So basically the second half of the Eighties in Central Park at night. Got it. Auria was right, its all about the definition of "significant."
Wut? To return to subject, violent crime rates in the U.S. have dramatically, hugely dropped over the past 30 years. So even if black-on-white crime has dropped only in tandem since then rather than at a higher rate (which I do believe is the case, but I can't find any statistics on that), the issue of crime -- and popular responses to it -- is very different than in the Eighties. Which is one reason why why Muslims have replaced blacks as the national bad guys.
You should have been more responsible with the keyboard yesterday. What you've listed here is just a bunch of anecdotes.
I remember my dad flying into Detroit in the early 70's and it being referred to then, as 'Homicide City, USA' so I don't think it's just one area. Well, I suspect that's got more to do with people needing a 'bad guy' than anything else, but, yeah... I think people are overthinking this Poor people are more likely to be involved in crime, (coz they're, y'know... poor), and because, as a proportion, more black people are poor than whites, they'll be more likely to be involved. Of course, all of that's different from the issue of perception which has been heavily skewed against black people because they're easier to identify as 'the other' to whites who were the majority back in the day and, in comparison to blacks, (as opposed to hispanic people), still the case now. IOW it's a mixture of factors, partly simple reality, (which can't just be ignored, regardless of the reason), but also a large slice perception.
What does the Federal Communications Commission have to do with anything? I mean, I agree that it was a really bad idea when Reagan got rid of the Fairness Doctrine and Dcrapping the Duopoly rule was a disaster, since it lead to corporate control of radio stations so that all you hear are the same %$#@ songs on every @&^%$# station in every $#&%$ city...
Still better than killer cops, no? I mean, given the choice between "iHeartRadio" and getting shot by a cop... well, give me a few minutes to think about it.
Thought the Nippert Stadium was a tipoff. They were referring to FC Cincinnati. I believe this marks the first ever political protest at a US Open Cup match.
Nuh-uh! I remember distinctly that people were saying that a number of protesters were outside Lusitano Stadium in Ludlow, Mass. for the USOC match between New England and Chicago, allegedly holding signs that may have been decrying farm price subsidys that would reduced the overall amount of food being produced. The protesters were worried that, with Snack Thornton in goal for Chicago, the planet couldn't afford to reduce the amount of food production. Either that, or they just sang mean songs about him being a "fat bastard," alleging that if he lived in Korea, he would, in fact eat a dog, and not necessarily a chihuahua either.
Watched many a match there. Had a cousin who played for the Lusitanos in the late 40's ... early 50's. All three of my kids played away matches there. David Socha [former FIFA Referee] tended bar in town.
Check this piece out, though it covers the deference people have to cops being good guys. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/off-duty-cop-killed-daughters-boyfriend-faces-3rd-48402399
Federal appeals court in Philly says cops can be filmed while on-duty: Americans have a constitutional right to film on-duty police officers in public, a federal appeals court in Philadelphia ruled Friday. The three-judge panel’s decision is not the first of its kind, but it marks a significant milestone: Half of U.S. states are now covered by rulings protecting the videotaping of law enforcement. In its decision in Fields v. City of Philadelphia, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals panel said the First Amendment’s protections extended to two people who used their smartphones to record police interactions with a third party. We ask much of our police. They can be our shelter from the storm,” Judge Thomas Ambro wrote for the majority. “Yet officers are public officials carrying out public functions, and the First Amendment requires them to bear bystanders recording their actions. This is vital to promote the access that fosters free discussion of governmental actions, especially when that discussion benefits not only citizens but the officers themselves.” The judges’ decision solidifies a growing consensus among the federal appeals courts on this nascent issue. The First, Fifth, Seventh, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits have also issued similar rulings, starting in 2011, to protect bystanders who record police actions. Their collective jurisdictions now amount to exactly half of U.S. states and roughly 60 percent of the American population. No federal appeals court has ruled to the contrary; the Supreme Court has not weighed in on the subject. https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...ictory-for-the-right-to-record-police/533031/
Come to the US to live the American dream, get shot by our trigger-happy cops!!! http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/australian-woman-who-called-911-shot-dead-by-minneapolis-police-1630549 An Australian woman has been shot and killed by a US police officer near her home in Minneapolis. Details about what exactly happened are sketchy but local reports say the woman, Justine Ruszczyk, called 911 after hearing a noise near her home and was shot dead by an officer who responded to her call. The incident took place at around 11.30pm local time (5.30am BST) the Minnesota's public safety department said. The police officers did not have their body cameras turned on.
Supposedly, she was standing in the alley in her pajamas and having a conversation with the driver of the police car, through the drivers-side window, when the officer on the passenger side of the car shot her through the drivers-side door. I'm wondering what creative explanation they'll come up with for this one. The usual "he was a scary-looking black man" isn't available to them this time.
Presumably the passenger-side officer thought she was pulling out a gun. (That had better be the excuse.) I wonder how many middle-aged women have shot policemen in Minnesota history? My best guess would be zero.
The name of the officer that shot her is Mohamed Noor. I think Real America is good to go with their preferred narrative on this one.
I'm going to stick with my narrative: People who armed are dangerous, regardless of either their ethnicity or occupation, and are to be avoided if at all possible. .
So what do we think is the real story? Accidental discharge? He conceived some notion that she was going for his driver's gun? I mean, why'd he have his out in the first place?