They have an election coming up, and it seems the citizens have a chance to rectify the white power structure that governs them. If they take it! They have not before, but that doesn't mean the white power structure should not govern fair and equal however.

And they have NOT.

You are talking about changing human nature, what group doesn't want to be on top and exercise their power which means that someone suffers. This isn't really about white and black it is about haves and have nots.

Equal protection and treatment under the law is a basic tenet of our constitution whether you have, or have not. You aren't justifying BAD human behavior are you?

Whether you like it or not Tal your Constitution enshrines racism. Slavery was not a subject they were prepared to deal with, those wonderful slave owning founders, so don't tell me about equal rights under your Constitution. If it were so the freedom marches would not have been necessary and that was then this is now just doesn't cut it either. You have a supreme court judge who believes in translating the Constitution according to what is written and the intent of those who wrote it. It did not give equal protection under the law to the black man in the eighteenth century. Don't look at me to justify bad behaviour, look among yourselves

wrong Clete . The 14th amendment is very much a part of the Constitution. And yes ,the intent of the authors and the relevant debates that preceded it's passage is very relevant in the rulings by the judiciary .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

The report says on Page 4: “Ferguson's law-enforcement practices overwhelmingly impact African-Americans.

Duh, Ferguson is 67.4% African American, 29.3% White. Of course it impacts blacks more.

---

You see ;Holder can't help but inject racism where none exists . Take the race nonsense out of the report and there are some very sound observations ....specifically about local policing's goal is revenue enhancement for the community . That is something practiced nationwide that must stop.

Tom yes you are right but statistics is the stronghold of the coward. Yes there are more black than white in that community but are you saying that blacks weren't disproportionately targeted by law enforcement. The facts tell you that there is at least a case to answer or do you believe that blacks are inherently a criminal element? Policing is about revenue enhancement and I thought it was a local tax collection system. Tom the laws target all law breakers but policing can decide who it impacts by the attention they give to members of the community. We want them to target law breakers but they use profiling to determine who to target

Quote:

---

statistics is the stronghold of the coward

---

especially ones that cite disproportional targeting . If someone is pulled over and ticketed for a traffic violation and that person is black ;was that person pulled over because of their race ,or because of the violation ? The Holders and Tal's of the world would like us to believe that is the determining factor in the officer's actions. They go further and say that is proof of systemic racism in the police dept .

Here is a stat that could be manipulated the same way if one had a predetermined conclusion. It is an indisputable fact ,according to the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) that blacks violate seat belt laws more often than drivers of other races .
Racial Profiling and Traffic Stops | National Institute of Justice

So if there is a seatbelt enforcement check point ,more blacks than any other race are likely to be pulled over and ticketed . Is that a statistical "disparate impact "? Does it mean that police should stop enforcing seat belt laws ? Or maybe Holder would prefer racial quotas for seatbelt enforcement .

Policing isn't/shouldn't be about revenue enhancement. It should be about serve and protect. The cops have become the collectors for the power structure, and their justice is unevenly meted out.

I disagree with your assessment Tom, that race was injected by Holder where none exists, because it does exist, in the minds of those who think its OKAY to see a black man and think he should be rousted, harassed, and checked because he is black (like in stop and frisk).

That's how the Fergeson mess started, a cop harassing two black guys walking in their own neighborhood. Or a white guy following a black guy in his own neighborhood. That's racism, plain and simple, and the underlying cause of a greater problem.

I buy your argument that the founders could only go so far in establishing this country, because they reasoned some were not ready for what they were really proposing, but 200 hundred years later we still are revisiting those same attitudes, policies, and practices? I submit how much longer do we have to wait for some to get ready for the full embrace of the promises those founders so diligently started? The physical chains and whips were outlawed but its time for the social and economic ones to be outlawed well, and remove the BIG lie of equality we keep perpetrating.

Just because they have gotten better at practicing their racism, doesn't mean it doesn't still exist. Just because some don't want to see it, or acknowledge it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I sure won't go away unless we talk about it.

Quote:

---

cop harassing two black guys walking in their own neighborhood.

---

if you can't even give an honest reason for officer Wilson confronted Brown then there isn't much else to say . Wilson stopped Brown and his friend because they were walking down the middle of the street . He told them the walk on the sidewalk.
That's it . He did not know about the cigars Brown had just robbed from the convenience store . He did not know at the time that Brown had mugged the clerk. Had Brown just followed Wilson's instructions he would've walked away .

Holder said that the US needed an Honest discussion on race. Well we are still waiting for Holder and the left to have one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

if you can't even give an honest reason for officer Wilson confronted Brown then there isn't much else to say . Wilson stopped Brown and his friend because they were walking down the middle of the street . He told them the walk on the sidewalk.
That's it . He did not know about the cigars Brown had just robbed from the convenience store . He did not know at the time that Brown had mugged the clerk. Had Brown just followed Wilson's instructions he would've walked away.

---

According to testimony they stated where they were going across the street in (their own neighborhood). You nor I have no idea how he addressed them, but they had a RIGHT to protest his order like the white guy with a gun in his OWN neighborhood in a previous link I provided.

Quote:

---

Holder said that the US needed an Honest discussion on race. Well we are still waiting for Holder and the left to have one.

---

We are having one Tom, right here, on the news, and allover TV. You may not agree with what we say, but you cannot dismiss, or deny we are debating it.

it's not harassing them to instruct them to walk on the sidewalk and not block traffic by walking on the street. The lesson is that if you physically confront a police officer ,regardless of your race ;bad things can happen.

Oh Tom, it was already pointed out that they weren't blocking traffic, and no reason to bother with two black guys in their own neighborhood in the first place.

I know,the cops are ALWAYS right, and two black guys in their own neighborhood have to be wrong. SHHHHESH!!

Two black guys in their own neighbourhood isn't that unlawful assembly? Add jaywalking and you have probable cause. My point is the law can be used two ways; to promote public order or to harrass. There are laws about wearing seatbelts, why shouldn't this be a choice? And please don't give me the public health arguments because making it optional would eventually remove the idiots from among us and reduce the policing load. It is like policing traffic, it is easy to set up cameras rather than waste police time