… I’d imagine they’re ignoring it, as it doesn’t fit their narrative of cops vs. thugs and savages
More likely they’d admonish the cop for breaking one of the basic tenets of “white privilege”: Handle very gently… if at all.
Ah right… a different meaning for “bad cop”.
That is probably referred to officially as a “Courtesy Shooting”.
I wonder if they’ll continue with their “back the blue” sentiment, with large amounts of cognitive dissonance, or if they’ll get so angry that, even as the “right sort” of people, they didn’t get treated the way they thought they should be, and become extremely anti-cop. I’ve seen both happen…
Welcome to “back the blue” 2-tier justice system. This is where you belong, all ACAB supporters.
At this rate, the leopards will run out of faces to eat. His melanin level had shielded him from most of the bullshit others has to put up in their life, sometimes with their life literally at risk. This is as privileged blind as much as possible one can get. This jackass doesn’t understand that his action doesn’t mean shit. His life depends on the cop’s mood at the moment. He just found out now, like the freaking blind he is.
It sounds like the son was there during the encounter. If nothing else, the occurrence could have left a lasting and accurate impression of what cops are and what his father wants him to back: Empowered monsters.
“No, thanks, I could eat another face… burp.”
Typical conservative; Nearly devoid of empathy. They can’t understand something unless it happens to them.
I truly would have been surprised if they had a K-9 dog bite the family dog.
“I back the blue. I support the blue. Like, I always want to show him that, you know, you submit to these guys. That you’re supposed to be able to trust them.”
This was the part that just about made me spit out my Altoid. That poor kid is being taught some seriously damaging bullshit.
Yeah, this should be one of those “teachable moments”
And so, in true conservative fashion, it wasn’t a problem as long as it was happening to everyone else, but it’s a big fucking deal now that it’s happening to me.
OK, that’s how you feel about a vacuous slogan used by nincompoops to get out of thinking. But how about the gangs of armed thugs who actually exist and have absolute power over you in the grown-up world?
I sometimes wonder whether the ‘Back the Blue’ approach isn’t also some form of ritual to protect themselves from it. If they’re suitably submissive and supportive at home, they’ll be proved correct when they do interact with police.
The ACLU will be representing the family.
Isn’t that a tad bit ironic?
… it works with God, doesn’t it
Not really no. The ACLU has generally had a history of supporting issues not particular types of individuals. Let’s not forget that they supported nazis and their right to free speech back in the 70s…
I was going to ask if it’s at all strategic. Do they think it’s a particularly good case? Or might enable them to get more people like the defendant on their side moving forward?
“I back the blue. I support the blue. Like, I always want to show him that, you know, you submit to these guys. That you’re supposed to be able to trust them.”
Well… yeah. You are supposed to be able to trust them. The fact that you absolutely, definitely can’t is kinda the whole problem that everyone you disagree with has been trying to point out.