ForumGarden

But apparently quite acceptable for crowd control. Really?

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-07/ ... 8JZi-yR9fA

I'm glad you posted that. It needed posting.

I'll offer a one dollar reward to the first person with sufficient brass-necked gall to say a white detainee would be treated that way too.

Tthey seem more pre-occupied as to how it looked rather than what it actually was.

magentaflame;1524289 wrote: Tthey seem more pre-occupied as to how it looked rather than what it actually was.


The suspect wasn't mistreated, it is just something that doesn't happen every day.

tude dog;1524305 wrote: it is just something that doesn't happen every day.


You don't think that perhaps it was a thing that used to happen far too often when Jim Crow ruled, and that the only gentleman in the photo is blatantly still non-white?

magentaflame;1524289 wrote: Tthey seem more pre-occupied as to how it looked rather than what it actually was.


No-one can look at that and not think slavery - the cops cannot have done that without intending it to look like slavery.

spot;1524306 wrote: You don't think that perhaps it was a thing that used to happen far too often when Jim Crow ruled, and that the only gentleman in the photo is blatantly still non-white?


I don't see the problem. He suffered no harm.

Bryn Mawr;1524312 wrote: No-one can look at that and not think slavery - the cops cannot have done that without intending it to look like slavery.


If you say so.

tude dog;1524319 wrote: I don't see the problem. He suffered no harm.


Your entire country suffered harm, it's shameful that you can't see it.

tude dog;1524320 wrote: If you say so.


Do you genuinely mean that you see that image and slavery does not suggest itself to you?

That image is the archetypal presentation of slavery that has been used for the past several hundred years.

spot;1524321 wrote: Your entire country suffered harm, it's shameful that you can't see it.


Oh pleased I been lectured for way too long about out political correctness to no see right away those two cops really committed one big faux pas.

Bryn Mawr;1524331 wrote: Do you genuinely mean that you see that image and slavery does not suggest itself to you?.


Cotton picking, Slave trading, horsewhipping, etc come to mind. Somehow two law enforcement officer bringing a suspect doesn't qualify.

Bryn Mawr;1524331 wrote: That image is the archetypal presentation of slavery that has been used for the past several hundred years.


Not to me.

tude dog;1524334 wrote: Oh pleased I been lectured for way too long about out political correctness to no see right away those two cops really committed one big faux pas.


Then why on earth did you write "I don't see the problem. He suffered no harm."?

It's not a matter of a mythical shrug-off political correctness, it's blatantly a matter of a very real pervasive departmental discrimination designed to be humiliating.

You know how evil people will always speak the truth about their evil because they believe in it? This statement ..."He added that the officers had no "malicious intent" when they led Mr Neely by a rope, and their body cameras were activated at the time...."... He actually believes that this is right by saying they didn't have an intent...another words this is seen as normal. The rest of us know it's evil but they don't because they believe it's right. that man was arrested and led down eight blocks to a police assembly point. Like really ? eight blocks before a car could pick him up? Bull****e!!!! But that's the psychology of evil for you. .

I don't believe for a minute that Tude thinks this is acceptable or it's smothered in political correctness. I believe Tude is somewhat cuffudled and can't make heads or tails of it....I can tell you right now that if this had happened in Australia or South Africa the nation would go spare! We've evolved in our basic human rights.

spot;1524339 wrote: Then why on earth did you write "I don't see the problem. He suffered no harm."?

It's not a matter of a mythical shrug-off political correctness, it's blatantly a matter of a very real pervasive departmental discrimination designed to be humiliating.


Was it done to be humiliating, probably?

Was it a matter of racial discrimination?

I suggest neither of us has any clue.

Perhaps we wait for more information before using that race taunt. Perhaps the Rangers Body Cams could shed some light on this arrest.

Attorney demands body cam footage of officers on horses leading black man by rope

tude dog;1524454 wrote: Perhaps we wait for more information before using that race taunt. Perhaps the Rangers Body Cams could shed some light on this arrest.




You know as well as I do that the department will never discuss the event in public again, that no official investigation will be made and that the officers concerned will suffer no departmental discipline. All you need do to reach this conclusion is to look at previous comparable events. The only thing that would force the department to address the matter would be a civil suit and I don't see anyone rich out there waving the necessary.

spot;1524455 wrote: You know as well as I do that the department will never discuss the event in public again, that no official investigation will be made and that the officers concerned will suffer no departmental discipline.
Gee, thank's for explaining that.

spot;1524455 wrote: All you need do to reach this conclusion is to look at previous comparable events.


I ain't no lawyer, but I would tanke on that case in a heartbeat.

spot;1524455 wrote: The only thing that would force the department to address the matter would be a civil suit and I don't see anyone rich out there waving the necessary.


Oh no doubt, no matter or what, there will be hungry lawyers and self-proclaimed "civil rights activists" looking for a payday.

Texas Rangers investigating man's controversial arrest by officers on horseback

More to come.

tude dog;1524457 wrote: Texas Rangers investigating man's controversial arrest by officers on horseback

More to come.


Exactly as I said. No internal police department investigation into either the officers or the event. An internal police department investigation into the departmental policy. Okay so far? We're on the same page?

And a third party investigation demanded by the mayor's office.

Which is exactly what I wrote.

You know as well as I do that the department will never discuss the event in public again, that no official investigation will be made and that the officers concerned will suffer no departmental discipline.

What we posted was exactly the same content, it's just that you pretend is says something different.