Milkman delivers

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 3, 2015 -> 10:19 AM) Of course, the true irony here is exposed in the comparison between these two posts. This is quite literally a fundamental example of why these communities feel they're being slighted. In the first post, how terrible it is, how unfair it is, to constantly be caught and fined for actually breaking the law. Speed limits are supposed to be flexible right, cops are supposed to be flexible, how dare they figure out easy ways to enforce them. In the second post....I'm sick of the cities being held to no f***ing standards at all. This is exactly the problem. Some people are allowed to and just expect to be granted immunity from harassment because of their privilege. Speed limits are important sometimes but how dare they figure out ways to focus on me and use me as a source of revenue! This shouldn't matter to me, it's totally unfair to target me! I know it's not going to happen, but try and take the experience of the first post and put it into the second. Imagine you've been ticketed for 2 mph over the speed limit 10 times in a year and stopped another 5 times just because they wanted to make sure you weren't thinking about speeding. Think there's any chance you might get mad? Think there's any chance that on any of those you might say something about how sick you are of being hassled? Maybe raise your arms if they try to grab you? After all, it's just a speeding ticket, right? Would that be worth being put in a choke hold? Or attacked by tear gas and MRAPs? As was pointed out, the communities in Ferguson and surrounding areas pull in 25-50% of their funding from tickets and court fees. You've literally outlined how its BS for police to come up with ways to maneuver around the rules to come up with that funding...but that's your privilege. On the other hand, communities that have to actively deal with that kind of focus on a non-stop basis aren't allowed to complain. They can't get angry in reply. They can't act out. It's their own fault. This is where the phrase "Check your privilege" comes from. You must be talking about a suburban department. No city squads have radar, unless they're specifically the traffic unit. And they're not in the neighborhoods you're strongly hinting at them harassing. And you need a reason to pull someone over. Despite what you say, nobody gets pulled over because they look like they wanna speed. I know, I know. DWB blah blah blah. Traffic stop statistical studies constantly show no bias.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jan 1, 2015 -> 10:30 AM) um... you're not damned if you do your job correctly... Ha.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 10:34 AM) I understand what you're saying, but this is a political battle they're trying to fight and phrasing is important. My point there was more that the police aren't exactly making a strong case to the public here. Sure, but again it's a political fight. If you stop making all of these really low-level arrests and citations and things don't fall apart, maybe people will end up seeing the police as less necessary than they did before, hurting the police position. On the flip side, if there is a spike in crime in the coming weeks, wouldn't the police have "blood on their hands" for refusing to do their jobs? Welcome to the life of a cop. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 08:35 AM) Meanwhile, the NYPD isn't exactly covering themselves in glory right now. From turning the funeral of a slain fellow officer into a petty protest to a work slowdown that's meant to demonstrate....something?, they're only making themselves look silly. From the NYT So, the city isn't falling apart yet, despite their being 90%+ fewer citations for pretty minor offenses. I don't know that this demonstrates what the police want it to demonstrate. The police have also said that they are not making arrests unless absolutely necessary; uh, shouldn't that be the case always, that you don't make unnecessary arrests? And all this because what appears to be a majority of the NYPD perceives protests and rallies over lack of accountability for specific cases of excessive use of force sometimes resulting in death as being "anti-police," and ending racial 'stop-and-frisk' as being "anti-police." DeBlasio even supports the "broken windows" policing that the NYPD wants. And this follows on the heels of this admission from an ongoing corruption investigation into the NYPD drug units: We fabricated drug charges against innocent people to meet arrest quotas, former detective testifies I'll never defend planting drugs on anyone, so let me get that out of the way right now. As to the bold, there are a million different incidents where you probably should make an arrest, but you aren't 100% obligated to do so. I'm sure those are what they're talking about. I don't mean to be condescending, but you have no idea what you're talking about. And I'm guessing the drop in tickets isn't meant to do much more than hurt the city's revenue.

Porn exists, guys. No need to watch a bad show for the occasional boob like it's 1995 and you're 14.

QUOTE (Brian @ Dec 8, 2014 -> 04:45 AM) Agree with most of Top 10. Whiplash is my #1 right now with Snowpiercer close behind. Like Itself will be in my T10 as well. I'll release my Top 10 in Jan when I see all the candidates. I know everyone is waiting with bated breath. Ha. I would never put a movie like "Let's Be Cops" in my worst list. It's not made for critical acclaim. I haven't seen it yet but I would rather put something that tried to be good but really failed in there. Like Interstellar?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 12:15 PM) They're justified to shoot in a deadly situation, but that ignores that they helped create the danger. The initial failure was driving right up to the kid so that if this kid you think has a gun makes any move whatsoever, you need to fear for your life and kill him instantly. And then there's the Walmart shooting, where the police just rushed in and shot the guy before he could even realize what was going on. I already allowed that they may have gotten too close (didn't watch it), but the call is for a person with a gun. Someone reaches for a gun, they are justified to shoot.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 11:21 AM) He reached for it, but the gun didn't leave his waistband so whether the tip had been altered or not isn't relevant. It could have still had the orange tip and he'd be just as dead. I'm pointing that out because that was a central part of the original story, "how could this kid or these parents be so dumb?" angle. A comparison would be yet another black man shot to death on police in a matter of seconds for holding a toy gun he picked up off of the shelf in a Walmart. This incident was also caught on tape, and there were no charges against the rambo cop who rushed in and immediately killed a guy who was talking on his phone and looking at fish food. In all cases, the police decided to dive right into the middle of things so that their only remaining options if the person looked like they were making any sort of move would be to shoot them dead. If there's a guy with a knife, why do you need to start the situation by driving within about 20 feet of him so if he takes one step toward you, you start shooting? If there's a kid with an alleged gun, why pull up with your partner's face about two feet from the kid, so that if the kid does anything at all you shoot and kill him in under two seconds? That's exactly the sort of thing the DoJ just criticized in a report on the Cleveland PD. In both of these situations, it seemed to be about escalating things from the start instead of defusing them. And a big part of this goes back to what Jake said yesterday, which is that, consciously or subconsciously, there's biases against black people and especially young black males to view them as more likely to be criminals or dangerous and threatening. Orange tip or not, if the call came in as a person with a gun and the person reaches for the gun in their waistband, they're justified to shoot. I know it's not the answer you want, but that's the reality. And again with the knife thing, maybe it would've been smarter to park a greater distance away, but the man approached the police with a deadly weapon in hand. Justified to shoot, plain and simple.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 5, 2014 -> 07:24 AM) Understood, that was kind of a crappy, rushed phone post so sorry about the tone. I posted it in the Dem thread, but their actions are exactly the sort of thing the DoJ just blasted the Cleveland PD over. They've found that Cleveland PD officers routinely take unnecessary actions where they place themselves in a situation where the deployment of force, sometimes lethal, is their only option. These two clowns drove around a bunch of bollards just so they could pull up two feet away from the kid they thought had a real gun. Then they shoot him to death within two seconds. The gun was still in the kid's waistband when he was shot, so the fact that the orange tip was removed isn't even relevant. Then the police lied about what happened, claiming that they saw him in the gazebo with other people around and that they told him to put his hands up three times. If they hadn't charged in like a bunch of cowboys for no reason, then the situation doesn't escalate rapidly and they aren't left with little choice but to kill a kid with a BB gun. It's similar to the shooting of the guy with a knife in Missouri a few months back. The police pulled up pretty damn close to the guy, leaving them little time to react and diffuse the situation without it turning deadly. The original story I heard about Cleveland was that the kid reached for the gun in his waistband. I don't know if that's true, but that justifies deadly force. And the Missouri knife thing, I discussed that a while back. That's about as textbook as it comes. And I'd venture to guess that was a suicide by cop.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 4, 2014 -> 09:07 PM) The officers who shot the twelve year old rushed up to him like a couple of cowboys and killed him within two seconds. He was presenting a threat to absolutely nobody when they arrived. The Cleveland police department as a whole was castigated in a doj report today over just this sort of excessive force and needlessly putting themselves in situations where deadly force is the only choice they have. The cop who killed this child immediately after exiting his car was found to be incompetent by his previous department. It's not hard to see why some people have such distrust of the police. What does a cop have to do for another cop to think they did something wrong? We have someone killed for "resisting arrest" by pulling his hand away and a twelve year old boy shot dead in two seconds by a couple of incompetent clowns and they're still getting excuses. I'm not defending the choking thing at all. I'm just saying that pulling away is technically resisting. If some kind of charges were brought, I'd completely understand why. If he violated the department's general orders, he'll probably be fired (I think someone said he already is). And he'll almost certainly face a civil suit and pay. And the department more than likely won't indemnify him due to breaking department orders. And if someone has a realistic gun in hand, or reaches for a realistic-looking gun, the cop is entirely justified in pulling the trigger. Two separate and distinct situations, and a different view on both.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 4, 2014 -> 04:26 PM) And this is why you don't trade Chris Sale for can't miss prospects. I noticed it. Nice.

QUOTE (Jake @ Dec 4, 2014 -> 02:10 PM) The "black folks should join the police force" argument has a serious problem. Many of the people who are so upset with the police force, believe it or not, have no faith in the police or probably the criminal justice system. "Reform from within" only makes sense when the system you're in works. I don't want to make a false equivalency, but any revolution makes sense to understand this thought process. Americans went to war with the British because they didn't feel that legal recourse had any chance of working. Confederates seceded because they felt the USA wouldn't let them keep their way of life. There are countless examples. The sentiment behind things like the Gawker article is that for as long as American police have existed, they have not treated black people fairly. Certainly, there are countless times each day in which well-meaning police act fairly towards everyone. Those incidences obviously outnumber the one we're talking about in this thread. In many ways, the plight of black people has improved in the recent past. One of the best things to happen is that it is almost always socially undesirable to be racist. But we're left with implicit biases - all of us are - that we struggle to recognize and even if we do, most of us try to convince ourselves that they aren't there. Most people would agree that the officers involved in these cases are probably not virulent racists who were thinking, "this guy is black, let's get him!" The allegation is that, unconsciously, their judgment of the people in question was influenced by their race. Michael Brown seemed more dangerous than he was because he was black. Tamir Rice's blackness made it more plausible that he was waving a real gun around. What is frustrating is the refusal by anyone to face their shortcomings. When we can't even get an indictment in these cases, many people see this as the police establishment saying, "no, this cannot possibly be fueled by a racial bias, even an unintentional one." If you walked up to a young man or woman at work and asked them to make you some copies and came to find out that, oops, this person is your superior...what would you do? Always assume that other young people are your inferiors or realize that you might not be able to make these judgments based on heuristics like how old somebody looks? That's all people are asking for here ... except there has been a far longer time to learn. You know that bias your profession always seems to have? Maybe be a little more careful, or at least act like you've accepted the possibility that it's an ongoing problem. At the very least, don't expect the group suffering at the hands of these biases to join the club as if that will fix things. It's a structural problem. We actually have research showing that, while less frequently/intense, even black folks have learned some biases against other black people. These things are pervasive. I like to think I'm a pretty thoughtful person, but I found myself referring to a female doctor as a nurse the other day. Why? Not because I'm evil, I don't think, but because I've been conditioned to assume that to be the case. We aren't perfect and never will be, but we'll only get better if we actively work towards fixing the problems rather than constantly confusing the victims and the perpetrators for one another. While I agree with almost everything you said here, I have to ask about the bold part. Are you suggesting charges need to be filed against the officers who shot the 12-year-old? I'd have to disagree on that. QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 4, 2014 -> 03:01 PM) lol resisting arrest. I haven't watched the video, but if he pulls away, he's resisting.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 11:38 AM) Many of these things are made worse by poverty and then quickly compound, as the article points out. Getting pulled over because you can't afford to fix a broken tail light or a cracked windshield but you still need the car to drive to work is a "poverty violation." There's also the documented statistical difference in how frequently black people are pulled over for minor infractions versus white people. This also applies to being too poor to be in an area regardless of color, as that happened to my wife and I once. Those minor equipment violations, while they may lead to being pulled over, are WAY less likely to result in tickets (in Chicago, at least).

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Nov 26, 2014 -> 11:12 AM) If you get pulled over and your credentials get run and they come up suspended, a warrant, or not valid for any reason it gets dealt with the same way no matter what color you are. Its not like they said, well Jimmy we see a warrant for your arrest and you have a suspended license but I see you went to Sandburg, live in Orland, and are white so have a nice day and don't do it again. The same with insurance. You need valid insurance to drive a car. If you don't have a valid license, have a warrant or no insurance then don't drive a car. That's not a poverty violation. Driving is a privilege not a right. The same with expired plates and registration. A while back, I mentioned that personal cameras on police will only result in more arrests and tickets. This is what I'm talking about. You can pull over the first 10 cars you see with violations, and likely more than half will have no insurance or a suspended or revoked license. If the cop has a camera on him recording every step of that, well now a ticket probably has to be written to cover his own ass.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 10:21 AM) These 2 are standing by a car about a football field's length away from the shooting, away from a crowd, and they're yelling "he had his f***ing hands up" and putting their hands up. It's on tape as their original reaction to the shooting. At the very least, people who say things about how the witnesses were coached in a crowd to say he had his hands up or that it was just a creation of the media are completely inconsistent with that bit of tape. It doesn't prove he had his hands up, but it proves to me that's what some people said the instant after it happened. There's a reason why this case caught attention. That's quite a distance away. And as someone else pointed out, simply having his hands up doesn't constitute surrendering if he continues towards the officer.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 09:54 AM) So, it's worth pointing out again that in realtime, right after the shooting, there is video of witnesses (not witness testimony later which I don't like relying on for either side, realtime video) of people running towards the officer yelling "He had his f***ing hands up". That was people's first reaction after seeing it happen. I can't prove this to you in any way, but it is a regular occurrence where "witnesses" give false information at crime scenes. You can have a person shot dead in the street by another civilian, and some will feed you incorrect descriptions to help a criminal they don't even know escape. So, forgive me if I don't believe the people in the video you're describing.

I'm absolutely fine with police wearing cameras. But be careful what you wish for. Those cameras will lead to more arrests and more tickets issued, not less.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 04:56 AM) I'm blown away by a lot of the responses on here. The entire thing was orchestrated so that what has happened would happen. They damn near wanted riots - you have to figure - for the terrible way in which this whole thing was planned out. Of course they should've announced the decision in daylight hours. Of course they shouldn't have made all the big announcements about mobilizing the Nat'l Guard. The militarization of the police is what is being fought in the first place, so lets talk big and scary about how we're militarizing the situation, right!? Let's just further fan the flames. That makes sense. I'm sorry. Should people be rioting and looting? No, of course not. But do I understand the pain, fear, hatred, anger and hopelessness people feel in light of the mockery of justice they were given? Absolutely. I'm also not going to ignore that the people burning buildings are probably just burning buildings. There's truth to that. They don't care one way or another, it's just an opportunity to create free mayhem. I get that. And that's f***ed up. But in my mind, then the DA and the system shouldn't have rigged the outcome in the f***ing first place. Mockery of justice? Rigged the system? Lol. I didn't get what I wanted, so there must've been a conspiracy!

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 25, 2014 -> 12:57 AM) If they announced it at 9 a.m., Tuesday, nothing would have happened at 9 a.m. The Army would have had all day to prepare for nightfall. A whole day would have passed. This is just f***ing ridiculous setting the city on fire. The announcement and presence of all the media at nighttime was setting it up on a tee, just daring the people of Ferguson to, on cue, pillage the town. Very very sad. I don't know why I bother with you, greg. Clearly you do not read anything you respond to. If they announced it at 9 a.m. on Tuesday morning, the rioting would begin at nightfall on that very same day. The national guard already had days to prepare. Nothing would be different. But this way, innocent people had plenty of time to get to their homes.

I assure you that if they waited until morning to make the announcement, the riots and looting would begin when nighttime rolls around. They announced it at night so that the innocent people who work or go to school would have ample time to get home safely before it began.

Greg, the real issue is that most departments offer bonuses to any cop that gets into a shooting. The bonuses grow if the person is paralyzed or killed. And some even have kickers that depend on the age of the person shot, often increasing on either end of the age spectrum.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Nov 17, 2014 -> 11:03 AM) The first 120 minutes of Interstellar were the best movie I've ever seen. Then it got weird. B But I want to see it again. Man, you are full of hyperbole when it comes to movies and TV. At no point during Interstellar did it ever cross my mind as one of the best in any way, let alone best movie I've ever seen.

I dunno, I'd lean towards 3.8422333 for Lucy.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 27, 2014 -> 08:54 AM) I think it wrapped everything up nicely, so it was satisfying as much as it could be. I still think it was a mistake to end it so quickly and with a shortened season. We could have gotten at least two more seasons with Capone and Luciano. Although I guess I can understand Winters' concern that Nucky didn't have much story left. IMO they could have made him more of a secondary character and the show could have continued with him as the "main" guy but not leading in screen time. Focus on Chicago and New York with the occasional check-in on Nucky trying to become more legitimate while his rivals were doing everything but that. I do like the twist that Tommy didn't kill in revenge for his father, but in revenge for his grandmother. I guess that wasn't really a twist so much as me not reading that situation properly, but still, I liked it. It made sense. Also for those interested, Sepinwall did an interview with Winter about some lingering storylines/issues: http://www.hitfix.com/whats-alan-watching/...e-series-finale Definitely should have been a full season. But they way they ended it, it just seemed all too convenient. Like they tried to be too tidy with the Darmody kid. It felt forced, to me.

Loved the show, but that finale was weak.