Goodell Admits NFL Was Wrong Not to Listen

[Rocbillsfan1]

On 6/5/2020 at 8:40 PM, Jaraxxus said:

 

I'm smart enough not to piss my employer off.

 

Kaepernick not so much.

most of the employers don’t give a *****, they were concerned about racist/ignorant fans not giving their money to the nfl. It was always about money, and the nfl chose short term profits over having a conscience. 

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Happy said:

 

Because he didn't listen to the initial order to back away and held his ground.  The mayor justified the police response.

 

Here is a source of reference:  https://www.tmz.com/2020/06/06/buffalo-mayor-knocked-down-elderly-man-agitator-martin-gugino-cops/

The Mayor does not justify pushing this guy to the ground.  The Mayor just kissing a little BPD heinie there...just like DiBlasio did, at first,  after police drive a van into a crowd.

[Meatloaf63]

On 6/6/2020 at 10:15 AM, Kirby Jackson said:

So in other words, “shut up and dribble”

No, in other words know the facts before you make emotionally  ridiculous responseS . In 2019 10 unarmed Black men were killed by the police, 19 white people were. The police kill more whites each year than Blacks. A police officer is 18 times more likely to be killed by a black person than an unarmed black person is likely to be killed by a police officer. Stats are from the Washington post. From the FBI, blacks kill more whites by a 2 to 1 ratio year in and year out. Police consistently kill more white people each year than blacks.

According to the US Department of Justice, African Americans accounted for 52.5% of all homicide offenders from 1980 to 2008, with Whites 45.3% and "Other" 2.2%. The offending rate for African Americans was almost eight times higher than Whites, and the victim rate six times higher. Most homicides were intraracial, with 84% of White victims killed by Whites and 93% of African American victims killed by African Americans.

Does all this mean there are not racist cops or people? Absolutely not, there are. But it does show its not a systemic issue that Democrats are pushing it as. Studies also show that the racial make up of police forces tend to mimic the community they serve. All of these cities That have  major issues have one thing in common. They have been run by one political party for 40, 50, and some cases 80 years. These mayors appoint who has been running the police department. Look no further than that to see why there is a local issue. People claim a lot of this goes back to opportunity’s to have better education. Well who has been running the schools? When George Bush tried to start a voucher program to allow inner city parents to get their kids out of failing schools, who blocked that? There is a high problem of a certain party trying to divide us by Race, Sex, and religion. They have pushed that narrative for as long as I can remember. We are now looking at the results...

[Kirby Jackson]

1 minute ago, Meatloaf63 said:

No, in other words know the facts before you make emotionally  ridiculous responseS . In 2019 10 unarmed Black men were killed by the police, 19 white people were. The police kill more whites each year than Blacks. A police officer is 18 times more likely to be killed by a black person than an unarmed black person is likely to be killed by a police officer. Stats are from the Washington post. From the FBI, blacks kill more whites by a 2 to 1 ratio year in and year out. Police consistently kill more white people each year than blacks.

According to the US Department of Justice, African Americans accounted for 52.5% of all homicide offenders from 1980 to 2008, with Whites 45.3% and "Other" 2.2%. The offending rate for African Americans was almost eight times higher than Whites, and the victim rate six times higher. Most homicides were intraracial, with 84% of White victims killed by Whites and 93% of African American victims killed by African Americans.

Does all this mean there are not racist cops or people? Absolutely not, there are. But it does show its not a systemic issue that Democrats are pushing it as. Studies also show that the racial make up of police forces tend to mimic the community they serve. All of these cities That have  major issues have one thing in common. They have been run by one political party for 40, 50, and some cases 80 years. These mayors appoint who has been running the police department. Look no further than that to see why there is a local issue. People claim a lot of this goes back to opportunity’s to have better education. Well who has been running the schools? When George Bush tried to start a voucher program to allow inner city parents to get their kids out of failing schools, who blocked that? There is a high problem of a certain party trying to divide us by Race, Sex, and religion. They have pushed that narrative for as long as I can remember. We are now looking at the results...

Lol, that was in response to someone demanding that we keep politics out of sports (which is never going to happen again). If you aren’t going to read the whole conversation don’t jump in. I quoted Laura Ingraham’s freezing cold take, and they agreed. 
 

Clearly see where you stand on the issue of SYSTEMIC racism though.... Thanks for your contribution ?. Feel free to go back to sticking your head in the sand.

[Meatloaf63]

2 hours ago, D. L. Hot-Flamethrower said:

This isn't some neo-liberal vs. right-wing issue, this is basic humanity and common sense......you are way off kilter with this and other responses. I'm guessing you don't think you'd ever be in that position yourself but if you were you'd expect to be treated in a similar fashion as you espouse- by law enforcement. That was sarcasm. You should reevaluate and soon.

The man defied a curfew, walks into the middle of a police line (Police who are probably exhausted from being over stressed and over worked. Some have been shot at, attacked by people in vehicles.) then puts his hands in the vicinity of the officers holstered  weapon. He wasn’t there to have a discussion, he was there to cause trouble. It sucks he got hurt, but he went out of his way to cause the situation. It doesn’t matter if he was 17 or 75. He put himself and the police in a bad position, not the other way around. 
If I jumped into the middle of a police line after all the rioting and violence that proceed this and put my hand near an officers weapon, I’d damn sure expect to get pushed back. That’s called personal responsibility for ones behavior, he came their looking to cause trouble and he found it.

8 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Lol, that was in response to someone demanding that we keep politics out of sports (which is never going to happen again). If you aren’t going to read the whole conversation don’t jump in. I quoted Laura Ingraham’s freezing cold take, and they agreed. 
 

Clearly see where you stand on the issue of SYSTEMIC racism though.... Thanks for your contribution ?. Feel free to go back to sticking your head in the sand.

Of course you ignore the the stats and a good part of the post you responded to. I’m surprised you couldn’t throw in “you’re a racist” while you were at it...

The whole Kap issue starts with a phony premise that there is a war on a Black men from police. Statistically speaking if there is a war on black men, it’s from other black men. The weekend after George was killed, 10 more black men were killed in Chicago alone with barely a peep this keeps happening. 

Edited June 7, 2020 by Meatloaf63

[Kirby Jackson]

16 minutes ago, Meatloaf63 said:

The man defied a curfew, walks into the middle of a police line (Police who are probably exhausted from being over stressed and over worked. Some have been shot at, attacked by people in vehicles.) then puts his hands in the vicinity of the officers holstered  weapon. He wasn’t there to have a discussion, he was there to cause trouble. It sucks he got hurt, but he went out of his way to cause the situation. It doesn’t matter if he was 17 or 75. He put himself and the police in a bad position, not the other way around. 
If I jumped into the middle of a police line after all the rioting and violence that proceed this and put my hand near an officers weapon, I’d damn sure expect to get pushed back. That’s called personal responsibility for ones behavior, he came their looking to cause trouble and he found it.

Of course you ignore the the stats and a good part of the post you responded to. I’m surprised you couldn’t throw in “you’re a racist” while you were at it...

The whole Kap issue starts with a phony premise that there is a war on a Black men from police. Statistically speaking if there is a war on black men, it’s from other black men. The weekend after George was killed, 10 more black men were killed in Chicago alone with barely a peep this keeps happening. 

If you’re going to chime in without reading I’m going to do the same ??‍♂️

[Hapless Bills Fan]

16 hours ago, Happy said:

The site is privately owned, why do they need to disclose ownership?

 

Let's try to put it this way.   Either accountability matters, or it doesn't.  If you're willing to be accountable, you stand by your words, and you let people know who you are, where you live, what your background is.  If you're not willing to do that, what are you trying to hide?

 

Quote

All they have to do is report accurately, which they do.

 

Except when they don't, evidently, since they've been identified as reporting misinformation

 

Quote

Interesting that your factcheck.org link only seems to list more conservative leaning sites as containing 'misinformation.'  No left leaning sites that I can see....hmmm.  

 

I don't think you looked very far

 

Quote

Getting back to the original issue, why did 57 Buffalo cops resign from the Emergency Response Team, and risk their careers, if these two cops did indeed harm an 'innocent' 75 year old protestor?  Could it be that they know something that isn't being reported by msm outlets?

 

We'd both be guessing here, but do you really think 57 officers are going to resign because they know the guy is secretly an Antifa agitator, without saying a word about it?  Wouldn't it make more sense for them to gather the evidence and support their colleagues by presenting it at trial?  Then absolutely no accountable, source-giving, willing to be fact checked media would interview and report an interview with at least one of those officers stating this reason?

 

My current best guess: The 57 feel their colleagues are getting a raw deal because they were told to clear the square and given rules of engagement, they followed orders and did not exceed their rules of engagement, and there appears to be a "rush to judgement" based in part upon political and media pressure where their brother officers are getting hung out to dry.  They feel "that could be me" and they don't want to participate in the team under those conditions.  Those seem like enough reasons to me.

 

But if it's true that the union withdrew support from the SWAT and HRT per link posted above, that's good reason also.

[HappyDays]

41 minutes ago, Meatloaf63 said:

The man defied a curfew, walks into the middle of a police line (Police who are probably exhausted from being over stressed and over worked. Some have been shot at, attacked by people in vehicles.) then puts his hands in the vicinity of the officers holstered  weapon.

 

41 minutes ago, Meatloaf63 said:

That’s called personal responsibility for ones behavior, he came their looking to cause trouble and he found it.

 

Here we go again. The elderly man may or may not have made a poor decision but that does not absolve the police officers of all responsibility. If I walk up to the loudest drunkest guy at the bar and shove him, that is a poor decision. If the guy pulls out a gun and shoots me in the head he is still guilty of murdering me. Police officers are not above that same legal standard. If they respond to a 75 year old man's "poor decision" by pushing him backwards on the pavement, they should be punished the same way anyone else would be.

 

Maybe they got unlucky this time, they certainly didn't mean for the guy to hit his head and get a concussion. But anyone else in that situation would have been charged with assault whether they intended to seriously hurt him or not. A drunk driver who hits a tree is handled very differently if there happens to be a pedestrian in front of the tree at the time. That's how the law has always been applied.

 

This is the point of the entire conversation. The police officers don't get a free pass to do whatever they want because the guy committed a nonviolent misdemeanor. As if his breaking curfew and ignoring a police order means they can be violent. That isn't how it works in any other circumstance. It never ceases to amaze me that so many people are okay with the police having unchecked power in these situations. Pretend they weren't wearing a uniform and punish them the same way you would anyone else in that situation.

Edited June 7, 2020 by HappyDays

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, FireChans said:

We'll see if they are convicted, I guess.

 

Is every cop who shoves a protestor back on the street committing assault?  I mean, we've seen 100s of videos of a line of cops pushing back when protestors encroach, at the WH, at other police lines, etc. Are they all guilty of assault?

 

On the conviction, frankly, it wouldn't surprise me if the DA quietly drops the charges depending upon how things go down.

 

I think there's a question you're not asking, that needs to be asked. 

 

Police convictions are rare, because police have broad "qualified immunity" unless they are violating something "clearly established".  Given that, police are not committing assault if they're using force against protestors consistent with their "rules of engagement".  Therefore, It's Legal.  When the police gun down a guy in broad daylight, It's (usually) Legal.  When they burst into a woman's apartment without announcing themselves as police and fire 22 rounds because her boyfriend with a legal licensed weapon thought he was defending a home invasion and 8 rounds hit and kill her, it's probably Legal.

 

The question not asked is: Is it Right?  Does it have to be that way?  Should it be that way?

 

I think the protests are being prolonged and inflamed by every new video that comes out of police using what appears to be excessive force on demonstrators protesting police use of excessive force - understandably so.

[FireChans]

22 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

 

Here we go again. The elderly man may or may not have made a poor decision but that does not absolve the police officers of all responsibility. If I walk up to the loudest drunkest guy at the bar and shove him, that is a poor decision. If the guy pulls out a gun and shoots me in the head he is still guilty of murdering me. Police officers are not above that same legal standard. If they respond to a 75 year old man's "poor decision" by pushing him backwards on the pavement, they should be punished the same way anyone else would be.

 

Maybe they got unlucky this time, they certainly didn't mean for the guy to hit his head and get a concussion. But anyone else in that situation would have been charged with assault whether they intended to seriously hurt him or not. A drunk driver who hits a tree is handled very differently if there happens to be a pedestrian in front of the tree at the time. That's how the law has always been applied.

 

This is the point of the entire conversation. The police officers don't get a free pass to do whatever they want because the guy committed a nonviolent misdemeanor. As if his breaking curfew and ignoring a police order means they can be violent. That isn't how it works in any other circumstance. It never ceases to amaze me that so many people are okay with the police having unchecked power in these situations. Pretend they weren't wearing a uniform and punish them the same way you would anyone else in that situation.

Uh normal people aren’t allowed to draw weapons on people they think committed a homicide. Cops are.

[FireChans]

12 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

On the conviction, frankly, it wouldn't surprise me if the DA quietly drops the charges depending upon how things go down.

 

I think there's a question you're not asking, that needs to be asked. 

 

Police convictions are rare, because police have broad "qualified immunity" unless they are violating something "clearly established".  Given that, police are not committing assault if they're using force against protestors consistent with their "rules of engagement".  Therefore, It's Legal.  When the police gun down a guy in broad daylight, It's (usually) Legal.  When they burst into a woman's apartment without announcing themselves as police and fire 22 rounds because her boyfriend with a legal licensed weapon thought he was defending a home invasion and 8 rounds hit and kill her, it's probably Legal.

 

The question not asked is: Is it Right?  Does it have to be that way?  Should it be that way?

 

I think the protests are being prolonged and inflamed by every new video that comes out of police using what appears to be excessive force on demonstrators protesting police use of excessive force - understandably so.

You’re right and that is the question. We simply need the police to police their own, so to speak. 

 

“Apply the law equally to everyone” is a silly argument because on-duty officers cannot operate under the same law as civillians. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

The Mayor does not justify pushing this guy to the ground.  The Mayor just kissing a little BPD heinie there...just like DiBlasio did, at first,  after police drive a van into a crowd.

 

Did I mishear, or in that video was the mayor saying the officers were "Highway Patrol officers"?  Thought they were identified as BPD?

[Cripple Creek]

2 hours ago, D. L. Hot-Flamethrower said:

This isn't some neo-liberal vs. right-wing issue, this is basic humanity and common sense......you are way off kilter with this and other responses. I'm guessing you don't think you'd ever be in that position yourself but if you were you'd expect to be treated in a similar fashion as you espouse- by law enforcement. That was sarcasm. You should reevaluate and soon.

I'm not sure why, but something tells me that ol' "happy" isn't the introspective type.  The 75 year old got what he deserved.  Floyd probably too, in his mind.  You do the crime you do the time.No knock warrant shoot em up? Those people shouldn't have been living there.  Not the fault of the cops.  That woman died in her bed because of choices she made.

[Mr. WEO]

57 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Did I mishear, or in that video was the mayor saying the officers were "Highway Patrol officers"?  Thought they were identified as BPD?

BPD

[Dirtbag]

2 hours ago, Cripple Creek said:

I'm not sure why, but something tells me that ol' "happy" isn't the introspective type.  The 75 year old got what he deserved.  Floyd probably too, in his mind.  You do the crime you do the time.No knock warrant shoot em up? Those people shouldn't have been living there.  Not the fault of the cops.  That woman died in her bed because of choices she made.

 

nothing good happens on a city street after 8 pm. time to bust heads.

[hjnick]

On 6/6/2020 at 3:12 PM, Logic said:

I find it weird how people that are offended by Kaep’s protest AREN’T offended by the constant onslaught of ads during NFL games trying to sell them alcohol.

 

I’d rather see one 2-minute silent protest before a game than 37 beer ads during it. Raising attention for a worthy and vital social cause is far more noble than taking advantage of captive viewership to try to sell them a product linked to addiction, disease and death.

 

Put another way: if you find a quick, silent, peaceful protest profane and distasteful, but you don’t find the constant barrage of advertising profane, I question where your heart lies. And if you say “well, the NFL needs the ad money!”, guess what? They also need the black players.

Worst logic Logic.  If Kaep wanted to produce a TV ad and play it during football games, I have no problem with that.

 

Intentionally being provocative at work to produce a controversy while working AND disrespecting a good majority of the American public, which cost the NFL many millions of dollars.  That is why Kaep will probably never be a QB again.

 

Even during press conferences after games or press interviews to share his views would have been ok IMO.  But out on the football field on Sunday in his teams uniform, I'm sorry I don't agree with it.

On 6/6/2020 at 3:32 PM, Logic said:

If folks don't like the beer ad comparison, how about the "Salute to Service" week?

If people feel that football is not the right forum for political/social issues and the league should "stick to sports", shouldn't we stop with the military flyovers, camouflage gear, and troops at games?

Curious, why is the military and saluting military personnel political or a social issue?  Dems/Repubs/Libertarians/Independents all participate in military service.

[Logic]

14 minutes ago, hjnick said:

 

Curious, why is the military and saluting military personnel political or a social issue?  Dems/Repubs/Libertarians/Independents all participate in military service.

By that logic, why is kneeling to bring attention to the murder of black people a political issue? Dems/Repubs/Libertarians/Independents, I would hope, all support bringing an end to systemic racism. The fact that "stop killing black people" is thought of as a political or partisan view is part of the problem.

[hjnick]

On 6/6/2020 at 3:58 PM, SDS said:

How would you like me to answer that? Composition of votes? Party registration? One example would be the presidential election in 2016. Trump received an astounding 62% of the white male vote (64% of which had a high school education or less). 
 

https://www.people-press.org/2018/08/09/an-examination-of-the-2016-electorate-based-on-validated-voters/

 

Demographics of conservative talk radio (where white men listen to other white men discuss what is wrong with everyone else not like them) is overwhelmingly middle-age white men. 
 

Anything else?

 

SDS,

 

In any of these cities where all this brutality is happening, which Political party is in power? 

 

Who voted for Trump has nothing to do with this issue.  Trump does not control the police force in Baltimore, NYC, Minneapolis, LA, Washington DC, Chicago.  The other party controls ALL the levers of power in those cities.  AND in most cases the other party has been in power there for MANY DECADES!

 

Maybe you should look at Biden who signed and championed the Crime Bill that put in many black people into jails....

 

 

[Logic]

16 minutes ago, hjnick said:

 

SDS,

 

In any of these cities where all this brutality is happening, which Political party is in power? 

 

Who voted for Trump has nothing to do with this issue.  Trump does not control the police force in Baltimore, NYC, Minneapolis, LA, Washington DC, Chicago.  The other party controls ALL the levers of power in those cities.  AND in most cases the other party has been in power there for MANY DECADES!

 

Maybe you should look at Biden who signed and championed the Crime Bill that put in many black people into jails....

 

 

Horseshit.

You might want to look at the data again:

https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/cities

[hjnick]

2 minutes ago, Logic said:

By that logic, why is kneeling to bring attention to the murder of black people a political issue? Dems/Repubs/Libertarians/Independents, I would hope, all support bringing an end to systemic racism. The fact that "stop killing black people" is thought of as a political or partisan view is part of the problem.

We are all for stopping the unnecessary violence towards blacks, whites, asians, hispanics, when in the custody of the police.  The George Floyd incident has put 99.9% of everyone on the same side.  The cop that did this should be put away for a LONG LONG time.

 

It's a political issue because of different groups that have made this political.  Black Lives Matter as a group is a far left group.  Antifa is a WAY far left group. Both of these group have politicized this.

 

I've seen many videos where Trump supporters wanted to come out and protest with all the other protestors, just to be shunned and ran out with the threat of violence.