Woman calls cops another Black Jogger
12 Jul 2020, 6:29 pm
QFT wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
TheRobotLives wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
You DID ask for an example of a black person calling the cops on a white person for no reason, which was EXACTLY what he did...The fact that the "white person" didn't exist doesn't change the facts regarding what he did.
You seem to have not provided a valid reason why the police consider it justifiable that Amy Cooper is being charged and Christian Cooper is not.
Police didn't.
A fame-seeking Democrat prosecutor did.
Ms Cooper was charged under an existing false-report law that has been already long been on the books and does not reference race. If the police objected then it would not go forward.
The prosecutor is trying Amy Cooper under a new law, which the Governor also signed last month, holds an individual who makes such calls liable "for injunctive relief, damages, or any other appropriate relief" in a civil lawsuit.
The only issue is what sentence she receives which is based on whether a judge agrees on the two items she is being charged with. My guess she will get some community service or education program.
For those interested, the following video has her lawyer (who does a lot of civil rights cases) discussing the case and the actual charge she is facing, along with why he decided to take the case:
For those not interested in watching:
She was charged under sub-section 3 of the false reporting section:
Quote:
A person is guilty of falsely reporting an incident in the third degree when, knowing the information reported, conveyed or circulated to be false or baseless, he or she:
3. Gratuitously reports to a law enforcement officer or agency (a) the alleged occurrence of an offense or incident which did not in fact occur; or (b) an allegedly impending occurrence of an offense or incident which in fact is not about to occur; or (c) false information relating to an actual offense or incident or to the alleged implication of some person therein;
3. Gratuitously reports to a law enforcement officer or agency (a) the alleged occurrence of an offense or incident which did not in fact occur; or (b) an allegedly impending occurrence of an offense or incident which in fact is not about to occur; or (c) false information relating to an actual offense or incident or to the alleged implication of some person therein;
As to the reason for taking the case, one major reason was related to involuntary filming of private citizens in public places and how it could affect someone like his nephew who has Autism, and how filming people like his nephew when he is having issues with emotion control could cause harm to his nephew if posted online, as NT's (and others) would jump to judge based on what, to them, would be "normal" expected behaviour [1] (a bit over 13 minutes in from where link starts).
[1] Much as people here are rushing to judge her reaction to the actions and words that were reported as having been spoken prior to the filming commencing, without all the facts... I wonder how they would feel, if they were on the spectrum (being that we have some NT's here, too), and were filmed having a meltdown\anxiety related reaction to something and this was posted online, with the world judging them solely on a minute or so of footage of this meltdown\reaction, and no context\background being presented.
I haven't heard of his nephew having autism. But then again I wasn't really paying attention to this outside of this thread. Do you have any links that talk about it?
In any case, as far as I recall, the man was the one who was filming. So if the issue is the man's nephew rather than the womans, I don't see how you can really say that one party is hurting the other party. More like the man hurting his own nephew.
No, it is her lawyer (Robert Barnes) whose nephew has Autism, which was one of the reasons for him taking the case.
He does weekly (I believe) "vlawgs" with Viva Frei, so as the case goes forward he'll likely be able to speak more about the case from the defence point of view (and being that the prosecution need to provide all related materials to him, probably summarizing the prosecution case regarding the issue as well). I have found both Robert and Viva quite interesting to listen to regarding prominant legal matters in the USA and Canada.
12 Jul 2020, 6:51 pm
cyberdad wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
I care if a black person calls me a “honkie” or a “white boy”—probably not as much as when a black person is called the “N” word for excellent, historic reasons—but it does upset me.
“Whitefella” from an Aborigine is not the same as “cracker” from an African-American....or is it?
“Whitefella” from an Aborigine is not the same as “cracker” from an African-American....or is it?
Aboriginal people are never racist toward anyone. Or at least I have never experienced it.
Therein lies your problem...You seem to have lived a very sheltered life (Upper middle class, I believe you said at one point).
Try getting out a bit and meeting people from groups below your social level...It may give you an insight into the real world.
12 Jul 2020, 7:04 pm
QFT wrote:
The point is that he has no power. Since you said one has to be in a position of power to be racist, then by that definition he won't be racist -- and all of his beliefs would be a moot point. Since you clearly think he "is" racist, then you have to admit that it "is" possible to be racist without being in a position of power, which is the point I was trying to make.
His power is being a member of the chosen race. He takes his membership seriously.
12 Jul 2020, 7:05 pm
Brictoria wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
I care if a black person calls me a “honkie” or a “white boy”—probably not as much as when a black person is called the “N” word for excellent, historic reasons—but it does upset me.
“Whitefella” from an Aborigine is not the same as “cracker” from an African-American....or is it?
“Whitefella” from an Aborigine is not the same as “cracker” from an African-American....or is it?
Aboriginal people are never racist toward anyone. Or at least I have never experienced it.
Therein lies your problem...You seem to have lived a very sheltered life (Upper middle class, I believe you said at one point).
Try getting out a bit and meeting people from groups below your social level...It may give you an insight into the real world.
My interaction with aboriginal people include Queensland, Darwin and Western Australia. The only negative experience was having people ask me for money in WA. Nothing racist.
12 Jul 2020, 7:06 pm
Brictoria wrote:
No, it is her lawyer (Robert Barnes) whose nephew has Autism, which was one of the reasons for him taking the case.
He does weekly (I believe) "vlawgs" with Viva Frei, so as the case goes forward he'll likely be able to speak more about the case from the defence point of view (and being that the prosecution need to provide all related materials to him, probably summarizing the prosecution case regarding the issue as well). I have found both Robert and Viva quite interesting to listen to regarding prominant legal matters in the USA and Canada.
He does weekly (I believe) "vlawgs" with Viva Frei, so as the case goes forward he'll likely be able to speak more about the case from the defence point of view (and being that the prosecution need to provide all related materials to him, probably summarizing the prosecution case regarding the issue as well). I have found both Robert and Viva quite interesting to listen to regarding prominant legal matters in the USA and Canada.
Where does it suggest Amy Cooper may be autistic?
12 Jul 2020, 7:12 pm
QFT wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
1) Anxiety can be a state of mind rather than a diagnosable trait. Amy Cooper apologised but tried to use state anxiety as a reason for her over reaction.
She "did" have anxiety as a "state of mind at the moment" but she didn't have "anxiety disorder".
Her "state of mind" was triggered by her being a female alone with much bigger male who said he will do something she won't like. Any other female in this situation would be in a "state of anxiety" too.
cyberdad wrote:
However she seemed in calm control when making her fake phone call.
On these videos she did *not* look calm at all. She was screaming, frantically trying to hold her dog. That looks rather anxious to me.
cyberdad wrote:
2) The dog was on leash so how could it eat the biscuits?
The dog was "not" on the leash. I thought that was the entire context of the whole encounter.
cyberdad wrote:
3) If the dog was on leash and she was alone then why didn't she leave instead of staying there?
Because the dog was not on the leash.
In the film/video the dog was leashed. Common sense suggests Christian started filming when Amy commenced her threats to call police.
12 Jul 2020, 7:20 pm
ASPartOfMe wrote:
Blacks can be racist, autistics can be ableist. There is no innate white or NT privilege.
Yes I agree with you blacks can also be ableist, homophobic and elitist (the old brown paper bag test was enthusiastically practiced by brainwashed light skinned blacks in the pre-civil rights era).
But can they be racist? I posit that the answer to that question is contextual. White privilege is a social psychological phenomena that is scientifically evidence based.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10 ... 1417753600
It's such a social taboo that even on discussion forums it illicits a negative response from people who self-identify as white.
12 Jul 2020, 7:23 pm
cyberdad wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
No, it is her lawyer (Robert Barnes) whose nephew has Autism, which was one of the reasons for him taking the case.
He does weekly (I believe) "vlawgs" with Viva Frei, so as the case goes forward he'll likely be able to speak more about the case from the defence point of view (and being that the prosecution need to provide all related materials to him, probably summarizing the prosecution case regarding the issue as well). I have found both Robert and Viva quite interesting to listen to regarding prominant legal matters in the USA and Canada.
He does weekly (I believe) "vlawgs" with Viva Frei, so as the case goes forward he'll likely be able to speak more about the case from the defence point of view (and being that the prosecution need to provide all related materials to him, probably summarizing the prosecution case regarding the issue as well). I have found both Robert and Viva quite interesting to listen to regarding prominant legal matters in the USA and Canada.
Where does it suggest Amy Cooper may be autistic?
Where did I ever suggest or indicate that she was? Please read what has been typed, rather than jumping to incorrect conclusions.
12 Jul 2020, 7:26 pm
Brictoria wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
No, it is her lawyer (Robert Barnes) whose nephew has Autism, which was one of the reasons for him taking the case.
He does weekly (I believe) "vlawgs" with Viva Frei, so as the case goes forward he'll likely be able to speak more about the case from the defence point of view (and being that the prosecution need to provide all related materials to him, probably summarizing the prosecution case regarding the issue as well). I have found both Robert and Viva quite interesting to listen to regarding prominant legal matters in the USA and Canada.
He does weekly (I believe) "vlawgs" with Viva Frei, so as the case goes forward he'll likely be able to speak more about the case from the defence point of view (and being that the prosecution need to provide all related materials to him, probably summarizing the prosecution case regarding the issue as well). I have found both Robert and Viva quite interesting to listen to regarding prominant legal matters in the USA and Canada.
Where does it suggest Amy Cooper may be autistic?
Where did I ever suggest or indicate that she was? Please read what has been typed, rather than jumping to incorrect conclusions.
I am trying to work out what Robert Barne's nephew being diagnosed with autism is relevant to mention with why he took on Amy Cooper's case (that seems to be your assertion there is a connection)?
12 Jul 2020, 7:31 pm
cyberdad wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
Blacks can be racist, autistics can be ableist. There is no innate white or NT privilege.
Yes I agree with you blacks can also be ableist, homophobic and elitist (the old brown paper bag test was enthusiastically practiced by brainwashed light skinned blacks in the pre-civil rights era).
But can they be racist? I posit that the answer to that question is contextual. White privilege is a social psychological phenomena that is scientifically evidence based.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10 ... 1417753600
It's such a social taboo that even on discussion forums it illicits a negative response from people who self-identify as white.
Racism:
Quote:
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group
OR
Quote:
the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.
So yes, ANY person who shows "prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism" against another based on their race (for instance, making statements indicating that the "white" person is the only one who can be racist, and PoC are not capable of this) is being explicitly racist.
12 Jul 2020, 7:33 pm
cyberdad wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
No, it is her lawyer (Robert Barnes) whose nephew has Autism, which was one of the reasons for him taking the case.
He does weekly (I believe) "vlawgs" with Viva Frei, so as the case goes forward he'll likely be able to speak more about the case from the defence point of view (and being that the prosecution need to provide all related materials to him, probably summarizing the prosecution case regarding the issue as well). I have found both Robert and Viva quite interesting to listen to regarding prominant legal matters in the USA and Canada.
He does weekly (I believe) "vlawgs" with Viva Frei, so as the case goes forward he'll likely be able to speak more about the case from the defence point of view (and being that the prosecution need to provide all related materials to him, probably summarizing the prosecution case regarding the issue as well). I have found both Robert and Viva quite interesting to listen to regarding prominant legal matters in the USA and Canada.
Where does it suggest Amy Cooper may be autistic?
Where did I ever suggest or indicate that she was? Please read what has been typed, rather than jumping to incorrect conclusions.
I am trying to work out what Robert Barne's nephew being diagnosed with autism is relevant to mention with why he took on Amy Cooper's case (that seems to be your assertion there is a connection)?
Because reading is hard...
Brictoria wrote:
As to the reason for taking the case, one major reason was related to involuntary filming of private citizens in public places and how it could affect someone like his nephew who has Autism, and how filming people like his nephew when he is having issues with emotion control could cause harm to his nephew if posted online, as NT's (and others) would jump to judge based on what, to them, would be "normal" expected behaviour [1] (a bit over 13 minutes in from where link starts).
So, jump forward about 13 minutes from where the video linked previously starts, and you'll find your answer.
12 Jul 2020, 7:37 pm
Brictoria wrote:
So yes, ANY person who shows "prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism" against another based on their race (for instance, making statements indicating that the "white" person is the only one who can be racist, and PoC are not capable of this) is being explicitly racist.
PoC can be racist to each other if they have some social privilege/benefit the other group does not have (classic example is Chinese racism toward blacks)
12 Jul 2020, 7:39 pm
Brictoria wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
Blacks can be racist, autistics can be ableist. There is no innate white or NT privilege.
Yes I agree with you blacks can also be ableist, homophobic and elitist (the old brown paper bag test was enthusiastically practiced by brainwashed light skinned blacks in the pre-civil rights era).
But can they be racist? I posit that the answer to that question is contextual. White privilege is a social psychological phenomena that is scientifically evidence based.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10 ... 1417753600
It's such a social taboo that even on discussion forums it illicits a negative response from people who self-identify as white.
Racism:
.
Did you read the article? or is reading hard for you as well?
12 Jul 2020, 7:48 pm
cyberdad wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
Blacks can be racist, autistics can be ableist. There is no innate white or NT privilege.
Yes I agree with you blacks can also be ableist, homophobic and elitist (the old brown paper bag test was enthusiastically practiced by brainwashed light skinned blacks in the pre-civil rights era).
But can they be racist? I posit that the answer to that question is contextual. White privilege is a social psychological phenomena that is scientifically evidence based.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10 ... 1417753600
It's such a social taboo that even on discussion forums it illicits a negative response from people who self-identify as white.
Racism:
.
Did you read the article? or is reading hard for you as well?
What: An article about "racial privilege"? How does that impact on racism, when racism is independant on "privilege"?
Racism is "the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.", so to see someone of particular race(s) as capable (or incapable) due to their race is itself racism...
The definition of racism does not require the person being racist to belong to the majority, simply that they treat people of one race as being superior (or inferior) to those of a different race, or ascribe certain characteristics to those of a subset of races, whilst claiming those who are not included in this subset cannot have this characteristic.
ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,480
Location: Long Island, New York
12 Jul 2020, 8:16 pm
Now back to the saga of the Coopers.
IMHO If she called the police and said an African-American man is threatening me might it be racist or a person just giving a description. Telling Chris in advance back away and let me continue to break the law or I am going to tell the cops an African-American man is threatening me was an explicitly racist act as well and showing a sense of entitlement. Here in New York and I assume in most other places telling somebody you might not like what I about am about to do would be considered an open-ended threat and when that person tried to trick my dog away from me would be seen as the person following through on the threat.
His reaction to the unleashed dog is unfathomable to me. When I see an unleashed dog with images of the dog leaping up and taking a part of my face I try to get as far away as possible as gingerly as possible, not film and try to take the dog, my lord. If he feels that strongly about unleashed dogs he should have walked away and called the cops thus giving the cops a better chance of catching her red-handed.
This incident was nothing more than a minor dustup between two narcissistic New Yorkers. At that moment there were probably hundreds of worse things going on in the big city. Yet thanks to social media this has become a Rorschach test.
_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity
It is Autism Acceptance Month
“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman
12 Jul 2020, 8:29 pm
Brictoria wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Brictoria wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
Blacks can be racist, autistics can be ableist. There is no innate white or NT privilege.
Yes I agree with you blacks can also be ableist, homophobic and elitist (the old brown paper bag test was enthusiastically practiced by brainwashed light skinned blacks in the pre-civil rights era).
But can they be racist? I posit that the answer to that question is contextual. White privilege is a social psychological phenomena that is scientifically evidence based.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10 ... 1417753600
It's such a social taboo that even on discussion forums it illicits a negative response from people who self-identify as white.
Racism:
.
Did you read the article? or is reading hard for you as well?
What: An article about "racial privilege"? How does that impact on racism, when racism is independant on "privilege"?
Racism is "the belief that different races possess distinct characteristics, abilities, or qualities, especially so as to distinguish them as inferior or superior to one another.", so to see someone of particular race(s) as capable (or incapable) due to their race is itself racism...
The definition of racism does not require the person being racist to belong to the majority, simply that they treat people of one race as being superior (or inferior) to those of a different race, or ascribe certain characteristics to those of a subset of races, whilst claiming those who are not included in this subset cannot have this characteristic.
Ok lets agree to disagree over semantics.
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| 3 D.C. Cops shot trying to serve arrest warrant |
14 Feb 2024, 5:09 pm |
| George RR Martin Calls out Anti-Fans |
10 Feb 2024, 10:33 am |
| Woman uses corpse to try and sign bank loan |
20 Apr 2024, 12:13 am |
| Where are the black people in Shogun? |
17 Mar 2024, 8:46 am |
