Violent Protests in Baltimore

[Trekker4747]

Freddie Gray was perfectly fine at the moment of his arrest, when he was put into that van.

I'd argue not. His legs are very limp and one of them seems bent at an odd angle. It sort of seems he partially supports himself on one of his legs for a moment, but overall I wouldn't say his legs are "perfectly fine" seemed to me he could have used some level of medical attention.

 

[Data Holmes]

A different perspective on the Baltimore unrest:

FoxNews.

Yes, so what?

But it's a blog source, Data and that is problematic. We don't have any way of checking this as the source is anonymous.
ETA: I admit I might be inclined to believe as Seattle's had its share of paid protesters. But that shows my bias, doesn't it?

I agree, but there isn't anything to suggest it being false. It might also explaign the FBI's intrest in the protest yesterday. If these actors are crossing state lines to inflame violence, it might be a federal crime.

 

[Peach Wookiee]

^But there isn't anything for us to prove this instance true, is there? We need solid evidence, Data.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

In any case, the only source for this is an "anonymous" company that does government work. Yeah, I know I'm going to take something like that seriously.

 

[Peach Wookiee]

One source is not enough. Especially when one source cannot identify itself and point us in the right direction.

 

[Jedi_Master]

Fixed: repost

A different perspective on the Baltimore unrest:

The Revolution will not be televised

 

[Data Holmes]

One source is not enough. Especially when one source cannot identify itself and point us in the right direction.

I agree. In fact I'd like to see a serious investigation into the matter.

 

[Jedi_Master]

How Baltimore's young black men are boxed in

 

[Peach Wookiee]

How Baltimore's young black men are boxed in

So President Obama's holistic approach that he outlined this morning seems to be good.

 

[Tiger Devil Dog]

As a wise man once said, "Whitey had a good run."

I won't argue with decriminalizing drugs and the positive effect that ought to have on our criminal justice system and rate of incarceration. That said, drug laws don't so much lead to "police brutality" as they provide a pretext for it; unless other things change, another pretext will be found pretty quickly.

What other things should change? I don't know what you're talking about.

And I would argue that the war on drugs isn't merely a pretext. If it weren't for the war on drugs then there would be far fewer police officers required. Far fewer SWAT teams. For less militarization of police which means cops would stop looking everyone, especially blacks since blacks commit drug crimes at a far higher rate than other races, like the "enemy" instead of fellow citizens. None of this exists in a vacuum. Simply crying racism is a cop out and won't solve anything.

 

[Hound of UIster]

How Baltimore's young black men are boxed in

America is #1!!

Best prisons too.

 

[Jedi_Master]

How Baltimore's young black men are boxed in

America is #1!!

Best prisons too.

Indeed. Even our Catholics and Protestants get along.

 

[Data Holmes]

Foxnews has an offical page for the social media story, now.

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2015/04...inks-between-baltimore-and-ferguson-violence/

 

[Peach Wookiee]

I'd like to see these actual tweets if they haven't been pulled.

 

[Melakon]

Why should people on food stamps be able to purchase whatever they want with them? It's not their money, it's the taxpayers money.

I've been on foodstamps before. If I went to the deli department in a grocery store during a lunch break from work, I couldn't buy a sandwich that grocery store made to order for me on foodstamps. I could, however, buy a loaf of bread, sliced meat, sliced cheese, and any condiments, despite the fact that the excess might spoil before I could get home to put it in the refrigerator. You couldn't buy a pint of potato salad or anything else made by the deli in the grocery store. I don't know if restrictions have changed since then or not.

We're not talking about tattoos or cigarettes or visits to strip clubs. If a mother wants to buy a steak for her kids because they want a steak (and it's food) then that should be their prerogative as a family who wants to eat a steak. If they're not attempting to purchase non-food items with their benefits it's nobody's business but theirs.

Actually it is the taxpayer's business, because it's the taxpayer's money.

Then we should be able to tell elected officials where they can live, and what they're allowed to buy out of the money they receive from taxpayers. But since the money they receive is called salaries and not benefits, somehow that doesn't happen.

 

[Captrek]

It's still an anonymous source with a very vague description of what it claims to have discovered and zero information on its methods. This kind of thing often passes for news on Fox, but it isn't.

 

[Timby]

A must-read: Why Baltimore is burning.

 

[ichab]

It could be worse. We could be living in the post-apocalyptic wasteland also known as Canada.

Yeah, our race riots are really making the headlines these days.

And a very difficult achievment considering only two percent of the entire country is black.

 

[BillJ]

It could be worse. We could be living in the post-apocalyptic wasteland also known as Canada.

Yeah, our race riots are really making the headlines these days.

And a very difficult achievment considering only two percent of the entire country is black.

They have their issues. Close to three percent of Canadian population is black yet they make up ten percent of the prison populace.

 

[Tiger Devil Dog]

Then we should be able to tell elected officials where they can live, and what they're allowed to buy out of the money they receive from taxpayers. But since the money they receive is called salaries and not benefits, somehow that doesn't happen.

Not the same. Elected officials provide a service to theor constituents and are paid a wage in return for their services. Now we can certainly argue how well they do their jobs and if they deserve that wage but it's their money. Money that we, as taxpayers, have agreed to pay them in return for services rendered. People on food stamps provide no service to the taxpayers, they are simply given assistance in return for nothing.