Tulsa police officer who killed Terence Crutcher charged with manslaughter

[annabenedetti]

And the caveats to the facts begin...

Please don't waste your time posting to me, rocketman. Your close-mindedness to anything I have to say just makes it a waste of time for both of us.

 

[ClimateSanity]

Where did you get that statistic? Not the person stating it, but that person's statistical methodology and the population numbers behind it? Because without that backing, it's just a number to throw around which may or may not be accurate.

Check out this article by heather McDonald. Click the red underlined word data and follow the various links on that page. The Washington post is the one who gathered the data.

https://www.themarshallproject.org/2016/02/08/black-and-unarmed-behind-the-numbers#.m0X7BgfPd

 

[patrick jane]

A fairer analysis, at ProPublica, found that black males aged 15 to 19 were 21 times more likely to be killed by police than white males in that age group. And The Washington Post reports that unarmed black men were seven times more likely to be killed by police this year than unarmed white men.

​

That's because blacks aged 15 to 19 are 100 times more likely to have a gun than whites of the same age. Elementary

(It's not 100 times more likely, but it is much higher than white youths with a gun)

 

[rocketman]

Please don't waste your time posting to me, rocketman. Your close-mindedness to anything I have to say just makes it a waste of time for both of us.

Don't be so self absorbed, I posted a rebuttal for all to read, not for you personally, nor do I give a rats behind whether you like it, or want me to. It is a public forum, having people you don't care for posting in rebuttal to you is just something you will have to learn to deal with.

 

[annabenedetti]

Don't be so self absorbed, I posted a rebuttal for all to read

Hate to break it to you, but that wasn't a rebuttal. Not even close. :chuckle:

not for you personally, nor do I give a rats behind whether you like it, or want me to. It is a public forum, having people you don't care for posting in rebuttal to you is just something you will have to learn to deal with.

Nor did I saying anything about whether I "like" it. I said it was a waste of your time and mine, so on ignore you go. Rant away now to your heart's content.

 

[Crucible]

This is how racism remains pervasive, and how it's passed down through generations.

That is how white folk keep from being killed by black folk.

It's sad that you replace reality with the utter nonsense you just stated lain:

 

[annabenedetti]

Check out this article by heather McDonald. Click the red underlined word data and follow the various links on that page. The Washington post is the one who gathered the data.

https://www.themarshallproject.org/2016/02/08/black-and-unarmed-behind-the-numbers#.m0X7BgfPd

Okay thanks, I'll look it up later when I have the time.

 

[rocketman]

Hate to break it to you, but that wasn't a rebuttal. Not even close. :chuckle:

My opposition got your attention didn't it... Rebutted successfully! :thumb:

Nor did I saying anything about whether I "like" it. I said it was a waste of your time and mine, so on ignore you go. Rant away now to your heart's content.

That would assume I was looking for your commentary or that I had an expectation of dialogue with you. Hate to break it to ya but, I could care less whether you want to dialogue with me or not, I pretty much ignore you in plain sight, I don't need the forum ignore option as a crutch.

 

[Crucible]

 

[annabenedetti]

Where did you get that idea? Cops are 15 times more likely to be shot by a black than a black is to be shot by a cop.

I read the article and followed the links that seemed pertinent, and I still couldn't find the above statistic.

 

[ClimateSanity]

I read the article and followed the links that seemed pertinent, and I still couldn't find the above statistic.

See point #5 in the following article taken from the same author.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/7264/5-statistics-you-need-know-about-cops-killing-aaron-bandler

 

[annabenedetti]

See point #5 in the following article taken from the same author.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/7264/5-statistics-you-need-know-about-cops-killing-aaron-bandler

Thanks. I found it. The above linked to her speech at Hillsdale College, where she says:

Over the last decade, an officer’s chance of getting killed by a black has been 18.5 times higher than the chance of an unarmed black getting killed by a cop.

Unfortunately, there are no footnotes to any of her numbers (and she puts out a lot of numbers), and I was looking for support for her statistics.

On a side note, after reading through it, I don't know that she ultimately provides support for her two hypotheses:

"I propose two counter hypotheses: first,that there is no government agency more dedicated to the idea that black lives matter than the police; and second, that we have been talking obsessively about alleged police racism over the last 20 years in order to avoid talking about a far larger problem—black-on-black crime."

I don't see that she supported her first overstatement, and the second is a straw man. Talking about police racism doesn't necessarily mean that "we" don't acknowledge there's black-on-black crime, just as there's white-on-white crime. In fact, statistics I read today in the doj pdf I posted said exactly that. Here's the quote from the pdf:

Although slightly less true now than before, most murders are intraracial
From 1976 to 2005 --
86% of white victims were killed by whites
94% of black victims were killed by blacks

I'll give her credit though, for acknowledging the problem:

"Given the history of racism in this country and the complicity of the police in that history, police shootings of black men are particularly and understandably fraught. That history informs how many people view the police."

 

[ClimateSanity]

BLM merely acknowledges black on black crime but raises hell over cop on black shootings when it pales in comparison.

 

[kmoney]

Maybe because the population of this country is still overwhelmingly white.

Some readers of our editorial “The Truth of ‘Black Lives Matter’” took exception to the idea that black Americans are “disproportionately killed in encounters with the police.” One commenter pointed us to an article in The Washington Times describing an analysis by Peter Moskos, assistant professor at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice at the City University of New York. The analysis purports to show that white people are more likely than black people to be killed by the police.

It’s hard to get real data on this. The statistics Mr. Moskos uses are deeply flawed. He drew his conclusions from a website called killedbypolice.net, which tracks news reports of fatal shootings by police. Some 25 percent of the entries have no race listed.

In any case, the numbers are misleading. “Based on that data, Mr. Moskos reported that roughly 49 percent of those killed by officers from May 2013 to April 2015 were white, while 30 percent were black,” the Washington Times article said. “He also found that 19 percent were Hispanic.”

That may be true, but whites make up 63 percent of the population of this country. Blacks are just 12 percent.

When Mr. Moskos adjusted his data to account for that, he found that black men were 3.5 times more likely to be killed by cops than white men. That’s inconvenient.

So Mr. Moskos did what other deniers of reality on this issue do: He larded into the results data on the homicide rate among African Americans, and then proclaimed that if you take that data into account, whites are at higher risk than blacks.

A fairer analysis, at ProPublica, found that black males aged 15 to 19 were 21 times more likely to be killed by police than white males in that age group. And The Washington Post reports that unarmed black men were seven times more likely to be killed by police this year than unarmed white men.

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/09/04/the-real-story-of-race-and-police-killings/​

I don't how this fits into the stats you're talking about here but I've seen some reports that the difference isn't how cops interact with blacks, the difference is that cops are more likely to interact with blacks to begin with.

 

[ok doser]

.... the difference is that cops are more likely to interact with blacks to begin with.

well, if you wanna look for criminals, you go where the crime occurs :idunno:

 

[ClimateSanity]

well, if you wanna look for criminals, you go where the crime occurs :idunno:

It's a catch 22. If you don't want to be accused of targeting blacks, you stay away from their neighborhoods or do minimal work there and stay hands off. The result is an escalation of Robberies and black on black crime.

But if you get asked to be proactive, you get accused of profiling and wanting to kill blacks. If you back off from your God given survival instincts,. You get shot.

 

[kiwimacahau]

It's a catch 22. If you don't want to be accused of targeting blacks, you stay away from their neighborhoods or do minimal work there and stay hands off. The result is an escalation of Robberies and black on black crime.

But if you get asked to be proactive, you get accused of profiling and wanting to kill blacks. If you back off from your God given survival instincts,. You get shot.

How did this man threaten anyone?

Sent from my SM-A500Y using Tapatalk

 

[ok doser]

How did this man threaten anyone?

Sent from my SM-A500Y using Tapatalk

at 1:52 you can see his hands go down - looks to me like he's reaching for the door handle :idunno:

so, to your question: how did he threaten anyone?


1. he decided to take illegal drugs (PCP)
2. he decided to go for a drive while tanked on PCP
3. while driving tanked on PCP, he decided to park his car in the middle of the road and walk around in a daze
4. when approached by the police, he decided to mumble incoherently and non-responsively, act in a way that was possibly threatening (putting his hands in his pockets, not responding to officer's commands, walking away with his hands in the air
5. when he reached the car, he made the fatal decision to ignore the police officer, put his hands down and reach toward the car - whether that was an open window or the door handle, doesn't matter - it represented a potential threat


but let's never forget where this started

1. he decided to take illegal drugs (PCP)


imo, drug users and drug sellers should be executed - swiftly, publicly and harshly

it's just too bad the guy who sold him the PCP wasn't standing next to him so the officer could have shot him too

 

[ok doser]

something i hadn't noticed before:

in this one, at 0:45, you can see something at his feet, immediately after he's shot, presumably it was in his hands:

 

[ok doser]

Two 911 calls brought officers to the scene... The first came from a woman who said an abandoned vehicle was blocking the street and a man was running away, warning that it was going to blow up. http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/20/us/oklahoma-tulsa-police-shooting/

cars don't usually blow up

except in the movies

and in terrorist attacks


if i'm a cop, i'm gonna be wondering if this guy's got a bomb on board