caw!.......caw! polly wants a cracker? ........caw! .... systemic racism! ...... caw!

@NoSheep. ............ your just a wnnderful barrel of movement cliches. and foul mouthed too! dream goil! ive found you at last!

Not sure. Need more information. "Homicide and manslaughter" infers INTENT not a random accident.

I think the real issue is poor training. Most officers are really not trained to deal with these types of chases. It really does take more than just being able to drive a car.
Until there is accountability for actions nothing will change. I hope the back lash is people who decide to go into the business of protect and serve get the best training in all areas so they can be the best at the job they chose to do.

@silverotter11 So what would have happened if the carjacker killed someone? We would be asking why more wasn't done to pursue him BEFOREHAND.

@Flowerwall Not persuing is an option. Siren blaring and pedal to the medal makes the bad guy run harder and faster. Every country has crime but the countries with way less of what we are seeing in the U.S. have far fewer disenfranchised people of all ages.

@silverotter11 What do you do? Do you send the message to carjackers that they are in no need of worrying about pursuit? I don't think that is the message to send even though people have disagreed and done the opposite.

one out of 3 black males has a felony record. one out of 17 whites has one. the ratio of black to white violent felony records seems to be a state secret, my racist radar makes my wonder it its even darker. in any case theres nothing accidental about it. does anyvbody have this urgently relevant statistic? and if we could get it, what would it be "just another example of "?

minneapolis has real problems with its criminal underclass

@holdenc98 Sadly the stats simply say felony record but what are the details? Man black men are chaged with a crime that if a white man had been the felon he would be charged with a lesser offense.
There are degrees of offenses. In many places in this country a black person stealing food to feed the family will be treated much more harshly than a white person doing the same thing. The black person will get a felony criminal record and the white in mnay cases will not. So I am not a fan of these sort of stats.

@silverotter11 i guess your not from NYC and have never heard of the famous manhattan district judge whose nick-name was "turn em loose bruce". it seems to me that judicial inconsistency is very much a mixed picture, and it in no way cancels the "under the rug"' issue of statisticly clear black criminality. but i very much thank you for your civil and reasoned reply. some other babe here called me a "psychopath". youre a refreshing change. and now we might talk of reasonable alternative policies to fix atleast the edgesof the problem: developing better alternative non lethal weapons for cops, better screening and therapy for the not uncommon nut cops, and best of all. weeding the criminal sociopaths from black society, and halting their breeding. sorry, but i ve got to question that " jean valjean" nonsense about blacks stealing to feed their families. whitey's give away entitlement food stamps feed their burgeoning families. they steal mainly to feed their drug habits. oh oh, there i go again, with that psychopath talk.

9oh oh, there i go ah

@holdenc98 Statistics are an awful yardstick a lot of the time.
They can be, and often are manipulated.
They reduce everything to numbers.
They hardly ever reveal the human cost or factors of what they're being used to portray.

There are far too many contributing elements in the case of "crime", for anyone to place blame solely on one group of people.

I'm also wondering what you mean by "criminal underclass"?
That's one of those phrases that can be used to mean several different things.

@holdenc98 statistics certainly don’t lie….
….however, statisticians do!

@KKGator .as leonard bernstein put it in his musical WEST SIDE STORY , "theyre depraved on account of their deprived"

@holdenc98 That's a rather piss poor answer.

Btw, they're.

@KKGator ....just tryin to keep in step with you

btw, theyre what?. " theyre real, and their spectacular "?

a.b.l.

always be literal

And most definitely NOT as an "In-House" Investigation by the Police themselves in my opinion.
There needs to be set up an completely Independent from the Police Services an Investigation Board/Committee empowered to investigate ALL matters dubious, etc, concerning police actions/activities, etc, with the right and power to level charges, demand dismissals and whatever punishments they so deem required.

you mean like mr floyd's history of fentinyl abuse?... play hard, but play fair.

@holdenc98 So how was Floyd's fentinyl abuse significant in deciding if it was right or not to kneel on his neck until he was dead?

@ToakReon ............. no one here want to exonerate cops. certainly not me, ive experienced cop borderline sociopathy. my issue is that bald faced sanctification of criminal floyd in our bad joke for an honest press.

@ToakReon, @DenoPenno yes, it was very wrong. and floyd was a criminal who set the stage.

@DenoPenno, @ToakReon ..and besides, its far from clear if floyd was killed by the inexcusable kneeling or the inexcusable fentinyl. the "expert testimony" doctor quack for the prosecution in that kangaroo show trial was a bad joke, don't you think?

@holdenc98 You're rather sounding as if you either 'want to exonerate cops', or you have no faith in your justice system, or both. Now mistrusting your justice system (your 'doctor quack for the prosecution in that kangaroo show trial' comment) I can understand - there are, indeed, incidents of courts and trials being dodgy, but beware of assuming them so just because evidence is presented that you dislike.

@ToakReon did you not see me, in my 3rd comment above, to you, speak of "cop borderline sociopathy" ? how is that " sounding as if you 'want to exonerate cops' "? you can have your chioce of boobie prizes: an optitians cloth for your reading glasses or half a bottle of my dementia medicine.

there is nothing lower on earth than a lawyer.

@holdenc98 Yes, I did see 'cop borderline sociopathy' and then I also read how you chose to discard evidence at a trial by declaring the witness to be 'the quack doctor for the prosecution in that kangaroo show trial' because you didn't like what that witness said, and you didn't like a trial that held borderline sociopathic cops to account.

When your own words make statements about your position on the matter, and then you hurl 'bottle of my dementia medicine' comments because someone inconveniently quotes the words you yourself posted that you now find inconvenient and would rather they ignored, then that says nothing about me - and a great deal about you.

@ToakReon............. what's that, sonny?
my hearing aid was off. ........reading my motivations from tea leaves again?
and those meandering comaless compound clauses, its like the grand canyon in there.......but you like me....right?

@holdenc98 Nice try.

@ToakReon .....evaluating the credibility of a witness has always been at the core of the jurys function of weighing evidence. duh?

@ToakReon ps ........my medicine for "dementia" is zanaz, 1.125 mg, t.i.d. or prm. good stuff

@ToakReon that stuff about reading floyds oxygen levelthrough the tapping of his fingers.... total quackery. thats called evaluating credibility

@holdenc98 Evaluating the credibility of a witness is the function of the trial. They had the information. They evaluated that credibility and made judgement based upon that evaluation.

And now you, who were not there and did not have opportunity to properly evaluate, make your own evaluation - and you believe I should NOT see that as an attempt to promote your own viewpoint?

And, once again, when you can't win the argument you revert to the dementia medicine comments - and you believe that is also not seen as illuminating about you, rather than anything else?

@ToakReon .its "illuminating" of a sense of humor, and a desire to find some positve thing to joke about. to lighten things up. you seem to have a deficiency in both these qualities. i can , and in fact have, already won this "arguement"

and why so sensitive about dementia medicine? relax. i don't care if youre dotty

@holdenc98 Regarding the dementia medicine, it's you that introduced it to the conversation. Not me. You - on two separate occasions. I responded to it on those occasions.

OK - let's do the experiment. Let's watch and see whether you introduce it to the conversation a third time, and then declare that I am the one 'sensitive' because you chose to do so.

The results will be interesting.

As for you winning the argument? Dream on.

@ToakReon i thought the converation was over. im looking to escape it. why are you so sensitive about DEMENTIA MEDICINE ?

@holdenc98 You introduced it to conversation.

Not me - you.

Not once - twice.

That was your decision. Your choice. Not mine. And now you bring it up again.

It's not me whose sensitive about it. I'm only responsing to your own choice of subject.

So are you going to continue to pursue this subject? It's your choice.

@ToakReon no, im not. im going to stop mentioning dementia altogether.. never speak of it again. and i beg your forgiveness for ever bringing it up in the first place. if you have dementia, which im quite sure you do not, its hardly noticable. there are millions of us in this same age bracket with dementia insipidus. they weather it, till one day they croak, and so can you. and i will keep you company throughout. dementos united together in peace and fellowship. some say i have it, but you can't prove it by me. i have no sign of it. i don't have it, thats clear. ..

you might have it.

@holdenc98 Excellent.

Let's let that matter rest.

@ToakReon ...............as you wish.