255
submitted 1 week ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] RunningInRVA@lemmy.world 48 points 1 week ago

I’ll get downvoted, but the body cam footage I saw showed Tyreek talking back to the officer, refusing instructions by rolling up his window, and telling them not to knock on his car window. It’s not exactly surprising he got yanked out of his car. Go ahead and argue it wouldn’t happen to a white person. I’m not getting into that discussion. Perhaps the cops should have attempted to deescalate, but Tyreek did himself 0 favors. Was not surprised that he found out after fucking around with the cop.

[-] callouscomic@lemm.ee 46 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

At this point, what you're saying is like telling a woman she shouldn't have been there or wearing that, and ignoring the real issue with power here.

Cops largely are pathetic power-abusing shitheads who escalate at every possible opportunity. You should not have to cower to every whim and demand of a cop if you are not doing anything dangerous. Cops have lost any credibility to suggest that we should have to give a shit about every stupid fucking tiny thing they have an issue with.

Based on your argument, you could say you'll only speak to a lawyer and you're giving the cops an out to beat the shit out of you for not complying. Cops don't understand non-violent approaches to solving any problem, and THAT is the problem to focus on.

Fuck the police.

[-] RunningInRVA@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago

Sure, fuck the police but I argue a white person or a black person is heading for a bad time if they act the way that he acted. I can’t speculate on this any more than anybody else on “what if” scenarios should Tyreek have been white, but if you create a situation where the cop does not feel safe (e.g. rolling up your 100% tinted windows against their instructions) then you are going to get an escalation from the police.

[-] Bacano@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

if you create a situation where the cop does not feel safe

You reach for your license 'too fast' - cop does not feel safe Acorn falls on car - cop doesn't feel safe You are boiling water at home - cop does not feel safe You are writhing in pain underneath their boot - cop does not feel safe

US cops are literally brainwashed into feeling like the public is a threat to them. They are wired to look for a reason to escalate.

[-] RunningInRVA@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Fine but those situations are not the same as “angry and noncooperative citizen disobeying my request and I can no longer see what is happening inside the vehicle.”

I would argue that this is actually the correct situation for a police officer to feel more concerned for their safety.

[-] burgersc12@mander.xyz 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The fact that we need to be concerned for our safety at all while "disobeying" a cop is proof that they act too aggressively and with almost no accountability. Cops can start a gang and murder you and no one bats a fucking eye

[-] CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee 5 points 1 week ago

Why would a guy in a McLaren, who already gave you his ID, raise suspicions that he might be trying to harm you by simply rolling his window up? This cop mentality that everyone is seconds away from ambushing them like they're in Fallujah circa 2002 is absurd and drives a lot of this police brutality and overreaction. Don't forget that these are paid professional government employees. It's not the citizen's job to coddle police and play into their own personal paranoia and delusions just to avoid getting beaten or shot.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Senal@programming.dev 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I don't have any studies to hand, but isn't the disparity between police responses to non-white vs white suspects a given at this point, in the US at least?

But lets look at your argument both ways.

On the one hand you'd be arguing that race disparity in police responses doesn't exist at all and so wouldn't apply here.

Or

Race disparity exists, but in this specific situation it doesn't apply for some reason.

If that's the case , id be interested in hearing why you think it doesn't apply in this specific circumstance?

Neither of those sound plausible to me but i could be missing what your actual argument is entirely, in which case, would you mind explaining why it doesn't fall in to the above categories?

[-] RunningInRVA@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

It’s more the latter. I don’t argue that race disparity exists. I’m only arguing that Tyreek did not do any kind of favor to himself in how he handled the situation. I’m sorry he got pulled from his car and cuffed, but my reaction to the video was that he had this coming. Blatantly disobeying an officer’s requests and in a way that can lead the officer to feel unsure over his/her safety and perceived control of the situation is going to end poorly. This could easily happen to a white person.

[-] Senal@programming.dev 3 points 1 week ago

It’s more the latter. I don’t argue that race disparity exists. I’m only arguing that Tyreek did not do any kind of favor to himself in how he handled the situation.

Agreed, but "didn't do the most optimal thing in a given situation" isn't the same as "deserved to be dragged out of his car"

Especially in a situation where it is known to be significantly more dangerous, regardless of behaviour, for someone of a more melanin-rich persuasion.

This confusion is easily resolved though, let's clarify with a couple questions.

Do you think anyone (regardless of race) should have received that level of response in that situation ?

Do you think anyone (regardless of race) would have received that level of response in that situation ?

I’m sorry he got pulled from his car and cuffed, but my reaction to the video was that he had this coming.

I'd personally view that as two opposing viewpoints, either you think he had it coming or you're sorry it happened.

Blatantly disobeying an officer’s requests and in a way that can lead the officer to feel unsure over his/her safety and perceived control of the situation is going to end poorly.

And this is the crux of the issue, officers feeling unsafe and their level of perceived control is known to have a direct correlation to how reflective your skin is.

That doesn't even account for the officers with a blatant racial bias.

So you can argue that point, but the threshold for where actions end up in poor outcomes is intrinsically linked to race, any argument you make is going need to account for that or it's going to be perceived as missing a large chunk of the context.

Which is what is happening here.

This could easily happen to a white person.

That's subjective but again, let's clarify :

In these exact same circumstances, you'd expect a white person to be treated in the exact same way ?

[-] RunningInRVA@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Do you think anyone (regardless of race) should have received that level of response in that situation ?

As with any dispute, both parties can always strive for more, but I try to put myself in the cop’s situation. How long is long enough before you have to pull somebody who is clearly not cooperating from their car? Not following a lawful order during a traffic stop is a misdemeanor, which means you may be exiting your vehicle whether you like it or not.

Do you think anyone (regardless of race) would have received that level of response in that situation ?

I am positive racism plays a part in policing. But I didn’t see anything in this that leads me to believe Tyreek’s skin color affected his outcome. I’m a white dude and I easily see this happening to me if I did what he did.

I’m sorry he got pulled from his car and cuffed, but my reaction to the video was that he had this coming.

I'd personally view that as two opposing viewpoints, either you think he had it coming or you're sorry it happened.

They are not opposing or mutually exclusive viewpoints. I can be sorry for someone for the outcome they have been dealt based on their own actions. I can be sorry for him but also unsurprised.

In these exact same circumstances, you'd expect a white person to be treated in the exact same way ?

Yes, I truly feel this way in these circumstances. Perhaps I’m a naive idiot, but I just didn’t sense that he was treated that unfairly given his actions.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] stoly@lemmy.world 28 points 1 week ago

So you think that we owe abject obedience to authority figures because they might hurt you otherwise but it would still be your fault if they did?

[-] CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Sounds a lot like an abusive husband claiming that he wouldn't have to beat his wife if she hadn't burned their dinner.

[-] RunningInRVA@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

How does this relate to domestic abuse and what did I say to imply that I am one who would do such a thing?

[-] CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee 7 points 1 week ago

Because you implied that he deserved to get assaulted and thrown to the ground for "talking back" and "not following instructions." You don't see the parallels between this and a husband assaulting and throwing to the ground their wife for talking back and not following instructions? What makes this okay simply because it's being conducted by a person who took a 6 week training course and gets to wear a badge on their chest?

[-] ShareMySims@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

They're also literally defending cops, probably the most well known group of domestic abusers out there. It really isn't a big leap to make that if someone gets defensive over abusers (or racists), it's because they're actually getting defensive about their own behaviour.

E: also, the fact that the mods had removed your comment, but none of the racist bootlicker's, tells you everything you need to know about who they prioritise in this space - when "don't be a dick" becomes "don't be a dick to fascists", you're actively platforming fascists.

[-] RunningInRVA@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

No, I don’t. I don’t believe I stated that.

[-] myliltoehurts@lemm.ee 26 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yeah nah. I thought your comment was probably the reasonable middle ground until I watched the footage too.

The police has 100% needlessly escalated to violence and fully on a power trip. They have not provided any reason for asking the window to be rolled down - nor did they have any. You can see into the car even though there's a lot of glare on the camera, most likely even better vision for a person. They made no attempt to explain any reasoning for the request to persuade him. Once on the ground and being cuffed, they proceeded to shout at him "when we tell you to do something you do it, not what you want". That's not how it works.

He didn't even try to resist the arrest but they treated him with quite a bit of force. They didn't listen at all when he called out he had an injury and needs more time to comply with the order of sitting down.

Yes, Tyreek did himself no favours with his attitude but he has also done absolutely nothing to deserve this treatment. He wasn't even particularly rude to the cops, his mistake seemed to be not to act fully deferential to a cop on a power trip, which is absolutely no reason to treat anyone like this.

[-] Jamil@lemm.ee 25 points 1 week ago

Disrespecting a police officer is not an invitation for police brutality. You are a bootlicker for having this mentality.

Police officers should be professionals and try to use the least violent means necessary, and if there is even a hint of excess, they should be deemed unfit to hold the power of authority over others. Police should be reactive on the escalation ladder, only using violence when they receive violence. However, police are given a carte blanche to do violence by claiming in any interaction that they felt threatened, giving them impunity and why we're here today.

[-] RunningInRVA@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

It was Tyreek not following directions and making the inside of his car not clearly visible to the officer (despite his requests). That creates a safety problem for the officer. This was the main issue IMO. If words don’t work and the citizen is not cooperating then I’m curious what is the next step besides pulling the guy from his car?

[-] Jamil@lemm.ee 22 points 1 week ago

He lowered his window, handed his license over, and put his windows back up. The officer felt safe enough to stand by the widow for half a minute, knocking on the glass. The argument that the situation was threatening holds zero water and is just bootlicker cope.

The officer can make all kinds of demands, but if they don't fall under the procedures they are required to follow, then it's on the officer. The lack of following procedures is likely why the officer is suspended and will hopefully no longer be on the force. The excessive use of force is also going to result in tax payers paying millions to the recipient of the assault.

[-] RunningInRVA@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

Please stop calling me a bootlicker. It’s not necessary for this conversation to occur.

[-] Jamil@lemm.ee 3 points 1 week ago

Sorry about that.

It is a pejorative, but only trying to use it as short hand for people that freely give away their rights to authority.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 3 points 1 week ago

Requests are optional, my friend. And the visibility no concern. We know that's a blatant lie. You want to know how we know? Easy.

What if the cop doesn't force him out of the car? What would the cop do? I got it! He'd go back to his police car, far from Tyreek, perfectly safe, and then he'd write up the ticket. Then he'd walk back to Tyreek and give him the ticket. The end. Almost no contact, and all of that with backup officers on hand ready to assist. No violence, no handcuffs, no nothing.

After all, most people driving expensive cars aren't gonna stress about a speeding ticket. So give them the ticket already.

[-] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I've been Tyreek and have been picked up on disorderly conduct charges for mocking a police officer to his face. They did not treat me like that. It was all bullshit too, they just wanted to search me thinking I was an easy target.

What you're are saying is the police get your complete obedience no matter what. Frankly, that is just not how humans work. I don't care if you're an authority. If you target me I will feel a way about it.

Edit: BTW charges dropped because being rude is not illegal. Cops don't just get your complete obedience. That is not the law. It may be a norm but we have the power to change norms. To change laws. Don't perpetuate your own oppression.

[-] SilentStorms@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 1 week ago

Yeah man, being rude to a public servant justifies being torn out of your car, slammed into the pavement and placed in handcuffs. Fuck right off.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

Okay, I will argue that. Because it wouldn't have happened to a white person. I've seen white people get away with doing a lot more than that to cops.

[-] rbesfe@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 week ago

I've seen plenty of sovcit videos where white people get their windows smashed and dragged out of the car

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yes. After doing a lot more than he did first.

Also, cops leave SovCits alone all the time because they don't want to deal with that shit. Black people, not so much.

[-] RunningInRVA@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Squid - I think your arguments are subjective at best. Because I saw a white guy get away with more doesn’t mean that this is an issue of race and your sample size of n=1 doesn’t hold a lot of weight for your argument either. I’m a white guy and I would never dream of acting out like Tyreek did for fear that the same thing could happen to me. I have a hard time seeing race as the issue based on what I saw. Tyreek even said he was embarrassed after the fact. He didn’t handle this situation well at all.

[-] AWistfulNihilist@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Sov Cits don't have documentation and refuse to comply with lawful orders. This gentleman gave the police his documentation and they got mad he wasn't bending over and spreading his asshole.

It's funny cause this situation is so crazy with how the cops escalated this situation when it wasn't warranted, you actually have to compare them to someone doing an actual crime!

Like that's how crazy this debate even is. Rich dude in super car being an asshole vs a person who is willfully driving with fake paperwork hoping a cop pulls them over.

Hill just looked like a rich asshole in a hurry and I can't imagine anyone advocating that the police action was OK.

[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 2 points 1 week ago

On occasion, racist cops will violate white folks too. They're never perfectly racist.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 15 points 1 week ago

Being rude is protected by the Constitution, as you learned in high school civics class. You did a perfect job of blaming the victim.

On the other hand, maybe what you were trying to say is something like, "We gotta be practically-minded because the cops are dirty racist bastards who will beat the hell out of us."

[-] tiefling 2 points 1 week ago

as you learned in high school civics class

As you learned in what now?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

My dad once rolled his window up on a cop. He told officer to wait because he was on a cell call with my step mom.

He didn't get dragged out of vehicle, the state tropper waited and then gave my dad a huge fine.

Two things this was the 90's in Texas and my dad is white.

[-] jpreston2005@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago

I have no problem with rich assholes getting knocked down a peg or two or three.

Keeping your window rolled down during a traffic stop is not an unreasonable demand, especially when it's heavily tinted.

[-] Jamil@lemm.ee 12 points 1 week ago

He already provided his license. The officers job was to go back to his vehicle and prepare a citation. Instead they decided to go on a power trip.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 week ago

You've got plenty of replies already, but I don't see one saying this. You do not have a requirement to be nice to the cops. You have to identify yourself in most states, and you have to provide license and registration. You do no have to (nor should you) answer questions or be polite. The reason they ask questions is to get you to contradict other statements or to otherwise incriminate yourself. Their job is not to protect people. It's to arrest people. It's shitty, but that's the world we're in. We should not defend the state agents who are given this much power over us. It is wrong and indefensible.

[-] frigidaphelion@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

disgusting take

[-] arefx@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I've seen videos of it happening to white people. They are all over youtube. I don't think k he was wrong for first pulling him out, if the police just let you ignore them they couldn't do their jobs, but after that he started power tripping.

Fuck the cops anyways though

this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024
255 points (100.0% liked)

News

22896 readers
3819 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS