I encountered this video on CNN this morning:
Observations:
1. No police officers should have to work under these conditions. This requires courage and tolerance above what any professional should have to muster on a regular basis.
2. Every urban mayor, district attorney, police chief, civil rights advocate and journalist should be asked to comment on the video regarding the principles of respect, civic responsibility, and citizenship.
3. If the question is asked why crime rates are rising in several cities due to a cessation of proactive law-enforcement, this video is a nearly complete answer.
4. What prominent U.S. African American officials, leaders and celebrities are condemning this conduct by the friends of the individual being arrested, and conduct like it all over the nation? I haven’t seen or heard a single one.
5. Allowing this phenomenon to continue without addressing it directly is community malpractice, irresponsible, destructive, and almost certain to be deadly.
6. When such a situation escalates to violence, as this one easily could, who will be responsible, and who should be held responsible?
Discuss.
Ethics Alarms 
OK. This is insane. Much like the entire situation regarding police and perps today.
Is it safe to say a subset of the greater community is in the opening stages of de facto insurrection? But we aren’t willing to admit it?
Probably a microaggression since it’s manifestly true.
Just being white is an automatic microaggression.
But you notice that outright agressive agression must be ignored because…black. Or now I guess, identifying black. Funny that no one in the video tried to identify as a white man or a police officer.
I counted now fewer than 23 microaggressions in your very racist comment.
In fact, on a deeper psychologicalistic level, I discovered at least 17 micropassiveaggresions also, and 12 micromanicdepressives.
You should get those checked out.
So is being an unbiased articulate bald man of Greco-American descent.
They wanted to elevate civil disobedience to the level of sainthood, and now they have it. The problem is, once disobedience of the law is elevated above the law, then no one has much of a reason to obey the law. The Russian Army of 1917 collapsed when the new Communist government, fearing the officer corps might become counterrevolutionary, stripped officers of disciplinary authority. We aren’t there yet, but this video shows we are moving generally in that direction, when two officers, trying to execute a presumably lawful warrant, find themselves surrounded, filmed, heckled, and defied by half a dozen of the arrestee’s friends, and can do essentially nothing except try their best to effect the arrest, hoping that all six don’t rush them. They could of course call for backup, but that might only escalate the situation, so they don’t. Frankly it’s easier to just cross the street, look the other way, and lay low, because the first rule of law enforcement is to make certain you go home alive at the end of your shift. Politicians need to be agreeing on this and backing their officers up to the point that at least they say routine harassment of officers is not legitimate protest and will be dealt with accordingly. Unfortunately too many politicians, looking for a quick talking point or something that would poll well or give them cred with the left of left crowd, have thrown in with the protestors. As a result the entire structure of lawful authority has come loose and no one respects it. As a result of that the police can’t do the routine part of their jobs without increased risk. I get that some parts of policing: high-angle rescue, bomb threats, hostage situations, high-risk warrants, deep cover, scuba, are supposed to be very dangerous as a matter of course, and that’s why you have SWAT, bomb squad, ESU, etc. Every average patrol officer isn’t trained up to that level, and no police force can have highly trained backup available for 3 minute response anywhere all the time. A police force can’t operate normally where every routine arrest or traffic stop has the potential to turn into a race riot and officers can’t function normally when they fear every action could turn their careers into political hay. Of course allowing the situation to get this far is leadership malpractice. Unfortunately, the alternative is to pull a Nika riot and crush the forces of disorder, which is politically impossible. I don’t know about you, but a move to rural parts is looming pretty attractive right now.
Very true words…
Words so true, they might reflect prophecy of a nationalized (federalized) police force.
The “national” police force need only shoot one violent, but “marginalized” offender for people to turn…
We’re pretty close to that now, for all intents and purposes, IMO.
I can’t wait to find a very secluded place for my family and I.
I sometimes see some sense in the spoils system. Tough for a politician to make hay with a cop when he picked the cop for the job in the first place.
7. When multiple situations such as this escalate to violence in sufficient number and frequency, federal policy will make sure that the most irresponsible people are assigned the most responsibility (and the least accountability). Meanwhile, the most responsible people in a large number of locales eventually will respond with sufficient violence to preserve themselves and quell the chaos in their locales – thereby incurring the greatest accountability, including blame for inciting the insurrectionary mobs which they, the responsible, quelled – and thus enabling further promotion of the most irresponsible people. “Government” just isn’t big enough YET.
Which will eventually lead to a King and a bunch of barons, dukes, earls and counts. If not in name, then in practice. Hello feudalism.
It all leads up to a Glorious People’s Revolution. Get the guillotines ready! We’ve already got a good statue of Lady Liberty.
Not sure that Robespierre was any better than any of the Hapsburgs…in fact, I think he was a darn site worse.
Given how well the officers handled that situation, I doubt any of it was anything new.
How do all those Steven Spielbergs afford to pay their cell phone bills?
Beth? Charles? Anyone? Beuhler?
Obamaphones.
Bingo.
This should just be the next “Filmed on an iPhone 6” commercial.
Animals. Worthless garbage.
Of course, you know this will never get on the air. It doesn’t tell the right story.
It did get on the air on CNN, though, as I mentioned at the start, and Chris Cuomo did a reasonably good job moderating a discussion about it.
Well, that’s truly a breath of fresh air!
The president has no direct impact on the program, and one could hardly call these devices “Obama Phones,” as the e-mail author does. This specific program, SafeLink, started under President George Bush, with grants from an independent company created under President Bill Clinton, which was a legacy of an act passed under President Franklin Roosevelt, which was influenced by an agreement reached between telecommunications companies and the administration of President Woodrow Wilson.
Wilson Phones, anyone?
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/the-obama-phone/
I thought they were just called “Obamaphones” because of a viral video of a woman who said she was voting for Obama because he gave away free phones?
P.S. Who thinks the whacko who just cut loose with a gun in Charleston might be a white guy pissed off at all this who decided to take it up to eleven? (raises hand)
I think that’s a reasonable guess.
Let’s watch carefully how this is politicized, and by whom….
Carefully? We know how it plays out-
Juvenile Left: “let’s just take all the guns from good people”
Squishy Left: “if everybody would just stop fighting, there’d be no more fighting”
Juvenile Right: “it’s a mental disorder”
Squishy Right: “a good person with a gun could have stopped the bad person with a gun”
Me: “there’s bad people in this world and the presence/lack of presence of ‘good’ guns may or may not have stopped this, I sure wouldn’t want to deny people the opportunity to try to stop this, but let’s not kid ourselves, most people don’t carry at Church.”
You left out “black lives matter.” $10 says this sparks up a full-on riot today or tomorrow,
Was the shooter a cop and the entire congregation resisting arrest?
Should I bother to post about how the brilliant observation by the NAACP and the Justice Department that this “is probably” a hate crime is so idiotic that it makes my ears bleed? So if the guy was black man who shot up a black church it would be what, a love crime? A mass murder motivated by humor? Irony? What is possibly gained or clarified by having a special crime for this? Is there any purpose, other than to politicize it?
Nope. Well, that and to take issues with the upcoming election off the front page for a while.
It’s already up to the point where commentators are calling upon the disarming of all white people. Just whites, mind you.
Because guilt by association has boomeranged. At this point if you are a white male you are presumed racist and sexist until proven otherwise.
It’s also coming to the point where large numbers of white folks just don’t give a damn anymore about being called that. We’ve been subjected to those verbal whips for half a century now and born it with patience. Now, after all that, plus numerous other financial, social and, now, increasing physical attacks, many have just had enough. An encouraging sign, though, is that a number of good black men are sick of the system, too, and are coming forth. There’s a showdown coming, all right. I just hope that enough good people of all races will stand to ranks together so that it won’t devolve into a bloody race war. That would truly be playing into the hands of the power seekers in Washington and our enemies abroad.
I’m afraid this is what president Obama and the left mean when they say that race relations have improved. Their definition of ‘improve’ is to make the whole country like Chicago. Mark that as one of the accomplishments of this administration.
What they mean when they talk about improving them is doing all the things the Weathermen et al couldn’t manage to do in the 1970s. White men are the enemy and the oppressor and need to disappear after 400 years of oppression.
I’m all for citizens having the right to film the police, but idiots like this make it hard for *peaceful* *respectful* exercise of rights. In case I did not say it clearly, these “citizens” are IDIOTS (and this from someone who leans heavily libertarian).
After watching this, every time I hear someone says that police hassle people for ‘walking black’, this is what flashes through my brain that ‘walking black’ is.