Mrs P- I heard you say this- but it was in the news again recently here, and is all over the motorcycle boards still- I am quite aware of this incident way up here in Alaska- the airforce dude being shot.

It will end for me when young Black men stop being the unfortunate recipients of massive acts of overkill such as 50 bullets in the case of Sean Bell and 41 bullets in the case of Amadou Diallo. It will end for me when the lives of innocent victims engender the same kind of knee-jerk responses as the apologists for the cops are indulging in.


1. The investigation is ongoing and we don't know the facts. (Leave it up to the "authorities" to investigate themselves and get to the bottom of the case and bring out the truth)

2. A car is a deadly weapon and so deadly force is justified. (By that logic a butter knife, umbrella, salad fork or a baby's rattle could be used as a deadly weapon. If anything can be used as a weapon any time a cop shoots someone can be justified as a "good shoot.")

3. Race had nothing to do with this except for the fact that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are exploiting it. (If race has nothing to do with the tragedy who do the apologists keep pointing out that there were Black and Latino officers involved? Do the bullets from the guns of minority officers only kill White suspects?)

4. Sean Bell had a criminal record. (Which is a fact none of the undercover officers knew before blowing him away and mentioning it only reveals the depths some people will plumb to justify the shooting)



The fact of the matter is that if it were White kids being riddled with bullets in such a manner there wouldn't be enough Al Sharptons in the world to demand justice. The fact of the matter is it ISN'T White kids being brutalized and shot down in gross acts of police brutality. It's Black kids and trying to gloss over it with "woulda/coulda/shoulda" scenarios convinces no one that pays any attention to the the history of the New York City police force.



Pardon me while I sneer at your ice-cream and cake pipe dream that race has nothing to do with the slaughter of Sean Bell. Cops recklessly and indiscriminately playing judge, jury and executioner does a hell of a lot more to "champion the cause of racial division" because when you've got one standard for one man and another for the other man then that is the embodiment of racial division.

Not that I would waste one minute trying to convince you of how race plays into this tragedy Aevans176. The only thing as bad as someone who sees racism where it doesn't exist is someone who never sees racism at all.



In our nation's past? What you sugarcoat as "inappropriate action" is nothing less than police brutality, a concept some people cannot begin to wrap their tiny little brains around. You call the protests and demands for an independent investigation in the killing of Sean Bell "a witch hunt?" Funny. It looks a lot more like citizens holding officials accountable and doubting that the cops are capable of investigating themselves.

Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson should not waste one second apologizing for standing up for the rights of people whom are being brutalized. Agitation and protest seems to be one of the few remaining effective ways to get the attention of a complacent public narcotized by too much TV and empty-headed political rhetoric designed only to placate and pacify. To the extent they annoy those who would prefer not to be reminded racism still exists in circa-2006 America, Sharpton and Jackson ARE carrying on the spirit of their mentors in the struggle for social justice.

When will it end for me? Probably at the same time YOU don't ignore the 42 posts that followed mine but it's only my remarks you single out for special attention. Probably at the same time YOU find someone else to be your bete noire besides one of the few African-Americans posting here.

Probably at the same time YOU realize that it isn't Black people walking up to the cops and asking them to kill them creating the problem here and it damn sure isn't playing the race card to suggest maybe the lives of Black people matter just as much as those of White people.

Probably at the same time I no longert have to worry about my son ending up on the business end of cop's bullet just because he happened to be born Black and male and that making him guilty until proven innocent in the eyes of the "law and order" types.

When will it end for me? As long as benighted mindsets like yours exist Aevans176 probably never.

Did you ever think that there were people shooting at the automobile that weren't white?
Did that cross your mind?

There is no double standard, NT, and the reason that I often argue your semantics is because I adamantly disagree. It has nothing to do with your race.

The frank nature of this incident is that, like anything else relating to anyone who happens to be black, it's publicized and beaten up on network news indefinitely for the pure fact that the kid was black. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson would not have been there had this man been white. It's not about rights, but about grandstanding and perpetuating a stigma long past... because it benefits people. It's a shame that the incident has to be clouded in the haze of racism, as these folks might've shot the heck out of a white kid, a hispanic kid, or whomever. This guy happened to be black.

To me, the saddest thing is that this man died the night before his wedding and it's turned into a racial debate. Al Sharpton, THE CHAMPION OF THE BLACK CAUSE... of course you agree with him, as you believe that all bad things that happen to someone of color are because of the tone of their skin.

Let's say the stories are true, and he tried to hit you with a car... and you were armed. What would you have done? If he was ramming your van. I suppose we also should forget that some of the cops were black... guess they were uncle Toms... go ahead, call them names. I can hear it already.

From the NYT... we know how conservative they are! HA!
[quote]
The first to open fire Saturday is a 28-year-old black man of Haitian descent who lives with his mother in Brooklyn[/b]

I guess Haitian black men are the biggest biggots out there... after all, by your logic, black immigrants have it the easiest of all!!!

Did it cross my mind that some of the cops shooting at the automobile weren't white?

Sure it did. But unlike you I don't think the race of the officers excuses the killing of Sean Bell. Unlike you I think a little deeper and I realize that Black cops and Latino cops would prefer to go along and get along and be part of the club than makes waves and not support their fellow officers.

But don't take my word for it...

A Justice Department report in 2000 found that a majority of white cops did not think that police were more prone to treat blacks more harshly than whites. A sizable number of black cops agreed. Despite massive public attention and outrage over the blue code of silence, the Justice Department survey found that eighty percent of police officers either believed the code of silence was necessary to do good police work or feared retaliation from other officers or even the brass if they squealed on bad cops.

Black cops were no more anxious to come forth to report misconduct by other officers than white cops out of fear of not being seen as a team player and that protesting abuse will damage their career. Many Black cops are also infected with the "us versus them" police siege mentality and will commit and then attempt to cover-up their misconduct or brutal acts. The problem of blacks using deadly force against other blacks will probably get worse. The number of black officers on big city police departments has soared since the 1970s.

Criminal justice experts agree that no matter how much training officers get, how they react in a situation on the streets depends on their own apprehensions and prejudices and that police work tends to aggravate whatever prejudices they have. Many black officers have those same prejudices as whites. They do not live in or grow up in impoverished black neighbors and see them as hostile and alien places. Many of them are just as jittery as white cops at the prospect of an armed encounter with other blacks.

link

Cops feel---probably with some justification---they are part of a fraternity where only other members can truly understand or appreciate the job they are tasked with. For the police it's BLUE that trumps "White" or "Black." The police exists by the same principle that binds soldiers. It doesn't matter where you come from or what you think about the other guy; you're both Marines and you need each other to get the mission accomplished.

Who wants to be labeled as a snitch? Who wants to be thought of as not being "a stand-up guy?" Film director Sidney Lumet made two excellent films in Serpico and Prince of the City that document how White cops are made outcasts when they "rat" on their brother officers.

Now add to that equation that you're Black and you're already regarded by some brother officers as just a "affirmative action" hire. Are you going to come in as a reformer or keep your head down and go along to get along? I think we both know the answer to that.

Black cops like any other cop tend to conform and support the goals of the collective group. That means you close ranks and back the play of another officer even if they may be wrong. The cop you bust for being a bad apple today might be the back-up you need tomorrow.



Stick to telling me what you believe because frankly you suck at telling me what I believe, Aevans176.

Yeah, Sean Bell just "happened" to be Black. Just "happened" to be Black and now Black and Dead because he lived and died in a city where unfortunate things just seem to "happen" between cops and young Black men like Bell. This "incident" isn't clouded in the haze of racism. It's clouded by the haze of 50 gunshots.

I could take your drivel about "grandstanding" and "perpetuating a stigma long past" and apply it to the cases of Amadou Diallo, Eleanor Bumpers, Patrick Dorismond or Abner Louima and nothing would change except the names of the victims of police brutality.

I'd like to think Sharpton and Jackson would be as outraged if it were a White kid gunned down in such a massive show of force as Sean Bell was. I'll leave it up to the apologists to find that example where a White life is treated as cheaply as Black life regularly is.

Nighttimer, your frustration is understood. "Passionate concern" is a legitimate response. Your feelings as expressed however leave virtually no room for any other conclusion but the one you draw. I don't see any other conclusion frankly but that either the policemen are nailed for the murder of an innocent man or that once again the police have white washed another egregious act of negligence (or worse, racism) in protecting one of their own.

With so little concession for any other possible outcome, these "debates" while for the most part civil, are rendered silly as at least one side already brings in a "stacked deck" that will not be "reshuffled" under any circumstance. As such, events like this simply become one more pulpit from which to trot out our already predetermined conclusions. In other words, the event itself becomes superfluous to another opportunity for defending the "platform".

Is there any other territory yet left uncovered? I guess not.

I freely admit that when it comes to matters of in-house investigations conducted by the police of the police, I am not a skeptic. I am a cynic.

I would like to say I hope that I am wrong. Experience and history lead me to believe I am not.

I have to agree with you on this, Nighttimer. My gut feeling is that there is no investigation, there is a collusion. It is common knowledge that police protect each other. So why should we expect anything different in this situation especially when there are so many questionable actions here it leads one to believe that this is a cover up in the making. Protocol was broken from the onset. Drinking allowed on the job? Since when? Isn't it illegal to carry firearms and consume alcohol at the same time? I guess it's not if you are the police or the Vice President. They broke cover of a murder case to break up a fight. That makes no sense. They allowed Bell's group to gain access to their car when it was thought that one of Bell's friends was going to get a gun. A series of actions that runs contrary to their training and we are supposed to believe that they did the wrong thing all the way up until they killed Bell. I don't buy it.

Not to mention that they are all scumbag pigs. That's a scientific fact by the way.

There have been some extremely intemperate and harsh statements made in this thread and you've made two of them barnaby2341. deng appears to be just a intemperate little troll dropping by to lower the quality of the debate. That makes his obnoxious and malicious tirade easy to dismiss.

You're not that easily disregarded.

You hate cops. That's crystal clear. That's your prerogative. You make some reasoned arguments as to why the benefit of the doubt should not automatically be given to the police.

But you lose me and undermine the valid points you make when you say all cops are scumbag pigs and you don't pity dead cops. Whatever justification you have for your hatred of the police does not apply to every police officer. Damning a whole profession because of what may be your limited exposure to them is excessive and radical. You are stereotyping cops simply because you don't like the job they do and that's no different from a rogue cop racially profiling all Black males as criminals.

Every cop is not a corrupt, lazy, racist, trigger-happy cowboy. Only the smallest percentage of police officers fits that description. There are bad cops just like there are bad doctors, lawyers and presidents. I don't like it when good cops cover the butts of bad cops. But I don't want to second-guess the police officer. I want them to do their jobs in a fair and evenly-applied manner.

I don't get a thrill when I hear about a cop taking a knife that a enraged husband was trying to plunge into his terrified wife's back during a domestic disturbance. I don't giggle when a officer gets shot in the face during a "routine" traffic stop. I don't think humanity is bettered when a policeman takes a bullet while pursuing a thief down a dark alley or busting a meth lab.

The difference between us barnaby2341 is I think the cops can do a better job. You don't think they should be doing it at all.

Regardless of whether part of the police response was racially-motivated or not, 50 bullets to take a person down is incredibly excessive.

It wasn't the greatest place for the groom to be just before his wedding day. It seems that American males think that guys have to finish sowing all their wild oats before getting married. Booze is added to lower inhibitions (read: wisdom, knowledge of consequences), and reckless behavior ensues. As a middle-aged woman I have never understood the need for men to do this, but that's beside the point.

The point is that the man was unarmed, and even ramming a police vehicle twice, injuring a police officer once when it happened, still did not justify a situation that is accurately described as overkill.

I hope for the sake of all the parties involved that the investigation will be thorough and open.

I understand that because of similar events involving black victims have taken place, there are justifiably concerns that the attack was as severe as it was because of the race of the groom and his buddies. I am not saying, however, that it was. That remains to be seen.

And yes, opportunistic politicians come in all shapes and colors. It would be hypocritical and disingenuous to single out black politicians alone for this behavior. Just who, if it isn't a very prominent white politician, stood on the rubble of what was left of the World Trade Center and has brought it up every month of every year to further his agenda?

I hope that the presence of the Reverends Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson will serve to comfort the community in mourning and perhaps encourage a fair investigation.

On what basis do you make the judgment that "50 shots was excessive"?

The police are trained to keep shooting until the fight is over. In NY, they are trained to keep shooting until their magazines run dry.

Why is this? Because there are many cases where a perp was shot and continued to fight back... killing an officer or an innocent.

What do you mean in the following statement...



Who exactly are you referring to with respect to "the community"? What "comfort" could those two hucksters possibly bring? And how could their prejudging of this case aid in "fairness"?? They've both declared that the cops "murdered" Bell. Is that "fair" to the officers involved?

Sharpton's record (and Jesse's) is well established. You should review the Tawana Brawley debacle if you want insight into Sharpton's character.

I guess I'm the only one who thinks 50 shots isn't necessarily excessive. The way I look at this:
1) If the person is not a real threat, one shot is excessive.
2) If the person is a real threat, the number of shots is irrelevant.

Obviously once the police make the decision to use deadly force they will shoot until the perceived threat is neutralized. The problem, in this case, was making that decision to begin with.

There is a famous FBI case, Platt and the FBI, where armed robbers were in the process of being apprehended..... One offender received almost 20 bullets to his body. About a dozen of those were fatal wounds, but before he died, was able to shoot dead 4 agents. There was another instance in Miami where an armed suspect on PCP was shot 33 times with 9mm handguns before he stopped shooting. Now we are speaking of three men (thought to be armed, in a vehicle that was thought to be hostile). In such an instance, IF the suspects WERE actually shooting back (as the police apparently seemed to believe), 50 doesn't sound excessive to me.

I was thinking about the rioting following the Rodney King beating in Los Angeles.

Again, I submit that it isn't only these personalities who make political hay while the sun shines, that there are others who do it as a matter of course. We all know this.

My hope is that if Sharpton and Jackson are going to be there that they actually provide comfort to those who grieve and not go beyond emphasizing the need for a fair and thorough investigation of what looks to some in the community like an exaggerated response to racial profiling.

It is no surprise to me that you consider these two men to be "hucksters" and yes, I am familiar with the Tawana Brawley case. It doesn't change how I feel about this situation, though. Fifty bullets pumped into an unarmed man screams for a thorough and impartial investigation of the men in blue who are sworn to "serve and protect".

Again, what do you mean by "the community"? Who specifically are you referring to?

All police shootings receive a "full and impartial" investigation. This one is being investigated.

But, Sharpton and Jackson don't help anything when they declare that the cops "murdered" Bell. Their motivation is what it's always been. To keep the hate alive. To this end, they have established a very telling record.

And, as Mrs. Pigpen pointed out, there are many documented cases where the perps involved in a gunfight were shot multiple times and kept shooting back.... killing cops. Police officers know of these cases and many more that most people never heard of. That's what it is NYPD doctrine to shoot until the magazine is dry when involved in a deadly force situation. Many of those officers use handguns that hold 17 rounds in their magazines. With 3 or 4 police officers involved, and shooting at who they believe to be 3 armed men, 50 shots is certainly not out of the question given their doctrine and their training.

When the facts are all in, we'll know what the story is. Until then, all we have is TV-hungry race hucksters trying to rile people up, generate hatred toward the police, and hang the cops involved before any charges, indictments, or trials have occurred.

But at least you don't use an Avatar in this forum that features a police officer in the crosshairs of a gun sight. That one is real nice.

The man was unarmed, and 50 bullets used to bring down an unarmed man is overkill, don't you think?

In addition, taking the time to change a clip in your gun to reload when nobody is shooting back at you is what I would call excessive, unless you're in a war zone.


Any proof of this, or is that why you used the scare quotes?

How many is the correct number of bullets? If you subtract the 32 shot by one officer is that an acceptable number?

Like the great comfort and and fair investigations of the Tawana Brawley case? Or the Crown Height Riots? Or maybe like the time he suggested that Freddie's Fashion Mart be burned to the ground... oh and then it was? I know, I know, Hymie Town, you're talking about all the comfort that brought people. But hey after all Jesse is going to pay the college tuition for the woman who ruined Duke Lacross and took 3 players with her on her lie, so that's comforting. Yeah, you're right these two hucksters and shake-down artists will surely bring comfort and fairness to this situation.

I find it interesting that you have essentially taken a thread about police gunning down an unarmed man and made it a referendum on Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

Just what are you more concerned about anyway--that the truth be known and justice be done for the sake of those who cared about the unarmed man shot to death, or whether the "hucksters" might make political hay about it?

You know, I could cite instances, such as the case of Malice Green in Detroit who was bludgeoned to death by a police officer with one of those big flashlights, because he wouldn't open his hand. There are numerous cases detailing the heavy-handedness of some men who use excessive force while wearing police uniforms. But I don't think it should be necessary. I could cite the case of the man who needed extensive colon surgery after being raped with an object by police officers who had him in custody. I could cite the black man who was peppered with gunshots on his doorstep, again, an unarmed man.

What I am saying is that there have been a sufficient number of circumstances where the men in blue have used inappropriate force against suspects. In many of these cases the suspects in question were unarmed.

You may say what you like about Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, but these men, like it or not, are accepted by members of the black community as leaders, spokesmen for their concerns.

I don't see Rudy Giuliani stepping up in this situation, and Mayor Bloomberg has to be as neutral as possible in this situation.

No they are not. Clearly you don't know many people in the black community but do watch a lot TV. Jackson and Sharpton are simply loudmouths who have basically blackmailed the media into paying attention to them or face their threats.

I don't believe Rudy Guiliani should have anything to say about this situation and Bloomberg has NOT been neutral.

This situation is completely unacceptable and needs to be investigated by the Police and another party to find out everything that went wrong. Sean Bell should not be dead for going to a strip club. Those two idiots need to be muzzled and ignored.

At least we can agree on this.

There are a lot of people in our society who should be "muzzled and ignored". Ann Coulter comes to mind with her comment regarding the 9/11 widows.
But such is the nature of free speech; you're not always going to hear something you like.

I do concede that I know very little about the black community. And maybe I do place a little too much credence in what the media portrays as spokespeople. But the situation where the groom is shot to death while unarmed SMELLS BAD, and obviously there are people who are afraid that if the police alone investigate it, the truth might not come out.

Glad you liked it. The problem is it ISN'T a avatar of a police officer in the cross-hairs of a gun sight.

It's the avatar of the rap group Public Enemy. For those who are squinting a further explanation may be necessary.

P.E. mastermind Chuck D. is, among other things, a shrewd self-promoter; everything about the group was calculated to make an immediate impact, from the group's name and logo (a black man in a cross-hair sight) link

So if you are blind in one eye and can't see out the other the Public Enemy avatar is not a cop in the cross-hairs of a gun sight. It's a Black man in the cross-hairs of a gun sight.. Relax and unclench.

Public Enemy has long believed that being a Black man in America is like being a moving target. Since some people here think 50 gunshots isn't "excessive" and whether it's 50, 100 or 500, the number of gunshots are "irrelevant," I'd say P.E. is probably right. However many bullets it takes to get the job done and kill someone should always be one bullet too many instead of one bullet not enough.

Which makes the avatar dead-on target for this thread.

Only a proven race-huckster would be silly enough to think after my last post defended the police I would then suggest killing cops!

But I guess that what happens when you try to rile up hatred and anger without having all the facts first.

Don't believe the hype.

Sure, in a case where the suspect is actively shooting at the police, then the police should use as many rounds as necessary to "neutralize" him. BUT, none of the people in Bell's car were armed, and none of them were shooting at the officers. The police didn't even know if anyone HAD a gun; they just "suspected" that one "might". To me, that isn't sufficient excuse to blast away at the car.

Exactly.

Edited to add:

Not that it has anything to do with the Bell case, but those "ruined" players gang-raped a girl, and deserve whatever punishment they get.

I agree that if they just "suspected" that he "might" have a gun there was no reason to fire at the car. However, if they were told "Watch out! He has a gun!" that is something entirely different. Someone was at fault here but it might not have been all of them, or even most of them. It might not have even been the ones who did most of the firing. It depends entirely on the situation. Which we don't know.

I've pretty much said all that I wish to on this subject. I truly hate debating race issues because they get so ugly, and personally don't think race was a factor here...same circumstances, same comedy of errors, and a few rough looking white fellows would have encountered the same thing, IMO.

Is your hatred for the NYC PD so deep that you can't see that the Haitian Black Police officer shot FIRST???

How on earth is that placating white society? If a black man shot another black man first, the how is this a racially motivated event?

Please stick to this case. You can post one-sided and inconsequential anecdotes about other black men that were shot. I don't think it's applicable here.

Again, I'll ask why you'd ever believe that this is a racially motivated shooting, and that Al Sharpton and his exploitation posse should be villified for grandstanding and playing the race card.

Why can't Sean Bell be remembered as Sean Bell, as opposed to the BLACK guy that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton used and abused on national television? Oh, because anything bad that happens to black people is purely based upon race. Even if a black man shot him first. I see it now. Thanks.

I thought I explained that already. Perhaps you didn't read that post before posting your typically reactionary spiel.



Maybe you did read it. Possibly you didn't understand it. Tell me how much simpler you want me to make it for you and I'll see if I can accommodate?

And regarding your shrill and ludicrous claim that I hate the New York City Police Department.





And who died and made you a Moderator? This isn't a thread you started. You don't determine what is applicable and what is not.

Of the things I don't care about I really don't care what you think is applicable here. Don't blame me for your inability to argue the FACTS. Got that Aevans176? The FACT is Black people have been victims of acts of brutality by the New York City Police Department. I know introducing a FACT intrudes upon your emotional rants but FACTS are what a debate board deals with.



Sean Bell can't be remembered as just Sean Bell because a racially-mixed group of NY cops went off and turned the last moments of his life into a recreation of Tony Montana's death scene in Scarface and these "accidents" happen far too frequently in New York to just be brushed off as a bad judgment call. Not when you have people who think firing 50 bullets at unarmed men is a reasonable, measured response or the real problem is the lousy aim of New York City cops.

Or are you just trying to show how much you hate Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton? The line forms there on the Far Right next to lordhelmet and BaphometsAdvocate.

I'm beginning to realize the best thing Jackson and Sharpton do is irritate the hell out of far-right wingers.

Cops are a restriction to every possible freedom we as a people could hope to have. We have no freedom of speech because a cop can determine if that speech is a disturbance of the peace. Or the threat of incarceration is enough to silence the dissident voices.

I'm sure you have seen this.
Protester shot in the face, and cops laugh The cops laughed about hitting her. The whole of them, not a few, not scattered voices, but all of them cheered. That cheer was the death knell of our First Amendment.



These police officers have great power and they wield it without consequence. My two cousins are police officers and they are not corrupt, or are they? One told me of a time when he arrested a black woman for spitting because she did it as an expression of her disdain for the police. So he wielded his power and took her freedom away for spitting on the sidewalk. You know that's not acceptable. My other cousin told me that if he is not shown the proper respect he dogpiles tickets onto the driver. I was not aware that proper respect was against the law. But anybody who does not show it pays a heavy price, or essentially, gets robbed. Who stops these minor offenders of our civil liberties? These cops are not pulling people over and taking bribe money, or confiscating drugs off of someone for their personal use. These are the rank and file police. The supposedly "good" cop.

Spousal abuse is almost always exacerbated by alcohol, the legal drug. Would you giggle if a burglar entering a person's home was shot by the homeowner? That is what a routine traffic stop is; a robbery. Take time out to read, Pirates and Emperors by Noam Chomsky to understand the perspective of one's role in society. I may be looking more at the bigger picture than you would like, but how can you enter a house to "bust a meth lab" and talk about it with your buddies over a beer and a smoke without choking on the hypocrisy? Alcohol and cigarettes have done more harm to our society than meth ever will and people continue to consume. Reagan and Bush were not too interested in stopping drugs when they made the deal with the Contras which lead to the destruction of inner city blacks on the West Coast.

Exactly.

Surely you are kidding? So, without the cops people could say whatever they like without fear of repercusion? No being shot for 'disrespect' or anything like that, right? Wow areas with little police protection sure tend to express their vast levels of "freedom" in strange ways...bars on their windows and all.

The whole purpose of government is to protect those rights via the use of force. If someone is free to hurt you/steal property at any time, for whatever arbitrary reason you have no freedom at all. This is like saying "the government is a thief that takes your money!"...refering to taxes, and then concluding that there should be no government at all (which there wouldn't be, incidentally, without police officers because there would be no means of enforcement but let's not even think that far...).

The fact that there are some unpleasant restraints on freedom as a cost for being a member of society does not indicate we would be better off with no restaints at all and pure law of jungle. Unless you are the biggest thug around that is, and there will always be someone bigger.



Yes indeed, no one would be laughing at others' misery if there was no police officers! Ever watch 'City of God'? I recommend a trip down to Liberty City Miami. Unless much has changed since I lived in Miami, you should be able to enjoy exactly the style of freedom you seem to be looking for with no police officer interference whatsoever.

Jackson and Sharpton MADE themselves the center of this case. Furthermore, the police didn't know the man was "unarmed". In contrast, they believe they were armed and shooting at them!

They are "leaders"? Of what? Keeping the hate alive for their own personal financial benefit? That's about it.

Malice Green? I remember that Detroit case and so does anyone interested in justice . A crackhead with a rap sheet a mile long was stopped by police and then tried to reach under the seat of his car in spite of police commands to "stop!". The police thought he was going for a gun (wouldn't you?). They subdued him but hit him on the head with their flashlight while doing so. He died. There was testimony at the trial that the cocaine in his system was partially responsible for his death. No matter. The OJ jury who heard the case wasn't interested in any "white man science". They convicted the white officers of homicide in a tremendous injustice.

You seem hung up on the "50 bullets" issue. Yet, with 4 cops firing guns that hold 17 rounds each, and their belief that they were under attack from 3 armed men who were shooting at them, that hardly seems excessive. It's irrelevant actually. And, the police were just following the NYPD training doctrine which instructs the officers, when faced with a deadly force situation, to empty their guns. Strictly speaking, several of the cops screwed up by not following their training. On top of it, only 21 shots hit the car. That indicates that better marksmanship training (under stress) is required for the NYPD.

I'll wait until the facts come out and ignore the race baiting shakedown hucksters Jackson and Sharpton. Frankly, Jackson should be under FBI investigation for tax evasion and Sharpton should be ignored by the press for his roles in the Tawana Brawley and Duke LaCrosse debacles.

You say that you'll wait until all the facts come out but you already made a conclusion that cops "believed that they were armed and shooting at them." What happened with waiting for all the facts coming out? At this point I am not willing to give police any benefit of a doubt.
Power corrupts.

The facts related to the number of shots fired, the number of shots that hit, and the "belief" of the officers is already known.

What is under investigation were the sequence of events on both sides so that a determination can be made as to the officer's negligence.

We still don't know what the 3 guys in the car did before and after the cops made their appearance. We don't know for sure which officer fired first. We don't know who or what the "4th man" was in the car and whether he was armed or not.

And why wouldn't you not give the police any benefit of the doubt. Do you REALLY think they would intentionally kill an unarmed man?

What makes you believe such a thing?

A belief isn't a fact. It is a fact that NYPD has already stated that after one shot went off (fired by an Officer) the others began to fire. One of them, an officer who'd never fired his gun on duty before - and whom had been shot at before - unloaded his first clip and believed his gun had jammed and then proceeded to unload that clip too.

Again - what a dilemma you'll ever be in if you ever need the Police to come to your aid knowing they'll kill you too. After all the Police kill millions of people everyday.

There is nothing wrong with being outraged at this situation. There is nothing wrong with demanding justice for Sean Bell.

Making this a racial issue, or a Blue vs. Black issue, or believing the Police are corrupted by power is wrong.

We know that they stated that they believed that they were in danger - doesn't mean that they really were and also doesn't mean that they actually believed it back then. They state it now because that may get them off the hook.
As for your last question. Cops, as representatives of the law, have tremendous power. A badge and a gun elevates a guy above all social circles and other inter-societal barriers. Also cops tend to get a benefit of the doubt in dicey situations. Some (probably a majority) can handle this power and carry the weight of this responsibility honorably. However, a great many of them get corrupted by this power; a slightest sign of disobedience is taken with "I'll show you" attitude and an immediate urge to achieve complete submission and obedience with any means possible.

For the record, I don't believe that this case has racial overtones; the guys in the car could have been a couple of white guys from Jersey, and they probably would get shot just as fast. Doesn't make this shooting any more or less legit.

If the facts of this case establish that the cops (1) believed that they were being shot at and (2) there was probable cause to support their belief, then the cops did not "murder" that guy.

It was an unfortunate accident and a tragedy. Not homicide as hucksters Sharpton and Jackson have claimed in order to keep the hate alive.

The cops will be disciplined according to the findings of the investigation. One or more may lose their jobs. Better training may be ordered for the rest.

It's easy to make judgements regarding US cops without knowing any and learning about what they face each and every day.

The fact that one of the posters in this thread has decided on an avatar that features a cop in a rifle scope is pretty telling about the mentality out there from the so-called "civilized" people. You should see what they face from the low lifes.

Police officers are not infallible. Expecting them to be perfect is unrealistic. BUT, the NYPD has a rather shaky history when it comes to brutality (as does the LAPD), especially against minorities. This, unfortunately or not, leaves them open to valid criticism whenever an event like this occurs. The problem with NYPD is so well-known that it has attracted the attention of both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. Granted, this report is dated 1998, but it is could have just as well have been written more recently.

While I still believe alcohol had far more to do with this latest case than race, there is still a racial element that cannot be ignored due to the NYPD’s past history. People can whine all they want about Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, but if it wasn’t them, it would be someone else; the black community needs someone to represent their interests, however distasteful some white men may find those representatives to be. I don’t care for either of the gentlemen, but then, I’m not part of that community. Someone does need to be there to make the NYPD accountable for its actions. Tough luck if some people don't like it.

Trent Benefield appreciates Al Sharpton's support, and wants justice for himself and his dead friend. Joseph Guzman, with 16 bullets in him, pleads for "no violence". Sean Bell's fiancee Nicole Paultre isn't angry, she just wants justice.
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/477344p-401515c.html

The police do a tough job. But, when they make mistakes (and they do), they should be made responsible for them. Historically, the investigation always sides with the cops, regardless.

And people wonder why the citizens get "unruly".

A Ten-Point breakdown of the preceding:

1. JUDGMENT: A man's judgment cannot be better that the information on which he has based it.
(Arthur Hays Sulzberger)

2. POLICE: For the middle class, the police protect property, give directions, and help old ladies. For the urban poor, the police are those who arrest you. (Michael Harrington)

Bryan Farrell, a Dallas police officer who shot and killed three people in seven months, was dismissed from the force when investigators found notches carved into his service pistol. (The Progressive, July 1989)

3. FACTS: We want the facts to fit the preconceptions. When they don't it is easier to ignore the facts than to change the preconceptions. (Jessamyn West)

4. OPINION: When we pass in review the opinions of former times which are now recognized as absurd, it will be found that nine times out of ten they were such as to justify the infliction of suffering.
(Bertrand Russell)

5. BIGOTRY: The mind of the bigot is like the pupil of the eye; the more light you pour upon it, the more it will contract. (Oliver Wendell Holmes)

6. RACISM: Racism originates in domination and provides the social rationale and philosophical justification for debasing, degrading, and doing violence to people on the basis of color. (Jim Wallis)

7. IGNORANCE: Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity. (Martin Luther King, Jr. )

8. HATE: Anger, yes, but not hatred. A man remains in ignorance as long as he hates. I hate what someone does, but I don't hate him. (Buck O'Neal)

9. ARGUMENT: The end of argument or discussion should be, not victory, but enlightenment.
(Joseph Joubert)

10. FUTILITY: "Never waste your time trying to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time, and it annoys the pig." (Anonymous)

You do understand that it if we go example for example the criminals will outnumber the police in terms of acts committed right? And should someone decide to choose a race, or religion of people who commit crimes the same outcome could be attained. The Police spend time where crime is. Why do you suppose crime is higher in areas where there are "urban poor" than where there are "middle class" people? Having lived in areas considered "urban poor" and moving to areas considered "middle class" I have a really good idea. Maybe yours is better. I don't know.

I do know my experience tells me while the Police are not your friend they're (generally) not out to kill me.






I always thought that was supposed to be a black man in sites. Isn't that an old PE symbol? 911 Is A Joke?

My opinion on this matter seems to fall rapidly right in between what is rapdily becoming two extremes. Certainly this sounds wrong, for several reasons, however now having been there I will await the results of an inquiry before lashing out at anyone.


However, a few factual errors have been made, assertions which are incorrect, I thought it was worth correcting them, as a couple have been repeated several times as if they consituted an argument.

Firstly, NYPD police are most certainly not taught to empty their guns when the open fire. The 'fire until dry' is a complete invention. Not only is it factually wrong, but it doesn't even make any logical sense.
Firstly, every police officer in North America, and that includes Canada is taught to fire in bursts of two to three rounds before stopping, reassessing and reaiming. The reason as anyone who has ever handled a an automatic knows, is if you fire as fast as you can, after three shots your accuracy is reduced to less than zero. Firing until dry would be a waste of ammunition and incredibly dangrous to anyone nearby. But wait, there is more. According to NYPD Comissioner Raymond Kelly, NYPD police in cases of extreme danger are taught to fire two or three nursts at maximum before reassesing the situation. According to veteran NYPD police officers, and the US Department of Justice Police use-of-force guidelines, if Police officers believe they are coming under fire, they are to seek cover and assess the situation rather than returning fire blindly.

Secondly, while the 'fire until dry' assertion may have been a total fabrication, here is an ACTUAL rule of the NYPD. Police officers are NOT allowed to fire into a vehicle if the only weapon being used against them is the vehicle itself. So ignoring the other officers who joined in for a moment, the FIRST officer who fired the first shot into the car was most certainly breaking proceedure.

Oh and as a final aside, NYPD issue Glock-19 handguns carry 15 rounds, not 17, and pretty much every police (and military) officer in the world only loads 14 as a full magasine (if kept loaded for any length of time) causes excess tension on the spring and seriously increases the risk of jamming.

Hopefully these facts might help clear up the debate on a few points.

Every week I watch America's Most Wanted there is a segment where the show honors law enforcement officials whom have fallen. Lately, I've noticed every week the show is on there is a fallen law enforcement officer to be honored.

Between the extremes where every cop is a pig or every cop is a shining blue knight, lies the reality that police officers are neither superheroes or supervillians. They are just ordinary men and women who do a job most of us don't have the stomach or temperament for. Every now and then a bad one gets through or a good one makes a bad mistake. I totally agree with you BaphometsAdvocate that the number of good cops killed by bad people far exceeds the number good people killed by bad people.

But the difference between my position and the side that says "Let's wait for all the facts but until then let me tell you why the cops did the right thing by shooting Sean Bell" is I support the proposition that along with the responsibility of wearing a badge and a gun comes the dual obligation to utilize it in a wise and judicious manner.

Nobody needs the protection of the police more than the urban poor residents of a high-crime area. Unfortunately, there are too many episodes where cops shoot first and make excuses later and it's the "urban poor" arranging the funerals while the "middle class" are all apologies and rationalizations.



You're correct that my current avatar has so rankled a particular undiscerning poster that they have continued to see it as a cop targeted by a gun-sight DESPITE an explanation establishing that said fig