|
VitalSigns posted:Why does this matter, if according to you he was poorly trained. It certainly isn't her fault that the department has poo poo standards. Blaming her for his behavior makes no sense. Sooooo.. Let me follow this.. If he isn't trained properly to deal with someone being an absolute gently caress, thats his fault. But her treating him like poo poo when he is trying to do his job isn't her fault? She has no responsibility to be reasonable, but he has to do the right thing with out being taught the right thing?
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 00:20 |
|
|
Genocide Tendency posted:And I am saying that his actions on the video appear that sexism and bad training is likely a factor. Which you responded to with : Ah perhaps I misunderstood you! If you're just advising me not to ignore other potential factors like misogyny or departmental problems with recruitment and training that also likely contributed then I agree. I thought you were trying to say that it's absurd to even suggest that racism was a likely factor at work here, but now that I think about it, that's an absurd position and I apologize for attributing it to you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
TheImmigrant posted:This, mere minutes after I posted: I'm not a racist but... Edit: just to be clear, I'm saying you can say you're against racism but if you spend your time arguing that racist poo poo isn't racist you're undermining your initial stance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:All the lawyers and cops in this thread just happen to agree with him, it's weird that a troll has so much support, no? Lawyers enjoy deconstructing lovely arguments laden with logical fallacies. Would it be better if everyone reached consensus on the raging controversy over whether racism is bad, and then congratulate themselves for arriving at agreement? Cracking debate that would be.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
TheImmigrant posted:Lawyers enjoy deconstructing lovely arguments laden with logical fallacies. Would it be better if everyone reached consensus on the raging controversy over whether racism is bad, and then congratulate themselves for arriving at agreement? Cracking debate that would be. I don't care what you guys do I'm just participating in the debate. Edit: also isn't it possible that lawyers and Cops are so entrenched in a racist system that they have to defend it because they're part of the problem? ElCondemn fucked around with this message at 17:35 on Aug 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
Genocide Tendency posted:Sooooo.. Let me follow this.. This is correct, professionals should be held to higher standards of behavior than random members of the public yes. If his training was so poor that it couldn't possibly be his fault (doubtful, I never had to be trained not to start fights with random people when I was in the military, but whatever let's say that's the case) than the blame for the situation lies with the professional organization that sent someone ill-equipped to his job out to enforce the law and protect public safety. E: Also, not sure how smoking a cigarette is being an absolute gently caress, but whatever, you apparently think it's no problem to arrest someone for no reason as long as the supreme court says it's not a crime but smoking a cigarette (also legal) is grounds for the government coming down on you like a ton of bricks so 
VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Aug 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
Genocide Tendency posted:Sooooo.. Let me follow this.. Yes, 1. She didn't treat him like poo poo 2. Ignorance is no excuse for someone in a position of power to abuse that power and ruin someone's life.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
Genocide Tendency posted:Also, they are not arbitrary commands. Maybe he is allergic to cigarette smoke. Maybe he has asthma, maybe his parents smoked and beat him so cigarettes trigger his sad brains.. Maybe he just thinks she should be polite and put the loving cigarette out while discussing the ticket. And, as much as you want to bitch about it, the Supreme Court has already said a cop can order someone out of a car. Who gives a poo poo? It's not like drive-through clerks can tell people to stop smoking, why should cops have that ability (assuming they've got smoking-related PTSD like your idiotic example)?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
I really don't see a meaningful response here. It just looks like you're putting words into my mouth, ignoring the dude who was previously concerned about the Confederate Flag, and ignoring the ultimate point that "bad thing happening only 0.00001% of the time" can still be a disastrous record of compliance. Maybe try and read for understanding rather than technicality next time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:36
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Ah perhaps I misunderstood you! If you're just advising me not to ignore other potential factors like misogyny or departmental problems with recruitment and training that also likely contributed then I agree. I thought you were trying to say that it's absurd to even suggest that racism was a likely factor at work here, but now that I think about it, that's an absurd position and I apologize for attributing it to you. See.. This is the problem. Could there be an issue with racism? Possibly. But defaulting to it is dumb as gently caress. It could be sexism. Bad training. A whole host of issues. Thats my point. Crying racism is stupid. Did he over react? Did he escalate the situation when she went from lovely to super lovely? Yep. But to sit there and say well the cop was white and she was black so "RACISM", isn't accurate. And to back it up by saying "well the department has had racism issues in the past and the state is notoriously racist" as your prof is a joke. I'm not requiring a checklist to prove its racist. I'm pointing out that that the argument of racism is weak and there could have been plenty of other reasons that this stop went bad. The stop went bad. And stops like this need to end. Saying its racism doesn't do poo poo to address that. Saying that there is a problem and looking at it in depth to find out what caused it dose. Just because a black person gets pulled over by a white cop, it doesn't automatically imply it was for "driving while black" and having that stop go south isn't automatically because of racism. It very well could be plenty of other problems. On the other hand, if a white cop walks up to the window of a black driver and says "you kinda dark to be drivin round here" then yea. There is an issue with racism. No problems with that. Won't argue. And I firmly believe that does happen. But its not always the case when an African American is pulled over by a white cop. Sometimes its because they didn't signal while changing lanes, and the stop went south because the cop was not trained/instructed to de-escalate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
How can you say it's sexism when the cop didn't say "I'm a sexist and hate women, therefore I am stopping you" though? Since that's the only way people can have motivations, when they explicitly declare them at every second.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:You guys are loving stupid. You're afraid that calling out a racist is going to trivialize the case against racism? Show me one video in this thread that exemplifies racism that doesn't have the cop yelling "friend of the family" or explicitly expressing hatred for other races. It's called denial, you see it every loving day but you have to justify it to yourself, you can't see racism because you don't want to. DARPA posted:said officer Wilson after mutilating a prisoner's eye in front of six other guards. Five of who didn't see nothing. The sixth who testified was terminated hours after Wilson's conviction quote:Seems to me that the problem here is an honest to god psychopath being hired as a prison guard (and the thin blue line stuff), I mean it's a good example of misconduct going completely ignored but not a good example of systemic racism. If gouging out a prisoner's eye in front of other guards, while calling him "just a loving friend of the family" isn't evidence of a systemic racism issue, what would be? The answer is nothing. Nothing will ever be good enough as evidence for systemic racism for a racist. You'd think stats would be useful, but racists are generally too loving stupid to use their turn signal, so fat chance they'd understand numbers or charts.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
No GT would agree that's racism because it meets the "I was only motivated to do something if I'm explicitly screaming why I'm doing it" bar.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
Radbot posted:Who gives a poo poo? It's not like drive-through clerks can tell people to stop smoking, why should cops have that ability (assuming they've got smoking-related PTSD like your idiotic example)? Drive through clerks can. A cop can. She dosen't have to put it out. He was reasonable when he asked, she got lovely over it. He has every right to ask her to "please put out the cigarette". Just like she can say no. On the other hand she can decline with out getting an attitude. Or you know, be polite and put the cigarette out and light it up once the stop is over. And hyperbole to support one's position is the theme of the thread, just sticking with the rules here. Like the following: Solkanar512 posted:I really don't see a meaningful response here. It just looks like you're putting words into my mouth, ignoring the dude who was previously concerned about the Confederate Flag, and ignoring the ultimate point that "bad thing happening only 0.00001% of the time" can still be a disastrous record of compliance. Your comparison to airline crashes, dude. I didn't put words into your mouth. You made a stupid comparison.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
No, drive through clerks can't. Not if they want to keep their job.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
Radbot posted:How can you say it's sexism when the cop didn't say "I'm a sexist and hate women, therefore I am stopping you" though? Since that's the only way people can have motivations, when they explicitly declare them at every second. I said "it could be". But thanks for playing. DARPA posted:Don't even bother trying to prove racism exists to racists. It's a waste of your life. Even when an officer is comfortable enough with his fellow officers to explicitly call the victim a friend of the family, that won't be enough. If gouging out a prisoner's eye in front of other guards, while calling him "just a loving friend of the family" isn't evidence of a systemic racism issue, what would be? The answer is nothing. Nothing will ever be good enough as evidence for systemic racism for a racist. You'd think stats would be useful, but racists are generally too loving stupid to use their turn signal, so fat chance they'd understand numbers or charts. [/quote] What's your point here? Because one officer in a completely separate incident was racist, all cops are? Because there is systemic racism, all cops are racist?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
Radbot posted:No GT would agree that's racism because it meets the "I was only motivated to do something if I'm explicitly screaming why I'm doing it" bar. But the five cops who stayed quiet and the people who fired the snitch aren't racist, obviously, they didn't use any racial slurs!
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
Genocide Tendency posted:I said "it could be". Based on...? Bizarre that you're willing to call this officer a sexist based on zero evidence, while you're taking others to task for doing the same.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
Genocide Tendency posted:I'm not requiring a checklist to prove its racist. I'm pointing out that that the argument of racism is weak and there could have been plenty of other reasons that this stop went bad. The stop went bad. And stops like this need to end. Saying its racism doesn't do poo poo to address that. Saying that there is a problem and looking at it in depth to find out what caused it dose. It sounds like we agree then. It could be racism (and let's face it, it probably was involved), but even if it was it's doubtless not the only contributing factor. No one is saying we should say "it's racism, case closed" and dust off our hands, I very much want to see this investigated and to find out how a cop that emotional and thin-skinned and emotionally volatile was even out on the job in the first place, and whether there's a history of ignored complaints that point to departmental sloth or corruption. In fact a properly functioning organization it wouldn't even matter if the cop is privately racist because there'd be mechanisms in place to prevent abuse of power with training, oversight, response to complaints, and corrections, a more representative police force, and a high standard of respect and professionalism such that cops that let their private feelings negatively affect their performance are disciplined or fired.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
Radbot posted:No, drive through clerks can't. Not if they want to keep their job. What the gently caress? That's because the owner of the establishment would rather get the business from the smoker.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
ElCondemn posted:But the five cops who stayed quiet and the people who fired the snitch aren't racist, obviously, they didn't use any racial slurs! What if the guy who said n****r has aphasia and he was trying to say "gentleman". Funny how people who are hypersensitive to racism are so casually ablist. I would be careful about throwing accusations of racism just because someone said a few racial slurs, you can never 100% prove what he was thinking when he said them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:What the gently caress? That's because the owner of the establishment would rather get the business from the smoker. Yes, thanks for getting my point. That being that cops are the only people that can order people to stop smoking and keep their jobs, besides maybe bouncers in states where indoor smoking is banned.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:What the gently caress? That's because the owner of the establishment would rather get the business from the smoker. You're right, cops answer to nobody so they can make whatever demands they want.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:What the gently caress? That's because the owner of the establishment would rather get the business from the smoker. Okay well as a citizen of a democracy, I'd rather have a people smoke in their cars than be beaten for it, so I'm going to say that the standards of professionalism for public servants should include not flipping out and threatening to tase and arrest someone because a cop is mad about her smoking. E: Just a reminder for everyone who is saying it's totally cool for a cop to threaten to tase you and arrest you for smoking in your car, even the department has said he violated their own policies. quote:Steven McCraw, the director of the public safety department, repeated that Trooper Encinia, 30, who is now on administrative duty, violated department policy, behaved rudely and failed to de-escalate a confrontational situation that ended in Ms. Bland’s arrest on a third-degree felony charge of assault on a public servant. At one point, the trooper threatened Ms. Bland with a stun gun. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Aug 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Radbot posted:Yes, thanks for getting my point. That being that cops are the only people that can order people to stop smoking and keep their jobs, besides maybe bouncers in states where indoor smoking is banned. I don't know the laws of Texas well enough, but its irrelevant. He has every right to ask her to put it out. Its the laws that determine if she has to/if its a lawful order. If not, then its a request. Which again. He has and should have every right to ask her to put the loving cigarette out. So does a clerk. If a clerk gets fired for that, its a lovely manager/owner. There is nothing wrong with someone asking another person to put out a cigarette while trying to talk to them. gently caress. I use to smoke and fully support smoker's rights to hork down that sweet sweet cancer cloud. But its not a crime for someone to ask them to put it out. Its "No! gently caress YOU DAD!" mentality to think he shouldn't be able to. Should she be required? No, not if the law doesn't require her to.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Genocide Tendency posted:I don't know the laws of Texas well enough, but its irrelevant. He has every right to ask her to put it out. He didn't ask, he COMMANDED her. Which he has no right to.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:15
|
|
|
Genocide Tendency posted:Sooooo.. Let me follow this.. A part of me wants to wish you had to suffer the continual indignity of being subjected to some hick rear end in a top hat's high school power trip, while he hides behind a badge, a gun, and his essential dishonesty, but you are just too loving tiresome to engender ill will.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
Genocide Tendency posted:I don't know the laws of Texas well enough, but its irrelevant. He has every right to ask her to put it out. Actually DPS has suspended him and said that his actions violated department policy, so no he doesn't have "every right" to threaten her for not putting out the cigarette except in the sense that I technically have "every right" to flip off everyone at work and call their mothers whores ie it is not technically illegal but it is unacceptable and I should face professional consequences and maybe lose my job.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
MariusLecter posted:He didn't ask, he COMMANDED her. Which he has no right to. "You mind putting out your cigarette please? If you don't mind." OH MY GOD HOW DARE HE ISSUE SUCH A HARSH COMMAND!!!! VitalSigns posted:Actually DPS has suspended him and said that his actions violated department policy, so no he doesn't have "every right" to threaten her for not putting out the cigarette except in the sense that I technically have "every right" to flip off everyone at work and call their mothers whores ie it is not technically illegal but it is unacceptable and I should face professional consequences and maybe lose my job. Was he suspended for asking her to put out a cigarette or for not de-escalating the situation?
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
I'm not a linguist, but I would guess the important difference between a request and a command is that you don't get threatened with a stun gun for declining a request.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:24
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I'm not a linguist, but I would guess the important difference between a request and a command is that you don't get threatened with a stun gun for declining a request. She had a stun-gun put in her face because she refused a lawful order. You know. That part where he ordered her to get out of the car... But keep ignoring that and say its because of the cigarette.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Genocide Tendency posted:"You mind putting out your cigarette please? If you don't mind." I bet you were really confused watching The Godfather huh.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Are people still pretending that department didn't produce the world's most pitiful, obvious edited copy of the video where they dub out the actual audio of the arrest and replace it with the cop literally describing the situation as it would appear in his police report? And are you still pretending that the issue here is not, "You can put that cigarette out now," but rather, "Well, you can step right out of the car now?" As though the two commands (and they were commands, administered under color of law) were the same, or as though either were lawful? Why would you want to pretend such a thing? And why would you insist on being so tiresome and trite doing so? If you're so overtly eager to be a peon lickspittle, go be a peon lickspittle. Please, though, stop trying to drag us all along with you. You can do obeisance all by yourself.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
So just to be clear - GT's argument as to why the evidence of racism isn't evidence of racism is that it is also evidence of sexism could also be evidence that he is worse than a racist because he treats everyone the way a racist cop would treat black people. But we shouldn't fire him because it might just be due to a deficiency of training that was not his fault. So we should... ignore it? I'm guessing at the last part. Actus is mostly correct here though. His behaviour is evidence for all three of ActusRhesus posted:So basically, the cop here could be: His history could probably clarify which of the three (or which combination of the three) was his most likely motivation, but I don't see how any of them are an argument that he should no longer be a cop.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
Genocide Tendency posted:She had a stun-gun put in her face because she refused a lawful order. To skip all the (somewhat dryly amusing) pedantry, which specific granular instant of the stop do you think the DPS Chief was talking about when he "repeated that Trooper Encinia, 30, who is now on administrative duty, violated department policy, behaved rudely and failed to de-escalate a confrontational situation that ended in Ms. Bland’s arrest", I don't want to make a mistake and assume the wrong part of the video was the rude violation of departmental policy and failure to deescalate a confrontational situation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
Genocide Tendency posted:"You mind putting out your cigarette please? If you don't mind."
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
I don't know Bland's backstory and life and times, beyond the fact she'd recently landed a new job at her alma mater. But I know from that video that she was an assertive woman with a backbone who did not tolerate or put up with bullshit from tinpot tyrants and bullies. That's a truly impressive and rare quality. Whatever happened to her, whether depression or suicide (likely aggravated by being subjected to false arrest from some upjumped bully) I do not know. But the one window I have into her behavior and demeanor frankly impresses me. Similarly, I have one window into that cop's behavior and demeanor. His behavior was poor. He was petulant, arrogant, and boorish, at best. He was criminal at worst. The fact that you give him the benefit of the doubt, and deny the same to her, when all you have is that one window into their respective behaviors in that one single, brief encounter is staggering to me. It makes me wonder if you have similar problems watching movies or reading books. I seriously have to wonder if you can identify who the bad guys or good guys are in children's stories.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Randbrick posted:"You can put that cigarette out now," Not what he said. I actually quoted him. He asked her to put out the cigarette. He ordered her out of the car. It actually matters. VitalSigns posted:To skip all the (somewhat dryly amusing) pedantry, which specific granular instant of the stop do you think the DPS Chief was talking about when he "repeated that Trooper Encinia, 30, who is now on administrative duty, violated department policy, behaved rudely and failed to de-escalate a confrontational situation that ended in Ms. Bland’s arrest", I don't want to make a mistake and assume the wrong part of the video was the rude violation of departmental policy and failure to deescalate a confrontational situation. Lets take a look: VitalSigns posted:I'm not a linguist, but I would guess the important difference between a request and a command is that you don't get threatened with a stun gun for declining a request. Nope. Still asked her to put out the cigarette. Ordered her to get out of the car.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Adamantly refusing to see the whole picture is a good debate trick. In this instance, if someone takes issue with the cop asking Bland to put out her cigarette, you say "what? it's not illegal to ask someone to put out her cigarette." If someone complains about him ordering her out of her car and escalating the situation to violence, you say "why? police have the power to order people to leave their vehicles." As long as you refuse to connect the dots, and keep treating the whole encounter as a series of unconnected incidents, there's nothing you can't explain away with pedantry.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 00:20 |
|
|
Genocide Tendency posted:Not what he said. Tiresome, man. Tiresome.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2015 18:39
|
|