Ignore this at your peril: The USA is going down

[rederob]

The only thing proven was the cop didn't handle the situation properly.

That does not mean he was being racist.

He asked "What unit are you in". Response: "I don't have to tell you that". Red flag.

"If you have ID with an address that would be great"
"F*cking unbelievable man"

No sympathy from me and nothing remotely racist. Just pointless obstruction from dude.

Again, you refuse to address the issue what prompted the officer's actions.
There was no crime in progress, nor reported.

You seem to want to base your defence on other actions, so how is providing your address not adequate? There is only one door into the dormitory!
What other actions did the officer take to determine the student might be trespassing?
Finally, as many here already pointed out, ID's don't necessarily have an address - I have over a dozen cards with my photo and other information, but none have an address.

 

[PZ99]

Again, you refuse to address the issue what prompted the officer's actions.
There was no crime in progress, nor reported.

You seem to want to base your defence on other actions, so how is providing your address not adequate? There is only one door into the dormitory!
What other actions did the officer take to determine the student might be trespassing?
Finally, as many here already pointed out, ID's don't necessarily have an address - I have over a dozen cards with my photo and other information, but none have an address.

Again, you are avoiding my point. How was any of this confrontation racist ?

All I'm seeing is someone wanting to be a tough guy swearing at the police and one of his fanbois uploading it on youtube to gain sympathy for a hate movement against authority.

I don't buy it.

 

[Junior]

Exactly, to name one major, the mining giant wants equality of gender in the workplace, which means as we have a higher proportion of site miners being male by far, it is very hard for a male to find employment in the brisbane head office which are favouring females by far..but hey on the company overall number they are bridging the gap...
Obviously at no point does anyone care about abilities, just sex..
Which in itself is a huge warning sign in term of overall performance of these giants in term of long term investment

A friend of mine is working on major Rail projects in Melbourne...they are desperate for gender equality. Any woman who applies for a job in rail is a shoe-in, amongst a sea of male applicants.

 

[rederob]

Again, you are avoiding my point. How was any of this confrontation racist ?

All I'm seeing is someone wanting to be a tough guy swearing at the police and one of his fanbois uploading it on youtube to gain sympathy for a hate movement against authority.

I don't buy it.

I know what you want to see.
Police react to reports of crime, or crimes in progress.
Neither was in play.
Moreover, none of your points hold water.
Continuing to lawfully work as required as part of the student's work-study program meets no sane person's definition of "someone wanting to be a tough guy."
Being told the means to collect rubbish constitutes carrying a weapon was farcical, as was the number of police who came to back up the demented officer.
You seem to share Trump's grip on reality.

 

[Austwide]

Well I thought it was age related, not color.

 

[Bill M]

All I'm seeing is someone wanting to be a tough guy swearing at the police and one of his fanbois uploading it on youtube to gain sympathy for a hate movement against authority.

Except that it was the Police Officers body cam video. The student made no videos, all he wanted to do was pick up the rubbish around his accommodations and he nearly got shot for doing it.

 

[sptrawler]

Again, you are avoiding my point. How was any of this confrontation racist ?

All I'm seeing is someone wanting to be a tough guy swearing at the police and one of his fanbois uploading it on youtube to gain sympathy for a hate movement against authority.

I don't buy it.

The problem I see is the only ones expected to behave civilly are the police, when mobs wreak havoc day after day and police who are just getting paid a wage are being physically abused every day by lawbreakers, eventually a policeman will crack.

A lot of people just want an excuse to behave badly, when that goes wrong, well laying blame becomes difficult. Is it the agitator for agitating, or the agitated for reacting?

I've had my fair share of trouble with the police, but never envied their position, when a certain group of people cause 90% of your troubles your expectation of trouble increases when dealing with them.
The other point people forget is, the police are trained to be assertive and not take crap, this is done to avoid situations escalating and more severe force being required.
PZ99 is spot on, answer the question if the question isn't unreasonable, then get on your way, you can't have police being assertive when acting on your behalf, then not being assertive when you feel like abusing them.
Just my opinion.

 

[PZ99]

You seem to share Trump's grip on reality.

First of all rederob, I respect your point of view on this so there's no need for you to lose this debate by resorting to a personal attack against me - like others before you, you'll only look like a goose if you go down that path. Stick to the point.

I didn't link being a tough guy with continuing to lawfully work.
I linked being a tough with the potty language that was coming out of his mouth.

My grip on reality is based on living in a high crime area where stuff like that video content happens all the time and the police are treated with contempt because there are kids running around thinking they are immune from the law and cry foul when getting pulled up for it. There are frequent ID checks around here and they are random. I have nothing to hide so I just produce it and get on with my day. Too easy.

That guy had two choices - comply with the request and if it felt unreasonable complain to the authorities later or stand there holding his ground and being a dickhead merely because he had a right to be a dickhead. He chose the latter.

Nothing in the video was about skin colour. That's just an unproven assertion from a youtube subscriber.

 

[rederob]

That guy had two choices - comply with the request and if it felt unreasonable complain to the authorities later or stand there holding his ground and being a dickhead merely because he had a right to be a dickhead. He chose the latter.

Again, he did as requested.
How many times does that need to be pointed out?
Then he continued to do his job, but was further harassed by the officer who had zero reasonable cause.
The matter was initiated and escalated at the officer's instigation on a notion that "trespass" occurs, even though it was not evident.
I have an inkling that if you were confronted by an officer for collecting rubbish in front of your place of residence, after the officer had seen you on your patio, that you might be a bit annoyed.
After providing all the necessary information about yourself and your place of residence how would you feel about being told you had to stop collecting the rubbish as you were now obstructing the police!!!
The officer was so stupid, aside from insistent in his deluded presumption, that he was going to arrest the student for obstruction in relation to an offence that did not happen!!!
Nothing the officer did was rational, by any standard.

Your points have nothing to do with living in a high crime area.
You need to respond to the basic issue of what prompted the officer's action, and despite being asked you keep avoiding the issue.

As to "reality," I am amused you might think that what transpired was reasonable.

 

[PZ99]

Again, he did as requested.
How many times does that need to be pointed out?
Then he continued to do his job, but was further harassed by the officer who had zero reasonable cause.
The matter was initiated and escalated at the officer's instigation on a notion that "trespass" occurs, even though it was not evident.
I have an inkling that if you were confronted by an officer for collecting rubbish in front of your place of residence, after the officer had seen you on your patio, that you might be a bit annoyed.
After providing all the necessary information how would you feel about being told you had to stop collecting the rubbish as you were now obstructing the police!!!
The officer was so stupid, aside from insistent in his deluded presumption, that he was going to arrest the student for obstruction in relation to an offence that did not happen!!!
Nothing the officer did was rational, by any standard.

Your points have nothing to do with living in a high crime area.
You need to respond to the basic issue of what prompted the officer's action, and despite being asked you keep avoiding the issue.

As to "reality," I am amused you might think that what transpired was reasonable.

You keep accusing me of avoiding the issue when you are avoiding the issue yourself.

The issue is about how the behaviour in that video was racist.

I'm not addressing anything else you've said until you respond to this basic issue of racism.

 

[rederob]

You keep accusing me of avoiding the issue when you are avoiding the issue yourself.

The issue is about how the behaviour in that video was racist.

I'm not addressing anything else you've said until you respond to this basic issue of racism.

I have clearly stated that a white person would be unlikely to have been treated the same, and you responded to that post!

 

[sptrawler]

It doesn't just happen to black people in the U.S, a white woman was walking up to a police officer and was SHOT dead and she was Australian.
https://www.9news.com.au/justine-ruszczyk

Mohamed Noor shot Justine Ruszczyk Damond as she approached his patrol car to report a possible rape behind her Minneapolis home on 15 July 2017.

Ms Damond, 40, was unarmed and the former policeman was found guilty of her murder on Tuesday.

 

[PZ99]

Yeah I remember that one but sadly I can't offer an accurate description of the guilty party without being accused of something that I'm not. Good find

I have clearly stated that a white person would be unlikely to have been treated the same, and you responded to that post!

But you don't know that it's racist. You're just assuming it but there isn't any proof. It's just your opinion right? Similarly, the cop had an opinion the student was doing something wrong. Can you see the folly in both assumptions instead of just one assumption ?

You said my other points have nothing to do with living in a high crime area. They have everything to do with living in a high crime area because it leads to heat of moment errors of judgement akin to the content in that video. That's the reality you find amusing.

The reality I find amusing is some smartarse playing verbal Russian roulette with the police. All that was asked originally was what unit did he live in and he refused to answer so he didn't all as requested.

So yeah - I'm happy to agree the cop got it all wrong but still not convinced it was racist.

 

[sptrawler]

So yeah - I'm happy to agree the cop got it all wrong but still not convinced it was racist.

The media is sympathetic to the rioters and if one is injured there will be a public outcry, yet the rioters are throwing bricks, molotov cocktails and other missiles at the police, if a policeman is injured of killed that just comes with the job.
We are certainly becoming a weird society, in most aspects of life today the media dictates what is acceptable, whether it is legal or socially responsible doesn't seem to matter anymore.
Big brother is indeed coming, one just wonders whether it will be in the form of a computer, or a morning show on t.v.

 

[PZ99]

The media is sympathetic to the rioters and if one is injured there will be a public outcry, yet the rioters are throwing bricks, molotov cocktails and other missiles at the police, if a policeman is injured of killed that just comes with the job.
We are certainly becoming a weird society, in most aspects of life today the media dictates what is acceptable, whether it is legal or socially responsible doesn't seem to matter anymore.
Big brother is indeed coming, one just wonders whether it will be in the form of a computer, or a morning show on t.v.

I remember the Star Hotel riot shown by the media was without favour or prejudice and demonstrated what the media should be portraying - exactly what happened and nothing else.

Things have changed for the worse since 1979 except for one thing. The rioters and cops went over the whole thing about 40 years later over a few beers

 

[rederob]

But you don't know that it's racist. You're just assuming it but there isn't any proof. It's just your opinion right?

Again, you need to provide a basis for the action of the officer.
What makes sense?

Can you see the folly in both assumptions instead of just one assumption ?

Police need probable cause to act as the do.
I do not assume anything.
There was no probable cause - the officer's bodycam and microphone are clear.

You said my other points have nothing to do with living in a high crime area.

If police suspect (or know) a crime may be occurring they have a duty to act, and in areas of high crime rates, they will act more often.
That's a fact.

They have everything to do with living in a high crime area because it leads to heat of moment errors of judgement akin to the content in that video.

Watch the video.
The officer saw the student on the patio before he acted.
He acted after the student clearly began collecting rubbish.
What on this planet suggests that might be suspicious?
It is a delusion that the officer made "heat of moment errors of judgement."
After being informed about what was necessary the officer chose not to believe the student. Why?
What reasonable "suspicion" could the officer have had at any point?
Did the student try to do other than what he was paid to do after informing the officer of his address and providing ID?
What prompted the officer to continue to harass the student?
Ultimately the officer believed another person - a white male - despite at no time there being any evidence of that person's credibility!
What makes that a sensible stance?

The officer displayed every characteristic pattern of behaviour that can be attributed to racism.

 

[PZ99]

Again, you need to provide a basis for the action of the officer.What makes sense?
Police need probable cause to act as the do.
I do not assume anything.
There was no probable cause - the officer's bodycam and microphone are clear.

You're assuming the officers' behaviour can be attributed to racism.

If police suspect (or know) a crime may be occurring they have a duty to act, and in areas of high crime rates, they will act more often.
That's a fact.

That's exactly what happened. You clearly hear the officer saying "We've had some stuff going on in this area"

Watch the video.

I did.

The officer saw the student on the patio before he acted.
He acted after the student clearly began collecting rubbish.
What on this planet suggests that might be suspicious?
It is a delusion that the officer made "heat of moment errors of judgement."

Oldest trick in the book - pretend you live or work there when a copper drives past.
Officer suspects some level of foul play and acts. Up to this point - perfectly entitled to do so.
Comes with the territory.

After being informed about what was necessary the officer chose not to believe the student. Why?
What reasonable "suspicion" could the officer have had at any point?

The fact that the student started getting overly defensive after being asked a very basic harmless question as to what unit he was in and refusing to give his date of birth. He doesn't have to give his date of birth but it does nothing to lull the officers' suspicion... particularly given the F words coming out of his mouth.

Did the student try to do other than what he was paid to do after informing the officer of his address and providing ID?
What prompted the officer to continue to harass the student?

As above. No unit number - just potty language.

Ultimately the officer believed another person - a white male - despite at no time there being any evidence of that person's credibility!
What makes that a sensible stance?

How do you know the officer believed that other person? There were other police there by that time but we don't know prior to this if he was IDed or not because the video was edited before this appearance.

It seems clear the white male turned up after being requested to turn up by either the police or the dude himself. Why else would he be there? I find it improbable that some nobody turns up for the sake of nothing.

The officer displayed every characteristic pattern of behaviour that can be attributed to racism.

I disagree. The officer displayed an error of judgement but no racism and that's backed up by the investigation.

 

[rederob]

You're assuming the officers' behaviour can be attributed to racism.

I make no assumptions.
This is textbook "pattern behaviour" of racism. There are thousands of academic papers that covers this topic.
You have shown no capacity to appreciate what probable cause involves. Instead, the idea that because an officer says "We've had some stuff going on in this area" seems to be adequate for you.
Racism involves nonrandom victimization and this was evident.
Much of your post was fabrication: there was at no time any reasonable ground to suspect anything.

You cannot offer a valid reason for the officer's initial actions and have consistently clutched at straws.

 

[PZ99]

Clutching at straws is your resort to semantics by going with a probable cause whilst saying you make no assumptions. My post is exactly what is in the video. By suggesting much of it is fabrication you are displaying the same judgmental errors as the officer did.

"We've had some stuff going on in this area" seems adequate to me and unless you live there or have some telepathic link with people who live there I don't think you have a basis for brushing it off as an "idea".

Racism involves nonrandom victimization. Agreed. It also happens without involving racism.

The only difference is nonrandom victimization isn't bolded

 

[qldfrog]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-02/us-riots-america-at-war-with-itself/12309196
Interesting article from , can't believe it the ABC
Obviously not one of their journos but kudos
Interesting to see Rederob now popping in here: is that the official soundbox of the BJ master?
Next Joeno will join and we won't need to read the China Daily