You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
38 points
*

At this point, what you’re saying is like telling a woman she shouldn’t have been there or wearing that, and ignoring the real issue with power here.

Cops largely are pathetic power-abusing shitheads who escalate at every possible opportunity. You should not have to cower to every whim and demand of a cop if you are not doing anything dangerous. Cops have lost any credibility to suggest that we should have to give a shit about every stupid fucking tiny thing they have an issue with.

Based on your argument, you could say you’ll only speak to a lawyer and you’re giving the cops an out to beat the shit out of you for not complying. Cops don’t understand non-violent approaches to solving any problem, and THAT is the problem to focus on.

Fuck the police.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Sure, fuck the police but I argue a white person or a black person is heading for a bad time if they act the way that he acted. I can’t speculate on this any more than anybody else on “what if” scenarios should Tyreek have been white, but if you create a situation where the cop does not feel safe (e.g. rolling up your 100% tinted windows against their instructions) then you are going to get an escalation from the police.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

if you create a situation where the cop does not feel safe

You reach for your license ‘too fast’ - cop does not feel safe Acorn falls on car - cop doesn’t feel safe You are boiling water at home - cop does not feel safe You are writhing in pain underneath their boot - cop does not feel safe

US cops are literally brainwashed into feeling like the public is a threat to them. They are wired to look for a reason to escalate.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

Fine but those situations are not the same as “angry and noncooperative citizen disobeying my request and I can no longer see what is happening inside the vehicle.”

I would argue that this is actually the correct situation for a police officer to feel more concerned for their safety.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

I don’t have any studies to hand, but isn’t the disparity between police responses to non-white vs white suspects a given at this point, in the US at least?

But lets look at your argument both ways.

On the one hand you’d be arguing that race disparity in police responses doesn’t exist at all and so wouldn’t apply here.

Or

Race disparity exists, but in this specific situation it doesn’t apply for some reason.

If that’s the case , id be interested in hearing why you think it doesn’t apply in this specific circumstance?

Neither of those sound plausible to me but i could be missing what your actual argument is entirely, in which case, would you mind explaining why it doesn’t fall in to the above categories?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It’s more the latter. I don’t argue that race disparity exists. I’m only arguing that Tyreek did not do any kind of favor to himself in how he handled the situation. I’m sorry he got pulled from his car and cuffed, but my reaction to the video was that he had this coming. Blatantly disobeying an officer’s requests and in a way that can lead the officer to feel unsure over his/her safety and perceived control of the situation is going to end poorly. This could easily happen to a white person.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 18K

    Posts

  • 480K

    Comments