- Joined
- 29 January 2006
- Posts
- 7,217
- Reactions
- 4,439
Again, you refuse to address the issue what prompted the officer's actions.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 are avoiding my point. How was any of this confrontation racist ?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.
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
I know what you want to see.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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.You seem to share Trump's grip on reality.
Again, he did as requested.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.
You keep accusing me of avoiding the issue when you are avoiding the issue yourself.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.
I have clearly stated that a white person would be unlikely to have been treated the same, and you responded to that post!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.
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 ?I have clearly stated that a white person would be unlikely to have been treated the same, and you responded to that post!
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.So yeah - I'm happy to agree the cop got it all wrong but still not convinced it was racist.
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.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.
Again, you need to provide a basis for the action of the officer.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?
Police need probable cause to act as the do.Can you see the folly in both assumptions instead of just one assumption ?
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.You said my other points have nothing to do with living in a high crime area.
Watch the video.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.
You're assuming the officers' behaviour can be attributed to racism.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.
That's exactly what happened. You clearly hear the officer saying "We've had some stuff going on in this 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.
I did.Watch the video.
Oldest trick in the book - pretend you live or work there when a copper drives past.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."
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.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?
As above. No unit number - just potty language.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?
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.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?
I disagree. The officer displayed an error of judgement but no racism and that's backed up by the investigation.The officer displayed every characteristic pattern of behaviour that can be attributed to racism.
I make no assumptions.You're assuming the officers' behaviour can be attributed to racism.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?