Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sr K who wrote (59449)	7/26/2009 10:47:35 AM
From: Bread Upon The Water	Respond to of 149317

It first had to be established that he was the owner and/or lessee and even if you are the owner/lessee that does not permit you to give the PO any lip if that at all detracts from the PO discharging his duties. (I'm not saying lip was given--it's an unknown--although apparently there is a tape of the proceeding.) As the home would have been registered on the tax rolls to the owner (which you have told me wasn't Gates) it appears there was an open question as to what Gates connection to the house was. Additonally, PO's often have to respond fast to fluid situations and as a result often are bit emotionally incapable of having nice rational chats at that moment. (Which is why one should be as rational as possible oneself in that situation.) Also, IMHO, if we don't want to discourage people from becoming police officers we need to cut them some slack, give them the benefit of the doubt, in these type of situations for the good of society as a whole. (I'm not talking about when they shoot someone or beat up someone with no apprent justification.) This is also why most states have laws on their books which give their cops the right to charge someone with disorderly conduct who lips them off (again not saying Gates lipped anyone off--unknown). And likewise it would be interesting to know what Gates first comment was also. The case is a microcoism for dissecting one's views about the role of police vs. would be suspects and we all are gong to bring our personal experiences with police and bias to the table in discussing it.

To: Sr K who wrote (59449)	7/26/2009 11:37:30 AM
From: ChinuSFO	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

This is how the Canadians see it. Notice the letters from the readers at the end of this news item. =========================================== EDITORIAL Of race and the police Jul 25, 2009 04:30 AM Two events in the news this week – one here in Toronto, the other south of the border – tell us that we have not yet entered a post-racial nirvana where skin colour is irrelevant. In Toronto, the human rights tribunal said a police officer, Michael Shaw, was guilty of racial profiling when he stopped a black letter carrier delivering mail in the wealthy Bridle Path neighbourhood, questioned him, trailed him, and asked a white letter carrier to verify his identity. The fact that the letter carrier "was an African Canadian in an affluent neighbourhood was a factor, a significant factor, and probably the predominant factor, whether consciously or unconsciously, in Const. Shaw's actions," the human rights adjudicator found. In response, Police Chief Bill Blair defended the constable and suggested the human rights tribunal has "a seriously flawed misunderstanding of the duties of a police officer." In Cambridge, Mass., a black Harvard professor, Henry Louis Gates Jr., was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct in his own home after an altercation with a police officer investigating a report of a possible break-in. The Cambridge police department later dropped the charge and said the incident was "regrettable and unfortunate." But the officer himself, James Crowley, has refused to apologize. Muddying the waters in these cases is that both Blair in Toronto and Crowley in Cambridge have exemplary records in the area of racial profiling. Under Blair, the Toronto police have worked hard with human rights officials to make sure officers are trained to deal with diversity in the city. "They're making a lot of progress," agrees Barbara Hall, chair of the human rights commission. As for Crowley, he is regarded as an expert on racial profiling and has taught a class on the subject at a police academy. All of which suggests, as President Barack Obama said in his news conference this week (see opposite), that while "incredible progress" has been made in race relations, "this still haunts us." thestar.com

To: Sr K who wrote (59449)	7/26/2009 12:49:49 PM
From: Little Joe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

"He had a right to be in his home. The police officer should have known who the occupant/owner of the house was before approaching the house or knocking on the door." How do you think the officer would have known "...who the occupant/owner of the house was before approaching the house or knocking on the door." Even if he knew the persons name, how could he know that the person he encountered was Gates, since, presumbably, he did not know him. Suppose he had knocked on the door and someone had answered and identified himself as Gates and the officer left and in fact Gates was in the house and was later killed by the intruders. What do you think would have happened. lj