• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Justice Department tellsFerguson police tostopwearing bracelets

j-mac said:
Wait a minute....We've seen this type of mis spelling, and non logic before....Didn't you get banned from here under a different name?
Click to expand...
Uhhhhh what is misspelled?

And no.
 
b_dubz said:
No its not explain why he didn't arrest his Friend on the spot for going for the cops gun if that's what really happened? It was in that filthy pigs story... Wouldint he have arrested him??

And for credibility i would go with the crook. Cops are known liars.

Crooks are more likely to be honest

Oh and pay no mind to the fact that the whole department is well known to be racist...
Click to expand...

Crooks are more likely to be honest? :lamo

What planet are you from?!?
 
apdst said:
Crooks are more likely to be honest? :lamo

What planet are you from?!?
Click to expand...
Reality how bout you?

Cops lie to make arrests every day.

Crooks lie occasionally to try to not get arrested.
 
b_dubz said:
Reality how bout you?

Cops lie to make arrests every day.

Crooks lie occasionally to try to not get arrested.
Click to expand...

You're defending Brown because he was black.
 
j-mac said:
You play the victim wonderfully....Do you have professional acting training?
Click to expand...

And you make **** up to fit the narrative you are trying to push. Funny how you do that, then get upset when people call you on it.
 
apdst said:
You're defending Brown because he was black.
Click to expand...
Nope I'm defending him because he was shot by filthy pig...

Same thing happened to a kid in salt lake that was white n i would defend him too...

Don't even start with one went viral because he's black either... It went viral because browns community flipped (as they should) and the ppl of salt lake did nothing.

FYI I'm white...
 
b_dubz said:
Nope I'm defending him because he was shot by filthy pig...

Same thing happened to a kid in salt lake that was white n i would defend him too...

Don't even start with one went viral because he's black either... It went viral because browns community flipped (as they should) and the ppl of salt lake did nothing.

FYI I'm white...
Click to expand...

It's all because a white cop shot a black dude. The race hustlers were all over it.
 
Fearandloathing said:
You know, I actually think that was a case of Obama realizing a mistake. When he said "that could have been me", he was commenting on the verdict of a jury by the man's peers. That undermines the trust in the legal system;
if it had happened in Jefferson's time he would have been impeached for obstruction of justice.
Click to expand...

I suspect the behind closed doors protest from trial lawyers, most of whom are liberals, warned him off further idiocy. If he had not ventured into the Trayvor thing, then his absence in Ferguson would not have been an issue. I suggest that because he had in that and other personal tragedies, the 'wronged' in Ferguson felt he had a responsibility to them because he had done so before, and by his absence, then, infuriated things even more.

That's why I see him as a rookie, even now, six years in. He continues to play rock star/obamacare salesman without realizing there is 250 years of precedent.
Click to expand...



If it had happened in Jefferson's time when almost all Blacks in the USA were slaves any protestors would have been killed.
 
CanadaJohn said:
So, as it relates to authority, it would be the equivalent of Al Sharpton ordering the Ferguson PD to remove the bands.

Do you find it at all troubling, perhaps a conflict of interest, perhaps political intimidation or an attempt at illegal influence, for the Justice Department of the United States, a JD that has initiated an investigation into racism in the Ferguson PD,
to try to wield authority they don't actually have?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



Who on this planet doesn't have authority to ask anyone to do something?
 
CanadaJohn said:
So, as it relates to authority, it would be the equivalent of Al Sharpton ordering the Ferguson PD to remove the bands.

Do you find it at all troubling
Click to expand...
, perhaps a conflict of interest, perhaps political intimidation or an attempt at illegal influence, for the Justice Department of the United States, a JD that has initiated an investigation into racism in the Ferguson PD, to try to wield authority they don't actually have?
Click to expand...



What I find really troubling is the fact that the members of the Ferguson Police Department wouldn't see that wearing those wristbands shows that they are prejudiced about this case.
 
shrubnose said:
What I find really troubling is the fact that the members of the Ferguson Police Department wouldn't see that wearing those wristbands shows that they are prejudiced about this case.
Click to expand...

Cops are assholes - they're their own breed of crazy.... Until Sharpton gets involved its everybody vs everybody. Then it's black vs white or Asian.

Everyone involved are terrible people.
 
shrubnose said:
What I find really troubling is the fact that the members of the Ferguson Police Department wouldn't see that wearing those wristbands shows that they are prejudiced about this case.
Click to expand...

And yet you don't see that the Justice Department exhibits its own kind of prejudice by asking them to ban the wearing of the wristbands while at the same time conducting an investigation of the Ferguson PD. That, in itself, indicates a certain prejudice or bias against the Ferguson PD on your own part.
 
CanadaJohn said:
This is nothing more than union solidarity, from what I can see. Out of curiosity, under what authority would the US Justice Department presume to order a local police department's conduct?
Click to expand...

It might very well be that. But the case isn't resolved. Lots of people on both sides have made their minds up, but we don't actually know what really happened, and there has been no trial or other process to resolve the big differences in the accounts.

And in the meantime, while policing protests by the black community over this incident, POLICE OFFICERS ON DUTY are wearing bracelets saying "I AM [the person whose actions you are protesting]" It's a giant FU to the protesters. The DOJ letter also said they'd received reports that at least some of those seen wearing the bracelets had also blacked over their names with tape, which is a further FU to the protesters.

Seriously, do you think wearing a bracelet saying "I AM [THE ACCUSED PERSON]" and blacking over their name tag is a good way to signal to the public you serve that you're a trusted and impartial defender of the law? It's unprofessional and shouldn't be tolerated, especially in a volatile situation that the police are supposed to be working to make less so, not pouring gas on the flames, which those bracelets and blacking over name tags just does. Whether DOJ has the authority to request or demand this I have no idea, and it's largely beside the point. It shouldn't be happening.

The time and place for supporting their union member and fellow officer is off duty on their own time and in civilian clothes.
 
CanadaJohn said:
And yet you don't see that the Justice Department exhibits its own kind of prejudice by asking them to ban the wearing of the wristbands while at the same time conducting an investigation of the Ferguson PD. That, in itself, indicates a certain prejudice or bias against the Ferguson PD on your own part.
Click to expand...

Speaking of prejudice, let's say you're a Ferguson police officer being interviewed by DOJ. What would you think if the investigator wore a bracelet, "I AM MICHAEL BROWN"?

It takes the common sense of a gnat to realize the bracelets shouldn't be worn by anyone in an official capacity anywhere near Ferguson MO.
 
shrubnose said:
The U.S. Justice Department asked the Ferguson, Missouri Police Department on Friday to order its officers not to wear bracelets in support of the white policeman who shot to death a black teenager last month, sparking protests.

Read the article here: http://news.yahoo.com/justice-department-tells-ferguson-police-stop-wearing-bracelets-004135604.html35

I don't know what you think but it looks to me like it will be a long time before there's ever any peace in Ferguson, Missouri.

Basically what those cops are telling people is that they're going to do whatever they want to do.

I don't believe that's going to bring people together.

What do you think?
Click to expand...

From your link:

Protesters have pledged continued civil unrest until Wilson is charged in Brown's death and on Friday night several dozen people gathered in downtown Ferguson to call for Jackson's ouster.
Click to expand...

It seems that the "protest" (including rioting, looting and property damage) has little to do with police uniform policy and everything to do with demanding that a predetermined action be taken by the grand jury. Why should the DOJ have the power to "suggest" that anyone not express an opinion while they are under investigation by the DOJ?
 
shrubnose said:
What I find really troubling is the fact that the members of the Ferguson Police Department wouldn't see that wearing those wristbands shows that they are prejudiced about this case.
Click to expand...

That prejudice is in the form of peacefully supporting the presumption of innocence (letting the grand jury decide if criminal charges are warranted) rather than rioting, looting and damaging the property of others in an attempt to coerce a proper decision.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Why should the DOJ have the power to "suggest" that anyone not express an opinion while they are under investigation by the DOJ?
Click to expand...

The DOJ has 'suggested' that officers not wear the bracelets while on duty policing those protests. And AFAIK, those officers aren't under investigation, and they aren't being prohibited from expressing an opinion on the case. They just are being asked/told that while on duty they don't pour gasoline on the damn fire by announcing their own biases.

Again, would you approve or disapprove if DOJ investigators wore bracelets, "I AM MICHAEL BROWN" while interviewing Ferguson PD? Of course not...
 
JasperL said:
The DOJ has 'suggested' that officers not wear the bracelets while on duty policing those protests. And AFAIK, those officers aren't under investigation, and they aren't being prohibited from expressing an opinion on the case. They just are being asked/told that while on duty they don't pour gasoline on the damn fire by announcing their own biases.

Again, would you approve or disapprove if DOJ investigators wore bracelets, "I AM MICHAEL BROWN" while interviewing Ferguson PD? Of course not...
Click to expand...

Really?

Justice Department Investigates Ferguson Police - ABC News
 
JasperL said:
I meant in regard to the shooting of Michael Brown, but I'll concede the point anyway.

And maybe you can address the actual point: "Again, would you approve or disapprove if DOJ investigators wore bracelets, "I AM MICHAEL BROWN" while interviewing Ferguson PD? Of course not..."
Click to expand...

One doesn't require much in the way of physical evidence to figure out what may have sparked the DOJ investigation of the Ferguson PD. ;)
 
ttwtt78640 said:
One doesn't require much in the way of physical evidence to figure out what may have sparked the DOJ investigation of the Ferguson PD. ;)
Click to expand...

"Again, would you approve or disapprove if DOJ investigators wore bracelets, "I AM MICHAEL BROWN" while interviewing Ferguson PD? Of course not..."
 
JasperL said:
"Again, would you approve or disapprove if DOJ investigators wore bracelets, "I AM MICHAEL BROWN" while interviewing Ferguson PD? Of course not..."
Click to expand...
That is absurd . They never would ...they are far too professional to do something like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom