Alton Sterling

[wizards8507]

I'm going to guess he didn't go thinking he was going to be a person of interest in the shooting of multiple police officers.

No, I suspect his goal was to be confronted by police, record that confrontation, plaster it all over social media, and rip on the police for harassing him.

 

[pumpdog20]

No, I suspect his goal was to be confronted by police, record that confrontation, plaster it all over social media, and rip on the police for harassing him.

Is that why he said he was talking and joking with police prior to finding out he was on TV?

 

[pkt77242]

No, I suspect his goal was to be confronted by police, record that confrontation, plaster it all over social media, and rip on the police for harassing him.

LOL. Your bias is very clear.

Maybe he is one of the gun owners who is upset with the gun ownership groups (such as the NRA) that stayed silent after what happened in Minnesota. I know a few NRA members who are furious that they stayed silent especially because they believe that if it was a white gun owner killed like that, that the NRA and other gun owner groups (GOA) would have been outraged.

 

[wizards8507]

Is that why he said he was talking and joking with police prior to finding out he was on TV?

Okay you tell me since you know everything. Why would a leader of an anti-police protest carry a rifle on his back during said protest?

 

[wizards8507]

Maybe he is one of the gun owners who is upset with the gun ownership groups (such as the NRA) that stayed silent after what happened in Minnesota. I know a few NRA members who are furious that they stayed silent especially because they believe that if it was a white gun owner killed like that, that the NRA and other gun owner groups (GOA) would have been outraged.

Except he's not. He's a BLM activist leading an anti-police protest rally. He certainly didn't do anything illegal and I'm glad he's been cleared and that he handled himself extremely responsibly when police took his weapon. But spare me the crap that he wasn't out for attention. Of course he was.

 

[Irish Insanity]

Okay you tell me since you know everything. Why would a leader of an anti-police protest carry a rifle on his back during said protest?

Because it's his right.

However, you seem to be the one often speaking in facts of things that aren't.

 

[wizards8507]

Because it's his right.

Of course it is! Not once did I suggest he should be locked up or that I'm glad he was misidentified as a possible shooter. I'm only speaking to his motivations for carrying the gun like that in the middle of a protest, especially when protests like this have turned violent in a number of cities in recent months.

However, you seem to be the one often speaking in facts of things that aren't.

Fact: He was a protester.
Fact: The purpose of protests is to affect change.
Fact: You affect change by getting attention.
Fact: Outside of Texas, a video of a man with a rifle on his back will elicit attention.

Where's the big leap in there?

 

[pumpdog20]

Okay you tell me since you know everything. Why would a leader of an anti-police protest carry a rifle on his back during said protest?

I don't know everything. I just know your following statement isn't true.

He's no victim. He's getting exactly what he wanted when he strapped that rifle to his shoulder.

Yes, he was a victim of mistaken identity (for now at least). Considering he turned himself in right away, it's easy to see that he didn't strap a rifle to his shoulder wanting to be wrongly accused of killing police officers.

Where's your confusion exactly?

 

[wizards8507]

Yes, he was a victim of mistaken identity (for now at least). Considering he turned himself in right away, it's easy to see that he didn't strap a rifle to his shoulder wanting to be wrongly accused of killing police officers.

Where's your confusion exactly?

That's not being a victim! Holy shit. Police officers were shot and somebody says "hey, I saw a dude walking around with a rifle on his back... maybe we should talk to him." That's not fucking unreasonable and doesn't make him a "victim." Nobody accused him of shit. He was a "person of interest" and had a conversation with police officers. That's not victim-hood, that's police conducting a reasonable investigation under extremely tense circumstances.

If someone calls the Bristol PD and says "I just saw a six-foot fat white guy in a purple Brooks Brothers shirt punch an old lady in the face," the police are going to come looking for me as a "person of interest." If I'm innocent, I'll answer their questions honestly and then they'll send me on my way, just like what happened in this case. Nobody is a victim.

 

[calvegas04]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">CBS News confirmed picture of Micah Xavier Johnson <a href="https://t.co/sKfrxXxQbK">pic.twitter.com/sKfrxXxQbK</a></p>— Jeff Glor (@jeffglor) <a href="https://twitter.com/jeffglor/status/751432178244853760">July 8, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[pkt77242]

Except he's not. He's a BLM activist leading an anti-police protest rally. He certainly didn't do anything illegal and I'm glad he's been cleared and that he handled himself extremely responsibly when police took his weapon. But spare me the crap that he wasn't out for attention. Of course he was.

You didn't just say he was out for attention. You said:

No, I suspect his goal was to be confronted by police, record that confrontation, plaster it all over social media, and rip on the police for harassing him.

Nice try though.

 

[GoldenToTheGrave]

Of course it is! Not once did I suggest he should be locked up or that I'm glad he was misidentified as a possible shooter. I'm only speaking to his motivations for carrying the gun like that in the middle of a protest, especially when protests like this have turned violent in a number of cities in recent months.


Fact: He was a protester.
Fact: The purpose of protests is to affect change.
Fact: You affect change by getting attention.
Fact: Outside of Texas, a video of a man with a rifle on his back will elicit attention.

Where's the big leap in there?

I'd be interested to hear your take on the Bundy Ranch standoff if you don't mind me asking.

 

[ACamp1900]

That's not being a victim! Holy shit. Police officers were shot and somebody says "hey, I saw a dude walking around with a rifle on his back... maybe we should talk to him." That's not fucking unreasonable and doesn't make him a "victim." Nobody accused him of shit. He was a "person of interest" and had a conversation with police officers. He wasn't indicted and sent to prison.

If someone calls the Bristol PD and says "I just saw a six-foot fat white guy in a purple Brooks Brothers shirt punch an old lady in the face," the police are going to come looking for me as a "person of interest." If I'm innocent, I'll answer their questions honestly and then they'll send me on my way, just like what happened in this case. Nobody is a victim.

WE all know you're not six feet tall dude.....

 

[TomHaverford]

nothing will happen to these cops, they won't serve a second of jail time, even though they should.

cops abuse white people too. it's not just blacks that get needlessly murdered or assaulted by some uneducated loser who couldn't do anything with his life so he became a local police officer. any gorilla with a 75 IQ can become a police officer. not exactly a difficult job to get.

 

[woolybug25]

WE all know you're not six feet tall dude.....

He also doesn't wear Brooks Bros shirts.

More like, "there's a short, middle aged white man wearing a Captain America tshirt and pleated khakis"...

 

[ACamp1900]

He also doesn't wear Brooks Bros shirts.

More like, "there's a short, middle aged white man wearing a Captain America tshirt and pleated khakis"...

you forgot fat.....

 

[wizards8507]

He also doesn't wear Brooks Bros shirts.

More like, "there's a short, middle aged white man wearing a Captain America tshirt and pleated khakis"...

He also doesn't wear Brooks Bros shirts.

More like, "there's a short, middle aged white man wearing a Captain America tshirt and pleated khakis"...

you forgot fat.....

I am neither short nor middle aged, nor do I wear pleated khakis. I am, however, fat. Reps to Camp.

 

[Irish Insanity]

He also doesn't wear Brooks Bros shirts.

More like, "there's a short, middle aged white man wearing a Captain America tshirt and pleated khakis"...

Isn't Wiz like early 30s at best?

 

[wizards8507]

Isn't Wiz like early 30s at best?

27 on Wednesday.

 

[pumpdog20]

That's not being a victim! Holy shit. Police officers were shot and somebody says "hey, I saw a dude walking around with a rifle on his back... maybe we should talk to him." That's not fucking unreasonable and doesn't make him a "victim." Nobody accused him of shit. He was a "person of interest" and had a conversation with police officers. That's not victim-hood, that's police conducting a reasonable investigation under extremely tense circumstances.

If someone calls the Bristol PD and says "I just saw a six-foot fat white guy in a purple Brooks Brothers shirt punch an old lady in the face," the police are going to come looking for me as a "person of interest." If I'm innocent, I'll answer their questions honestly and then they'll send me on my way, just like what happened in this case. Nobody is a victim.

He received death threats because of it, so yes, he's a victim. Quit acting like that particular situation was no big deal, or that he wanted that to happen. Don't imagine CT and old ladies, put yourself in the hostile environment of last night and say to yourself that being wrongly identified as a possible shooter and having your mug on national TV is not a scary thing.

 

[wizards8507]

He received death threats because of it, so yes, he's a victim. Quit acting like that particular situation was no big deal, or that he wanted that to happen. Don't imagine CT and old ladies, put yourself in the hostile environment of last night and say to yourself that being wrongly identified as a possible shooter and having your mug on national TV is not a scary thing.

Of course it's a scary thing. But not everything bad/scary makes you a victim. "Victomhood" implies some kind of illegitimate act on the part of some perpetrator that caused harm. No harm came to him. Not every bad thing that happens to a person makes them a victim. Give me a break. If you're man enough to carry a gun into an anti-police protest then you're man enough to handle some meanie-meanie-bo-beanies on fucking Twitter.

 

[ACamp1900]

Not every bad thing that happens to a person makes them a victim.

... and here is one of the larger philosophical divides in the country right here.

 

[Irish YJ]

... and here is one of the larger philosophical divides in the country right here.

hammer meet head.

There are accountability Qs on both sides. And they are good Qs.

 

[ACamp1900]

Isn't Wiz like early 30s at best?

fat people only live to be 55........ just like the poors.

 

[NorthDakota]

fat people only live to be 55........ just like the poors.

Poor fatties only live to about 45.

 

[Irish YJ]

watching fox news right now. interesting dialog compared to cnn 30 min ago

 

[Irish YJ]

Poor fatties only live to about 45.

what about rich fatties. i'm neither fat, nor rich, just curious what size and economic status i should shoot for

 

[yankeehater]

Not sure what thread to post in so I will place it here.

5 Statistics You Need To Know About Cops Killing Blacks | Daily Wire

 

[yankeehater]

I heard Heather MacDonald on several shows today and it was very interesting. One of the many interesting facts was that statistics show economic conditions do not influence crime. It holds true when looking at tensions in the 60's as the economy was growing. Also during our most recent recession crime fell until Ferguson turned it the other direction.

One other piece I found interesting was that Asian immigrants come over as some of the poorest yet commit very little crime. They have less income than those on welfare in the states. This was attributed to their strong family (2 parent households) structure and values, heavy belief in academic discipline and respect for authority.

 

[drayer54]

What Black Lives Matter argues is the proof of racism is not primarily the disparity in achievement, but rather the disparity in discipline. In other words, more black students get in trouble and therefore the system is racist.

For a very long time now, Americans have been lead to believe that schools are the primary socializers of children. What if that’s actually not the case? What if parents are actually the primary socializers and that young children have to be socialized at home in order to do well in school? Do we really believe that a five- or six-year-old child can simply be ready to go to school, sit, listen, obey, and learn without the parents doing a lot of socialization in the preceding years?

Of course not.

There is a disparity that Black Lives Matter and the dominant cultural spokespeople refuse to address. They will talk about disparities in discipline, disparities in achievement, disparities in income, and on and on. Yet, there is almost never any mention of the enormous disparities in out-of-wedlock birthrates between the races............

But Black Lives Matter doesn’t seem to want to discuss a root cause such as family breakdown. Instead, it rages against the injustices of “systemic racism” and “white privilege”.

The reality is that if Black Lives Matter wants to see black students achieve in school and life, it must turn its focus to the black family. As the family goes, so goes everything else.

What is the goal of the cause? To keep police officers from getting out of the car? To get inner city policeman to not charge black men to manage the statistics? Maybe it should be to better the community and reduce the time that black people spend with cops...




What Black Lives Matter Should Protest | Intellectual Takeout