# Race and Waco Bikers



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswi...e-are-saying-about-the-waco-shootout-and-race

Of all the self absorbed, self indulgent, stupid yet clarifying articles. Seems like everything is fodder for people whose whole world is seen through race colored glasses. Not seeing everything as a matter of race is now also racist.

This article detailed some instant poorly thought out remarks on twitter about how racist it was that the media and police were not calling the Waco bikers thugs as they has called the Ferguson rioters thugs. 

Well, it could be that 1) everyone assumed that a "criminal biker gang" consisted of thugs and 2) these bikers were not constantly blaming everyone else for their antisocial behavior so no discussion of whether they were criminals or not was needed. They are, they think they are and the police agreed.

Are there simply no stupidity filters in the media anymore? Has the democracy truly been achieved by the internet so that anything no matter how defective must be taken seriously?


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

They are a minority.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

"race colored glasses" That's profound.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

I think it is a perfectly reasonable question to ask. I am wondering why it isn't splashed all over GC with people wondering if they should stockpile food and hide in their homes because the white gangs are coming to destroy them all. Go read a Baltimore thread or 2 and then come back and tell me again that article is crazy. Unless we can link the violence to gay people (see Amtrack thread) or Islam white people pretty much get a free pass around here and in the media too.


----------



## Ozarks Tom (May 27, 2011)

Did I miss the part where they tried to burn down Waco? That they're thugs is a given, but they do have a more generic term that's applicable - motorcycle gang members, is there a reason to call them something else?

In Ferguson and Baltimore there are much easier identifiers that could have been used than thugs, but given the choice of thugs seems the mildest.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Patchouli said:


> I think it is a perfectly reasonable question to ask. I am wondering why it isn't splashed all over GC with people wondering if they should stockpile food and hide in their homes because the white gangs are coming to destroy them all. Go read a Baltimore thread or 2 and then come back and tell me again that article is crazy. Unless we can link the violence to gay people (see Amtrack thread) or Islam white people pretty much get a free pass around here and in the media too.


That article isn't crazy, the author was clever in twisting things around to make it all about race. Still wrong, but not crazy.

So a bunch of bikers are sitting quietly where they were told to, without any physical restraints, meekly waiting to be taken to jail, even though 9 of their brothers are laying there dead, likely shot by the police. They found it in themselves to remain calm, they didn't set anything on fire. Behavior makes all the difference, not race.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Patchouli said:


> I think it is a perfectly reasonable question to ask. I am wondering why it isn't splashed all over GC with people wondering if they should stockpile food and hide in their homes because the white gangs are coming to destroy them all. Go read a Baltimore thread or 2 and then come back and tell me again that article is crazy. Unless we can link the violence to gay people (see Amtrack thread) or Islam white people pretty much get a free pass around here and in the media too.


Well, it wasn't. It is a stupid question, and there is no equivalency on any level. It is nonsense to try to draw a parallel.

You might equate it to black gangs fighting a turf war, but that is not what Baltimore, NY, Ferguson or Florida was about. That was nothing but false protest and riots about white brutality on blacks. Race dividers look everywhere and every time for something to build more followers and get more power over their followers.

There were more bikers arrested than black protesters in all those places combined, and the bikers are held with $1M bond. Equate that, if you can.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Some don't hesitate to point out black on black violence, but when white on white violence is pointed out it seems to strike a nerve.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Nevada said:


> Some don't hesitate to point out black on black violence, but when white on white violence is pointed out it seems to strike a nerve.


What are you pointing out? They are all white? What??

Some are brown too, btw. Still, what is your point?


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Nevada said:


> Some don't hesitate to point out black on black violence, but when white on white violence is pointed out it seems to strike a nerve.


Sounds like someone didn't actually read the article.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

MO_cows said:


> Sounds like someone didn't actually read the article.


I wasn't talking about the article. But I seem to have stuck a nerve with HDRider. But to be fair, a few are non-white. Here are the first 33 mugshots, and I see maybe 2 who don't appear to be white.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Nevada said:


> I wasn't talking about the article. But I seem to have stuck a nerve with HDRider. But to be fair, a few are non-white. Here are the first 33 mugshots, and I see maybe 2 who don't appear to be white.


You always strike a nerve with me. I just wanted to know what your point was.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

There are a lot of black bikers,by the way. Many of you may never see them but we sure do around the beaches. Myrtle Beach gets hit with at least 2 Bikers weeks each year. Black Bikers prefer to a different week from the whites. White Bikers perfer also to go different weeks from the blacks but they don't call it White Bike Week

* Black Bike Week 2015 Dates*

http://www.blackbikeweek.us/
By Clarence &#8211; May 30, 2013*Posted in: * Black Bike Week, Black Bike Week 2015
*Like This!! And Share!!* 
*Black Bike Week 2015 The Revolution!!!*
During the 2014 Black Bikefest, three people were killed and one wounded in shootings at the Bermuda Sands Motel in Myrtle Beach 
Gov. Nikki Haley wanted the bikefests stopped but the city merchants disagreed.



*Myrtle Beach Bike WeekÂ®
Spring Rally
*The Dates At Present Are &#8211;*
May 13 &#8211; 22, 2016
May 12 &#8211; 21, 2017
* *Myrtle Beach Bike WeekÂ®
Fall Rally*
Whatever you want to call this event
The Dates At Present Are &#8211;*
Sept. 25 &#8211; Oct. 4, 2015*


*
*


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

QUOTE=Nevada;7457445]I wasn't talking about the article. But I seem to have stuck a nerve with HDRider. But to be fair, a few are non-white. Here are the first 33 mugshots, and I see maybe 2 who don't appear to be white.

[/QUOTE]

Well the thread was about the article so if you didn't even read it what can you bring to the discussion?

About those those mug shots, there seems to be Latinos in every row, plus 1 black and 1 Asian in 2nd row. Might wanna get your eyes checked.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

I saw at least 6 who are not caucasion. 2 in the first row and 2 in the second. I saw at least 2 others who are not white.


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

There seems to bit of confusion between bikers, biker clubs (non criminal) and biker clubs who are basically gangs ie organized crime syndicates.

Not all bikers and biker clubs are 'gangs'


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

The ones in Waco were gangs!


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

MO_cows said:


> Well the thread was about the article so if you didn't even read it what can you bring to the discussion?
> 
> About those those mug shots, there seems to be Latinos in every row, plus 1 black and 1 Asian in 2nd row. Might wanna get your eyes checked.


He can bring an observation on the comments in the thread. I would say it was pretty apt. I predict the usual meltdown we see here as soon as race is dragged in.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

MO_cows said:


> Well the thread was about the article so if you didn't even read it what can you bring to the discussion?


I didn't say that I didn't read the article. I just said my post wasn't directed at the article.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Patchouli said:


> He can bring an observation on the comments in the thread. I would say it was pretty apt. I predict the usual meltdown we see here as soon as race is dragged in.


Race was "dragged in" by the author of the article. Nevada's comment was not "apt" to me because it had nothing to do with the accusation made in the article, which is what is under discussion. Sure there will be thread drift but none of you "left handed hitters" so far are even touching on the original subject matter or the theory of the article author, just accusing everyone else of racism. Yawn.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Tiempo said:


> There seems to bit of confusion between bikers, biker clubs (non criminal) and biker clubs who are basically gangs ie organized crime syndicates.
> 
> Not all bikers and biker clubs are 'gangs'


The bikers I've known were certainly not criminal. They were members of clubs, but they were fraternal organizations of people with a common interest -- riding.

A lot of the renegade gang perception of bikers is from 50s, 60, & 70s biker films. They portrayed bikers in that light, largely because that's what people wanted to believe. There was money to be made in making B-rated movies with that theme.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Nevada said:


> Some don't hesitate to point out black on black violence, but when white on white violence is pointed out it seems to strike a nerve.


Got your "race colored glasses" on I see. :dance:


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Ok, I cant comment on the article because my net is working slow today. It wont load for me. What I will comment on is there is a big difference from a motorcycle club and a biker gang. Assuming the two are the same is calling a plantain a banana. They look similar and have similar colors but one leaves a bad taste in your mouth. 

The banditos formed in 1966 and the Cossacks formed in 1969. They have always been at odds to say the least. Both are Texas based but the Banditos are larger. Lately the Cossacks have formed an alliance with Hells Angels out of California to take territory from the Banditos. Its not over and it wont be pretty. Cossacks also have ties to Siona (sp?) 13 out of Mexico. As does the Hells Angels. 

Ok the page finally loaded. Its easy to cherry pick certain photos and call it the _whole_ story. Its also easy for most people to fall for it without all the facts. 

It also _*real easy*_ to write something that will inflame people just for the sake of a buck. 

Just my nickle


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Nevada said:


> Some don't hesitate to point out black on black violence, but when white on white violence is pointed out it seems to strike a nerve.


Of course there is white on white violence. What started this latest snark off was the usual attack on the forum members (the why doesn't the bike wars trigger a prepper frenzy as did the race riots did) rather than a discussion of why the race riots are treated differently than these biker wars. A personal attack is sure to derail any thread. 
Race riots are different than this, at least for the present. And trying to make a race issue out the reporting of the criminality of a gang war if as off base here as it was in the article. 
And the most foolish remarks of all are the ones who spit venom then complain about the venom spit in return. As if their feelings are the issue.
I am also sure if there were widespread instances of biker wars wreaking havoc to noninvolved people, they will certainly be get more attention.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Bikers pretty much stay to themselves. They may have rumbles but if it is gang related, they don't mess with anybody else. 
There are the biker clubs who are family type people who just ride for the enjoyment, the fellowship with like minded people. They also stay to themselves.
There are the bikers both black and white who go to the beaches up and down the coast, both Myrtle Beach and Daytona are huge, but they visit other beaches as well. They advertise on their websites so you know when they are coming. They usually stay pretty much in their own groups also. We who live at the beaches just don't go out while they are around. They are really loud when they are in town but they don't usually loot or rob anybody.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

There is something I would like to say about color. I was raise up in my young years as a share cropper in Tejas. My father worked alongside what most may call blacks or browns and whites. We lived in the same "neighborhood". Meaning the scattered houses that were on the outskirts of the farm that were haphazardly placed. I don't say this for a medal or a pat on the back because it was what it was. It was life and it was a good one too. 

What I learned at a young age was this. There are no black people or white people or even yellow people. We are all just a different shade of brown. Some are darker brown and some are lighter brown. So what gives? If a 5 yo can figure that out why cant adults? Why let the media take your thoughts and turn them to what they want just so they can make a buck?

I don't know what happened in Waco. I wasn't there. I had lunch with a few cop friends today and learned about the rival between the two gangs. That's all I know but as a volunteer firefighter/emt I know that 180 patients would stress our capacity to beyond our limits. These cops were arresting 180 perps. It takes time to get 180 handcuffs to a scene with 180 cops to help man them. I heard they had to call to Austin PD for help. Its an hour away.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

I wish we did not say black and white but it seems that this is what the African Americans want. To be honest, most people are eiher white, beige, brown and only rarely black.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

While "Some don't hesitate to point out black on black violence", some do hesitate, even refuse to point it out, and also refuse to acknowledge black on white violence.
Instead, they focus on the comparatively rare "White on Black" violence.
The question is, why is the "president" and his henchmen raising such a fuss about white on black when black on black and black on white violence is much more common?
Answer: It fuels unrest, distrust and violence, further dividing the American people along the race lines perpetuated by the democratic party.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Some don't hesitate to point out black on black violence, but when white on white violence is pointed out it seems to strike a nerve.


Black on black is quite well documented

On another thread you were asking when was the last time something like this "white on white" happened at all.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

gapeach said:


> There are a lot of black bikers,by the way. Many of you may never see them but we sure do around the beaches. Myrtle Beach gets hit with at least 2 Bikers weeks each year. Black Bikers prefer to a different week from the whites. White Bikers perfer also to go different weeks from the blacks but they don't call it White Bike Week
> 
> * Black Bike Week 2015 Dates*
> 
> ...



One of the best rallys I have been to was Daytona when I was the guest of a NC city local chapter Prez of the Outcasts. Totally cool, spent the nights in a trailer behind a club in a black neighborhood. I was the only white guy around. I danced my tail off for a couple of nights.


[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdJoMqnmUJM[/ame]


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

You heard and danced to some really good blues music!:thumb:


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> The bikers I've known were certainly not criminal. They were members of clubs, but they were fraternal organizations of people with a common interest -- riding.
> 
> A lot of the renegade gang perception of bikers is from 50s, 60, & 70s biker films. They portrayed bikers in that light, largely because that's what people wanted to believe. There was money to be made in making B-rated movies with that theme.


All of the bikers I rode with until recently fell in the category of criminal bikers that I call "old school bikers". Some of them rode with outlaw clubs, some (like myself) just loved to putt and party. I rarely see the old school biker these days... most today are just motorcycle enthusiasts. From what I gather the boys involved in the waco incident were old school bikers.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> All of the bikers I rode with until recently fell in the category of criminal bikers that I call "old school bikers". Some of them rode with outlaw clubs, some (like myself) just loved to putt and party. I rarely see the old school biker these days... most today are just motorcycle enthusiasts. From what I gather the boys involved in the waco incident were old school bikers.


Just don't get sideways. I was camped next to the officers of the San Jacinto High Rollers in Sturgis. Partied with them every night I was there.

http://sjhr.org/

They said they were the family version of the Banditoes, after you have kids and are older, if you live that long. They were all over 50, maybe close to 60 years old.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

MO_cows said:


> Race was "dragged in" by the author of the article. Nevada's comment was not "apt" to me because it had nothing to do with the accusation made in the article, which is what is under discussion. Sure there will be thread drift but none of you "left handed hitters" so far are even touching on the original subject matter or the theory of the article author, just accusing everyone else of racism. Yawn.


I am sorry I directly addressed the article and agreed with it wholeheartedly. Might want to go back and re-read my post there.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

So if you are white and a biker and you were formerly or even currently are a criminal that is cool so long as you don't drag other people into it? Alright.

I am thinking all the customers at that Twin Peaks restaurant where this brawl occurred probably were not too excited to be in the middle of it. Nor are the people in the town of Waco and the rest of Texas who are expecting more violence to break out. 

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/19/us/texas-biker-gang-brawl/




> Swanton said that a coalition of motorcycle groups had reserved the outdoor bar area at Twin Peaks when "an additional biker gang, who was not invited to this meeting, showed up."
> "When those individuals showed up, there was a disturbance in the parking lot," said the police spokesman, adding it may have involved a tiff over a spot or someone having his foot run over.
> But it wasn't confined there. Swanton said there were "crime scenes inside and outside" the restaurant, including in the bathroom, eating area and around the bar. Most of those involved in the bloody scene came from outside the Waco area.
> They used all sorts of different weapons -- from brass knuckles to guns, from knives to chains -- to inflict pain. And when police responded -- within 30 to 45 seconds because of their proximity -- some bikers turned their weapons on law enforcement, according to Swanton.
> "Our officers took fire and responded appropriately, returning fire," the sergeant said, adding that it was "most likely" that three or four of the 18 Waco officers opened fire.





> But why were lives endangered in the first place?
> Arrest warrants for some suspects offer clues, noting that members of the Cossacks motorcycle gang were in the Twin Peaks parking lot when members of the rival Bandidos biker gang arrived.
> The trouble started there, though really, authorities saw it coming.
> A May 1 memo from the Texas Joint Crime Task Force warned that the violence between the rival groups "has increased in Texas with no indication of diminishing."
> ...


----------



## haypoint (Oct 4, 2006)

OK, I think we all understand the difference between motorcycle clubs and motorcycle gangs. There are also gangs that form in urban communities. Black Nation of Islam, Moorish Science Temple of America, Crypts and the Bloods and many more. 
Without my Race Colored Glasses, a notable difference is motorcycle gangs tend to kill each other in a Clubhouse or bar parking lot. The other gangs make the news when they kill innocent children during the popular, "drive by shooting". 
One group requires a motorcycle for transportation, while the other depends on public transit or their sister's car.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Patchouli said:


> I am sorry I directly addressed the article and agreed with it wholeheartedly. Might want to go back and re-read my post there.


If you agreed with it wholeheartedly there is nothing to discuss. I thought it was a propaganda piece and I bet the author had to go to the chiropractor after writing it, something had to be pulled in that stretch. 

Lives were lost to police gunfire at the biker brawl. And bikers could make every bit as good a case as minorities for police harassment. 

But if you want to wallow in white guilt you go right ahead. Encourage those "lost boys" of the low income black community to be angry and act out. That will improve their lot in life, NOT.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

haypoint said:


> OK, I think we all understand the difference between motorcycle clubs and motorcycle gangs.



It doesn't seem like the understanding is there.. 

If the members wear MC or M/C on their back patch, then it is a 1% club.. or gang as people like to call them. 

If they are not a Motorcycle Club, or MC, then they are a riding club.. or RC.. two different worlds... 

I've hung around with some MC's for years, I knew some really great people in M/C's... I've also ridden with a couple of RC's, and have met some of the worst people there.. 

Just like life, it's not all black and white..


----------



## Guest (May 20, 2015)

"MC or M/C on their back patch, then it is a 1% club.. or gang as people like to call them"

uhhhhh ever hear of the Blue Knights MC, but they might, I guess, qualify as a gang. Have the colors in my closet has MC on it..lol


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

gapeach said:


> I wish we did not say black and white but it seems that this is what the African Americans want. To be honest, most people are eiher white, beige, brown and only rarely black.


Could be but it seems to me the main ones wanting to know what shade of brown we are is the government. It started when we were old enough to write and read. "check this box and that box" type stuff. The when we are older we have to do the same thing. Census and benefits and SS status etc. The list goes on. My question is simple .......Why? What does it benefit except an excuse to wag the dog somewhere down the road. (been wagging a lot lately too) I wonder, if we had never had to do this how far along we would be today without this. We would not have to judge people on color but instead judge them by individual character. This has never been a liberal or conservative thing but instead a "statesman" thing. All are guilty imo for keeping this going. 

And they say Hitler was evil. At least he was honest about his bias.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Patchouli said:


> So if you are white and a biker and you were formerly or even currently are a criminal that is cool so long as you don't drag other people into it? Alright.
> 
> I am thinking all the customers at that Twin Peaks restaurant where this brawl occurred probably were not too excited to be in the middle of it. Nor are the people in the town of Waco and the rest of Texas who are expecting more ]


In the rush to disagree, the basic fact this misses is that when the police in Texas acted to stop the violence, they were seen to be acting for the good of the general populace and supported. While, if the police act to stop the violence in a Ferguson, they are seen as being against the general populace and are opposed.
There is room for criticizing the effectiveness of police, depending on personal opinion, but the main difference between the communities is that one community identifies themselves as law abiding and therefore the beneficiary of police action while the other identifies itself with the criminal and therefore as being abused by police action.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

where I want to said:


> In the rush to disagreed, the basic fact this misses is that when the police in Texas acted to stop the violence, they were seen to be acting for the good of the general populace and supported. While, if the police act to stop the violence in a Ferguson, they are seen as being against the general populace and are opposed.
> There is room for criticizing the effectiveness of police, depending on personal opinion, but the main difference between the communities is that one community identifies themselves as law abiding and therefore the beneficiary of police action while the other identifies itself with the criminal and therefore as being abused by police action.


The majority of the people in Ferguson or Baltimore don't identify themselves as criminals. They are, in many cases, upset as being identified and treated as criminals by the police as they walk or drive down the street doing their legal business. There were four days of nonviolent protests in Baltimore that got almost no news coverage. Were those protestors identifying themselves with criminals or just upset that a man died in police custody and many not in their communuty saw it as business as usual?


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

mmoetc said:


> The majority of the people in Ferguson or Baltimore don't identify themselves as criminals. They are, in many cases, upset as being identified and treated as criminals by the police as they walk or drive down the street doing their legal business. There were four days of nonviolent protests in Baltimore that got almost no news coverage. Were those protestors identifying themselves with criminals or just upset that a man died in police custody and many not in their communuty saw it as business as usual?


And that is identifying with criminals. Not being a criminal. Bikers died, probably some at police hands, while the surrounding people simply feel that bikers are one thing while they are another.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

The cops were there knowing this meeting could get out of hand. And it did. Law enforcement did the best they could under the circumstances. There have been no reports that I have read where these bikers threw rocks at cops. They did not riot, loot, steal, or burn anything. I'm willing to bet they didn't shoot at cops. They tried to keep this among themselves. This is not a race issue no matter how hard media like NPR and others try to make it.
Waco had criminals who got what they deserved, and people understand that. The other places have some people who ignore facts of the persons criminal behavior and only focus on the fact that a black man was shot by a white officer. Waco is just a criminal situation, the others were turned into a racial issue by ignorant protesters who ignore facts and the media.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

The media whines and cries "racism" every chance it gets. 
Turns everything into a 'black -vs- white -vs- black' issue.

I wonder why the media DOESN'T print TRUE racism, dare I say, worse than racism but 'population control'....bordering on genocide???

Let's talk about REAL hard statistical facts. Not 'perceptions'.

http://www.lifenews.com/2012/10/16/...ood-abortion-clinics-target-blacks-hispanics/


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Cornhusker said:


> While "Some don't hesitate to point out black on black violence", some do hesitate, even refuse to point it out, and also refuse to acknowledge black on white violence.
> Instead, they focus on the comparatively rare "White on Black" violence.
> The question is, why is the "president" and his henchmen raising such a fuss about white on black when black on black and black on white violence is much more common?
> Answer: It fuels unrest, distrust and violence, further dividing the American people along the race lines perpetuated by the democratic party.


Post of the day award.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

where I want to said:


> And that is identifying with criminals. Not being a criminal. Bikers died, probably some at police hands, while the surrounding people simply feel that bikers are one thing while they are another.


If knowing that a man who supposedly fled after making eye contact with a police officer entered custody healthy and died a week later as the result of what happened while he was in custody is wrong qualifies as identifying with criminals call me guilty. I can differentiate people legitimately protesting wrongdoing and those who are doing wrong by looting, burning or attacking police officers.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

MO_cows said:


> If you agreed with it wholeheartedly there is nothing to discuss. I thought it was a propaganda piece and I bet the author had to go to the chiropractor after writing it, something had to be pulled in that stretch.
> 
> Lives were lost to police gunfire at the biker brawl. And bikers could make every bit as good a case as minorities for police harassment.
> 
> But if you want to wallow in white guilt you go right ahead. Encourage those "lost boys" of the low income black community to be angry and act out. That will improve their lot in life, NOT.


Post of the week award.

Plus, seems some here were called racists again, in this thread. Nice.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

gapeach said:


> The cops were there knowing this meeting could get out of hand. And it did. Law enforcement did the best they could under the circumstances. There have been no reports that I have read where these bikers threw rocks at cops. They did not riot, loot, steal, or burn anything. I'm willing to bet they didn't shoot at cops. They tried to keep this among themselves. This is not a race issue no matter how hard media like NPR and others try to make it.
> Waco had criminals who got what they deserved, and people understand that. The other places have some people who ignore facts of the persons criminal behavior and only focus on the fact that a black man was shot by a white officer. Waco is just a criminal situation, the others were turned into a racial issue by ignorant protesters who ignore facts and the media.


Post of the day award.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

mmoetc said:


> If knowing that a man who supposedly fled after making eye contact with a police officer entered custody healthy and died a week later as the result of what happened while he was in custody is wrong qualifies as identifying with criminals call me guilty. I can differentiate people legitimately protesting wrongdoing and those who are doing wrong by looting, burning or attacking police officers.


Guilty- at least of parsing out facts need to be ignored to support your opinion. The problem comes from assuming wrong doing based on who is involved in the first place, ie black man dies at the hands of white police can not possibly be due to criminality in the deceased. While white biker dies at hands of police is obviously due to criminality.
The way this is made clear is the rush to dismiss any question in the first instance while there is zero interest in questioning in the second. 
As usual, the idea should be that the word "supposedly" in your post should make the judgement less absolute but it doesn't.
Me- I suspect that the police in Waco were more primed to shoot because of the nature of the people involved to a much higher level than any of allegations of this happening in the cases causing rioting Baltimore or Ferguson. But the intrepretation is different because of the biases of the interpreters.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

where I want to said:


> Guilty- at least of parsing out facts need to be ignored to support your opinion. The problem comes from assuming wrong doing based on who is involved in the first place, ie black man dies at the hands of white police can not possibly be due to criminality in the deceased. While white biker dies at hands of police is obviously due to criminality.
> The way this is made clear is the rush to dismiss any question in the first instance while there is zero interest in questioning in the second.
> As usual, the idea should be that the word "supposedly" in your post should make the judgement less absolute but it doesn't.
> Me- I suspect that the police in Waco were more primed to shoot because of the nature of the people involved to a much higher level than any of allegations of this happening in the cases causing rioting Baltimore or Ferguson. But the intrepretation is different because of the biases of the interpreters.


I have a lot of questions in the first instance. Why did the police lie in the initial reports about the arrest? Lies brought to light by a citizen's cell phone footage. Why did it take street surveillance camera footage to show that 4, not 3 as claimed by the transportation officer, stops were made? Should the allegations made against the supervising officer by another police force been taken more seriously? Why not just buckle the man in per policy? A lot of the same questions that were asked during the days of peaceful protest. Questions that many of the residents of Baltimore feared would go unanswered just as the many ongoing concerns they had about the police force had before. But it's probably easier to ignore these questions and lump all the residents together with the wrongdoers. 

As to the second I'm not sure what there is to question. Violent people attacked each other with knives, chains, guns and other weapons and the police moved in to supress it. Seems a little more straight forward than chasing a man because he made eye contact.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Another thing in Waco was that there were not enough police to arrest 200 men. The police had to wait for additional officers to come from Austin which is an hour away so it is not like they were sitting on their laurels as some sources have portrayed.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

mmoetc said:


> I have a lot of questions in the first instance. Why did the police lie in the initial reports about the arrest? Lies brought to light by a citizen's cell phone footage. Why did it take street surveillance camera footage to show that 4, not 3 as claimed by the transportation officer, stops were made? Should the allegations made against the supervising officer by another police force been taken more seriously? Why not just buckle the man in per policy? A lot of the same questions that were asked during the days of peaceful protest. Questions that many of the residents of Baltimore feared would go unanswered just as the many ongoing concerns they had about the police force had before. But it's probably easier to ignore these questions and lump all the residents together with the wrongdoers.
> 
> As to the second I'm not sure what there is to question. Violent people attacked each other with knives, chains, guns and other weapons and the police moved in to supress it. Seems a little more straight forward than chasing a man because he made eye contact.


Can't you see the basic fundamental bigotry in the statement "because he made eye contact." If people died because "they made eye contact" ,even if it was only black people, the world would be knee deep in bodies. That itself is assumption that can't possibly be true, yet it gets repeated as a condemning fact. There was certainly much more involved that gets neglected because alleging that simplifies blame in a situation not simple at all.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

where I want to said:


> Can't you see the basic fundamental bigotry in the statement "because he made eye contact." If people died because "they made eye contact" ,even if it was only black people, the world would be knee deep in bodies. That itself is assumption that can't possibly be true, yet it gets repeated as a condemning fact. There was certainly much more involved that gets neglected because alleging that simplifies blame in a situation not simple at all.


Making eye contact was the precipitating incident listed in the police report that led to Mr Gray fleeing, being pursued and ultimately meeting his death. What will never know is what Mr Gray saw in that eye contact that caused him to flee. I'm sure it was much more involved but we'll never really know Mr. Gray's side of that involvement. That's why it's important that others ask those questions and maybe have a little doubt about the answers given by those who have already misled.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

mmoetc said:


> If knowing that a man who supposedly fled after making eye contact with a police officer entered custody healthy and died a week later as the result of what happened while he was in custody is wrong qualifies as identifying with criminals call me guilty. * I can differentiate people legitimately protesting wrongdoing and those who are doing wrong by looting, burning or attacking police officers.*


Well then I sure wish you had come to Ferguson, and then Baltimore. You could have picked those thugs out of the crowd of demonstrators and a lot of misery would have never happened.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

When protestors are hired I wonder if they are asked if they are violent or non-violent and what kind of credentials it takes to be a protestor? if they agree not to loot then they are thieves when they do, but then they have someone to get them out of jail so why worry about being arrested?gre:

Poor small business people who try to make something of themselves, be successful in life and then lose it all to a bunch of greedy scumbags.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

MO_cows said:


> Well then I sure wish you had come to Ferguson, and then Baltimore. You could have picked those thugs out of the crowd of demonstrators and a lot of misery would have never happened.


It's really not that difficult to tell the difference betwee people like these http://www.newsweek.com/photos-peaceful-protests-baltimore-after-death-follows-arrest-325263 who have legitimate concerns about their community and the police who serve it and those who use unrest as an excuse to riot, loot and burn. Being unable, or unwilling, to acknowledge the difference might say something about the agenda of the less discerning.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

gapeach said:


> When protestors are hired I wonder if they are asked if they are violent or non-violent and what kind of credentials it takes to be a protestor? if they agree not to loot then they are thieves when they do, but then they have someone to get them out of jail so why worry about being arrested?gre:
> 
> *Poor small business people who try to make something of themselves, be successful in life and then lose it all to a bunch of greedy scumbags.*


Greedy scumbags like Sharpton and Obama


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

They came here a month ahead of the G8 Summit and set up their camps. They were run out of the parks and Squares because the homeless can't set up camp and neither could the protestors.

*Citizens' responses and authorities' counter-responses
Protests

The protests against the 2004 meeting of the G8 Summit in Sea Island, Georgia, took place over the course of several days in the cities of Brunswick and Savannah, Georgia.* Local police coordinated with the Georgia Army and Air National Guard, Georgia State Troopers, and agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, and the Secret Service, as well as officers from the Georgia Department of Natural Resources and others who arrived to control crowds and prevent terrorist attacks. Military vehicles (HUMVEEs) and Georgia State Patrol vehicles roamed the city streets and in Savannah and Brunswick near the bridge to the Island daily. The National Guard soldiers also patrolled on foot, searching for weapons and explosives and watching for known "domestic terrorist" groups and the so-called black bloc protesters.

The protests began in Savannah on June 8 with an anti-G8 march. However, about one third of those who marched were undercover agents from the FBI. Much of the planned "black bloc" protests in Savannah were thwarted when the leader of one "domestic terrorist" group was arrested in Savannah for possession of marijuana. Also, National Guard soldiers found several stockpiles of materials that the protest groups intended to use in a "sleeping dragon" maneuvers as well as bats with nails driven through them and piles of rocks and bricks. Then several protesters wearing all black clothing were confronted by National Guard soldiers in riot gear and then arrested by police after they congregated in front of the Starbucks and The Gap stores and began shouting antiglobalization slogans. At least three explosives were found by National Guard soldiers, though none of them turned out to be very big. One "dummy bomb" was found in a trashcan near a hotel where some members of the media were staying. It consisted of a shoe box with an alarm clock, newspapers and dead leaves. On the last day of the Summit, three protesters showed up on River Street, dressed as the Statue of Liberty, but they walked through the street quickly shouting anti-Bush slogans and then left.:rock:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/30th_G8_summit

Federal Law Enforcement did a super job of handling what could have been a bad situation but it was not the same Justice Dept. that we have today!


----------



## fordy (Sep 13, 2003)

Nevada said:


> I wasn't talking about the article. But I seem to have stuck a nerve with HDRider. But to be fair, a few are non-white. Here are the first 33 mugshots, and I see maybe 2 who don't appear to be white.


 ..............I count 11 Mexicans in that group of 33 ! One , could be black or mexican . , fordy


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

mmoetc said:


> It's really not that difficult to tell the difference betwee people like these http://www.newsweek.com/photos-peaceful-protests-baltimore-after-death-follows-arrest-325263 who have legitimate concerns about their community and the police who serve it and those who use unrest as an excuse to riot, loot and burn. Being unable, or unwilling, to acknowledge the difference might say something about the agenda of the less discerning.


Being in denial about how easily the punks and the thugs who are out to cause damage can camoflage in the midst of even the best-intentioned demonstrators says a lot about one's agenda, too. And when the "peaceful demonstrators" know darn good and well this will happen but they carry on anyway, it reveals their priorities, too. Amazing what just a little observation can do. 

I'm still waiting for someone to care enough about Machole Stewart to protest. A town is just about destroyed for an out of control punk who caused his own death, and the whole world took notice. But an innocent little girl was shot in a drive by, and months later, nobody knows nuthin and her killer(s) are scot free, the irony is just painful. The most messed up set of priorities, values imaginable.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

dlmcafee said:


> "MC or M/C on their back patch, then it is a 1% club.. or gang as people like to call them"
> 
> uhhhhh ever hear of the Blue Knights MC, but they might, I guess, qualify as a gang. Have the colors in my closet has MC on it..lol



The blue Knights is about the only club you will see that will wear MC that is not a 1% club.. I believe they do that to thumb their noses at the people in M/C's they police.

They also wore a three piece path for years, and only recently have made a 1 piece patch.. since the "stigma" that goes with a three piece is reserved for the outlaw world.. and again I think the blue Knights did a three piece just to tork the M/C's


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

These guy's are tough! I ride with some of them!


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Sorry, California chapter!


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

All I can really say is kudos to mmoetc. The mindset here is so set in concrete no amount of facts or reality will ever pound it's way through. 

If you truly can not see the difference between a man being killed for the only crime of making eye contact with a police officer and people being killed because they are having a war in a public restaurant and parking lot and the police are forced to step in then I can not help you. If you can not see why a group who has been perpetually oppressed would finally rise up and protest and even riot and then somehow attempt to compare that to people not rioting because the police carted off bikers in the middle of a WAR then I can not help you. If you can defend armed stand-offs between white ranchers and white militia members and the police/state/government and yet rage against black people who are fed up and can't take the abuse anymore then I can not help you. 

Willful blindness is only fixable by the blind themselves.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> All I can really say is kudos to mmoetc. The mindset here is so set in concrete no amount of facts or reality will ever pound it's way through.
> 
> If you truly can not see the difference between a man being killed for the only crime of making eye contact with a police officer and people being killed because they are having a war in a public restaurant and parking lot and the police are forced to step in then I can not help you. If you can not see why a group who has been perpetually oppressed would finally rise up and protest and even riot and then somehow attempt to compare that to people not rioting because the police carted off bikers in the middle of a WAR then I can not help you. If you can defend armed stand-offs between white ranchers and white militia members and the police/state/government and yet rage against black people who are fed up and can't take the abuse anymore then I can not help you.
> 
> Willful blindness is only fixable by the blind themselves.


Oppressed by whom? I don't believe anyone is asking for your "help" in any way, shape, or form. It sounds very elitist and condisending of you to think that "we" would even need your help. I see what I see and I simply disagree with your assessment.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

JeffreyD said:


> Oppressed by whom? I don't believe anyone is asking for your "help" in any way, shape, or form. It sounds very elitist and condisending of you to think that "we" would even need your help. I see what I see and I simply disagree with your assessment.


Here are some stories about the more $5 million in settlements the Baltimore city government has paid out since 2011 in police brutality and misconduct cases. You can decide for yourself if an 80 year old grandmother, a pregnant woman or a guy buying chicken might feel oppressed. http://data.baltimoresun.com/news/police-settlements/ Or if a community that sees and deals with such cases regularly might.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Patchouli said:


> All I can really say is kudos to mmoetc. The mindset here is so set in concrete no amount of facts or reality will ever pound it's way through.
> 
> If you truly can not see the difference between a man being killed for the only crime of making eye contact with a police officer and people being killed because they are having a war in a public restaurant and parking lot and the police are forced to step in then I can not help you. If you can not see why a group who has been perpetually oppressed would finally rise up and protest and even riot and then somehow attempt to compare that to people not rioting because the police carted off bikers in the middle of a WAR then I can not help you. If you can defend armed stand-offs between white ranchers and white militia members and the police/state/government and yet rage against black people who are fed up and can't take the abuse anymore then I can not help you.
> 
> Willful blindness is only fixable by the blind themselves.


It certainly short circuits any criticism of dubious remarks to turn it into personal attacks. After all, if you pretend to be superior, you might convince someone, maybe yourself, that what you say is important. 
I'm sorry that you can't participate like a adult, nor understand the points being made, but since the deficiency seem inherent, there is nothing I can do to make it clearer to you.
The reduction in moderating has certainly benefited those who confuse a display of rudeness with power. If you can't successfully debate, there is always the retreat into the violence of the mob, which you seem to so admire. I wondered if dishing out bitterness and rudeness as you do would make a difference but I doubt it.
BTW before you willfully misconstrue everything as you normally do, into order to assign poor arguments to others so you can think yourself wiser than everyone else, the issue being raised is the validity of saying that racism made the police treat these bikers better than the protestors/rioters of Ferguson and the media reported the bikers in a better light. Which is utter nonsense however you choose seek to portray rioters stealing sneakers for themselves as noble, abused defenders of the downtrodden. Remember no one is portraying the bikers as anything but criminal.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

mmoetc said:


> Here are some stories about the more $5 million in settlements the Baltimore city government has paid out since 2011 in police brutality and misconduct cases. You can decide for yourself if an 80 year old grandmother, a pregnant woman or a guy buying chicken might feel oppressed. http://data.baltimoresun.com/news/police-settlements/ Or if a community that sees and deals with such cases regularly might.


As I said, the issue is whether the police of Waco, not Baltimore, treated these bikers better because they were (assumed to be) white as did the media. Not whether the police of Baltimore are corrupt.

BTW 5 million in 3 years is chump change for a city police lawsuit payout. I bet that ranks at the bottom of most major cities. And not a good reflection of poor behavior anyway, as I bet the most corrupt police departments actually do not have major settlements anyway.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> If you truly can not see the difference between *a man being killed for the only crime of making eye contact with a police officer* and people being killed because they are having a war in a public restaurant and parking lot and the police are forced to step in then I can not help you.


That's a stretch.

We all know he wasn't intentionally killed, and it's quite possible the fatal injury happened when they first took him down to arrest him.

To imply his death was "punishment" is not realistic


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

mmoetc said:


> Here are some stories about the more $5 million in settlements the Baltimore city government has paid out since 2011 in police brutality and misconduct cases. You can decide for yourself if an 80 year old grandmother, a pregnant woman or a guy buying chicken might feel oppressed. http://data.baltimoresun.com/news/police-settlements/ Or if a community that sees and deals with such cases regularly might.


What about these? One payout was almost $13 million? Why aren't they rioting here? Do they feel oppressed? I'm sure they do, still no rioting, why not? The police here aren't all black, white, hispanic, asian so they don't cater to any perticular ethnicity. Most all of Baltimores police, city council, mayor, prosecutor, are black.


http://spreadsheets.latimes.com/lapd-settlements/

Plaintiff	Type	Disposition	Opened	Closed	Amount
Ajuria, Xiomara *	Police-Civil Rights	Settlement	May 1, 2007	Feb. 9, 2011	$12,860,000
Lisechko, Arthur	Traffic Accident - Other	Settlement	Apr. 7, 2004	Jun. 7, 2006	$6,250,000
The Estate of Devin Leigh Petelski	Traffic Accident-Failed to Stop/Yield	Settlement	Jul. 14, 2010	Feb. 14, 2011	$5,000,000
Hill, Robert	Police - Retaliation	Trial	Jan. 25, 2007	Jun. 23, 2010	$4,014,845
Nagatoshi, Richard	Police - Retaliation	Settlement	Nov. 8, 2001	Mar. 24, 2004	$4,000,000
Gousse, Angelo E.	Police-Civil Rights	Settlement	Jul. 11, 2001	Jul. 17, 2009	$3,010,000
Borck, Melissa	Police - Sexual Harassment	Settlement	Mar. 26, 2009	Mar. 31, 2010	$3,000,000
City of Los Angeles	Police- Other	Settlement	May 19, 2010	Mar. 31, 2010	$3,000,000
Diaz, David	Police-Civil Rights	Settlement	Jul. 26, 2001	Oct. 4, 2006	$2,850,000
Bender #35776, Donald A.	Police - Retaliation	Trial	Nov. 8, 2006	Apr. 22, 2009	$2,500,000
Fuller, Patricia G.	Police - Sexual Harassment	Settlement	Feb. 1, 2006	Jul. 1, 2009	$2,250,000
Jones, Johneen	Police - Retaliation	Settlement	Dec. 5, 2002	Jan. 6, 2004	$2,125,000
Mares, Peter	Police-Civil Rights	Trial	Sep. 25, 2001	Mar. 18, 2003	$1,791,241
Slade, H.	Police-Civil Rights	Settlement	Sep. 26, 2001	Jan. 19, 2005	$1,700,000
Ballaz, Patricia Lynn	Police-Civil Rights	Settlement	Oct. 2, 2007	Sep. 29, 2010	$1,612,500
Madrigal, Ernie	Traffic Accident-Unsafe Lane Change	Settlement	Jul. 15, 2002	Mar. 15, 2004	$1,600,000
Davis, Evelyn	Police: Wrongful Death - OIS	Settlement	May 11, 2005	Jun. 7, 2006	$1,500,000
Gilbert, Elvin Andre	Police-False Arrest/False Imprisonment	Trial	Aug. 9, 2006	Jan. 10, 2011	$1,461,834
Matthews, Judy	Police: Wrongful Death - OIS	Settlement	Mar. 7, 2003	May 10, 2004	$1,250,000
Berg, Eric	Police-Civil Rights	Settlement	Dec. 12, 2001	Feb. 6, 2004	$1,200,000
Tico, Mark	Police - Retaliation	Settlement	Nov. 8, 2001	Mar. 3, 2004	$1,200,000
Brooks, Warren Kenneth	Police - Retaliation	Settlement	Dec. 5, 2002	Dec. 23, 2004	$1,135,000
Campbell, Derek J.	Police - Race/Color Discrimination	Settlement	Jul. 29, 2002	Dec. 17, 2003	$1,100,000

Then there is New York!

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...joins-pothole-settlements-costing-735-million

Sept. 4 (Bloomberg) -- New York City plans to spend* $735 million this year *on settlements or awards in lawsuits claiming negligence, police abuse and property damage, the most in its history and almost six times what Los Angeles pays per capita. Yes, they include ALL payouts.

So, again, i'll ask......Why are THEY rioting and others are not, when clearly other cities issues are far worse?


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> If you can defend armed stand-offs between white ranchers and white militia members and the police/state/government and yet rage against black people who are fed up and can't take the abuse anymore then I can not help you.
> 
> Willful blindness is only fixable by the blind themselves.


I can tell you a difference I see. The rancher / govt stand-off was just that. A stand-off. The rancher and their supporters went straight to the government authorities they had a problem with and (probably because of social media, more than numbers and fire-power) were able to get the government to stand down. They did not burn and loot the ranch or the local community.

The racial protest riots I've seen in the recent past, seem to spill out all over the place and destroy the communities. The homes/neighborhoods/businesses have been looted and burned. I respect only the people involved in the actually protesting that has been targeted at law-enforcement locations and government officials who are role-players in what the people are protesting. 

I recognize that very likely many of the destructive people may not be locals from there, and that might be a factor. But, I also saw a lot of non-locals show up to assist the rancher.

That bothers me a lot when comparing the two. I'm not claiming it does or doesn't have to do with race. I'm just saying I do see a pretty big difference in the issues I've just compared.


----------



## Wanda (Dec 19, 2002)

The splitting of hairs is a fine art form for some people. Bring up the war of Nothern Aggression and the fur will fly. Bring up injustice within your own lifetime and it is :shrug:.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Originally Posted by Patchouli
> If you can defend armed stand-offs between white ranchers and white militia members and the police/state/government and yet rage against black people who are fed up and can't take the abuse anymore then I can not help you.
> 
> *Willful blindness *is only fixable by the blind themselves.


Do you really not see the difference in a group who pretty much stood around doing nothing, and the rioters in MD who burned cars and businesses and looted stores?


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

JeffreyD said:


> What about these? One payout was almost $13 million? Why aren't they rioting here? Do they feel oppressed? I'm sure they do, still no rioting, why not? The police here aren't all black, white, hispanic, asian so they don't cater to any perticular ethnicity. Most all of Baltimores police, city council, mayor, prosecutor, are black.
> 
> 
> http://spreadsheets.latimes.com/lapd-settlements/
> ...


I'll start by pointing out that Baltimore has a $200K cap on all awards involving police misconduct which helps to keep that number lower relative to the one's you cited. As for LA we don't have to go that far back in history to remember the celebrations that occurred after officers pulled a man from a speeding hyundai and beat him soundly. I understand some of the scars are still visible in certain neighborhoods. New York City, didn't we have two police officers shot and killed last year in retaliation for the Ferguson decision. 

Here are some more large scale protests in major cities that were mostly peaceful. http://data.baltimoresun.com/news/police-settlements/. Though if you read closely you will find some bad behavior. I'm not enough of an expert on crowd dynamics to be able to explain why protests don't turn violent like the first 5 days in Baltimore only to explode later. I also don't know why one incident will break the proverbial camel's back and drive people to the streets. I only know it will eventually happen if bad behavior seemingly goes unchecked.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

JeffreyD said:


> What about these? One payout was almost $13 million? Why aren't they rioting here? Do they feel oppressed? I'm sure they do, still no rioting, why not? The police here aren't all black, white, hispanic, asian so they don't cater to any perticular ethnicity. Most all of Baltimores police, city council, mayor, prosecutor, are black.
> 
> 
> http://spreadsheets.latimes.com/lapd-settlements/
> ...


And I'll ask- don't you think that money might be better spent? Or should people just stand by and do nothing?


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Bearfootfarm said:


> That's a stretch.
> 
> We all know he wasn't intentionally killed, and it's quite possible the fatal injury happened when they first took him down to arrest him.
> 
> To imply his death was "punishment" is not realistic


If it wasn't to inflict some sort of street "punishment" why cuff him behind his back, shackle his feet and place him face down facing forward in the back if the van before driving around for half an hour? Why not secure him per procedure? Intentional or not the man died. Oops, my bad won't bring him back.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Not long ago there was a thread about black youths rampaging through a southern city. Lots of fear, consternation and outrage over a series of incidents in which no one died and the damage was relatively minor.

Biker gangs get involved in an altercation in a shopping center restaurant with deaths, injuries and 300+ weapons recovered and the reaction is ho hum. Isolated incident. Might the reaction have been different if it was the Crips and Bloods feuding over a parking space not the Bandidos and Cossacks? Of course not.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

mmoetc said:


> Not long ago there was a thread about black youths rampaging through a southern city. Lots of fear, consternation and outrage over a series of incidents in which no one died and the damage was relatively minor.
> 
> Biker gangs get involved in an altercation in a shopping center restaurant with deaths, injuries and 300+ weapons recovered and the reaction is ho hum. Isolated incident. Might the reaction have been different if it was the Crips and Bloods feuding over a parking space not the Bandidos and Cossacks? Of course not.


The reaction is far from ho hum. It has been in the news and more than one thread about it. 

The difference is, some people look at each event individually, evaluate it on its own merit, while others try to make them fit an agenda. And the article author's assertion that the bikers were somehow treated more favorably by the police because they were mostly white is an example of twisting everything to fit the agenda. And it's flat wrong. If you want to see "equal treatment", what would have to happen is the police would have opened fire on the demonstrators once the burning and looting started and left 9 of them laying there dead.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

My opinion is this.......

When the dust starts to settle, the media creates another storm.
Hate, dissention, discord, misery, etc sells.
Keeps people glued to the TV. Keeps people on the internet.
Keeps people angry, hostile.
Puffs them up with pride and prejudice.....

Well played satan..........well played.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Patchouli said:


> All I can really say is kudos to mmoetc. The mindset here is so set in concrete no amount of facts or reality will ever pound it's way through.
> 
> If you truly can not see the difference between a man being killed for the only crime of making eye contact with a police officer and people being killed because they are having a war in a public restaurant and parking lot and the police are forced to step in then I can not help you. If you can not see why a group who has been perpetually oppressed would finally rise up and protest and even riot and then somehow attempt to compare that to people not rioting because the police carted off bikers in the middle of a WAR then I can not help you. If you can defend armed stand-offs between white ranchers and white militia members and the police/state/government and yet rage against black people who are fed up and can't take the abuse anymore then I can not help you.
> 
> Willful blindness is only fixable by the blind themselves.



We can all take comfort in the fact you and people like you plead the cases for the perpetually oppressed. 

Further comfort can be taken in the fact I and people like me really don't give a ----.


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Bearfootfarm said:


> We all know he wasn't intentionally killed,



Umm no. 
You doth presume a lot !
In fact your statement shows you don't understand the simplest, most basic point of the Baltimore situation. 
The riots happened because many there think he WAS intentionally killed.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

MO_cows said:


> The reaction is far from ho hum. It has been in the news and more than one thread about it.
> 
> The difference is, some people look at each event individually, evaluate it on its own merit, while others try to make them fit an agenda. And the article author's assertion that the bikers were somehow treated more favorably by the police because they were mostly white is an example of twisting everything to fit the agenda. And it's flat wrong. If you want to see "equal treatment", what would have to happen is the police would have opened fire on the demonstrators once the burning and looting started and left 9 of them laying there dead.


The difference also lies in what criteria the evaluators of those incidents use. Most of the focus of this thread hasn't been about the fear of biker gangs unlike the focus of the other thread I mentioned. Had the criminals in Baltimore been killing each other deadly force by the police would have been appropriate. The police in Baltimore should have done more to quell the destruction. I find it interesting how many who fear the government are quick to point its power towards others.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

HDRider said:


> We can all take comfort in the fact you and people like you plead the cases for the perpetually oppressed.
> 
> Further comfort can be taken in the fact I and people like me really don't give a ----.


As long as it's someone else's problem why should you care. Your tune might change when the power is pointed towards you. It's easy to worry about things like over regulation of business and unfair taxing of the rich when you're not living in fear of being stopped and searched or beaten by the police on a daily basis.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

mmoetc said:


> As long as it's someone else's problem why should you care. Your tune might change when the power is pointed towards you. It's easy to worry about things like over regulation of business and unfair taxing of the rich when you're not living in fear of being stopped and searched or beaten by the police on a daily basis.


Being black must be a curse that I just can't relate to. I am glad you can. Are you black and living in that constant state of fear of which you speak so passionately?


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

Laura Zone 5 said:


> My opinion is this.......
> 
> When the dust starts to settle, the media creates another storm.
> Hate, dissention, discord, misery, etc sells.
> ...


The media makes a fortune off we the people's blood...

Man has always been violent. It's only in more modern times we've tried to act like we're civilized... but the media is a somewhat new thing... and it loves to keep the blood flowing...


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

mmoetc said:


> I'm not enough of an expert on crowd dynamics to be able to explain why protests don't turn violent like the first 5 days in Baltimore only to explode later. I also don't know why one incident will break the proverbial camel's back and drive people to the streets. I only know it will eventually happen if bad behavior seemingly goes unchecked.


In my experience, which isn't omnipotent-i'll admit, it happens in places with strong ties to welfare and entitlement programs.

The rioting and looting do not ever have to do with the other people who may be genuinely protesting a recent event within that community.

Rioters and looters are opportunists who have lived under the thumb of the government's welfare programs for so long, they have lost the instinct to pursue their interests and desires independently of the government. That means everything, too by the way. Food, shelter, clothing, medical care, schooling, transportation, all other financial needs.

As a community, too many of them have lost the ability to remember how to chase down things legally and on their own. So, when an opportunity presents itself to illegally obtain something----they seize it. Rioting is the perfect chaos to loot in.

I do think it happens with blacks more than other ethnic groups. I do think the media race baits constantly and it's disgusting. But, I don't think it involves blacks for a racist reason.

From what I've studied over the years, the black community, was fairly systematically targeted by the government, so politicians could win their demographic of voters. The welfare-type programs that black communities became entrenched in have really harmed them.

There are trashy communities of every color and faith too. But, I think it's really more about black communities becoming like this from govt intervention and take-overs of their community. They were the easiest prey because they were already legally citizens, but were not as active in voting, sometimes due to not having strong family histories of generations that could vote. Sometimes because Jim Crow type laws stopped them from voting. But, they already spoke English and could constitutionally had the right to vote. So, when politicians wanted to gain support, blacks were the obvious choice to court for huge amounts of votes.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

This is all part of the NWO agenda. The destruction of our society is being achieved by several methods. 1). The continuing use of race to pit people against each other and keep blacks down and out. 2). The use of feminism to promote the hatred of men by women in order to break down the family unit. 3). And the virtual unlimited immigration of foreign nationals into America thereby diluting the opportunities which are left.


Exactly!


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Martin Luther king Jr... has a national holiday. 
Martin Luther king Jr holds the answer.


STOP LOOKING AT PHYSICAL APPEARANCE JUDGE CHARACTER.
IT'S NOT THE SKIN THAT IS THE PROBLEM IT'S THE BEHAVIOR.

Each of us can choose our behavior none of us can choose our DNA.

Allowing folks to shift the discussion to DNA and to justify the results of the situations on to DNA hands out victim cards, never giving those folks a chance for improving their future.

Why no chance for a better future..... you let that wrong reason for their situation stand.

Just like medicine if a doctor misdiagnosed a person and treats the condition for an illness the person DOESN'T have the chances of the person improving are not as good as if the doctors treat them for what they really have.

If you want people to have a better chance.....Why lie to them and miss diagnose what is the problem.

If a PERSON is a drunk and gets fired all the time... Allowing and supporting that they lose jobS because the are a female.... is JUST NOT TRUE.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

mmoetc said:


> Not long ago there was a thread about black youths rampaging through a southern city. Lots of fear, consternation and outrage over a series of incidents in which no one died and the damage was relatively minor.
> 
> Biker gangs get involved in an altercation in a shopping center restaurant with deaths, injuries and 300+ weapons recovered and the reaction is ho hum. Isolated incident. Might the reaction have been different if it was the Crips and Bloods feuding over a parking space not the Bandidos and Cossacks? Of course not.


A assumption totally unsupported. I went to check "Bloods and Crips" fights on the internet. Guess what? There were so many reports, full of guns and deaths, that I couldn't choose one as a simple example.
Actually the reality is exactly opposite of whatever news feed is supplying your assumptions. Black gang violence is treated exactly the same way as biker violence. Only when it spills out of its usual areas or victims does the media, police and public get excited.
I think , that like this article, you want, for race based goals of your own, to make everything about your own beliefs. 
Of course race riots are likely to raise broader anxiety and fear than a biker war. I can chose to not be a biker but I can't chose not to have a race. I can get dragged down by racists of all colors constant drumming on media and government but the biker lobby (facetious term) has yet to impact me seriously.
The utter silliness of equating the police action in Waco with the police action during riots screams out for contradicting.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

gapeach said:


> . And the virtual unlimited immigration of foreign nationals into America thereby diluting the opportunities which are left.
> 
> 
> Exactly!


I think the mainly Hispanic immigrants flooding in are being targeted like I said the black community was target for free govt assistance in exchange for political support. Our govt is creating a huge new demographic that is on the path to voting right . But ultimately it will be a hat communities undoing. Many of the other demographics will feel fallout t . Especially in relation to cheap labor driving down everyone's incomes and collective national debt from these programs.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

The US is going to be taking many more Syrians in now since ISIS has almost 50% control of Syria.

Update.......ISIS has now seized more than 50% of Syria.

They control over 36,000 miles now.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

where I want to said:


> A assumption totally unsupported. I went to check "Bloods and Crips" fights on the internet. Guess what? There were so many reports, full of guns and deaths, that I couldn't choose one as a simple example.
> Actually the reality is exactly opposite of whatever news feed is supplying your assumptions. Black gang violence is treated exactly the same way as biker violence. Only when it spills out of its usual areas or victims does the media, police and public get excited.
> I think , that like this article, you want, for race based goals of your own, to make everything about your own beliefs.
> Of course race riots are likely to raise broader anxiety and fear than a biker war. I can chose to not be a biker but I can't chose not to have a race. I can get dragged down by racists of all colors constant drumming on media and government but the biker lobby (facetious term) has yet to impact me seriously.
> The utter silliness of equating the police action in Waco with the police action during riots screams out for contradicting.


Pointing out the ease of finding black gang violence stories on the internet seems to support my contention of differential treatment, not refute it. Do a similar search on biker gang violence and you'll find stories like this. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-biker-gang-violence-20150518-story.html. An article that points out how biker gangs ride under the radar. Even in this thread much has been made of the difference between biker gangs and biker clubs with some rather subtle distinctions being made. The difference between peaceful protestors and rioters seems a little blurrier to many. Maybe the Bloods and Crips would benefit from a teddy bear drive.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

mmoetc said:


> Pointing out the ease of finding black gang violence stories on the internet seems to support my contention of differential treatment, not refute it. Do a similar search on biker gang violence and you'll find stories like this. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-biker-gang-violence-20150518-story.html. An article that points out how biker gangs ride under the radar. Even in this thread much has been made of the difference between biker gangs and biker clubs with some rather subtle distinctions being made. The difference between peaceful protestors and rioters seems a little blurrier to many. Maybe the Bloods and Crips would benefit from a teddy bear drive.


And how does this support the contention of being treated differently? Saying so doesn't make it so. Behaving differently, not race, seems to be what determines treatment.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

HDRider said:


> Being black must be a curse that I just can't relate to. I am glad you can. Are you black and living in that constant state of fear of which you speak so passionately?


No I'm not. Doesn't mean I don't know some who live in such areas. I once lived in an area that had many small jurisdictions between my workplace and home. I quickly learned which to avoid driving through late at night after closing because my aging Honda and long hair ensured my being followed by a series of patrol cars and on more than one occasion being stopped just to see who I was. I was especially aware of my route if I chose to give one of my black co workers a lift. I had choices as to my route. Many who live and work in cities have less choice.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Mpete... so you see a person as a race and treated them different... and we who care about behavior are the racist... news flash as long as you use a person's race to choose your actions you will be the racist. Dare to let go of your person racist view and you will see things the king wanted and that many of us have already


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

mmoetc said:


> No I'm not. Doesn't mean I don't know some who live in such areas. I once lived in an area that had many small jurisdictions between my workplace and home. I quickly learned which to avoid driving through late at night after closing because my aging Honda and long hair ensured my being followed by a series of patrol cars and on more than one occasion being stopped just to see who I was. I was especially aware of my route if I chose to give one of my black co workers a lift. I had choices as to my route. Many who live and work in cities have less choice.


They were probably following you for your own safety. In Savannah, there are some sections that the police dept requires a black and a white officer go into together. It makes sense. The guy who takes care of our yard has told us that he nor his wife will drive their cars on that part of the downtown and they are black.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

mmoetc said:


> The difference also lies in what criteria the evaluators of those incidents use. Most of the focus of this thread hasn't been about the fear of biker gangs unlike the focus of the other thread I mentioned. Had the criminals in Baltimore been killing each other deadly force by the police would have been appropriate. The police in Baltimore should have done more to quell the destruction. I find it interesting how many who fear the government are quick to point its power towards others.


Huh? You're all over the place. When you come up with a point, get back to us.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

mmoetc said:


> As long as it's someone else's problem why should you care. Your tune might change when the power is pointed towards you. It's easy to worry about things like over regulation of business and unfair taxing of the rich when you're not living in fear of being stopped and searched or beaten by the police on a daily basis.


So how is the status of being free of being stopped and searched achieved? I've been thinking about this a lot. I can see how black people got into this situation as holding slaves creates the possiblility of an uprising and holding slaves primarily based on race creates the possiblility of race uprising.
But the issue is how to break a very out of date cycle of race hate and suspicion. That is certainly not achieved by perpertuating a sense of victimization through assigning racism as an issue where it doesn't apply. Which has become a kneejerk reaction. The very idea that you can spew racial hatred and still expect to be treated as if you didn't is stupid. 
I started a thread awhile back about people interpreting remarks as racist based on who was saying them. If a remark was made by someone known to be a friend or can be assumed to be in the same catagory, it was not considered racist while the same words spoken by a stranger, especially of a different race, were assumed to be racist. 
And that seems to be going on big time around here and the nation.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

In Waco, the words used to describe the participants in a shootout so violent that a local police spokesman called the crime scene the bloodiest he had ever seen included âbiker clubs,â âgangsâ and âoutlaw motorcycle gangs.â

While those words may be accurate, they lack the pathological markings of those used to describe protesters in places like Ferguson, Mo., and Baltimore. President Obama and the mayor of Baltimore were quick to use the loaded label âthugsâ for the violent rioters there. That the authorities have not used that word to describe the far worse violence in Waco makes the contrast all the more glaring.

The words âoutlawâ and âbikerâ while pejorative to some, still evoke a certain romanticism in the American ethos. They conjure an image of individualism, adventure and virility. Thereâs an endless list of motorcycle gang movies. A search for âmotorcycle romanceâ on Amazon yields thousands of options. Viagra, the erectile dysfunction drug, even has a [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LErirfXcWp0"]motorcycle commercial[/ame].

While âthug lifeâ has also been glamorized in movies, music and books, its scope is limited and racialized. It is applied to â and even adopted by â black men. And the evocation is more âMenace II Societyâ than âEasy Rider.â The pejorative is unambiguous.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/21/o...-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region&_r=0


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

In Waco, the words used to describe the participants in a shootout so violent that a local police spokesman called the crime scene the bloodiest he had ever seen included &#8220;biker clubs,&#8221; &#8220;gangs&#8221; and &#8220;outlaw motorcycle gangs.&#8221;

While those words may be accurate, they lack the pathological markings of those used to describe protesters in places like Ferguson, Mo., and Baltimore. President Obama and the mayor of Baltimore were quick to use the loaded label &#8220;thugs&#8221; for the violent rioters there. That the authorities have not used that word to describe the far worse violence in Waco makes the contrast all the more glaring.

The words &#8220;outlaw&#8221; and &#8220;biker&#8221; while pejorative to some, still evoke a certain romanticism in the American ethos. They conjure an image of individualism, adventure and virility. There&#8217;s an endless list of motorcycle gang movies. A search for &#8220;motorcycle romance&#8221; on Amazon yields thousands of options. Viagra, the erectile dysfunction drug, even has a motorcycle commercial

While &#8220;thug life&#8221; has also been glamorized in movies, music and books, its scope is limited and racialized. It is applied to &#8212; and even adopted by &#8212; black men. And the evocation is more &#8220;Menace II Society&#8221; than &#8220;Easy Rider.&#8221; The pejorative is unambiguous.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/21/o...-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region&_r=0


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

HDRider said:


> In Waco, the words used to describe the participants in a shootout so violent that a local police spokesman called the crime scene the bloodiest he had ever seen included âbiker clubs,â âgangsâ and âoutlaw motorcycle gangs.â
> 
> While those words may be accurate, they lack the pathological markings of those used to describe protesters in places like Ferguson, Mo., and Baltimore. President Obama and the mayor of Baltimore were quick to use the loaded label âthugsâ for the violent rioters there. That the authorities have not used that word to describe the far worse violence in Waco makes the contrast all the more glaring.
> 
> ...


Seems to me that using the word "thugs" by officials was an attempt to differentiate between criminal and noncriminal activity in the same location and having a superficial appearance of similarity. No one had a need for that differentiation in Waco. The bikers are clearly thugs and not engaged in any activity that could be confused with non-thuggery. 
The problem comes from the confusion and support given to rioters as a valid and understandable protest method. This necessitated some word to point out to the confused that it was not acceptable. So, yes people were called thugs because they clearly needed to have someone explain the difference.

Are you saying "thugs" is a word already appropriated by the black community and has been transmuted into a word with romantic connotations as in "biker"? Which BTW I think has not been as widely adopted as a figure of romance as you seem to say anyway.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

where I want to said:


> It certainly short circuits any criticism of dubious remarks to turn it into personal attacks. After all, if you pretend to be superior, you might convince someone, maybe yourself, that what you say is important.
> I'm sorry that you can't participate like a adult, nor understand the points being made, but since the deficiency seem inherent, there is nothing I can do to make it clearer to you.
> The reduction in moderating has certainly benefited those who confuse a display of rudeness with power. If you can't successfully debate, there is always the retreat into the violence of the mob, which you seem to so admire. I wondered if dishing out bitterness and rudeness as you do would make a difference but I doubt it.
> BTW before you willfully misconstrue everything as you normally do, into order to assign poor arguments to others so you can think yourself wiser than everyone else, the issue being raised is the validity of saying that racism made the police treat these bikers better than the protestors/rioters of Ferguson and the media reported the bikers in a better light. Which is utter nonsense however you choose seek to portray rioters stealing sneakers for themselves as noble, abused defenders of the downtrodden. Remember no one is portraying the bikers as anything but criminal.


You might want to look back through this thread because some people here are portraying those criminal biker gangs as decent people.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> That's a stretch.
> 
> We all know he wasn't intentionally killed, and it's quite possible the fatal injury happened when they first took him down to arrest him.
> 
> To imply his death was "punishment" is not realistic


He should have never been arrested in the first place. If he hadn't been he would be alive today. Whether the injury came during his arrest or from being thrown around in the police van he still died at the hands of the police. Death may not have been their intention, only pain and suffering but death was still the ultimate outcome.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

where I want to said:


> So how is the status of being free of being stopped and searched achieved? .


I believe we need to do two things.

1. Really lock down what the government can legally interfere with and what constitutes enough suspicion in the things it should pursue for them to be gin intervention.

2. Really open up the protection of individual citizens rights to act as their own first responders against those who would take action to cause them, their loved ones, or their property harm.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

gibbsgirl said:


> I can tell you a difference I see. The rancher / govt stand-off was just that. A stand-off. The rancher and their supporters went straight to the government authorities they had a problem with and (probably because of social media, more than numbers and fire-power) were able to get the government to stand down. They did not burn and loot the ranch or the local community.
> 
> The racial protest riots I've seen in the recent past, seem to spill out all over the place and destroy the communities. The homes/neighborhoods/businesses have been looted and burned. I respect only the people involved in the actually protesting that has been targeted at law-enforcement locations and government officials who are role-players in what the people are protesting.
> 
> ...


If the citizens of Ferguson had come out with guns and set up a line of defense against those tanks what do you think would have happened? And why do you think the government did not show up with the same sort of force at the Bundy ranch in spite of having armed snipers training weapons on them?


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

My point was that I respected the rancher people and supporters and the Ferguson protestors who directed their efforts specifically at the government agencies and hey had issues with. I do not respect the rioters and looters who destroyed and stole from other places in the he community. Sorry if that wasn't clear.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Patchouli said:


> You might want to look back through this thread because some people here are portraying those criminal biker gangs as decent people.


No, some pointed out there are criminal biker grouos and non criminal biker groups.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

gibbsgirl said:


> My point was that I respected the rancher people and supporters and the Ferguson protestors who directed their efforts specifically at the government agencies and hey had issues with. I do not respect the rioters and looters who destroyed and stole from other places in the he community. Sorry if that wasn't clear.


I understood that point.  I was just taking it another step. We both agree that outsiders came into communities that felt they had legitimate reasons to protest and mucked things up. I remember Mr. Bundy having to ask some people to leave too because they were problem causers. The 2 who went on to shoot those cops in Las Vegas were booted for example.* Protests bring in bad elements. 

My question is moving on from that if we had seen the same thing happen in Ferguson and black militias had come in to stand up against the unfair police treatment and even to stand guard and keep out looters from out of town what do you think the police reaction would have been? 


* http://www.businessinsider.com/las-vegas-cop-killers-bundy-ranch-connection-shooting-2014-6


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Patchouli said:


> He should have never been arrested in the first place. If he hadn't been he would be alive today. Whether the injury came during his arrest or from being thrown around in the police van he still died at the hands of the police. Death may not have been their intention, only pain and suffering but death was still the ultimate outcome.


Maybe. Maybe even likely in some respects. But murder needs premeditation. It is not a word to bandy around because it vents personal feeling. Nor should racist. Nor is the absolute certainty expressed as such.
Confusing questioning with accusation seems to be happening. And that is why so much hostility is vented based on very slim knowledge.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

where I want to said:


> No, some pointed out there are criminal biker grouos and non criminal biker groups.


Sort of like there were peaceful protestors and rioters. A concept some can't seem to grasp.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

where I want to said:


> No, some pointed out there are criminal biker grouos and non criminal biker groups.


These appear to be a positive spin to me: 



Yvonne's hubby said:


> All of the bikers I rode with until recently fell in the category of criminal bikers that I call "old school bikers". Some of them rode with outlaw clubs, some (like myself) just loved to putt and party. I rarely see the old school biker these days... most today are just motorcycle enthusiasts. From what I gather the boys involved in the waco incident were old school bikers.





HDRider said:


> Just don't get sideways. I was camped next to the officers of the San Jacinto High Rollers in Sturgis. Partied with them every night I was there.
> 
> http://sjhr.org/
> 
> They said they were the family version of the Banditoes, after you have kids and are older, if you live that long. They were all over 50, maybe close to 60 years old.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

gibbsgirl said:


> I believe we need to do two things.
> 
> 1. Really lock down what the government can legally interfere with and what constitutes enough suspicion in the things it should pursue for them to be gin intervention.
> 
> 2. Really open up the protection of individual citizens rights to act as their own first responders against those who would take action to cause them, their loved ones, or their property harm.


Where would your limits be? Would the demard of the public that police put themselves at risk for making choices that have no good result be considered? Or that fast choices based on little time hapoen frequently? Or that lawyers and criminals tend to exaggerate for self serving reasons? 
In other words, justice sounds good but details are required.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

where I want to said:


> Where would your limits be? Would the demard of the public that police put themselves at risk for making choices that have no good result be considered? Or that fast choices based on little time hapoen frequently? Or that lawyers and criminals tend to exaggerate for self serving reasons?
> In other words, justice sounds good but details are required.


I'm not sure I understand your questions. They seem open ended. I can try and be specific if you ask something a little more focused.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

where I want to said:


> But murder needs premeditation.


First degree murder requires premeditation, but not always for second degree murder. The definitions vary by state, but dangerous conduct that shows a disregard for human life can also get you charged with second degree murder.

As an engineer in a refinery, I was always made aware that a screw-up that resulted in loss of life could make me criminally liable for second degree murder. I don't personally know anyone that it's happened to, but I'm told that it's possible.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

HDRider said:


> In Waco, the words used to describe the participants in a shootout so violent that a local police spokesman called the crime scene the bloodiest he had ever seen included âbiker clubs,â âgangsâ and âoutlaw motorcycle gangs.â
> 
> While those words may be accurate, they lack the pathological markings of those used to describe protesters in places like Ferguson, Mo., and Baltimore. President Obama and the mayor of Baltimore were quick to use the loaded label âthugsâ for the violent rioters there. That the authorities have not used that word to describe the far worse violence in Waco makes the contrast all the more glaring.
> 
> ...


This article is excellent and covers the issue perfectly in my opinion. 



> The world has seen, even in the last few years, unspeakable savagery of a scale on which the recent American riots would hardly register, and no one racial group has the market cornered on barbarism.
> Human beings, as a whole, under the right (or should I say wrong?) conditions, are capable of primal, animalistic violence.
> But there is something about black violence that makes some people leap to a racialized conclusion that the violence is about our fraying culture â that itâs not simply about people behaving violently, but about the entirety of the environment from which they sprang. Black violence stops being about individual people, and starts being about the whole of a people.
> Does the violence in Waco say something universal about white culture or Hispanic culture? Even the question sounds ridiculous â and yet we donât hesitate to ask such questions around black violence, and to answer it, in the affirmative. And invariably, the single-mother, absent-father trope is dragged out.
> ...


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> My question is moving on from that if we had seen the same thing happen in Ferguson and black militias had come in to stand up against the unfair police treatment and even to stand guard and keep out looters from out of town what do you think the police reaction would have been?
> 
> 
> I don't know what the cops would have done. But I would have respected a black militia if they had shown up and forced a standoff against the law and shown they were taking action to secure the lives and property in the hay community since they felt strongly that the govt had failed to. I respected the oath keepers who showed up there. And I respected the media who showed live feeds night after night of on the ground footage. It fave me a chance to see unscripted happenings there, which I found more useful than the packaged neat stories the media typically prepared for broadcast.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

> The words &#8220;outlaw&#8221; and &#8220;biker&#8221; while pejorative to some, still evoke a certain romanticism in the American ethos. They conjure an image of individualism, adventure and virility. There&#8217;s an endless list of motorcycle gang movies.


Those films were an American mainstay during the 50s, 60s, and even 70s. By the 1980s people began to see that those films unfairly demonized biker clubs. It seemed to start with the hit 1953 movie The Wild One. In this classic clip, two bikers (Marlon Brando & Lee Marvin) square off.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwB_Mrnwr_8[/ame]


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Patchouli said:


> I understood that point.  I was just taking it another step. We both agree that outsiders came into communities that felt they had legitimate reasons to protest and mucked things up. I remember Mr. Bundy having to ask some people to leave too because they were problem causers. The 2 who went on to shoot those cops in Las Vegas were booted for example.* Protests bring in bad elements.
> 
> My question is moving on from that if we had seen the same thing happen in Ferguson and black militias had come in to stand up against the unfair police treatment and even to stand guard and keep out looters from out of town what do you think the police reaction would have been?
> 
> ...


The Bundy case and Ferguson are apples and oranges. No parallel there. One was about land rights, the other about a death. One was the federal government, the other was a local police force. One involved race, the other didn't. Very poor choice of analogies. 

So what was the "unfair police treatment" in Ferguson? In spite of a heavy police presence and all their show of heavy artillery, none of it was used against the crowds and much of the town was looted and burned. People who lost their businesses and jobs could easily say they didn't do enough! And don't forget two police officers were shot during a "peaceful demonstration", yet none of their LEO brethren lost their cool and fired back into the crowd. A real tragedy was averted there!

But the worst part of it all, was that it all spiraled out of control over a lie. What lit the fire was Brown's friend lying thru his teeth to a local reporter, saying Brown was shot in the back with hands in the air. That was the first news that went out, also over social media, and what caused the riot at the convenience store the first night. And while that behavior can't be condoned at least it can be understood, there was a cause and effect relationship in that one incident. 

But then there were 3 autopsies; a local, state and federal investigation; a grand jury, all finding that Brown was NOT shot in the back, did NOT have his hands in the air, and that the physical evidence showed he had physically scuffled with the cop. Through his own behavior, he caused his own death.

But there was already a "protest industry" that had sprang up and everyone just carries on as if the first story were true. It's crazy and I can't believe anyone is still defending it.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Patchouli said:


> This article is excellent and covers the issue perfectly in my opinion.


And that is the difference between you and I. 

I thought the article was total BS.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Patchouli said:


> These appear to be a positive spin to me:


You left out my black biker friends story.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

mmoetc said:


> And I'll ask- don't you think that money might be better spent? Or should people just stand by and do nothing?


Of course that money could be spent better. But that is the way our elected officials like it to be, or they would change it, right? Should people be allowed to destroy the properties of others because their disgruntled? The Baltimore folks WANTED property destruction and were vocal about allowing it to happen. You agree with this?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

mmoetc said:


> I'll start by pointing out that Baltimore has a $200K cap on all awards involving police misconduct which helps to keep that number lower relative to the one's you cited. As for LA we don't have to go that far back in history to remember the celebrations that occurred after officers pulled a man from a speeding hyundai and beat him soundly. I understand some of the scars are still visible in certain neighborhoods. New York City, didn't we have two police officers shot and killed last year in retaliation for the Ferguson decision.
> 
> Here are some more large scale protests in major cities that were mostly peaceful. http://data.baltimoresun.com/news/police-settlements/. Though if you read closely you will find some bad behavior. I'm not enough of an expert on crowd dynamics to be able to explain why protests don't turn violent like the first 5 days in Baltimore only to explode later. I also don't know why one incident will break the proverbial camel's back and drive people to the streets. I only know it will eventually happen if bad behavior seemingly goes unchecked.


I had brick thrown through the window of my truck when folks rioted TWENTY YEARS AGO!!! I remember! There are NO scare from the Rodney King deal. There were other beatings too. Killings even. But no riots.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> This article is excellent and covers the issue perfectly in my opinion.


That an excuse for bad behavior, nothing more.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> I understood that point.  I was just taking it another step. We both agree that outsiders came into communities that felt they had legitimate reasons to protest and mucked things up. I remember Mr. Bundy having to ask some people to leave too because they were problem causers. The 2 who went on to shoot those cops in Las Vegas were booted for example.* Protests bring in bad elements.
> 
> My question is moving on from that if we had seen the same thing happen in Ferguson and black militias had come in to stand up against the unfair police treatment and even to stand guard and keep out looters from out of town what do you think the police reaction would have been?
> 
> ...


I saw pictures of a group of black men with weapons standing guard in Ferguson! I'll try and find it. I don't have a problem with that, do you?


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

mmoetc said:


> Sort of like there were peaceful protestors and rioters. A concept some can't seem to grasp.


I think *the hiring of protesters* seems smarmy, for any cause. Sort of like hiring professional mourners.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

HDRider said:


> You left out my black biker friends story.


It didn't fit the agenda. (And let's not even go there to think it might be a "blacks only" club and be guilty of membership discrimination. Some of our leftie friends might just curl up in the fetal position and whimper!)


----------



## ninny (Dec 12, 2005)

MO_cows said:


> It didn't fit the agenda. (And let's not even go there to think it might be a "blacks only" club and be guilty of membership discrimination. *Some of our leftie friends might just curl up in the fetal position and whimper!)*




That's what they're good at.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

kasilofhome said:


> Mpete... so you see a person as a race and treated them different... and we who care about behavior are the racist... news flash as long as you use a person's race to choose your actions you will be the racist. Dare to let go of your person racist view and you will see things the king wanted and that many of us have already


What person did I see and treat differently because of their race?


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

where I want to said:


> And how does this support the contention of being treated differently? Saying so doesn't make it so. Behaving differently, not race, seems to be what determines treatment.


The discussion was that the media and public treated the groups differently. Finding many examples, as you claim ,of stories involving bloods and crips shows that they get coverage. Now show me the stories of the Bandidos, bells Angels, and other motorcycle gangs. Show me the stories of their violence, drug dealing and criminal activity. Those stories would go towards proving the point that black violence isn't treated, reported and responded to differently.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

JeffreyD said:


> I had brick thrown through the window of my truck when folks rioted TWENTY YEARS AGO!!! I remember! There are NO scare from the Rodney King deal. There were other beatings too. Killings even. But no riots.


So were there riots in LA or weren't there? Kind of hard to tell from this post.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

mmoetc said:


> So were there riots in LA or weren't there? Kind of hard to tell from this post.


Reading comprehension lacking. TWENTY YEARS AGO! What's so hard to understand about that? It was TWENTY YEARS AGO! Not recent history! We also had the Watts riots in 1969. Again, not recent history. We have had multiple police shootings, but no riots. Why not? Tens of millions in payouts. Why no riots here?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

mmoetc said:


> The discussion was that the media and public treated the groups differently. Finding many examples, as you claim ,of stories involving bloods and crips shows that they get coverage. Now show me the stories of the Bandidos, bells Angels, and other motorcycle gangs. Show me the stories of their violence, drug dealing and criminal activity. Those stories would go towards proving the point that black violence isn't treated, reported and responded to differently.


As soon as a biker feud erupts, cops are there, like they were in Waco. The bikers get arrested, like in Waco.

This did NOT happen in Ferguson or Baltimore. The blacks were left alone to rampage as they pleased with the blessings of the black mayor and city council. Not even remotely close to the same situation. We're the bikers fighting with the cops, or behaving peacefully while being arrested? We're the blacks in Ferguson or Baltimore behaving the same way? Not even close!! It's all on video for those willing to look.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

I lived through the 60's protests and riots and never saw anything like Ferguson and Baltimore where the police had to stand back.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

mmoetc said:


> What person did I see and treat differently because of their race?




Post 95...your assumptions are just assumptions as why things happen. For you everything is black and white.... you aver look behavior and assume race... Why because you focus on race as a reason ....a person who view people by race are called racist...


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

mmoetc said:


> What person did I see and treat differently because of their race?


" I was especially aware of my route if I chose to give one of my black co workers a lift. "

That part. It does have some racism tones to it. I get that you were making choices because you felt you were reacting to the racism you might encounter from others. But, how are we supposed to overcome racism, if we continue to step lightly around the actions we expect from others. Much better in my view to do right by each other, and if we do encounter a racist reaction, then deal with it. I get why you did what you did. But, it is a legitimate example of how sometimes we can do things that might be helping continue racism, instead of pushing it away, and that was totally not our intention.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

gibbsgirl said:


> " I was especially aware of my route if I chose to give one of my black co workers a lift. "
> 
> That part. It does have some racism tones to it. I get that you were making choices because you felt you were reacting to the racism you might encounter from others. But, how are we supposed to overcome racism, if we continue to step lightly around the actions we expect from others. Much better in my view to do right by each other, and if we do encounter a racist reaction, then deal with it. I get why you did what you did. But, it is a legitimate example of how sometimes we can do things that might be helping continue racism, instead of pushing it away, and that was totally not our intention.


I wasn't going to stop anything by having my trip
home interrupted yet again by flashing lights behind me. How do you prove you didn't drift from one side of the lane to the other. How do you prove that you didn't "look suspicious"? I was once told that I was pulled over because I was driving too precisely and such hyperawareness could be a sign of drunkeness. For some a black man and white man together late at night could only mean drugs were being sold. I've stood up and fought many battles. I also learned young that sometimes it's best to avoid battles that can't be won. I'll agree that too much that has been done in the name of repairing race relations had had the opposite effect. All I can really do is treat people equally in my own life and hope that example rubs off in some way on others. That includes not letting people use their race as an excuse for bad behavior. I have a lot of empathy for those who legitimately suffer from racism and none for those who use the unrest caused by some of these incidents to rob, steal , loot burn and hurt.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

HDRider said:


> And that is the difference between you and I.
> 
> I thought the article was total BS.


I was genuinely surprised that you posted it.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

kasilofhome said:


> Post 95...your assumptions are just assumptions as why things happen. For you everything is black and white.... you aver look behavior and assume race... Why because you focus on race as a reason ....a person who view people by race are called racist...


I didn't view the person sitting next to me as my black friend. He was just my friend. I'm kind of that way with all my friends. I don't check them off some sort of a list. I choose them, or they choose me, because they're good people in my eyes. How others see and react to any of them is largely out of my control. How I react to those reactions is in my control.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

HDRider said:


> You left out my black biker friends story.


I didn't think the black biker group was an outlaw one? I just posted the 2 that specifically mentioned them being outlaw or criminal.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

JeffreyD said:


> I saw pictures of a group of black men with weapons standing guard in Ferguson! I'll try and find it. I don't have a problem with that, do you?


Not at all. I saw that too. I don't think they were armed though if I remember correctly.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Patchouli said:


> I was genuinely surprised that you posted it.


I thought another example of such BS might illuminate the total BSness of the line of thought and false parallel.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

JeffreyD said:


> Reading comprehension lacking. TWENTY YEARS AGO! What's so hard to understand about that? It was TWENTY YEARS AGO! Not recent history! We also had the Watts riots in 1969. Again, not recent history. We have had multiple police shootings, but no riots. Why not? Tens of millions in payouts. Why no riots here?


Here's something a bit more recent. http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/07/17/us/los-angeles-protests-zimmerman.html?referrer=

Why LA hasn't had a major riot in twenty years I can't answer. Of course the people of Baltimore could make the same claim until not too long ago. Rather than touting the new city slogan for LA. "We kill citizens but they don't riot! Visit LA!" maybe working towards fewer deaths would be a better policy.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

JeffreyD said:


> As soon as a biker feud erupts, cops are there, like they were in Waco. The bikers get arrested, like in Waco.
> 
> This did NOT happen in Ferguson or Baltimore. The blacks were left alone to rampage as they pleased with the blessings of the black mayor and city council. Not even remotely close to the same situation. We're the bikers fighting with the cops, or behaving peacefully while being arrested? We're the blacks in Ferguson or Baltimore behaving the same way? Not even close!! It's all on video for those willing to look.


Nine dead, eighteen hospitalized, reports of gunfire exchanged between the police and bikers. Yep, the minute the cops, who were already in the parking lot, showed up the bikers quit squabbling and started singing Kumbaya.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

The use of the phrase "it's all on video" in an earlier post got me thinking. What if there had been news crews at the restaurant in Waco. All the photos are of the aftermath. Men and women who look a lot like the people we see every day sitting quietly. Had we seen photos or video of some of these same, normal looking people, beating each other, fighting with knives, exchanging gunfire among themselves and maybe the police would the reaction of many be different?


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

mmoetc said:


> Nine dead, eighteen hospitalized, reports of gunfire exchanged between the police and bikers. Yep, the minute the cops, who were already in the parking lot, showed up the bikers quit squabbling and started singing Kumbaya.


Maybe the police were there because their was a high likelihood of trouble. Don't 'cha think?

Singing kumbaya?


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

HDRider said:


> Maybe the police were there because their was a high likelihood of trouble. Don't 'cha think?
> 
> Singing kumbaya?


There was trouble and police presence didn't stop it. It may have ended but it didn't prevent nine people from being killed. Ther have been a couple posts pointing the photos showing how peacefully these bikers were acting with the police and at least hinting that the minute police appeared all hostilities ceased. If all was so peaceful how did nine end up dead?


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

mmoetc said:


> There was trouble and police presence didn't stop it. It may have ended but it didn't prevent nine people from being killed. Ther have been a couple posts pointing the photos showing how peacefully these bikers were acting with the police and at least hinting that the minute police appeared all hostilities ceased. If all was so peaceful how did nine end up dead?


I see police every time there is a public gathering of bikers. I have never seen violence breakout. 

This time violence did break out. It will happen again. 

HA, and many other motorcycle clubs are violent and fund themselves via criminal activity. Drugs, prostitution, gun running, how do you think they fund that free and easy lifestyle. It ain't the boy scouts. Best give them a wide berth, unless you know how to act around them, and even then, you are an outsider and are taking a big chance being where they are.

Who said otherwise? Or, are you an agenda seeking a narrative? This one ain't working for you.

Don't 'cha know?


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Here is another one for you...

A jury has found Harrah's Laughlin liable for injuries sustained by bystanders when a fight broke out among rival biker gangs at the hotel-casino in 2002, killing three people.

Casino officials were aware trouble was brewing between members of the Hell's Angels and Mongols gangs, but didn't act, and security was inadequate, resulting in injuries to his clients, Bryson said.

"They chose to ignore that information," said Bryson, adding this appears to be the first time Harrah's has been found liable in the incident.

http://lasvegassun.com/news/2010/nov/04/harrahs-laughlin-found-liable-fatal-2002-casino-br/


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

mmoetc said:


> There was trouble and police presence didn't stop it. It may have ended but it didn't prevent nine people from being killed. Ther have been a couple posts pointing the photos showing how peacefully these bikers were acting with the police and at least hinting that the minute police appeared all hostilities ceased. *If all was so peaceful how did nine end up dead?*


Coz the police kept shooting after the bikers started singing kumbaya.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

mmoetc said:


> I didn't view the person sitting next to me as my black friend. He was just my friend. I'm kind of that way with all my friends. I don't check them off some sort of a list. I choose them, or they choose me, because they're good people in my eyes. How others see and react to any of them is largely out of my control. How I react to those reactions is in my control.


Sorry but this is not your first rodeo.... you focus like laser as to race... so, often when you post race relations is your hot button.. sorry your do not see it.

I know for me my hot bottom is self responsibility. That folks are soft. 

You look at the visual aspects.. hair lenghts, race etc.... If you really want to open your eyes do a search of your own posts and read them for yourself.. don't take my word for it ...check it out how looks and DNA impact you.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

mmoetc said:


> There was trouble and police presence didn't stop it. It may have ended but it didn't prevent nine people from being killed. Ther have been a couple posts pointing the photos showing how peacefully these bikers were acting with the police and at least hinting that the minute police appeared all hostilities ceased. If all was so peaceful how did nine end up dead?


I am pretty sure what happened was the they police heard about possible problems and were dispatched to the area. I am also pretty sure the whole force wasn't there at the start. Maybe only five to ten just to help keep the peace. When 180 bikers started to fight they were out manned to say the least. What would you have them do in that instance?


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

We can split hairs back and forth all day long, the whole premise is bogus. The article that started this goat roping asserted that the "battling bikers" were treated better than the "peaceful demonstrators" by the police, because of their race. It's not true and all the side points and issues in the world won't ever make it true. 

Everything that has been posted here from all perspectives when you really analyze it, only reinforces that behavior plays a much larger role than race. 

Three of the police officers indicted in the Freddie Gray case appear to be black in their mug shots, yet the protestors march around with "black lives matter" signs on Gray's behalf. Somebody is very confused, and I'm pretty sure it's not me!


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

mmoetc said:


> There was trouble and police presence didn't stop it. It may have ended but it didn't prevent nine people from being killed. Ther have been a couple posts pointing the photos showing how peacefully these bikers were acting with the police and at least hinting that the minute police appeared all hostilities ceased. If all was so peaceful how did nine end up dead?


You just make this stuff up at will. No one but you said that they were innocent little lambs. You just exaggerated that people said there no rioting after the arrest for effect. No burning or looting. No in your face screaming. No Al Sharpton. No Presidential remarks. 
You said that was because people protested recognized the innocent, noble citizen Freddie Gray was murdered by racist police. While the bikers all killed were obviously criminals and deserved what they got. But I suspect you know not one of those bikers' names much less if they were innocent or not.
It doesn't concern you because it doesn't seem to offer any scope for you to berate the posters on this forum that you consider racist.
And that lack of interest causes you no pause why?


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

I don't know why some don't get it that the police in Waco only has X number of officers and had to call Austin for help and Austin is an hour away!
You cannot be taking on arresting a hundred people when you don't have enough men to get it done. A lot more people would have died if they had.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

kasilofhome said:


> Sorry but this us not your first rodeo.... you focus like laser as to race... so, often when you post race relations is your hot button.. sorry your do not see it.
> 
> I know for me my hot bottom is self responsibility. That folks are soft.
> 
> You look at the visual aspects.. hair lenghts, race etc.... If you really want to open your eyes do a search of your own posts and read them for yourself.. don't take my word for it ...check it out how looks and DNA impact you.


I'm not so blind to my own human failings not to realize that I posess racist and tribal tendencies. Have I ever made a snap judgement based on someone's skin tone, hair length, choice of tattoos or piercings, clothing style or a hundred other things. Sure. I'm human. Race, especially the way some are treated or looked at because of their race is a hot button issue for me. We are discussing things on an Internet forum. Sometimes describing a situation requires the use of a term like black co-worker to make a point. Calling him just a co-worker pÃ ints an entirely different scenario. I don't shy away from discussing racial issues. I don't shy away from calling out those who use race as an excuse for bad behavior. I don't shy away from calling out those who use race as weapon on either side. I also don't shy away from calling out those who can't tell protestors from rioters, whatever reason they give for their lack of discernment.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

I'm part black. I'll let you guess what part.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

mmoetc said:


> calling him just a co-worker pÃ ints an entirely different scenario.
> Really WHY....
> i don't shy away from discussing racial issues. True
> 
> i don't shy away from calling out those who use race as an excuse for bad behavior.


question when people discuss bad behavior of a person and the fail to metion the race of the person.... Say obama...have you overlooked the behavior complaned about and claimed racism.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

mmoetc said:


> I'm not so blind to my own human failings not to realize that I posess racist and tribal tendencies. Have I ever made a snap judgement based on someone's skin tone, hair length, choice of tattoos or piercings, clothing style or a hundred other things. Sure. I'm human. Race, especially the way some are treated or looked at because of their race is a hot button issue for me. We are discussing things on an Internet forum. Sometimes describing a situation requires the use of a term like black co-worker to make a point. Calling him just a co-worker pÃ ints an entirely different scenario. I don't shy away from discussing racial issues. I don't shy away from calling out those who use race as an excuse for bad behavior. I don't shy away from calling out those who use race as weapon on either side. I also don't shy away from calling out those who can't tell protestors from rioters, whatever reason they give for their lack of discernment.


But despite what you say above, I have never heard any criticism from you of anything that is the most egregiously racist or religious bigotry by anyone other than white Christian people. No criticism of Sharpton or Obama or the black protestors who have been wrong time and time again, no acknowledgement of valid fears or uncongenial facts.
I don't think you even recognize that to assume Freddy Gray is an "innocent civilian murder by the corrupt police" is itself founded on racist assumptions. Or that the bikers are guilty and not worthy of questions on their behalf or that Muslims bear no responsibility for what happens in their name, etc etc etc, are in fact based on prejudice just as much as the statements you so readily oppose. And that by making them, you contribute to ever more polarization and hardening of positions.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

I just want to say that I hope y'all are having these same types of discussions in real life with your kids. When we first became parents we tried to only have age appropriate discussions with our kids.

That backfired on us. We needed to actually tell them enough so they could process and respond to what other people said to them.

One example was when my two youngest were coached in football. These guys were talking about Obama (reelection was nearing). One of my boys ended up saying that we didn't want him as president. Now we're mostly white, at least enough to look like it at a glance.

These dads told my kids that people who didn't like him were racist. It was awful because my kids didn't even fully understand what that meant. So we explained. Then they thought we must be bad people. So unfortunately I had to have a whole in depth discussion explaining tons of reasons why many liberals and a good chunk of conservatives do not at all have our support.

They were 6 and 7 I think that year. Anyway we got it all sorted. But I just wanted to say, on some level I encourage y'all to share the thoughts you're sharing on HT. Cause you should be the only who helps frame your kids perspective of the world. They may or may not agree when they get grow up, but they won't be able to process things well if you haven't given them a start at it.

I frequently read stuff from here to the household.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

where I want to said:


> But despite what you say above, I have never heard any criticism from you of anything that is the most egregiously racist or religious bigotry by anyone other than white Christian people. No criticism of Sharpton or Obama or the black protestors who have been wrong time and time again, no acknowledgement of valid fears or uncongenial facts.
> I don't think you even recognize that to assume Freddy Gray is an "innocent civilian murder by the corrupt police" is itself founded on racist assumptions. Or that the bikers are guilty and not worthy of questions on their behalf or that Muslims bear no responsibility for what happens in their name, etc etc etc, are in fact based on prejudice just as much as the statements you so readily oppose. And that by making them, you contribute to ever more polarization and hardening of positions.


I criticize who I criticize. Have you seen me come to the defense of Sharpton, Jackson, et al? Because I choose not to pile on doesn't imply agreement with them. I have criticized Muslim extremists and will continue to do so. But I know that not all Muslims are extremists. If bring able to recognize differences and pointing them out gardens others views it is there issue, not mine. Have a great Memorial Day Weekend. Remember someone for their sacrifice.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Evil exist when good people are silent.

Is al Sharpton harming society.... Why give him a pass if you do not support him?

You are free to do that but what does it say.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

mmoetc said:


> I criticize who I criticize. Have you seen me come to the defense of Sharpton, Jackson, et al? Because I choose not to pile on doesn't imply agreement with them. I have criticized Muslim extremists and will continue to do so. But I know that not all Muslims are extremists. If bring able to recognize differences and pointing them out gardens others views it is there issue, not mine. Have a great Memorial Day Weekend. *Remember someone for their sacrifice.*


True 'dat.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

kasilofhome said:


> *Evil exist when good people are silent.*
> 
> Is al Sharpton harming society.... Why give him a pass if you do not support him?
> 
> You are free to do that but what does it say.


You get pretty upset when people are fighting for what they think is right with regards to same sex marriage if it disagrees with you? You did a lot of trying to shut people down when they were complaining about how this site was run.

You are more than confusing.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

painterswife said:


> You get pretty upset when people are fighting for what they think is right with regards to same sex marriage if it disagrees with you? You did a lot of trying to shut people down when they were complaining about how this site was run.
> 
> You are more than confusing.


I think it is called "not backing down".

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvlTJrNJ5lA[/ame]


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

HDRider said:


> I think it is called "not backing down".
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvlTJrNJ5lA


I am all for not backing down. Just don't go telling people they should but you don't have to. Then tell them not to be quiet because it is a side you are on.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

painterswife said:


> I am all for not backing down. Just don't go telling people they should but you don't have to. Then tell them not to be quiet because it is a side you are on.


Seems to be a common thread around here. Right up there with pitching a fit about the left side being rude and belittling and then completely ignoring it when the right does it.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

mmoetc said:


> I criticize who I criticize. Have you seen me come to the defense of Sharpton, Jackson, et al? Because I choose not to pile on doesn't imply agreement with them. I have criticized Muslim extremists and will continue to do so. But I know that not all Muslims are extremists. If bring able to recognize differences and pointing them out gardens others views it is there issue, not mine. Have a great Memorial Day Weekend. Remember someone for their sacrifice.


If you avoided criticizing others yourself, that might be a valid indication of temperance. But you spare no one who posts here with such considerations. Nor do you spare the police, nor religious , nor anyone else not in agreement.
Who is not subject to "piling on" and who is indicates a lot.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

painterswife said:


> I am all for not backing down. Just don't go telling people they should but you don't have to. Then tell them not to be quiet because it is a side you are on.


But that is what I keep saying. Yet that is what happens all the time with snarky personal attacks.
I suggest that if all that can be offered is personal pot shots at the poster rather than responding to the poster's ideas, you are totally out of ammo and need to retire from the field with as much dignity as possible.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

where I want to said:


> If you avoided criticizing others yourself, that might be a valid indication of temperance. But you spare no one who posts here with such considerations. Nor do you spare the police, nor religious , nor anyone else not in agreement.
> Who is not subject to "piling on" and who is indicates a lot.



Neither do you so I am not sure what your point is here? You give a free pass to people on your side being insulting and calling names. There are several in the last couple of pages you blipped right by. You have things you give a free pass to and things you pile on along with the rest of the conservatives here. At least he is honest and admits he criticizes people. You keep complaining about it while doing it yourself.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

Patchouli said:


> Neither do you so I am not sure what your point is here? You give a free pass to people on your side being insulting and calling names. There are several in the last couple of pages you blipped right by. You have things you give a free pass to and things you pile on along with the rest of the conservatives here. At least he is honest and admits he criticizes people. You keep complaining about it while doing it yourself.


I admit to passing somethings by because the level of discussion is so low. And I pass many things by that are claimed based on religion because that is not a matter of thinking through. And I avoid the name calling of public figures because it show a lack of articulation. 
But there are a few things that I don't avoid responding over. Like targeting a specific poster with berating rather than ideas- ie a bully. Or one who distorts what another says in order to make fun of it. Or a person who is so one dimensional that they drag ever conversation back to their own interest and goal so that there is never a chance not to argue. 



Oh, and people who feel free to tear down my home state while clearly having little understanding of it.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

painterswife said:


> You get pretty upset when people are fighting for what they think is right with regards to same sex marriage if it disagrees with you? You did a lot of trying to shut people down when they were complaining about how this site was run.
> 
> You are more than confusing.


Don't you think everyone is multi-faceted? Some people are more of a straight line than others, but if you pay attention you will find yourself pleasantly surprised by a post from time to time, when a person reveals more depth than you might have ever given them credit for.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Oh said:


> You hit a on a nerve for me. Also lumping everybody from the south as racist. People who have never lived in the south have any idea how we live. Some people think all of us are backward and dumb like some situation comedies that poke fun at southerners.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

MO_cows said:


> Don't you think everyone is multi-faceted? Some people are more of a straight line than others, but if you pay attention you will find yourself pleasantly surprised by a post from time to time, when a person reveals more depth than you might have ever given them credit for.


Sure they are multifaceted but the poster I responded to has been calling a poster on this thread racists along with a few other things. I am just doing what she asked of him, letting my voice be heard when I think someone is wrong. Just like you are doing.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

gapeach said:


> You hit a on a nerve for me. Also lumping everybody from the south as racist. People who have never lived in the south have any idea how we live. Some people think all of us are backward and dumb like some situation comedies that poke fun at southerners.


I was born in California and lived in Indiana and now Kentucky.

Those opinions do exist. But from my personal experience racism is far more severe and dangerous in California than anything I've seen out here.

Some people may have subtle racism or more easily make comments from time to time. But that's child's play by my standard. In California, people were very careful not to run their mouths regardless of how they felt, cause there were a lot of people who were racist and prejudice who would try and kill you without batting an eye 

Anyway, that's my two cents on the that subject


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

gibbsgirl

Just one question, do you find living in Kentucky better along that line?


----------



## BlackFeather (Jun 17, 2014)

I saw this the other day thought i'd post it, it looks like it was written by a biker of some nature, and therefore I hold it to be some what suspicious, but if the article were to be true, it would throw a different light on things.

https://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/2015/05/20/first-they-came-for-the-bikers/



> The bloody incident at Waco&#8217;s Twin Peaks restaurant was not a &#8220;biker shootout.&#8221; At present there is no evidence that any of the nine victims were killed by fellow bikers, rather than being &#8220;taken out&#8221; by the scores of police &#8212; including snipers &#8212; who had effectively turned the parking lot into a kill zone. ............ What we DO know is that the place was already surrounded by FEDS, WACO Police and ATF LONG before any biker showed up! WHY were they there? Literally HUNDREDS of biker meetings between the various 1%, MC&#8217;s and Org&#8217;s had met there in the past &#8230;.ALL peacefully! The PD states it was because of the dispute the previous week. HOWEVER, there was a fight that started inside Twin Peaks and made it&#8217;s way outside! Those fighting had KNIVES &#8230;NOT GUNS when they took the fight outside.
> 
> NO GUNS were shown as the fight made it outside from our understanding, but that is when the police started firing. WE DO NOT know if someone pulled out a gun from within the groups OR if the police were just too quick on their draw! Either way, ALMOST all shots fired came from police&#8230;not the ones fighting. ***again this is from we are getting from those there***


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Blackfeather, I heard on the radio, an interview of a man that infeltrated a biker gang, was working with the ATF/gov. ect. He said that the 2 gangs had been in an ongoing fude over part of their "colors". One side had taken to wearing a patch that the otherside claimed was only for them. Hard to explain it. 
Maybe the Cops knew there was a "war" going down.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

This is for those with an abundance of white guilt and blessed with such strong empathy genes.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYKPPoin2ZM[/ame]


----------



## ninny (Dec 12, 2005)

fordy said:


> ..............I count 11 Mexicans in that group of 33 ! One , could be black or mexican . , fordy


The one on the top row, third from the right, is a retired San Antonio policeman, Mexican. Was on the news yesterday.

.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

gapeach said:


> gibbsgirl
> 
> Just one question, do you find living in Kentucky better along that line?


Absolutely. Because even though people sometimes are a little more open to running their mouths than I think is reasonable, it has good consequences. I've found people are less hesitant here to interact with each other in very positive ways too. One of my 13 yos best friends is black and his mom is terrific too. She and I talked about her ex husband come ng here from Chicago and seeing/feeling the same things we have.

I will add that I think rural vs suburban vs urban living I believe plays a bit role in why we've encountered the differences here.

I've just found it odd and amusing that I had locals in California and here make the same assumptions you described. But our experience has been in the extreme opposite


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

BlackFeather said:


> I saw this the other day thought i'd post it, it looks like it was written by a biker of some nature, and therefore I hold it to be some what suspicious, but if the article were to be true, it would throw a different light on things.
> 
> https://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/2015/05/20/first-they-came-for-the-bikers/


I guess I would wait and see who the bike gangs go after now. I'm thinking some of them probably want to respond now and consider this to be a blood feud. So depending who they all go after will probably at least indicate who they believe is responsible.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

gibbsgirl said:


> I guess I would wait and see who the bike gangs go after now. I'm thinking some of them probably want to respond now and consider this to be a blood feud. So depending who they all go after will probably at least indicate who they believe is responsible.


Supposably they are going after Cops now for killing their "Brothers". Warnings of bombs.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

gibbsgirl said:


> Absolutely. Because even though people sometimes are a little more open to running their mouths than I think is reasonable, it has good consequences. I've found people are less hesitant here to interact with each other in very positive ways too. One of my 13 yos best friends is black and his mom is terrific too. She and I talked about her ex husband come ng here from Chicago and seeing/feeling the same things we have.
> 
> I will add that I think rural vs suburban vs urban living I believe plays a bit role in why we've encountered the differences here.
> 
> I've just found it odd and amusing that I had locals in California and here make the same assumptions you described. But our experience has been in the extreme opposite


Well, I am not going to dwell on it either but I am glad that you have found Kentucky to be friendly. My hubby and I have traveled around a lot and we have gotten to be friends with a good many Kentuckians and they have all been extremely open and friendly and certainly not racist in any way. They talk and act like most people in the south, at least the ones we know.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

7thswan said:


> Supposably they are going after Cops now for killing their "Brothers". Warnings of bombs.


Oh, Good Lord, if we did not have enough to worry about already. Syria is getting controlled more and more by ISIS every day. They took another city over today. :runforhills:

My hubby is 81 yrs young today and he says he does not worry about anything anymore!:grin:


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

gapeach said:


> Oh, Good Lord, if we did not have enough to worry about already. Syria is getting controlled more and more by ISIS every day. They took another city over today. :runforhills:
> 
> My hubby is 81 yrs young today and he says he does not worry about anything anymore!:grin:


Well, He's got YOU takeing care of him:kiss:!!!!


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Thanks, Swan, I am going to try to be more like him. He watches no tv now except for sports and movies. He does read our daily newspaper but it is mostly local stuff and that is stressful enough. He really doesn't worry anymore because he says he can't do anything about any of it. He still votes though. He says he will vote until he dies and as long as he votes, he celebrates his American freedom and hopes for the best.:grin:


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

gapeach said:


> Thanks, Swan, I am going to try to be more like him. He watches no tv now except for sports and movies. He does read our daily newspaper but it is mostly local stuff and that is stressful enough. He really doesn't worry anymore because he says he can't do anything about any of it. He still votes though. He says he will vote until he dies and as long as he votes, he celebrates his American freedom and hopes for the best.:grin:


 OT---OH Hon. I am dealing with the same for a few "older People" I am takeing of. They just want to be happy and ignore things, even if those things take their life away. I too agree, there is nothing we can do about it-any of us- noone is listening ,evil has taken over.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

So true!


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Were the Mongols one of the clubs involved in that Waco deal? Just found out they are holding a gathering in our back yard this weekend.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

gapeach said:


> You hit a on a nerve for me. Also lumping everybody from the south as racist. People who have never lived in the south have any idea how we live. Some people think all of us are backward and dumb like some situation comedies that poke fun at southerners.


I agree with you on this one. I was raised in Ohio, had lots of relatives in Indiana. Since I went in the military I have lived in the south. MS, TX, LA and now Arkansas. Ohio and Indiana were far more racist in my opinion than what I have seen down here.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

wrong thread....


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

MO_cows said:


> Were the Mongols one of the clubs involved in that Waco deal? Just found out they are holding a gathering in our back yard this weekend.


From what I heard it was the Cossacks and Banditos. But you never know who is allied with whom anymore so there is no telling at this point. 

I did hear from the grapevine (police) that it will get worse, but I am not sure what that will mean yet.


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2015)

http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015...o-was-actually-organized-political-gathering/

'"Despite the characterization by police that the afternoon gathering at a Twin Peaks restaurant in Waco, Texas that led to Sunday&#8217;s bloody shooting incident was a gathering of criminal biker gangs with violent intent, the meeting appears to have been a legitimate, organized gathering of motorcycle riders meeting to discuss political issues."

Interesting spin on the topic and not in agreement with LEs description of events purpose.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

AmericanStand said:


> Umm no.
> You doth presume a lot !
> In fact your statement shows you don't understand the simplest, most basic point of the Baltimore situation.
> The riots happened because many there *think* he WAS intentionally killed.


What they think doesn't mean it's true.

Putting someone in the back of a van isn't a well thought out plan if they intended to kill him.

The "simpilist most basic point" is he was black and most of the cops weren't


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> He should have never been arrested in the first place. *If he hadn't *been he would be alive today. Whether the injury came during his arrest or from being thrown around in the police van he still died at the hands of the police. Death may not have been their intention, only pain and suffering but death was still the ultimate outcome.


If he hadn't run as soon as they saw him he would probably still be alive.
Don't keep pretending he was just some innocent guy standing on the street.

He died because of how he lived


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> You might want to look back through this thread because some people here are portraying those criminal biker gangs as decent people.


Really? I didn't see that & have now read the thread up to this point. Can you quote those"some people here"?
Some talked about biker clubs that were decent, is that what you mean? Or b/c someone is in a biker gang, they are always NOT decent?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> He should have never been arrested in the first place. If he hadn't been he would be alive today. Whether the injury came during his arrest or from being thrown around in the police van he still died at the hands of the police. Death may not have been their intention, only pain and suffering but death was still the ultimate outcome.


And you know that how? B/c you think he was arrested for making eye contact? How utterly ridiculous. He was on parole. He was not supposed to be in his back alley "drug store". He SAW the police looking AT HIM. And he ran from arrest. The rest should not have happened. Its tragic. Part came from resisting arrest.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

gibbsgirl said:


> My point was that I respected the rancher people and supporters and the Ferguson protestors who directed their efforts specifically at the government agencies and hey had issues with. I do not respect the rioters and looters who destroyed and stole from other places in the he community. Sorry if that wasn't clear.


Of course it was clear.
Like, did anyone see the ranchers/homesteaders there burn & loot & attack police?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> I understood that point.  I was just taking it another step. We both agree that outsiders came into communities that felt they had legitimate reasons to protest and mucked things up. I remember Mr. Bundy having to ask some people to leave too because they were problem causers. The 2 who went on to shoot those cops in Las Vegas were booted for example.* Protests bring in bad elements.
> 
> My question is moving on from that if we had seen the same thing happen in Ferguson and black militias had come in to stand up against the unfair police treatment and even to stand guard and keep out looters from out of town what do you think the police reaction would have been?
> 
> ...


It was my understanding & the media's that in Baltimore, that did happen. the black gangs stood b/w cops & protesters, AFTER the big riot nite/looting/destruction/attack on police.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

mmoetc said:


> Sort of like there were peaceful protestors and rioters. A concept some can't seem to grasp.


Why do you say this? We've all seen peaceful protests. And we saw the nite of Gray's funeral. Some have said they have no idea why after several days of peaceful protest, it went to violence. Hmmmm...how about it was the day of the funeral & paid protesters came to help.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

gapeach said:


> I think *the hiring of protesters* seems smarmy, for any cause. Sort of like hiring professional mourners.


Worse! I'm thinking paid mourners wouldn't incite riots.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

mmoetc said:


> The discussion was that the media and public treated the groups differently. Finding many examples, as you claim ,of stories involving bloods and crips shows that they get coverage. Now show me the stories of the Bandidos, bells Angels, and other motorcycle gangs. Show me the stories of their violence, drug dealing and criminal activity. Those stories would go towards proving the point that black violence isn't treated, reported and responded to differently.


Have there been mass destructions of property that wasn't theirs w/biker gang fights? Looting? Stealing along w/rioting? Attacking cops?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

where I want to said:


> But despite what you say above, I have never heard any criticism from you of anything that is the most egregiously racist or religious bigotry by anyone other than white Christian people. No criticism of Sharpton or Obama or the black protestors who have been wrong time and time again, no acknowledgement of valid fears or uncongenial facts.
> I don't think you even recognize that to assume Freddy Gray is an "innocent civilian murder by the corrupt police" is itself founded on racist assumptions. Or that the bikers are guilty and not worthy of questions on their behalf or that Muslims bear no responsibility for what happens in their name, etc etc etc, are in fact based on prejudice just as much as the statements you so readily oppose. And that by making them, you contribute to ever more polarization and hardening of positions.


Post of the day award.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> Seems to be a common thread around here. Right up there with pitching a fit about the left side being rude and belittling and then completely ignoring it when the right does it.


Its funny that by now y'all don't know that we -for the most part- couldn't care less about a gay union. Live & let live.
What we DO care about is FORCING others to abandon their faith & participate in one. Everyone has the 'right' to buy bread from a bakery. A Cake. But to FORCE a muslim bakery to bake an obvious gay cake is WRONGWRONGWRONG. Or a Christian one for the same. We have freedom of religion in our country.
But carry on w/the rantings.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

painterswife said:


> Sure they are multifaceted but the poster I responded to has been calling a poster on this thread racists along with a few other things. I am just doing what she asked of him, letting my voice be heard when I think someone is wrong. Just like you are doing.


Really? An opinion is just a starting point for a discussion. Stating an opinion in a way that expresses contempt for different opinions, dripping with sarcasm or venom, is a call to a battle of the same. Respecting others enough to explain, listen to the response, and addresses at least some of their points is what is called for.

If dismissal or contempt oozes from words, it is the ooze, not the ideas, that gets the response. And choice of words can lift the discussion or drag it down.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Patchouli said:


> I agree with you on this one. I was raised in Ohio, had lots of relatives in Indiana. Since I went in the military I have lived in the south. MS, TX, LA and now Arkansas. Ohio and Indiana were far more racist in my opinion than what I have seen down here.


That is good to hear, Patchouli. I think a lot of people from other areas of the country who have not lived in this area just don't know how we live, so close together, and our mixed neighborhoods have been this way for many years now. Some of our best neighbors are a different color,black or brown and they have been in this neighborhood since the houses were built in the 70's so it has been integrated here for a very long time with no problems whatsoever. We all get along fine.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

where I want to said:


> Really? An opinion is just a starting point for a discussion. Stating an opinion in a way that expresses contempt for different opinions, dripping with sarcasm or venom, is a call to a battle of the same. Respecting others enough to explain, listen to the response, and addresses at least some of their points is what is called for.
> 
> If dismissal or contempt oozes from words, it is the ooze, not the ideas, that gets the response. And choice of words can lift the discussion or drag it down.


Contempt did ooze from my words, just as it oozes from hers and many other posters. It was that contempt for others expressing their opinion and trying to shut down others in previous posts and then castigating posters in this thread because they don't voice their contempt for ideas when she feels they should.

Lots of contempt in this forum and your have not been an exception. In my opinion


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Patchouli said:


> Ohio and Indiana were far more racist in my opinion than what I have seen down here.


Ohio is a strange mix, since many families are proud of their participation in the underground railroad before the civil war. But in industrialized parts of Ohio racism was driven by fear. Blacks integrating to Ohio posed a threat to job security, since blacks from the south were able-bodied and willing to do most anything. White Ohioans were concerned that there wouldn't be enough work to go around. That racism has survived for many generations.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

painterswife said:


> Contempt did ooze from my words, just as it oozes from hers and many other posters. It was that contempt for others expressing their opinion and trying to shut down others in previous posts and then castigating posters in this thread because they don't voice their contempt for ideas when she feels they should.
> 
> Lots of contempt in this forum and your have not been an exception. In my opinion


You're right in that at times I have responded with like contempt. It seemed that was the only thing understood. But I have never started out with an opening remark with a version of 'how stupid racist mean illiterate etc etc etc.'

If a point is raised, valid or invalid, then the point should be addressed. And addressing it means responding with supporting or opposing ideas, not saying that was spelled wrong or bringing up an old argument or assigning other words that were not written or that all (fill in the blanks) are just the same or that the poster is a (equally fill in the contemptible blank too.) 

Everyone fails sometimes but if that is all that is ever offered, it is not surprising that any remarks from such a poster are assumed to be useless.

Oh and disagreeing is NOT the same as belittling.


----------



## Wanda (Dec 19, 2002)

Tricky Grama said:


> Its funny that by now y'all don't know that we -for the most part- couldn't care less about a gay union. Live & let live.
> What we DO care about is FORCING others to abandon their faith & participate in one. Everyone has the 'right' to buy bread from a bakery. A Cake. But to FORCE a muslim bakery to bake an obvious gay cake is WRONGWRONGWRONG. Or a Christian one for the same. We have freedom of religion in our country.
> But carry on w/the rantings.



For ease of understanding could you give your definition of ''force''. Then could you give an example where a baker in this country was ''forced'' to bake an objectionable cake. Thanks


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Tricky Grama said:


> Really? I didn't see that & have now read the thread up to this point. Can you quote those"some people here"?
> Some talked about biker clubs that were decent, is that what you mean? Or b/c someone is in a biker gang, they are always NOT decent?


I did that already, guess you will have to reread the thread.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

In America, people have the right to be racist. It is just that some have not a clue that they are racist. The sting comes when the reality that if you separate folks I. Groups by race.....you are a racist.


***** college fund.... racist...
Just for ******
Black caucus....racist only blacks allowed to wish to oppress all other races
Black Panthers... racist. A violent group of blacks with criminal behaviors.

Anyone who supports a racist group..... must have some racist beliefs.

Christian charities...all races included... care given to any in need... Christian and no. Christian as well.


These racist group exist to lead a certain race to the mind set that they are not equal and that the are victims at the hands of whites when the real truth is that leadership in those organizations are using ....enslaving their own people as pawns for their own person power and wealth.

Walk away from all Sharpton and Louis and even Obama and be what you are willing to earn.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

kasilofhome said:


> In America, people have the right to be racist. It is just that some have not a clue that they are racist. The sting comes when the reality that if you separate folks I. Groups by race.....you are a racist.
> 
> 
> ***** college fund.... racist...
> ...


In the light of the recent discussions in this thread, I have to say it is true what you said but incomplete. All those black racists organizations came into being because black people were denied access to white structures which dominated everything until recently. In my childhood, colleges in even black dominated areas saw little or no black enrollment of even the few fully prepared students while a whole lot of pathetically prepared white students partied college away. The military not while theoretically integrated saw only a very few black officers.
That these truly racists organizations exist is not a surprise nor should it be expected they suddenly disappear. 
But it would be good if they were acknowledged as just as racist as any all white group that is subject to legal or civil protest. It just changes us from an evil/good interpretation to a we're all defective interpretation that allows hate to die.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

These group need to be accepted as what they are.... racist and those who want racism to grow or exist can support them and people like myself that can accept that as you stated there once was a time when they....not including the black Panthers were a help to people to get and education .... but these days they are as out dated vestige of the past..


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

where I want to said:


> In the light of the recent discussions in this thread, I have to say it is true what you said but incomplete. All those black racists organizations came into being because black people were denied access to white structures which dominated everything until recently. In my childhood, colleges in even black dominated areas saw little or no black enrollment of even the few fully prepared students while a whole lot of pathetically prepared white students partied college away. The military not while theoretically integrated saw only a very few black officers.
> That these truly racists organizations exist is not a surprise nor should it be expected they suddenly disappear.
> But it would be good if they were acknowledged as just as racist as any all white group that is subject to legal or civil protest. It just changes us from an evil/good interpretation to a we're all defective interpretation that allows hate to die.


I agree that they were formed as a reaction to racism. I don't think that makes them racist in return. If a group wants to send their kids to college and there is no one out there who will fund scholarships for their group, as a matter of fact it will deny them solely based on their race then it isn't racist to start your own fund. Your kids need scholarships too. 

The funny thing is that United ***** College fund that was mentioned actually helps kids from ALL races. It was started to specifically help blacks at a time when they could not get scholarships and now it helps whoever needs it. 

Knee jerk reactions to historical names only says something about the owner of the knee.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

where I want to said:


> . And addressing it means responding with supporting or opposing ideas, not saying that was spelled wrong.


Good. Cause if there are rules about spelling, I'm in trouble. I'm afraid the tiny key screen and autocorrect on this smartphone my husband has got me has turned me into a typist that appears like I'm functionally illiterate and English is not my first language sometimes.

I'd hate to have to worry I could be voted off the island cause of my spelling.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> I agree that they were formed as a reaction to racism. I don't think that makes them racist in return. If a group wants to send their kids to college and there is no one out there who will fund scholarships for their group, as a matter of fact it will deny them solely based on their race then it isn't racist to start your own fund. Your kids need scholarships too.
> 
> The funny thing is that United ***** College fund that was mentioned actually helps kids from ALL races. It was started to specifically help blacks at a time when they could not get scholarships and now it helps whoever needs it.
> 
> Knee jerk reactions to historical names only says something about the owner of the knee.


I think racist is a poor word to describe this. So prefer segregated. And, I guess my real issue is we need to decide once and for all if that's okay or not.

If it is, then everything be should be free to make their own groups regardless of how offensive they may be to others. If they're not, they should all be banned.

I learn towards the former being the better option of the two.

I think the real problem is which ones are acceptable and which ones are not is a moving target that blows around in the wind of current political correctness with each passing decade


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

gibbsgirl said:


> I think racist is a poor word to describe this. So prefer segregated. And, I guess my real issue is we need to decide once and for all if that's okay or not.
> 
> If it is, then everything be should be free to make their own groups regardless of how offensive they may be to others. If they're not, they should all be banned.
> 
> ...


I am confused. Are you talking about now or at the time they were created? If you are talking about then you think creating a group as a reaction to being blocked from another group somehow justifies everyone having their own segregated group?

If you are talking about today is it the name you have an issue with? Because they are helping everyone now. And the name is an historical one. Should they change it to the United ***** (and any other race today) Fund?


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

But is It possible to be segregated according to race and not be racist?


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

where I want to said:


> But is It possible to be segregated according to race and not be racist?


I suppose that would depend on the reason for the segregation. In the example of the UNCF I would say no it was not racist. It was formed to help their kids get an education as a reaction to them not being able to get scholarships from other groups. They only had limited funds to work with and white kids had tons of choices in scholarships so they couldn't waste their precious resources on kids who didn't need it anyways. Their reasons don't meet any of the criteria for racism. 

racÂ·ism
&#712;r&#257;&#716;siz&#601;m/
_noun_
noun: *racism*
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> I am confused. Are you talking about now or at the time they were created? If you are talking about then you think creating a group as a reaction to being blocked from another group somehow justifies everyone having their own segregated group?
> 
> If you are talking about today is it the name you have an issue with? Because they are helping everyone now. And the name is an historical one. Should they change it to the United ***** (and any other race today) Fund?


I'm talking about now, but not specifically the united ***** fund. I mean generally. Look every type of group out there is created as a reaction to something.

Depending on who you ask, a group could be described as prejudiced or promoting something. Depending on who you ask, it could be described as racist, segregated, prejudiced, preferential, focused, etc.

My point is, I'd rather have people decide to live and let live. But in reality, there are all kinds of groups not solely focused on helping the people they want to work with. They are focused a lot on tearing apart opposition groups. Even worse, to me, is that public money is spent on supporting some. Also, I could care less about private money being limited. I just want to know who gives and how much.

Those changes, I think, would go along way in actually accomplishing good changes to the system we've created that we live under now.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

where I want to said:


> But is It possible to be segregated according to race and not be racist?


Probably not. But that's why I'm saying live and let live and remove these legal and social restrictions, and add transparency.

I believe those changes would open the eyes of the general public and the membership of groups. If you shine a light on things like that, it always seems to sort out the garbage from the worthwhile


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

http://www.npr.org/2015/05/23/408926836/theyre-not-gang-members-bikers-protest-mass-arrests-in-waco

Hi de ho and away we go.

Biker protests in Waco and lawyering up.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Bearfootfarm said:


> If he hadn't run as soon as they saw him he would probably still be alive.
> Don't keep pretending he was just some innocent guy standing on the street.
> 
> *He died because of how he lived*


But he shouldn't have died, that's the whole point. We have laws about cruel and unusual punishment, remember? And cops aren't allowed to dole out the punishment, either. Being a drug head and trying to avoid an encounter with the police is not a capitol offense. Lock him up, yes, but to cause or allow him to be fatally injured while in custody is where the system broke down in this case.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

where I want to said:


> http://www.npr.org/2015/05/23/408926836/theyre-not-gang-members-bikers-protest-mass-arrests-in-waco
> 
> Hi de ho and away we go.
> 
> Biker protests in Waco and lawyering up.


Sounds like they definitely arrested way more than was needed. Are these people still in jail? If so it sounds like the mess with the Baltimore protestors. They just rounded up anyone and everyone and left them in jail for way longer than their own laws allowed.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> Sounds like they definitely arrested way more than was needed. Are these people still in jail? If so it sounds like the mess with the Baltimore protestors. They just rounded up anyone and everyone and left them in jail for way longer than their own laws allowed.


Million Dollar bond....each! Most all.are still in jail. Waco is going to have a huge issue with false imprisonment, my opinion.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Nevada said:


> Ohio is a strange mix, since many families are proud of their participation in the underground railroad before the civil war. But in industrialized parts of Ohio racism was driven by fear. Blacks integrating to Ohio posed a threat to job security, since blacks from the south were able-bodied and willing to do most anything. White Ohioans were concerned that there wouldn't be enough work to go around. That racism has survived for many generations.


Yes, the Underground railroad was a marvelous thing. But like some said there are lots of people in the north that think that most southerners are racists. They don't stop to think that the RR was started and over half if the distance of it was managed by southerners. When northerners got caught, it was no big deal but if southerners got caught it often cost them their lives by hanging. 
These people risked death to save those slaves but I know a few online posters (none here) that will swear that we are racist just by geography without ever having stepped one foot below the mason Dixon line. 

Racist in my area are the minority although I did know one once.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Patchouli said:


> Knee jerk reactions to historical names only says something about the owner of the knee.


I like that and I agree. I don't think that what was meant though. I could be wrong. 

I read once about the Houston PD having a black HPD, a Hispanic HPD, a female HPD and an Asian HPD organization. Even though there was one for all HPD officers. So _supposedly _ a group got together and formed the Caucasian HPD org and then it hit the fan. They said it was because they wanted to show that it was ridiculous to have so many separate orgs. when they were all of the same brotherhood. They shut it down but the others are still in operation I think. 

None of those groups are racists that I know of but it does do a lot toward division.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

MO_cows said:


> But he shouldn't have died, that's the whole point. We have laws about *cruel and unusual punishment*, remember? And cops aren't allowed to dole out the punishment, either. Being a drug head and trying to avoid an encounter with the police is not a capitol offense. Lock him up, yes, but to cause or allow him to be fatally injured while in custody is where *the system broke down *in this case.


He wasn't "punished" so all that is meaningless

I still believe he was injured before they ever put him in the van, since he was obviously in pain and unable to walk when they first picked him up.

If he hadn't run, he wouldn't have been chased and subsequently injured during his apprehension.

His death was an accident
His running away was intentional

The system broke down when they let someone with his record out on the streets


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

mreynolds said:


> I like that and I agree. I don't think that what was meant though. I could be wrong.
> 
> I read once about the Houston PD having a black HPD, a Hispanic HPD, a female HPD and an Asian HPD organization. Even though there was one for all HPD officers. So _supposedly _ a group got together and formed the Caucasian HPD org and then it hit the fan. They said it was because they wanted to show that it was ridiculous to have so many separate orgs. when they were all of the same brotherhood. They shut it down but the others are still in operation I think.
> 
> None of those groups are racists that I know of but it does do a lot toward division.


Your example is one I've encountered and heard of over and over for years. And, it's exactly the type of situation that led me to my conclusions in my posts. It's also why I use the word segregation. I don't doubt some groups do it for racist reasons and some do not. But I've found whenever the word racism is used in a discussion of these issues it just seems to shutdown any sort of meaningful or productive discussion. Besides I really think segregation is the right word for it.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Bearfootfarm said:


> He wasn't "punished" so all that is meaningless
> 
> I still believe he was injured before they ever put him in the van, since he was obviously in pain and unable to walk when they first picked him up.
> 
> ...


It is not clear whether they had any cause to detain him in the first place, either. 

Is the world worse off without him, except for his family, no. But he still had rights, and he had not been sentenced to death. 

The police are gonna have to take their lumps on this one.

Since you believe it was his own fault for running, logic would dictate that you also think Walter Scott deserved to die? 

Being a cop is a hard and for the most part thankless job, you couldn't pay me enough to do it. But we give LEOs a lot of authority including deadly force, it is in all of our best interest to make them play by the rules. We can't let them become vigilantes, no one would be safe.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

gibbsgirl said:


> Your example is one I've encountered and heard of over and over for years. And, it's exactly the type of situation that led me to my conclusions in my posts. It's also why I use the word segregation. I don't doubt some groups do it for racist reasons and some do not. But I've found whenever the word racism is used in a discussion of these issues it just seems to shutdown any sort of meaningful or productive discussion. Besides I really think segregation is the right word for it.


Yes, I thought so when I noticed your use of the word segregation. There is a difference between that and racism, but it is not much IMO.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Wanda said:


> For ease of understanding could you give your definition of ''force''. Then could you give an example where a baker in this country was ''forced'' to bake an objectionable cake. Thanks


There was a lawsuit. We discussed it here but I'm sorry I can't remember the name of the threads. 
A bakery would not provide a cake for a gay marriage. They were sued. They lost. They lost a lot of $$$ which damaged their biz, not sure if they recovered, but if anyone says that is not 'forcing' the bakery to bake a wedding cake I'd like to know what it is. Something similar happened w/florist. 
I will try to find links but there were plenty here at the time.

We have freedom of religion here in this country. "...congress shall make no law concerning religion...". 
"No business should be forced to provide a service they disagree with. So no 'gay themed cakes' from the Christian bakers. No bacon from the Muslim or Jewish market. Refuse to bake the cake but refuse to sell a loaf of bread? No."-Greg.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

kasilofhome said:


> These group need to be accepted as what they are.... racist and those who want racism to grow or exist can support them and people like myself that can accept that as you stated there once was a time when they....not including the black Panthers were a help to people to get and education .... but these days they are as out dated vestige of the past..


Especially when some-like NAACP-refuse admittance to some black groups...


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> I suppose that would depend on the reason for the segregation. In the example of the UNCF I would say no it was not racist. It was formed to help their kids get an education as a reaction to them not being able to get scholarships from other groups. They only had limited funds to work with and white kids had tons of choices in scholarships so they couldn't waste their precious resources on kids who didn't need it anyways. Their reasons don't meet any of the criteria for racism.
> 
> racÂ·ism
> &#712;r&#257;&#716;siz&#601;m/
> ...


I'm not sure I've ever read that definition. I certainly do not think it is racist if one declares black athletes to GENERALLY be superior, in some sports. DNA plays a big role. Those of African decent are born w/leaner muscular structure than those decended from Europeans. 
I could practice hoops all day everyday-from the time I was 2 yrs old- & will never come close to Michael Jordan's ability.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> It is *not clear* whether they had any cause to detain him in the first place, either.


It's perfectly clear.

His running away was "reasonable suspicion" of a crime, and his illegal knife was enough for the arrest



> Is the world worse off without him, except for his family, no. But he still had rights, and he had not been sentenced to death.


I don't care about philosophical speculations.

Let's just stay focused on the facts, and stop pretending he was "sentenced" to anything, since that's just emotional hype



> Since you believe it was his own fault for running,* logic would dictate* that you also think Walter Scott deserved to die?


Logic would dictate if I thought that I would have said that.

I never said running was justification to use deadly force, so you're talking apples and oranges.

Again, let's stick to just the facts of *this *case and don't be pretending I even thought about Scott



> But we give LEOs a lot of authority *including deadly force*, it is in all of our best interest to make them play by the rules. We can't let them become vigilantes, no one would be safe


Once more you are trying to imply they intentionally used deadly force, when there is no evidence of that at all.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

Bearfootfarm said:


> It's perfectly clear.and
> 
> I don't care about philosophical speculations.
> 
> Let's just stay focused on the facts, and stop pretending he was "sentenced" to anything, since that's just emotional hype


The irony of saying this is that legally absolutely zero evidence has been presented in court for review by a judge or jury who legally are the only individuals who have a legal right to interpret and draw any conclusions.

So I don't see why you want to participate in sharing your opinions on this while debating the validity of other people's thoughts.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

gibbsgirl said:


> The irony of saying this is that legally absolutely zero evidence has been presented in court for review by a judge or jury who legally are the only individuals who have a legal right to interpret and draw any conclusions.
> 
> So I don't see why you want to participate in sharing your opinions on this while debating the validity of other people's thoughts.


Because the choice of words reflects the beliefs. To say Gray was executed or murdered means, or should mean if the definition of the words are understood, that the police meant to kill him, that their actions were specifically directed at that goal. 
I think that they were, unless some off wall explanation appears, they were negligent in their duty to keep him safe and some one was probably criminally negligent.
The words murder or executed used in the way they have been leads to misunderstanding of the issues and therefore keeps improvement from happening. If the police recognize the inappropriate accusations, then those accusations will either be dismissed or the best people will leave a profession subject to hysterical witch hunts. No a good thing.
So yes, emotional hyperbole should be addressed.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Bearfootfarm said:


> It's perfectly clear.
> 
> His running away was "reasonable suspicion" of a crime, and his illegal knife was enough for the arrest
> 
> ...


My words didn't imply their intentions, that happened in your head. 

Personally I don't think they meant to kill him at all. They were just too rough with him and probably ignorant of the level of injuries that were inflicted. Until it was too late. 

We'll see how it comes out in court.

One facet of the case where we might agree is the protestors. The family flat out said they didn't want them, and justice was already in the works for the "sins" of the police officers anyway, so the demonstrating was totally unnecessary and all they accomplished was providing the opportunity for the looters and arsonists to have their fun.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

mreynolds said:


> I like that and I agree. I don't think that what was meant though. I could be wrong.
> 
> I read once about the Houston PD having a black HPD, a Hispanic HPD, a female HPD and an Asian HPD organization. Even though there was one for all HPD officers. So _supposedly _ a group got together and formed the Caucasian HPD org and then it hit the fan. They said it was because they wanted to show that it was ridiculous to have so many separate orgs. when they were all of the same brotherhood. They shut it down but the others are still in operation I think.
> 
> None of those groups are racists that I know of but it does do a lot toward division.


I think that they should all be a group and seperating themselves into groups like that probably isn't best for cohesion. But starting a Caucasian group was absurd because they already were a Caucasian group by and large. Blacks, females, Asians and Hispanics are probably each a tiny minority in the HPD*. I think the reason why they form these groups is because they get treated like crap when they join an organization that has been mainly white. They need the moral support of others in their minority group. It just makes sense you will want to band together with other people who are going through the same problems you are suffering. 

White people don't need special groups because they already are a special group and have been ever since this country was founded. And honestly you want to end special interest minority groups tomorrow? It's super easy: get white people to act right and stop being racist and misogynist. End of problem. Sad thing is all I ever see is people complaining about minority groups being racist and I never see white people telling other white people to just get over themselves and stop being racist. 

This is interesting because it breaks down the racial demographics of major cities and their police departments and compares them. As you can see most PDs are predominantly white even when their citizens are anything but. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/09/03/us/the-race-gap-in-americas-police-departments.html


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> It's perfectly clear.
> 
> His running away was "reasonable suspicion" of a crime, and his illegal knife was enough for the arrest
> 
> ...


Except running away isn't a crime and his knife was not actually illegal.


----------



## fordy (Sep 13, 2003)

.............An article in NY Times said He had under gone a "Back Procedure" several days previous , and his Doc had told him to remain Inactive and stay at home for a couple of weeks ! In addition , he had received medical treatment for his back on several previous dates . So , he , was as much to blame for his own demise as were the cops ! He had to have realized that he was going in Harm's Way by selling drugs thereby subjecting himself to an active arrest involving physical handling by the cops when he decided to sell drugs . , fordy


----------



## fordy (Sep 13, 2003)

..........I just did a google on Freddie Gray+previous back injuries , and , an article in the Washington Times was saying FG's back problems may not have been proven ! So , I guess it is still conjecture at this point in time . , fordy


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

Unfortunately, it's all conjecture at this point. Interesting to discuss still. 

I think the solution to these happenings isn't about race at all.

If we would repeal the criminalization of a huge amount of things, then the citizenry and police would have less need to interact and people would have a better chance of everyone being competently versed on the laws.

If we would also do a massive scaling back of the government run welfare programs and simplify/lower the taxes on citizens income and spending, that would go a long way to stopping people from having time to get involved in things that contribute to rampant policing.

If you are responsible for your own food clothing and shelter, instincts tend to kick in pretty hard to handle your business.

Under the current system, working people are being bankrupted, and freeloaders are getting way more than food, clothing and shelter.I know that isn't an across the board statement, but it's applicable to an awful lots of folks.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

No drugs were found on Freddie Gray at the time of his arrest.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Except running away isn't a crime and his knife was not actually illegal.


No one said running away was a crime, so saying it isn't is rather pointless.

What was said is that it is "reasonable suspicion" and gives the police the right to detain the suspect. 

During that "detention" they found the illegal knife.

You can keep saying it's legal, but reality is it violates a Baltimore City ordinance, and the prosecutor was going by State law.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Freddie-Gray-death-carrying-illegal/2015/05/05/id/642797/


> May 05, 2015 Â· A Baltimore police investigation has found that Freddie Gray was carrying an illegal knife when he was arrested April 12


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

fordy said:


> .............An article in NY Times said He had under gone a "Back Procedure" several days previous , and his Doc had told him to remain Inactive and stay at home for a couple of weeks ! In addition , he had received medical treatment for his back on several previous dates . So , he , was as much to blame for his own demise as were the cops ! He had to have realized that he was going in Harm's Way by selling drugs thereby subjecting himself to an active arrest involving physical handling by the cops when he decided to sell drugs . , fordy


There was no truth in that article


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

fordy said:


> .............An article in NY Times said He had under gone a "Back Procedure" several days previous , and his Doc had told him to remain Inactive and stay at home for a couple of weeks ! In addition , he had received medical treatment for his back on several previous dates . So , he , was as much to blame for his own demise as were the cops ! He had to have realized that he was going in Harm's Way by selling drugs thereby subjecting himself to an active arrest involving physical handling by the cops when he decided to sell drugs . , fordy


I'm sorry selling drugs? Because drugs were found on him? Because I totally missed that. Never ceases to amaze me how you guys want to make this his fault.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> No one said running away was a crime, so saying it isn't is rather pointless.
> 
> What was said is that it is "reasonable suspicion" and gives the police the right to detain the suspect.
> 
> ...


Nope. The police said it was illegal. The head prosecutor said it wasn't. The law is so vague and conflicting in the end only a Judge would be able to make the final decision. 

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/05/1...ing-knife-laws-that-can-confuse-across-state/


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

This debate reminds me of arguing between republicans and democrats. Cpeople focus so much on the differences and which side is right, they fail to see their similarities are so close that it resembles a one party system.

As far as I'm concerned, Freddy Greg and these cops are pawns in our dysfunctional society. And, with online and social media access, they whole story has gone absolutely viral. 

I just pray that none of me and mine ever go viral, for any reason. Cause it happens so easily these days. And the internet and news cycles just chew people up and spit then out. You can't unring a bell. That's for sure.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

fordy said:


> ..........I just did a google on Freddie Gray+previous back injuries , and , an article in the Washington Times was saying FG's back problems may not have been proven ! So , I guess it is still conjecture at this point in time . , fordy


There's really no conjecture since there were no previous back injuries.
It's just a false rumor that won't die


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> Nope. The police said it was illegal. The head prosecutor said it wasn't. *The law is so vague and conflicting* in the end only a Judge would be able to make the final decision.
> 
> http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/05/1...ing-knife-laws-that-can-confuse-across-state/


The law is neither vague nor conflicting
The only ordinance that matters is the Baltimore ordinance

MD state law allows the possession and Baltimore City law does not.
I already told you that the prosecutor was wrong.

The head prosecutor's biggest campaign contributor also happens to be representing Gray's family, so nothing she says is credible

If the police REASONABLY believed the knife was illegal, then the arrest was legal, even if they later decide the knife is legal

It's not hard to look this stuff up

http://reason.com/blog/2015/05/21/dropped-charges-reflect-doubts-about-leg


> Of the criminal charges proposed by Marilyn Mosby, the state's attorney for Baltimore, in connection with the death of Freddie Gray, three are notably missing from the indictments approved by a grand jury today.
> 
> The Washington Post reports that *"charges of false imprisonment against three of the officers are no longer part of the case.*"
> 
> ...


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> But starting a Caucasian group was absurd because they already were a Caucasian group by and large.
> 
> And honestly you want to end special interest minority groups tomorrow? It's super easy: get white people to act right and stop being racist and misogynist. End of problem.
> 
> [/url]


Question. When whites become a minority in the USA will you think it's okay to have Caucasian groups?

Question. What about communities or organizations where whites are a minority now? Is is okay for them to have xausasian groups?

I believe you mentioned the united ***** fund as a group that helps regardless of race. Would it be okay for them to have special Caucasian representatives within their group?

Question. Since white people need tocact right and stop being racist and mysogynistic, and if you glanced at me, I'd fit the description "white girl", what should I do to stop acting wrong, being racist, and mysogynistic?

That last statement of yours sounded pretty racist to me.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

fordy said:


> .............An article in NY Times said He had under gone a "Back Procedure" several days previous , and his Doc had told him to remain Inactive and stay at home for a couple of weeks ! In addition , he had received medical treatment for his back on several previous dates . So , he , was as much to blame for his own demise as were the cops ! He had to have realized that he was going in Harm's Way by selling drugs thereby subjecting himself to an active arrest involving physical handling by the cops when he decided to sell drugs . , fordy


And he wasn't just arrested for running...he was in the back alley that was his DRUG STORE! Where he was NOT supposed to be-violation of being out on parole.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

wr said:


> No drugs were found on Freddie Gray at the time of his arrest.


Just heroin in his system.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

gibbsgirl said:


> I believe you mentioned the united ***** fund as a group that helps regardless of race. Would it be okay for them to have special Caucasian representatives within their group?
> Question. Since white people need tocact right and stop being racist and mysogynistic, and if you glanced at me, I'd fit the description "white girl", what should I do to stop acting wrong, being racist, and mysogynistic?
> That last statement of yours sounded pretty racist to me.


My grandsons really needed some help with money in college. They are twins. I know of several people in SC, white, who got partial scholarships at SC State University, an historically black university. I called the admissions office at the University where they are going in Ga. to see if they might get a minority scholarship since they are the minority race being white students. The lady that I talked to told me that it was a possibility and to have him come in. They were already enrolled there. When one of them went into the admission office, he was directed to a lady who was in charge of admissions. She laughed him out of the office and was very rude to him. She said Black is the minority and will stay that way.
They will both be seniors next year and have done very well in their GPA, but I think it is a shame that if there is money available, that they could not get any help. They have worked full time all the way through. Since this is a state University, the business program for this part of the state is there.

*Caucasian Scholarships at an HBCU-A Best Bet*

_Maybe one of the best places to shop for a &#8220;minority&#8221; scholarship aimed at white males is through one of the public Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). The system of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) was established to provide African Americans with a viable place to secure a rightful college education, at a time when they were afforded the same legal rights to a higher education, but in many instances could find none. Now many HBCUs are scrambling to diversify&#8212;they have to, under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which clearly states that any institution that receives federal aid may not discriminate on the basis of race, color, creed or sex. This means that public HBCUs must recruit students from all backgrounds. _
_If you read up on the minority and Affirmative Action issues, you might assume from various stats and editorial commentaries that white enrollment is on the increase at the HBCUs, but according to The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, this so-called trend is nothing more than hot air. HBCUs remain predominantly black. And even in cases where there are now scholarship incentives for whites, &#8220;white students usually opt to go elsewhere.&#8221; _
_A few state&#8217;s public HBCU systems have been involved in bitter and lengthy legal battles over the issue of segregation. Various decisions have forced quite a few predominantly black institutions to begin aggressively marketing &#8220;minority&#8221; scholarships to white students:_


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Tricky Grama said:


> Just heroin in his system.



I'm not sure that has actually been proven or not because the autopsy results have not been released but I was responding to a comment made that he was dealing drugs and that's tough to prove if he had no merchandise available to sell.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Patchouli said:


> I think that they should all be a group and seperating themselves into groups like that probably isn't best for cohesion. But starting a Caucasian group was absurd because they already were a Caucasian group by and large. Blacks, females, Asians and Hispanics are probably each a tiny minority in the HPD*. I think the reason why they form these groups is because they get treated like crap when they join an organization that has been mainly white. They need the moral support of others in their minority group. It just makes sense you will want to band together with other people who are going through the same problems you are suffering.
> 
> White people don't need special groups because they already are a special group and have been ever since this country was founded. And honestly you want to end special interest minority groups tomorrow? It's super easy: get white people to act right and stop being racist and misogynist. End of problem. Sad thing is all I ever see is people complaining about minority groups being racist and I never see white people telling other white people to just get over themselves and stop being racist.
> 
> ...


----------



## edcopp (Oct 9, 2004)

Is Freddie still dead?

That "EYE CONTACT" will get you every time.

Too bad about the Constitution of The United States of America being suspended in Baltimore. That could have saved him, at one time. The forth amendment requires probable cause to arrest him. Eye contact ain't that. So no search could have been made, no (legal) knife found , and no cop murder commited.

It would have been better for the cops to have played by the law of the land.

Now freddie is still dead and hopefully a bunch of cops who swore an oath to protect the constitution of the united states of america, will get to spend an appropriate amount of time in prison. I understand that "gen pop" has a special plan for bully cops.

Freddie will still be dead.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

gibbsgirl said:


> Question. When whites become a minority in the USA will you think it's okay to have Caucasian groups?
> 
> Question. What about communities or organizations where whites are a minority now? Is is okay for them to have xausasian groups?
> 
> ...


So true. I've "known" far more blacks that hate whites than the other way arround. From what I've seen, whites just brush off the nasty tude that blacks have towards whites; it's very strange and most(whites) don't even know what to think about it(someone must be haveing a bad day....)


----------



## fordy (Sep 13, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> I'm sorry selling drugs? Because drugs were found on him? Because I totally missed that. Never ceases to amaze me how you guys want to make this his fault.


 ...........It seems I was wrong as well as the material in the NY Times ! , fordy


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> The law is neither vague nor conflicting
> The only ordinance that matters is the Baltimore ordinance
> 
> MD state law allows the possession and Baltimore City law does not.
> ...


The problem here is you and I could post conflicting reports all night long. And that is because the law is vague. For every article you post saying it was illegal I can find one saying it was legal. I did look it up.  I am just as fond of having a valid source for my opinion as you are.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

gibbsgirl said:


> Question. When whites become a minority in the USA will you think it's okay to have Caucasian groups?
> 
> Question. What about communities or organizations where whites are a minority now? Is is okay for them to have xausasian groups?
> 
> ...


I think because of their historical behavior they will probably need a Caucasian group. Good luck defining that though. 

We actually have acceptable white groups in America. We have Irish Americans and Dutch Americans and Scottish Americans, etc. In areas where whites are the minority they probably are a member of some group that celebrates who they are and no there is nothing wrong with that. Humans like to congregate with people who are like them and it isn't a problem unless you consider yourself superior and hate others because they aren't in your group. 

The UNCF helps EVERYONE. So why exactly would you need specialty groups? That would be pointless. 

Once again we were talking about a specific situation here and you are taking it out of context. The reason we have special groups in the example we were discussing: police departments is because they do not reflect the community around them, they are majority white and majority male. We have seen several PDs get in trouble lately due to racist emails, tweets and other social media posts made by white males. It's a chronic issue and it leads to people feeling a need to group together in defense. 

My point is you won't find these groups anymore once there is no longer a need for them. Level the playing field. End the racism. Don't try to turn this into something personal, see it for what we are actually discussing and what the root cause of the problem really is.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

OK. Do you think that the bulk of cops who are not white are somehow more inclined to treat people fairly.

Cause I don't.

I can only draw from my personal life experience. And, I can say, without hesitation that I've seen a large portion of law enforcement seems to have the same m.o. regardless of their race, faith, or gender.

I think the problems are really rooted in a culture of "here's my do anything I want and get away with it badge."

Was that on point enough for you?


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

BTW, sorry if I seem out of context to you. But i'm a big picture thinker. Sometimes getting out of the minutia let's you see things more holistically.

This thread has drifted all over the place, but is still interesting. If you want to control what's allowed to be considered relevant, I suggest using private email.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

gibbsgirl said:


> BTW, sorry if I seem out of context to you. But i'm a big picture thinker. Sometimes getting out of the minutia let's you see things more holistically.
> 
> This thread has drifted all over the place, but is still interesting. If you want to control what's allowed to be considered relevant, I suggest using private email.


If we are talking about something specific you can not necessarily extrapolate that into everything. It may only apply to a specific topic. I am not talking about thread drift. As an analogy if we are talking about kids with food color allergies and I say they shouldn't drink Kool-aid you can't take that and say you hate Kool-aid and you say no kid should ever drink Kool-aid. That isn't what I said at all. 

If we are talking about the Houston Police Dept. and you say it is wrong for them to have special interest groups based on race or gender and I say I think it's a good idea because those races and genders have been oppressed and mistreated minorities and so those groups are good and necessary that does not mean I am all for the KKK or any other race based group. Saying it is okay in a specific situation does not mean it is cool in every possible situation.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> If we are talking about something specific you can not necessarily extrapolate that into everything. It may only apply to a specific topic. I am not talking about thread drift. As an analogy if we are talking about kids with food color allergies and I say they shouldn't drink Kool-aid you can't take that and say you hate Kool-aid and you say no kid should ever drink Kool-aid. That isn't what I said at all.
> 
> If we are talking about the Houston Police Dept. and you say it is wrong for them to have special interest groups based on race or gender and I say I think it's a good idea because those races and genders have been oppressed and mistreated minorities and so those groups are good and necessary that does not mean I am all for the KKK or any other race based group. Saying it is okay in a specific situation does not mean it is cool in every possible situation.


I understand what you are saying. I just disagree with some of it.

I've already posted how I feel about what the legal and social norms for whose allowed to have groups should be. So I don't need to be repetitive.

I do write generalized thoughts. I guess maybe that bothered you in this case cause you don't want the same rules to apply more evenly to all Americans.

I could be making incorrect assumptions by interpreting your comments that way. But it seems I'm not since you haven't answered my questions about how white people should act/change after your very generalized remark. And, since you've ignored my question of whether the poor treatment of some people by police might have less to do with race and more to do with the culture of that employment industry.

You can choose not to respond to that, and that is perfectly fine. But I think you, I and everyone else here should be able to share our thoughts without others expecting us to shift our beliefs to line up with someone else's.

Disagreement does not equal invalidated.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

7thswan said:


> So true. I've "known" far more blacks that hate whites than the other way arround. From what I've seen, whites just brush off the nasty tude that blacks have towards whites; it's very strange and most(whites) don't even know what to think about it(someone must be haveing a bad day....)


I see this as well. Even in the media. Someone says something perceived as not PC & the left is all over 'em. But let the NBP sing & rant about killing crackers & cracker babies & hey-its ok. They've been oppressed. 
I've overheard conversations that would make your hair curl, just seemed like ordinary folks til you hear what they really think-pretty hateful..


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

gibbsgirl said:


> BTW, sorry if I seem out of context to you. But i'm a big picture thinker. Sometimes getting out of the minutia let's you see things more holistically.
> 
> This thread has drifted all over the place, but is still interesting. If you want to control what's allowed to be considered relevant, I suggest using private email.


Lessee, was it YOU who posted things would get better if whites treated Black people better? That was "on topic".


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Patchouli said:


> I think that they should all be a group and seperating themselves into groups like that probably isn't best for cohesion. But starting a Caucasian group was absurd because they already were a Caucasian group by and large. Blacks, females, Asians and Hispanics are probably each a tiny minority in the HPD*. I think the reason why they form these groups is because they get treated like crap when they join an organization that has been mainly white. They need the moral support of others in their minority group. It just makes sense you will want to band together with other people who are going through the same problems you are suffering.
> 
> White people don't need special groups because they already are a special group and have been ever since this country was founded. And honestly you want to end special interest minority groups tomorrow? It's super easy: get white people to act right and stop being racist and misogynist. End of problem. Sad thing is all I ever see is people complaining about minority groups being racist and I never see white people telling other white people to just get over themselves and stop being racist.
> 
> This is interesting because it breaks down the racial demographics of major cities and their police departments and compares them. As you can see most PDs are predominantly white even when their citizens are anything but. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/09/03/us/the-race-gap-in-americas-police-departments.html


Its super easy to see it that way when in reality all it takes is one or two people to get the ball rolling in a small group. In my life of construction I have seen this over and over when the Hispanic members come to work. All I do is treat them with the same respect as I would anyone else and it rubs off to the others. There is usually suspicion form both sides at first. But in the end all except the most rabid racist will begin to respect. Small groups lead to big groups and so on. 

If I had to lead a group of people that left the job and went to their respective groups of segregation to talk about all the problem of segregation instead of talking about solutions then a solution would never happen IMO. 

When I first started at the age of 13 yo with my dad, we were all white crews. Only the concrete contractors were Hispanic back then. I don't think anyone needs a special group. I think everyone needs to like you said start acting like everyone matters.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Patchouli said:


> If we are talking about something specific you can not necessarily extrapolate that into everything. It may only apply to a specific topic. I am not talking about thread drift. As an analogy if we are talking about kids with food color allergies and I say they shouldn't drink Kool-aid you can't take that and say you hate Kool-aid and you say no kid should ever drink Kool-aid. That isn't what I said at all.
> 
> If we are talking about the Houston Police Dept. and you say it is wrong for them to have special interest groups based on race or gender and I say I think it's a good idea because those races and genders have been oppressed and mistreated minorities and so those groups are good and necessary that does not mean I am all for the KKK or any other race based group. Saying it is okay in a specific situation does not mean it is cool in every possible situation.


Not trying to split hairs Patch but in a sense you are saying you hate Kool-Aid in a sense when talking about the HPD. You have automatically assumed that these groups were repressed and hence started these groups to talk about it. While this might have been the case it wasn't necessarily so. 

One reason I am not trying to get in on the legal side of Freddy Gray because you nor I know what really happened until all the facts come out. The OP was about race and bikers in Waco so since I know virtually nothing about bikers I have been talking about race. Racism is a thought process. They can be changed very easy if only we would just try a little harder.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> The problem here is you and I could post* conflicting reports *all night long. And that is because the law is vague. For every article you post saying it was illegal I can find one saying it was legal. I did look it up. I am just as fond of having a valid source for my opinion as you are.


Only the Baltimore City Ordinance matters.
You posted an article about laws outside the city.

Even your article said the knives are illegal *in* Baltimore.

Also, the "false arrest" charges have been dropped.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Patch, let me tell you a story of my experience. One of my jobs at one time was to do government housing work back in the '90's. Many were black neighborhoods where I was not welcomed by most. In some areas there were drug dealers on the corner. These especially did not like me. After a year or so my showing respect lead to mutual respect from even from those dealers. Once someone tried to steal some tools out of my truck and one of those dealers made him put it back. He came and told me that he spread the word that no one was to mess with me or my crew. These people see me twenty years later and make it a point to stop and talk to me. 

Respect leads to mutual respect. Division leads to more division.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

mreynolds said:


> Its super easy to see it that way when in reality all it takes is one or two people to get the ball rolling in a small group. *In my life of construction I have seen this over and over when the Hispanic members come to work. All I do is treat them with the same respect as I would anyone else and it rubs off to the others. There is usually suspicion form both sides at first. But in the end all except the most rabid racist will begin to respect.* Small groups lead to big groups and so on.
> 
> If I had to lead a group of people that left the job and went to their respective groups of segregation to talk about all the problem of segregation instead of talking about solutions then a solution would never happen IMO.
> 
> When I first started at the age of 13 yo with my dad, we were all white crews. Only the concrete contractors were Hispanic back then. I don't think anyone needs a special group. I think everyone needs to like you said start acting like everyone matters.


That is a perfect example of what I am saying people need to do. You treat them all the same and after awhile they see you are for real and they don't need any special interest groups. 

You will always have a few people who are so negative that no matter what you do they will see racism. You can't do anything about that. But the vast majority of people will respond to good treatment with relief and a desire to continue that egalitarian philosophy in their workplace.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

mreynolds said:


> Not trying to split hairs Patch but in a sense you are saying you hate Kool-Aid in a sense when talking about the HPD. You have automatically assumed that these groups were repressed and hence started these groups to talk about it. While this might have been the case it wasn't necessarily so.
> 
> One reason I am not trying to get in on the legal side of Freddy Gray because you nor I know what really happened until all the facts come out. The OP was about race and bikers in Waco so since I know virtually nothing about bikers I have been talking about race. Racism is a thought process. They can be changed very easy if only we would just try a little harder.


I am making an assumption true. I haven't checked out each group to see their exact reasons for forming these groups. But I think I have the weight of evidence on my side. The fact that these police departments are heavily stacked in favor of white males. There have been tons of stories over the years of how hard it is to get into these police forces as a minority or female. The harassment and hazing is well documented. So are the very recent investigations and the social media fails from these police officers. It would strain all credulity to say these minorities formed these groups for any reason other than pride they actually made it in and the need for support to survive.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

The trouble comes in the details. The tendency to use extremes as a reflection of all. So, if you purposely conduct yourself in a good manner, someone comes along who looks like you or is a member of the same group, who behaves badly. And all the old hostility spills right back out, washing over everyone.
And when the hosility washing over someone not themselves guilty, it raises hostility there too. 
The only way to avoid this merry go round is to honor the process, not the people. In other words, if you want to be treated with respect, you must agree on what that respect looks like and demand it not just for yourself but for everyone. 
Demanding on your personal interpretation, as in the phrase 'hurt feelings', is unachievable. But protecting a code, to be applied to all equally, without exception means your personal actions to protect the code when you see it being violated anywhere will lead to others protecting the code when you need it in turn.
So, in this case, if police violated the code profiling based on race and that is being protested, then it is equally required to protest based on profiling bikers.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

where I want to said:


> The trouble comes in the details. The tendency to use extremes as a reflection of all. So, if you purposely conduct yourself in a good manner, someone comes along who looks like you or is a member of the same group, who behaves badly. And all the old hostility spills right back out, washing over everyone.
> And when the hosility washing over someone not themselves guilty, it raises hostility there too.
> The only way to avoid this merry go round is to honor the process, not the people. In other words, if you want to be treated with respect, you must agree on what that respect looks like and demand it not just for yourself but for everyone.
> Demanding on your personal interpretation, as in the phrase 'hurt feelings', is unachievable. But protecting a code, to be applied to all equally, without exception means your personal actions to protect the code when you see it being violated anywhere will lead to others protecting the code when you need it in turn.
> So, in this case, if police violated the code profiling based on race and that is being protested, then it is equally required to protest based on profiling bikers.


I agree with everything you said there.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Patchouli said:


> I am making an assumption true. I haven't checked out each group to see their exact reasons for forming these groups. But I think I have the weight of evidence on my side. The fact that these police departments are heavily stacked in favor of white males. There have been tons of stories over the years of how hard it is to get into these police forces as a minority or female. The harassment and hazing is well documented. So are the very recent investigations and the social media fails from these police officers. It would strain all credulity to say these minorities formed these groups for any reason other than pride they actually made it in and the need for support to survive.


I am with you on that. Neither of us know for sure but history shows that it probably was the case.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

mreynolds said:


> I am with you on that. Neither of us know for sure but history shows that it probably was the case.


Then show that a larger inclusion has changed the police dynamics. Such places exist- oh let's say Baltimore. 
There is an assumption that white males are the cause of the problem but in truth , hazing and harassment occur in all other groups. Well, maybe not Quakers- I'd have to look into it. But generally any group based on a hierarchy uses all sorts of tactics to determine who is in and who is out. Even though males seem better at it, anyone who has attended an all girl school or team knows that women do it too.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

where I want to said:


> Then show that a larger inclusion has changed the police dynamics. Such places exist- oh let's say Baltimore.
> There is an assumption that white males are the cause of the problem but in truth , hazing and harassment occur in all other groups. Well, maybe not Quakers- I'd have to look into it. But generally any group based on a hierarchy uses all sorts of tactics to determine who is in and who is out. Even though males seem better at it, anyone who has attended an all girl school or team knows that women do it too.


Not sure what you are asking so far as the police dynamics? Do you mean did the minority special interest groups continue once they stopped being a minority? 

I agree that hazing and harassment is perpetrated by all groups and across genders. Whites just happen to be in the majority in these PDs and have been historically since they were founded. I am in no way saying if the tables were turned and they were majority black or Hispanic that the same thing would not have happened.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> I agree that hazing and harassment is perpetrated by all groups and across genders. Whites just happen to be in the majority in these PDs and have been historically since they were founded. I am in no way saying if the tables were turned and they were majority black or Hispanic that the same thing would not have happened.


Then what are you saying? What things would continue happening regardless of which race is a majority? And, if the identity of the race in majority won't change things, then what is the point of minority groups organizing to effect change within the police dept? Do you just want it be affirmative action for hiring so a pie chart of races looks more even? Cause I can't see why you'd want to fight that battle if you think it wouldn't change anything.


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

Newsweek published an article I found interesting and reminded me of this discussion. It's from may 14th and titled "the new racial makeup of u.s. police departments".

I don't know how to copy and paste a link to it from my phone, and I'm traveling right now. Could someone post the link, so yall can see what I'm reading? Thanks.


----------



## Guest (May 25, 2015)

http://www.newsweek.com/racial-makeup-police-departments-331130


----------



## gibbsgirl (May 1, 2013)

Thank you dlmcafee.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> I am making an assumption true. I haven't checked out each group to see their exact reasons for forming these groups. But I think I have the weight of evidence on my side. The fact that these police departments are heavily stacked in favor of white males. There have been tons of stories over the years of how hard it is to get into these police forces as a minority or female. The harassment and hazing is well documented. So are the very recent investigations and the social media fails from these police officers. It would strain all credulity to say these minorities formed these groups for any reason other than pride they actually made it in and the need for support to survive.


I really do not think this is the case-the hazing, etc. I think it is hard to get in b/c of the work/study/ethics needed. Many do not see that as worth being a cop in the 1st place. There's cities all over the country that try everything in their power to get minorities to join. We see it often. Especially when requirements are LOWERED to try to get minorities in. This is WRONG. Requirements should be met to get in.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

wr said:


> I'm not sure that has actually been proven or not because the autopsy results have not been released but I was responding to a comment made that he was dealing drugs and that's tough to prove if he had no merchandise available to sell.


I found 3 websites saying he had heroin & pot in his system. I'll find the links...
Granted it was a Baltimore cop who said it-anonymously-in 1.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Tricky Grama said:


> I found 3 websites saying he had heroin & pot in his system. I'll find the links...
> Granted it was a Baltimore cop who said it-anonymously-in 1.


I found several as well but they always quote 'unnamed sources.' The autopsy report has not been publicly released so it remains speculation. 

I would really like to see the actual autopsy report because at this time, we only have opinions with little fact.


----------

