PhillyArena Forums
PhillyArena Community => NBA Discussion => Topic started by: rickortreat on July 24, 2009, 11:36:08 AM
-
For those of you unfamiliar with the story, a policeman responded to a call about a potential break-in. Upon arriving at the location he found the Proffesor and requested ID, which the home-owner provided, proving that the house was in fact his. The rest of the information is sketchy, coming from the police report.
It seems to me, that if you prove to a policman that the house he's concerned about is yours and that you're ok, that he should be satisfied. In fact it's very hard to understand ANY scenario in which the homeowner gets arrested. President Obama said the police acted stupidly and yet we have the rank and file policeman behind the officer in spite of the fact that the charges were dropped.
It's hard to come to a direct conclusion because of the hearsay information, but it seems to me that these policeman are MORONS! Absent of the professor pulling a gun on the police, their job is to protect and serve and not harrass.
-
I think he acted stupid. I can't believe right wing talk radio has just focused in on 'oh well its okay for a lady to call the cops if a man looks like hes breaking into a house, they had break ins before!' and 'He was acting belligerent to the cop' They even went as far to say that he followed the cop outside to continue to talk trash.....yet the picture clearly shows he was cuffed right at his front door.
Once the ID was provided the cop should have left. Arguing with a cop is not against the law and neither is being 'belligerent' in your own home. While I think they both let their egos get the best of them, one person was taken out of his home and booked, one wasn't. Clearly the cop was acting like a typical a-hole cop.
To me the real problem was that a 50 year old black male, in a polo shirt, TUCKED IN, with a cane was not given the benefit of the doubt that he owned the home. That bothered me moreso than anything else. Had it been some 20 year old wearing huge baggy pants, a big chain, and a doo rag then it might have been a different story.
-
I'm siding with the police officer on this one. (Surprise, surprise.)
Let's say I'm a policeman. I've gotten a call telling me 2 men are trying to break into a house. I'm going in, assuming, for my own safety, that these two men have hostile intent.
In such a case, if I'm the policeman, I'm going to ask the man to step outside his house, whether he's the home-owner or not. Why? If there is someone inside with hostile intent, I've just removed that person's bargaining chip. If a person asks suspiciously, for any reason, I'm going to assume something is going on inside - the homeowner or a member of his family is endangered. I'm going to be even more demanding that he step outside. Right now is my best chance for safeguarding the homeowner.
The reason the man is arrested is for one reason and one reason only - he became belligerent and abusive. And he did it to a person who was only trying to safeguard him.
Let me throw out the following scenario: let's assume that there *WAS* someone in there with hostile intent. That was reported to the police - by the neighbor (thank goodness for a neighbor who actually cared enough to get involved). 2 people are there - the home-owner, and a burglar. Or perhaps 2 burglars with the home-owner unaware of their presence. The policeman just goes, "Oh, false alarm. Sorry sir," and leaves. Are we then looking at a situation where a black home-owner says, "Well, if I were white, the police would have actually checked on things"? What happens if the burglar kills this man, when the police could have prevented it?
We have to ask this question: were the police being unreasonable by asking the man to come outside, and by asking if anyone else was in the house with him? The answer is "NO." In fact, ONLY by getting the man out of the house can you assure that you are in control of the situation.
This is one of those cases where a man with a chip on his shoulder is upset because someone gave him a vehicle for his paranoia. He overreacted. He was arrested. End of story.
-
I'm siding with the police officer on this one. (Surprise, surprise.)
Let's say I'm a policeman. I've gotten a call telling me 2 men are trying to break into a house. I'm going in, assuming, for my own safety, that these two men have hostile intent.
In such a case, if I'm the policeman, I'm going to ask the man to step outside his house, whether he's the home-owner or not. Why? If there is someone inside with hostile intent, I've just removed that person's bargaining chip. If a person asks suspiciously, for any reason, I'm going to assume something is going on inside - the homeowner or a member of his family is endangered. I'm going to be even more demanding that he step outside. Right now is my best chance for safeguarding the homeowner.
The reason the man is arrested is for one reason and one reason only - he became belligerent and abusive. And he did it to a person who was only trying to safeguard him.
Let me throw out the following scenario: let's assume that there *WAS* someone in there with hostile intent. That was reported to the police - by the neighbor (thank goodness for a neighbor who actually cared enough to get involved). 2 people are there - the home-owner, and a burglar. Or perhaps 2 burglars with the home-owner unaware of their presence. The policeman just goes, "Oh, false alarm. Sorry sir," and leaves. Are we then looking at a situation where a black home-owner says, "Well, if I were white, the police would have actually checked on things"? What happens if the burglar kills this man, when the police could have prevented it?
We have to ask this question: were the police being unreasonable by asking the man to come outside, and by asking if anyone else was in the house with him? The answer is "NO." In fact, ONLY by getting the man out of the house can you assure that you are in control of the situation.
This is one of those cases where a man with a chip on his shoulder is upset because someone gave him a vehicle for his paranoia. He overreacted. He was arrested. End of story.
Arrested for what? Being belligerent in his own home? That's not a crime Joe. Arguing with an officer is not against the law either.
-
Ratt "Lack of Communication" 1983 ;D ;) The live videos are horrible. Listen to the original studio version. :D
Don't have nearly enough of the facts yet so didn't vote yet. The Right media is a sad joke tho. Bitter selfish losers.
I love Obamas style. Was it him or the cop who said lets have a beer and hash this out? Then the cop said "Could you get these media slugs off my lawn" and Obama said "I have a bigger lawn then you and i can't get them off my lawn." :D :D
-
I'm siding with the police officer on this one. (Surprise, surprise.)
Let's say I'm a policeman. I've gotten a call telling me 2 men are trying to break into a house. I'm going in, assuming, for my own safety, that these two men have hostile intent.
In such a case, if I'm the policeman, I'm going to ask the man to step outside his house, whether he's the home-owner or not. Why? If there is someone inside with hostile intent, I've just removed that person's bargaining chip. If a person asks suspiciously, for any reason, I'm going to assume something is going on inside - the homeowner or a member of his family is endangered. I'm going to be even more demanding that he step outside. Right now is my best chance for safeguarding the homeowner.
The reason the man is arrested is for one reason and one reason only - he became belligerent and abusive. And he did it to a person who was only trying to safeguard him.
Let me throw out the following scenario: let's assume that there *WAS* someone in there with hostile intent. That was reported to the police - by the neighbor (thank goodness for a neighbor who actually cared enough to get involved). 2 people are there - the home-owner, and a burglar. Or perhaps 2 burglars with the home-owner unaware of their presence. The policeman just goes, "Oh, false alarm. Sorry sir," and leaves. Are we then looking at a situation where a black home-owner says, "Well, if I were white, the police would have actually checked on things"? What happens if the burglar kills this man, when the police could have prevented it?
We have to ask this question: were the police being unreasonable by asking the man to come outside, and by asking if anyone else was in the house with him? The answer is "NO." In fact, ONLY by getting the man out of the house can you assure that you are in control of the situation.
This is one of those cases where a man with a chip on his shoulder is upset because someone gave him a vehicle for his paranoia. He overreacted. He was arrested. End of story.
Arrested for what? Being belligerent in his own home? That's not a crime Joe. Arguing with an officer is not against the law either.
Whether or not either is legally permissible, both are unwise. And a peaceful protest of words is one thing, but being belligerent towards someone who is trying to make sure you are safe is just being an @$$. And trust me, if you're an @$$, you're not going to get any breaks. At that point, you're INVITING abuse - not because of your race, or gender, or political belief, or whatever, but because YOU'RE AN @$$! At that point, I'm sure the policeman was watching for *ANY* violation of the law.
The man should be grateful that 1) the police responded to protect his home and property, and 2) a neighbor cared enough to actually call. "Thank you for coming, officer, but I'm sure you can see I'm completely safe and there's no one intruding here at my house" would have solved the problem. "You're a racist jerk who is prying into my business!" is always going to be counter-productive.
Also, I do not see why me being hostile toward a waitress at a restaurant or to a co-worker at the office is considered bad form, because these people are just doing their jobs, but being belligerent toward a police officer just doing his job makes the policeman the jerk.
-
I'm siding with the police officer on this one. (Surprise, surprise.)
Let's say I'm a policeman. I've gotten a call telling me 2 men are trying to break into a house. I'm going in, assuming, for my own safety, that these two men have hostile intent.
In such a case, if I'm the policeman, I'm going to ask the man to step outside his house, whether he's the home-owner or not. Why? If there is someone inside with hostile intent, I've just removed that person's bargaining chip. If a person asks suspiciously, for any reason, I'm going to assume something is going on inside - the homeowner or a member of his family is endangered. I'm going to be even more demanding that he step outside. Right now is my best chance for safeguarding the homeowner.
The reason the man is arrested is for one reason and one reason only - he became belligerent and abusive. And he did it to a person who was only trying to safeguard him.
Let me throw out the following scenario: let's assume that there *WAS* someone in there with hostile intent. That was reported to the police - by the neighbor (thank goodness for a neighbor who actually cared enough to get involved). 2 people are there - the home-owner, and a burglar. Or perhaps 2 burglars with the home-owner unaware of their presence. The policeman just goes, "Oh, false alarm. Sorry sir," and leaves. Are we then looking at a situation where a black home-owner says, "Well, if I were white, the police would have actually checked on things"? What happens if the burglar kills this man, when the police could have prevented it?
We have to ask this question: were the police being unreasonable by asking the man to come outside, and by asking if anyone else was in the house with him? The answer is "NO." In fact, ONLY by getting the man out of the house can you assure that you are in control of the situation.
This is one of those cases where a man with a chip on his shoulder is upset because someone gave him a vehicle for his paranoia. He overreacted. He was arrested. End of story.
Arrested for what? Being belligerent in his own home? That's not a crime Joe. Arguing with an officer is not against the law either.
Whether or not either is legally permissible, both are unwise. And a peaceful protest of words is one thing, but being belligerent towards someone who is trying to make sure you are safe is just being an @$$. And trust me, if you're an @$$, you're not going to get any breaks. At that point, you're INVITING abuse. At that point, I'm sure the policeman was watching for *ANY* violation of the law.
The man should be grateful that 1) the police responded to protect his home and property, and 2) a neighbor cared enough to actually call. "Thank you for coming, officer, but I'm sure you can see I'm completely safe and there's no one intruding here at my house" would have solved the problem. "You're a racist jerk who is prying into my business!" is always going to be counter-productive.
Also, I do not see why me being hostile toward a waitress at a restaurant or to a co-worker at the office is considered bad form, because these people are just doing their jobs, but being belligerent toward a police officer makes the policeman the jerk.
I work and have lived in LA, we don't need to be told about the bold :D
I agree that I think BOTH their egos really took it farther than it should have gone. The prof was upset that he was not given the benefit of the doubt and the cop was upset that he was doing the 'DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM I WANT YOUR BADGE NUMBER'. Had both parties not let their egos get the best of them we wouldn't be talking about this. Why do I have a feeling that if this was two women it would have been peaceful LOL!
My problem is that he was not given the benefit of the doubt. I personally don't assume middle aged men with tucked in polo shirts, leather shoes, and a bad hip are the type to break into homes in broad day light. Had he looked more like a hip hop thug with a doo rag, huge flashy chain, some pants that you could hide WMDs in and looked like he was a younger man then the cop would have a better argument. In this case he does not.
The difference between your waitress/cop example is that police are not regular citizens when in uniform. A waitress can not find a reason to bring criminal charges against you. At the very best she can talk to a manager to ask you to leave. In a work setting the very best that person you directly have a problem with can do is talk to a manager or HR. A cop, who would be directly involved in the argument can take it upon himself to make a reason to take you to the station. That's what the problem is and why a cop is looked at like a 'jerk'. If he/she is upset with you he/she can take it upon oneself to 'punish' you whether right or wrong in the argument. That is exactly what this guy did here. There was no burglary. Arguing with a police officer is not against the law and being belligerent in your own home is not an arrest able offense.
-
Pardon me, but the Harvard Law Professor asked for the policeman's badge number and he refused. THAT IS AGAINST THE LAW! Regarldess of anything else, an anonymous tip about a home break in the police officer is required to identify himself.
The next thing is that this man pays taxes to support the police. In effect he was harassed by an employee! Note that eveyone in politics from the Cambrige municipal authority to the President had a real problem with the police officers behavior and note that the police themselves dropped the charges. The only people who are defending this officer are other policeman.
Now a normal layman might have handled things differently, but in this case it was a Harvard Law Professor, someone who knows the law better than anyone else in Boston. A cop decides to get into a pissing match with a man like that should loose and should do down hard. Would you want a cop like that working in your neighborhood? Arresting people because they're upset realizing their home, might have been broken into and the cop decides to arrest you rather than investigating. Sorry this man is too stupid to be a policeman, IMO.
-
The officer did identify himself. The homeowner got irate and belligerent. I agree with Joe; the cop was in the right.
To address another issue:
Being belligerent to a cop EVEN IN YOUR OWN HOME can be basis for arrest. If you are interfering with the cop trying to do his job then you can be arrested. Let's say you are in your home and your brother starts beating up his wife. Your wife calls the cops but when they get there things have calmed down but it is obvious what happened. As the cop tries to find out what has happened you scream at the cop to leave your house. You tell him it is none of his business and to leave. You start barking orders at him for his name, badge number, unit, supervisor name, etc. The cop has every right...and in most cases should...bust you for interfering. IMO this is what Gates did.
-
Koast and Rick, you sound like you know as much of the facts as Obama did. Have you read the police report? Have you read the arresting officers written report? Do you know what Gates' first words to the policeman were, when the officer asked if he would show identification?
He was arrested on the porch, not in the house, as he shouted at the policeman and the neighbors.
I have to admit, when I first heard the story, I cringed because it sounded ridiculous for the policeman to do that. But after a couple of days and more information, I have to agree, for the most part, with both the arrest and the decision to drop charges. Gates was being disorderly, and he was an ASS. And sure, the officer probably was a power head, but he was definitely within the law, and he did nothing wrong.
I have no problem with Obama voicing his opinion. I have to admit, I was a little embarrassed for him (and others I suppose). "I have to admit I don't know many of the facts of the case . . . but it's clear the police acted stupidly."
Do they teach that style of argument at Harvard? Admit ignorance and state position. Hmm . . .
Anyways, guys, read the reports, bridle your biases, and then tell us what you think.
-
My problem is that he was not given the benefit of the doubt. I personally don't assume middle aged men with tucked in polo shirts, leather shoes, and a bad hip are the type to break into homes in broad day light. Had he looked more like a hip hop thug with a doo rag, huge flashy chain, some pants that you could hide WMDs in and looked like he was a younger man then the cop would have a better argument. In this case he does not.
Oh give me a break! The policeman stepped inside the house, says, "Sir, I'm responding to a call regarding a possible break in at this address. Can you show me some identification?" And the guys shouts, "NO I WILL NOT!"
And you're whining about benefit of the doubt. But since you love giving people the benefit of the doubt, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt. I'm going to assume you haven't read the police reports. And if our President can blast a police department in ignorance, I can't hold it against you.
"I'll talk to your mama on the porch!"
A leading African-American scholar advances the cause of race relations by freaking out on a police officer responding to a citizen's report of burglary.
-
Koast and Rick, you sound like you know as much of the facts as Obama did. Have you read the police report? Have you read the arresting officers written report? Do you know what Gates' first words to the policeman were, when the officer asked if he would show identification?
Talk radio has covered it EXTENSIVELY for the entire week. Both conservative talk radio (KFI) and liberal talk radio (Air America) Not only have I heard the police report but I've heard it multiple times. Since you read it, exactly what in the police report said all that other than he was being 'belligerent'? There was no parts of the police report that alluded to a real crime or any type of threats on the officers life.
Btw, the police report is only one side of the story. A bias one at that. So why exactly is the police report treated as gospel in your eyes?
He was arrested on the porch, not in the house, as he shouted at the policeman and the neighbors.
Yes, as soon as he stepped one foot out he was arrested. Everyone saw the picture. Nothing more than a lame technicality.
I have to admit, when I first heard the story, I cringed because it sounded ridiculous for the policeman to do that. But after a couple of days and more information, I have to agree, for the most part, with both the arrest and the decision to drop charges. Gates was being disorderly, and he was an ASS. And sure, the officer probably was a power head, but he was definitely within the law, and he did nothing wrong.
The fact that a policeman can get into a disagreement with someone and take it upon themselves to punish someone is the problem. Being arrested, driven away from your home after just getting back from a trip overseas, finger printed, have a mug shot taken, and the embarrassment of all that is being punished. Whether the actual criminal charges were dropped or not it was still a major pain in the rear.
I have no problem with Obama voicing his opinion. I have to admit, I was a little embarrassed for him (and others I suppose). "I have to admit I don't know many of the facts of the case . . . but it's clear the police acted stupidly."
Do they teach that style of argument at Harvard? Admit ignorance and state position. Hmm . . .
Anyways, guys, read the reports, bridle your biases, and then tell us what you think.
It was clear the police acted like an a-hole because this was a middle aged man, wearing a polo shirt, who walks withh a cane that should have been given the benefit of the doubt that it was in fact his home. Who is to say the police wasn't an ahole to him from the jump? Because that wasn't in the police report? :D
-
New bulletin: Middle-aged men wearing polo shirts cannot possibly be involved in criminal activities. This is the report I'm talking about:
http://www.pamshouseblend.com/upload/documents/GatesPoliceReport.pdf
There is another police report filed by another responding officer, Carlos Figueroa, that backs up the fact that Gates was yelling
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0723092gates3.html
You'll note that both reports indicate the gentlemen was on the porch yelling when he was arrested. That's two police reports from two officers. And the arresting officer, Crowley, has a stellar record and was even selected by an African-American superior to teach a class on avoiding racial profiling.
On a side note, I just read this article and thought it was interesting.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/07/27/gates_caller_didnt_cite_race_police_say/
Bottom line: Gates reacted foolishly by immediately pulling the race card and being belligerent to a police officer responding to a reported crime. All he had to do was say, "Yeah, this is my house. I'm Henry Louis Gates, this is my ID. I just got back from China and lost my keys, so I had to force my door. Thanks for checking in."
Seriously, that's all he had to. If that happens, the officer tips his cap and says good day sir. Is it that unreasonable for a police officer in that situation to ask him to come outside and talk? Well, anyway, we know what happened. Gates acted like an idiot and gave the officer all the reason he needed to be a power head. It's not like being a police officer is a fun, easy job. You get all kinds of shite from all kinds of people for no reason other than you're a cop. Now I'm not saying the officer had to arrest him. He didn't. From his refusal you can tell he's proud and quite sure he was in the right. There's no reason to give that kind of cop a reason to cuff you. Turning yourself into a martyr in front of onlookers, calling the cop a racist in front of onlookers . . . ridiculous.
-
This is certainly off topic, for sure.
1. Why were the cops even there?
Because a women called them after seeing two men trying to jimmy a door in a neighborhood that apparently was having issues with break-ins.
2. But one of the men owned the house.
Actually, he was renting the house and was not yet well-known to any of his neighbors. And he looked like he was trying to break into a house. (is this hard for some people around here to comprehend?)
3. So the cops clearly overreacted by insisting the person they encountered show proof he lived in a house he was seen trying to break into and did.
And was confronted with 'cops are clearly racist for asking him for his identification and they were 'profiling'. Again, it just seems that they would have to to this whether or not the men they encountered in the house were black or not. It just seems to me they were being sure because it is their job to be sure. And the men had been reported to be breaking into a house and the men the police encountered in the house were black. Who, exactly, would they then go in search of for identification in the house other then the two men they encountered, who, once again for the reading impaired, had been reported to them as being there and trying to break into, let me think, the house they were investigating?
4. There was an overreaction in here somewhere, but once the cops started to leave and were once again verbally assaulted by the renter (not owner), they could have kept walking or they could come down to the level of the renter and cuff him in front of his neighbors to make it look like he may be guilty of the break in after all. This is where the cops have to explain themselves.
5. The cop who did the arresting was, in fact, the training officer for five years on that police force for....um....training officers NOT to just racially profile suspects.
-
New bulletin: Middle-aged men wearing polo shirts cannot possibly be involved in criminal activities. This is the report I'm talking about:
http://www.pamshouseblend.com/upload/documents/GatesPoliceReport.pdf
There is another police report filed by another responding officer, Carlos Figueroa, that backs up the fact that Gates was yelling
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0723092gates3.html
You'll note that both reports indicate the gentlemen was on the porch yelling when he was arrested. That's two police reports from two officers. And the arresting officer, Crowley, has a stellar record and was even selected by an African-American superior to teach a class on avoiding racial profiling.
On a side note, I just read this article and thought it was interesting.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/07/27/gates_caller_didnt_cite_race_police_say/
Bottom line: Gates reacted foolishly by immediately pulling the race card and being belligerent to a police officer responding to a reported crime. All he had to do was say, "Yeah, this is my house. I'm Henry Louis Gates, this is my ID. I just got back from China and lost my keys, so I had to force my door. Thanks for checking in."
Seriously, that's all he had to. If that happens, the officer tips his cap and says good day sir. Is it that unreasonable for a police officer in that situation to ask him to come outside and talk? Well, anyway, we know what happened. Gates acted like an idiot and gave the officer all the reason he needed to be a power head. It's not like being a police officer is a fun, easy job. You get all kinds of shite from all kinds of people for no reason other than you're a cop. Now I'm not saying the officer had to arrest him. He didn't. From his refusal you can tell he's proud and quite sure he was in the right. There's no reason to give that kind of cop a reason to cuff you. Turning yourself into a martyr in front of onlookers, calling the cop a racist in front of onlookers . . . ridiculous.
::)
Let me put this into perspective for you here....and let's save the 'I didn't know middle aged white men can't commit crimes' bs. You know exactly why the point was made that he was a middle aged man in tucked in polo shirt with a cane. ill even type it out to make it very clear. H e should have been given the benefit of the doubt. For all you know the police could have approached him as a robber as oppose to asking him what was going on. If they were still trying to open the door when the cops showed up, simple question simple answer. If the cops showed up after he was already inside that makes the situation worse. If he didn't have a napsack trying to ran sack items then what would be the point of acting like he was robbing the house? Both you and Jomal are doing an excellent job of tip toeing around the fact that the cop could have came off wrong. Wouldn't be the first time or the last time.
I take it you have never been pulled over by yourself or with someone else for something real petty only to have a cop make you jump through hoops for no apparent reason. If you haven't I can tell you first hand it is very annoying to get pulled over because 'the light on your license plate was out' and have the cops all the sudden act like people are on drugs just because teenagers are in the car. Or better yet if you've even driven around with a black guy in a semi-nice car you'll understand that there are plenty of instances of people not being given the benefit of the doubt. I think a middle aged man, in a tucked in polo shirt, with a cane should be asked 'what happened' and not 'what are you doing here'. Clearly there is a difference between the two. If you just got home after a long trip, your door was jammed, and then a cop approached you as if you were a criminal rather than talking to you, you probably would have got upset as well. It is not against the law to get upset with an officer when you are not committing a crime.
Jomal, whether he owned it or rented it is irrelevant. No one is saying it is the ladies fault for calling in what she thought was a robbery so this point doesn't apply. On top of that, whether he rented it or owned it, it was still his residence and he belonged there.
-
koast...for a well-educated, professional black man why did Gates act like a kid from the hood when questioned? If Gates is an "expert" on African-American studies then he should have known how potentially explosive the situation was and taken steps to defuse it. Instead he took actions that would escalate the situation in any part of this country. Why didn't he calmly explain the situation instead of reacting with a chip on his shoulder?
And why shouldn't the cop react like he is confronted with a hoodlum when the person acts like one?
-
You DO, know, coast, that most cops killed in the line of duty are doing somewhat routine things like traffic stops and answering domestic calls, right?
You DO know that, I hope. We don't have to really explain to you what it means to a cop, which contrary to your tone, often have families and lives they want to keep, while answering calls such as a report of a potential breakin at a neighborhood house, where.....please read this carefully.....THEY HAVE NO IDEA IF THEY WILL BE SHOT AT ONCE!!!!!!!
And do NOT condescend to us like none of us white guys have not be stopped by cops for taillights being out, or a fast lane change - both of which has happened to me and both times I had to convince the policeman I was sober before I could go. Public road tests and all.
If he wanted to be sure that an old black man with a cane and a polo shirt that was tucked in was, you know, NOT A LOOKOUT FOR SOMEONE, please, please tell us exactly how the cop was going to do that without questioning the man, asking for him to prove he belonged there, and ensuring he was not going to be shot in the back as he left just because the guy said everything is fine so go away.
-
Lurker I can just the same ask why did the police officer not calmly approach Gates and ask what was going on? If the cop is an 'expert' at handling situations by talking to people (as per his training) then he should have known how potentially explosive a situation would be if he did in fact approach a middle aged man with a bad hip like a burglar instead of an upstanding member of that community.
I travel quite a bit for work. Almost every other week at times. When I get home from a cross country flight the only thing I want to do is go home and relax. Now you tell me you can't understand why a guy would get upset when he just got back from a flying across the ocean when he is being harassed about being in his own home? Why shouldn't Gates act like an a-hole if he is confronted with a cop who cannot give a middle aged man who is dressed 'nice' the benefit of the doubt?
Everyone seems to be assuming that this cop would not bend the truth of a story to save his own rear end. Let's not be naive to thing that the police report is the gospel here.
-
Koast, you are so off base on this one. Your whole point is that he should have been given the benefit of the doubt. Ridiculous! A potential crime had been reported. You're asking a police officer who knows nothing about the situation (except that "two men were forcing entry to a home") to make a judgement on the situation based on the fact that the guy has a tucked-in polo shirt and a cane. Pure horsesh*t.
He arrives on scene, sees a man through the forced-open door, and instead of busting in and drawing down on the person, he asks "Sir, can you come out here and talk to me?" Seriously? Is that so much to ask?
Let me put this into perspective for you here....and let's save the 'I didn't know middle aged white men can't commit crimes' bs. You know exactly why the point was made that he was a middle aged man in tucked in polo shirt with a cane.
Well of course I was messing with you. I know what point you were trying to make. My point is, it doesn't matter what he was dressed like. The point you are making makes no sense to me because the cop appears to have tried to give the guy the benefit of the doubt. He didn't see the black man in the house, break down the door, and then find out what's going on. He asked the guy to come talk to him. What is he supposed to do? Respond to the scene, see Gates through the door, and say, oh, he doesn't look like a perp. I'm outta here. Seriously?!?
For all you know the police could have approached him as a robber as oppose to asking him what was going on.
No, I do know. The police officer asked him to come out and talk to him. And by the way, Gates has not disputed ths part of the police officer's account.
I take it you have never been pulled over by yourself or with someone else for something real petty only to have a cop make you jump through hoops for no apparent reason.
No, but I did get royally screwed over by a cop who somehow said it was my fault that an old lady with no insurance backed out of her parking spot and into my car. Luckily we had a friend in the department who tipped us off that the cop knew the lady and basically screwed me over because I was a fully insured 18-year-old kid. Yes, I know cops can suck.
I think a middle aged man, in a tucked in polo shirt, with a cane should be asked 'what happened' and not 'what are you doing here'.
Totally agree with you. Even better than "What happened?" would be "Can you please come out here and talk to me?" Again, facts . . . they help.
It is not against the law to get upset with an officer when you are not committing a crime.
Agreed with one correction. It is against the law to shout at, get belligerent, and resist an officer who is trying to ascertain the facts of a situation.
-
Bottom line: Gates reacted foolishly by immediately pulling the race card and being belligerent to a police officer responding to a reported crime. All he had to do was say, "Yeah, this is my house. I'm Henry Louis Gates, this is my ID. I just got back from China and lost my keys, so I had to force my door. Thanks for checking in."
Seriously, that's all he had to. If that happens, the officer tips his cap and says good day sir...... Now I'm not saying the officer had to arrest him. He didn't. From his refusal you can tell he's proud and quite sure he was in the right. There's no reason to give that kind of cop a reason to cuff you. Turning yourself into a martyr in front of onlookers, calling the cop a racist in front of onlookers . . . ridiculous.
Besides the accounts you posted, if Al Sharpton and the other shister get involved (Jackson), then i will know the professor acted foolishly.
You guys carry on your discussion with westkoasts deep counter thoughts. ;)
-
Lurker I can just the same ask why did the police officer not calmly approach Gates and ask what was going on?
Undisputable evidence that you either do not know or do not care about the facts.
READ THE REPORTS. READ GATES' ATTORNEY'S STATEMENTS. They do not contradict each other on this point. The police officer asked Gates if he would come out and talk to him on the porch.
WHAT THE F*** ELSE WOULD YOU HAVE HIM DO.
-
You guys carry on your discussion with westkoasts deep counter thoughts. ;)
I'm trying, but he hasn't read much about it. That's the only conclusion I can come to.
-
You DO, know, coast, that most cops killed in the line of duty are doing somewhat routine things like traffic stops and answering domestic calls, right?
Again, irrelevant. What does that have to do with an unarmed, middle aged man who walks with a cane? Nothing. If you are trying to argue that this was a routine stop that he could have been shot at, it wasn't. Clearly he knew the man was unarmed when he arrested him.
You DO know that, I hope. We don't have to really explain to you what it means to a cop, which contrary to your tone, often have families and lives they want to keep, while answering calls such as a report of a potential breakin at a neighborhood house, where.....please read this carefully.....THEY HAVE NO IDEA IF THEY WILL BE SHOT AT ONCE!!!!!!!
Are we talking about a middle aged man with a bad hip or are we talking about some teenage street thug? Was it Slim Shady with one pant leg rolled up trying to break into the house? Was it 50 Cent's clone out their yelling 'WHAT UP GANGSTA' as he ran sacked the house? No. So again, whatever you are trying to say here is irrelevant to what we are discussing because there was not even one shred of evidence that says the cop should have approached the situation as such. I guess when a cop shoots an unarmed man you also agree because 'who knows if that wallet was actually a gun!!'
And do NOT condescend to us like none of us white guys have not be stopped by cops for taillights being out, or a fast lane change - both of which has happened to me and both times I had to convince the policeman I was sober before I could go. Public road tests and all.
Um, I am white. I never said it didn't happen to white guys. Based on the way Ted and yourself were answering it had been almost like a cop has never annoyed you for pulling you over for a BS reason only to start being a prick over unrelated things to why he/she pulled you over.
The fact that you had the convince the policeman you were not drunk is exactly what I am talking about. You are telling me you were not even the slightest bit annoyed you had to jump through hoops for the officer? Now imagine this happened while you were on your own property and just got back from a long overseas flight.
If he wanted to be sure that an old black man with a cane and a polo shirt that was tucked in was, you know, NOT A LOOKOUT FOR SOMEONE, please, please tell us exactly how the cop was going to do that without questioning the man, asking for him to prove he belonged there, and ensuring he was not going to be shot in the back as he left just because the guy said everything is fine so go away.
Because when the cop showed up the guy did not try to run off? Or didn't yell, whistle, or anything else a look out would do. Cops are trained to pick up on such things.
Why did the police officer not leave after being shown the ID? Because his ego was bruised and he wanted to stick it to Gates. I've already repeated this MANY times in this thread. The fact that a cop can take it upon him/herself to punish someone when they get in a disagreement is what is not ok. That would be like me deciding since we don't agree in this thread that I am going to drag you out of your chair at work, take you to get your finger prints done, a nice mugshot of you, and make you wait until your wife could come pick you up. My justification can be anything if I do what cops do. They purposely bend definitions and rules to punish people who do not 'respect their authori-tie'
-
Lurker I can just the same ask why did the police officer not calmly approach Gates and ask what was going on?
Undisputable evidence that you either do not know or do not care about the facts.
READ THE REPORTS. READ GATES' ATTORNEY'S STATEMENTS. They do not contradict each other on this point. The police officer asked Gates if he would come out and talk to him on the porch.
WHAT THE F*** ELSE WOULD YOU HAVE HIM DO.
He was arrested AFTER he produced his ID. Maybe you haven't read up as much as you thought. By the way, there is more than ONE side to this story. You keep focusing in on a police report written by someone who was in the disagreement and then try to pretend like there would be no bias. Let's not be silly here Ted.
Like I said, Talk Radio has covered this constantly for the past week. I've listened to the break down from both sides here. PLENTY OF TIMES. Just because I don't agree with you and am not naive enough to think a police report would not ever be written to save a cops rear end doesn't mean I know nothing of what happened.
-
Koast, you are so off base on this one. Your whole point is that he should have been given the benefit of the doubt. Ridiculous! A potential crime had been reported. You're asking a police officer who knows nothing about the situation (except that "two men were forcing entry to a home") to make a judgement on the situation based on the fact that the guy has a tucked-in polo shirt and a cane. Pure horsesh*t.
He arrives on scene, sees a man through the forced-open door, and instead of busting in and drawing down on the person, he asks "Sir, can you come out here and talk to me?" Seriously? Is that so much to ask?
WTF? THIS IS NOT what happened. Did you even see the picture of him being arrested?
(http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/CRIME/07/21/massachusetts.harvard.professor.arrested/art.gates.demotix.jpg)
He was in still partially standing in his door frame. The officer DID NOT just walk up and say 'let me see your ID' then asked him to step outside to be arrested. If that was the case it would have been even WORSE. The cop approached him, they got into an argument, eventually the ID was provided, when Gates kept asking for the badge number and yelling out the 'DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM PHRASE' that is when he was asked to step outside THEN was arrested.
You have your facts all mixed up buddy. Maybe you should have listened to BOTH sides.
"Gates told the officer he lived there and showed him his Massachusetts driver's license and Harvard University identification card. The officer followed him into his house and said he had received a report of a possible break-in, the lawyer said. Gates grew frustrated that the officer was continuing to question him in his home and asked for the officer's name and badge number, Ogletree said."
AFTER he asked him to come outside is when they arrested him.....facts. They are important.
"Gates refused to step outside to speak with the officer, the police report said, and when Crowley told Gates that he was investigating a possible break-in, Gates opened the front door and exclaimed, "Why, because I'm a black man in America?" the report said."
Now for the bold....
"While I was led to believe that Gates was lawfully in the residence, I was quite surprised and confused with the behavior he exhibited toward me," he said, according to the report."
That right there should have been the end of it. The fact he had a 'reaction' to his behavior is what prompted the arrest. His ego was bruised. Much like Gates was. The difference is Gates couldn't do anything but request a badge number. The cop did actually take him down to the station and treated him like a criminal.
-
Again, irrelevant. What does that have to do with an unarmed, middle aged man who walks with a cane? Nothing.
That's a lot for a cop to ascertain looking in to the house through a plate glass door. Whether a guy is unarmed, his age, whether he has criminal impulses in mind.
Are we talking about a middle aged man with a bad hip or are we talking about some teenage street thug? Was it Slim Shady with one pant leg rolled up trying to break into the house? Was it 50 Cent's clone out their yelling 'WHAT UP GANGSTA' as he ran sacked the house?
Golly Koast. Sure sounds like you're guilty of racial profiling there. Rolling On The Floor Laughing My Ass Off. That's right, I spelled it out. I felt the situation called for it.
The fact that you had the convince the policeman you were not drunk is exactly what I am talking about. You are telling me you were not even the slightest bit annoyed you had to jump through hoops for the officer? Now imagine this happened while you were on your own property and just got back from a long overseas flight.
Lost my mom and sister to drunk driver. So . . . NO. I would not be annoyed if a policeman wanted to make sure I was not drunk. I'd thank him for doing his effing job.
Why did the police officer not leave after being shown the ID? Because his ego was bruised and he wanted to stick it to Gates. I've already repeated this MANY times in this thread.
I don't know how long I can keep this up. The officer did, in fact, start walking out the door after seeing the ID. Gates followed him out the door and began making a martyr of himself to the neighborhood. Now perhaps a perfect man, would walk to his cruiser and drive away. But Gates pushed this police officer plenty far. Again, READ THE REPORTS!!
-
That's a lot for a cop to ascertain looking in to the house through a plate glass door. Whether a guy is unarmed, his age, whether he has criminal impulses in mind.
Now you are straight adding your own take to this. There is nowhere in the police report that says this.
Golly Koast. Sure sounds like you're guilty of racial profiling there. Rolling On The Floor Laughing My Ass Off. That's right, I spelled it out. I felt the situation called for it.
Um Slim Shady = a white guy dressed like a thug (also known as EMINEM) 50 Cent = a black guy dressed like a thug. See the two examples are not racial but based on dress and appearance. Let's me show you in pictures....
Now if these two guys were trying to break into a door, makes sense that they would be asked differently than say....(oh btw this is a picture of SLIM SHADY and 50 CENT, the guys I used as examples, I purposely used both WHITE and BLACK guys to get my point across)
(http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/1149/6627eminem50centpostersrd7.jpg)
Someone like this...
(http://eiswein.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/bill-cosby.jpg)
So no, I wasn't racial profiling. If anything I was discriminating based on age and dress. Good try though Ted but still going to give you the FAIL stamp for doing the typical 'no THE OTHER person (in this case me and not the cop) is being racist' bs.
Lost my mom and sister to drunk driver. So . . . NO. I would not be annoyed if a policeman wanted to make sure I was not drunk. I'd thank him for doing his effing job.
That's a specific instance based on an unfortunate family event. To those of us who have not had those types of events happen to us it is very annoying to be treated like you are breaking the law when you are in fact not. When a cop pulls me over for a crack in my windshield I don't want to be asked 'do you have an illegal substances in the car' right off the bat.
I don't know how long I can keep this up. The officer did, in fact, start walking out the door after seeing the ID. Gates followed him out the door and began making a martyr of himself to the neighborhood. Now perhaps a perfect man, would walk to his cruiser and drive away. But Gates pushed this police officer plenty far. Again, READ THE REPORTS!!
No, you are wrong. He walked INTO the house after seeing the ID.
"Gates told the officer he lived there and showed him his Massachusetts driver's license and Harvard University identification card. The officer followed him into his house and said he had received a report of a possible break-in, the lawyer said. Gates grew frustrated that the officer was continuing to question him in his home and asked for the officer's name and badge number," Ogletree said.
-
WTF? THIS IS NOT what happened. Did you even see the picture of him being arrested?
I'm guessing that you're showing us this picture because you assume this is the moment that Gates was arrested. How cute. If you had read the police report, you would remember that the police initially cuffed Gates with his hands behind his back. And after Gates said he couldn't walk without a cane, Crowley instructed another officer to change the cuffs so Gates' hands were in front of him. Crowley then went into the house and got a cane for Gates. Sorry Koasty, this picture, while indicative of the demeanor of the two people involved, says nothing about "where" Gates was actually arrested.
And by the way, I have read both accounts. There are only two major parts that Gates disputes:
1. Whether the police officer identified himself.
2. Whether Gates yelled as much as Crowley says he did.
But your photo (and thanks for helping me with my point) seems to indicate that Gates was doing some yelling on the porch. Here's an interesting article on why Gates was really arrested. Which, please remember, had nothing to do with the report of burglary.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-oped0726pagejul26,0,7040077.story
-
Pardon me, but the Harvard Law Professor asked for the policeman's badge number and he refused. THAT IS AGAINST THE LAW! Regarldess of anything else, an anonymous tip about a home break in the police officer is required to identify himself.
Now a normal layman might have handled things differently, but in this case it was a Harvard Law Professor, someone who knows the law better than anyone else in Boston.
Talk about not knowing the facts or speaking before you do! Gates IS NOT A LAW PROFESSOR!!!! He has no law degree and he knows NOTHING about law in or outside of Boston. He is a black studies professor, and a rather well known race baiter. Had he known the law as you suggest, he would have known it is AGAINST THE LAW to confront an officer investigating a possible crime. Had he merely cooperated with the officer, whom I might add TEACHES a class on how NOT to profile, would have no doubt would have peacefully left after the matter was cleared up. As an aside, the 911 tape reveals that the caller NEVER identified either of the men she saw as being black, so his screaming about profiling, almost as soon as he saw the police was his problem, not the cops.
Your calling this clown a law professor when he has an English lit degree just tells me you like to spout off without the facts, and while they are not all available, that fact is on Harvard's website.
-
The last sentence of the Chicago Trib article I just posted rings very true to me:
In that sense, Crowley and the other officers probably never expected Gates' arrest to hold up and it didn't. Now people across the country, including me, are arguing about what happened as if we were there in Gates' house and can read the minds of everyone involved. Based on our own experiences, it is easy to feel as if we were, even when we only fool ourselves.
It will be interesting when and if the Cambridge police department releases the tapes they have of Crowley relaying information back to dispatch with Gates yelling at the officer in the background. Maybe Obama's beer party can smooth things over and make it all go away.
-
Too much to comment on here "Koast, suffice to say, you are so very wrong here it is mind boggling. I would take the time myself to destroy your fatuous and and ridiculous assertions but between Lurker, JoMal, and especially Ted, you are standing there quite clearly with you pants around your ankles, your argument in favor of this pathetic poseur of a professor are easily your most embarrassing moment on this board.
-
Too much to comment on here "Koast, suffice to say, you are so very wrong here it is mind boggling. I would take the time myself to destroy your fatuous and and ridiculous assertions but between Lurker, JoMal, and especially Ted, you are standing there quite clearly with you pants around your ankles, your argument in favor of this pathetic poseur of a professor are easily your most embarrassing moment on this board.
The bold right there keeps me from really carrying what you think on this situation to be quite honest. Sounds to be like you are taking this a little too far and already have a built in problem, for whatever reason. He is a very well decorated professor with quite a career.
What I do find funny is someone from Los Angeles acting like that a police report is always 'factual' and tells the entire story. You do know, as a perfect example in YOUR backyard, that PLENTY of people have been released from jail because of falsefied police reports and testimony in this very county. Not saying this applies to every single cop or department everywhere but let's not act like a police report is always 'factual' and 'non-bias'
The only 'facts' anyone can prove beyond a reasonable doubt is both these guys let their ego escalate this to where it did not need to go. I just can't say that demanding a badge number is the same as taking a person out of their home, get them finger printed, mug shot taken, and have them sit in a cell until they could be picked up.
-
Sounds to be like you are taking this a little too far and already have a built in problem, for whatever reason. He is a very well decorated professor with quite a career.
Yeah, my problem is with anyone even remotely looking at a minority they are automatically racist, I AM a minority, Native American and Hispanic, I have dealt with racist LA County Sheriffs, and I also am smart enough to know how counterproductive it is to be antagonistic when a cop is just doing his job. Your uber elite supersmart professor is clearly either too stupid to know better than escalate what should have been a simple matter by cooperating with a cop doing his job or he had an agenda, to provoke an incident so he could play the race card, I tend to believe it to be the latter based on his past comments and the curriculum of his class at Harvard. Now while I certainly agree profiling exists, your assertion in this thread that this is such an example, your readily disparaging a cop for doing his job, your loudly proclaiming this "average" professor with an "average" Harvard career but a nice history of painting people as racist is laughable on its face, and a sad commentary on what society is programmed to believe by men such as Gates and Sharpton as well.
What I do find funny is someone from Los Angeles acting like that a police report is always 'factual' and tells the entire story.
What I find funny is you proving facts matter little to you as I never acted like anything regarding a police report, never mentioned one, never said I believed one regarding this incident, and never said a police report tells the entire story.
Your assumptions are as silly as Rick claiming this man is a Harvard Law Professor, no basis in fact but rather what appears to be a desire stand up for a perceived injustice, let me clue you in 'Koast, not all black men are innocent, and not all white people are racist, in fact, the biggest racist in this country, or at least the one with the biggest bully pulpit, is not white, he's black, he sure is not a man of God as his title indicates, and his name is Al Sharpton. I've lived through the racism of the 60's and 70's, trust me, you have no idea of what you speak.
-
No, you are wrong. He walked INTO the house after seeing the ID.
"Gates told the officer he lived there and showed him his Massachusetts driver's license and Harvard University identification card. The officer followed him into his house and said he had received a report of a possible break-in, the lawyer said. Gates grew frustrated that the officer was continuing to question him in his home and asked for the officer's name and badge number," Ogletree said.
Man, sometimes you come across so dense it feels like you need to cut your crap with a knife. So what if Gates showed that he lived there and showed he had a valid ID? SO WHAT????
SO WHAT????
Where, then, were the two guys reported to have broken into his house? Two guys who were not immediately identified as being black? Where would a cop look to see if the house was secured from the two guys who had been reported breaking into his house? Two guys, not two black guys, just two guys. No mention of one having a tucked in polo shirt and using a cane, just two guys breaking in a door. At Gates' house. Do you think, possibly, the cop was trying to protect Gates, who may not have been aware two guys had been reported to have broken into his house? And might still be inside, you know, looking for polo shirts and stuff and Gates may not be aware his shirts were being violated? Or.....he DID know they were inside, but something really terrible was going on instead?
Try understanding what a cop might be thinking PRIOR to the owner throwing the race card in his face for making sure the owner/renter of the house was safe? Try to think how YOU would want them to handle a case where a neighbor thought he saw a man sneaking out your daughter's window and called 9-1-1? Maybe it was a boyfriend making his escape....or maybe not. Either way, you didn't know what was going on. A cop shows up, asked if you live there and maybe were messing with a window or something. And you are not white, so you call the cop names and demand to see his badge and tell him to get off your property, or whatever Gates did during the additional questioning...
......and now imagine that it wasn't a boyfriend crawling out the window after all, but a rapist...or a killer.
You can claim this cop was overreacting from the start, but there is a reason they follow protocol, coast. A very, very, very, very important reason. Occasionally, there IS a bad guy standing behind the door with a gun on the home owner, instructing him to get rid of the cop or you are both dead.
My God, you are something.
-
Yeah, my problem is with anyone even remotely looking at a minority they are automatically racist, I AM a minority, Native American and Hispanic, I have dealt with racist LA County Sheriffs, and I also am smart enough to know how counterproductive it is to be antagonistic when a cop is just doing his job. Your uber elite supersmart professor is clearly either too stupid to know better than escalate what should have been a simple matter by cooperating with a cop doing his job or he had an agenda, to provoke an incident so he could play the race card, I tend to believe it to be the latter based on his past comments and the curriculum of his class at Harvard. Now while I certainly agree profiling exists, your assertion in this thread that this is such an example, your readily disparaging a cop for doing his job, your loudly proclaiming this "average" professor with an "average" Harvard career but a nice history of painting people as racist is laughable on its face, and a sad commentary on what society is programmed to believe by men such as Gates and Sharpton as well.
If you can provide a logical reason, other than 'oh he didn't know if he was a burglar or not', as to why you would approach a man in such a manner that you would make them feel like a criminal please let me hear it. I am all ears on to how a middle aged man standing in his home, not with a nap sack, or running around, could not get the benefit of the doubt that he was not a burglar.
I'd tend to agree if it looked like he was stealing stuff or he looked scared when a cop showed up or maybe he was a younger street cat or tried to run. None of this applies though.
What I find funny is you proving facts matter little to you as I never acted like anything regarding a police report, never mentioned one, never said I believed one regarding this incident, and never said a police report tells the entire story.
The fact that you are backing up what Ted is saying alludes to that LFD. You can't say you 100% agree with Ted and then turn around to say 'never acted like anything regarding a police report' Ted's entire argument is based on the police report. So yea LFD just because you didn't outright say it doesn't mean you never 'acted like anything' Re-Read Ted's arguments.
Your assumptions are as silly as Rick claiming this man is a Harvard Law Professor, no basis in fact but rather what appears to be a desire stand up for a perceived injustice, let me clue you in 'Koast, not all black men are innocent, and not all white people are racist, in fact, the biggest racist in this country, or at least the one with the biggest bully pulpit, is not white, he's black, he sure is not a man of God as his title indicates, and his name is Al Sharpton. I've lived through the racism of the 60's and 70's, trust me, you have no idea of what you speak.
I don't care who is more racist, which other people are racist, or any of that. That doesn't apply here. We are speaking on a specific instance. I can just as easily answer that by saying 'When I get pulled over by myself in a nice area I am given the benefit of the doubt I am not doing anything wrong because of my skin color' But that's not the point. We are not discussing race in a general sense. We are discussing the fact this guy couldn't get the benefit of the doubt even though he looks like Bill Frickin Cosby and not Tupac Shakur.
Not all black men are innocent and not all black men are guilty just the same.
-
Man, sometimes you come across so dense it feels like you need to cut your crap with a knife. So what if Gates showed that he lived there and showed he had a valid ID? SO WHAT????
SO WHAT????
I am dense yet you can't wrap ya head around the simple idea that his VALID DRIVERS LICENSE SHOWED THE ADDRESS THEY WERE AT? REALLY? You don't understand why that would be important to bring up?
Where, then, were the two guys reported to have broken into his house? Two guys who were not immediately identified as being black? Where would a cop look to see if the house was secured from the two guys who had been reported breaking into his house? Two guys, not two black guys, just two guys. No mention of one having a tucked in polo shirt and using a cane, just two guys breaking in a door. At Gates' house. Do you think, possibly, the cop was trying to protect Gates, who may not have been aware two guys had been reported to have broken into his house? And might still be inside, you know, looking for polo shirts and stuff and Gates may not be aware his shirts were being violated? Or.....he DID know they were inside, but something really terrible was going on instead?
The two guys who were reported to have broken in the house were the ones standing right in front of the cop. You know one of which who proved he lived there. The cop responded right away. Not 2 hours later. So the excuse that 'maybe they ran off' doesn't apply here.
Do you think possibly the officer came up saying that TWO men were trying to break into the house to TWO MEN who were standing there to say that it was them and proceeded to provide an ID?
When you walk up to a middle aged man in a tucked in polo shirt do you get the vibe of day time burglar? Burglaries tend to be done by young males. Not older males.
Try understanding what a cop might be thinking PRIOR to the owner throwing the race card in his face for making sure the owner/renter of the house was safe? Try to think how YOU would want them to handle a case where a neighbor thought he saw a man sneaking out your daughter's window and called 9-1-1? Maybe it was a boyfriend making his escape....or maybe not. Either way, you didn't know what was going on. A cop shows up, asked if you live there and maybe were messing with a window or something. And you are not white, so you call the cop names and demand to see his badge and tell him to get off your property, or whatever Gates did during the additional questioning...
Try understanding what a cop might be thinking AFTER being threatened by a guy who wants to report him to superiors....I mean it's not like cops get pissed at people for not kissing their feet during even the most routine traffic stops.
Your situation with the daughter/boyfriend in a side window is different. It does not directly involve that person. It involves someone LEAVING the house in the middle of the night. HORRIBLE example. Just down right horrible. Apples and oranges. Besides, what if it was established that it was the girls boyfriend? Would they need to go track him down, accuse him of being a rapist, take him to jail, and then realize maybe it was a bad idea?
Now let's think if you just got home after counting beans all day. You pull up to your house and when you go to open the door you notice its stuck. You ask your co-worker to come help you open the door. Once inside a cop shows up and tells you 'We had a report someone was trying to break into this house' You respond saying 'No this is my house, I couldn't get in' The cop then proceeds to make you feel like a criminal as oppose to a civil servant who does good in Sacramento. Would you be happy? After providing a Valid Drivers license with your address on it AND showing your badge for the government building you are still being asked questions after making it clear YOU were the person trying to get into the house, would you be happy?
My guess would be no. Do I think that you would escalate farther than it needed to go? I don't know you well enough to say if you have an ego NOR do I know how you act after coming home from a trip.
You can claim this cop was overreacting from the start, but there is a reason they follow protocol, coast. A very, very, very, very important reason. Occasionally, there IS a bad guy standing behind the door with a gun on the home owner, instructing him to get rid of the cop or you are both dead.
My God, you are something.
I can claim that. Just as you can claim that Gates was the who started it all. As far as following protocol, not everyone does that. Other than asking for ID you don't know what the protocol is do you? Isn't it protocol to give your badge number and information when asked as well? Or no? I thought it was. Correct me if I am wrong.
You using this far fetched, absolute worst scenarios possible is doing nothing.
Though JoMal I do appreciate you pointing out that the lady never said it was two black males breaking into the house.....except that was in the police report. She went on record as saying she never identified what race they were. The police report that Ted is so dead set on being filled with 'facts' well, isn't all that factual.
-
Hokey Smokes 'koast! Methinks perhaps you have painted yourself into a corner here and now you can't get out so you're choosing to go down with the ship! Either that or JoMal is right and you really are that dense, or so hung up on being PC that this stinkbug professor HAS to be in the right. You are coming off VERY hypocritical by saying on the one hand, because he is a an old gentleman in a tucked in polo shirt he MUST be innocent, or at least given the benefit of the doubt, but some thug life lookin' clown is probably guilty because after all, he looks like Tupac! Your reasoning is so nebulous as to be non-existent.
Oh and BTW, rumor has it OJ Simpson was wearing a tucked in polo shirt when he slaughtered 2 innocent people, funny how he looks like Bill Cosby.
-
And what are you accomplishing, coast?
At what point does a policeman stop doing his job of securing a scene to the satisfaction of the one person who cares, apparently? ME! Because none of the scenarios you think are overreactions by the cop are anywhere NEAR overreactions to me, or to Dan, or to Ted, or to Joe, or to Doug, or to anyone who has ever needed a cop to be diligent.
And I am real glad to hear you don't give a rat's ass about the safety of your daughter. You might show her your posts here to show how much you care about her.
-
And what are you accomplishing, coast?
At what point does a policeman stop doing his job of securing a scene to the satisfaction of the one person who cares, apparently? ME! Because none of the scenarios you think are overreactions by the cop are anywhere NEAR overreactions to me, or to Dan, or to Ted, or to Joe, or to Doug, or to anyone who has ever needed a cop to be diligent.
And I am real glad to hear you don't give a rat's ass about the safety of your daughter. You might show her your posts here to show how much you care about her.
Number 1, I don't have children.
Number 2, if I did I find it in VERY BAD TASTE for you to try to take a shot like that. That's pretty pathetic on your part. Out of all the things you've ever said to me, I never been offended. For you to even insinuate that if I had a daughter, like you thought, that I wouldn't care if she could have got 'raped' is disgusting. You are a POS quite frankly.
Number 3, your example was dumb and a worst case scenario that was unrelated to what actually happened. A person escaping through a window is not the same as a person going into a house and telling the cop 'ya it was me who they must have called about, I live here' Don't try to take personal shots at me because YOUR example didn't apply.
Number 4, if you want to be condescending take another approach rather than spelling my nick name on a message board wrong. The young jokes are much better.
Hokey Smokes 'koast! Methinks perhaps you have painted yourself into a corner here and now you can't get out so you're choosing to go down with the ship! Either that or JoMal is right and you really are that dense, or so hung up on being PC that this stinkbug professor HAS to be in the right. You are coming off VERY hypocritical by saying on the one hand, because he is a an old gentleman in a tucked in polo shirt he MUST be innocent, or at least given the benefit of the doubt, but some thug life lookin' clown is probably guilty because after all, he looks like Tupac! Your reasoning is so nebulous as to be non-existent.
Oh and BTW, rumor has it OJ Simpson was wearing a tucked in polo shirt when he slaughtered 2 innocent people, funny how he looks like Bill Cosby.
I am not hung up on being PC. I am hung up on police officers using their power over regular citizens to do what they feel in instances where their ego gets bruised.
Now who is trying to be PC? You are the one who is saying that a middle aged man in a polo shirt should be give the same benefit of the doubt as a 20-something year old in tats, a backwards hat, looking like Tupac.....
Needless to say more homes get robbed by guys dressing like hip hoppers than they do by guys looking like Bill Cosby.
As for your OJ example, he had blood all over his car. There was clear evidence he committed a crime. What crime was committed here again?
-
A person escaping through a window is not the same as a person going into a house and telling the cop 'ya it was me who they must have called about, I live here'
Continuing to assume facts not in evidence huh? Wow, if that is what Gates really said we should just lock this stupid racist cop and throw away the key! And while I'm at it, explain to me how a cop, walking up to a front door that has been clearly broken into, with all the splintered wood and all that that accompanies just such an action, assume anything different than seeing someone coming out a window, maybe that's how some cultures exit their house no?
-
Dan what is your evidence? Based on the police report that had inconsistencies in it? Like where the report says he talked to the women who said she saw two black men with back packs but on the audio recording never said that? Even as far as saying she never did multiple times.
Again, evidence and facts are not entirely based on he said/she said situations are they? That's what this is.
I am done with this thread. I can argue any way I want. I also am entitled to my opposing view. You are not right. I am also not saying I am right. Just stating what I believe. After JoMal being Shrek's side kick, I am done. Period point blank.
-
Number 1, I don't have children.
Not so oddly, this is very good to know.
Number 2, if I did I find it in VERY BAD TASTE for you to try to take a shot like that. That's pretty pathetic on your part. Out of all the things you've ever said to me, I never been offended. For you to even insinuate that if I did had a daughter, like you thought, that I wouldn't care if she could have got 'raped' is disgusting.
It was meant to be disgusting, coast. You have no idea how completely offensive your arguement is becoming and frankly you need to feel it. This IS personal and what you think is overreaction will kill people and you need to think about that.
Number 3, your example was dumb and a worst case scenario that was unrelated to what actually happened. A person escaping through a window is not the same as a person going into a house and telling the cop 'ya it was me who they must have called about, I live here' Don't try to take personal shots at me because YOUR example didn't apply.
I am not interested in whether or not my example applies. Domestic calls do not have a set formula or outcome and never have. Each side has their own script. It is the policemans' job to figure out the script on the other side and all I was providing was another angle. The unknown is the point. I really do not care if Gates or you know what the script might be on the cops side, but whether it is me in the house, you in the house, or Gates, it really makes a difference to play your part so the cop can secure YOU! or me! or Gates.
And come to think of it, doesn't that photo of Gates' arrest show a cop in the background. With his BADGE <and i assume his BADGE NUMBER, I would guess> clearly visable to GATES??
God almighty ::)
Number 4, if you want to be condescending take another approach rather than spelling my nick name on a message board wrong. The young jokes are much better.
Really? So.....to take the condescension a step further, we can play the idiot jokes in regards to you, right, KOAST? Let that stuff go, and just try to get back to the topic here, okay?
I am not hung up on being PC. I am hung up on police officers using their power over regular citizens to do what they feel in instances where their ego gets bruised.
Why didn't you just say you offended by police officers in general, then? Maybe regular citizens should figure out there might be a wrong way to deal with being "harassed" by the police and just work around those issues before the ego-bruised cops actually respond to their antics and put them in handcuffs? It certainly worked to control the situation once and for all in this case.
-
I am dense yet you can't wrap ya head around the simple idea that his VALID DRIVERS LICENSE SHOWED THE ADDRESS THEY WERE AT? REALLY? You don't understand why that would be important to bring up?
If he were arrested for being in the wrong house, that would be important. He was not arrested for being in the wrong house koast. He was arrested for disorderly conduct.
-
You are not right. I am also not saying I am right.
Penultimate example of the inadequacy of your ability to debate. I'm not right, you're not right, and moral relevance once again rears its evil head, perfect 'koast, perfect.
-
Now let's think if you just got home after counting beans all day. You pull up to your house and when you go to open the door you notice its stuck. You ask your co-worker to come help you open the door. Once inside a cop shows up and tells you 'We had a report someone was trying to break into this house' You respond saying 'No this is my house, I couldn't get in'.
I like this scenario. It's what should have happened. It's what did happen (according to both sides) up until Gates hollered "No I will not" instead of "No this is my house, I couldn't get in."
Koast, did you really just post that?
-
I am done with this thread. I can argue any way I want. I also am entitled to my opposing view. You are not right. I am also not saying I am right. Just stating what I believe. After JoMal being Shrek's side kick, I am done. Period point blank.
I swear this has happened before.
-
Well, at least you are not an obsessed and overly protective old ass with bean counting issues.
-
Anybody notice that the arresting officer filed a false REPORT? In his report, Crowley claims he spoke with the woman who called the police about the potential break in, prior to going to the house. The Woman has gone on record as saying she never spoke to a police officer.
The Police officer is lying about what happened, and arrested a man who proved who he was and that he in fact had the right to be there. THAT IS STUPID, and it's not the kind of behavior you want from the police that are there to protect you.
Gates may every well have acted stupidly himself, but the police absolutely look stupid for arresting a man from his own home!
Gates has the right to be stupid, although it's pretty shameful for a Harvard Professor to scream at a policeman in front of his home, who is trying to make sure his property is safe.
A little common sense and cool headedness would have gone a long way. That Gates didn't act reasonably is shamefull, but what the Police Officer did here is well beyond the pale. He arrested a man from his own home and filed a false report.
How is that not STUPID?
-
You are not right. I am also not saying I am right.
Penultimate example of the inadequacy of your ability to debate. I'm not right, you're not right, and moral relevance once again rears its evil head, perfect 'koast, perfect.
::)
Really? Or is it a situation where
A) No one was actually there to say WHAT REALLY HAPPEND
B) The Police report has inconsistencies and is only ONE account so it cannot be used to tell the whole story
How can you fully debate and say one person is wrong or not with out being there LFD? That's my point. You cannot say you are right because you were not there to say for sure. Neither was I. All we can do is give our OPINIONS of what we think happened but doesn't make it fact.
If there were actual facts from both sides, rather than he said/she said, then maybe you could really debate. Us arguing here on what we assumed to have happened doesn't really make for a good debate.
-
I was wondering if we would hear something like this. I've been wondering what the African-American officer in the foreground of koast's picture thought of the situation.
Below is an excerpt of a new article on CNN.
Two black officers on the Cambridge force have stood solidly by their comrade.
Sgt. Leon Lashley was outside Gates' house when the professor was arrested. He has no problems with the way Crowley handled the situation.
"It happened to be a white officer on a black man, and the common call a lot of times is to call it a racist situation," said Lashley. "This situation right here was not a racial-motivated situation. ... There's nothing rogue about him. He was doing his job."
Lashley acknowledged that if he, as a black officer, had entered the home first, it likely would've been a different outcome.
Kelly King, another African-American Cambridge officer, said she has known Crowley for more than a decade and that he's "a good police officer, a good man with character."
"I think Professor Gates has done a very good job of throwing up a very effective smokescreen, calling race into this. It had nothing to do with it," she told CNN's Don Lemon with Crowley at her side.
She said people who have turned against Crowley need to "keep their minds open and realize that we would not support someone that we felt wronged someone else. ... We would not support anyone in blue doing the wrong thing."
When she finished speaking, she and Crowley embraced. "You've got to be touched by that," CNN's Lemon said.
The officer at the center of the controversy nodded his head, fighting off tears.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/07/30/gates.arrest.recap/index.html?iref=mpstoryview
-
[A) No one was actually there to say WHAT REALLY HAPPEND
I kept on thinking about this comment until the absurdity of it finally came to me.
-
Ted,
I was wondering if you saw the article where another police officer called him a jungle monkey. Why bring this up? Well to point out that not only do racist cops exist but they are in the same police department AND cops in Boston have had a long history of being racist.
A Boston police officer was placed on administrative leave after he allegedly used a racial slur when referring to Henry Louis Gates Jr.
Watch Report
Boston Globe
In a mass e-mail, Officer Justin Barrett, 36, called Gates a "jungle monkey," according to a law enforcement source.
Gates, a black Harvard scholar, was arrested at his home earlier this month on a disorderly conduct charge after he tried to budge open the door of his Cambridge home.
Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis found out about the e-mail on Tuesday and immediately stripped Barrett of his gun and badge, officials said. The e-mail was first sent anonymously to the Boston Globe and then to local members of the National Guard, where he is a member.
I mean yea, again, police never take up for each other! Never has happened in this history of police work.....
Oh wait, other cops supported the ones who beat Rodney King senseless....
Now let's think about this Ted, logically. Would another cop come out to speak against a fellow cop which would then alienate him from the rest of the police force and jeopardize his job? In a recession none the less.... Think about that for a second. Get back to me after.
-
[A) No one was actually there to say WHAT REALLY HAPPEND
I kept on thinking about this comment until the absurdity of it finally came to me.
Oh so Dan or I were there? People on this message board were there to know what went down? Cuz that is what I was reffering to. Did you take some classes with Reality on spinning peoples quotes and not bringing in the whole paragraph that was said? Because CLEARLY I was speaking to Dan that the 'debate' around here can't really be one much farther than us giving our opinions on what WE thought happened since 'no one was there to really say what happened'
As far as absurd, is that like an old man so upset ON A MESSAGE BOARD that he had to take a shot at someones children or how they view children? Even tho I don't have any, it doesn't matter because you thought I did and made an asinine comment.
-
Ted,
I was wondering if you saw the article where another police officer called him a jungle monkey. Why bring this up? Well to point out that not only do racist cops exist but they are in the same police department AND cops in Boston have had a long history of being racist.
A Boston police officer was placed on administrative leave after he allegedly used a racial slur when referring to Henry Louis Gates Jr.
Watch Report
Boston Globe
In a mass e-mail, Officer Justin Barrett, 36, called Gates a "jungle monkey," according to a law enforcement source.
Gates, a black Harvard scholar, was arrested at his home earlier this month on a disorderly conduct charge after he tried to budge open the door of his Cambridge home.
Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis found out about the e-mail on Tuesday and immediately stripped Barrett of his gun and badge, officials said. The e-mail was first sent anonymously to the Boston Globe and then to local members of the National Guard, where he is a member.
I mean yea, again, police never take up for each other! Never has happened in this history of police work.....
Oh wait, other cops supported the ones who beat Rodney King senseless....
Now let's think about this Ted, logically. Would another cop come out to speak against a fellow cop which would then alienate him from the rest of the police force and jeopardize his job? In a recession none the less.... Think about that for a second. Get back to me after.
Sorry. I thought about it. You're point that there are stupid, racist cops out there is of course valid. This Sergeant Barrett is a fool and will soon be out of a job. Funny how none of his buddies are standing up for him. All he did was voice his racial tendencies. Crowley supposedly acted on them. Which is worse?
I'm going to have to take the comments at face value. Especially since one of them fits that all-important criteria that you placed on this situation . . . HE WAS ACTUALLY THERE. (Here's where you back off that statement because it no longer suits you.)
It's okay Koast. I know you're never backing off your position. I can respect the fact that you want to hold your ground in this debate. But I can't respect how you're trying to do it, and I think that is what bugs Dan, JoMal, and me. You twist every fact to fit your argument. You back off your own statements when they don't suit you, and you pick up new facts when the others have failed you. Now, it seems, no Cambridge/Boston cop (African-American or otherwise) can be trusted to be true and honest about this situation.
Sometimes it's good to stand up in front of opposition for what you believe, but that often results in you looking like one of those poor people walking down the street yelling at the voices in their heads. Trust me, I know what you're going through right now.
-
You guys debate like teenage girls. In fact my teenage girl would run circles around all of you in a debate/discussion! ::) I could argue either side of this debate and beat any of you into the ground. I'm really disappointed in the effort put forth by all of you! :(
P.S. I'm not kidding.
-
Another interesting excerpt:
Meanwhile, a black Cambridge police sergeant on the scene the day of Gates' arrest wrote a letter to Crowley, asking him to mention to Gates and Obama that he is now known as the "black sergeant" and to some others as an "uncle Tom."
"I'm forced to ponder the notion that as a result of speaking the truth and coming to the defense of a friend and colleague, who just happens to be white, that I have somehow betrayed my heritage," Sgt. Leon Lashley wrote. "Please convey my concerns to the president that Mr. Gates' actions may have caused grave and potentially irreparable harm to the struggle for racial harmony in this country and perhaps throughout the world."
Lashley wrote in the letter he would like Gates to reflect on the incident and ask himself what responsibility he bears, what he can do to heal the rift and what he can do to mitigate the damage done to the officers' reputations.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/30/harvard.arrest.beers/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
-
You guys debate like teenage girls. In fact my teenage girl would run circles around all of you in a debate/discussion! ::) I could argue either side of this debate and beat any of you into the ground. I'm really disappointed in the effort put forth by all of you! :(
P.S. I'm not kidding.
I really tried hard to take this seriously, but it's just too funny.
Classic armchair quarterback response. A guy who is either too lazy, too stupid, or too ambivalent to put for ANY EFFORT AT ALL is castigating those who did.
P.S. I'm not kidding.
;D
-
Ted isn't part of debating taking points and fitting to the side you are arguing on? You are doing just the same. As is LFD. Isn't that how layers debate in court? They will argue their side from the clients point of view?
I don't care who I am pissing off to be quite honest because it's stupid to get pissed off about. This is a debate on a message board and I am entitled to my opinion. If someone is getting upset because I am voicing my own opinion that is their problem and not mine. My arguments were valid, they just were not coming from the side of you 3, that is not wrong. There is more than one side to any story and more than one perspective. Again this goes back to my point that NONE of us where actually there so it is not like you can say 'no koast you are wrong because I was there as an unbias 3rd party' In fact there was no account from an unbias 3rd party. It was Gates vs Cops. The basis of your guys argument is on a police report but ignoring Gates. I am taking Gates story into consideration and not giving as much weight to the police report because there is a lie in it (he did not talk to that woman nor did she say it was black guys). I know Gates story is bias and I know the police report is bias. That is why I said that no one can really say they are right. It's just their opinion. I could be wrong, I could be right. You guys could be right and you could just as easy be wrong.
This is not directed at you as much as it is that grumpy old man Jomal and my fellow Laker buddy Dan. I think it is wrong that JoMal's comments are being swept under the rug. What he said was very uncalled for, unwarranted, and just placed him on Reality's level as far as I am concerned. I crack jokes about the posters here but I don't take shots at family and especially would not make a comment a long the lines of 'Hay Ted you don't care if your daughter could get raped, why not show her on the screen how much you really care about her' Again, I do not have kids but it doesn't mean that the level of disrespect in what he got at was wayyy over the top. He actually thought I had kids. LFD seems more concerned with people cussing than he does something like this because he's pissed off I am not in agreement with him? Come on... ::)
As far as what has happened, they seemed to move on. They both agreed that they could have handled things different when they sat down with Obama and Biden. That is something we ALL should agree on if they in fact did the same. They were there and we were not.
-
I think it is wrong that JoMal's comments are being swept under the rug.
Hey, every family has the uncle with the crazy sense of humor who gets away with everything.
What he said was very uncalled for, unwarranted, and just placed him on Reality's level as far as I am concerned.
Now you're confusing him with the crazy uncle with no sense of humor.
He actually thought I had kids.
Now that would be scary. :D
As far as what has happened, they seemed to move on. They both agreed that they could have handled things different when they sat down with Obama and Biden.
Where did you read that? All I've heard is that it was a cordial discussion but that no one apologized. That was made very clear.
-
I'm a bit disapointed to tell the truth. I thought Colin Powel was right when he said they both needed an adult to step in.
Agian, without being there and no objective 3rd party to tell us what really happened, we know the policeman had a legitmate concern to be there, and Gates had the right to be there. We also know Gates got ticked off at the cop and started getting loud. (Very childish professor, I mean, really!) The Police officer decided to pull rank and show this Harvard Intellectual that he a cop could drag him off in cuffs.
Both of them should have apologized, In fact this should NEVER HAVE HAPPENED, and it's pretty pathetic that grown up professionals behaved this way.
-
Hey, every family has the uncle with the crazy sense of humor who gets away with everything.
LOL! True but JoMal went way over the line with this one. We have had email discussions about personal things regarding his family. I would NEVER EVER even utter a negative word about anything we talked about, pissed at him or not.
I have a neice that means the world to me. That is why I took offense to what he said. I look at her as a daughter and while I don't have one of my own, his words were out of line.
Now you're confusing him with the crazy uncle with no sense of humor.
Had there been some humor in there, like maybe, 'Koast what if some guy broke into your house and raped you like Shaq did Danny Ferry' then maybe I'd agree. I am all for getting made fun of.
Now that would be scary. :D
Duh Ted, I have not even gone through puberty yet, how could I have kids! I thought you knew I was 11.
Where did you read that? All I've heard is that it was a cordial discussion but that no one apologized. That was made very clear.
After looking at another news source I saw the 'no one apologized' part so that was my bad. My comment was based on seeing this from a website
"At this point, I am hopeful that we can all move on, and that this experience will prove an occasion for education, not recrimination. I know that Sergeant Crowley shares this goal. Both of us are eager to go back to work tomorrow."
I took that as they both came to an agreement that they both admitted they could learn something about how they each handled the situation.
-
Agreed Rick. I think the one article that got it very close to right is the one that said Gates wasn't arrested for disorderly conduct, rather for contempt of cop. You disrespect a cop in front of his colleagues or too many other citizens, they're going to cuff you. Can't say I blame them completely, but a bigger man, a more self-secure man would walk away.
If Crowley just walks away and says "Sir, now that we have ascertained there was no burglary attempt on this premises, we will leave you in peace. You have yourself a very nice day . . . Yes, sir, my mother is a very nice woman and she would provide you very pleasant conversation on your porch . . . Okay sir, thank you sir. You have a nice day. Goodbye."
-
I think it is wrong that JoMal's comments are being swept under the rug.
Hey, every family has the uncle with the crazy sense of humor who gets away with everything.
What he said was very uncalled for, unwarranted, and just placed him on Reality's level as far as I am concerned.
Now you're confusing him with the crazy uncle with no sense of humor.
Ted, Jomal and even LFD (gasp) have definitely been on my level on this thread, westkoast.
-
I really tried hard to take this seriously, but it's just too funny.
Classic armchair quarterback response. A guy who is either too lazy, too stupid, or too ambivalent to put for ANY EFFORT AT ALL is castigating those who did.
P.S. I'm not kidding.
;D
Castigating takes effort you rube!
For some reason you guys are off your game on this one, stepping into this argument would be like stepping into a game of basketball with my 8 year old.
-
Castigating takes effort you rube!
For some reason you guys are off your game on this one, stepping into this argument would be like stepping into a game of basketball with my 8 year old.
Holy cow, you just busted me with some serious dissing from the Roaring 20's.
-
TED! That was GREAT!
-
^^ concur :D :D
Mr. Burns:
You! Fill her up with petroleum distillate...and revulcanize my tires....POST HASTE!
put on your Raccoon coat and get ready to Charleston. 23 Skidoo and cat's meow, vo vo dee oh doe and oh you kid! ...
im sure the manual will indicate which lever is the velocitator and which the deceleratrix
"Ooh don't poo-poo a nickel, Lisa. A nickel will buy you a steak and kidney pie, a cup of coffee, a slice of cheesecake and a newsreel. With enough change left over to ride the trolley from Battery Park to the Polo Grounds."
-
Castigating takes effort you rube!
For some reason you guys are off your game on this one, stepping into this argument would be like stepping into a game of basketball with my 8 year old.
Holy cow, you just busted me with some serious dissing from the Roaring 20's.
I was shooting for Mid-Evil, I guess I should have consulted with JoldMal.
-
You guys debate like teenage girls. In fact my teenage girl would run circles around all of you in a debate/discussion! ::) I could argue either side of this debate and beat any of you into the ground. I'm really disappointed in the effort put forth by all of you! :(
P.S. I'm not kidding.
If you have to tell us you are not kidding, me thinks your daughter should give it a try instead.
How come people have to somehow convince us they can do something better by saying they can instead of actually, you know, stepping up in the first place.
-
[A) No one was actually there to say WHAT REALLY HAPPEND
I kept on thinking about this comment until the absurdity of it finally came to me.
Oh so Dan or I were there? People on this message board were there to know what went down? Cuz that is what I was reffering to. Did you take some classes with Reality on spinning peoples quotes and not bringing in the whole paragraph that was said? Because CLEARLY I was speaking to Dan that the 'debate' around here can't really be one much farther than us giving our opinions on what WE thought happened since 'no one was there to really say what happened'
As far as absurd, is that like an old man so upset ON A MESSAGE BOARD that he had to take a shot at someones children or how they view children? Even tho I don't have any, it doesn't matter because you thought I did and made an asinine comment.
From Ted:
It's okay Koast. I know you're never backing off your position. I can respect the fact that you want to hold your ground in this debate. But I can't respect how you're trying to do it, and I think that is what bugs Dan, JoMal, and me. You twist every fact to fit your argument. You back off your own statements when they don't suit you, and you pick up new facts when the others have failed you. Now, it seems, no Cambridge/Boston cop (African-American or otherwise) can be trusted to be true and honest about this situation.
Read what Ted had to say verrrry slowly and with comprehension this time. What I pointed out in your original quote above is an absurd statement and you should have simply stated. "Okay, I see the point, what I should have stated was that - No one ELSE was actually there to say WHAT REALLY HAPPENED"
Now, this is a simple little debate, actually and valid points can be made on both sides, though not as clearly eloquently as WOW would make, apparently, if he had the balls his daughter has to step up and say something about it. But for you to go off on this as if you were right in the first place and you clearly did not state what you meant, means you have lost the integrity of your arguement and it is going to be pretty hard for you to regain it without stepping back now.
As for somehow disparaging your fictitious and/or future daughter, tell her I am hardily sorry that her dad is a doofus, but I will stand by my original analogy for what it was intended to be. Something you apparently will never see and I truly hope never have to face, because any policeman who shows up at your door to make sure your house is secure, including YOU, will be faced with the same choice that Cambridge cop had to make.
-
How come people have to somehow convince us they can do something better by saying they can instead of actually, you know, stepping up in the first place.
Because it's much easier, something I learned from that dirt bag Ronald Reagan and his Star Wars program.
That fact that either side can be argued tells you it's not a winable debate. Unless the Prof confesses that he was being "up-ity" or the cops confess to over reacting this is a no-win, or no-lose, discussion. The fact remains that both sides of this debate have been poorly represented in this thread.
-
Something you apparently will never see and I truly hope never have to face, because any policeman who shows up at your door to make sure your house is secure, including YOU, will be faced with the same choice that Cambridge cop had to make.
FYI WK, the cop keeping you safe ONLY applies if you're rich or live in a great neighborhood, being white also helps tremendously. So stop wasting time on this board and make some money, you're going to need it if you want to keep your daughters safe from rapists!