sheriff defends stopping black man for walking with his hands in his pockets

originally posted by: captaintyinknots
How about society as a whole? Is it a win that society now accepts that a person can report that you are making him nervous, and you now have to answer to that to police? What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

He wasn't charged with anything. So as far as I know he is innocent.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

I think it was the "big scary black man" stereotype being fueled by his fear from being robbed several times. Makes sense if you think about it.

of course it makes sense....
he had been robbed several times.
the guy freaked him out so he called 911
the cop talked to the dude for a few minutes and that was it.

in the end, the guy was out a few minutes of his day.
in the end he had to answer a couple questions..

bfd

a reply to: Grovit

Oh I know. I'm not arguing with the outcome. I was just answering your question on how the business owner could be "possibly racist". That's all. The person DID use the modifier "possibly" after all.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: captaintyinknots
How about society as a whole? Is it a win that society now accepts that a person can report that you are making him nervous, and you now have to answer to that to police? What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

He wasn't charged with anything. So as far as I know he is innocent.

and he had to prove it.

Consider that for a few.

a reply to: captaintyinknots

by having a few minute conversation...
bfd man

cops respond to 911 calls. thats how it works.

cant take the chance on not talking to him and then have him actually rob the store....

i think this is a non issue

originally posted by: captaintyinknots

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: captaintyinknots
How about society as a whole? Is it a win that society now accepts that a person can report that you are making him nervous, and you now have to answer to that to police? What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

He wasn't charged with anything. So as far as I know he is innocent.

and he had to prove it.

Consider that for a few.

So what? What's so bad about answering a few questions? There was no presumption of guilt, it was just a cop making sure everything was fine. It's not like the person had to answer the questions either, his fifth amendment right wasn't violated. I think you are irrationally blinded by police. Believe it or not, some police officers DO do a good job. You are making a mountain out of a mole here.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

So what? What's so bad about answering a few questions?

Yeah....what so bad about having to prove your innocence when walking down the street? Seriously, perhaps we should just start issuing papers...

There was no presumption of guilt

Then why did they stop him? If there was no presumption that he was going to commit a crime, what was the interaction all about?

It's not like the person had to answer the questions either, his fifth amendment right wasn't violated

Yeah, because it always ends so well for people (especially black men) when they refuse to answer cops.

I think you are irrationally blinded by police.

Then I think you have COMPLETELY missed my point. Ok, I know you have.

Its not the individual cops that I have an issue with.

Believe it or not, some police officers DO do a good job.

No one is claiming otherwise, so save the hyperbole.

You are making a mountain out of a mole here.

I think you meant 'mole hill'

That said, the systematic shift in the way cops act and expect to be treated is no mole hill. Unfortunately, just like has happened all throughout history, y'all wont get it until its far too late.

a reply to: Grovit

by having a few minute conversation... bfd man cops respond to 911 calls. thats how it works.

Its like talking to a bunch of scarecrows around here...

OF COURSE COPS RESPOND TO 911 CALLS. That is not up for debate. HOW they respond, IS.

cant take the chance on not talking to him and then have him actually rob the store....

Thank you for illustrating my point.

People like you have accepted that it is better for a cop to get involved because of the FEAR that someone MIGHT commit a crime.

Fear is your lord.

I don't see any problem here. Yes, the 911 caller did probably profile, but as a citizen, that's his prerogative. The cop was very cool, I thought.

If I called 911 because I was afraid of a group of men, I would expect a cop to respond, even though they hadn't yet committed any crime.

I'd like to know if Brandon McKean really did walk back and forth in front of the store windows...

originally posted by: captaintyinknots


OF COURSE COPS RESPOND TO 911 CALLS. That is not up for debate. HOW they respond, IS.
so its wrong to stop and talk to someone for a few minutes...how else are they supposed to respond? im glad he stopped and talked to him....



People like you have accepted that it is better for a cop to get involved because of the FEAR that someone MIGHT commit a crime.

Fear is your lord.

i never said i was afraid.
i said if someone calls 911 to report something it hurts nobody to have a cop stop and check it out. it hurt nobody to talk to him for a couple minutes....
never said i was afraid. dont put words in my mouth.
thanks balloon hands

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

for some reason when i read your post about a group of men i thought of something.

what about the female that is walking to her car at night and she spots a couple guys hanging about...she gets scared for whatever reason and she calls the cops.
cops come and talk to them for a few, then its done...

i would rather have that happen than her not call and the cops not come and have it end very bad.

nothing wrong with someone being afraid or suspicious of something.
nothing wrong with the cops talking to someone for a minute, just to check it out.

my what if question was not to you BH

a reply to: Grovit

Yeah, I agree (Hey! We agree! Let's celebrate! LOL!). That's what I was saying. It always helps me to make an analogy. If I was afraid of a group of men who were walking back and forth around where I was, I would expect the cops to respond. My question is, did this guy really walk by the window many times... Somehow that sounds suspicious to me.

The 911 caller has the right to be racist and to profile or whatever. It's the cop's actions that need to be looked at and in this case, I don't see anything at all wrong with his response.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic


Yeah, I agree (Hey! We agree! Let's celebrate! LOL!).
i know you are good people BH. we have been disagreeing a lot lately but we agree on things as much as we disagree. just not in the topics of late...it will pass

That's what I was saying. It always helps me to make an analogy. If I was afraid of a group of men who were walking back and forth around where I was, I would expect the cops to respond.
i would hope so. i know if my wife was coming out of the mall and got spooked and called the cops and they didnt show and something bad ended up happening, i would have to go on a rampage..


My question is, did this guy really walk by the window many times... Somehow that sounds suspicious to me.
who knows. worst case is he didnt and the store owner profiled him. worse case is the store owner is a total dick. its his right you know.

The 911 caller has the right to be racist and to profile or whatever. It's the cop's actions that need to be looked at and in this case, I don't see anything at all wrong with his response.

youre right though. about the cops actions i mean.
he responded. talked for a few. and everyone went on their way.
that is not a bad thing.

i think this day in age its better to be safe than sorry. i mean, we dont live in beaver cleaver ville anymore.

i dont just mean better safe than sorry when a guy spooks you for whatever reason outside your store.
i mean with everything.

with the situation about a lady that we just talked about.

the past 5 years ago they ave started cracking down on domestic violence and taking it more serious and thats a good thing.
act like its no big deal and people(especially women and kids) were getting hurt by their abuser, cause people didnt think their calls were warranted.

a few minute conversation or a ride by or a call back is not a bad thing.

now if he would have tossed this dude on the car and started tuning him up or choking him like the dude in new york, then it would be a different story..

originally posted by: captaintyinknots
A win for the store owner-absolutely. He got to call in with paranoia and confirm that he can report anyone at anytime, and the cops will come.

Isn't that what we want? If you call the cops because you're scared of a potential threat shouldn't we as a society want the police to arrive? What if they didn't? What if the guy then got robbed and possibly harmed? The whole theory behind the police is that they're there to protect society. Showing up and investigating is EXACTLY what they should be doing.

A win for the cops-absolutely. Just one more rung in the "people wont question us" ladder.

The man questioned them, the cops proved their case with cameras. They acted professionally and with restraint. Considering you're more likely to be killed by a cop these days than by a criminal I absolutely consider this one a win, those cops acted according to the ideal that they should.

A win for the suspect? Seriously? Its a win for him....HOW, EXACTLY? He was walking, minding his own business, and had to prove his innocence to police. That is NOT a win.

The cops showed up and asked him a few questions. That is preventative police work. Crime prevention is far more effective than restitution. The man wasn't detained, he was simply asked a couple of questions. None of his civil rights were violated. If we as a society call the police shouldn't the expectation be that they can take some action? What were the police supposed to do, tell the guy too bad when he called about a potential upcoming robbery? Even Andy Taylor acted this way in Mayberry... it's not some messed up line of action.

How about society as a whole? Is it a win that society now accepts that a person can report that you are making him nervous, and you now have to answer to that to police? What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

Answer to the police? As soon as a brief investigation revealed that there was no threat the man was free to go. This isn't even a "papers please" scenario.

a reply to: Aazadan

you make good points.
id much rather see crime prevention than a crime investigation

a reply to: captaintyinknots

I'm not arguing that there is a problem with abuse of authority from the police. I agree, it is a situation that is in serious need of addressing in this country. But THIS situation is not an example of that. It's just a police officer doing his duty.

originally posted by: o0oTOPCATo0o

There is a supreme court case, Terry V. something er other, that upholds what the cop did.
It's even called a "Terry Stop"
The cop had the right to search him even, if he wanted to. IMO the cop handled the situation beautifully.

originally posted by: captaintyinknots
A terry stop requires criminal activity to have taken place. No crime happened.

Please, dont cite legal precedence unless you know what you are talking about.

Please, check ya facts before discrediting
Terry Stop Wiki

a reply to: Grovit

Until the MSM goes from reporting a story like this: "Unarmed black man..." or "Unarmed white man" to reporting it like this: "Unarmed man" nothing will change. Unless that changes, ignorent masses will continue to fall right into the trap of 'seeing' racism where there is none.

a reply to: Grovit

Your words:

cant take the chance on not talking to him and then have him actually rob the store....

Thats fear my friend.

a reply to: Aazadan

Isn't that what we want? If you call the cops because you're scared of a potential threat shouldn't we as a society want the police to arrive? What if they didn't? What if the guy then got robbed and possibly harmed? The whole theory behind the police is that they're there to protect society. Showing up and investigating is EXACTLY what they should be doing.

Ugh. Ill restate it one more time, for the scarecrows:

OF COURSE WE WANT THE COPS TO RESPOND. The MEANS of that response are what is up for debate.

Do you all live your lives based on "what if"? "What if" he was going to rob the store. "What if" the cops didnt respond at all. "what if" monkeys started falling from the sky.

The facts are this:
-ONE shop owner reported what HE (and only he) called a suspicious looking man.


Thats it. Thats the total of the "suspicion".

What if I dont like the way you look. If I call 911 and tell them you look suspicious, should you have to explain yourself to the cops?

Answer to the police? As soon as a brief investigation revealed that there was no threat the man was free to go. This isn't even a "papers please" scenario

Thats exactly what it is. Like you said, he was no threat, committed no crime. Yet he had to prove that to police.

Papers, please.