Buying a TV while Black

[theprestige]

Awful lot of anecdotes about shoplifting scams in thread about a man who did not, in fact, shoplift.

Like most ISF threads, there wasn't much left to discuss after the first page or so, and naturally digressions have emerged.

You're complaining about the digressions, but you could have used that post to raise some central point from the OP that hasn't yet been discussed.

 

[theprestige]

I may have missed something in this thread, but I keep seeing speculation and reading stories about return scams (some of which are undoubtedly germane to the issue of return scams), but does anyone here actually know for a fact whether or not the people in question had documentation or receipts for the TV when they returned it? Not the usual speculation about what sometimes happens, or what they expect happened, or some dirt about their past, etc., but actual knowledge of what transaction was occurring?

We don't know that for a fact. Anyone who asks (as you have done) gets a veiled (or not so veiled) accusation of racism thrown at them. That said, it's probably not too important.

I would like to know what the cops were told, and what they were thinking, in the run-up to the violence, but that's more out of curiosity/completionism, than any expectation of mitigating circumstances for their actions on video.

 

[Thermal]

We don't know that for a fact. Anyone who asks (as you have done) gets a veiled (or not so veiled) accusation of racism thrown at them. That said, it's probably not too important.

I would like to know what the cops were told, and what they were thinking, in the run-up to the violence, but that's more out of curiosity/completionism, than any expectation of mitigating circumstances for their actions on video.

This. As with all stories, at a bare minimum we need both sides opening arguments. Preferably some evidence to weigh.

This gig of skeptics running rampant with one side of the story is just jaw dropping

 

[Skeptic Tank]

To me, it has always seemed the natural role of a skeptic to hear a story presented in the media as "horrible racist treatment of black people has happened again, black man beaten and/or killed for no reason at all!" and then say "Hmm, I bet there's more to this story"

I don't see why so many here want to shut down that sort of reaction to these stories.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Sorry

I'm sad because you're not wrong...

 

[TurkeysGhost]

We don't know that for a fact. Anyone who asks (as you have done) gets a veiled (or not so veiled) accusation of racism thrown at them. That said, it's probably not too important.

I would like to know what the cops were told, and what they were thinking, in the run-up to the violence, but that's more out of curiosity/completionism, than any expectation of mitigating circumstances for their actions on video.

It strikes me as odd that these cops can't arrest an unarmed man without breaking 3 of his teeth and requiring him to get staples and stitches in his head.

Regardless of the justification for the arrest, this is poor work from professional law enforcement.

Edit: The false arrest claim is largely a separate issue from the grotesque overuse of force here.

 

[ponderingturtle]

It strikes me as odd that these cops can't arrest an unarmed man without breaking 3 of his teeth.

Regardless of the justification for the arrest, this is poor work from professional law enforcement.

Hey they were perfectly capable of it, never question their competence. It is just much less fun.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Lack of receipt wouldn't be an issue. The policies you link to said quite clearly that while a receipt is requested, it isn't required.

Store credit wouldn't be an issue, the policies you linked to said quite clearly that refunds were issues as cash or credit to the purchasing card, not store credit.

Numerous others of you speculations contradict the supposed police reasoning that they believed the TV was stolen.

So you're in a strange position of being curious enough to type out a lot of speculation, but not curious enough to read your own link or the other source links that make your speculation pointless.

It reminds me a bit of your Michelle Obama post and your every post on issues of racism and police brutality. You work so hard to give a facade of reasonability to a desperate search to smear black people and liberals with any plausibly deniable attack.

I wonder if I can imagine some reasons you're like this:

Nah, I'll leave the exercises in imaginative BS to the experts like you.

This is the kind of post that keeps me coming back here. Shame there's no "Forensically dissecting the crap" Award.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

If we were in Georgia, could I arrest you now?

Dave

Arrest? You can point a shotgun at him and if he tries to stop you, shoot him, that's self defence*

* Minimum melatonin levels may apply, please consult your local Dulux Colour Store for confirmation.

 

[johnny karate]

To me, it has always seemed the natural role of a skeptic to hear a story presented in the media as "horrible racist treatment of black people has happened again, black man beaten and/or killed for no reason at all!" and then say "Hmm, I bet there's more to this story"

I don't see why so many here want to shut down that sort of reaction to these stories.

Cool.

Here’s you insisting that a racist murderer was acting in self-defense despite all evidence to the contrary.

Tell us more about how skepticism works.

 

[bruto]

This. As with all stories, at a bare minimum we need both sides opening arguments. Preferably some evidence to weigh.

This gig of skeptics running rampant with one side of the story is just jaw dropping

I was thinking it works rather the other way too. The sorts who are always trying to justify such attacks have thrown in the possibility that what he was doing looked worse than it was, and thus that it's reasonable to go and smash his head in when he doesn't immediately kowtow like the thief he knows he isn't, for the second time in the same store.

In so many of these recent cases, it seems that the victim gets blamed for his attitude, or his belligerence, but how is one supposed to react when attacked for no good reason? There seems, for many, to be an assumption that if you're a ****** you ought to know you are running under a different set of rules, and have no right to be indignant.

 

[theprestige]

I was thinking it works rather the other way too. The sorts who are always trying to justify such attacks have thrown in the possibility that what he was doing looked worse than it was, and thus that it's reasonable to go and smash his head in when he doesn't immediately kowtow like the thief he knows he isn't, for the second time in the same store.

I don't think I've seen anything like that in this thread. Do you have an example?

 

[smartcooky]

Not familiar with two of your examples, but of the other two (Guyger and McMichaels), one is in prison for murder and the other two under arrest for same and awaiting trial. So the police pretty clearly can't do what you claim they can.

Rubbish.

The fact that they did it means they can do it. I said nothing about getting away with it without consequences. The point is, these things should not even be happening in the first place.

Also, in a nation of a third of a billion people, there are going to be occasional outliers of hateful injustice. Please don't insult all of us with that wide brush of yours.

If you believe the incidence of white cops killing black people are "occasional outliers", then you are living in a river in North East Africa, you are deluding yourself. Racism in the USA is pervasive and chronic, it infests the political alt-right and far-right. It also infests law enforcement from coast to coast, and this is especially so in the old south.

These sorts of things do not happen to people of predominantly one race or skin colour in any other free democracy in the world. How often do you see white cops gunning down innocent black people in Canada, or in France, UK, Italy, Germany, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Switzerland or any other country in greater Europe (which incidentally, have a combined population 50% greater than 'Merica!!?

 

[smartcooky]

I think he's saying it's ok to shoot him for that.

But only if he's black!

 

[smartcooky]

Awful lot of anecdotes about shoplifting scams in thread about a man who did not, in fact, shoplift.

Yeah, but that man is black - that alone is enough to make some people suspicious and to come up with any irrelevant bollocks they can to put the heat on the "probably guilty of something" black man, while doing everything they can to make excuses for the "just doing his job" white cop who is wearing the halo.

 

[Robin]

Most of us wondered "Maybe there is more to this story" in the first five minutes and then went and did a bit of research.

The ones saying "Maybe he was returning a box full of bricks" or "Maybe he was returning an old television set and bullying the clerk into not checking" don't appear to have done that research.

 

[Robin]

I may have missed something in this thread, but I keep seeing speculation and reading stories about return scams (some of which are undoubtedly germane to the issue of return scams), but does anyone here actually know for a fact whether or not the people in question had documentation or receipts for the TV when they returned it? Not the usual speculation about what sometimes happens, or what they expect happened, or some dirt about their past, etc., but actual knowledge of what transaction was occurring?

Do we have any reason to doubt that the transaction that was occurring was just as set out in the complaint?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I may have missed something in this thread, but I keep seeing speculation and reading stories about return scams (some of which are undoubtedly germane to the issue of return scams), but does anyone here actually know for a fact whether or not the people in question had documentation or receipts for the TV when they returned it? Not the usual speculation about what sometimes happens, or what they expect happened, or some dirt about their past, etc., but actual knowledge of what transaction was occurring?

Occam's razor cuts this one down pretty easily.

Both were arrested on the scene on suspicion of theft and the TV was seized by the police. Later, the TV was returned to the customers. While they charged the mother with interference and resisting arrest, no charges for any kind of theft were forthcoming.

It's hard to imagine a scenario where there was any evidence of theft and the police returning the TV and not charging them.

The simplest explanation is that the TV was not stolen.

 

[theprestige]

Most of us wondered "Maybe there is more to this story" in the first five minutes and then went and did a bit of research.

It's the OP's job to do research on the items they post about.

The ones saying "Maybe he was returning a box full of bricks" or "Maybe he was returning an old television set and bullying the clerk into not checking" don't appear to have done that research.

Life's to short to crawl through crappy news outlet websites trying to figure out what might have happened, just because someone's going to accuse you of racism if you don't. If shemp wanted to tell a complete story, or even have an accurate thread title, he could have done that.

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

If you believe the incidence of white cops killing black people are "occasional outliers", then you are living in a river in North East Africa, you are deluding yourself. Racism in the USA is pervasive and chronic, it infests the political alt-right and far-right. It also infests law enforcement from coast to coast, and this is especially so in the old south.

How did you learn so much about racism in the US living way over there in New Zealand? Do you have any way of qualifying your statement that racism is "pervasive and chronic" in the US? How about that it "infests law enforcement from coast to coast"? And finally that it's "especially so" in the South?