The national media was all over this shocking case. Who would brutally murder this whole family? It was assumed, due to the “personal” nature of the crime (throat slashing), that the killer was someone known to the family. Someone very angry at them. The media tried to pick this mystery apart, and covered the story closely. This was a well-known and well-liked Richmond family–what had they done to bring this on?

It wasn’t long before the mystery was solved. Someone confessed, and two guys–complete strangers to the Harveys–were soon arrested for the murders.

Wait–you never heard about this case? This horrifying quadruple murder committed by total strangers in broad daylight? That’s because the national media abruptly dropped all coverage once the killers–black men–were caught. The Harveys were a white family, and the media was only interested when it was assumed that they had been killed by a (presumably white) friend or relative. These murders–no less horrifying than the Manson murders–were “forgotten” by the national media overnight.

you see it in cases where vain women are unable to stand other women nearby, hysterically seeing them as sinister competition, out to “get” them somehow. examples of this are marilyn monroe’s famous demand that ‘no other blonde be onscreen with her’. or nancy pelosi’s sytematic elimination of women in the (house) democrat party’s power structure. other textbook examples are the “overly jealous insecure boy/girlfriend” archetype; or, as in your case, the person insecure about his/her intellect calling everyone else ‘dumb’. (i believe you tried to dress up your childish insults as a pontification about ‘limitations’. unsubtle, true, but amusing anyway.)

your overwhelming urge to have the last word is also quite telling, to those who can see.

please: seek help. it’s a bright beautiful world out there, jmk, if you could only tear yourself away from the seductive siren call of the beautiful, beautiful mirror. ahhhh, well. perhaps i’m asking too much of you. as you said: “limitations”.

I’ve carefully and in painstaking detail, explained to you that the police DO have “broader latitude” with the use of force than you or I, as civilians do.

That’s a fact. Their jobs require that somewhat broader latitude and it is granted by law.

You’re obviously unable to refute that or you would look up a source (as I have) and you’d claim that “This source refutes that.”

You haven’t because you can’t, as there is no such source.

The police are given broader latitude when it comes the use of force. That “broader latitude” means more of a “benefit of the doubt” and a “higher standard” needed to prove wrong-doing in such cases.

That is NEITHER “super-special” nor remotely the same as “not held accountable to the same laws.”

You apparently don’t even understand the argument.

That’s not your fault.

I accept your limitations.

I’ve been very patient and explained it all very carefully, and added real-life examples to clarify those explanations.

You’ve refused to read them, you apparently don’t understand the basic concepts involved, so you’re trapped within your own limitations.

I’m honestly surprised that you seem to have your feelings hurt (not my intent), but believe me, I’m on my best behavior here. I generally don’t suffer fools gladly, but I took a stab and made an exception here because it seemed such a basic, easy-to-understand misconception of yours to clarify for you.

Maybe if you were able to read that first post through, you might have gotten it, but again…limitations.

it was never about your sadly specious argument about why you think cops should be granted “super-special” legal status, above and beyond those of us who don’t carry badges. this is america: if you want to bleat “bless our security forces” as we slide down the slope towards police-statedom, well…this is america. you can do what you want. believe what you want, no matter how ridiculous.

what it was *about* was your predilictions toward verbosity: using 50 words where anyone else would make do with…you know….2 or 3. i’m not the only person here to have commented on it; but i – good guy that i am – wanted to help you become a better person. even your beloved security forces wouldn’t accept **long-winded** prayers for them at your hand-made shrine.

sadly, it went right over your head. i’m not sure what we can ascribe your long-windedness to, jmk: there may be deep psychological reasons for it – and your didacticism – or it may be something as simple yet unpleasant as mere arrogance; or perhaps an egotistical refusal to be bound be the rules & customs that hinder others.

i truly hope all this doesn’t come across as offensive. but if i can’t help you with this little bit of understanding, there’s little hope for you.

just being honest!

I carefully explained to you why.

YOU came back with a snarky response and I again told you why you were wrong and how your insistance on failing to understand the difference between two very basic concepts (“greater latitude” and “subject to the same laws”) didn’t bode well for you.

It doesn’t.

You responded to my initial post that answered your question with an answer and real-life examples that demonstrated that with a poorly thought-out non-argument that I felt warranted what I said in response.

The fact that you now acknowledge that you didn’t read my initial answer to you, shows that you’re not interested in knowing why the police have a “broader latitude” in the use of force than do civilians.

Like I said, “I can’t help you with that bit of basic understanding, if those above real-life examples didn’t help, there’s little hope.”

That’s not being “snippy,” just honest.

and since you’ve decided to get all snippy, let me just say i hope that you don’t have jury duty anytime soon, too! judges & lawyers don’t look too kindly towards folks who insist on droning on & on & on when there’s a trial they’re supposed to be paying attention to. when you do that on the web, we just ignore you. do it in a courtroom, and you’ll be tossed in jail. perhaps you’ll be able to hero-worship the cops there. who knows? but you have a nice day, now, ok?

I’m sorry you have a problem with that (eye strain?), but your bigger problem seems to be basic reading comprehension.

Maybe your eyes got tired, but as I pointed out, the police ARE by statute (that’s by law) given broader latitude than you and I (as civilians) in the use of force. That’s a fact of life and there’s a good reason for those laws.

The police ARE however, subject to the VERY SAME laws as you and I and are even subject to departmental regulations and procedures that can have police booted off the job even when some their actions are found to be otherwise within the law.

The reason the law gives the police that broader latitude is because they’re jobs require them to intervene when they see a crime occurring, and they are required to confront dangerous felons as a part of their job. They are paid to act as an “enforcement arm” of the government, enforcing and upholding its laws.

Above, I gave you a number of examples of that latitude.

I can see why you were unable to construct an argument, that’s not easy to do when you don’t understand the difference between concepts like “broader latitude” and “subject to the same law.”

I can’t help you with that bit of basic understanding, if those above real-life examples didn’t help, there’s little hope.

I hope you don’t get called to serve on a jury any time soon, as those kinds of things come into play pretty routinely.

so why didn’t you just say so? see how i did that in just a couple of sentences?

ok, now you try! remember: brevity! always brevity! bandwidth isn’t free, ya know!

Certainly true on “white and Hispanic,” as a neat little media/law enforcement trick is their listing most Hispanic on black violence as “white on black ‘HATE’ crimes,” while any white on Hispanic crime is listed as “white on Hispanic ‘HATE’ crimes.”

I haven’t seen that done with Asians, though to be honest, Asians have one of the lowest violent crime rates, to this point.

Another similar trick is that almost all white on black acts of random violence (muggings, etc) are presumed to be “hate crimes.”

There’s actually no such thing as a “hate crime,” it’s an artifical construct, as ALL violent crime is motivated by “hate” or antipathy and this category actually exists solely in order to excuse some similar crimes being taken more seriosuly than others. In that regard, the concept of “hate crimes” actaully violates the principle of “equal protection before the law.”

At any rate, while virtually all random white on black violence is presumed to be a “hate crime,” most black on white violence is NOT. It is generally explained away as violence in the perpetration of another crime (robbery, etc).

In that way so-called “hate crime” stats are rigged and worthless.

The entire concept of “hate crimes” should be abhored by ANY and ALL decent people who respect the principle of “equality before the law.”

Why should a black victimized by another black be deemed “unluckier” and worthy of less justice than a black mugged by an Hispanic or white?

Not to mention the obvious question of why are most “Hispanic on black crimes listed as “white on black,” while in white on Hispanic crimes, Hispanics are listed within their own racial derviation???

First off…  any spambots reading this should immediately go here, here, here,  and here.  Die spambots, die!  And now…  here are all the links submitted by members of the Watcher’s Council for this week’s vote. Council li…

You didn’t mention that a few days later, two jurors responded to the white juror’s article and gave their version of the story. And it wasn’t race, it was a matter of the policeman lying on the stand or not lying on the stand. It was based upon the time the policeman stated was needed to get from one area to another area and the jurors didn’t believe the timeline.

The last letter in that exchange was from the original white juror. Again, if I remember correctly, he stated he grew up with the idea that the police are to be trusted and given the benefit of the doubt. Meanwhile, there were jurors who stated they know that police are capable of lying. He then admitted that race may not have been a factor, just previous contacts with the police.

FYI: two weeks ago DC Council gave $3.8 million to the NAACP, the masters of race hustling and poverty pimping to relocate their offices from Baltimore to DC. What good are they? What have they ever done for anyone, let along Baltimore. As usual, no outrage.

And just as I responded to Project 21, what’s the difference between the NAACP office and D.C. funding of baseball? Project 21 didn’t like the idea of tax breaks going to the NAACP, but the umbrella group of Project 21 is a non-profit and also gets tax breaks.

The same thing is now occurring in Prince George’s County which is experiencing a higher violent crime rate than Baghdad.

When you look at the violent crime, you see it occurs mostly inside the Beltway.

When the white professional asked why, the blacks responded that the “system” is responsible and therefore, even though they believed the thug guilty, he didn’t deserve punishment. But what about the black victim? It was of no concern. And what if he should kill again the white guy asked. Again, of no concern. Six months later after getting away literally with murder, he killed another young black youth. This is not an isolated incident in DC.

(And don’t forget the “Don’t Snitch” t-shirts. That’s the way to stick it to the “Man”!)

I have been complaining about this for almost two decades that black people have been dropping like flies here in DC for 40(!!) years in this majority black city and no one cares. Our leaders, political, civic, and religious, only become interested in poor blacks when there’s a political payoff – namely exploiting the biggest shakedown of all time: white guilt. Otherwise they are too busy to be concerned with blacks, especially poor ones, because they have better things to do, like fighting “racism” and working for “social justice”. The same thing is now occurring in Prince George’s County which is experiencing a higher violent crime rate than Baghdad.

FYI: two weeks ago DC Council gave $3.8 million to the NAACP, the masters of race hustling and poverty pimping to relocate their offices from Baltimore to DC. What good are they? What have they ever done for anyone, let along Baltimore. As usual, no outrage.

No one will pay attention to you. It will be ignored.