SWB: Shopping While Black

[Infected Mushroom]

It will come down as a good shoot. He did not obey orders to put said object down, there is a 911 call that stats he was waving it around. Seems pretty clear cut to me.

That police are trigger happy when it comes to black people? I agree.

its not about race.

Anyone waving a gun around would threaten the police and the public

[Gauthier]

It will come down as a good shoot. He did not obey orders to put said object down, there is a 911 call that stats he was waving it around. Seems pretty clear cut to me.

That police are trigger happy when it comes to black people? I agree.

Yep, if you're white you can carry an actual semiautomatic rifle and the police will be all polite about arresting you. If you're black even cotton candy becomes a lethal weapon that needs deadly response.

[Iron Dog]

It will come down as a good shoot. He did not obey orders to put said object down, there is a 911 call that stats he was waving it around. Seems pretty clear cut to me.

That police are trigger happy when it comes to black people? I agree.

Well considering I did not say that.

[Maurepas]

its not manslaughter if you can justify your reasoning and if you were acting in a professional capacity. Its not just the outcome, the reasoning is important too.

Unfortunately that's not really true. Doctors and Surgeons get charged this way on a regular basis despite them acting in their capacity as professionals.

[Mavorpen]

That police are trigger happy when it comes to black people? I agree.

its not about race.

Anyone waving a gun around would threaten the police and the public

Again. NO legitimate evidence WHATSOEVER he was "waving the gun around."

[Condunum]

You're really condescending. Annoyingly so. Stop that. My point remains: There is no reason for me to believe they felt threatened just because one person said they did, if they don't confirm that. Because no one did. Not. One. Person.

You were being just as condescending if not more to multiple people in this thread just because they didn't share your opinion.
That still doesn't mean that no one felt threatened, it just means they didn't report it, that's all that means.

Irrelevant.

No, you asked me a question and I gave you an answer it was completely relevant to the question you asked me. Again, you brought it up, this is the second time you'e brought something up only to dismiss it as irrelevant when you don't like my response. Pathetic.

Which I never disagreed with.

Yes you did, that was your original point.

Here's the original claim to which you replied:

The Ritchie's claimed other shoppers felt threatened, yet no other shoppers said they felt threatened, or phoned the police.

Note how I say that no other shoppers said they felt threatened, not that they did not feel threatened.

[Infected Mushroom]

its not about race.

Anyone waving a gun around would threaten the police and the public

Again. NO legitimate evidence WHATSOEVER he was "waving the gun around."

you have at least one witness

[Iron Dog]

Again. NO legitimate evidence WHATSOEVER he was "waving the gun around."

you have at least one witness

This ^

[Polkopia]

And what? America has had its share of shootings in the last few years. You really can't be too careful. Although the gun isn't directly lethal, it looks real enough to compare to one that is. Besides, haven't you seen A Christmas Story?

Yeah, no, I refuse to accept this as an excuse to justify racial profiling, whether it's conscious or not.

Seriously, why does EVERY crime an African American do be labeled as racial profiling? Of course, I'm exaggerating when I use the word "every" but it seems like if it were a black man who called the cops on a white man, people would be saying that the white man threatened the other man's life and he had every right to defend himself. Double standard is a miraculous thing, isn't it?

[Condunum]

Again. NO legitimate evidence WHATSOEVER he was "waving the gun around."

you have at least one witness

One witness doesn't even get a case

[Mavorpen]

Again. NO legitimate evidence WHATSOEVER he was "waving the gun around."

you have at least one witness

And utterly not a SINGLE person that was supposedly threatened by the "gun" backed up his claims.

[Iron Dog]

Lets put this out there. How many people have been in the situation where they had to use a weapon on another person?

[Mavorpen]

Seriously, why does EVERY crime an African American do be labeled as racial profiling? Of course, I'm exaggerating when I use the word "every" but it seems like if it were a black man who called the cops on a white man, people would be saying that the white man threatened the other man's life and he had every right to defend himself. Double standard is a miraculous thing, isn't it?

Please quote me saying that only white people can commit crimes. I'll wait.

[Infected Mushroom]

you have at least one witness

And utterly not a SINGLE person that was supposedly threatened by the "gun" backed up his claims.

Again the outcome was wrong. But the reasoning behind the police's decision to shoot is fine. The decision to shoot was professional, if ultimately wrong.

You need to distinguish between outcome and decision. Just because something had a bad outcome doesn't mean it was a poorly-reasoned decision.

The police had this information: someone called and someone said there's a dude waving a gun around in a shop full of people.

You show up and you DO see someone waving what looks like a gun around. You tell him to drop it, he keeps waving it. Well... you can't be blamed for choosing to do what you did based on the information available at the time.

You're not going to go around the store interrogating everyone in the shop and taking notes while a potential madman is waving what looks like a gun around.

The police make decisions based on limited information and if the limited information suggests there is a dangerous madman waving a gun around, you act based on that.

[Maurepas]

Lets put this out there. How many people have been in the situation where they had to use a weapon on another person?

Lets put this out there. How many people have been trained in the ability to use a weapon on another person?

Or maybe even another. How many strawmen does it take to win an argument?

[Mavorpen]

you have at least one witness

One witness doesn't even get a case

Also, if this Ritchie guy is telling the truth about, "when people did look at him, he was pointing the gun at them. He was pointing at people," then there is, in fact, not just ONE witness. There are several witnesses. And if we assume Ritchie was telling the truth about THAT, then there would be several people who would have verified his story.

And not surprisingly, we don't have any.

[Infected Mushroom]

you have at least one witness

And utterly not a SINGLE person that was supposedly threatened by the "gun" backed up his claims.

they came to the store to stop the supposed bad guy after first getting the call from the person...

they had no time to ask anyone else. And yes, they did see a person waving a gun around.

their decision was therefore understandable

[Polkopia]

Seriously, why does EVERY crime an African American do be labeled as racial profiling? Of course, I'm exaggerating when I use the word "every" but it seems like if it were a black man who called the cops on a white man, people would be saying that the white man threatened the other man's life and he had every right to defend himself. Double standard is a miraculous thing, isn't it?

Please quote me saying that only white people can commit crimes. I'll wait.

When did I EVER say that? You're putting words in my mouth. I said that there's a double standard when an African American man commits a crime (Or is killed) compared to a white man. Never did I say that you said that only white people commit crimes. Please reread my post and get back to me when you have a better argument.

[Mavorpen]

You show up and you DO see someone waving what looks like a gun around. You tell him to drop it, he keeps waving it. Well... you can't be blamed for choosing to do what you did based on the information available at the time.

Irrelevant red herring. NO evidence he was waving it around. Stop trying to distract us from the ACTUAL discussion.

[Iron Dog]

Lets put this out there. How many people have been in the situation where they had to use a weapon on another person?

Lets put this out there. How many people have been trained in the ability to use a weapon on another person?

Or maybe even another. How many strawmen does it take to win an argument?

Well, I can speak from experience, it is something that never leaves you when you have to. So when the officers who have most likely been in that type of situation before comes up on a man who refused to put the "weapon" down they they are going to go with training and fire on him.

[Maurepas]

Lets put this out there. How many people have been trained in the ability to use a weapon on another person?

Or maybe even another. How many strawmen does it take to win an argument?

Well, I can speak from experience, it is something that never leaves you when you have to. So when the officers who have most likely been in that type of situation before comes up on a man who refused to put the "weapon" down they they are going to go with training and fire on him.

Which would mean that their training was a failure.

[Mavorpen]

When did I EVER say that? You're putting words in my mouth.

That's the fucking point.

I said that there's a double standard when an African American man commits a crime (Or is killed) compared to a white man.

And you have utterly no evidence of this whatsoever.

Never did I say that you said that only white people commit crimes. Please reread my post and get back to me when you have a better argument.

Please reread MINE and get back to me when you've moved past the pathetic desire to mischaracterize the other side.

[Earth in Roughly 1000 Years]

You were being just as condescending if not more to multiple people in this thread just because they didn't share your opinion.
That still doesn't mean that no one felt threatened, it just means they didn't report it, that's all that means.


No, you asked me a question and I gave you an answer it was completely relevant to the question you asked me. Again, you brought it up, this is the second time you'e brought something up only to dismiss it as irrelevant when you don't like my response. Pathetic.


Yes you did, that was your original point.

Here's the original claim to which you replied:

The Ritchie's claimed other shoppers felt threatened, yet no other shoppers said they felt threatened, or phoned the police.

Note how I say that no other shoppers said they felt threatened, not that they did not feel threatened.

So now you're assuming he's lying? Maybe they told him they felt threatened.

[Mavorpen]

Here's the original claim to which you replied:

Note how I say that no other shoppers said they felt threatened, not that they did not feel threatened.

So now you're assuming he's lying? Maybe they told him they felt threatened.

In which case Ritchie would have said that to the police and the police would have questioned these people individually.

Yet, he didn't do that. Why?

[Infected Mushroom]

You show up and you DO see someone waving what looks like a gun around. You tell him to drop it, he keeps waving it. Well... you can't be blamed for choosing to do what you did based on the information available at the time.

Irrelevant red herring. NO evidence he was waving it around. Stop trying to distract us from the ACTUAL discussion.

there's at least some evidence because one witness said so