Posted on 12/17/2014 12:32:00 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
He is very mistaken. Black lives are devalued when “good” black people support “bad” black people who have harmed others of any kind.
A mother of any kind can be expected to still care when her bad child, seeking to harm others, is himself harmed. But for others to embrace him, a bad person, solely because they share his color, condemns all people of that shared color to stereotype, that they put race above honesty and character.
Other people cannot be blamed for stereotypes in such circumstances. “White privilege” is such a stereotype, but it is caused by the opposite problem. The perception by black people that the stereotype of bad behavior applied to them *does not* apply to white people.
They think this is unfair. But it isn’t. White people seldom have any belief in “racial solidarity”. They are first to condemn a white person who tries to harm others and is arrested or harmed himself. This is the real meaning of “white privilege”. White people are privileged precisely because they do not tolerate bad behavior by other white people.
Look at the destruction leveled on the black community because they do not discourage each other from trying to harm others. Not encouraging honesty and character gets black people killed. They kill each other. Non-black people kill black people who try to harm them. And yes, policemen, of all colors, will kill black people who attack them or try to harm or kill others.
Charity begins at home, but so does responsibility, honesty and character. And condemning those who don’t behave themselves.
Thugs are not going to surprise anyone when they engage in thuggish behavior.
I tried to find stats on how many times suspects (or others) go for officers' guns and I couldn't find one. But I did find this article (from AP from 2005) which says the FBI doesn't keep that stat. Not every office who looses his weapon is shot).
Cases of Officers Killed by Their Own Guns Likely Will Not Change R.I. Policies (May 2, 2005 The Associated Press)
Over a recent six-week period, a handful of officers from Rhode Island to Illinois had their guns taken from them after they allegedly were overpowered by suspects or inmates. In each case, the ending was deadly.The incidents have shaken departments and raised questions about safety procedures. But some law enforcement experts say not much will change _ and shouldn't. Despite the latest tragedies, they say there's no evidence that basic procedure is failing officers...
There are no national statistics on how many times officers' guns are taken away. But the FBI says that of the 616 law enforcement officers killed on duty by criminals from 1994 through 2003, 52 were killed with their own weapon, amounting to 8 percent...
..Defendant Brian Nichols wasn't restrained, partly because of legal rulings against letting a jury see a defendant in shackles.
White said some courts have defendants wear stun belts, which can produce an incapacitating jolt of electricity and can be activated remotely. But a defendant in Texas last year put a sandwich between his belt's batteries and electrodes, interrupting the current, and was able to attack a witness during his trial...
The black "community" did the same thing when they cheered/supported OJ getting one over on "the law" after murdering two people. It did nothing to bring justice to anyone who may have been unjustly convicted of a crime in some other court case.
Actually, the first shots were fired INSIDE the patrol car, when Brown hit Wilson multiple times & attempted to take Wilson's gun. It fired twice during the struggle.
Clearly, this was a life or death struggle initiated solely by Brown. Brown turned a minor confrontation with police into a deadly assault.
As for the street shooting, Wilson repeatedly told Brown to stop as Brown charged him with his head down like a football player. Multiple witnesses attest to this. Brown freely chose to continue his attack.
Wilson had every reason to believe that after one deadly attack by Brown only seconds before, the second attack would be just as deadly. He had legal and moral right to shoot Brown in self defense just as any person would, & under the rapid & extreme circumstances, Wilson had no obligation to temper his use of force.
Any soldier who has been in combat will tell you he was afraid, or he is lying or crazy. There is no doubt Wilson had right to fear for his life from a lunatic who apparently attacked him twice for merely telling him to get out of the road. No one can be expected to use the minimal amount of force under such circumstances. It would be foolish & potentially deadly to try to put away his gun & try to use the taser. It might not work. You might fumble with it & not have a chance to fire before Brown tackles you.
I don't think the victim of violence has any responsibility for the safety of the attacker. A victim has every right to use any & all force necessary to stop the attacker, for the victim has no idea of the intentions, capabilities, or weapons the attacker has. The attacker forfeits his human rights the moment he attacks - he is reduced to the status of rabid dog.
Well gee, truth in propaganda for once.
It is not about a real wrong it is about destroying whites who are doing the lion share of paying taxes and living as productive citizens. Can not imagine why the democrats are starting to have a huge white problem.
“Whatever happened to “ban bullying”?”
Thanks for asking. Same thing I’ve been wondering. Is bullying so very “last year?” The Crump/Sharpton crowd doesn’t know how to find any sympathetic characters? They produce one thug after another, i.e., Trayvon, Brown, Garner.
It’s easy to sit here and second guess officer Wilson’s actions that day but people need to look at it from his perspective. Being in a life or death struggle with a big powerful person is stressful enough but it goes to another level when the gun is added to the struggle. He was full of adrenaline after that initial fight in the car. In his mind there was no alternative but to shoot Brown when he turned and charged him. He had every reason to think his life was in serious danger from a charging Mike Brown.
” In his mind there was no alternative but to shoot Brown when he turned and charged him.”
Forget about “in his mind.” Objectively, his life was in serious danger. If he hadn’t killed the thug, he’d probably have been carried by six instead of judged by 12.
Still gonna opt for that 'stun gun' ?
A good thug is a dead thug.
Not a bad point.
However, I’m sure you can see the obvious difference between Indy and Wilson.
Brown didn’t have a 3’ long scimitar.
Also Wilson had or certainly could have had, a nightstick or something similar.
I’m not saying Wilson made the wrong decision, only that it simply isn’t true that “He had no choice.”
Just realized this article is a classic example of “begging the question.”
If a person is killed by another acting in justified defense of self or others, then the dead dude isn’t a “victim.”
A logical argument would be for the author to show why all or most black guys killed by cops are indeed victims. But she simply assumes they are and develops her “argument” on that foundation.
The problem with her developing a logical argument as to how many are true victims is that it would probably blow a major hold in her position by demonstrating that the considerable majority of dead guys were quite properly shot.
“12% of black guys shot by cops were bad shoots” just isn’t a very good position for her.
To pick a random number. I have no idea the real percentage, and neither does anybody else. To a considerable extent because it is well known cops will defend each other even at the cost of the truth. And that many “witnesses” will lie to make the cops look bad.
“White privilege, along with the critical race theory and post traumatic slave syndrome, are liberal false theories and ideologies designed to ignore the real reasons for failings in the inner city black community. Liberals and liberal academia cannot face, nor acknowledge, that the true reason for these failings lie in decades of Democrat liberal policies. They can’t acknowledge that government dependency, welfare, food stamps, and a host of other government programs that were supposed to help the black community, actually proved to have the opposite effect. They can’t acknowledge this because they were the architect of these policies.”
http://blog.chron.com/texassparkle/2014/05/the-myth-of-white-privilege/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.