Philando Castille shooting

[Cruel Hand Luke]

When making decisions about safety and "threat vs non threat " we need to look at the whole picture in making decisions... not just clothes or skin color or tattoos....The overwhelming majority of people are good people. And no race has the monopoly on kindness... or cruelty for that matter. A black guy in a suit on the streets of Chattanooga at lunchtime is going to appear as far less of a threat than a black guy dressed in "urban street attire" in Alton Park at 11PM.  And there are plenty of candy ass white kids who like to dress like gangbangers...... and not every black guy with a red shirt on is a "Blood".....But to dismiss the combination of tattoos (especially gang affiliation tats ) , race and clothing is just naive. The pasty white dude with the "88" tattoo on his shoulder and "spider web" tat on his elbow is advertising to you what his background is if you know how to read the signs. Add to that a pair of black BDU pants and combat boots and a shaved head and you have someone I will consider a threat until proven otherwise....even though I am a white guy too and have a good friend who is a pasty white guy with a shaved head....But the guy with the tattoos and the "uniform" is a potential threat simply due to how he is advertising himself. 

Just like I'd see the totality of circumstances and big picture with a black guy with pants hanging down , tattoos of a 6 pointed star and a pitchfork (Crip Gang symbols) and a North Carolina "NC" hat (Northside Crips) turned to one side. Or a brown guy with tattoos of the Virgin Mary and " MS13" tattoo....they all are telling a story if you just read the page.... And looking at the whole picture is how we make better decisions on whether something is dangerous or not. It is not just race...or just clothing ...or just tattoos....or just body language... it is the totality of circumstances. And if that makes you feel bad then I suggest you spend less time watching Oprah and listening to NPR.  

[tennessee1911]

On 6/22/2017 at 2:50 PM, LINKS2K said:

This may be comparing apples to oranges, but I spent my time in the military and Gulf War as an MP.  

Like our civilian counterparts, many soldiers hated our guts.  On a daily basis we interacted with guys who could thrash us in the blink of an eye. 

There are exceptions to every rule, but I believe that our civilian counterparts could stand to learn better interpersonal and communication skills, and require frequent refreshers on the escalation of force. 

As an MP, knowing that almost everyone that you interact with on a daily basis is as well or better trained to kill forces you to attempt to de-escalate every intervention. 

Daily I see videos where cops escalate a situation because someone bruises their ego. That being said, whether we like it or not, I feel that it's always best to be in total compliance with the officer even if you feel he is wrong.

Fight your battle in the courtroom, not the roadside. 

You make wonderful points, but as a coworker of mine pointed out recently while we were discussing this incident. He rightful said you can't win the roadside fight but the public increasingly can't win in court either.

Criminal jury conviction rates these days are near above 90% in all cases. Bench trial conviction rates are even higher.

[DaveTN]

1 hour ago, tennessee1911 said:

You make wonderful points, but as a coworker of mine pointed out recently while we were discussing this incident. He rightful said you can't win the roadside fight but the public increasingly can't win in court either.

Criminal jury conviction rates these days are near above 90% in all cases. Bench trial conviction rates are even higher.

Of course court convictions are high. By the time you find yourself in court the facts/accusations/evidence/witnesses has been investigated by the responding Officers, usually Detectives (if it’s a serious case), and the DA’s investigators/prosecutors.

The jury of your peers gets to see all the evidence, hear firsthand the witnesses, the Officers, the victims, and should they so choose; the accused.

We don’t get any of that here; we get the news stories.

Are innocent people convicted? Sure. And guilty people are acquitted. Your chances are directly impacted by how much money you have to spend on your defense.

[Capbyrd]

On 7/1/2017 at 3:55 PM, DaveTN said:

Are innocent people convicted? Sure. And guilty people are acquitted. Your chances are directly impacted by how much money you have to spend on your defense.

 

So you acknowledge that the system is biased against the working class?

[DaveTN]

3 hours ago, Capbyrd said:

 

So you acknowledge that the system is biased against the working class?

No. The system is bias towards the poor and the working class that thinks justice will be done when they go to court. The working class can hire an attorney. The poor can’t; they get a public defender. Poor or middle class though your outcome is not necessarily determined by your guilt or innocence; it is determined by the deal your attorney can make, who he knows, or how he handles the case at trial.

I’ve seen plenty of people go to prison because they couldn’t afford a good defense. I’ve also seen the guilty walk because they had a good attorney.

I’ve also seen people charged because they listened to their attorney (who was not there) telling them not to talk to the Police.

We don’t have a justice system, we have a legal system and if you are going to get off the porch you better be able to run with the big dogs.

[E4 No More]

3 hours ago, DaveTN said:

No. The system is bias towards the poor and the working class that thinks justice will be done when they go to court. The working class can hire an attorney. The poor can’t; they get a public defender. Poor or middle class though your outcome is not necessarily determined by your guilt or innocence; it is determined by the deal your attorney can make, who he knows, or how he handles the case at trial.

I’ve seen plenty of people go to prison because they couldn’t afford a good defense. I’ve also seen the guilty walk because they had a good attorney.

I’ve also seen people charged because they listened to their attorney (who was not there) telling them not to talk to the Police.

We don’t have a justice system, we have a legal system and if you are going to get off the porch you better be able to run with the big dogs.

I am certainly in agreement with you here, but it would help matters if the government didn't try to market it as a justice system.

[Randall53]

Is there anyone here that does NOT get an image in their mind when you hear the word THUG?  Be honest now folks. That being said, I doubt that everybody that dresses and looks "thugish" is a thug, but every thug dresses and looks "thugish".  That's MHO.

[Chucktshoes]

1 hour ago, SWJewellTN said:

I am certainly in agreement with you here, but it would help matters if the government didn't try to market it as a justice system.

It would help the citizenry, but it wouldn't be in the government's interest.