police murder megathread

[Ebsy]

What media outlets covered the death of Freddie Gray? I visit the New York Times' website every day and did not see an article about Freddie Gray or a death in Baltimore. I've been paying attention to the news on a more sporadic basis as of late but this behavior is actually pretty reflective of the average American.

We're actually discussing Freddie Gray on this forum now. Although I'm sure that the Baltimore riots will turn-off most of the public, there will be segments of the public that will be more concerned about Gray's death than riots. Again, I doubt that these sympathetic segments would have heard about Gray before the rioting.

The CNN link posted here in Reply 5 was published last Tuesday, April 21.  Stories were run on the national nightly newscasts around the same time.  It was in the news.

The only thing riots will do is make many people less sympathetic to Freddy Gray, not more.

Black people don't want sympathy. They want the extrajudicial killings to stop.

[ChainsawJedis]

Serious question: did you know about Freddie Gray before the rioting began? I didn't know about Freddie Gray before I read about the riots.

Considering the riots didn't start until Saturday and the story was all over on the news earlier in the week, anyone who was paying attention to the news should have known about Freddie Gray before the riots.

What media outlets covered the death of Freddie Gray? I visit the New York Times' website every day and did not see an article about Freddie Gray or a death in Baltimore. I've been paying attention to the news on a more sporadic basis as of late but this behavior is actually pretty reflective of the average American.

We're actually discussing Freddie Gray on this forum now. Although I'm sure that the Baltimore riots will turn-off most of the public, there will be segments of the public that will be more concerned about Gray's death than riots. Again, I doubt that these sympathetic segments would have heard about Gray before the rioting.

In short: rioting is effective at raising awareness. It's possible to condemn rioting and acknowledge that rioting has played an important role in American history. Although endemic rioting was behind the inception of "backlash voting", it also produced a keen awareness among public officials that the living conditions in inner-cities posed a risk for all Americans. This isn't disputable: discussions of the material conditions and slum-like conditions played a much more prominent role in American public life after Watts.

Agree with alot of what you said here. However, I had heard about Freddie Gray's death for over a week now. That is very possibly because it is much more close to home for me.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

What media outlets covered the death of Freddie Gray? I visit the New York Times' website every day and did not see an article about Freddie Gray or a death in Baltimore. I've been paying attention to the news on a more sporadic basis as of late but this behavior is actually pretty reflective of the average American.

We're actually discussing Freddie Gray on this forum now. Although I'm sure that the Baltimore riots will turn-off most of the public, there will be segments of the public that will be more concerned about Gray's death than riots. Again, I doubt that these sympathetic segments would have heard about Gray before the rioting.

The CNN link posted here in Reply 5 was published last Tuesday, April 21.  Stories were run on the national nightly newscasts around the same time.  It was in the news.

The only thing riots will do is make many people less sympathetic to Freddy Gray, not more.

I don't watch CNN so I can't comment about their coverage but my point still stands: clearly, more people will be aware of Freddie Gray because of the rioting. Will riots make people less sympathetic to Freddie Gray? Of course but they'll also make people more concerned about Freddie Gray because the story will have a prominent place in the news. Will people be more willing to restrain police departments if it stops a perceived threat to "law and order"? It's quite possible.

Extra-judicial killings, police brutality, rampant and unnecessary incarceration have plagued Black communities for decades. Black voters have expressed their concerns at the ballot box and through political organizations but nothing has changed. In fact, the incarceration rate has increased as crime has decreased. Why should we expect African-Americans to patiently wait for the legislative process to produce results? It has never been responsive to their concerns.

[ChainsawJedis]

Here's a sample of upvoted comments from the Baltimore Sun:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

ing disgusting.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bal-university-of-baltimore-closes-amid-high-school-purge-threat-20150427-story.html#page=1&panel=comments

Idiots post on the internet...news at 11

F-cking Disgusting.

[cinyc]

Oh yeah: come on cinyc, common sense. Rioting is always going to get more coverage than clapping your hands and singing. That's not to say that white reaction isn't a concern. We all know the history of the late 60s leading to Mr. "law and order" Nixon.

Rioting gets more negative coverage, perpetuating negative stereotypes about young African-American males.  Clapping your hands and singing last week got plenty of coverage to anyone who was paying attention to the news last week.

Why is the white reaction a "concern", exactly?

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

Oh yeah: come on cinyc, common sense. Rioting is always going to get more coverage than clapping your hands and singing. That's not to say that white reaction isn't a concern. We all know the history of the late 60s leading to Mr. "law and order" Nixon.

Rioting gets more negative coverage, perpetuating negative stereotypes about young African-American males.  Clapping your hands and singing last week got plenty of coverage to anyone who was paying attention to the news last week.

Why is the white reaction a "concern", exactly?

I'd argue that there's a pretty stark distinction between stories that are covered by the media and stories that generate active and sustained interest in collective action, public policy issues and background information. Ferguson played a central role in public life for months. Do you honestly mean to suggest that a few thousand peaceful protesters marching in Baltimore would have aroused the senses of the public?

The New York Times, MSNBC, CNN, Fox News, and the Big Four have been replete with stories that feature "police brutality" over the past few months. The stories that were the most "cut and dry" did not drive as much internet traffic as the more ambiguous cases, which featured more public protest and unrest.

[Beet]

Oh yeah: come on cinyc, common sense. Rioting is always going to get more coverage than clapping your hands and singing. That's not to say that white reaction isn't a concern. We all know the history of the late 60s leading to Mr. "law and order" Nixon.

Rioting gets more negative coverage, perpetuating negative stereotypes about young African-American males.  Clapping your hands and singing last week got plenty of coverage to anyone who was paying attention to the news last week.

Why is the white reaction a "concern", exactly?

You said it yourself man. "perpetuating negative stereotypes about young African-American males." a.k.a., perpetuating white racist attitudes. A return to the hard core "law and order" mentality of the 1970s probably won't happen without a rise in crime rates, but it's always a concern.

[cinyc]

I'd argue that there's a pretty stark distinction between stories that are covered by the media and stories that generate active and sustained interest in collective action, public policy issues and background information. Ferguson played a central role in public life for months. Do you honestly mean to suggest that a few thousand peaceful protesters marching in Baltimore would have aroused the senses of the public?

Again, the story was extensively covered by the media last week.  The focus then was what happened to Freddie Gray.  Now, the focus is on how a bunch of idiots burned down the local drug store and slashed the hoses of the firemen who were trying to put the fire out.  How does that help, exactly?  Someone dies in police custody, an investigation is currently underway, and people are rioting before the investigation is even complete.

[Ebsy]

Why on earth would people wait for the investigation to be complete when they have no confidence in the integrity of said investigation?

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

I'd argue that there's a pretty stark distinction between stories that are covered by the media and stories that generate active and sustained interest in collective action, public policy issues and background information. Ferguson played a central role in public life for months. Do you honestly mean to suggest that a few thousand peaceful protesters marching in Baltimore would have aroused the senses of the public?

Again, the story was extensively covered by the media last week.  The focus then was what happened to Freddie Gray.  Now, the focus is on how a bunch of idiots burned down the local drug store and slashed the hoses of the firemen who were trying to put the fire out.  How does that help, exactly?  Someone dies in police custody, an investigation is currently underway, and people are rioting before the investigation is even complete.

I'm done responding to any of your posts. On the whole, I don't think this discussion has been very productive and you haven't really responded to any of my points. We'll see where this story goes over the next week or two. I can't say that I'm optimistic about this situation.

[Cory]

Jesus, my fellow red avatars just can't bring themselves to condemn the rioting without pouching it in some kind of excuse.

Oh, and for phucks sake: This situation was widely covered on news networks before the rioting, so no, rioting isn't "the only way to get attention". Just stop with the pathetic excuses for bad behavior.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

The comments I've seen on all this show that America is in desperate need of re-education.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

Jesus, my fellow red avatars just can't bring themselves to condemn the rioting without pouching it in some kind of excuse.

Oh, and for s sake: This situation was widely covered on news networks before the rioting, so no, rioting isn't "the only way to get attention". Just stop with the pathetic excuses for bad behavior.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/the-brutality-of-police-culture-in-baltimore/391158/

Has the national media covered any of these cases? My hope is that they'll consider exploring the origins of the riot rather than engage in shrill condemnation. Frankly, the story that I've posted above justifies throwing bricks at cop cars.

[Cory]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/the-brutality-of-police-culture-in-baltimore/391158/

Yes those things are terrible, and those people deserve justice. But rioting isn't going to change any of that. If anything it will backfire and people will think "no wonder police officers have to be especially on guard around those people". The current story was gaining traction and most likely have led to reforms from the city's black mayor and police chief.

I just don't see how looting a liquor store and burning a CVS after raiding it for prescription drugs will help.

[Bojack Horseman]

Jesus, my fellow red avatars just can't bring themselves to condemn the rioting without pouching it in some kind of excuse.

Oh, and for s sake: This situation was widely covered on news networks before the rioting, so no, rioting isn't "the only way to get attention". Just stop with the pathetic excuses for bad behavior.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/the-brutality-of-police-culture-in-baltimore/391158/

Has the national media covered any of these cases? My hope is that they'll consider exploring the origins of the riot rather than engage in shrill condemnation. Frankly, the story that I've posted above justifies throwing bricks at cop cars.

+1

[Ebsy]

I don't see what use comes out of people condemning the violence, or why it falls to a certain group, due to their sympathy with the cause of the demonstrators, to condemn the violence. Arguing that the rioters and protesters have a point is not an endorsement of how they are acting out, whether peacefully of violently. Of course the violence is counterproductive and unacceptable, but is not the oppressive culture that the police of Baltimore and many other cities just as worthy of condemnation? I've watched this all before from much closer than most of you, as my city has consumed itself in violence and looting. Condemnations from white and black Democrats did little to nothing to discourage the outbreaks of violence; I imagine condemnations from white democrats on a political forum will have similar impotency.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/the-brutality-of-police-culture-in-baltimore/391158/

Yes those things are terrible, and those people deserve justice. But rioting isn't going to change any of that. If anything it will backfire and people will think "no wonder police officers have to be especially on guard around those people". The current story was gaining traction and most likely have led to reforms from the city's black mayor and police chief.

I just don't see how looting a liquor store and burning a CVS after raiding it for prescription drugs will help.

Nothing will help. No one is listening. No one cares about these communities. Baltimore's public officials are powerless to act in the face of Maryland's Police Officers' Bill of Rights (I've posted a link to the implications of this). Baltimore's residents are powerless at the polls: they're a small portion of Maryland's population and have entirely different concerns than African-Americans who live in Prince George's County. At this point, I don't have any public policy prescriptions or strategies to offer. These people are powerless in the face of a system that has been rigged against them at every possible point. Baltimore has de-industrialized, the welfare state has been gutted, incarceration rates continue to increase and the police have the carte blanche authority to do as they please. When has the fabled "median voter" expressed the slightest inkling of a concern about these facts? America's once great industrial cities are as impoverished and dangerous as parts of Central America. We've known this for decades. What has been done about it? Nothing. We had the ability to stop urban blight, white flight, the carceral state and slow the pace of de-industrialization: we didn't do anything because Americans don't care.

With this in mind, I understand the unalloyed sentiment that is embodied by throwing a brick through a payday loan office or a police car.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2015/04/24/the-police-officers-bill-of-rights/

[ChainsawJedis]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/the-brutality-of-police-culture-in-baltimore/391158/

Yes those things are terrible, and those people deserve justice. But rioting isn't going to change any of that. If anything it will backfire and people will think "no wonder police officers have to be especially on guard around those people". The current story was gaining traction and most likely have led to reforms from the city's black mayor and police chief.

I just don't see how looting a liquor store and burning a CVS after raiding it for prescription drugs will help.

Nothing will help. No one is listening. No one cares about these communities. Baltimore's public officials are powerless to act in the face of Maryland's Police Officers' Bill of Rights (I've posted a link to the implications of this). Baltimore's residents are powerless at the polls: they're a small portion of Maryland's population and have entirely different concerns than African-Americans who live in Prince George's County. At this point, I don't have any public policy prescriptions or strategies to offer. These people are powerless in the face of a system that has been rigged against them at every possible point. Baltimore has de-industrialized, the welfare state has been gutted, incarceration rates continue to increase and the police have the carte blanche authority to do as they please. When has the fabled "median voter" expressed the slightest inkling of a concern about these facts? America's once great industrial cities are as impoverished and dangerous as parts of Central America. We've known this for decades. What has been done about it? Nothing. We had the ability to stop urban blight, white flight, the carceral state and slow the pace of de-industrialization: we didn't do anything because Americans don't care.

With this in mind, I understand the unalloyed sentiment that is embodied by throwing a brick through a payday loan office or a police car.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2015/04/24/the-police-officers-bill-of-rights/

Thanks for speaking the truth man. While I cannot condone the actions of the rioters (not protesters) in Baltimore, to put all of your focus on them is to lose sight of the real issues at hand. You are completely ignoring a majority of people peacefully protesting and only wanting change they have been promised but not given for decades now, whether that be economic equality, social equality, or racial equality.

[H. Ross Peron]

http://www.nytimes.com/live/confrontation-in-baltimore/church-leaders-gang-members-meet/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Adam Griffin]

Yes, why exactly should any of us be made to apologize or even feel remorse over these outbreaks of destruction? The simple fact is that large portions of America - particularly white America - simply don't understand the level of systemic poverty, discrimination and lack of opportunity that exists (and has existed for decades or more) in areas where this behavior typically arises. All too many people want to refer to these people as animals, when in reality, it is a response from them being treated like animals.

They're not looting because they want free stuff. They're not burning down buildings in "their community", because nothing in their so-called community belongs to them in the first place. When dealing with areas where a majority of fathers and young sons are being hauled off for responding to their institutionalized poverty in mostly non-violent but unconventional ways, where generation upon generation has found itself denied equal opportunity, where education truly lacks in structure - let alone at home - and where justice seemingly doesn't exist, these people lash out because it is all that releases the stress and all that sends a message. Nothing around them is truly indicative of a community. Nobody at any other time ever listens.

The only way things change, whether pacifists and non-violent propagandists like it or not, is through systematic agitation of the power structures that wish it would stay the same. Sometimes, that means action like what we're seeing. Drawing the venom out is necessary, because it's seeping all over the place under the surface anyway.

Of course, latte-loving white suburbia is going to frown and flex its big, lazy mouth through internet commentary that calls them "animals" and says "shoot them all on sight!", because they haven't the faintest clue nor care about what is truly going on in these places except when it is to indulge their worst stereotypes with 24/7 media coverage. How inconvenient it must be for and how much skin in the game must there be from all of these tough-on-crime suburbanites and rubes who watch from afar and prognosticate about entire groups of people and their motivations! If there was a God, then these sorts of people would be blessed with the same sort of unrest and injustice within their own little posh ecosystems.  

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Yes, why exactly should any of us be made to apologize or even feel remorse over these outbreaks of destruction? The simple fact is that large portions of America - particularly white America - simply don't understand the level of systemic poverty, discrimination and lack of opportunity that exists (and has existed for decades or more) in areas where this behavior typically arises. All too many people want to refer to these people as animals, when in reality, it is a response from them being treated like animals.

They're not looting because they want free stuff. They're not burning down buildings in "their community", because nothing in their so-called community belongs to them in the first place. When dealing with areas where a majority of fathers and young sons are being hauled off for responding to their institutionalized poverty in mostly non-violent but unconventional ways, where generation upon generation has found itself denied equal opportunity, where education truly lacks in structure - let alone at home - and where justice seemingly doesn't exist, these people lash out because it is all that releases the stress and all that sends a message. Nothing around them is truly indicative of a community. Nobody at any other time ever listens.

The only way things change, whether pacifists and non-violent propagandists like it or not, is through systematic agitation of the power structures that wish it would stay the same. Sometimes, that means action like what we're seeing. Drawing the venom out is necessary, because it's seeping all over the place under the surface anyway.

Of course, latte-loving white suburbia is going to frown and flex its big, lazy mouth through internet commentary that calls them "animals" and says "shoot them all on sight!", because they haven't the faintest clue nor care about what is truly going on in these places except when it is to indulge their worst stereotypes with 24/7 media coverage. How inconvenient it must be for and how much skin in the game must there be from all of these tough-on-crime suburbanites and rubes who watch from afar and prognosticate about entire groups of people and their motivations! If there was a God, then these sorts of people would be blessed with the same sort of unrest and injustice within their own little posh ecosystems. 

^^ the rioters are, essentially, acting in self-defence, pushing back against a system that has continuously been attacking them since birth.

[Simfan34]

http://www.nytimes.com/live/confrontation-in-baltimore/church-leaders-gang-members-meet/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I mean, I guess that least the few black owned businesses there are avoided being wiped out, as they usually are in these sorts of things.

The question of why there are so few black-owned businesses in black neighborhoods is one worth asking. Why are they often owned by, in many cases South Asian immigrants or Korea people who, in some cases, could hardly speak English- people who level of "privilege" could not be all that much greater than that of blacks, especially considering the neighborhood? We should seriously consider what kind of effect increasing black business ownership would allow people to feel they have a greater stake in their community and as such would be less likely to burn it down.

[Simfan34]

Am I naive in wondering why they can't just have an unimpeachable, inoffensive MLK-style march? Even Fox News couldn't get hot and bothered about that.

The problem is, many whites will view the march as being another Sharpton stunt. Even MLK was controversial in his lifetime among many whites, even those who weren't racists from the south. I don't condone rioting, but it is not my place to decide what the black communities response should be.

The Million Man March may have gotten more traction had it been organized by someone other than Louis Farrakhan. Something along these lines may be necessary. Some kind of national "Day of Rage Justice" with a DC march headlined by Obama and a mix of establishment and activist figures, with local rallies nationwide. Maybe propose a new Civil Rights Act, even if it won't get anywhere (I worry that LGB concerns would latch on- even if justifiably- and bog it down further). Voter registration drive, hopefully make enough gains in Congress to get it to pass after 2016. A push for police-community dialogue at the state level. Jesus. Sounds like something out of a UN peacekeeping plan.

I've long felt that social integration of blacks has been a double edged sword of sorts. On one end, we are now a country that is for the most part able to elect black leaders to high office, which is fantastic. But the downside of this is that the blacks with the most potential now aim to become national rather than "black leaders", leaving a leadership gap, in a community that does need a degree of leadership, that is often filled by second-rate figures or race-baiting charlatans. So I think, in many ways, people like Obama, Booker, Foxx, and hopefully even Republicans like Scott, Carson, etc. should occasionally assume the role of "black leader" when that becomes necessary- as it now is.

There also needs to be more engagement with the middle class blacks- the "African-Americans living in Prince George's County" as DFB mentioned- and the inner city poor. Coming from my immigrant background I did not have many opportunities to interact with these sorts of circles, but more recently I've interacted with upper-middle class African-American groups in the form of organizations like Jack and Jill, 100 Black Men, the Boulé (I have relatives who are members of the last two), and so forth. Now, I've come to appreciate that, skin color aside, there is a common "African-American" cultural heritage, and that it is as such something worth preserving and passing down. But many of these groups seem to engage in activities- ski trips, college tours, debutante balls- that I consider fantastic, don't get me wrong, but don't tem from that cultural heritage (but they may be, who knows), but rather their elite status, and as such I wonder if they'd be better off doing those sorts of things on a non-racial basis.

It seems as if this Talented Tenth of sorts, to put it otherwise, is overly concerned with perpetuating and advancing the cause of the African-American elite. I'm fine with the perpetuation of elites, and I'm all in favor of the advancing the cause of African-Americans , but I cannot help but feel that they are too... insular. Thus groups like these should step up to fill the leadership gap and work to essentially do what Booker T. Washington called for- improve the standard of education and promote African-American entrepreneurship on a wide (rather than an elite-based) scale. I won't claim to know how people in these communities would react to this- it obviously might seem like African-American paternalism- but in political terms it is these groups that I imagine would be best positioned to successfully lobby for change. Fundamentally, however, I see it as a socio-cultural issue that cannot be meaningfully resolved through political means alone.

[Slander and/or Libel]

The people decrying the actions of those rioting like to tut tut, click their tongues and say things like, "violence begets violence," as if to say that these people are bringing the harsh reaction of the state upon them by acting violently in the first place.

The problem? This is not "in the first place." This is the violence begotten by the violence visited upon these communities by the state for centuries in one form or another. You don't get to let the state murder a man for no reason and then turn around and say, "They started it!" when the community from which he hailed lashes out.

[The Free North]

http://www.nytimes.com/live/confrontation-in-baltimore/church-leaders-gang-members-meet/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wow thats awful