So they are burning and looting in Baltimore tonight

[iceaura]

And as previously umpteen times umpteen times, the previously referenced text in the DOJ document clearly exonerates Officer Wilson.

Not from doing wrong, or poor judgment, and the like - it explicitly refuses to consider those matters. I quoted the refusal, in case you missed it.

Officer Wilson was justified in his use of lethal force. That is what the DOJ report found.

It found no direct conflict between that claim of Wilson's and the evidence. So?

Where in the DOJ document does it find Officer guilty of ANY malfeasance?

Nowhere. So?

Officer Wilson’s weapon was holstered, until Brown (that young black teenager) attempted to remove it.

That's what Wilson said. But that's the only evidence for it, and much physical evidence casts doubt on it, as presented to you above.

Yes, there is NO credible evidence which supports your assertions.

I listed five items above, all straight from the DOJ report, to support one of them. And the one so thoroughly supported was relevant here.

As with Zimmerman finding himself under attack and in fear, Wilson has more to answer for than just the final shot. Likewise the police in Baltimore and elsewhere. The police in Ferguson, Baltimore, New York, and all the rest, greeted none of this with shock or surprise or anything that would indicate to an observer that much out of the ordinary had happened.

And that apparent indifference is the context of the riots in Baltimore.

 

[wellwisher]

The bottom lines are being ignored in favor of a distraction. All these police incidents are occurring in cities controlled by the Democratic party. The Democratic party was the original party of slavery and segregation, with the segregation still strongest in Democratic controlled cities. Democratic party talk is different from results.

Baltimore has the 4th highest per capita spending on education, in the country. The money is not being spread uniformly, with blacks getting sub par schools. This huge amount of money is controlled by the Democrats, who then blame republicans for not given even more. Only morons or thieves would need more to get the job done. One solution is to boot out the democrats who maintain a type of modern segregation, no matter how much money is thrown at the problem.

The other half of the problem is black crime and violence. The blacks in these Democratic cities kill more blacks than police kill blacks, by a large margin. Yet the preponderance of the data is ignored if favor of the distraction. The reason cops may target the blacks is because this is needed to protect innocent blacks, who abide by the law. You need to be proactive and not just reactive, since there are so many gangs, guns and criminals.

If the police rounded up all the criminals and shipped then off to somewhere, things would get better and the need for police shake down would not be needed. The idea the democrats have is to reduce the police being proactive, so the thugs can dominate the innocent. Nobody will want to build a business there, then you blame the republican for not caring.

.

 

[joepistole]

The bottom lines are being ignored in favor of a distraction. All these police incidents are occurring in cities controlled by the Democratic party. The Democratic party was the original party of slavery and segregation, with the segregation still strongest in Democratic controlled cities. Democratic party talk is different from results.

Baltimore has the 4th highest per capita spending on education, in the country. The money is not being spread uniformly, with blacks getting sub par schools. This huge amount of money is controlled by the Democrats, who then blame republicans for not given even more. Only morons or thieves would need more to get the job done. One solution is to boot out the democrats who maintain a type of modern segregation, no matter how much money is thrown at the problem.

The other half of the problem is black crime and violence. The blacks in these Democratic cities kill more blacks than police kill blacks, by a large margin. Yet the preponderance of the data is ignored if favor of the distraction. The reason cops may target the blacks is because this is needed to protect innocent blacks, who abide by the law. You need to be proactive and not just reactive, since there are so many gangs, guns and criminals.

If the police rounded up all the criminals and shipped then off to somewhere, things would get better and the need for police shake down would not be needed. The idea the democrats have is to reduce the police being proactive, so the thugs can dominate the innocent. Nobody will want to build a business there, then you blame the republican for not caring.

.

Except as usual Wellwisher, you don't have your facts straight. The mayor of Ferguson is a Republican and formerly the chairman of the Missouri Young Republicans...oops. And the biggest violence problem with whites, is white on white violence. The bottom line is once again you don't have your facts straight.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Knowles_III

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

And the biggest violence problem with whites, is white on white violence.

Indeed. As I pointed out in an earlier post, most white people who are killed by gunshots are shot by white people, and the same phenomenon is true within the black community.

I haven't seen any statistics about other kinds of violence. But considering that a century and a half after the abolition of slavery, it's still common for white people to live among other white people and black people to live among other black people, proximity and opportunity would obviously reduce inter-racial violence.

 

[joepistole]

Not from doing wrong, or poor judgment, and the like - it explicitly refuses to consider those matters. I quoted the refusal, in case you missed it.

LOL, oh and where is your evidence to support that assertion? Where does the DOJ report explicitly state it doesn’t consider wither Officer Wilson did anything wrong or exercised poor judgement? The two sentences you quoted is no such assertion which I will repost below:
“The same is true even if Wilson could be said to have acted with poor judgment in the manner in which he first interacted with Brown, or in pursuing Brown after the incident at the SUV. These are matters of policy and procedure that do not rise to the level of a Constitutional violation and thus cannot support a criminal prosecution. Cf. Gardner v. Howard, 109 F.3d 427, 430–31 (8th Cir. 1997) (violation of internal policies and procedures does not in and of itself rise to violation of Constitution). "
I suggest you look up the definition of “could”, “even if it could be said” Officer Wilson acted with poor judgement. That isn’t the same as “did” act. Nor is it an explicit statement that the DOJ never considered wither Officer Wilson acted with malice or was guilty of malfeasance or bad judgement. The whole point of the DOJ investigation was to investigate the incident for malfeasance and bad judgement and violation of law.
In the sentences which immediately preceded the two sentences you quoted, the DOJ specifically absolves Officer Wilson of malfeasance and poor judgement. Funny, that is one of the parts you keep ignoring. http://www.sciforums.com/threads/so...baltimore-tonight.145828/page-12#post-3299251

It found no direct conflict between that claim of Wilson's and the evidence. So?

It did more than that, it found Officer Wilson’s use of deadly force justified. It found, contrary to your assertions, that Officer Wilson’s account and the account of witnesses clearly indicated Officer Wilson’s use of deadly force was justified. If found Officer Wilson’s decision was reasonable in part because witnesses also found Officer Wilson’s use of deadly force was justified.

Nowhere. So?

So you lied. You claimed Officer Wilson drew his weapon in order to accost a young black teenager who was merely jaywalking and offered the DOJ report as evidence. Where is your evidence Officer Wilson’s testimony was carefully coached as you have repeatedly claimed? Where does it say the evidence was tampered with? It doesn’t. The Department of Justice found no evidence of witness or evidence tampering. The bottom line is the DOJ investigation and report of the Brown shooting found your beliefs about the event to be explicitly wrong.

That's what Wilson said. But that's the only evidence for it, and much physical evidence casts doubt on it, as presented to you above. I listed five items above, all straight from the DOJ report, to support one of them. And the one so thoroughly supported was relevant here.

Where in the DOJ investigation and report does it say the physical evidence casts doubt on anything Officer Wilson said, or what the credible witnesses said for that matter? As a point of fact, and something that has been repeated over and over for your edification, the DOJ, found no inconsistencies in the evidence. So you want everyone to believe that you know more about forensics and the evidence in this case than the DOJ experts and the people who actually saw the evidence and were tasked with the investigation?

As with Zimmerman finding himself under attack and in fear, Wilson has more to answer for than just the final shot. Likewise the police in Baltimore and elsewhere. The police in Ferguson, Baltimore, New York, and all the rest, greeted none of this with shock or surprise or anything that would indicate to an observer that much out of the ordinary had happened.
And that apparent indifference is the context of the riots in Baltimore.

Ok, now you are changing the subject. The Zimmerman case wasn’t even remotely related to Ferguson. It wasn’t a police shooting for starters. And in the Zimmerman case there was actually evidence which implicated Zimmerman. In Baltimore case, there is actually evidence which implicates the police department. In the Ferguson case, there is no evidence which implicates Officer Wilson. Unfortunately for you, but fortunately for the rest of us, we no longer have lynch mobs. Evidence means something, and that is a good thing.

 

[iceaura]

The KKK never lynched a tenth of the number of black men that other black men killed fighting over women or money - that does not diminish the nature or significance of what they did.

I haven't seen any statistics about other kinds of violence. But considering that a century and a half after the abolition of slavery,

Most human violence is domestic violence, or intertribal violence. Both gangs and marriages are normally built from acquaintanceship, the right degree of proximity.

Racial segregation in the US was enforced by law until the 1960s, and by custom until this very day (black people attempting to move into white neighborhoods meet focused and often effective opposition of various kinds, today).

So the role and effect of police violence, of which the occasional killing is a very small part, is much different and more significant than its statistical footprint alone would suggest.

 

[Photizo]

"So you lied. You claimed Officer Wilson drew his weapon in order to accost a young black teenager who was merely jaywalking and offered the DOJ report as evidence. Where is your evidence Officer Wilson’s testimony was carefully coached as you have repeatedly claimed? Where does it say the evidence was tampered with? It doesn’t. The Department of Justice found no evidence of witness or evidence tampering.

The bottom line is the DOJ investigation and report of the Brown shooting found your beliefs about the event to be explicitly wrong."

 

[joepistole]

The KKK never lynched a tenth of the number of black men that other black men killed fighting over women or money - that does not diminish the nature or significance of what they did.

Oh, and where is your evidence to back that one up? Just the sheer differences in population sizes would suggest otherwise. Two, even if it were somehow true, it isn't relevant. Murder is murder and murder is wrong. It really is that simple.

 

[iceaura]

Nor is it an explicit statement that the DOJ never considered wither Officer Wilson acted with malice or was guilty of malfeasance or bad judgement.

It is an explicit justification of the DOJ's refusal to state that Wilson was innocent of poor judgment and wrong doing, or even that the his innocence of such behavior was consistent with the evidence. It made no findings in those matters, and justified making no such findings as quoted.

The whole point of the DOJ investigation was to investigate the incident for malfeasance and bad judgement and violation of law.

No, it wasn't. It specifically and explicitly and formally and officially was not addressed to matters of judgment, procedure, violation of State law, or anything else aside from its mandated responsibility to the US Constitution and specific Federal law. It did not replace the grand jury, or address its findings. It did not replace the Ferguson police officials, or address their decisions. That was for another report, not involving Wilson's particular infractions if any.

So you lied. You claimed Officer Wilson drew his weapon in order to accost a young black teenager who was merely jaywalking and offered the DOJ report as evidenc

I said the physical evidence indicates Wilson most likely drew his gun early in the encounter, before being assaulted by Brown, and I offered the physical evidence presented in the DOJ report as examples of such supporting evidence you could not deny. And you have in fact not contested any of that evidence. So where's the lie?

Where in the DOJ investigation and report does it say the physical evidence casts doubt on anything Officer Wilson said, or what the credible witnesses said for that matter?

Nowhere. So?

Ok, now you are changing the subject. The Zimmerman case wasn’t even remotely related to Ferguson

It's as closely related as Ferguson is to Baltimore. Are we talking about the context of the Baltimore riots, or not?

In the Ferguson case, there is no evidence which implicates Officer Wilson

? Of course there is. Lots of it. More than Zimmerman faced. If a rigged grand jury hands down a "no bill" in Baltimore, are you going to revise your assessment of that evidence as well?

Circling the wagons around the police in the US is a major source of trouble, and an instigating factor in the Baltimore riots. IMHO.

 

[Photizo]

"I said the physical evidence indicates Wilson most likely drew his gun early in the encounter, before being assaulted by Brown, and I offered the physical evidence presented in the DOJ report as examples of such supporting evidence you could not deny. And you have in fact not contested any of that evidence.

So where's the lie?"

 

[joepistole]

"I said the physical evidence indicates Wilson most likely drew his gun early in the encounter, before being assaulted by Brown, and I offered the physical evidence presented in the DOJ report as examples of such supporting evidence you could not deny. And you have in fact not contested any of that evidence.

So where's the lie?"

LOL, Ouch That's good Photizo.

 

[iceaura]

LOL, Ouch That's good Photizo.

I'm actually sorry to see that happen. But not startled, I guess.

Meanwhile, you've been throwing the word "lie" around quite a bit, generally after posting something that needs - once again - to be corrected. These "errors" of yours, in other words, are conjoined to the word "lie" almost by reflex or habit. Any idea how that happens?

 

[joepistole]

It is an explicit justification of the DOJ's refusal to state that Wilson was innocent of poor judgment and wrong doing, or even that the his innocence of such behavior was consistent with the evidence. It made no findings in those matters, and justified making no such findings as quoted.

Except it did, the DOJ very explicitly exonerate Officer Wilson of any culpability or malfeasance in the shooting of Officer Wilson per the previously referenced text in the DOJ report. The text you quoted, from the DOJ report was a supposition in which it said even if it could be proven Officer Wilson could be proven to have in some way exercised poor judgement, Officer Wilson acted in accordance with law and the polices of his police department. Those two sentences, the sentences you claim limit the scope of the DOJ investigation don’t in any way limit the DOJ investigation or its findings. They supposed something not in evidence to demonstrate a point. And if you read the sentences which preceded the two sentences you like to reference, those sentences clearly exonerate Officer Wilson.

No, it wasn't. It specifically and explicitly and formally and officially was not addressed to matters of judgment, procedure, violation of State law, or anything else aside from its mandated responsibility to the US Constitution and specific Federal law.

Except, it was, and it very clearly so states and the DOJ report clearly and explicitly states that all the physical evidence and witness testimony supports Officer Wilson’s account and claim of self-defense.

It did not replace the grand jury, or address its findings.

It didn’t replace the grand jury nor was it ever intended to replace the grand jury, but the grand jury came to the same conclusions in a separate investigation. No one but you has made the claim the DOJ report replaced the grand jury.

It It did not replace the Ferguson police officials, or address their decisions. That was for another report, not involving Wilson's particular infractions if any.

Hmm, the only policeman present during the shooting was Officer Wilson. So how is that relevant? It isn’t. There was a separate DOJ investigation into the Ferguson Police Department. That is another issue. You are obfuscating again.

I said the physical evidence indicates Wilson most likely drew his gun early in the encounter, before being assaulted by Brown, and I offered the physical evidence presented in the DOJ report as examples of such supporting evidence you could not deny. And you have in fact not contested any of that evidence. So where's the lie?

Yes you said that, and in your previous post you admitted that the DOJ report doesn’t confirm or in any way imply your claim Officer Wilson drew his gun prematurely. Now after being called on your lie, you are back to your original assertion.

Just where is this evidence in the DOJ report which backs up your belief that Officer Wilson pulled his gun prior to being attacked by Brown in his squad car? I’m looking for the specific text and not vague references to the document which do not support your assertions.

Nowhere. So?

Ok, so you lied again.

It's as closely related as Ferguson is to Baltimore. Are we talking about the context of the Baltimore riots, or not?
? Of course there is. Lots of it. More than Zimmerman faced. If a rigged grand jury hands down a "no bill" in Baltimore, are you going to revise your assessment of that evidence as well?

No, the Zimmerman case has nothing to do with Ferguson and the Brown shooting. By introducing it, you are attempting to obfuscate. You have no evidence of a “rigged” grand jury. The case in Baltimore will not go through a grand jury; the DA has already brought charges.
Unlike you Ice, I will only revise my opinion or belief when the facts change. As I previously stated, the difference between Baltimore and Ferguson cases, is evidence. In Baltimore there is evidence of police malfeasance. In Ferguson, in the Brown, case there isn’t.

Circling the wagons around the police in the US is a major source of trouble, and an instigating factor in the Baltimore riots. IMHO.

Except, there is no evidence anyone is circling the wagons are police. To the contrary, police departments and in particular the Ferguson and Baltimore police departments have come under great scrutiny. Even the police department in my city has come under scrutiny and it hasn’t been in the national press for years. The only one circling wagons is you my friend.

As I have repeatedly said, evidence and reason matter Ice.

 

[joepistole]

I'm actually sorry to see that happen. But not startled, I guess.

Meanwhile, you've been throwing the word "lie" around quite a bit, generally after posting something that needs - once again - to be corrected. These "errors" of yours, in other words, are conjoined to the word "lie" almost by reflex or habit. Any idea how that happens?

LOL, I think you had better read Photizo's post and my response again Ice.

You have admitted to lying. You said things which clearly were not true. You attributed things to the DOJ report which clearly were not there. Contrary to your assertions, you have been repeatedly unable to back up your claims about the Officer Wilson with specific text from the DOJ report in no small part because the DOJ report does not back up your assertions. In fact, the DOJ report very clearly and explicitly debunks your assertions. When pressured, you were forced to admit the DOJ report doesn't say what you claimed it said. That is the bottom line Ice.

 

[iceaura]

LOL, I think you had better read Photizo's post and my response again Ice.

I'd be a bit wary, were I you.

Photizo is not an innocent person who simply keeps losing track of stuff and confusing his own bullshit with what somebody else posted, or what is actually in a document like a DOJ report. He's self-aware, conscious, and intends what he does. It's one thing to be muddled and silly, it's quite another to link arms with depravity.

As I have repeatedly said, evidence and reason matter Ice.

So when I reason from five or six items of evidence I found presented in - say - a DOJ report of a police encounter with a black man,

in support of an overall argument - say, that US police officers tend to draw their guns earlier and more often in encounters with black men - which is itself merely one aspect of a larger argument directly pertaining to a thread - say the context of some rioting and such in Baltimore -

you will henceforth follow along carefully and reply relevantly?

Instead of this:

You have admitted to lying. - - - When pressured, you were forced to admit the DOJ report doesn't say what you claimed it said - - - -

which just means you still don't have a clue here.

And white people refusing to buy a clue are the central context of the Baltimore riots: when faced with bad police behavior they deny plain evidence, reflexively cover for the cops, ignore patterns in event, continually attempt to justify the plainly unjustifiable, pretend to a reality everyone including at some level themselves (you can tell by their jokes) knows is not as they describe.

And eventually the odd and unceasing pressure of that aberrant fantasy world pressing in on the black community cause something to give.

 

[joepistole]

I'd be a bit wary, were I you.
Photizo is not an innocent person who simply keeps losing track of stuff and confusing his own bullshit with what somebody else posted, or what is actually in a document like a DOJ report. He's self-aware, conscious, and intends what he does. It's one thing to be muddled and silly, it's quite another to link arms with depravity.

Said the pot to the kettle, you very clearly misread the post.

So when I reason from five or six items of evidence I found presented in - say - a DOJ report of a police encounter with a black man,
in support of an overall argument - say, that US police officers tend to draw their guns earlier and more often in encounters with black men - which is itself merely one aspect of a larger argument directly pertaining to a thread - say the context of some rioting and such in Baltimore - you will henceforth follow along carefully and reply relevantly?

Yeah, because unfortunately for you fact, evidence and reason do matter and you have none. As repeatedly demonstrated you have absolutely no evidence. As repeatedly proven, contrary to your claims, the DOJ doesn’t support in any way your assertions. In fact, it disproves them. And when confronted with reality you moved on to the Grey incident in Baltimore and the Zimmerman case. The Baltimore and Zimmerman cases do not involve police shootings or police brandishing of guns, so it is difficult to see how those incidents support your belief and assertion police prematurely draw their weapons when confronting black males. And as previously pointed out to you, in the Zimmerman and Baltimore (i.e. Grey) cases there is evidence of wrong doing, though not by police in the Zimmerman case. And in the Ferguson case, again as repeatedly demonstrated, there is nothing which implicates the police of any wrong doing in the shooting of Brown, the young black teenager. Contrary to your assertion, the DOJ report very clearly found the policeman involved (Officer Wilson), acted rationally and in self-defense. And you have admitted you have lied about the DOJ report, you have repeatedly unable to produce text from the DOJ report to prove your assertions. Because, it doesn’t exist.

Instead of this: which just means you still don't have a clue here.

So a personal attack is the best you can do? Well, when all the evidence clearly demonstrates your beliefs are wrong and you don’t have the fortitude to admit you are wrong, I guess that is the best you can do.

And white people refusing to buy a clue are the central context of the Baltimore riots: when faced with bad police behavior they deny plain evidence, reflexively cover for the cops, ignore patterns in event, continually attempt to justify the plainly unjustifiable, pretend to a reality everyone including at some level themselves (you can tell by their jokes) knows is not as they describe.

The only ones running away from reality here are you and PJ. If you didn’t notice, there were good numbers of white folks in Baltimore protesting along with black folks. I yet to hear anyone defend the death of Mr. Grey as legitimate, but no guns were involved in the death of Mr. Grey. And the officer arrested for his murder is a black police officer. So it is difficult to see how you think the Baltimore incident supports your belief/assertion that police officers pull their guns prematurely and early in encounters with blacks when no guns were involved in that incident.

And eventually the odd and unceasing pressure of that aberrant fantasy world pressing in on the black community cause something to give.

Hmm, so blacks live in fantasy world? Perhaps this gets to the root of your issues; you are unable to distinguish evidence and reason from fantasy. And you have clearly demonstrated such in this and other threads, you distain evidence and reason and favor your fantasies and beliefs. Unfortunately for you Ice, evidence and reason do matter.

 

[iceaura]

As repeatedly demonstrated you have absolutely no evidence. As repeatedly proven, contrary to your claims, the DOJ doesn’t support in any way your assertions. In fact, it disproves them.
- - -
And you have admitted you have lied about the DOJ report, you have repeatedly unable to produce text from the DOJ report to prove your assertions. Because, it doesn’t exist.

So which of the five items of evidence I listed, all taken from the DOJ report, are you claiming do not exist and are not found in that report? Please be specific. Your choices are: the location and path of the bullet in the door, the rest location of the two shell casings ejected from Wilson's gun in the car encounter, the wound to Brown's hand, location of bruises on Wilson's head, and the agreement of the testimony of Johnson and Wilson concerning Brown's the timing and nature of Brown's insulting remarks prior to assaulting Wilson.

So a personal attack is the best you can do?

In response to posts dominated by unsupported accusations of me lying, you mean?

So it is difficult to see how you think the Baltimore incident supports your belief/assertion that police officers pull their guns prematurely and early in encounters with blacks when no guns were involved in that incident.

Never said it did.

And I don't think you know whether guns were drawn early during Freddie Gray's arrest.

And eventually the odd and unceasing pressure of that aberrant fantasy world pressing in on the black community cause something to give.
Hmm, so blacks live in fantasy world?

? Lots of black people can read with better comprehension than that.

The argument is that the context of the rioting and looting in Baltimore is racially biased and abusive policing acting as a continuation of longstanding racial oppression , as is common - to the point of being apparently accepted as normal - throughout the US.

 

[joepistole]

So which of the five items of evidence I listed, all taken from the DOJ report, are you claiming do not exist and are not found in that report? Please be specific. Your choices are: the location and path of the bullet in the door, the rest location of the two shell casings ejected from Wilson's gun in the car encounter, the wound to Brown's hand, location of bruises on Wilson's head, and the agreement of the testimony of Johnson and Wilson concerning Brown's the timing and nature of Brown's insulting remarks prior to assaulting Wilson.

Sure, just as soon as you prove the DOJ document backs up your assertions. You have been repeatedly challenged to provide the actual text from the DOJ report which backs up your assertions. To date, you have only offered two sentences which you took out of contest and misrepresented while ignoring the other 86 pages of text. And none of that is new. You have been repeatedly challenged to provide the specific text from the DOJ report which justifies your beliefs. You have failed to provide that text. A few posts ago you acknowledged you couldn’t provide it, because it doesn’t exit.

So if you have had a change of heart, go for it. Post the specific text which validates your claim that Officer Wilson prematurely drew his gun in order to accost a black young teenager who was merely jaywalking. You can’t because that isn’t in the DOJ report. You then used the excuse that it wasn’t within the scope of the DOJ investigation by quoting and misconstruing those two sentences.

Your choice is to be honest or to continue with your dishonesty. It really is that simple. The unpleasant fact for you is where you believe there are inconsistencies in the forensic evidence, the DOJ finds no inconsistencies. The DOJ report, as repeated numerous times to you, found Officer Wilson’s shooting of that black young teenager reasonable and justifiable under the law and consistent with the forensic evidence and the witness testimony. Unlike you, I can and have repeatedly cited specific text from the DOJ report which clearly exonerates Officer Wilson, and finds his actions consistent with the law, the evidence and the witness testimony.

So In response to posts dominated by unsupported accusations of me lying, you mean?

Well what do you call it when someone deliberately communicates he knows to not be true with the intent to deceive?

So Never said it did.

Then why did you bring up the Zimmerman and Baltimore incidents to support of your belief that police officers drawdown on blacks faster than they would for people of other races?

So And I don't think you know whether guns were drawn early during Freddie Gray's arrest.

Ok, so where is your evidence guns were drawn in the Freddie Gray arrest? Freddie ran from the police and was chased down and physically tackled/restrained by the police. You generally don’t tackle people ore physically restrain people with a drawn weapon.

? Lots of black people can read with better comprehension than that.

I guess you are not lots of black people, because you wrote it. Is your memory that bad? You took your post and misrepresented it as mine and that isn’t the first time you have done that very same thing.

The argument is that the context of the rioting and looting in Baltimore is racially biased and abusive policing acting as a continuation of longstanding racial oppression , as is common - to the point of being apparently accepted as normal - throughout the US.

Well a police officer defending himself isn't racist or evidence of racial oppression. It’s just a police officer exercising his right to defend himself. In the Brown shooting, which was the subject under discussion, there was no evidence of racial oppression or police abuse. You interjected the Gray (i.e. Baltimore) incident into that discussion.

In the Baltimore incident, a black police officer has been accused of murdering Mr. Gray...not a white officer. So it is difficult to see how that can be in anyway construed as racism.

But none of that relates to the subject we were discussing (i.e. your accusation that police officers prematurely drawdown on blacks) and your assertion that Officer Wilson drew down on Brown prematurely.

 

[Billy T]

BALTIMORE (AP) — A grand jury indicted all six officers charged in the case of Freddie Gray, who died of injuries he suffered in police custody, allowing the state's attorney to press ahead with the most serious charges despite criticism that she was part of an "overzealous prosecution."
The indictments announced Thursday were similar to the charges Baltimore State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby announced nearly three weeks ago. The most serious charge for each officer, ranging from second-degree "depraved heart" murder to assault, stood, though some of the lesser alleged offenses had changed.*

Mosby said prosecutors presented evidence to the grand jury for the past two weeks. ... Mosby said the arrest was unlawful because the knife is legal under state law.

* Got all the officer names correctly spelled, at least.
I am disturbed that there is no charge for illegal search and seizure. - The police had no "probable cause" except "racial profiling" which is also illegal.

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

The KKK never lynched a tenth of the number of black men that other black men killed fighting over women or money - that does not diminish the nature or significance of what they did.

I'd like to see the source of your statistic. Nonetheless, today it is consistently reported that most white people who are murdered are killed by white people, and most black people who are murdered are killed by black people.

At first blush, this seems to be merely the effect of our largely segregated communities. Yet even here in Maryland, arguably the most successfully integrated state in the country, where a higher percentage of the population is black than in any other state, and where it's common for white and black people to be cordial neighbors, that statistic nonetheless holds true.

So the role and effect of police violence, of which the occasional killing is a very small part, is much different and more significant than its statistical footprint alone would suggest.

Black police officers seem to shoot (or injure non-lethally, or simply shake down and harass) more black civilians than white ones.