Louisiana policemen arrested for killing six year old, boy's father critical

Ravioli

Crazy Cat Lady
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 4, 2015
Messages
2,699
Reaction score
423
Location
Germany, native Israeli
Website
annagiladi.wixsite.com
But doesn't Black Lives Matter lose part of its credibility if it demands awareness from white people about police brutality against black people, but doesn't show the same awareness and outrage when it hits whites?
I realize Black Lives Matter is not exclusive as in, "Only Black Lives Matter" or "Black Lives Matter More". And I realize police brutality tends to hit blacks harder than whites due to deeply rooted and widely accepted/tolerated racism. I realize that makes the problem more difficult and more dangerous for black people. However, a dead child = a dead child, black or white, the white kid isn't less dead or less of a loss, so if black people want white people to speak up against police killing black children, they should put their money where their mouth is when they say the movement doesn't mean that ONLY black lives matter.

This is like Zionists screaming that the world doesn't sufficiently condemn and mourn Jewish victims of Palestinian terror, but then those same people take a huge dump on Palestinian victims of Zionist opression. No. It can't work like that. It mustn't. And yes, I know Zionists in Israel, unlike blacks in america, are in power and hence carry greater responsibility. But as I said, dead kid = dead kid, so if you want to champion a movement that condemns senseless violence and murder, you can't go and ignore a senseless murder at your doorstep just because the victim isn't the color you represent.
 

Amadan

Banned
Joined
Apr 27, 2010
Messages
8,649
Reaction score
1,623
But doesn't Black Lives Matter lose part of its credibility if it demands awareness from white people about police brutality against black people, but doesn't show the same awareness and outrage when it hits whites?

If BLM loses credibility, it's not because it focuses on its specific mission and not on related ones.

I have criticisms of BLM, but "An organization focused on black lives does not spend the same energy criticizing things that affect white people" isn't one of them.

I realize Black Lives Matter is not exclusive as in, "Only Black Lives Matter" or "Black Lives Matter More". And I realize police brutality tends to hit blacks harder than whites due to deeply rooted and widely accepted/tolerated racism. I realize that makes the problem more difficult and more dangerous for black people. However, a dead child = a dead child, black or white, the white kid isn't less dead or less of a loss, so if black people want white people to speak up against police killing black children, they should put their money where their mouth is when they say the movement doesn't mean that ONLY black lives matter.

Do you really want to do the #alllivesmatter thing?
 

Ravioli

Crazy Cat Lady
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 4, 2015
Messages
2,699
Reaction score
423
Location
Germany, native Israeli
Website
annagiladi.wixsite.com
If BLM loses credibility, it's not because it focuses on its specific mission and not on related ones.

I have criticisms of BLM, but "An organization focused on black lives does not spend the same energy criticizing things that affect white people" isn't one of them.



Do you really want to do the #alllivesmatter thing?
No, but blatantly disregarding a case this exceptionally brutal can't possibly be in anyone's interest, including BLM. I understand the difference between BLM and ALM, but why should whites preoccupy themselves with black lives if vice-versa there's silence?
 
Last edited:

veinglory

volitare nequeo
Self-Ban
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
28,750
Reaction score
2,933
Location
right here
Website
www.veinglory.com
But doesn't Black Lives Matter lose part of its credibility if it demands awareness from white people about police brutality against black people, but doesn't show the same awareness and outrage when it hits whites?

I would say quite the opposite. BLM is about drawing attention to black victims and cases where unacknowledged racial bias may have contributed. It is not about reporting all killings by police, all murders, racial bias in other countries, expressing a general outrage that bad things happen, being a model of race-neutral reporting etc etc etc.

Hundreds of senseless murders occur every single day, BLM is not about being permanently horrified by this, it is about getting racial bias addressed by police forces by investigation, prosecution, and prevention training.

BLM has enough to do without making them the entity that has to ensure justice in cases outside their remit. They are just people like us. If we want to pressure for a full investigation of this case, we should do that. Not just abdicate the job to some other people who had their own reason for lobbying on some other cases.

I think suggesting that they need to be race-neutral is lazy and inappropriate, they are lobbying for a race-specific cause because the whole rest fo the world is not race-neutral. So we are basically demanding they do what the police forces do not do, and thus be part of perpetuating racism because no one is allowed to focus on minorities ever. Not even the minority them-selves. But everyone is allowed to discriminate against then because that is "normal".
 
Last edited:

Deepthought

Think hard, often
Banned
Flounced
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
474
Reaction score
62
Location
N/A
Well, although race is a factor in these police brutality news stories, the main problem is one of accountability. Going back and looking at the crimes committed in warfare against civilians, it is often because of little accountability. It is true that the law generally lets the police officers off relatively lightly when they are actually caught. A system of accountability must be instated; that, I think, is the crux of the problem.
 

rugcat

Lost in the Fog
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
16,339
Reaction score
4,110
Location
East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
Website
www.jlevitt.com
No, but blatantly disregarding a case this exceptionally brutal can't possibly be in anyone's interest, including BLM. I understand the difference between BLM and ALM, but why should whites preoccupy themselves with black lives if vice-versa there's silence?
Black lives matter was formed to bring attention to systematic oppression, unjust treatment, and the killing of black citizens by police officers. It's not so much about individual cases as it is an entire mindset that singles out African-Americans in a way that whites are not.

I have issues with them, to put it mildly, but there's no reason they should involve themselves in a specific case that at present appears to be a personal vendetta involving some really bad cops as opposed to an expression of an entire system.

And perhaps the reason this thread got less replies is that there is no question about what happened.

In Ferguson, there were and still are deep divisions over the actual facts of the matter. Opposing beliefs about whether Michael Brown was attempting to kill the officer, who defended himself, or whether the officer executed Michael Brown for racially motivated reasons has become a gulf that will probably never be bridged.

Plus, in this case, the officers were immediately arrested and charged with murder. There's apparently video which shows the incident. There's not a lot to say about it at present. Who's going to disagree with that?
 

robjvargas

Rob J. Vargas
Banned
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
6,543
Reaction score
511
BLM has no relevance here. They shouldn't be involved. Any more than in the case of the man in Albequerque, NM, who was shot by several officers after he'd put his weapon down.

As others have already stated, their mission is about the role of racial bias in these incidents. From what I can tell (and that's not much from reports so far), there's no racial bias involved here.
 

DancingMaenid

New kid...seven years ago!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
5,058
Reaction score
460
Location
United States
I think it's probably best for BLM activists to work in solidarity with others than to take up the cause of white victims of police brutality directly.

Though I don't think BLM should be apathetic, I think there are a lot of problems with expecting minority groups to start championing members of the majority. A big part of why groups like BLM exist in the first place is because support for minority groups is lacking in our broader society. I think the expectation that black activists should spend energy protesting on behalf of white people is a little like having a friend who makes more than you, never offers to treat when you go out, but then gets insulted when you get a small bonus at work and don't offer to treat them to dinner with it.

Also, I think most people who see this as hurting BLM's credibility are people who are primarily interested in finding fault with BLM. It's like when men's rights activists criticize feminists for not doing enough for men. You'll notice these are never guys who are doing anything, themselves, to help male abuse victims or challenge harmful attitudes that affect men. But they criticize women for not doing enough.

I suspect many BLM activists would be eager to work with people who fight against police brutality in general. In fact, I've seen this happen in my own city. There's definitely shared support between people who are primarily involved with Black Lives Matter and people who fight against police brutality and the prison industrial complex as a whole. The latter group recognizes, though, that the fact that white people get hurt too doesn't mitigate that fact that abuse by police often disprortionately affects people of color, especially black people.
 

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
4,103
Location
CBUS
But doesn't Black Lives Matter lose part of its credibility if it demands awareness from white people about police brutality against black people, but doesn't show the same awareness and outrage when it hits whites?

No. It's called "BlackLivesMatter." It's right there in the name, get it? Not "BlackLivesMatter---and Little White Kids in Cars Seats Too." I don't agree it demands awareness from White people. It's not about heightening awareness among Black people. It's about heightening awareness among White people.

While BLM can call to attention it can't demand and make anyone pay attention.

BLM is not a declaration that a Black life matters more than anybody else. It's a declaration Black life doesn't matter less which is where the problem has always been. Focused concern for the lives of Black people does not mean indifference to everybody else.

Ravioli said:
I realize Black Lives Matter is not exclusive as in, "Only Black Lives Matter" or "Black Lives Matter More". And I realize police brutality tends to hit blacks harder than whites due to deeply rooted and widely accepted/tolerated racism. I realize that makes the problem more difficult and more dangerous for black people. However, a dead child = a dead child, black or white, the white kid isn't less dead or less of a loss, so if black people want white people to speak up against police killing black children, they should put their money where their mouth is when they say the movement doesn't mean that ONLY black lives matter.

They do. Hello? Notice my posts here? Hey, I'm Black! Will that do, or should I circulate a memo to the 35 million other Black Americans to chime in too?

Ravioli said:
This is like Zionists screaming that the world doesn't sufficiently condemn and mourn Jewish victims of Palestinian terror, but then those same people take a huge dump on Palestinian victims of Zionist opression. No. It can't work like that. It mustn't. And yes, I know Zionists in Israel, unlike blacks in america, are in power and hence carry greater responsibility. But as I said, dead kid = dead kid, so if you want to champion a movement that condemns senseless violence and murder, you can't go and ignore a senseless murder at your doorstep just because the victim isn't the color you represent.

Who's ignoring it? Blacks make up 13 percent of the U.S. population while Whites make up 62 percent, but Blacks are 21 percent more likely to be shot by the police than Whites. If anyone is ignoring this shooting it's White folks who need to get riled up.

Where were The Outrage Brigade when Zachary Hammond got smoked by a cop? Nowhere, that's where, but I guess it must be the fault BLM because they weren't massing in the streets. Is it your contention whenever anyone is killed by the cops it's on BLM to make a stink about it?

The two cops who killed 6-year-old Jeremy Mardis were arrested and charged with murder within 72 hrs. The two cops who killed 12-year-old Tamir Rice, the previously youngest victim of police shooting, have not been arrested and haven't been charged at all nearly a year after his death.

It's White Americans who need to acknowledge how horrible it is when a child is slain in this manner and that unchecked police violence can be a threat to them too. Blacks already know all about it.

If the #AllLivesMatter crowd were to acknowledge police violence against whites, it would call into question all the reactionary arguments that African Americans are to blame for their own deaths. It would undermine the ubiquitous efforts to pathologize and criminalize black victims of police violence in order to explain away each and every case of racial injustice: that they were no angels, that they should not have run, that they should not have been drunk. Racism precludes these arguments from working with Hammond and other white victims.

If white America were to acknowledge police violence against whites, it would put white privilege under a microscope, highlighting the exceptionality of incidents involving whites while shining a glaring spotlight on the disproportionality of police killings of African Americans and Native Americans.



If white America were to look at Hammond alongside Mike Brown, Walter Scott, Sam Dubose and Sandra Bland, it would call into question the very fabric of white supremacy, demanding that we ask who, indeed, threatens our security and our freedom.



Throughout history, the vision of policing has been that America needs a militarized and massive police apparatus to control the criminal black body and to always protect and serve white America. The killing of Hammond undermines the narrative that tells white America that more police puts them out of harm’s way from the thugs, the terrorists and the undocumented immigrants.



False narratives about no one caring about white lives ignore reality. It is essential for white America to see that denying the dangers of police violence is not making any of us safer. Only when we all begin to recognize the truth and see the humanity of every victim of police violence will we be on a path to justice.

Instead of wagging a reproachful finger in at Black people for not showing sufficient concern, that energy would be better directed at White people who get hot and bothered about Christmas coffee cups than murdered kids.
 
Last edited:

veinglory

volitare nequeo
Self-Ban
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
28,750
Reaction score
2,933
Location
right here
Website
www.veinglory.com
I think the "main factor" is somewhat different for different people but accountability in general is pretty broad. The broader the target that less impact any social movement has on it. I think accountability for police who kill people unnecessarily due to conscious or unconscious racial bias is far more do-able and like what it says on the box.
 

DancingMaenid

New kid...seven years ago!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
5,058
Reaction score
460
Location
United States
BLM is not a declaration that a Black life matters more than anybody else. It's a declaration Black life doesn't matter less which is where the problem has always been. Focused concern for the lives of Black people does not mean indifference to everybody else.

This is an important distinction.

I'm certainly upset about what happened in this case. I definitely think it deserves outrage. But I think everyone recognizes that it's terrible for a couple rogue cops to shoot a young white kid.

But too often when black people, even kids/teens, are hurt, I think people are quicker to make excuses for why the cop might have acted as they did and why the victim might have seemed like more of a threat than they were, or may have been to blame for it. I think that's a big part of why Black Lives Matter exists. People want to change the perception that a black kid is understandably more suspicious than a white one.
 

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
4,103
Location
CBUS
More about the super shady background of the two cops and their web of lies.

Any time police shoot and kill a 6-year-old, there are bound to be tough questions. And officers in Louisiana had answers about the death of Jeremy Mardis on November 3.


They said that Mardis’s death was a tragic accident that occurred when police tried to serve a warrant on the boy’s father, Chris Few. They said Few had resisted that warrant. When he’d been cornered on a dead-end road after a chase, they said, he had tried to reverse and hit the officers. Then there was an exchange of gunshots, and Jeremy—buckled into the front seat—was tragically caught in the crossfire.


Yet almost none of that turned out to be true.

There appear to have been no outstanding warrants for Few. No gun was found in his truck. Officials said while two of the officers had claimed Few reversed his SUV and tried to ram them, that wasn’t actually true. When officials reviewed body-cam footage of the incident, they found Few actually had his arms in the air when the officers unloaded the barrage on the car. (Few survived the shooting that killed his son.)


Much of the attention given to Mardis’s death has been on the role of body cameras. Because the incident was caught on film, the officers’ accounts were debunked, and it’s clear from Edmonson’s comments that reviewing the footage had a strong effect on his own decision. There’s much that’s still unknown about how body cameras will effect policing and justice, and while this case is a single incident, the fact real footage can take the place of unreliable witness testimony is positive.


That’s an appropriate and important way to think about the story, but it’s not the only one. Another is about the honesty and trustworthiness of the police. Since the nation grants the police a near-monopoly on the use of deadly force, it’s important that officers be honest, reliable, and trustworthy. In the Mardis case, all signs so far suggest officers did not meet that standard.


Consider all the discrepancies in the case: the apparently nonexistent warrant, the story of Few resisting and trying to ram the marshals, the supposed threat to the officers, the suggestion that Few had fired a gun. The officers involved are alleged to have lied about the incident, and Edmonson also expressed concern about two of the officers’ refusal to speak to police. “It’s more concerning the longer it takes to talk to us,” he said. “All we want to know is what happened.” When The Guardian asked why they hadn’t been interviewed, Edmonson replied: “You’d have to ask them. We are trying to talk with them.” (It appears the shooting occurred amid a turf war between the city marshal and the police department, complicating matters.)


Both Stafford and Greenhouse had been subject to multiple prior complaints—what the Associated Press characterized as “a string of civil lawsuits.” Stafford was sued for two incidents in 2012, one in which he allegedly shocked a woman with a stun gun while she was handcuffed and another in which he was accused of breaking a girl’s arm while breaking up a fight on a school bus. In 2014, a jury awarded $50,000 to a man who said Stafford had arrested him as payback for filing a complaint against him. Stafford was indicted twice for rape in 2011. In one of those cases, he was charged with raping a 15-year-old in 2004. Both charges were dismissed, but it’s not clear why.


(emphasis added because how the hell was this scumbag allowed to keep his badge? :Wha:)

Stafford and Greenhouse were also defendants together in two separate cases. In one, a man said they used excessive force while arresting him in 2014. In the second, they were accused of refusing to take action while a third officer assaulted a teenager.


Meanwhile, reports have noted there appears to have been a conflict between Few and Greenhouse before the incident. Greenhouse was a former classmate of Few’s girlfriend, Megan Dixon. Dixon said Greenhouse had been sending her messages, and Few threatened Greenhouse. “I told Chris, and Chris confronted him about it and told him, ‘Next time you come to my house I’m going to hurt you,’” Dixon said.

There are good cops and there are okay cops and there are bad cops and then there's these cops. Nothing but straight-up gangsters with badges.
 

DancingMaenid

New kid...seven years ago!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
5,058
Reaction score
460
Location
United States
Maybe I've missed something, but is there any indication of what the cops' motivation was, given that the entire reason given for the pursuit appears to be made up? Was this a planned murder? The circumstances are extremely suspicious.
 

vsrenard

Watching the Whales
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 8, 2007
Messages
1,288
Reaction score
118
Location
SF Bay Area
Website
www.vanithasankaran.com
The discussion over BLM v ALM is similar to healthcare campaigns based on a specific disease. Just because you support breast cancer awareness does not mean you don't support epilepsy awareness. Yes, they compete is the same space for dollars and attention but most of us don't malign one group or another for focusing on a specific cause. For every good campaign out there, there's about a dozen more wanting to grab the headline by being outraged. It gets old.