Baltimore: The Next Ferguson? (1 Viewer)

[TobiasFunke]

This idiot mayor, crying about how hard the city worked to get CVS into that neighborhood, then refusing to protect it because cops are cowards who value their own safety over that of the citizens and property they are sworn to protect.

You are foolish

That's your opinion.

But facts are facts. And the fact is that the cops did nothing to protect that building from private criminals.

And you don't suppose they did what they were ordered to do by a superior?

I'm glad that you're here to defend the Baltimore PD from the terrible and irresponsible assertion of cowardly behavior. Brave public servants like these fine gentlemen deserve the benefit of the doubt.

How about you link some of the videos from the hundreds if not thousands of thugs rummaging the city that they are there to protect. Their job is fairly difficult, especially in a situation yesterday when being constantly assaulted while ordered to not react.

I'm sure TFunke would've handled it better.

I've never worked in law enforcement so I guess I can't really say I'm 100% certain. But I feel confident that I would not make it regular practice to beat up innocent people without justification. I would not have beaten the #### out of an 87 year old grandmother and told her "“#####, you ain’t no better than any of the other old black #####es I have locked up." I would not have slammed an innocent pregnant woman to the ground. I would not have taken down a 4'11, 107 pound innocent grandmother and ground her face into the concrete. And I would not have cost the city millions of dollars that could obviously have been better spent elsewhere, and fueled completely justified distrust and anger for law enforcement in the process. And yes, I also don't think I would forcefully shove an innocent man with his hands up to the ground, or throw rocks at protestors, or arrest journalists for doing their (very important) job.

But sure, let's absolve the police of these many, many horrific acts and ignore the justifiable resentment they cause in the community because "their jobs are fairly difficult."

 

[John Bender]

Just heard a stat that 50% of black adult males are unemployed in Baltimore.

I need a link for a stat like this... This is almost unbelievable.

Why is it so unbelievable to you?The unemployment rate for all blacks in this country is around 17%, 10 points higher than for everyone else. The poverty rate in all of our inner cities approaches 40%.

Current unemployment is 5.5%... To say that black men in this city are 900% above the national average is something I would like proof on

Heard it on Morning Joe this morning. Here's link to the segment.

on.msnbc.com/1EMz2TB

Guy says it around the 5:50 mark. He actually says OVER half are unemployed.

Maybe cherry picking/distorting the real data due to an axe to grind. I'd consider the source. I try to stay away from anything MSNBC or FoxNews for info like this. (Go ahead and flame me for being a CNN guy

 

[fantasycurse42]

I've never worked in law enforcement so it's difficult to say. But I feel confident that I would not make it regular practice to beat up innocent people without justification. I would not have beaten the #### out of an 87 year old grandmother and told her "“#####, you ain’t no better than any of the other old black #####es I have locked up." I would not have slammed an innocent pregnant woman to the ground. I would not have taken down a 4'11, 107 pound innocent grandmother and ground her face into the concrete. And I would not have cost the city millions of dollars and fueling completely justified distrust and anger for law enforcement in the process. And yes, I don't think I would forcefully shove an innocent man with his hands up to the ground, or thrown rocks at protestors, or arrested journalists for doing their (very important) job.

But sure, let's absolve the police of these many, many horrific acts and ignore the justifiable resentment they cause in the community because their jobs are hard.

$5.7MM over 4 years in a city with well over 500,000 people doesn't sound like a huge chunk to me, do you want robots to enforce the law?... The problems here go well beyond those who are hired to enforce the law... To endlessly point your finger at law enforcement is foolish... This behavior yesterday is unacceptable and I'd be happy if the penalties for inciting riots like this were increased 10 fold.

I don't know the solution here, but neither do you, nor does the African American Mayor, or the African American Police Commissioner.

 

[igbomb]

Some historical context

Interesting. The '67 riots destroyed my city, it was before I was born but my grandparents lived on the edge of where the riots ended up. Detroit never recovered, anyone with the ability to move out did over the next 20 years and you see where it is today. The interstate system displaced many of the poorest residents in many urban areas, and then the Fair Housing Act of 1966 brought drastic changes to very segregated areas. Then the riots came, and then everyone with means left. Rinse and repeat in St Louis, Newark, Cleveland, Chicago, Baltimore and many more cities across the country. Long story short since I don't want to get to deep into this, we really haven't learned from what happened almost 50 years ago and we've repeated some of the mistakes that made many urban areas in this country nearly unlivable. Runaway crime, drugs, poverty, and a mentality of the populace of nothing to lose. Part of it is a policing problem but it is a societal problem and we love to just ignore our problems hoping they will dissolve on their own. Well they don't, and the destitute will have their say here and in many places all over the world. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

The question is why are they destitute and do the comfortable really truly care?

The answer to the second part is clearly "no".

The answer to the first part is much more difficult and goes to much deeper issues than most are willing to acknowledge IMO.

But instead of solely the history of segregation and income inequality, one might also consider political corruption, one-party systemic rule, unsustainable public services, unsustainable union practices, and a breakdown of basic familial and social norms -- it seems like another place to start.

If we are going here shouldn't you start with the war on drugs? Has any single policy wrecked more havoc on our urban centers the past 45 years?

Don't leave out Easy access to drugs and a culture which glorifies their usage, the decline of the social structures such as family, church, schools...

I hate this line of reasoning. Garbage.

Huh? One of the strongest correlations/predictors for future poverty and criminal conduct is being raised by a single parent. Anyone who has been raised by a single parent knows how difficult it is for both the parent and child. To ignore that factor is foolishness.

My issue is that people cite the decline of social structures as the CAUSE of issues. It's not, it's a consequence. Did the people in our urban communities simply one day wholesale choose to start dropping out of school, having kids out of wedlock and slinging dope in the streets.

Poverty is the driver, it's not the result. Poverty drives drug use. It drives criminal behavior. It drives single parenthood and school dropouts.

The degradation of the family structure didn't come first.

That's why I hate that line of reasoning. It's policies that a) demean the poor and b) encourage them to stay poor that are causing our issues. The issues didn't create themselves.

 

[tdoss]

The war on drugs is no worse a failure than the war on poverty. Again, 50% unemployment among black males. Government assistance is propping up this cesspool of a city.

Are you blind or something? You even quoted my post where I told you many of them have jobs in the drug trade. And what is your level of familiarity with Baltimore? Do you live there? Have you spent much time there? Where do you live?

Sorry, I didn't take your post seriously.

They aren't looking for work because they have work. Making more money than they would working in legitimate business. But just disregard that fact because you can't seem to get your brain around it.

So half the black males in Baltimore are drug dealers? Is what you're saying?

Really gotta wonder though...for those that say the war on crime...im sorry, drugs, is at fault.Let's say you make pot legal...what happens...do 50% of the black males just go down to City Hall for a permit and all open up dispenseries?

And is pot really what these folks are getting "harrassed by the man" over?

If not...are you saying legalize all drugs? That can't really be the answer can it?

Or are you saying arresting people for drug laws is the problem? Are we not supposed to enforce the law?

I'm really trying to understand how the War on Drugs is the problem and how ending said war works?

Seems like you'd either have a lot of people breaking those laws and you turn a blind eye and not arrest them...or you get rid of those laws and you have all forms of drugs just freely flowing without recourse. I'm missing the angle here.

 

[Gary Coal Man]

Gary Coal Man, what happened in South Central Los Angeles following the King riots wasn't so much businesses leaving as a reshuffling. If anything, property actually became more valuable after the riots because insurance money kicked in and a lot of old dilapidated buildings were torn down.

Your assumption is incorrect. Businesses do not leave because of riots. They leave when sales go down. I have no idea how much revenue that CVS earned, but if it did well, it will be back shortly. Same for the liquor store.

Economic and social fallout of the 1967 riots

After the riots, thousands of small businesses closed permanently or relocated to safer neighborhoods, and the affected district lay in ruins for decades. Of the 1967 riots, politician Coleman Young, Detroit's first black mayor, wrote in 1994:

The heaviest casualty, however, was the city. Detroit's losses went a hell of a lot deeper than the immediate toll of lives and buildings. The riot put Detroit on the fast track to economic desolation, mugging the city and making off with incalculable value in jobs, earnings taxes, corporate taxes, retail dollars, sales taxes, mortgages, interest, property taxes, development dollars, investment dollars, tourism dollars, and plain damn money. The money was carried out in the pockets of the businesses and the white people who fled as fast as they could. The white exodus from Detroit had been prodigiously steady prior to the riot, totally twenty-two thousand in 1966, but afterwards it was frantic. In 1967, with less than half the year remaining after the summer explosion—the outward population migration reached sixty-seven thousand. In 1968 the figure hit eighty-thousand, followed by forty-six thousand in 1969.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_Detroit#cite_note-23

Once again, Detroit was a much larger riot, but the mentality of relocating your business to a safer area remains.

 

[irish eyes]

This idiot mayor, crying about how hard the city worked to get CVS into that neighborhood, then refusing to protect it because cops are cowards who value their own safety over that of the citizens and property they are sworn to protect.

You are foolish

That's your opinion.

But facts are facts. And the fact is that the cops did nothing to protect that building from private criminals.

And you don't suppose they did what they were ordered to do by a superior?

I'm glad that you're here to defend the Baltimore PD from the terrible and irresponsible assertion of cowardly behavior. Brave public servants like these fine gentlemen deserve the benefit of the doubt.

I can't wait for the cops to bust heads and boot stomp these criminals into submission tonight and have you #######

We can only hope this is what happens and then the real belly aching will start. Just hope a few crips and bloods or whatever those morons call themselves are taken out. How pathetic of a human being do you gave to be to be in a gang. But I'm sure some people will come in here and say "but they have bad up bringings and need a family" lololol...if you're in a gang you are the lowest sewer gutter rat in existence

 

[TheIronSheik]

You can love or hate Ray lewis but he nails it here.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/04/ray-lewis-baltimore

Cue the Lewis bashers...........................

That murderer makes a good point.

Only took 1 reply,I'm shocked

 

[timschochet]

I don't usually agree with tdoss very often but he makes some good sense here. While I'm in favor of of ending the drug war, how would it affect the inner city? Wouldn't corporations quickly take over the sale of most narcotics?

 

[tdoss]

The war on drugs is no worse a failure than the war on poverty. Again, 50% unemployment among black males. Government assistance is propping up this cesspool of a city.

Are you blind or something? You even quoted my post where I told you many of them have jobs in the drug trade. And what is your level of familiarity with Baltimore? Do you live there? Have you spent much time there? Where do you live?

Sorry, I didn't take your post seriously.

They aren't looking for work because they have work. Making more money than they would working in legitimate business. But just disregard that fact because you can't seem to get your brain around it.

So half the black males in Baltimore are drug dealers? Is what you're saying?

The 50% unemployed are selling to the 50% employed. It's a market strategy centered around getting to know your customer.

Think about that for a moment.

50% of black males are unemployed.

Some percentage of that are selling drugs.

Now imagine what that town looks like...

You're a Baltimore cop...you get enough money to move your kids out of that depressing situation...now that's used against you as being an occupying force.

Who in the hell would want to live in some place with those numbers? You'd be downright irresponsible if you didn't do everything you could to keep your kids from growing up in that environment.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Gary Coal Man, what happened in South Central Los Angeles following the King riots wasn't so much businesses leaving as a reshuffling. If anything, property actually became more valuable after the riots because insurance money kicked in and a lot of old dilapidated buildings were torn down.

Your assumption is incorrect. Businesses do not leave because of riots. They leave when sales go down. I have no idea how much revenue that CVS earned, but if it did well, it will be back shortly. Same for the liquor store.

Yeah, well, riots tend to dry up business after it drives away the responsible people. My mother-in-law's family owned a couple of businesses in Camden, NJ back in the day. They weren't rich, but their businesses made them a living. Then the race riots happened. People moved away and they had to close their businesses. That happened all over Camden. When the people you served lunch to, or sold candy to, are suddenly throwing bricks through your windows and burning your place down, most people don't really care to rebuild and look those same people in the face again.The effect not only meant Camden was left with few businesses, few jobs and with a bleak future, it affected all those small business owners that lost their living. My MIL's family went from a solid lower middle class to really struggling for generations because of their loss.

 

[Hang 10]

Just heard a stat that 50% of black adult males are unemployed in Baltimore.

I need a link for a stat like this... This is almost unbelievable.

Why is it so unbelievable to you?The unemployment rate for all blacks in this country is around 17%, 10 points higher than for everyone else. The poverty rate in all of our inner cities approaches 40%.

Current unemployment is 5.5%... To say that black men in this city are 900% above the national average is something I would like proof on

Heard it on Morning Joe this morning. Here's link to the segment.

on.msnbc.com/1EMz2TB

Guy says it around the 5:50 mark. He actually says OVER half are unemployed.

Maybe cherry picking/distorting the real data due to an axe to grind. I'd consider the source. I try to stay away from anything MSNBC or FoxNews for info like this. (Go ahead and flame me for being a CNN guy

I'm not going to say the stat is fact, as I first said...I simply heard it this morning. And to be clear it was half of adult black males...not all blacks. BUT it wasn't Joe that cited the stat, it was someone with some supposed knowledge of Baltimore. Seems like it would have been easy to call him out if he was 40% off.

 

[TobiasFunke]

I've never worked in law enforcement so it's difficult to say. But I feel confident that I would not make it regular practice to beat up innocent people without justification. I would not have beaten the #### out of an 87 year old grandmother and told her "“#####, you ain’t no better than any of the other old black #####es I have locked up." I would not have slammed an innocent pregnant woman to the ground. I would not have taken down a 4'11, 107 pound innocent grandmother and ground her face into the concrete. And I would not have cost the city millions of dollars and fueling completely justified distrust and anger for law enforcement in the process. And yes, I don't think I would forcefully shove an innocent man with his hands up to the ground, or thrown rocks at protestors, or arrested journalists for doing their (very important) job.

But sure, let's absolve the police of these many, many horrific acts and ignore the justifiable resentment they cause in the community because their jobs are hard.

$5.7MM over 4 years in a city with well over 500,000 people doesn't sound like a huge chunk to me, do you want robots to enforce the law?... The problems here go well beyond those who are hired to enforce the law... To endlessly point your finger at law enforcement is foolish... This behavior yesterday is unacceptable and I'd be happy if the penalties for inciting riots like this were increased 10 fold.

I don't know the solution here, but neither do you, nor does the African American Mayor, or the African American Police Commissioner.

This is a ridiculous straw man argument. I never said the problem is limited to law enforcement. I didn't endlessly point my finger at law enforcement. I have condemned rioting repeatedly in the Ferguson thread and now this one too. I never said I had the solution.

All I did was ridicule your preposterous knee-jerk defense of clearly improper police behavior because "their jobs are hard." Ignoring the sins of law enforcement here is a huge mistake, because that's obviously a source of a lot of the frustration in the community. And for that matter, why is there so much more outrage about people looting a CVS than there is about police beating up innocent grandmothers and pregnant women and many many other innocent people? Would anyone here even know about those incidents without the Gray death and the protests? Hell I bet the majority of the posters here condemning the looting still haven't read that Baltimore Sun investigation even though I've now posted it twice.

 

[General Tso]

Some historical context

Interesting. The '67 riots destroyed my city, it was before I was born but my grandparents lived on the edge of where the riots ended up. Detroit never recovered, anyone with the ability to move out did over the next 20 years and you see where it is today. The interstate system displaced many of the poorest residents in many urban areas, and then the Fair Housing Act of 1966 brought drastic changes to very segregated areas. Then the riots came, and then everyone with means left. Rinse and repeat in St Louis, Newark, Cleveland, Chicago, Baltimore and many more cities across the country. Long story short since I don't want to get to deep into this, we really haven't learned from what happened almost 50 years ago and we've repeated some of the mistakes that made many urban areas in this country nearly unlivable. Runaway crime, drugs, poverty, and a mentality of the populace of nothing to lose. Part of it is a policing problem but it is a societal problem and we love to just ignore our problems hoping they will dissolve on their own. Well they don't, and the destitute will have their say here and in many places all over the world. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

The question is why are they destitute and do the comfortable really truly care?The answer to the second part is clearly "no".

The answer to the first part is much more difficult and goes to much deeper issues than most are willing to acknowledge IMO.

But instead of solely the history of segregation and income inequality, one might also consider political corruption, one-party systemic rule, unsustainable public services, unsustainable union practices, and a breakdown of basic familial and social norms -- it seems like another place to start.

If we are going here shouldn't you start with the war on drugs? Has any single policy wrecked more havoc on our urban centers the past 45 years?

Don't leave out Easy access to drugs and a culture which glorifies their usage, the decline of the social structures such as family, church, schools...

I hate this line of reasoning. Garbage.

Huh? One of the strongest correlations/predictors for future poverty and criminal conduct is being raised by a single parent. Anyone who has been raised by a single parent knows how difficult it is for both the parent and child. To ignore that factor is foolishness.

My issue is that people cite the decline of social structures as the CAUSE of issues. It's not, it's a consequence. Did the people in our urban communities simply one day wholesale choose to start dropping out of school, having kids out of wedlock and slinging dope in the streets?

The answer is Yes. It started around 1965, AFTER the war on poverty and passage of civil rights legislation. Look it up. The numbers are staggering.

 

[timschochet]

Gary Coal Man, what happened in South Central Los Angeles following the King riots wasn't so much businesses leaving as a reshuffling. If anything, property actually became more valuable after the riots because insurance money kicked in and a lot of old dilapidated buildings were torn down.

Your assumption is incorrect. Businesses do not leave because of riots. They leave when sales go down. I have no idea how much revenue that CVS earned, but if it did well, it will be back shortly. Same for the liquor store.

Economic and social fallout of the 1967 riots

After the riots, thousands of small businesses closed permanently or relocated to safer neighborhoods, and the affected district lay in ruins for decades. Of the 1967 riots, politician Coleman Young, Detroit's first black mayor, wrote in 1994:

The heaviest casualty, however, was the city. Detroit's losses went a hell of a lot deeper than the immediate toll of lives and buildings. The riot put Detroit on the fast track to economic desolation, mugging the city and making off with incalculable value in jobs, earnings taxes, corporate taxes, retail dollars, sales taxes, mortgages, interest, property taxes, development dollars, investment dollars, tourism dollars, and plain damn money. The money was carried out in the pockets of the businesses and the white people who fled as fast as they could. The white exodus from Detroit had been prodigiously steady prior to the riot, totally twenty-two thousand in 1966, but afterwards it was frantic. In 1967, with less than half the year remaining after the summer explosionthe outward population migration reached sixty-seven thousand. In 1968 the figure hit eighty-thousand, followed by forty-six thousand in 1969.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_Detroit#cite_note-23

Once again, Detroit was a much larger riot, but the mentality of relocating your business to a safer area remains.

OK so I took away your 1992 example and now you have to back to 1967 to prove your point? The problem with 1967 is that back then the inner cities were part black, part white. The riots led to white flight to the suburbs. But eventually all of the businesses came back, just not run by white people.

This time around all the whites have already fled.

 

[TheIronSheik]

The war on drugs is no worse a failure than the war on poverty. Again, 50% unemployment among black males. Government assistance is propping up this cesspool of a city.

Are you blind or something? You even quoted my post where I told you many of them have jobs in the drug trade. And what is your level of familiarity with Baltimore? Do you live there? Have you spent much time there? Where do you live?

Sorry, I didn't take your post seriously.

They aren't looking for work because they have work. Making more money than they would working in legitimate business. But just disregard that fact because you can't seem to get your brain around it.

So half the black males in Baltimore are drug dealers? Is what you're saying?

The 50% unemployed are selling to the 50% employed. It's a market strategy centered around getting to know your customer.

Think about that for a moment.

50% of black males are unemployed.

Some percentage of that are selling drugs.

Now imagine what that town looks like...

You're a Baltimore cop...you get enough money to move your kids out of that depressing situation...now that's used against you as being an occupying force.

Who in the hell would want to live in some place with those numbers? You'd be downright irresponsible if you didn't do everything you could to keep your kids from growing up in that environment.

I know a lot of big city cops, and most of them live outside of the city.

 

[matttyl]

I don't usually agree with tdoss very often but he makes some good sense here. While I'm in favor of of ending the drug war, how would it affect the inner city? Wouldn't corporations quickly take over the sale of most narcotics?

Of course, if there is money to be made.

 

[Hang 10]

The war on drugs is no worse a failure than the war on poverty. Again, 50% unemployment among black males. Government assistance is propping up this cesspool of a city.

Are you blind or something? You even quoted my post where I told you many of them have jobs in the drug trade. And what is your level of familiarity with Baltimore? Do you live there? Have you spent much time there? Where do you live?

Sorry, I didn't take your post seriously.

They aren't looking for work because they have work. Making more money than they would working in legitimate business. But just disregard that fact because you can't seem to get your brain around it.

So half the black males in Baltimore are drug dealers? Is what you're saying?

The 50% unemployed are selling to the 50% employed. It's a market strategy centered around getting to know your customer.

Think about that for a moment.

50% of black males are unemployed.

Some percentage of that are selling drugs.

Now imagine what that town looks like...

You're a Baltimore cop...you get enough money to move your kids out of that depressing situation...now that's used against you as being an occupying force.

Who in the hell would want to live in some place with those numbers? You'd be downright irresponsible if you didn't do everything you could to keep your kids from growing up in that environment.

I know a lot of big city cops, and most of them live outside of the city.

I think it's pretty common in all professions for people to settle out in the burbs once they start a family.

 

[urbanhack]

Some historical context

Interesting. The '67 riots destroyed my city, it was before I was born but my grandparents lived on the edge of where the riots ended up. Detroit never recovered, anyone with the ability to move out did over the next 20 years and you see where it is today. The interstate system displaced many of the poorest residents in many urban areas, and then the Fair Housing Act of 1966 brought drastic changes to very segregated areas. Then the riots came, and then everyone with means left. Rinse and repeat in St Louis, Newark, Cleveland, Chicago, Baltimore and many more cities across the country. Long story short since I don't want to get to deep into this, we really haven't learned from what happened almost 50 years ago and we've repeated some of the mistakes that made many urban areas in this country nearly unlivable. Runaway crime, drugs, poverty, and a mentality of the populace of nothing to lose. Part of it is a policing problem but it is a societal problem and we love to just ignore our problems hoping they will dissolve on their own. Well they don't, and the destitute will have their say here and in many places all over the world. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

The question is why are they destitute and do the comfortable really truly care?The answer to the second part is clearly "no".

The answer to the first part is much more difficult and goes to much deeper issues than most are willing to acknowledge IMO.

But instead of solely the history of segregation and income inequality, one might also consider political corruption, one-party systemic rule, unsustainable public services, unsustainable union practices, and a breakdown of basic familial and social norms -- it seems like another place to start.

If we are going here shouldn't you start with the war on drugs? Has any single policy wrecked more havoc on our urban centers the past 45 years?

Don't leave out Easy access to drugs and a culture which glorifies their usage, the decline of the social structures such as family, church, schools...

I hate this line of reasoning. Garbage.

Huh? One of the strongest correlations/predictors for future poverty and criminal conduct is being raised by a single parent. Anyone who has been raised by a single parent knows how difficult it is for both the parent and child. To ignore that factor is foolishness.

My issue is that people cite the decline of social structures as the CAUSE of issues. It's not, it's a consequence. Did the people in our urban communities simply one day wholesale choose to start dropping out of school, having kids out of wedlock and slinging dope in the streets?

The answer is Yes. It started around 1965, AFTER the war on poverty and passage of civil rights legislation. Look it up. The numbers are staggering.

Yea...i'm amazed how some of them waltzed right into white neighborhoods and were greeted with open arms. 1965 was a memorable year!

Get a clue.

 

[[icon]]

People in this thread blaming cops for not stopping the rioters from burning the CVS are likely the same guys who would be blaming the cops for excessive force if they had... because I'm pretty sure head-pats and "move along fella's" would have stopped anyone.

 

[Rove!]

Just heard a stat that 50% of black adult males are unemployed in Baltimore.

I need a link for a stat like this... This is almost unbelievable.

Why is it so unbelievable to you?The unemployment rate for all blacks in this country is around 17%, 10 points higher than for everyone else. The poverty rate in all of our inner cities approaches 40%.

Current unemployment is 5.5%... To say that black men in this city are 900% above the national average is something I would like proof on

the 5.5% doesn't account for those who have dropped out of the workforce entirely....the actual number is much higher and hasn't changed much since the economic meltdown..

 

[Jack White]

The fat white male Republican governor is just as worthless as the hot black female Democratic mayor.

 

[tdoss]

Do we even have any speculations yet on what happened to this guy?

Did they do one of those rides where they cuff him, toss him in the van and then drive over every speed bump and pothole?

I haven't heard anything on how he got injured yet.

 

[jonessed]

Great. I see all the race-baiters are now showing up. So tell me guys, how is Baltimore racist again? The city has been led by blacks for the last 30 years.

- the current Mayor (in office since 2010) is black

- the Mayor before that was black.

- 4 of the last 5 Mayors have been black.

- the current Police Chief is black

- 7 of the past 10 Police Chiefs have been black.

- 54% of the police force is minority.

It's sad the lengths people will go to to find racism as the root cause for almost any problem. Last night on the news a black community leader in Baltimore, Adam Jackson, came right out and blamed all this on former mayor Martin O'Malley and his racist policies. The only white mayor in Baltimore for the last 30 years. A mayor who hasn't been in office for over 8 years.

Who's the real racist here Adam?

Let's get away from the decades of poor leadership who, despite their best efforts, are also really just victims of the system and have no power to influence their departments.

The real story is in the anecdotes centered around the racist and out of control police force. The lack of opportunity is their fault. The lack of investment in these communities is their fault. What kind of police force can't peacefully stop rioters? ####### racists.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Some historical context

Interesting. The '67 riots destroyed my city, it was before I was born but my grandparents lived on the edge of where the riots ended up. Detroit never recovered, anyone with the ability to move out did over the next 20 years and you see where it is today. The interstate system displaced many of the poorest residents in many urban areas, and then the Fair Housing Act of 1966 brought drastic changes to very segregated areas. Then the riots came, and then everyone with means left. Rinse and repeat in St Louis, Newark, Cleveland, Chicago, Baltimore and many more cities across the country. Long story short since I don't want to get to deep into this, we really haven't learned from what happened almost 50 years ago and we've repeated some of the mistakes that made many urban areas in this country nearly unlivable. Runaway crime, drugs, poverty, and a mentality of the populace of nothing to lose. Part of it is a policing problem but it is a societal problem and we love to just ignore our problems hoping they will dissolve on their own. Well they don't, and the destitute will have their say here and in many places all over the world. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

The question is why are they destitute and do the comfortable really truly care?

The answer to the second part is clearly "no".

The answer to the first part is much more difficult and goes to much deeper issues than most are willing to acknowledge IMO.

But instead of solely the history of segregation and income inequality, one might also consider political corruption, one-party systemic rule, unsustainable public services, unsustainable union practices, and a breakdown of basic familial and social norms -- it seems like another place to start.

If we are going here shouldn't you start with the war on drugs? Has any single policy wrecked more havoc on our urban centers the past 45 years?

Don't leave out Easy access to drugs and a culture which glorifies their usage, the decline of the social structures such as family, church, schools...

I hate this line of reasoning. Garbage.

Huh? One of the strongest correlations/predictors for future poverty and criminal conduct is being raised by a single parent. Anyone who has been raised by a single parent knows how difficult it is for both the parent and child. To ignore that factor is foolishness.

My issue is that people cite the decline of social structures as the CAUSE of issues. It's not, it's a consequence. Did the people in our urban communities simply one day wholesale choose to start dropping out of school, having kids out of wedlock and slinging dope in the streets.

Poverty is the driver, it's not the result. Poverty drives drug use. It drives criminal behavior. It drives single parenthood and school dropouts.

The degradation of the family structure didn't come first.

That's why I hate that line of reasoning. It's policies that a) demean the poor and b) encourage them to stay poor that are causing our issues. The issues didn't create themselves.

How does poverty cause single parenthood? Historical statistics show no such correlation. Poverty has existed for all of eternity and it's only been in the last 50 years that we've seen the percentage of single parents shoot through the roof. And it doesn't explain why kids who grow up in poverty with two parent households do much better than those with single parent households.

 

[whiskey7]

People in this thread blaming cops for not stopping the rioters from burning the CVS are likely the same guys who would be blaming the cops for excessive force if they had... because I'm pretty sure head-pats and "move along fella's" would have stopped anyone.

Exactly.

Same for many of the media hacks. Same ones who were going with the 'police are not protecting these homes/business from rioters and looters' angle would be going with the 'police are using too much force on these demonstrators' angle if the cops got in there and started taking people down.

 

[tom22406]

People in this thread blaming cops for not stopping the rioters from burning the CVS are likely the same guys who would be blaming the cops for excessive force if they had... because I'm pretty sure head-pats and "move along fella's" would have stopped anyone.

Cops were in a no win situation and I would say they did handle this(unlike with the death)the best way possible.The Mayor though had me scratching my head.Even if that was how you felt why would you say that publicly,it was almost like handing the keys to the city over and do with it what you will to get your anger out.Really stupid move IMO.

 

[Gary Coal Man]

Gary Coal Man, what happened in South Central Los Angeles following the King riots wasn't so much businesses leaving as a reshuffling. If anything, property actually became more valuable after the riots because insurance money kicked in and a lot of old dilapidated buildings were torn down.

Your assumption is incorrect. Businesses do not leave because of riots. They leave when sales go down. I have no idea how much revenue that CVS earned, but if it did well, it will be back shortly. Same for the liquor store.

Economic and social fallout of the 1967 riots

After the riots, thousands of small businesses closed permanently or relocated to safer neighborhoods, and the affected district lay in ruins for decades. Of the 1967 riots, politician Coleman Young, Detroit's first black mayor, wrote in 1994:

The heaviest casualty, however, was the city. Detroit's losses went a hell of a lot deeper than the immediate toll of lives and buildings. The riot put Detroit on the fast track to economic desolation, mugging the city and making off with incalculable value in jobs, earnings taxes, corporate taxes, retail dollars, sales taxes, mortgages, interest, property taxes, development dollars, investment dollars, tourism dollars, and plain damn money. The money was carried out in the pockets of the businesses and the white people who fled as fast as they could. The white exodus from Detroit had been prodigiously steady prior to the riot, totally twenty-two thousand in 1966, but afterwards it was frantic. In 1967, with less than half the year remaining after the summer explosionthe outward population migration reached sixty-seven thousand. In 1968 the figure hit eighty-thousand, followed by forty-six thousand in 1969.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_Detroit#cite_note-23

Once again, Detroit was a much larger riot, but the mentality of relocating your business to a safer area remains.

OK so I took away your 1992 example and now you have to back to 1967 to prove your point?The problem with 1967 is that back then the inner cities were part black, part white. The riots led to white flight to the suburbs. But eventually all of the businesses came back, just not run by white people.

This time around all the whites have already fled.

You didn't "take away" anything. You buried your head in the sand and dismissed people who have more knowledge on the topic (the author on the LA riots, and the mayor of Detroit post the riots.

And '92, '67, 2015 -- it doesn't matter. Many business owners do relocate their business to a safer area post-riot if they have the resources to do so.

But even if we accept that the businesses relocate after riots solely due to their earnings declining because of less tourists and pedestrian traffic -- isn't the end result of less jobs due to less business the same? Wasn't that the point of suggesting that unemployment often rises post-riots due to business relocating?

 

[jonessed]

Do we even have any speculations yet on what happened to this guy?

Did they do one of those rides where they cuff him, toss him in the van and then drive over every speed bump and pothole?

I haven't heard anything on how he got injured yet.

There was no trauma outside of the spinal injury which would rule out beating. It looks like they were negligent in both not properly buckling him in as well as not seeking medical attention when he asked for it.

 

[[icon]]

People in this thread blaming cops for not stopping the rioters from burning the CVS are likely the same guys who would be blaming the cops for excessive force if they had... because I'm pretty sure head-pats and "move along fella's" would have stopped anyone.

Cops were in a no win situation and I would say they did handle this(unlike with the death)the best way possible.The Mayor though had me scratching my head.Even if that was how you felt why would you say that publicly,it was almost like handing the keys to the city over and do with it what you will to get your anger out.Really stupid move IMO.

I would agree here 100%

 

[Jack White]

Tom Carcetti never would have let this happen.

 

[Jack White]

Hey look, here comes another worthless politician!

 

[Apple Jack]

Do we even have any speculations yet on what happened to this guy?

Did they do one of those rides where they cuff him, toss him in the van and then drive over every speed bump and pothole?

I haven't heard anything on how he got injured yet.

There was no trauma outside of the spinal injury which would rule out beating. It looks like they were negligent in both not properly buckling him in as well as not seeking medical attention when he asked for it.

Dont buckle him in, speed up and slam on the brakes...oops. Is that the suspected cause?

 

[Jack White]

People in this thread blaming cops for not stopping the rioters from burning the CVS are likely the same guys who would be blaming the cops for excessive force if they had... because I'm pretty sure head-pats and "move along fella's" would have stopped anyone.

Cops were in a no win situation and I would say they did handle this(unlike with the death)the best way possible.The Mayor though had me scratching my head.Even if that was how you felt why would you say that publicly,it was almost like handing the keys to the city over and do with it what you will to get your anger out.Really stupid move IMO.

I would agree here 100%

Serious question: do you think the pols and police would have let these private criminals ransack and burn down City Hall?

 

[fantasycurse42]

I've never worked in law enforcement so it's difficult to say. But I feel confident that I would not make it regular practice to beat up innocent people without justification. I would not have beaten the #### out of an 87 year old grandmother and told her "“#####, you ain’t no better than any of the other old black #####es I have locked up." I would not have slammed an innocent pregnant woman to the ground. I would not have taken down a 4'11, 107 pound innocent grandmother and ground her face into the concrete. And I would not have cost the city millions of dollars and fueling completely justified distrust and anger for law enforcement in the process. And yes, I don't think I would forcefully shove an innocent man with his hands up to the ground, or thrown rocks at protestors, or arrested journalists for doing their (very important) job.

But sure, let's absolve the police of these many, many horrific acts and ignore the justifiable resentment they cause in the community because their jobs are hard.

$5.7MM over 4 years in a city with well over 500,000 people doesn't sound like a huge chunk to me, do you want robots to enforce the law?... The problems here go well beyond those who are hired to enforce the law... To endlessly point your finger at law enforcement is foolish... This behavior yesterday is unacceptable and I'd be happy if the penalties for inciting riots like this were increased 10 fold.

I don't know the solution here, but neither do you, nor does the African American Mayor, or the African American Police Commissioner.

This is a ridiculous straw man argument. I never said the problem is limited to law enforcement. I didn't endlessly point my finger at law enforcement. I have condemned rioting repeatedly in the Ferguson thread and now this one too. I never said I had the solution.

All I did was ridicule your preposterous knee-jerk defense of clearly improper police behavior because "their jobs are hard." Ignoring the sins of law enforcement here is a huge mistake, because that's obviously a source of a lot of the frustration in the community. And for that matter, why is there so much more outrage about people looting a CVS than there is about police beating up innocent grandmothers and pregnant women and many many other innocent people? Would anyone here even know about those incidents without the Gray death and the protests? Hell I bet the majority of the posters here condemning the looting still haven't read that Baltimore Sun investigation even though I've now posted it twice.

Prob bc it was burned and destroyed. But that is just a building owned by a corporation so who gives a ####? I can take a guess...

Prob grandma and grandpa who rely on the largest pharmaceutical carrier in their neighborhood. They might have difficulty conveniently obtaining life saving or altering medication for the next few months as this store is rebuilt (or if it is rebuilt). They might care and this might cause some outrage.

 

[MattFancy]

Do we even have any speculations yet on what happened to this guy?

Did they do one of those rides where they cuff him, toss him in the van and then drive over every speed bump and pothole?

I haven't heard anything on how he got injured yet.

Sounds like it was a "rough ride" thing where they made sure to drive like idiots in order to send a message to him. The cops involved should no doubt be punished. I believe they were already suspended last week or so.

 

[[icon]]

So with the upswing in these sorts of rioting situations... does this indicate a trend where the correct response is "hands off" and police simply "taking it" when rioters are attacking/injuring them?

If so:

• what message is that sending to the rioters?
• Is it allowing a legitimate but constructive release of rage? Or is it providing a "purge-esque" environment for bad folks (hesitant to use the word thugs here, despite that likely being apropos) to simply act a fool without repercussions?

• What does that say to the businesses / homes in the path of something like this? Who is repsonsible for the rebuild?
• Does this "hands off" approach encourage future blow-ups due to the lack of repurcussions?
• What impact does this have on the morale of the police force? Does it cause a pull pack in personnel quitting or opting against that career path?

 

[[icon]]

People in this thread blaming cops for not stopping the rioters from burning the CVS are likely the same guys who would be blaming the cops for excessive force if they had... because I'm pretty sure head-pats and "move along fella's" would have stopped anyone.

Cops were in a no win situation and I would say they did handle this(unlike with the death)the best way possible.The Mayor though had me scratching my head.Even if that was how you felt why would you say that publicly,it was almost like handing the keys to the city over and do with it what you will to get your anger out.Really stupid move IMO.

I would agree here 100%

Serious question: do you think the pols and police would have let these private criminals ransack and burn down City Hall?

Of course not. That's a silly question.

 

[Smack Tripper]

National Guard protects City Hall, while CVS is looted and burned without resistance.

Do you think some store is more important than city hall?

 

[MattFancy]

So with the upswing in these sorts of rioting situations... does this indicate a trend where the correct response is "hands off" and police simply "taking it" when rioters are attacking/injuring them?

If so:

• what message is that sending to the rioters?

• Is it allowing a legitimate but constructive release of rage? Or is it providing a "purge-esque" environment for bad folks (hesitant to use the word thugs here, despite that likely being apropos) to simply act a fool without repercussions?

• What does that say to the businesses / homes in the path of something like this? Who is repsonsible for the rebuild?

• Does this "hands off" approach encourage future blow-ups due to the lack of repurcussions?

• What impact does this have on the morale of the police force? Does it cause a pull pack in personnel quitting or opting against that career path?

Good questions and I'm not sure.

It's certainly a delicate situation. The police can't go into these situations guns blazin' because it will only make matters worse. Yet when they sit on their hands like they did yesterday, that doesn't appear to help things either.

As for the business owners, what incentive will they have to rebuild in their current locations? The West Side of Baltimore was already lacking businesses. This won't do anything to attract busienss owners to that area.

 

[Apple Jack]

National Guard protects City Hall, while CVS is looted and burned without resistance.

Do you think some store is more important than city hall?

he doesnt think

 

[Smack Tripper]

In all honesty, the Irony is, cvs has gotten more publicity already than the sunk cost of one store would be. Factor in the insurance and it's not some incalculable Ioss.

This is cvs. These stores are retail feces on our culture.

 

[jonessed]

Do we even have any speculations yet on what happened to this guy?

Did they do one of those rides where they cuff him, toss him in the van and then drive over every speed bump and pothole?

I haven't heard anything on how he got injured yet.

There was no trauma outside of the spinal injury which would rule out beating. It looks like they were negligent in both not properly buckling him in as well as not seeking medical attention when he asked for it.

Dont buckle him in, speed up and slam on the brakes...oops. Is that the suspected cause?

I think so. I don't know how easy it's going to be to prove though. They were clearly negligent, but intent would require a lot more evidence.

 

[Smack Tripper]

I've never worked in law enforcement so it's difficult to say. But I feel confident that I would not make it regular practice to beat up innocent people without justification. I would not have beaten the #### out of an 87 year old grandmother and told her "#####, you aint no better than any of the other old black #####es I have locked up." I would not have slammed an innocent pregnant woman to the ground. I would not have taken down a 4'11, 107 pound innocent grandmother and ground her face into the concrete. And I would not have cost the city millions of dollars and fueling completely justified distrust and anger for law enforcement in the process. And yes, I don't think I would forcefully shove an innocent man with his hands up to the ground, or thrown rocks at protestors, or arrested journalists for doing their (very important) job.

But sure, let's absolve the police of these many, many horrific acts and ignore the justifiable resentment they cause in the community because their jobs are hard.

$5.7MM over 4 years in a city with well over 500,000 people doesn't sound like a huge chunk to me, do you want robots to enforce the law?... The problems here go well beyond those who are hired to enforce the law... To endlessly point your finger at law enforcement is foolish... This behavior yesterday is unacceptable and I'd be happy if the penalties for inciting riots like this were increased 10 fold.

I don't know the solution here, but neither do you, nor does the African American Mayor, or the African American Police Commissioner.

This is a ridiculous straw man argument. I never said the problem is limited to law enforcement. I didn't endlessly point my finger at law enforcement. I have condemned rioting repeatedly in the Ferguson thread and now this one too. I never said I had the solution.

All I did was ridicule your preposterous knee-jerk defense of clearly improper police behavior because "their jobs are hard." Ignoring the sins of law enforcement here is a huge mistake, because that's obviously a source of a lot of the frustration in the community. And for that matter, why is there so much more outrage about people looting a CVS than there is about police beating up innocent grandmothers and pregnant women and many many other innocent people? Would anyone here even know about those incidents without the Gray death and the protests? Hell I bet the majority of the posters here condemning the looting still haven't read that Baltimore Sun investigation even though I've now posted it twice.

Prob bc it was burned and destroyed. But that is just a building owned by a corporation so who gives a ####? I can take a guess...

Prob grandma and grandpa who rely on the largest pharmaceutical carrier in their neighborhood. They might have difficulty conveniently obtaining life saving or altering medication for the next few months as this store is rebuilt (or if it is rebuilt). They might care and this might cause some outrage.

Cvs will have a couple of triage trailers and generate huge pub for rebuilding. It's a marketing opportunity.

I am more concerned about bobs pharmacy than cvs

 

[Jack White]

National Guard protects City Hall, while CVS is looted and burned without resistance.

Do you think some store is more important than city hall?

Yes, I do.

But even if I didn't, you're missing the larger point.

That being that cops will serve and protect their own, not private property and civilians.

 

[comfortably numb]

I've never worked in law enforcement so it's difficult to say. But I feel confident that I would not make it regular practice to beat up innocent people without justification. I would not have beaten the #### out of an 87 year old grandmother and told her "#####, you aint no better than any of the other old black #####es I have locked up." I would not have slammed an innocent pregnant woman to the ground. I would not have taken down a 4'11, 107 pound innocent grandmother and ground her face into the concrete. And I would not have cost the city millions of dollars and fueling completely justified distrust and anger for law enforcement in the process. And yes, I don't think I would forcefully shove an innocent man with his hands up to the ground, or thrown rocks at protestors, or arrested journalists for doing their (very important) job.

But sure, let's absolve the police of these many, many horrific acts and ignore the justifiable resentment they cause in the community because their jobs are hard.

$5.7MM over 4 years in a city with well over 500,000 people doesn't sound like a huge chunk to me, do you want robots to enforce the law?... The problems here go well beyond those who are hired to enforce the law... To endlessly point your finger at law enforcement is foolish... This behavior yesterday is unacceptable and I'd be happy if the penalties for inciting riots like this were increased 10 fold.

I don't know the solution here, but neither do you, nor does the African American Mayor, or the African American Police Commissioner.

This is a ridiculous straw man argument. I never said the problem is limited to law enforcement. I didn't endlessly point my finger at law enforcement. I have condemned rioting repeatedly in the Ferguson thread and now this one too. I never said I had the solution.

All I did was ridicule your preposterous knee-jerk defense of clearly improper police behavior because "their jobs are hard." Ignoring the sins of law enforcement here is a huge mistake, because that's obviously a source of a lot of the frustration in the community. And for that matter, why is there so much more outrage about people looting a CVS than there is about police beating up innocent grandmothers and pregnant women and many many other innocent people? Would anyone here even know about those incidents without the Gray death and the protests? Hell I bet the majority of the posters here condemning the looting still haven't read that Baltimore Sun investigation even though I've now posted it twice.

Prob bc it was burned and destroyed. But that is just a building owned by a corporation so who gives a ####? I can take a guess...

Prob grandma and grandpa who rely on the largest pharmaceutical carrier in their neighborhood. They might have difficulty conveniently obtaining life saving or altering medication for the next few months as this store is rebuilt (or if it is rebuilt). They might care and this might cause some outrage.

Cvs will have a couple of triage trailers and generate huge pub for rebuilding. It's a marketing opportunity.

I am more concerned about bobs pharmacy than cvs

You monster!

Matt worked at that CVS.

 

[tdoss]

People in this thread blaming cops for not stopping the rioters from burning the CVS are likely the same guys who would be blaming the cops for excessive force if they had... because I'm pretty sure head-pats and "move along fella's" would have stopped anyone.

Cops were in a no win situation and I would say they did handle this(unlike with the death)the best way possible.The Mayor though had me scratching my head.Even if that was how you felt why would you say that publicly,it was almost like handing the keys to the city over and do with it what you will to get your anger out.Really stupid move IMO.

And then double down by saying she didn't say that and we're twisting her words.

That's some impressive politicking.

 

[fantasycurse42]

I've never worked in law enforcement so it's difficult to say. But I feel confident that I would not make it regular practice to beat up innocent people without justification. I would not have beaten the #### out of an 87 year old grandmother and told her "#####, you aint no better than any of the other old black #####es I have locked up." I would not have slammed an innocent pregnant woman to the ground. I would not have taken down a 4'11, 107 pound innocent grandmother and ground her face into the concrete. And I would not have cost the city millions of dollars and fueling completely justified distrust and anger for law enforcement in the process. And yes, I don't think I would forcefully shove an innocent man with his hands up to the ground, or thrown rocks at protestors, or arrested journalists for doing their (very important) job.

But sure, let's absolve the police of these many, many horrific acts and ignore the justifiable resentment they cause in the community because their jobs are hard.

$5.7MM over 4 years in a city with well over 500,000 people doesn't sound like a huge chunk to me, do you want robots to enforce the law?... The problems here go well beyond those who are hired to enforce the law... To endlessly point your finger at law enforcement is foolish... This behavior yesterday is unacceptable and I'd be happy if the penalties for inciting riots like this were increased 10 fold.

I don't know the solution here, but neither do you, nor does the African American Mayor, or the African American Police Commissioner.

This is a ridiculous straw man argument. I never said the problem is limited to law enforcement. I didn't endlessly point my finger at law enforcement. I have condemned rioting repeatedly in the Ferguson thread and now this one too. I never said I had the solution.

All I did was ridicule your preposterous knee-jerk defense of clearly improper police behavior because "their jobs are hard." Ignoring the sins of law enforcement here is a huge mistake, because that's obviously a source of a lot of the frustration in the community. And for that matter, why is there so much more outrage about people looting a CVS than there is about police beating up innocent grandmothers and pregnant women and many many other innocent people? Would anyone here even know about those incidents without the Gray death and the protests? Hell I bet the majority of the posters here condemning the looting still haven't read that Baltimore Sun investigation even though I've now posted it twice.

Prob bc it was burned and destroyed. But that is just a building owned by a corporation so who gives a ####? I can take a guess...

Prob grandma and grandpa who rely on the largest pharmaceutical carrier in their neighborhood. They might have difficulty conveniently obtaining life saving or altering medication for the next few months as this store is rebuilt (or if it is rebuilt). They might care and this might cause some outrage.

Cvs will have a couple of triage trailers and generate huge pub for rebuilding. It's a marketing opportunity.

I am more concerned about bobs pharmacy than cvs

I think they're going to take a strong look at their P/L from this store before any of this.

To add, I think a lot of people who depend on meds, might be highly highly inconvenienced for quite some time. A lot of these people are in bad shape and inconveniencing them is dangerous to their health.

 

[Gawain]

Just heard a stat that 50% of black adult males are unemployed in Baltimore.

I need a link for a stat like this... This is almost unbelievable.

Why is it so unbelievable to you?The unemployment rate for all blacks in this country is around 17%, 10 points higher than for everyone else. The poverty rate in all of our inner cities approaches 40%.

Current unemployment is 5.5%... To say that black men in this city are 900% above the national average is something I would like proof on

Heard it on Morning Joe this morning. Here's link to the segment.

on.msnbc.com/1EMz2TB

Guy says it around the 5:50 mark. He actually says OVER half are unemployed.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t02.htm

African American Unemployment rate for March 2015...10.1%

 

[[icon]]

That being that cops will serve and protect their own, not private property and civilians.

So this is the cops fault?

:spitshook: