[News] The USA Police State will never satisfy its lust for beating, gassing, and imprisoning minorities

Well, his assertion that black guys can't be racist is just patently naive. People from every race can be racist. Hell, people of the SAME race find things to hate about each other based on ludicrously stupid reasons. Women can be sexist, too. Does either of these things make it better when they are discriminated against? Hell no. But to give carte blanche to one group's actions is just dumb. I will agree that it could be put in as a red herring based on the topic, so that could be his angle.

But I'm still not seeing an apology to O_C from him yet.
Here's the thing about racism. Racism can cut a wide swath of meaning and usually muddies the waters in discussions of this type. A better term to use would be racial discrimination. This fits better in all these discussions because what we're really talking about is using the race of a person as a basis for power, or lack thereof. I find that often people talk about racism when they actually mean racial discrimination. As the Avenue Q song goes, everyone is a little bit racist, and this is totally true. We process racial biases on an unconscious level, so it will never ever be eradicated. Even if we were to find some way to change everyone in the world to genderless, raceless, sexless blobs, we would find something else to use to identify in and out groups. We as human beings base a great deal of our identity based on our relations to others, mainly similarities and differences. So, yes, anyone from any race can be racist, but really, that's not the issue.

Now, if we look at racial discrimination, that is a horse of a different color. It's about actually treating people differently based solely on their race. It's about actual real world actions. In the real world, what's occurring is not cool and there are many people in the wrong. In the real world, it's much more common for a black person to be racially discriminated against. That doesn't say that white people never are, but it's far less likely. This boils down to the same problems with the feminism argument, or any other group based -ism argument.
 
Twitter feeds abuzz that police have raided a church in Ferguson that was stocked with food, gas masks, tear gas recovery kits, and taken all of it.
 
Twitter feeds abuzz that police have raided a church in Ferguson that was stocked with food, gas masks, tear gas recovery kits, and taken all of it.
This is getting stupid. This is going to end terribly and we Americans are just going to roll over for these thugs. Why aren't the "protect are freedoms with every breath in our bodies/don't tread on me" people getting involved here? This seems perfectly set up for them. Or maybe I missed it and they are?
 

GasBandit

Staff member
This is getting stupid. This is going to end terribly and we Americans are just going to roll over for these thugs. Why aren't the "protect are freedoms with every breath in our bodies/don't tread on me" people getting involved here? This seems perfectly set up for them. Or maybe I missed it and they are?
We already had this discussion on pages 1 and 2 of this thread.

But reader's digest version... MO is an open carry state. Anyone who wants a gun there, pretty much has one. The fact that there hasn't been civilians shooting at cops tells me there's more going on on the ground than media (either social or conventional) is telling us. Furthermore, the whole point of the protests is that they are being peaceful. If people start "voting from the rooftops" now they surrender the high ground and give the police justification for what they are doing and more, and not help the cause nor the people of Ferguson. Remember, the 2nd amendment solution is the last resort, not the first. Also, as noted, most of the troublemakers/arrested people are not actually from Ferguson, they're outside agitators looking to stir shit up.
 

Dave

Staff member
We already had this discussion on pages 1 and 2 of this thread.

But reader's digest version... MO is an open carry state. Anyone who wants a gun there, pretty much has one. The fact that there hasn't been civilians shooting at cops tells me there's more going on on the ground than media (either social or conventional) is telling us. Furthermore, the whole point of the protests is that they are being peaceful. If people start "voting from the rooftops" now they surrender the high ground and give the police justification for what they are doing and more, and not help the cause nor the people of Ferguson. Remember, the 2nd amendment solution is the last resort, not the first. Also, as noted, most of the troublemakers/arrested people are not actually from Ferguson, they're outside agitators looking to stir shit up.
One guy has been arrested three or four times. He's from Texas. Another couple were from Chicago.
 
Also, as noted, most of the troublemakers/arrested people are not actually from Ferguson, they're outside agitators looking to stir shit up.
That's really the worst part of it. That some people want the situation on the ground to escalate further is terrifying.[DOUBLEPOST=1408571288,1408571043][/DOUBLEPOST]NYTimes update on the situation has some interesting bits, including an official Ferguson PD statement.

However, law enforcement officials say witnesses and forensic analysis have shown that Officer Wilson did sustain an injury during the struggle in the car.
As Officer Wilson got out of his car, the men were running away. The officer fired his weapon but did not hit anyone, according to law enforcement officials.
 
We already had this discussion on pages 1 and 2 of this thread.

But reader's digest version... MO is an open carry state. Anyone who wants a gun there, pretty much has one. The fact that there hasn't been civilians shooting at cops tells me there's more going on on the ground than media (either social or conventional) is telling us. Furthermore, the whole point of the protests is that they are being peaceful. If people start "voting from the rooftops" now they surrender the high ground and give the police justification for what they are doing and more, and not help the cause nor the people of Ferguson. Remember, the 2nd amendment solution is the last resort, not the first. Also, as noted, most of the troublemakers/arrested people are not actually from Ferguson, they're outside agitators looking to stir shit up.
I hear you, it just seems like kind of exactly what people are worried about in the anti-big government crowd. I'm not being sarcastic either, it seriously seems like the abuses and oversteps here are ripe for their protesting power.

I'm not denying it's probably better they aren't there, just kind of surprised.
 

I'm guessing the guy who put down the second sign could be charged with vandalism.

Gas has it right. The protestors have the high ground and people are supporting them across the country. They forfeit that, they might as well stop. None of them want this to escalate. It's only outsiders who figure this is their Purge area. The Ferguson PD are armed for war; the protestors need to only give them peaceful resistance.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
Like I said, I'm not advocating for it, it was just a thought that struck me.
As libertarian as I am, I have to say that the system apparently hasn't completely broken down yet. There's still an investigation going on, and a prosecutor is presenting evidence to a grand jury. The police are definitely overmilitarized, however there's been shockingly few instances of injuries or fatalities from violence. We consider the actions of the FPD here to be unacceptable, but not yet completely beyond addressing. Hard as it might be to imagine, it could be worse. Instead of using non-lethal/crowd control ordinance, they could be shooting real bullets, beating protestors to death, or driving APCs over them. I think then you'd see a "2nd amendment solution" come to the fore.
 
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure that if a study were performed (maybe one has been?) that measures someone's fear response to videos of threatening people, that a threatening black guy would result in a more fearful response than a threatening white guy.
Of course, and it's in large part due to the media and how they report things.
 
We process racial biases on an unconscious level, so it will never ever be eradicated. Even if we were to find some way to change everyone in the world to genderless, raceless, sexless blobs, we would find something else to use to identify in and out groups.
This is why any aliens probably won't invite us to their federation. Once we realize there are "others" out there, humanity will focus its distaste of "the others" against the aliens. Minorities will probably love it, though.
I'm guessing the guy who put down the second sign could be charged with vandalism.
I'm guessing any conviction of this would ultimately be overturned...since it is, in itself, an exercise of 1st amendment rights.

--Patrick
 
so... I posted Jay's post from here nearly word for word. The expected shitstorm didn't happen. I got exactly one like, one reblog, and one comment. All from here.

So it goes.
 
so... I posted Jay's post from here nearly word for word. The expected shitstorm didn't happen. I got exactly one like, one reblog, and one comment. All from here.

So it goes.
Good, it's completely irrelevant to this discussion

I'm also shocked, SHOCKED that the police raided a church and stole supplies to aid people suffering from the effects of tear gas
 
Apparently the tear gas being used by the Ferguson PD causes miscarriages. While I agree on Gas's point why 2nd amendment supporters aren't going into Ferguson guns blazing, why aren't all the groups who lobby against Roe v Wade or picket abortion clinics or pass laws that close abortion clinics saying or doing anything in response to this?

I mean, I have a theory*, but maybe someone has a fact.


*
They don't give a shit 'cause odds are it's only black women/fetuses.

In other news, crowd was dwindling last night. If the Ferguson PD can keep their hands off for another week, they may not have to worry about this further and everything can go back to its previously-perfect (for them) status quo. But I doubt they can.
 

Dave

Staff member
That guy was threatening and trying to start shit. I watched it earlier and he's yelling, "SHOOT ME!" while rushing at the cops with a knife.

Not sure why so many shots, but that could be adrenaline.
 
Yeah, thats called suicide by cop by a mentally ill person. It's a shame there wasn't a non-lethal way to take him down so he could get some real help.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
The Governor has now ordered the National Guard to withdraw from Ferguson, the Highway Patrol will remain in charge.
 
Not yet anyways. :( And you're not even going to get me arguing against a shooting like that. If our country spent maybe like 1% of what we spend on improving ways to kill people on inventing a ranged non-lethal knock out type of gun, we would have probably invented it ten years ago.

Also, here's an interesting perspective. I haven't really digested it yet, so don't count this as me endorsing all that is said in. I just like sharing some far-leftish / radical things to counteract "In Support Of Darren Wilson", maybe stuff people might not have read otherwise :)

edit: link helps http://thenewinquiry.com/essays/in-defense-of-looting/
 
Last edited:
Not yet anyways. :( And you're not even going to get me arguing against a shooting like that. If our country spent maybe like 1% of what we spend on improving ways to kill people on inventing a ranged non-lethal knock out type of gun, we would have probably invented it ten years ago.
We're actually trying very hard to do this. Some of the things we've tried so far...

- High frequency flashing lights. Shelved because it can cause lethal seizures.
- Pepper spray paint balls, augmented with foul smelling stuff. Shelved because it doesn't work, just like pepper spray.
- Stun darts fired from a shotgun. Shelved because it doesn't work with heavy clothing, just like a taser.
- Rubber batons fired from a grenade launcher. Occasionally used, but it has all the same problems of using rubber bullets.
- Various types of gases. We still use tear gas, which CAN be lethal.
- Beanbag rounds for shotguns. We use these and they work better than rubber bullets (it's like getting smacked with a baseball) but it's not like most departments have auto-shotguns to really make them effective.

I assure... we are trying REALLY HARD to find an effective non-lethal option. It's just a much harder objective than just killing a guy.
 
I'd just like to point out that it is possible to shoot someone non-lethally.
But then why shoot them?

If they are not showing lethal intent, you keep talking. But once they are in a position to threaten a life, it is the citizen's safety, then the officer's safety that comes above the perpetrator.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
The second thing you learn when learning to shoot (the first being "treat all guns as if they are loaded, even when you know they are not") is that you don't shoot at something you are not trying to kill. Guns are for killing. Forget everything you've heard or seen about trick shot artists or disabling shots or shooting legs/feet. If you shoot, you shoot to kill. You aim for center mass, you double tap. Doing otherwise just increases the danger, both to yourself (for running a much higher risk of not actually stopping your assailant) and someone else that may catch the ricochet of the shot you were trying to be fancy with when it missed his ankle, bounced off the pavement, and smacked someone down the road in the head.

All that, and there's not a spot on the body anywhere that you can reasonably assume you'll be able to hit perfectly to not kill someone. Shooting someone in the leg can be just as deadly if you hit an artery.
 
There is no way to shoot non-lethally. Guns are killing machines. There is no function of them or use that isn't trying to end someone's life as swiftly and messily as possible.
 
I feel like I should keep this post bookmarked for the next time the gun discussion comes up and people try to say that guns have a purpose other than killing. We've got our leading second amendment defender straight up admitting that guns have no other purpose :p
 

GasBandit

Staff member
Even shooting center mass doesn't guarantee death. Pumping multiple rounds into someone, however, does.
Heck, even shooting someone in the head doesn't "guarantee" death. But center mass is the best way to give yourself the highest probability of hitting.. and it happens to be where we store most of our important guts.[DOUBLEPOST=1408652888,1408652836][/DOUBLEPOST]
I feel like I should keep this post bookmarked for the next time the gun discussion comes up and people try to say that guns have a purpose other than killing. We've got our leading second amendment defender straight up admitting that guns have no other purpose :p
Well, you can also use them to cause sonar shockwaves for 3d underground mapping, but you generally don't do that as a form of defense.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
Either way, in that video, I would definitely qualify the amount of shots fired as excessive force.
How many shots are not excessive but still effective? Bear in mind it often takes multiple shots to take down someone with hard drugs in their system, which is often the case in those who are belligerent toward groups of plainly armed police officers.
 
Top