[de Blasio] Living in a post-Bloomberg era

[DGuller]

No, de Blasio and Lynch.

Of course de Blasio is.  It's mayor's sacrosanct responsibility to character assassinate ever unarmed black guy that NYPD cops kill.

[garbon]

He's coming off as a dick because he publicly dissed the NYPD, guys who are out on the streets facing danger under his control.

He ran an election campaign which as in larger part, had him publicly dissing the NYPD.

Besides, I think the NYPD is being more than a little butthurt. His speech was not an all out attack on them but rather he noted:

"Chirlane and I have had to talk to Dante for years about the dangers that he may face – good young man, law abiding young man, never would think to do anything wrong, and yet because of the history that still hangs over us, the dangers he may face. We've had to literally train him, as families have all over this city for decades, in how to take special care in any encounter he has with the police officers who are there to protect him," he said.

"I've had to worry over the years. Chirlane's had to worry. Is Dante safe each night? There are so many families in this city who feel that each and every night. Is my child safe?...Are they safe from the very people they want to have faith in as their protectors?"

That's pretty tame / they were living in a fantasy world if they thought he was going to stand happily by with what transpired.

[DGuller]

I think Bratton has it right:  this is more or less a Democratic/Republican partisan divide at this point.  I think it's fair to say that white Republicans in NYC have always been shitting their pants about de Blasio, and worried that he would be an airhead liberal that would turn the city back into ghetto.  Cops are about as virulently white Republican as they come, with all the nuanced understanding of politics that comes with it, so I think they already started off with disdain for de Blasio before he even said anything about the Garner incident.

[Admiral Yi]

He ran an election campaign which as in larger part, had him publicly dissing the NYPD.

Did he?  I knew he campaigned against stop and frisk.  That wasn't cops being dickheads because they're dickheads, that's cops carrying out policy set by the Bloomberg administration.  If he campaigned on cops shooting up blacks for fun, I was unaware of it.

Besides, I think the NYPD is being more than a little butthurt. His speech was not an all out attack on them but rather he noted:

"Chirlane and I have had to talk to Dante for years about the dangers that he may face – good young man, law abiding young man, never would think to do anything wrong, and yet because of the history that still hangs over us, the dangers he may face. We've had to literally train him, as families have all over this city for decades, in how to take special care in any encounter he has with the police officers who are there to protect him," he said.

"I've had to worry over the years. Chirlane's had to worry. Is Dante safe each night? There are so many families in this city who feel that each and every night. Is my child safe?...Are they safe from the very people they want to have faith in as their protectors?"

If you accept the premise that blacks who do absolutely nothing are at risk from the police by virtue of their skin color, that would be an attack but a justified one.  If you accept the premise the Staten Island choking case is an example of the unfortunate outcomes that can occur when people resist arrest, it is an unjustified attack, which will naturally upset the people it is directed toward.

Should people stopped by the police have the right to negotiate the terms of their surrender?  Should a police shooting of unarmed people automatically be a crime?  We as a democracy are of course free to come to that conclusion, as long as we are willing to accept the consequences.  But to blame police officers who believed they were operating in good faith with the laws and rules as they understood them is not right IMO.

[garbon]

Who else would you blame? Blame the victim?

[Admiral Yi]

Who else would you blame? Blame the victim?

The dead guy did not do what he was supposed to do under the law.

[garbon]

So therefore should the police kill him - while using tactics that their own handbook says they should do their best to avoid, all is good?

[Admiral Yi]

So therefore should the police kill him - while using tactics that their own handbook says they should do their best to avoid, all is good?

Of course all is not good.  And no, police should not kill every person who resists arrest.

Do you have any serious questions?

[garbon]

Do you have any serious questions?

Ah, you mean like the "serious" (hopefully rhetorical) questions that you asked?

[garbon]

To be serious Yi, I think given the video evidence and the ME report, it was a travesty of justice that the grand jury didn't find the cop open to  charges for anything, even reckless endangerment (which from my understanding wasn't even offered up by the DA). After all, for Garner, we aren't talking about whether or not the cop would actually be found guilty - but just if there is enough merit to bring it to trial.

That's little to do with whether people should be able to dictate the terms on which they surrender (though it seems like many wealthy people get that option for their crimes) nor about it automatically being a crime if a police officer shoots an unarmed civilian.

[Admiral Yi]

Ah, you mean like the "serious" (hopefully rhetorical) questions that you asked?

I have heard numerous statements by protesters, activists, and the Al Sharptons of the world that suggest they think my questions are not in the least rhetorical.

[garbon]

But to blame police officers who believed they were operating in good faith with the laws and rules as they understood them is not right IMO.

Doubling back on this - I think it is okay if the police want to be upset at the mayor (really would good measure the DA should be angry) but I think it doesn't make sense for police officer, in uniform, to go about snubbing the mayor. I suppose when I'm angry at the words of the CEO of my company, I could go around snubbing him - but that seems like it would be wildly inappropriate and disastrous.

[CountDeMoney]

Cops don't like to be criticized by non-cops, mainly because they're cops and you're not.

[Admiral Yi]

To be serious Yi, I think given the video evidence and the ME report, it was a travesty of justice that the grand jury didn't find the cop open to  charges for anything, even reckless endangerment (which from my understanding wasn't even offered up by the DA). After all, for Garner, we aren't talking about whether or not the cop would actually be found guilty - but just if there is enough merit to bring it to trial.

That's little to do with whether people should be able to dictate the terms on which they surrender (though it seems like many wealthy people get that option for their crimes) nor about it automatically being a crime if a police officer shoots an unarmed civilian.

If you believe it was a travesty of justice, then your focus would be on reforming grand juries, or DAs, or other things that impacted this particular travesty.  It would not be on warning your black son that New York cops in general are dangerous.

[garbon]

But they are.