Who's stupid now?

[Foxfyre]

Yes, but Foxfire was claiming all her information came from 911 tapes.

I supposed that comment all by itself was threatening enough to arrest someone over.

No dear. My information comes from the 911 tape AND the recorder the Dispatcher was making of the entire encounter the entire time.

 

[ConHog]

Yes, but Foxfire was claiming all her information came from 911 tapes.

I supposed that comment all by itself was threatening enough to arrest someone over.

No dear. My information comes from the 911 tape AND the recorder the Dispatcher was making of the entire encounter the entire time.

You do realize that having a rational, mature, intelligent conversation with Ravi is impossible? I doubt s/he could manage one of the three , let alone ALL three.

 

[Foxfyre]

Yes, but Foxfire was claiming all her information came from 911 tapes.

I supposed that comment all by itself was threatening enough to arrest someone over.

No dear. My information comes from the 911 tape AND the recorder the Dispatcher was making of the entire encounter the entire time.

You do realize that having a rational, mature, intelligent conversation with Ravi is impossible? I doubt s/he could manage one of the three , let alone ALL three.

Ah Ravi's okay. I don't have any problem with her. She's just a liberal and as a result will be a bit 'off' in her perceptions as all liberals appear to be to us conservatives. But we look just as 'off' to them.

 

[ConHog]

No dear. My information comes from the 911 tape AND the recorder the Dispatcher was making of the entire encounter the entire time.

You do realize that having a rational, mature, intelligent conversation with Ravi is impossible? I doubt s/he could manage one of the three , let alone ALL three.

Ah Ravi's okay. I don't have any problem with her. She's just a liberal and as a result will be a bit 'off' in her perceptions as all liberals appear to be to us conservatives. But we look just as 'off' to them.

I used to think so to, but the more I read this board the more I become aware of five things

1) A high percentage of liberals just plain can't read and understand anything written above a junior high school level.

2) most liberals are racists

3) most liberals are liars

4) most liberals will argue the most minute point into the ground no matter if it has any bearing on the original discussion or not

5) most liberals would as soon get poked in the eye with a stick than ever admit to being wrong.


There are of course exceptions

 

[Foxfyre]

You do realize that having a rational, mature, intelligent conversation with Ravi is impossible? I doubt s/he could manage one of the three , let alone ALL three.

Ah Ravi's okay. I don't have any problem with her. She's just a liberal and as a result will be a bit 'off' in her perceptions as all liberals appear to be to us conservatives. But we look just as 'off' to them.

I used to think so to, but the more I read this board the more I become aware of five things

1) A high percentage of liberals just plain can't read and understand anything written above a junior high school level.

2) most liberals are racists

3) most liberals are liars

4) most liberals will argue the most minute point into the ground no matter if it has any bearing on the original discussion or not

5) most liberals would as soon get poked in the eye with a stick than ever admit to being wrong.


There are of course exceptions

I think there are more exceptions than not, especially among our USMB membership which boasts some of the more intelligent liberals I've encountered on the internet.

Talking past each other, which is often the case, is not the same thing as reading incomprehension. I only assume reading incomprehension when my point of view is seriously misrepresented or mischaracterized.

Probably most liberals who see all or most minorities as victims or who see race in everything are racist, but this is not a malicious racism. It is often counterproductive or detrimental to the presumed victims, but is not malicious.

And if we're fair, we conservatives are just as dogmatic and sometimes pigheaded in our views as the most fervent liberal.

And we don't like admitting we are wrong any more than they do.

 

[MaggieMae]

When Henry Louis Gates Jr., a prominent Harvard professor of African-American studies, was arrested for disorderly conduct by a white Cambridge police officer last summer, President Obama led a chorus of critics denouncing the local Police Department.

Gates, who is African-American, described his arrest as a “teaching moment’’ about race relations in America.

His case drew national attention to the relationship between policing and race. Obama wound up hosting Gates and the officer who arrested him for a so-called beer summit at the White House. And the arrest, for some, raised the question of whether officers disproportionately arrest blacks for disorderly conduct, considered one of the most discretionary and most abused charges in the nation’s criminal justice system.

But a review of the Cambridge department’s handling of disorderly conduct cases from 2004 to 2009 finds no evidence of racial profiling. Instead, the analysis by the New England Center for Investigative Reporting finds that the most common factor linking people who are arrested in Cambridge for disorderly conduct is that they were allegedly screaming or cursing in front of police.

Review finds no links to race, arrests - The Boston Globe

About NECIR-BU New England Center for Investigative Reporting at Boston University

I was under the impression that the subject of racial profiling by police was a generalization, not specifically directed at the Cambridge Police Department.

That said, with over 60% of the prison population being African American, it's hard to see how racial "profiling" would NOT be used in some of the more crime-laden areas of cities. But it also begs the question which comes first? The crime or the punishment which creates even more criminal activity?

 

[ConHog]

When Henry Louis Gates Jr., a prominent Harvard professor of African-American studies, was arrested for disorderly conduct by a white Cambridge police officer last summer, President Obama led a chorus of critics denouncing the local Police Department.

Gates, who is African-American, described his arrest as a “teaching moment’’ about race relations in America.

His case drew national attention to the relationship between policing and race. Obama wound up hosting Gates and the officer who arrested him for a so-called beer summit at the White House. And the arrest, for some, raised the question of whether officers disproportionately arrest blacks for disorderly conduct, considered one of the most discretionary and most abused charges in the nation’s criminal justice system.

But a review of the Cambridge department’s handling of disorderly conduct cases from 2004 to 2009 finds no evidence of racial profiling. Instead, the analysis by the New England Center for Investigative Reporting finds that the most common factor linking people who are arrested in Cambridge for disorderly conduct is that they were allegedly screaming or cursing in front of police.

Review finds no links to race, arrests - The Boston Globe

About NECIR-BU New England Center for Investigative Reporting at Boston University

I was under the impression that the subject of racial profiling by police was a generalization, not specifically directed at the Cambridge Police Department.

That said, with over 60% of the prison population being African American, it's hard to see how racial "profiling" would NOT be used in some of the more crime-laden areas of cities. But it also begs the question which comes first? The crime or the punishment which creates even more criminal activity?

Anyone who doesn't understand that profiling is a valuable law enforcement technique has a screw loose.

 

[Ravi]

No dear. My information comes from the 911 tape AND the recorder the Dispatcher was making of the entire encounter the entire time.

You do realize that having a rational, mature, intelligent conversation with Ravi is impossible? I doubt s/he could manage one of the three , let alone ALL three.

Ah Ravi's okay. I don't have any problem with her. She's just a liberal and as a result will be a bit 'off' in her perceptions as all liberals appear to be to us conservatives. But we look just as 'off' to them.

Could you link me to the recording of the yo mama comment? Thanks.

 

[Bfgrn]

When Henry Louis Gates Jr., a prominent Harvard professor of African-American studies, was arrested for disorderly conduct by a white Cambridge police officer last summer, President Obama led a chorus of critics denouncing the local Police Department.

Gates, who is African-American, described his arrest as a “teaching moment’’ about race relations in America.

His case drew national attention to the relationship between policing and race. Obama wound up hosting Gates and the officer who arrested him for a so-called beer summit at the White House. And the arrest, for some, raised the question of whether officers disproportionately arrest blacks for disorderly conduct, considered one of the most discretionary and most abused charges in the nation’s criminal justice system.

But a review of the Cambridge department’s handling of disorderly conduct cases from 2004 to 2009 finds no evidence of racial profiling. Instead, the analysis by the New England Center for Investigative Reporting finds that the most common factor linking people who are arrested in Cambridge for disorderly conduct is that they were allegedly screaming or cursing in front of police.

Review finds no links to race, arrests - The Boston Globe

About NECIR-BU New England Center for Investigative Reporting at Boston University

I was under the impression that the subject of racial profiling by police was a generalization, not specifically directed at the Cambridge Police Department.

That said, with over 60% of the prison population being African American, it's hard to see how racial "profiling" would NOT be used in some of the more crime-laden areas of cities. But it also begs the question which comes first? The crime or the punishment which creates even more criminal activity?

Anyone who doesn't understand that profiling is a valuable law enforcement technique has a screw loose.

Anyone who doesn't understand that profiling is bigotry, anti-freedom and statism is an intellectual ancestor of the people who allowed and supported every police state throughout history.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I was not relying on media reports. I was relying on the 911 and dispatcher recordings. And Whalen was not 'just passing through the neighborhood' - she worked 100 yards from Gates' home. You have no basis whatsoever to evaluate what my relatives and friends say about anything. Had Crowley behaved badly, they would have said so as they have no use for police officers that they work with or anywhere else who behave badly. Had Gates appeared calm and unagitated in any way, it would not have been mandatory to invite him to step outside. The fact that he was not calm and unagitated made it mandatory. There was no way to know whether he was just being a prick or was in fact in distress.

One wonders why you are so quick to evaluate Officer Crowley's mental state when you have no basis to go on other than what looks very much like prejudice and a bit of erroneous information of your own. Got too many speeding tickets?

Also, the next time you are doing just doing your job as you have been trained to do it, and some idiot decides to accuse you of all kinds of malfeasance because you're doing it, maybe you might understand how a police officer does get a bit irritated in that kind of situation.

She was passing through the neighborhood, she did not live there, she was not a neighbor and never claimed to be, even in the 911 tapes. The only place that claim was made was in the media, I therefore conclude that you are relying on the media reports. You still got your facts wrong.

He was not invited to step outside because of department policy, he was asked to step outside so that Crowley would have an excuse to arrest him. Anyone that tells you anything else is lying. And I mean lying as in the case of deliberately and consciously distorting the facts. If there was a legitimate reason to continue the conversation Crowley could have stayed at the door and spoke to him through the screen.

I am not evaluating Crowley's mental state, i am evaluating his actions. He told Gates to step outside if he wanted to continue the conversation, those were his words, not mine. He wrote them in his reports, I didn't. If he had suspected that Crowley was being held hostage or in distress he could have said so in his report, he did not.

I worked in customer service, people yelled at me every day, it is part of my job. I keep a collection of the more ridiculous ones, and I have a feeling you would be on my top ten list. Police should be able to shrug it off even easier than I do, they have the benefit of fully paid counseling. Instead they get all macho and arrest people who piss them off. That should tell you something, the fact that it does not worries me.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That's good to know.

I still think contempt of cop is bullshit. Especially in your own home when you are doing nothing wrong.

So then you would be ok with me spitting on Obama if he came to my house?

I would.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Anyone who doesn't understand that profiling is bigotry, anti-freedom and statism is an intellectual ancestor of the people who allowed and supported every police state throughout history.

It is all of that, it is also a useful tool. Kinda weird how bad things sometimes can sometimes be helpful. FYI, there is no way anyone alive today could be an ancestor, intellectually or otherwise, of every police state in history. A descendant possibly.

 

[MaggieMae]

When Henry Louis Gates Jr., a prominent Harvard professor of African-American studies, was arrested for disorderly conduct by a white Cambridge police officer last summer, President Obama led a chorus of critics denouncing the local Police Department.

Gates, who is African-American, described his arrest as a “teaching moment’’ about race relations in America.

His case drew national attention to the relationship between policing and race. Obama wound up hosting Gates and the officer who arrested him for a so-called beer summit at the White House. And the arrest, for some, raised the question of whether officers disproportionately arrest blacks for disorderly conduct, considered one of the most discretionary and most abused charges in the nation’s criminal justice system.

But a review of the Cambridge department’s handling of disorderly conduct cases from 2004 to 2009 finds no evidence of racial profiling. Instead, the analysis by the New England Center for Investigative Reporting finds that the most common factor linking people who are arrested in Cambridge for disorderly conduct is that they were allegedly screaming or cursing in front of police.

Review finds no links to race, arrests - The Boston Globe

About NECIR-BU New England Center for Investigative Reporting at Boston University

I was under the impression that the subject of racial profiling by police was a generalization, not specifically directed at the Cambridge Police Department.

That said, with over 60% of the prison population being African American, it's hard to see how racial "profiling" would NOT be used in some of the more crime-laden areas of cities. But it also begs the question which comes first? The crime or the punishment which creates even more criminal activity?

Anyone who doesn't understand that profiling is a valuable law enforcement technique has a screw loose.

Except that one can hope that in addition to the color of the skin, something else is striking that leads to the profile.

 

[Ravi]

I was not relying on media reports. I was relying on the 911 and dispatcher recordings. And Whalen was not 'just passing through the neighborhood' - she worked 100 yards from Gates' home. You have no basis whatsoever to evaluate what my relatives and friends say about anything. Had Crowley behaved badly, they would have said so as they have no use for police officers that they work with or anywhere else who behave badly. Had Gates appeared calm and unagitated in any way, it would not have been mandatory to invite him to step outside. The fact that he was not calm and unagitated made it mandatory. There was no way to know whether he was just being a prick or was in fact in distress.

One wonders why you are so quick to evaluate Officer Crowley's mental state when you have no basis to go on other than what looks very much like prejudice and a bit of erroneous information of your own. Got too many speeding tickets?

Also, the next time you are doing just doing your job as you have been trained to do it, and some idiot decides to accuse you of all kinds of malfeasance because you're doing it, maybe you might understand how a police officer does get a bit irritated in that kind of situation.

She was passing through the neighborhood, she did not live there, she was not a neighbor and never claimed to be, even in the 911 tapes. The only place that claim was made was in the media, I therefore conclude that you are relying on the media reports. You still got your facts wrong.

He was not invited to step outside because of department policy, he was asked to step outside so that Crowley would have an excuse to arrest him. Anyone that tells you anything else is lying. And I mean lying as in the case of deliberately and consciously distorting the facts. If there was a legitimate reason to continue the conversation Crowley could have stayed at the door and spoke to him through the screen.

I am not evaluating Crowley's mental state, i am evaluating his actions. He told Gates to step outside if he wanted to continue the conversation, those were his words, not mine. He wrote them in his reports, I didn't. If he had suspected that Crowley was being held hostage or in distress he could have said so in his report, he did not.

I worked in customer service, people yelled at me every day, it is part of my job. I keep a collection of the more ridiculous ones, and I have a feeling you would be on my top ten list. Police should be able to shrug it off even easier than I do, they have the benefit of fully paid counseling. Instead they get all macho and arrest people who piss them off. That should tell you something, the fact that it does not worries me.

Please stop it. I have no more rep to give you.

 

[Valerie]

She was passing through the neighborhood, she did not live there, she was not a neighbor and never claimed to be, even in the 911 tapes. The only place that claim was made was in the media, I therefore conclude that you are relying on the media reports. You still got your facts wrong.

Whalen has for more than 15 years worked for Harvard in an office about 100 yards from Gates’s home, according to Murphy. [her lawyer] “For her to be characterized as the racist spark that fueled the fire is just utterly, 100 percent wrong,’’ Murphy said.

Gates caller didn’t cite race, police say - The Boston Globe

 

[Valerie]

He was not invited to step outside because of department policy, he was asked to step outside so that Crowley would have an excuse to arrest him.

Nobody pushed him out on that porch, the police were leaving and he clearly knew exactly what he was doing as he dramatically drew the attention of his neighbors and loudly and falsely incited racist charges toward the officer causing a public disturbance which certainly warranted a trip downtown to file some paperwork...It was actually the smart thing for the police to do at that point, IMO.

 

[ConHog]

I was under the impression that the subject of racial profiling by police was a generalization, not specifically directed at the Cambridge Police Department.

That said, with over 60% of the prison population being African American, it's hard to see how racial "profiling" would NOT be used in some of the more crime-laden areas of cities. But it also begs the question which comes first? The crime or the punishment which creates even more criminal activity?

Anyone who doesn't understand that profiling is a valuable law enforcement technique has a screw loose.

Except that one can hope that in addition to the color of the skin, something else is striking that leads to the profile.

Well of course, profiling means using more than one characteristic to determine the target of an investigation no matter the characteristic.

 

[Ravi]

He was not invited to step outside because of department policy, he was asked to step outside so that Crowley would have an excuse to arrest him.

Nobody pushed him out on that porch, the police were leaving and he clearly knew exactly what he was doing as he dramatically drew the attention of his neighbors and loudly and falsely incited racist charges toward the officer causing a public disturbance which certainly warranted a trip downtown to file some paperwork...It was actually the smart thing for the police to do at that point, IMO.

hmmm...do you think he was acting or actually angry? I see him as angry, as I would be.

And I agree with QW...the cop knew exactly what he was doing.

 

[Valerie]

He was not invited to step outside because of department policy, he was asked to step outside so that Crowley would have an excuse to arrest him.

Nobody pushed him out on that porch, the police were leaving and he clearly knew exactly what he was doing as he dramatically drew the attention of his neighbors and loudly and falsely incited racist charges toward the officer causing a public disturbance which certainly warranted a trip downtown to file some paperwork...It was actually the smart thing for the police to do at that point, IMO.

hmmm...do you think he was acting or actually angry? I see him as angry, as I would be.

And I agree with QW...the cop knew exactly what he was doing.

I think Gates was hypersensitive and irrational. There was no real reason to be angry.






Agitated, confused, shocked, concerned, verbally abusive, angry, fine...Whatever..Still no excuse for inciting racism in the community and certainly no reason to try to pull rank.

He was an over emotional doofus...his conduct from beginning to end was uncooperative, disorderly and created a public disturbance.

The police did what they had to under the circumstances, IMO.

 

[Againsheila]

I guess I see VIOLENCE different than calling someone names.

"Sticks and stones may break my bones but names will NEVER hurt me." kind of thing...

I also see the frustration in being accused of robbing ones own home, as being part of the stress behind Gates yelling.

If gates had been beating his wife in his own home or if he had committed any crime at all and then started going verbally ballistic, then i could see arresting him for yelling at the cop....

otherwise, no....I don't think cops should be arresting people in their own homes or on their own property when they are endangering NO ONE, and when they did not do anything wrong to have the cops approach them in the first place......then to me, the cop should recognize such, and just leave.....it is not the cops home, he does not rule another person's home....especially if the cop knew within a minute, the crime he thought had happened, DID NOT.

I know I differ with you on this, but there are so many REAL CRIMINALS out there, and the police are wasting tax payer's dime on innocent people like gates.

Care

maybe you should take this up with the person who called the cops?

It's not the person who called the cop's fault that instead of going back to his job once it was established that Gates was no burglar, dear Officer Crowley decided to throw his weight around.

I'll admit, it's been awhile since a read about this case, but as I recall, Gates was not arrested until he followed the cop out of his house and off of his porch all the time hurdling obscenities at the cop. Only when he stepped off the front porch did the cop turn around and arrest him.