What does it take?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

You just admitted there are no quotes supporting your claim...

You lost me there.

... Why do you think he mentioned those issues? Could it have anything to do with the protest those police were working being deeply connected to those same issues?..

The only way he should have mentioned those "issues" in relation to the protest was to say: "I apologize if you mistook my misguided leftist blabbering for true reasons to protest. Go home, obey the law and stop being disproportionally criminal and the police will stop disproportionally interacting with you."

Or he could have just repeated Martin Luther Kings' words (emphasis mine):

“Do you know that Negroes are 10 percent of the population of St. Louis and are responsible for 58% of its crimes? We’ve got to face that. And we’ve got to do something about our moral standards,” Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. told a congregation in 1961. “We know that there are many things wrong in the white world, but there are many things wrong in the black world, too. We can’t keep on blaming the white man. There are things we must do for ourselves.”

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Self-righteous.  It's amazing to see it on display...

Self-righteousness is a feeling or display of moral superiority derived from a sense that one's beliefs, actions, or affiliations are of greater virtue than those of the average person

Don't be so hard on yourself.

Cheers,
Bart

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Don't be so hard on yourself.

Ah, Bart finally displaying a sense of humor, even crossing to the dark side of caustic sarcasm! Welcome to the club, mate!

[MattBurt]

You lost me there.

I guess I must have overlooked the quotes that support your claims.

The only way he should have mentioned those "issues" in relation to the protest was to say: "I apologize if you mistook my misguided leftist blabbering for true reasons to protest. Go home, obey the law and stop being disproportionally criminal and the police will stop disproportionally interacting with you."

Or he could have just repeated Martin Luther Kings' words (emphasis mine):

I think what he actually said it pretty in line with what MLK said. What people claim he said or meant is way over the top. So I sort of agree with you there.

I thought this was pretty even-handed:

We know that the overwhelming majority of police officers do an incredibly hard and dangerous job fairly and professionally.  They are deserving of our respect and not our scorn.  (Applause.)  And when anyone, no matter how good their intentions may be, paints all police as biased or bigoted, we undermine those officers we depend on for our safety.  And as for those who use rhetoric suggesting harm to police, even if they don’t act on it themselves -- well, they not only make the jobs of police officers even more dangerous, but they do a disservice to the very cause of justice that they claim to promote.  (Applause.) 

We also know that centuries of racial discrimination -- of slavery, and subjugation, and Jim Crow -- they didn’t simply vanish with the end of lawful segregation.  They didn’t just stop when Dr. King made a speech, or the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act were signed.  Race relations have improved dramatically in my lifetime.  Those who deny it are dishonoring the struggles that helped us achieve that progress.  (Applause.)

But we know -- but, America, we know that bias remains.  We know it.  Whether you are black or white or Hispanic or Asian or Native American or of Middle Eastern descent, we have all seen this bigotry in our own lives at some point.  We’ve heard it at times in our own homes.  If we’re honest, perhaps we’ve heard prejudice in our own heads and felt it in our own hearts.  We know that.  And while some suffer far more under racism’s burden, some feel to a far greater extent discrimination’s sting.  Although most of us do our best to guard against it and teach our children better, none of us is entirely innocent.  No institution is entirely immune.  And that includes our police departments.  We know this.

[Photog-x]

Honestly, I have no idea why LuLa allows a open discussion forum here.  It's much more enjoyable just visiting for photography.  So sorry I decided to click on the Coffee Corner forum ;-) 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

We know that Obama is a gifted speaker. As I said, he provides a smorgasbord of opinions in the same speech. The first part was meant to placate the police as not to boo him on stage or turn their backs on him during the speech (as NY cops did when De Blasio delivered a similar speech). And then he goes proceeds with  his, and the left's, favorite talking points.

The third paragraph you quoted, Matt ("But we know...") is particularly vile and dangerous. There was no place for it in the same speech and for the same occasion. Claiming that "the bias remains," that there is "racism," "discrimination," "institutional racism," "police racism" is a dangerous, vile accusation, far from the truth. It, however, provides ammunition (pardon the ominous pun) for the blacks at al to perpetuate their sense of victimhood, and provides justification for their "fight" against the police and the "system."

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Honestly, I have no idea why LuLa allows a open discussion forum here...

Since America is meddling in everyone else's affairs around the world, this LuLa forum is the only place where non-Americans can return the favor and tell us how much we suck

[MattBurt]

We know that Obama is a gifted speaker. As I said, he provides a smorgasbord of opinions in the same speech. The first part was meant to placate the police as not to boo him on stage or turn their backs on him during the speech (as NY cops did when De Blasio delivered a similar speech). And then he goes proceeds with  his, and the left's, favorite talking points.

The third paragraph you quoted, Matt ("But we know...") is particularly vile and dangerous. There was no place for it in the same speech and for the same occasion. Claiming that "the bias remains," that there is "racism," "discrimination," "institutional racism," "police racism" is a dangerous, vile accusation, far from the truth. It, however, provides ammunition (pardon the ominous pun) for the blacks at al to perpetuate their sense of victimhood, and provides justification for their "fight" against the police and the "system."

Ok well I disagree. But now we do have something concrete to disagree on.

[Tim Lookingbill]

While not perfect, jury trial, as practiced in this country, is by far the best justice system on this planet, compared to alternatives. 12 people, sitting for days, listening to both sides of the story and seeing all available evidence, then locked into deliberation until all 12 have a unanimous decision, is hard to beat. You and I see only this or that angle of the story, and only a fraction of the evidence, while we all have our own idea of what justice is. So, when in doubt, I tend to trust the jury and the official justice.

What is the alternative? American Idol-type of mob phoning in their votes "guilty" or "not guilty"?

Clearly you didn't bother to find out facts on the evidence which is what I asked for. Why can't the public view the evidence or is the public just lazy and would rather just draw conclusions according to their political view of how the world works. To hell with facts, the world IS flat!

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Listen what a black police sherif, a supporter of the "racist" Trump, by the way, has to say about race, Obama lies (his words, not mine) and the police:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/18/us/wisconsin-sheriff-david-clarke-i-predicted-this/index.html

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Clearly you didn't bother to find out facts on the evidence which is what I asked for. Why can't the public view the evidence or is the public just lazy and would rather just draw conclusions according to their political view of how the world works. To hell with facts, the world IS flat!

So, instead of 12 people examining the evidence, you advocate a mob vote?

[Tim Lookingbill]

Listen what a black police sherif, a supporter of the "racist" Trump, by the way, has to say about race, Obama lies (his words, not mine) and the police:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/18/us/wisconsin-sheriff-david-clarke-i-predicted-this/index.html

Really good find, Slobodan. With the mention of the KKK in that video it's almost as if they were responding to what I was pointing out in my initial post on the frequency of public video captures of police exchanges with black individuals.

But that's just one Sheriff talking about something he doesn't have nor couldn't acquire all the facts on.

[Tim Lookingbill]

So, instead of 12 people examining the evidence, you advocate a mob vote?

No, I want to know the facts they based their decision on and make it public for everyone to read so the public at large in regards to how videos show one thing and the jury sees something else. The CNN Sheriff interview didn't mention any provable facts. It was just heated arguments.

If people keep seeing so many videos showing people getting killed by police and the law makes it difficult for the public at large to see the facts then it's a problem created by lack of communication.

Videos speak a million words to a million people where a jury speaks to only 12. Not an admirable dissemination of information for a world filled with information, in fact too much information for anyone to have the time to cull through.

[jfirneno]

Thanks, I read these references with great interest. My conclusion is that it's not a black and white [pun not intended] as your conclusion and there's a lot more balanced information in there.

Yes your conclusion is yours.  The answer as to whether more Americans agree with me or you will be answered in November.  I believe (and the polls seem to be agreeing) that the majority of Americans would rather elect a very flawed man like Donald Trump as president than allow the leftists to pander to violence and anarchy.  We'll know in less than four months.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Videos speak a million words to a million people where a jury speaks to only 12...

So you do advocate American Idol mob-style voting instead of a jury trial? Fair enough, but I'd personally stick with the time-proven concept.

As for the frequency of videos... it is entirely possible that the public display of those videos creates a false impression about the frequency of such events, due to an availability bias.

I remember a quiz question in a class on decision making: "Which cause of death is more frequent, car accidents or heart attack?" Typically, a dominant answer in a class of 80 people is "car accidents" (wrong). The reason being that we all read in the media about almost every car accident that happens in our neighborhood, but only about heart attacks when it concerns someone famous. In other words, we are biased by the information available to us.

Similar thing with those videos. Only those that portray something shocking become viral. When a man bites a dog is shocking, not the other way around. When a policeman shoots someone unarmed and black, that is shocking and goes viral. When a policeman shoots a white unarmed guy, nobody notices, and it doesn't go viral. When a policeman is shot on duty, it is just "normal," that is what we paid them for, and it doesn't go viral. When police risk their lives to save somebody, it doesn't become viral.

So, as a result, the dominance of that one type of viral videos creates the impression that that type of behavior is the norm. While in reality, it is just the fact of life that shit happens sometimes, and in the grand scheme of things, it isn't a proof of "systemic racism" but simply a proof that noise happens no matter what (to return to the photographic lingo).

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...If you guys don't solve your refugee problem you're going to see something that will astound you...

"A teenage Afghan refugee armed with an axe and knife injured four people on a train in southern Germany before being shot dead by police..."

[Tim Lookingbill]

So you do advocate American Idol mob-style voting instead of a jury trial? Fair enough, but I'd personally stick with the time-proven concept.

Good grief, Slobodan. Why do you argue with the logic of a teenager? That's what you sound like when you twist what I said into simplistic assumptions like that.

I said the information as to how the jury arrived at their decision should be made as public as the video and media presented the lack of facts. Videos don't tell the whole story, but that's how it's perceived by hot heads who want to use it to retaliate against the police.

[Justinr]

"A teenage Afghan refugee armed with an axe and knife injured four people on a train in southern Germany before being shot dead by police..."

I cannot think of a better reason as to why civilians should not be armed, can you imagine a bunch of trigger happy lads'n'lasses firing off shots at a madman in a crowded train? I dread to think what the death toll would be in such a case

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

.. you twist what I said into simplistic assumptions like that...

Ok, my bad, I misunderstood your position.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

I cannot think of a better reason as to why civilians should not be armed, can you imagine a bunch of trigger happy lads'n'lasses firing off shots at a madman in a crowded train? I dread to think what the death toll would be in such a case

Much lower than otherwise: