil Power." The Army can field at least a full infantry battalion in riot gear, going by the E300,000 purchase of such equipment a couple of years ago. (Whether it replaced or supplemented earlier owned equipment I'm not sure)

https://flic.kr/p/7g7TMD
https://flic.kr/p/7g7Srn

Note use of MOWAG APC.

US military term is "Domestic Support to the Civil Authorities"

Egginacup · 18-08-2014 05:50PM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

The social unrest was not caused by the shooting. It was just a handy excuse for some looting and smashing. Even if the cop had gunned down the kid while he was begging on his knees it wouldn't have justified rioting.

Are you for real? A kid begging for his life on his knees gets executed and you don't think that's cause for a riot?

I would bet the farm that if there were riots in Iran or Moscow or Cuba in response to police brutality or governmental malfeasance you'd approve of those riots with gleeful enthusiasm.

18-08-2014 06:12PM

Disappointing to see so few white faces among the protesters I have to say.

The only footage on BBC with the voiceover mentioning the "troublemakers" among the protesters was someone picking up a canister and lobbing it back.

Manic Moran · 18-08-2014 06:35PM

Egginacup wrote: »

Are you for real? A kid begging for his life on his knees gets executed

Erm.. isn't this a contested point?

Sand · 18-08-2014 06:37PM

Egginacup wrote: »

And if you point out the German statistics to so many on here they'll find any excuse to explain away the need to fire 200 bullets at a guy in a car or 26 at a dog. They'll come up with some parallel universe scenarios like "the guy in the car could have had super powers that allowed him to absorb 199 bullets without injury or he could have had a bomb planted and was reaching for the switch, or the dog might have been a werewolf on angel dust and the cop was taking no chances"

:pac:

Nothing so complicated - if you make the decision to shoot (and likely kill) somebody, you keep shooting until they go down and stay down.

Reekwind · 18-08-2014 06:43PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So If this turns out to be a legitimate action by the police officer in the first place. Will this be a case of trial by social media again, jumping to completely the wrong conclusion

No, it will be held up as another example of botched police communications; how a failure to adequately inform a community (plus the use of heavy-handed repressive tactics) greatly inflamed an already tense situation. See London 2011 as an example.

Seeing all those people on the news holding their hands up, I have no idea how one runs away with their hand up in the air like that. Seemed all very far fetched to me.

Out of curiosity, have you ever heard the terms 'racial tension' or 'mistrust of police' before?

wicklowstevo · 18-08-2014 06:46PM

wes wrote: »

How is there testimony biased exactly?

wasnt some of the people who had just carried out the robbery with brown the main witnesses ? sure he would have no reason to guild the truth would he ?

RustyNut · 18-08-2014 06:49PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Disappointing to see so few white faces among the protesters I have to say.

The only footage on BBC with the voiceover mentioning the "troublemakers" among the protesters was someone picking up a canister and lobbing it back.

Plenty of white faces here.

See guy at 1.30

Manic Moran · 18-08-2014 06:51PM

If that Marine is still in the service, he's in a whole heap of trouble. Your first amendment rights get curtailed when you join the military. We're apolitical.

18-08-2014 06:57PM

RustyNut wrote: »

Plenty of white faces here.

See guy at 1.30

Well the opening panning shot the first 3 white guys are 2 cops and someone holding a camera, other than those there's a good 80 black people before the next white face.

Sand · 18-08-2014 07:00PM

Reekwind wrote: »

No, it will be held up as another example of botched police communications; how a failure to adequately inform a community (plus the use of heavy-handed repressive tactics) greatly inflamed an already tense situation. See London 2011 as an example.

The police aren't going to have a full set of answers within a couple of hours of a shooting just to meet the 24 hour news cycle.

They need to investigate the scene, interview witnesses, interview the shooter, await the autopsy, and check for any discrepancies or additional points before reaching a decision. Most people (not in this case obviously) understand that and give the police some time to carry out their investigation before burning down the town. It will be a prime example of social media rushing to judgement without anything bothersome like evidence or a trial. If the shooting is shown to be justified, which is *still* under dispute.

Out of curiosity, have you ever heard the terms 'racial tension' or 'mistrust of police' before?

It's obvious there is widespread distrust of police in Ferguson. I noticed the low number of black officers in the Ferguson police force has been highlighted repeatedly. I also noticed comments by a local Ferguson resident named "MikeyMike" (or similar) who was engaged in conversation by the state police captain Johnson after MikeyMike became aggressive towards another police officer he felt has disrespected him. MikeyMikes assessment, after much flattery by Johnson, was that Johnson was personally "ice" but it was a shame he was a cop and not a fireman. MikeyMike didn't approve of the company Johnson kept.

If attitudes like that prevail, does the Ferguson PD racial imbalance reflect that very few people in the black community in Ferguson wish to join the police?

Reekwind · 18-08-2014 07:21PM

Sand wrote:

The police aren't going to have a full set of answers within a couple of hours of a shooting just to meet the 24 hour news cycle.

Except that they don't need "a full set of answers". What they do however need to do is be open and frank about what they do and do not know (eg no obfuscation over obvious details), set out a clear timeline as to how the investigation will proceed, establish clear and ongoing lines of communication to community leaders and the family and generally recognise the legitimate concerns of the community. And so on. Basically, engage with the community.

What they do not need to do is hide key facts (eg evasion over the number of times that Brown was shot - something the police knew over a week ago but has only been made public following an independent autopsy), release unrelated information in an attempt to defend themselves, employ paramilitary troops to suppress the protesters, arrest journalists, impose curfews on all, etc, etc. Essentially taking a confrontational approach to the entire community.

Whatever about the initial shooting, the police's handling of this affair has been a complete and utter mess.

If attitudes like that prevail, does the Ferguson PD racial imbalance reflect that very few people in the black community in Ferguson wish to join the police?

Obviously. But who can blame anyone for that attitude when a nearly exclusively white police force discriminates against the black community that it's supposed to protect?

I mean, really, the whole idea that a police force should reflect and engage with the community that it polices is not revolutionary. Hence the efforts in England, and particularly London, to attract ethnic minority officers into the ranks. Or just look up north at the PSNI.

crockholm · 18-08-2014 07:33PM

Reekwind wrote: »

Except that they don't need "a full set of answers". What they do however need to do is be open and frank about what they do and do not know (eg no obfuscation over obvious details), set out a clear timeline as to how the investigation will proceed, establish clear and ongoing lines of communication to community leaders and the family and generally recognise the legitimate concerns of the community. And so on. Basically, engage with the community.

What they do not need to do is hide key facts (eg evasion over the number of times that Brown was shot - something the police knew over a week ago but has only been made public following an independent autopsy), release unrelated information in an attempt to defend themselves, employ paramilitary troops to suppress the protesters, arrest journalists, impose curfews on all, etc, etc. Essentially taking a confrontational approach to the entire community.

Whatever about the initial shooting, the police's handling of this affair has been a complete and utter mess.

Obviously. But who can blame anyone for that attitude when a nearly exclusively white police force discriminates against the black community that it's supposed to protect?

I mean, really, the whole idea that a police force should reflect and engage with the community that it polices is not revolutionary. Hence the efforts in England, and particularly London, to attract ethnic minority officers into the ranks. Or just look up north at the PSNI.

A Quick look at the crime stats from city-data website shows that the police had been doing a good job in reducing crime in the Town,so maybe thats why 22 year old quavondrius and his many grandchildren might not be so enamoured with local law enforcement.

But nah,just start screeching about racism and discrimination instead-who knows,you might get a gig as the token cracker in the Jesse & Al Roadshow 2014.

Reekwind · 18-08-2014 07:41PM

crockholm wrote: »

A Quick look at the crime stats from city-data website shows that the police had been doing a good job in reducing crime in the Town,so maybe thats why 22 year old quavondrius and his many grandchildren might not be so enamoured with local law enforcement.

Are you suggesting that the deep distrust between a near all-white police force and the black community is because the latter are all criminals who are resentful at the police's efficiency?

crockholm · 18-08-2014 07:51PM

Reekwind wrote: »

Are you suggesting that the deep distrust between a near all-white police force and the black community is because the latter are all criminals who are resentful at the police's efficiency?

Why are you suspicious of this 94% White police force? Do you have evidence that they actually discriminate against black candidates?

Thing is,do we know what % of black residents trust the police to do their job and what % distrust them?

Crime was dropping in the Town due to the efforts of the black and White police,and yes,you will Always get the bandwagon jumpers whenever a situation like this arises.It is just silly to jump to the conclusion of "it was de racism wot killed 'em" from the offset.

Reekwind · 18-08-2014 08:11PM

crockholm wrote: »

Why are you suspicious of this 94% White police force? Do you have evidence that they actually discriminate against black candidates?

The figures certainly suggest so. To quote some of the indicators on racial profiling in Ferguson:

"...African-American drivers represented 86 percent of all traffic stops despite making up only 67 percent of the city’s population; white drivers, by contrast, accounted for only about 13 percent of the traffic stops in Ferguson despite making up 29 percent of its population. Meanwhile, African-American drivers accounted for nearly 93 percent of the arrests and whites only 7 percent, despite the fact that, when Ferguson police did search drivers, they found contraband on more than a third of their white targets and only a fifth of their black ones."

Amazingly, an overwhelmingly white police force has a habit of disproportionally singling out black drivers for searches and arrests. What are the odds of that? Which is of course not to even to go into the qualitative accounts of policing in Ferguson.

So either the police are amazingly good at their jobs and most criminals are black (even though the fewer whites stopped are statistically more likely to be criminals) or there is indeed a racial bias to policing in that area. Which is it? (Hint: this is the bit where you try to answer the question in my above post.)

Thing is,do we know what % of black residents trust the police to do their job and what % distrust them?

Given the absence of opinion polls, I'd take the mass protests that have convulsed the town as an indicator that the police aren't terribly popular amongst the community right now.

AlekSmart · 18-08-2014 08:16PM

crockholm wrote: »

Why are you suspicious of this 94% White police force? Do you have evidence that they actually discriminate against black candidates?

Thing is,do we know what % of black residents trust the police to do their job and what % distrust them?

Crime was dropping in the Town due to the efforts of the black and White police,and yes,you will Always get the bandwagon jumpers whenever a situation like this arises.It is just silly to jump to the conclusion of "it was de racism wot killed 'em" from the offset.

Some of my more engaging memories of growing up in Dublin,are concerned with the widespread perception in the 1960's that The Gardai were a "Cuclhie" dominated force,and were ill disposed towards all Dubs.

Most,if not all,young native Dubs were quite convinced that any citizen of the Pale would ne'er don the Blue Serge,and to be honest,hearing a Dublin Accent on a Garda back then would be rare enough.

Back then,our Bandwagon was horsedrawn,but it rolled on nonetheless

AlekSmart · 18-08-2014 08:25PM

Reekwind wrote: »

.
Given the absence of opinion polls, I'd take the mass protests that have convulsed the town as an indicator that the police aren't terribly popular amongst the community right now.

What I find noteworthy,is how the initial protests,heartfelt though they were,consisted of relatively low numbers,of up to 200-300 people.

As the Networks began their Heli-Teli and in-your-face coverage,the scale and intensity of protesting and protestors grew appropriately.

The Police are not popular amongst a sector of the community,that much is obvious,however,I would be surprised if there were not a sizeable chunk of the greater "Community" who also appreciate that Policing,by it's very nature,cannot depend upon "popularity" for its success.

Wanderer2010 · 18-08-2014 08:42PM

Two things strike me about this case:

1. When the picture of the officer who shot the kid was released I was surprised by just how young he looks, he cant be anymore than 25.

2. He will get away with this scot free, he will walk straight back into his job, and stay there cushy until he retires, while the boy he killed is in the ground forever. American cops almost never get punished for what they do to people, how many prisoners have been outright murdered for the heinous crime of resisting arrest or running away. American cops can murder people and walk straight back into their jobs. Absolutely terrifying.

Little CuChulainn · 18-08-2014 08:49PM

Karl Stein wrote: »

The police shooting unarmed people will have consequences regardless of whether they're 'justified'. We should know that by our own experiences here on this island.

This was one policeman shooting one unarmed person. It wasn;t a spate of police brutality incidents. People were rioting within 24 hours claiming "no justice". What kind of justice is delivered in 24 hours? Oh that's right, mob justice.

InTheTrees wrote: »

Add obvious racial injustice to that too.

Where was the racial injustice in this? Just because the cop was white and the criminal black?

Egginacup wrote: »

Are you for real? A kid begging for his life on his knees gets executed and you don't think that's cause for a riot?

I would bet the farm that if there were riots in Iran or Moscow or Cuba in response to police brutality or governmental malfeasance you'd approve of those riots with gleeful enthusiasm.

As usual, you completely miss the point. The actions of one cop do not justify the scenes in Ferguson, no matter what he did.

Reekwind wrote: »

Except that they don't need "a full set of answers". What they do however need to do is be open and frank about what they do and do not know (eg no obfuscation over obvious details), set out a clear timeline as to how the investigation will proceed, establish clear and ongoing lines of communication to community leaders and the family and generally recognise the legitimate concerns of the community. And so on. Basically, engage with the community.

What they do not need to do is hide key facts (eg evasion over the number of times that Brown was shot - something the police knew over a week ago but has only been made public following an independent autopsy), release unrelated information in an attempt to defend themselves, employ paramilitary troops to suppress the protesters, arrest journalists, impose curfews on all, etc, etc. Essentially taking a confrontational approach to the entire community.

Whatever about the initial shooting, the police's handling of this affair has been a complete and utter mess.

Obviously. But who can blame anyone for that attitude when a nearly exclusively white police force discriminates against the black community that it's supposed to protect?

I mean, really, the whole idea that a police force should reflect and engage with the community that it polices is not revolutionary. Hence the efforts in England, and particularly London, to attract ethnic minority officers into the ranks. Or just look up north at the PSNI.

The problem with releasing facts as you get them is they can often be wrong. The primary witness testimony turned out to be a criminal accomplice of the victim.

18-08-2014 08:52PM

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

2. He will get away with this scot free, he will walk straight back into his job, and stay there cushy until he retires, while the boy he killed is in the ground forever. American cops almost never get punished for what they do to people, how many prisoners have been outright murdered for the heinous crime of resisting arrest or running away. American cops can murder people and walk straight back into their jobs. Absolutely terrifying.

Not necessarily. They'll scapegoat one cop now and then. Also likely he'll retire and could get into private security through the cop contacts.

Looting and Rioting in St. Louis (Merged)

Comments