Police State: Man Detained For Walking With Hands In Pockets...

[bodecea]

Woodrow Wilson signed the Espionage Act and imposed wartime restrictions on freedom of speech and expression, becoming the first President to tread on the civil and political rights of Americans. Americas slide into a police state began then, and the patriot act is stage two. Not looking forward to stage three.

Wilson was far from the first President to tread on the rights of Americans.

Far, far from the first.

Alien and Sedition Acts - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Ruled unconstitutional.

Actually, and surprisingly, it was not...Jefferson just let it expire.

 

[The Rabbi]

Who chose you to speak for all black men? What are you qualifications for this job?

You have a very flawed perspective on this one. There's nothing wrong with understanding another's perspective. Most Black Men in America do feel they're treated like criminals and often harassed this way. Agreeing or disagreeing, isn't the point. It is how they see things. Acknowledging and trying to understand that feeling, could help solve the problem. That's all i'm saying.

Im asking what your qualifcations are to speak on behalf of most or all black men.

Most black people seem to feel that anything adverse that happens to them is the result of societal racism. That doesnt really make it true.

First you question paulitician's qualifications to speak for most black men - and then you go on to speak for most black men.

Doesn't that cognitive dissonance hurt?

Your reading skills suck. English must be a distant second language to you.

Your weak attempt at an ad-hom doesn't make your ridiculous post magically go away.

What "qualifications" do you have that let you know what "most black men" feel?

I didnt realize I needed qualifications to express an opinion based on personal experience. Thus the word "seem" in my post.
Paulinoid did not use the word seem and appeared to speak for most or all black men.
Again, smart people look at two similar things and see differences.
Stupid people see similarities,

 

[bodecea]

You have a very flawed perspective on this one. There's nothing wrong with understanding another's perspective. Most Black Men in America do feel they're treated like criminals and often harassed this way. Agreeing or disagreeing, isn't the point. It is how they see things. Acknowledging and trying to understand that feeling, could help solve the problem. That's all i'm saying.

Im asking what your qualifcations are to speak on behalf of most or all black men.

Most black people seem to feel that anything adverse that happens to them is the result of societal racism. That doesnt really make it true.

First you question paulitician's qualifications to speak for most black men - and then you go on to speak for most black men.

Doesn't that cognitive dissonance hurt?

Your reading skills suck. English must be a distant second language to you.

Your weak attempt at an ad-hom doesn't make your ridiculous post magically go away.

What "qualifications" do you have that let you know what "most black men" feel?

I didnt realize I needed qualifications to express an opinion based on personal experience. Thus the word "seem" in my post.
Paulinoid did not use the word seem and appeared to speak for most or all black men.
Again, smart people look at two similar things and see differences.
Stupid people see similarities,

Similarities such as "all blacks are thugs"?

 

[The Rabbi]

Im asking what your qualifcations are to speak on behalf of most or all black men.

Most black people seem to feel that anything adverse that happens to them is the result of societal racism. That doesnt really make it true.

First you question paulitician's qualifications to speak for most black men - and then you go on to speak for most black men.

Doesn't that cognitive dissonance hurt?

Your reading skills suck. English must be a distant second language to you.

Your weak attempt at an ad-hom doesn't make your ridiculous post magically go away.

What "qualifications" do you have that let you know what "most black men" feel?

I didnt realize I needed qualifications to express an opinion based on personal experience. Thus the word "seem" in my post.
Paulinoid did not use the word seem and appeared to speak for most or all black men.
Again, smart people look at two similar things and see differences.
Stupid people see similarities,

Similarities such as "all blacks are thugs"?

Not really. Are you suggestng I wrote that or just being smarmy?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You have a very flawed perspective on this one. There's nothing wrong with understanding another's perspective. Most Black Men in America do feel they're treated like criminals and often harassed this way. Agreeing or disagreeing, isn't the point. It is how they see things. Acknowledging and trying to understand that feeling, could help solve the problem. That's all i'm saying.

Im asking what your qualifcations are to speak on behalf of most or all black men.

Most black people seem to feel that anything adverse that happens to them is the result of societal racism. That doesnt really make it true.

First you question paulitician's qualifications to speak for most black men - and then you go on to speak for most black men.

Doesn't that cognitive dissonance hurt?

Your reading skills suck. English must be a distant second language to you.

Your weak attempt at an ad-hom doesn't make your ridiculous post magically go away.

What "qualifications" do you have that let you know what "most black men" feel?

I didnt realize I needed qualifications to express an opinion based on personal experience. Thus the word "seem" in my post.
Paulinoid did not use the word seem and appeared to speak for most or all black men.
Again, smart people look at two similar things and see differences.
Stupid people see similarities,

Aha, so rather than speaking for most black men, instead you're using your (obviously limited) personal anecdotes to justify your blanket racism. That makes sense.

 

[The Rabbi]

Im asking what your qualifcations are to speak on behalf of most or all black men.

Most black people seem to feel that anything adverse that happens to them is the result of societal racism. That doesnt really make it true.

First you question paulitician's qualifications to speak for most black men - and then you go on to speak for most black men.

Doesn't that cognitive dissonance hurt?

Your reading skills suck. English must be a distant second language to you.

Your weak attempt at an ad-hom doesn't make your ridiculous post magically go away.

What "qualifications" do you have that let you know what "most black men" feel?

I didnt realize I needed qualifications to express an opinion based on personal experience. Thus the word "seem" in my post.
Paulinoid did not use the word seem and appeared to speak for most or all black men.
Again, smart people look at two similar things and see differences.
Stupid people see similarities,

Aha, so rather than speaking for most black men, instead you're using your (obviously limited) personal anecdotes to justify your blanket racism. That makes sense.

You get your ass handed to you and default to an ad hom.
How typical.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

First you question paulitician's qualifications to speak for most black men - and then you go on to speak for most black men.

Doesn't that cognitive dissonance hurt?

Your reading skills suck. English must be a distant second language to you.

Your weak attempt at an ad-hom doesn't make your ridiculous post magically go away.

What "qualifications" do you have that let you know what "most black men" feel?

I didnt realize I needed qualifications to express an opinion based on personal experience. Thus the word "seem" in my post.
Paulinoid did not use the word seem and appeared to speak for most or all black men.
Again, smart people look at two similar things and see differences.
Stupid people see similarities,

Aha, so rather than speaking for most black men, instead you're using your (obviously limited) personal anecdotes to justify your blanket racism. That makes sense.

You get your ass handed to you and default to an ad hom.
How typical.

What "ad hom" are you referring to, exactly?

Calling your comments racist isn't an off-topic attack meant to distract from the argument, it IS the argument. Assigning emotions to an entire race (or "most" of that race) is pretty much the textbook definition of racism, particularly when your only evidence for those blanket statements is limited "personal experience".

Have you ever heard the expression "the plural of anecdote is not data"?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Rabbi, did you know that the group with the highest level of feelings of persecution in this country are White Christians?

 

[The Rabbi]

Your reading skills suck. English must be a distant second language to you.

Your weak attempt at an ad-hom doesn't make your ridiculous post magically go away.

What "qualifications" do you have that let you know what "most black men" feel?

I didnt realize I needed qualifications to express an opinion based on personal experience. Thus the word "seem" in my post.
Paulinoid did not use the word seem and appeared to speak for most or all black men.
Again, smart people look at two similar things and see differences.
Stupid people see similarities,

Aha, so rather than speaking for most black men, instead you're using your (obviously limited) personal anecdotes to justify your blanket racism. That makes sense.

You get your ass handed to you and default to an ad hom.
How typical.

What "ad hom" are you referring to, exactly?

Calling your comments racist isn't an off-topic attack meant to distract from the argument, it IS the argument. Assigning emotions to an entire race (or "most" of that race) is pretty much the textbook definition of racism, particularly when your only evidence for those blanket statements is limited "personal experience".

Have you ever heard the expression "the plural of anecdote is not data"?

Are you actually denying that many blacks blame white racism for their problems?
Of course now that I handed you your ass you are desperate to deflect to something else. And failing that too.
Do you ever get it right?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Your weak attempt at an ad-hom doesn't make your ridiculous post magically go away.

What "qualifications" do you have that let you know what "most black men" feel?

I didnt realize I needed qualifications to express an opinion based on personal experience. Thus the word "seem" in my post.
Paulinoid did not use the word seem and appeared to speak for most or all black men.
Again, smart people look at two similar things and see differences.
Stupid people see similarities,

Aha, so rather than speaking for most black men, instead you're using your (obviously limited) personal anecdotes to justify your blanket racism. That makes sense.

You get your ass handed to you and default to an ad hom.
How typical.

What "ad hom" are you referring to, exactly?

Calling your comments racist isn't an off-topic attack meant to distract from the argument, it IS the argument. Assigning emotions to an entire race (or "most" of that race) is pretty much the textbook definition of racism, particularly when your only evidence for those blanket statements is limited "personal experience".

Have you ever heard the expression "the plural of anecdote is not data"?

Are you actually denying that many blacks blame white racism for their problems?
Of course now that I handed you your ass you are desperate to deflect to something else. And failing that too.
Do you ever get it right?

I see that "most" has become "many" now.

How "many" are we talking about?

 

[The Rabbi]

I didnt realize I needed qualifications to express an opinion based on personal experience. Thus the word "seem" in my post.
Paulinoid did not use the word seem and appeared to speak for most or all black men.
Again, smart people look at two similar things and see differences.
Stupid people see similarities,

Aha, so rather than speaking for most black men, instead you're using your (obviously limited) personal anecdotes to justify your blanket racism. That makes sense.

You get your ass handed to you and default to an ad hom.
How typical.

What "ad hom" are you referring to, exactly?

Calling your comments racist isn't an off-topic attack meant to distract from the argument, it IS the argument. Assigning emotions to an entire race (or "most" of that race) is pretty much the textbook definition of racism, particularly when your only evidence for those blanket statements is limited "personal experience".

Have you ever heard the expression "the plural of anecdote is not data"?

Are you actually denying that many blacks blame white racism for their problems?
Of course now that I handed you your ass you are desperate to deflect to something else. And failing that too.
Do you ever get it right?

I see that "most" has become "many" now.

How "many" are we talking about?

Do you think the cops would have stopped the guy in the video if he had been white and behaving the same way? I say Yes.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Rabbi, did you know that the group with the highest level of feelings of persecution in this country are White Christians?

I doubt that very much.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Aha, so rather than speaking for most black men, instead you're using your (obviously limited) personal anecdotes to justify your blanket racism. That makes sense.

You get your ass handed to you and default to an ad hom.
How typical.

What "ad hom" are you referring to, exactly?

Calling your comments racist isn't an off-topic attack meant to distract from the argument, it IS the argument. Assigning emotions to an entire race (or "most" of that race) is pretty much the textbook definition of racism, particularly when your only evidence for those blanket statements is limited "personal experience".

Have you ever heard the expression "the plural of anecdote is not data"?

Are you actually denying that many blacks blame white racism for their problems?
Of course now that I handed you your ass you are desperate to deflect to something else. And failing that too.
Do you ever get it right?

I see that "most" has become "many" now.

How "many" are we talking about?

Do you think the cops would have stopped the guy in the video if he had been white and behaving the same way? I say Yes.

I agree.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Rabbi, did you know that the group with the highest level of feelings of persecution in this country are White Christians?

I doubt that very much.

There's a thread on it, I'll try to find the survey.

 

[The Rabbi]

Rabbi, did you know that the group with the highest level of feelings of persecution in this country are White Christians?

I doubt that very much.

There's a thread on it, I'll try to find the survey.

It will be hard to overcome evidence like this.
How black male student underachievement is reversible theGrio

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Oops.


There has been a great deal of discussion on the internet about a deputy talking to "a man with his hands in his pockets." Unfortunately, this issue demonstrates one of the disadvantages of social media. Often times, individuals share things without knowing the facts and in some cases promote a specific agenda unrelated to the reality of the situation. Shocking that the internet does not tell the full picture or people use this for an agenda-right? So, here is the whole story.

The video that was posted was an edited version of the whole situation and cut out the Deputy fully explaining as to why 911 was called on him, and ended with this person agreeing that the police should respond. The 911 call received by the Oakland County Dispatch Center originated from a nearby business that had been a victim , as well as its employees, of seven robberies. The caller and his employees were concerned about the individual who had walked by the front window of the business five or six times, while looking inside with his hands in his pockets. Fearing for their safety, the business dialed 911 and the Deputy responded.

In the unedited version of the event, the individual stated that if he had called the police on a suspicious person, he would expect the police to respond, check the area, and talk to the suspicious person being called about. The Deputy did not detain or pat down the individual and considering the nature of the call responded in a very restrained and professional manner.

We will continue to take each and every call seriously at the Sheriff’s Office and hold our Deputies to the highest standards and expectations of public service.

Basically this is a long version trying to justify why just any black guy is profiled and feared for no reason an thats why its reasonable to harass this guy for it. Kudos.

Now where is the link for this fantastic story you just spun. I mean since you took the time out to chastise social media and edited videos....you think you would include proof.

Ah, another race whore injecting race into this instance without a single whit of reasoning behind it. Tell me, should we just make it illegal for a white cop to interact with a black person?

Sent from my phone from a bumpy road. Please excuse any errors.

It seems to me that it was about race and I'm disinclined to easily jump to that conclusion. The reason I think so is not because of the cop but because of the paranoid shop owner. It also perplexes me that you white folk think race is never an issue. Don't know if you're white but you sure are white-splaining this. A lot of you are.

And stop texting while driving. Are you freaking crazy?

LOL. I am not going to respond to a thread while driving I was the passenger.

Anyway, it can seem that way to you but that is utterly irrelevant. I don't care who wants to interject race into this - there is absolutely NOTHING to base that on. Nothing. There isnt a single fact that shows anything in this encounter was related to race at all. I notice that you don't bother to include any reasoning as to why this is about race other than flatly stating its your assumption. Again, that is because that assumption has nothing to back it up. It is telling that so many are willing to simply ASSUME that race is involved. It shows the asinine conditioning that the media has inflicted on us. A white cop cannot approach a black person in any context without people chomping at the bit claiming the cop is a racist pos.

It is not only completely asinine but it is getting very, very old.

Your reading comprehension could use a little fine tuning. I said it wasn't the cop's actions but the paranoid merchant that led me to that suspicion. And my "assumption" is based on theirs. They didn't report a crime, they reported a man walking outside with his hands in his pocket. Because no crime was committed the detention for questioning was not justified. That's an opinion just like yours is.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

The thing about totalitarians is that they have this funny way of discovering a crime, even when one is not being committed.

Sure, you are walking with your hands in your pockets, nothing illegal about that. But you get detained by a cop having a bad day, and then you get kind of pissed and call him a fucking pig, and the next thing you know, "Obstruction of Justice".

We all need to get kind of pissed about this bullshit. Stop rolling over for these assholes. YOU are the authority.


We are letting the government sift through our mail, monitor our phone calls, study our reading habits at the library, all without so much as a fucking whimper.

Wake up!

His real 'offense' was being a Black Man walking down a street. The dirty little secret most White Americans refuse to acknowledge and address.

Link to that conclusion?

Ha, did you really ask for a 'link' for that? Seriously? This man was treated like a criminal for merely being a Black Man walking down a street. It is what it is.

You're right and wrong. The cop was in the wrong for treating him like a criminal but to suggest this means we're in a police state is beyond stupid. If an over zealous cop is all it takes for a police state, then every country is a police state because it would be impossible to not be. Go to North Korea and voice your opinions there and you'll find out what a real police state is.

 

[The Rabbi]

Oops.


There has been a great deal of discussion on the internet about a deputy talking to "a man with his hands in his pockets." Unfortunately, this issue demonstrates one of the disadvantages of social media. Often times, individuals share things without knowing the facts and in some cases promote a specific agenda unrelated to the reality of the situation. Shocking that the internet does not tell the full picture or people use this for an agenda-right? So, here is the whole story.

The video that was posted was an edited version of the whole situation and cut out the Deputy fully explaining as to why 911 was called on him, and ended with this person agreeing that the police should respond. The 911 call received by the Oakland County Dispatch Center originated from a nearby business that had been a victim , as well as its employees, of seven robberies. The caller and his employees were concerned about the individual who had walked by the front window of the business five or six times, while looking inside with his hands in his pockets. Fearing for their safety, the business dialed 911 and the Deputy responded.

In the unedited version of the event, the individual stated that if he had called the police on a suspicious person, he would expect the police to respond, check the area, and talk to the suspicious person being called about. The Deputy did not detain or pat down the individual and considering the nature of the call responded in a very restrained and professional manner.

We will continue to take each and every call seriously at the Sheriff’s Office and hold our Deputies to the highest standards and expectations of public service.

Basically this is a long version trying to justify why just any black guy is profiled and feared for no reason an thats why its reasonable to harass this guy for it. Kudos.

Now where is the link for this fantastic story you just spun. I mean since you took the time out to chastise social media and edited videos....you think you would include proof.

Ah, another race whore injecting race into this instance without a single whit of reasoning behind it. Tell me, should we just make it illegal for a white cop to interact with a black person?

Sent from my phone from a bumpy road. Please excuse any errors.

It seems to me that it was about race and I'm disinclined to easily jump to that conclusion. The reason I think so is not because of the cop but because of the paranoid shop owner. It also perplexes me that you white folk think race is never an issue. Don't know if you're white but you sure are white-splaining this. A lot of you are.

And stop texting while driving. Are you freaking crazy?

LOL. I am not going to respond to a thread while driving I was the passenger.

Anyway, it can seem that way to you but that is utterly irrelevant. I don't care who wants to interject race into this - there is absolutely NOTHING to base that on. Nothing. There isnt a single fact that shows anything in this encounter was related to race at all. I notice that you don't bother to include any reasoning as to why this is about race other than flatly stating its your assumption. Again, that is because that assumption has nothing to back it up. It is telling that so many are willing to simply ASSUME that race is involved. It shows the asinine conditioning that the media has inflicted on us. A white cop cannot approach a black person in any context without people chomping at the bit claiming the cop is a racist pos.

It is not only completely asinine but it is getting very, very old.

Your reading comprehension could use a little fine tuning. I said it wasn't the cop's actions but the paranoid merchant that led me to that suspicion. And my "assumption" is based on theirs. They didn't report a crime, they reported a man walking outside with his hands in his pocket. Because no crime was committed the detention for questioning was not justified. That's an opinion just like yours is.

The guy had been robbed like 4 times. How is it paranoid to see a guy who might be casing your joint and think maybe this is a 5th time?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Basically this is a long version trying to justify why just any black guy is profiled and feared for no reason an thats why its reasonable to harass this guy for it. Kudos.

Now where is the link for this fantastic story you just spun. I mean since you took the time out to chastise social media and edited videos....you think you would include proof.

Ah, another race whore injecting race into this instance without a single whit of reasoning behind it. Tell me, should we just make it illegal for a white cop to interact with a black person?

Sent from my phone from a bumpy road. Please excuse any errors.

It seems to me that it was about race and I'm disinclined to easily jump to that conclusion. The reason I think so is not because of the cop but because of the paranoid shop owner. It also perplexes me that you white folk think race is never an issue. Don't know if you're white but you sure are white-splaining this. A lot of you are.

And stop texting while driving. Are you freaking crazy?

LOL. I am not going to respond to a thread while driving I was the passenger.

Anyway, it can seem that way to you but that is utterly irrelevant. I don't care who wants to interject race into this - there is absolutely NOTHING to base that on. Nothing. There isnt a single fact that shows anything in this encounter was related to race at all. I notice that you don't bother to include any reasoning as to why this is about race other than flatly stating its your assumption. Again, that is because that assumption has nothing to back it up. It is telling that so many are willing to simply ASSUME that race is involved. It shows the asinine conditioning that the media has inflicted on us. A white cop cannot approach a black person in any context without people chomping at the bit claiming the cop is a racist pos.

It is not only completely asinine but it is getting very, very old.

Your reading comprehension could use a little fine tuning. I said it wasn't the cop's actions but the paranoid merchant that led me to that suspicion. And my "assumption" is based on theirs. They didn't report a crime, they reported a man walking outside with his hands in his pocket. Because no crime was committed the detention for questioning was not justified. That's an opinion just like yours is.

The guy had been robbed like 4 times. How is it paranoid to see a guy who might be casing your joint and think maybe this is a 5th time?

Because thats the definition of paranoid

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Basically this is a long version trying to justify why just any black guy is profiled and feared for no reason an thats why its reasonable to harass this guy for it. Kudos.

Now where is the link for this fantastic story you just spun. I mean since you took the time out to chastise social media and edited videos....you think you would include proof.

Ah, another race whore injecting race into this instance without a single whit of reasoning behind it. Tell me, should we just make it illegal for a white cop to interact with a black person?

Sent from my phone from a bumpy road. Please excuse any errors.

It seems to me that it was about race and I'm disinclined to easily jump to that conclusion. The reason I think so is not because of the cop but because of the paranoid shop owner. It also perplexes me that you white folk think race is never an issue. Don't know if you're white but you sure are white-splaining this. A lot of you are.

And stop texting while driving. Are you freaking crazy?

LOL. I am not going to respond to a thread while driving I was the passenger.

Anyway, it can seem that way to you but that is utterly irrelevant. I don't care who wants to interject race into this - there is absolutely NOTHING to base that on. Nothing. There isnt a single fact that shows anything in this encounter was related to race at all. I notice that you don't bother to include any reasoning as to why this is about race other than flatly stating its your assumption. Again, that is because that assumption has nothing to back it up. It is telling that so many are willing to simply ASSUME that race is involved. It shows the asinine conditioning that the media has inflicted on us. A white cop cannot approach a black person in any context without people chomping at the bit claiming the cop is a racist pos.

It is not only completely asinine but it is getting very, very old.

Your reading comprehension could use a little fine tuning. I said it wasn't the cop's actions but the paranoid merchant that led me to that suspicion. And my "assumption" is based on theirs. They didn't report a crime, they reported a man walking outside with his hands in his pocket. Because no crime was committed the detention for questioning was not justified. That's an opinion just like yours is.

The guy had been robbed like 4 times. How is it paranoid to see a guy who might be casing your joint and think maybe this is a 5th time?

So that makes anyone walking outside with their hands in their pockets a criminal? The cop talked to the guy because they wanted him to as opposed to just asking for a police presence which avoids any accusations. If they're scared of the public then maybe it's time for counseling or to close the business. Because sending cops to harass citizens is not the answer.