Faith Linthicum, a labor and delivery nurse at Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center in California, has been forced on leave for writing on Facebook that Stephon Clark, the unarmed black man who was fatally shot by police, “deserved it for being stupid.” This is the latest example of employees being fired for expressing their views outside of work, including prior controversies involving nurses. Update: the hospital has fired Linthicum.
We have previously discussed the issue of when it is appropriate to punishment people for conduct outside of the work place. We have followed cases where people have been fired after boorish or insulting conduct once their names and employers are made known. (here and here and here and here). I often come down on the side of free speech, but some cases directly impact the employer and the underlying business or services. This may be one such case, but it, again, raises the question of what political and social views are protected for employees to express in social media or on their personal time.
As the Sacramento Bee reported, Linthicum posted the following:
“Yeah but he was running from the police jumping over fences and breaking in peoples house…why run??!!! He deserved it for being stupid.”
Linthicum did not speak as a nurse, but activist Christina Arechiga researched her identity and found her Facebook profile. She then posted her background information.
Linthicum’s short statement set off a public outcry on social media. In response, Kaiser Permanente denounced its own nurse for a view that she expressed outside of her job:
“Kaiser Permanente does not tolerate hate or discrimination and has a long history of embracing diversity and inclusion – it remains a place where we welcome everyone. We want to emphasize that the comments expressed by this employee, who is no longer with the organization, do not in any way reflect Kaiser Permanente’s views or actions.”
Linthicum is now being investigated while on leave. People applauded the decision without considering the implications of this “Little Brother” problem where private employers (acting outside of the free speech protections of the first amendment) censor or punish people for their political or social or religious views. There is no indication from Kaiser Permanente how it will monitor the views of employees outside of work, including the standards to apply. Would a posting denouncing the police as racist or deserving the same fate cause a termination? Will Kaiser Permanente also monitor and punish other opinions that the company does not agree with — forcing employees to forego free speech rights in exchange of their employment?
I say good riddance to another Black criminal! And he was stupid, for running from the cops in the dark, particularly in the dark. How stupid do you have to be to not realize that if you black, then it is hard to make you out in the dark? Gee, but I have seen Blacks run across the road at night in front of my car before, and they are darn lucky I wasn’t speeding. Because they are sometimes hard to see until they are in front of the headlights.
The cop has to act to protect his life, and if in the dark, he mistook the phone for a gun, then tough sh*t for the idiot who started it all.
Plus, I wonder how California’s Anti-SLAAP laws apply to this?
https://www.casp.net/california-anti-slapp-first-amendment-law-resources/statutes/
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
For the record, Stephon Clark has not been established as the man alleged to have used a crowbar (not found on Stephon Clark) to break into cars (no goods from these cars were found on Stephon Clark) and oh, he was shot mostly in the back several times and once in the side. He was guilty however of being black in his grandmother’s yard.
To be fair, he was alleged to have been seen running to his grandmother’s home. I used to live 2 blocks from my grandparents home and almost always ran there from the age I was allowed to make that trip by myself until I got a car. He is alleged to have hoped the fence to the yard. I don’t know where he was coming from and whether his route brought him to the back of the home as opposed to the front. I do know he was unarmed and lest we forget, shot in the back, proving once again that no position or response is possible that can’t make police fearful for their life.
Alton Sterling who was pinned to the ground by police was shot and killed and no charges will be brought. The list is long but I don’t want to bore.
Again he was filmed jumping over fences and running through people’s back yards. His clothing matched the description of the person who was breaking into cars. When the police collared him, he ran away from them. (He has a criminal record, btw). Remarkable concatenation of events and reflexes if we assume he was just minding his own business.
I don’t assume anything. I just note that the police have not been able to verify it is the same man as of yet so I imagine neither can you. The autopsy does confirm he was shot in the back.
The investigation isn’t complete and we don’t know enough to exonerate or condemn anyone at this point. I wouldn’t rely in “independent” autopsies, news accounts or the family of the victim. They usually prove themselves wrong.
I’d think if he wasn’t shot 7 times in the back, the police might have mentioned it? I’ll agree the investigation isn’t complete. In this case, the investigation has been taken over by an outside party, but they still have ties to the local police force.
I’d think if he wasn’t shot 7 times in the back
Now, you are just nitpicking. Stephon is the one who chose to run into a dark yard instead of just halting and surrendering to the police. My goodness, under circumstances like that, it was very good shooting skills that allowed them to hit him 7 times at all.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
One of the possible outcomes of surrendering to the police is being shot and killed. You know black people when confronted by police with guns, all have an urge to reach into their waistband containing no gun, for no apparent reason.
Plus, we still don’t know for a fact the person they were initially chasing was the one they killed.
And it won’t make one bit of difference to you when the cops confirm that he was the one responsible. Because he was black, and you are chugging full of resentment.
Stephon was pretty much a career criminal at the ripe old age of 22. Grand theft auto. Robbery. Felony robbery. Assault. Endangering a child. Pimping out prostitutes. 3 domestic violence charges.
If these are the things he was caught doing, you can rest assured there are 50 felonies he got away with. A stay at home dad? Ha! More likely a stay at home drug dealer.
Good riddance. Only in the screwed up Black Community is poor old Stephon a martyr.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
And in what community is seven times in the back a good shooting? Never mind, there I go nitpicking again.
One of the possible outcomes of surrendering to the police is being shot and killed.
One thing I find notable about you is your habit of looking at spiders in the corner when there’s a huge pink elephant crapping on the carpet in the middle of the room. About 8,000 blacks die by homicide in a typical year. About 2% of them are killed by police officers. Very few among that 2% were ‘surrendring’ at the time they were shot. And, of course, you don’t need to be surrendering for your death to induce rioting on the part of a certain sort of local resident (aided and abetted by sorosphere rent-a-crowd). See Michael Brown, who wasn’t surrendering.
I have a son, about 6′ 3″, 210lbs who would never hurt a soul but would be imposing enough to make many a spider with a gun fear for his life. He’s married, father of two, holds a responsible job and is starting his own business. Yet he participates daily in the kinds of activities that can get a man such as he killed. He drives a car, he walks, he answers his door, sometimes he finds himself in white neighborhoods, sometimes he finds himself in black neighborhoods. Sometimes he takes his kids to the park. And while doing all these things, he’s 6′ 3″, 210 lbs, and making someone scared who sees him as a threat.
Lest you think I’m imagining it all, as a high school student who lived two blocks from his mostly white school and was stopped by police who wondered why this black kid was walking to school in this neighborhood where he didn’t belong. Not believing his answer )or noticing the backpack). They escorted him to the office where they had to verify he was a student before allowing him to go on to the class they made him late for. He was not under arrest, just made to get in the back of the police car and be taken to the office. I learned that no matter what neighborhood I lived in (Winter Park, FL) there was no ability to protect my children from racism at the hands of the police. The reason black people get upset about police shootings of unarmed men is that almost no matter the circumstance, including when there is video and audio, there is almost never any justice. The female officer that shot a man with his hands up in I believe Oklahoma is now at work in another jurisdiction. The officers who shot a man pinned to the ground had the Attorney General of Louisiana decide not to press charges. The officer who pulled up on 12-year-old Tamir Rice and shot him within 1 and 1/2 seconds of arriving on the scene was not charged. That’s why I don’t ignore what you see as spiders. I have a black son.
Irrational risk assessment remains irrational risk assessment. It doesn’t matter how lacking in concision is your expression of it.
@Enigma
If your son ever gets gunned down, odds are it will be a young black punk who does it.
And, this is going to hurt. IF that ever does happen to him, you will be partially responsible for refusing to call out bad Black behaviors and helping change thing in the community. All that “solidarity: that you express with black criminals only encourages them to continue in their evil ways.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Location of wounds of a fleeing suspect isn’t very revealing.
Except when you compare it to the police statements that he was advancing towards them. What was he moonwalking?
Well, he’s sideways and could have been advancing or retreating so that’s not dispositive either. However, I’d typically take the cop’s word over a kid with a criminal record.
I’m not sure how you got sideways out of 7 shots to the back? What we typically see in a police shooting, before we even know the names of the policeman involved is a statement from the local police union, completely exonerating the officer(s) which sometime later proves to be completely contradicted by the evidence.
The officers have between two days to 30 days before they have to give a statement, giving them time to make it fit the evidence. If there is video, it typically isn’t released in a timely fashion. In Baton Rouge (Alton Sterling) the police constantly denied the existence of videotapes, lo and behold, after the Attorney General refused to press charges, two videos of body cam footage appeared magically. In shooting after shooting, the one consistent thing is police lying. Along with the media repeating the lie so if/when the truth comes out it barely makes a ripple.
A well placed round on a fleeing suspect spins the susspect in unpredictable ways. This convicted armed robber and domestic abuser isn’t going to get any benefit of the doubt.
“e. The female officer that shot a man with his hands up in I believe Oklahoma is now at work in another jurisdiction. ”
15-20 miles from here… Tulsa
The piece oh sheeet was just another going to be a Doctor High as hell on PCP! Be Stupid, Get Shot!
I don’t care if he were a white, black blue or green these cops have something like 30- 40 seconds to decide in some cases if they live or are k*lled by soon loon on dope.
Do yourself a favor, check out the way the azzholes are behaving in South Africa. Infowars is on that story among others.
Can’t you see it’s the Wallst/City of London Bankers you should have been attacking for the past 300 years? Of course no you don’t as it’s a multi-dimensional war against whites, blacks, blues & green, bankers/insur co. against them all..
Of well, carry on blaming whitey, class war, identity politics.
I get accused of “blaming whitey” because it’s a convenient deflection. Give me one example?
Keep getting your news from Alex Jones and InfoWars, you’ll be just fine in your bubble.
https://www.facebook.com/mlnangalama The beautiful black author of this blog is likely more African than you. She studies and writes in depth of modern Africa and its murderous, hateful black regimes. According to her, the suffering poor regular folks who populate Africa now long for a new white colonialism/occupation, to return their better lifestyle the white’s provided them.
Do you approve of the recently deposed Mugabe who amassed multiple billion USD and a palace with servants on 40 lush acres, while his people ate dirt? CRICKETS FROM YOU AND USA BLACK LEADERS. Shame on such lying, disgusting hypocrites. Learn from Jordan Peterson: MAKE YOUR OWN BED, THEN FIX ALLEGED WHITE RAYCISTS. Fix your friends and family with their 76% single households, where black male children have absolutely nothing to guide them and make them into proper adults, and blacks rely on Uncle Sam instead of marriage (and increasingly whites too, I admit).
Is Nangalama lying and/or naïve, or are your constant claims false, claims that black oppression is all whitey’s fault? Why are black run and wholly owned Baltimore and DC both crime ridden murderous cesspools, which your gaze avoids? Marrion Barry is your hero? Whitey’s fault, right? Why does DNC wholly owned and operated California have the highest US poverty rate, OVER 20%?
There may well be something worthy of responding to in your statement. But it is well hidden by the ridiculous assumptions in your narrative. I suggest you get out more.
enigmainblackcom
April 3, 2018 at 1:01 AM
I get accused of “blaming whitey” because it’s a convenient deflection. Give me one example?
Keep getting your news from Alex Jones and InfoWars, you’ll be just fine in your bubble.
::
For ever reason the reply click isn’t showing up on my side for your post above anyway:
“Give me one example? ”
Just one of thousands of examples: The Tulsa PD Lady Cop that rolled up on an Adult Black male, just west of 36th/Lewis, out of prison for PCP who was later found to be High as Hell on PCP when she had No Choice but to shoot the Idiot.
You Blamed Her.
Hell she had to move out of town because of your types Racism. Add Obama’s years of stirring up the racism where it was very settled down here.
All I know as a white is like in the decades past as a white I’m not waste my time on race baiting losers of the Demo party.
My Great Grand Dad helped free many blacks in the civil war, almost a million whites died to free almost a million blacks. We don’t owe you sh*t, quit whining like little girls & stop tearing down the monuments that gave you/us all our freedoms. Or just move & Make Africa Great for Once. Just show us all what great people with the will can do.
anyway Gnite.
Blaming an individual for shooting someone with his hands up is not “blaming whitey.” It’s blaming a specific individual that performed a specific act. Many black cops are indoctrinated into the code of silence and racial profiling and bad shoots as well. I would then blame those individuals. Your example pretty much sucks!
FWIW, I think the shooting of Alton Sterling was unnecessary. Not criminal or anything, but simply unnecessary. He was sitting there minding his own business, selling bootleg CD’s, and as far as I have read, not bothering anybody. Of course he had a gun. He was in the Hood. Ex-Felon or not, he would have been stupid not to be armed in the Hood. Too many savage Black and Illegal-Alien criminals there.
Now, does that mean he should have resisted arrest? Nope. He should have complied, but he was as high as a kite on various drugs and he brought his death on himself. IMHO, however, when the cops rolled up and saw him sitting there selling CDs, they should have just left him the heck alone. The same as with the dude selling loose cigarettes in New York, whatever his name was. If they ain’t selling drugs or committing some kind of violent crime, just running their various hustles, leave them the f*ck alone. They ain’t hurting nobody.
As far as Stephon Clark, I have zero sympathy for him. Running from the police IN THE DARK is just asking to get shot. No cop should risk their life on the presumption that a black man means them no harm. With black men, things can go to hell in a second. That is just the reality of things.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Apparently, telling the police you have a gun that you are licensed to carry will get you killed, standing with your hands up can get you killed, walking away from an officer can get you killed, holding a cell phone can get you killed, holding a toy gun in a park, sleeping on a couch. There seems to be no appropriate action that not only might get you killed, but see the officers involved found to be justified in their actions. That too is the reality of things.
In that case, you need to do something quick! I suggest you start working on getting Black Women to get married BEFORE having children, then raising the children to be law abiding and respectful! In less than 20 years, you can help change the whole social dynamic for Blacks!
In the meantime, this is Reality:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ji6INhImanM
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
You are correct in calling yourself girl. When you become a woman and can analyze concepts apart from your emotional immaturity then maybe having a conversation with you will be worth while. Meanwhile girl run along an find a sandbox.
When you can apply your twisted feelings to white thugs and worthless sacks of human garbage then you will deserve a response. I guess you think the piece of poop who shot the people in the South Carolina church should be canonized
I think that the “sleeping on the couch” refers to the tragedy of the 7? year-old girl killed in a SWAT raid in Detroit.
There was a big financial settlement given to her family, and probably a revision of the rules of engagement for SWAT-style raids.
There were some unmentioned circumstances that contributed to this tragedy.
The aunt the aunt’s boyfriend, who just shot and killed a 17 year old high school student, were in that house.
The girl’s father was later convicted as an accesory in that murder…I think he got a 10 year sentence.
Knowing the nature of the suspect(s) they were after, the police were likely keyed up, and that makes them more prone to error.
Even absent the police raid, I think it’s a bad idea to harbor a murderer in your home, especially a home with small children.
It’s not the best environment in any case.
And unfortunately, one of the officers who thought he saw a threat fired, shot and killed the little girl.
Instead of portraying this as though it were a typical event, a typical threat for child sleeping on a couch to be killed by police, I thought that what happen should be put in some context.
I know that the context interferes with the desired goal of portraying those cops as gunning for a kid sleeping on a couch, but there’s actually more to the story than that.
It the life of a 7-year-old black girl was valued, They would have taken the suspect another way.
Enigma,..
You have cited this example before, without any reference to the context of that SWAT raid.
I think that it’s important to consider that context, as well as the context of the guy in his 30s who shot and killed the 17 year old.
That’s where we differ…the context to you HAS TO BE that the life of a 7 year old black girl is insignificant to the racist police.
You are so tied with that theme that I won’t try to convince you otherwise.
I would add that if I were a parent of a black child in inner city Detroit, or, Chicago, or St. Louis, or Baltimore etc. that I would have a hell of a lot more concern about my kid being shot by someone like the guy who killed the 17 year old kid, than I would about the police not “valuing the life of a 7 year old girl”.
But stick with your theme that the bigger problem is racist police not sweating the unintentional shooting death of that girl….that theme is too damn valuable for you to give up.
I made no comparisons. You feel the need to tell me what my theme is. The police should have known (and cared) that a little girl was inside and planned accordingly. And yes, whoever made the decision to make the raid, under those circumstances, didn’t care.
You repeatedly mention the 7 year old killed on the couch, as if that is representative of a great overall threat to blacks everywhere.
Your ommisions of the context of that raid are significant.
You ARE making comparisons, promoting your pet themes, by very selectively and editing your stories about how “bkack lives don’t matter” to police.
And I know that you’te not likely to evaluate the comparative threat re black homucides….that would interfere with your theme that police killing blacks is a far greater threat to blacks.
When you realistically discuss the relative threat re black homicdes, I might pay attention to your posts.
Otherwise, it’s the same old promotion of your theme that there is some kind of widespread, indiscriminate targeting of blacks by police.
You are correct in calling yourself girl. When you become a woman and can analyze concepts apart from your emotional immaturity then maybe having a conversation with you will be worth while. Meanwhile girl run along an find a sandbox.
When you can apply your twisted feelings to white thugs and worthless sacks of human garbage then you will deserve a response. I guess you think the piece of poop who shot the people in the South Carolina church should be canonized
Apparently, you have a rich fantasy life! Haldol might help!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Doubtful.
Squeeky – when I was at Barnes & Noble this weekend I saw that they have The Coffee Lover’s Handbook. It is in the magazine section.
enigma – what appears to be an over-reaction by the police affects all races, not just blacks. However, juries are loath to punish police if they raise the “I was in fear of my life” defense. Also, when you are in pursuit, you are making split-second judgments. It is easy for us to Monday night quarterback them, but it is harder if you are on the ground, with less knowledge and constantly moving.
In AZ you cannot shoot unless the pursuee is a felon and you have to have seen it or a fellow officer has to have seen it. However, in a felony pursuit, they are likely to be shot in the back if they are running through backyards.
Some of those “overreactions” were preceded by statements like, “I’m gonna kill that MF” and events like turning off the body cam and mike (in this instance the mikes were turned off after the shooting). Why wouldn’t that in and of itself be a fireable offense? If there is no penalty, everyone will turn off the devices supposed to tell the story.
@Paul C Schulte March 31, 2018 at 11:48 PM
“enigma – what appears to be an over-reaction by the police affects all races, not just blacks.”
Agreed, but it seems to affect blacks disproportionately. The following article has a wealth of engaging information, including links to and descriptions of several relevant studies:
“Black people are much more likely to be killed by police than their white peers
“Based on nationwide data collected by The Guardian, black Americans are more than twice as likely as their white counterparts to be killed by police when accounting for population. In 2016, police killed black Americans at a rate of 6.66 per 1 million people, compared to 2.9 per 1 million for white Americans.”
https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/3/22/17151960/stephon-clark-sacramento-police-shooting-video
About 52% of the homicides in this country are committed by blacks. Blacks account for a similarly elevated share of the perpetrators of robbery and rape. It’s not terribly surprising that disagreeable encounters between police and public are disproportionately with black members of the public. Nearly everyone killed by police in these encounters is male, a ‘disproportion’ that doesn’t bother anyone.
@Natacha is insufferable April 1, 2018 at 8:23 PM
“It’s not terribly surprising that disagreeable encounters between police and public are disproportionately with black members of the public.”
Characterizing police killings as “disagreeable encounters” is revealingly rich.
From the Vox article cited:
“That’s not to say that higher crime rates in black communities explain the entire racial disparity in police shootings. A 2015 study by researcher Cody Ross found, ‘There is no relationship between county-level racial bias in police shootings and crime rates (even race-specific crime rates), meaning that the racial bias observed in police shootings in this data set is not explainable as a response to local-level crime rates.’ That suggests something else — such as, potentially, racial bias — is going on.” [Emphasis added]
From the 2015 study:
“A Multi-Level Bayesian Analysis of Racial Bias in Police Shootings at the County-Level in the United States, 2011–2014″
3. Unarmed and Shot by Police: Across Race/Ethnicity
“The median probability across counties of being {black, unarmed, and shot by police} is 3.49 (PCI95: 1.77, 6.04) times the probability of being {white, unarmed, and shot by police}.
[Emphasis added]
“The median probability across counties of being {hispanic, unarmed, and shot by police} is 1.67 (PCI95: 0.99, 2.68) times the probability of being {white, unarmed, and shot by police}.
“As before, there is extensive variation across counties in the U.S. in these relative risk ratios. Figs 6 and 7 plot the posterior distributions of county-specific risk ratios, as well as the geographic distributions of the estimates.
“It is notable that Miami-Dade (FL, contains Miami), Los Angeles (CA, contains Los Angeles), and Orleans Parish (LA, contains New Orleans), stand out as counties where the ratio of {black, unarmed, and shot by police} to {white, unarmed, and shot by police} is elevated to 22.88 (PCI95: 6.25, 87.70), 10.25 (PCI95: 2.96, 76.05), and 9.29 (PCI95: 1.88, 105.54) respectively. [Emphasis added]
“See Data folder of S1 File for additional county-level results; there are several additional counties with highly elevated levels of racial bias in police shootings not listed here.”
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0141854
No clue why you’d undertake an ecological study in that circumstance. It’s not even clear how ‘racial bias’ is defined in your summary. This is hand-waving by the researcher.
“Black males make up 42% of the cop killers in the last decade, while being 6% of the population”-
New York Post, July 6, 2017
We can have all kinds of fun with statistics,…if one wanted to cite this statistic as “evidence” that there is an epidemic of blacks killing cops, you just quote that article to make your case.
And conversely, you can cull some stats to try to support a claim that it’s open season on blacks by the cops.
Both claims are essentially bullsh**,.but if you’re inclines to promote pet theme, go to “the statistics”to “prove ” your point.
There are c.1,000 fatal shootings of civilians per year by police.
I haven’t seen that number mentioned here, but that is the rough consensus from articles that I’ve read.
My evaluation of those numbers is far different than anything that I’ve seen presented here; specifically, what were the circumstances in those fatal shootings.
How many involved justifiable use of deadly force because an inmediate threat posed by a suspect
armed with a weapon?
How many are “borderline”, where there’s a legitimate debate about whether less-than-deadly force might have been used?
And how many were clearly unjustified?
IMO, those are the central questions that need to asked, and answered, if one is actually serious about looking at civilians killed by police.
If anyone has brought this up here, I missed it.
@Tom Nash April 3, 2018 at 5:05 AM
“There are c.1,000 fatal shootings of civilians per year by police.”
“My evaluation of those numbers is far different than anything that I’ve seen presented here; specifically, what were the circumstances in those fatal shootings.
IMO, those are the central questions [See them, above, in TN’s comment] that need to [be] asked, and answered, if one is actually serious about looking at civilians killed by police.
If anyone has brought this up here, I missed it.”
In the study I called attention to, up-thread, these central questions are addressed. Here is an excerpt from that study:
“The work of documenting police violence in the United States, has recently begun through several open-contribution, public-access projects in addition to the USPSD [US Police-Shooting Database]. The Stolen Lives Project started by the Anthony Baez Foundation and the National Lawyers Guild [7], the Fatal Encounters Database started by Brian Burghart [8], and the Killed By Police database [9] are examples, as is the Mapping Police Violence project [10], which emphasizes visualization of the raw data from the above-mentioned databases. [Emphasis added]
“Additionally, Wikipedia.org [11], the Washington Post [12] and the Guardian [13] have begun keeping rigorous statistics on police shootings in specific years. Unlike the censored data released by official sources, the data in the USPSD and other grassroots databases allow for fine-scale evaluation of the use of lethal force, including investigation of department-specific and even officer-specific patterns.
“It is, for instance, possible to identify police departments and officers who kill unarmed black individuals at disproportionate rates. With the previously-used SHR data, lack of reporting and/or selective-biases in reporting of police shootings, could have masked underlying racial biases in police shootings, or masked the rates at which unarmed individuals are shot by police.”
Ken Rogers,…
I didn’t see anything in your links that addressed the questions that I raised….that is, what percentage of those fatal shootings by police involve a high threat level from an armed suspect, and are justifiable?
How many are questionable/ debatable as to whether less-than-lethal force might have been used?
How many of these shootings killed unarmed suspects who posed no threat that warranted the use of deadly force? If, for example, 750 of those 1,000 fatal shootings involved an armed, non-compliant suspect, is it important to make that distinction, and focus on the 250 that are not in that category?
Or, as with most articles, do you just focus on aggregate numbers without distinction.
If you have an idea of the percentages of those 1,000 fall into the clearly justified, questionable, or unjustified categories, can you state it here?
I can’t pick out those answers from the material/links that you posted.
There are c.1,000 fatal shootings of civilians per year by police.
The Bureau of Justice Statistics has been conducting intermittent studies for 40 years. The usual number is around 350, without much of a secular trend.
Nutchacha,..
I’ll look into this “350/10000” discrepany.
Either the 1,000 number is greatly inflated, or the lower number greatly understates killing of civilians by police.
Meant to write “350/1,000…not 10,000
“As a nation, we simply haven’t bothered to gather the data, to collect the information” –
FBI Dir. Comey, Oct. 2016 on the killing of civilians by police
The complaint about the figures of the DOJ was that, at least until recently, police departments were not required to report civilian deaths at the hands of the police.
That’s why newspapers like the Washington Post and others started to compile their own databases.
I don’t know if the there are now reporting requirements ( rather than voluntary compliance) in the last year or two, but the DOJ/BJS numbers were cinsidered to be suspect because of haphazard collection, and volutary reports from thousands of police agencies around the country.
I’ll try to plow through some of the DOJ stats in the pdg files to see if there is now a systematic, mandatory reporting system.
“pdf files”
Ken Rogers – and they are twice as likely to commit a crime as their white counterparts.
@Paul C Schulte April 1, 2018 at 11:30 PM
“Ken Rogers – and they are twice as likely to commit a crime as their white counterparts.”
Assuming for the sake of argument that your undocumented statistic is accurate, what are you implying by your comment in the context of unarmed blacks’ being from 3.5 to 23 times as likely to be shot by police as are whites, depending on the locale?
Ken Rogers – you really have to get down to the raw data on this. Once you do, some startling numbers jump out. Do that and get back to me. 🙂
@Paul C Schulte April 2, 2018 at 11:10 AM
“Ken Rogers – you really have to get down to the raw data on this. Once you do, some startling numbers jump out. Do that and get back to me. 🙂”
Do I look like your research assistant taxed with making spurious arguments for you?
If I research anything for you, it will be how anyone can without apparent embarrassment offer up such a feeble-minded evasion of a question having nothing to do with data, and everything to do with your argumentative intention, namely:
“Assuming for the sake of argument that your undocumented statistic is accurate, what are you implying by your comment in the context of unarmed blacks’ being from 3.5 to 23 times as likely to be shot by police as are whites, depending on the locale?”
Ken Rogers:
I’m glad you’re not my researcher since you’re bad at it. Blacks are about 2.5 times more likely than whites to be killed by police. Whites of course are killed more often in raw numbers by police since they account for more of the population. What you don’t mention is that blacks are 7 times more likely to commit homicide than whites. This probably accounts for the discrepancy as does attitudinal reactions to police. Let me know if you need my research citations.
@mespo727272 April 2, 2018 at 11:49 PM
“Ken Rogers:
“I’m glad you’re not my researcher since you’re bad at it. Blacks are about 2.5 times more likely than whites to be killed by police.”
Two questions, mespo727272:
1) To whom do you imagine that your evidence-free pontificating could conceivably be persuasive, and
2) To what research of mine are you referring?
1. People who enjoy facts from the DOJ.
2. None, that’s the point.
Ken Rogers – show me the raw data.
@Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter March 31, 2018 at 1:10 PM
“I say good riddance to another Black criminal!”
@enigmainblackcom March 31, 2018 at 3:13 PM
“For the record, Stephon Clark has not been established as the man alleged to have used a crowbar (not found on Stephon Clark) to break into cars…”
You’re right to point this out to other readers here, but the commenter in question doesn’t stand on trivial considerations such as innocence or guilt when it comes to killing people.
She is the same person, you may recall, who advocates, like one of her authoritarian heroes, Rodrigo Duterte, the extra-judicial murder of anyone even suspected of trafficking in certain drugs, outside of state-approved channels.
I hope you’ll agree that it’s good, however, that violently prejudiced people have forums such as this one in which they can verbally ventilate their hostility, as it stands to reason that it reduces the likelihood of their acting out physically.
I wonder if it were not for the anonymity provided by the Internet if she would be so bold?
@enigmainblackcom April 1, 2018 at 10:13 PM
“I wonder if it were not for the anonymity provided by the Internet if she would be so bold?”
I don’t know, but as it is, I’m glad she can relieve herself here of at least some of her racist animus, and someone may even share something that will help her see through and get past it.
I hope you can summon up some pity, as I have, for someone whose fear-warped worldview can make her write, “No cop should risk their (sic) life on the presumption that a black man means them no harm. With black men, things can go to hell in a second. That is just the reality of things.”
A lot of commenters call Squeeky a racist but nobody challenges her assertions that illegitimacy is a problem giving rise to criminality’s in the black community, that crime statistics show black males commit disproportionately more violent crime than their white, Asian or Hispanics counterparts. Or that no criticism of black criminal glorification in song and art is even considered before being routinely dismissed as racism. If you answer those charges, your claims of divining her intent might not sound so self-serving.
@mespo727272 April 2, 2018 at 11:55 PM
“A lot of commenters call Squeeky a racist…”
What? Really? Gee, that’s a real puzzler.
I don’t know, maybe it could have something to do with their simply misunderstanding dozens of comments similar to this one, rife with prejudicial assumptions and spurious arguments to the man, loaded with hostility for another commenter (who’s black) and dripping with venom for the decedent, whose guilt or innocence of anything that night has yet to be determined:
@Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter April 2, 2018 at 6:27 PM
“And it won’t make one bit of difference to you when the cops confirm that he was the one responsible. Because he was black, and you are chugging full of resentment.
“Stephon was pretty much a career criminal at the ripe old age of 22. Grand theft auto. Robbery. Felony robbery. Assault. Endangering a child. Pimping out prostitutes. 3 domestic violence charges.
“If these are the things he was caught doing, you can rest assured there are 50 felonies he got away with. A stay at home dad? Ha! More likely a stay at home drug dealer.
“Good riddance. Only in the screwed up Black Community is poor old Stephon a martyr.”
When it comes to the darkies, you see, for Queen Squeeks in Wunnerland, it’s always, “Sentence first, verdict afterward.”
Well if you can’t refute her, lambast her I suppose. So I take it you agree with her facts, you don’t like the way she portrays them.
@mespo727272 April 3, 2018 at 5:40 AM
“Well if you can’t refute her, lambast her I suppose. So I take it you agree with her facts, you don’t like the way she portrays them.”
“Lambast” her by quoting her? That’s a good one. 🙂 Please read again with an open mind what she wrote at 6:27 PM yesterday, but imagine while doing so that the beneficiaries of her evidence-deprived, energetic loathing are you and your cohort of Workers’ Compensation plaintiff attorneys, whom she excoriates for aiding and abetting the destruction of the Protestant work ethic.
To my knowledge, no one has ever claimed that “Squeeky” or anyone else in the world who manifests self-stupefying racial animus is 100% wrong about every social issue involving African Americans, Hispanics, Asians, or any other minority in the US.
However, if her apprehension of the sociological facts regarding members of the African American cohort that you refer and/or allude to is as compromised by hostile prejudice as her apprehension of the facts in the case of Stephon Clark, then even her sociological “facts” are open to question.
In any event, the salient question is whether indisputably factual social problems are more susceptible of being successfully approached, ameliorated, and/or resolved with the mindset of, say, a Jimmy Carter, or with that of a Rodrigo Duterte.
Do you deny, notwithstanding the plethora of evidence provided by her comments here, that “Squeeky’s” hostile, pre-judgmental, and punitive mindset in this regard is very close to that of Duterte?
Or, do you admit that it is, but think that more Duterte-consciousness is just what we need to solve our social problems?
Ken Rogers:
Calling her Duterte doesn’t dispute her facts; it merely disputes her disposition. That doesn’t make for much of a counter-argument. Refute her facts or her conclusions.
Ken Rogers – the point is, is she correct in her facts or not?
“Crazy Abe” Lincoln would like to say a few words. Go ahead, Abe.
Ahem…
“If all earthly power were given me,” said Lincoln in a speech delivered in Peoria, Illinois, on October 16, 1854, “I should not know what to do, as to the existing institution [of slavery]. My first impulse would be to free all the slaves, and send them to Liberia, to their own native land.” After acknowledging that this plan’s “sudden execution is impossible,” he asked whether freed blacks should be made “politically and socially our equals?” “My own feelings will not admit of this,” he said, “and [even] if mine would, we well know that those of the great mass of white people will not … We can not, then, make them equals.”
The entire unconstitutional welfare state, in all its facets, must be fully and completely rescinded.
Ben Franklin, 1789, we gave you “…a republic, if you can keep it”.
Ben Franklin, 2018, we gave you “…a republic, if you can take it back”.
The Civil War needlessly killed and maimed over 1million. The industrial revolution arrived 30 years later, thus eliminating the need for slavery. IMO, with the tariffs that could have followed, within a few decades after the Civil War the S would have wanted back in, minus all the blood and northern carpet bagging that followed the war.
Plus how and why was it worth “saving” the Union when Abe had to destroy the Constitution on which it is based? Abe violated Habeus Corpus and free speech, tossed journalists in prison for reporting the news, without a trial for national security, etc. Did Abe have to “destroy” the Union to save the Union? Abe performed actions that Trump has not done, yet for which modern Progressives call Trump Hitler….if such acts are Hitlerian, then Abe was a precursor to Hitler. Both parties have now filled the USA with so many 3rd world types that we have reinstituted slavery (Google “modern US slavery”).
On Tucker Carlson’s show he politely asked at least a dozen intelligent DNC gun control guests what would they do about the millions of guns and magazines in private possession now after banning certain gun and magazine sales. Would they take them away by force? Not one of these DNC scum bags has answered directly, including the woman who ran HRC’s last campaign. Every single person he asked accuses Tucker of baiting them instead of answering this simple question.
We’re heading for a civil war. Glad there are few Progressives here.
Peace and love to you.
@Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter, March 31, 2018 at 1:10 PM
“I say good riddance to another Black criminal!”
On what basis (that is, other than his having been black) do you refer to Stephon Clark as a criminal?
He had a record, which his family alluded to.
Uh, I ain’t your b*tch. Google “stephon clark criminal record.” DUH!
And you can walk your a$$ to the fridge and get your own damn beer, too!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
What’s to prevent someone from creating an account in someone else’s name? This is a slippery slide.
It’s not about the truth.
You are foolish to think you can post anything you want and are protected by the first amendment. Unless you are independently wealthy, you best be careful what you put down in words.
I agree with Paul, that if public statements can jeopardize employment, then it needs to be spelled out in their employment contract, and the rule must be applied equally.
This latest election has been rough. Many on the Left actually believe that everyone else is evil. I saw that play out in my own family like some sort of Greek Tragedy. Not everyone participated in the blood sport against conservatives, and there were Democratic family members who firmly refused to take part in their own relatives’ attacks on other family members. That took courage.
In light of what I saw over the past couple of years, I have a question for this Kaiser hospital. Did they review the social media of each and every employee, and did they fire everyone who liked a photo of Kathy Griffin holding up Trump’s severed head, or who posted anything about all white men are racist/racists/privileged/homophobes/Islamaphobes, etc. Did they fire anyone who liked the countless anti-conservative memes going around after shootings? The bashing of Trump supporters? Because if the rules are applied equally, very few of my Left leaning friends on social media would still be employable. Then there are the right leaning people who call Liberals “Libtards” on social media.
Faith Linthicum’s statements were callous. No, you do not deserve to be shot if you try to evade police. That said, you do have some responsibility for your life going down the toilet if you keep breaking the law and find yourself running from the police on a regular basis, even if you should not have been shot. I have no idea if this was a justified shooting or not. I have not heard any evidence to support firing upon him. Since he was breaking into people’s houses, were they afraid that he would hurt someone if he got away? I don’t know. I do not find the comment that you deserve what you get if you get shot breaking the law and running from the police racist, unless there was more to the comment than that.
As a small business owner, I can say that many businesses cannot afford to have their reputation harmed among their customers. If an employee’s actions impacts the profits or reputation of the employer, then the employer may have the right to take action. The last thing that any laboring woman needs to worry about is if her labor and delivery nurse lets personal opinions interfere with her quality of care. That said, I sincerely believe that this rule is most often used for content bias against conservatives. I fear that we will one day soon arrive to a Single Party State, where any diverse opinions will be punished. We already see such bias in the public education system, from pre-school to graduate school.
As an RN in the State of California we must abide by conduct rules. Faith clearly broke these. She has the right to free speech however when her FB profile clearly states that she is a Labor & Delivery Nurse at Kaiser and she engages in HATE speech with her occupation and company clearly visible then she can be fired for such and SHOULD. What she wrote is an embarrassment to ALL nurses. This is not a free speech issue, most hospitals have conduct policies in place. She should have kept her employer off of her profile which she was using for HATE speech. And, in CA we have the largest nurses union in the country…if they don’t think she is worth fighting for then she obviously broke conduct rules.
And with the other comments re: the man shot and killed by Sacramento Police. It wouldn’t have been so bad of the officers had taken responsibility and not lied. The facts and science clearly dispute theirs over up, and story of murder.
As an RN in the State of California we must abide by conduct rules. Faith clearly broke these.
Cite the rule she broke, four-flusher.
Maybe we should focus on the etchical and competent cops for the solution instead of the wreckless “cowboy cops” (apparently other nations view American cops like this). There are professional American cops also that invalidate that stereotype.
A while back there was an amazing story outside the White House about the professionalism of a uniformed Secret Sevice officer. During broad daylight, a mentally destrurbed man with a knife or gun, refused to drop his weapon. The professional Secret Service officer, knowing there was a potentially lethal weapon talked the man down instead of shooting him. The officer could have easily justified shooting him without any risk to his career – but he chose to de-escalate the situation.
The recent case of wreckless “cowboy cops” had the suspect totally surrounded using infrared video from a helicopter. There was no place for the suspect to hide or run to. If they were concerned about the home’s residents – not knowing it was his home – they could have awoken his relatives from the front door. There appeared to be ample time to verify whose house it was and they were chasing a suspected vandal that destroyed property (not an escapee from death row known to harm people).
Maybe we need better police training on ethics and de-escalation techniques from highly professional officers – like the uniformed Secret Service officers receive – instead of justifying the behavior of “cowboy cops”.
You’re a great believer in the talking cure. The rest of us have to live in the world that is.
Does anybody else think Christina Arechiga is the villain in this saga? She appointed herself to escalate from a difference of opinion to personal warfare by publishing the identity of a fellow Facebook commenter. It’s very similar to the mentality of the Jacobins during the French Revolution of 1789…..whatever the disagreement, denounce the individual and sharpen the guillotine. Many social media platforms have rules against personal infowarfare and strictly enforce them. That Facebook would not quash this type of personal attack warfare is yet another blow to their carefully-concocted image of “connecting people”. In this case, it caused harm.
Agree PB. Personally I find the nurse’s comment revolting, however she has the right to express her opinions. Arechiga, SJW “activist” is a stalker IMO. I imagine she spends her time “outing” folks who have differing non PC POVs. Kaiser needs to get a grip!
Of course she’s a villain. There would be fewer of her if companies were not responsive to this sort of informing. The foremost villains here work for Kaiser Permanente.
@pbinca , March 31, 2018 at 11:18 AM
“Does anybody else think Christina Arechiga is the villain in this saga?”
Why, yes, obviously. Here we have, in this “saga,” a compassionate medical caregiver, Nurse Linthicum, trying to save lives by implicitly urging people to not be stupid, lest they deserve to be executed for possessing cellphones in their backyards, or for doing something similarly stupid.
Her being relieved of her duties seems like yet another example of no good deed’s going unpunished.
And why would a medical care organization be concerned, anyway, that one of its medical caregivers could say that a 22-year old fellow human being and father of two deserved to die for being stupid?
Apparently, it hasn’t occurred to K-P’s HR and PR people that Nurse Linthicum’s compassion for the victim in this case, and her desire to not see others similarly dead, is quite probably reflective of her compassion for her potentially stupid patients, as well.
“Stephon Clark, the unarmed 22-year-old killed by Sacramento police officers earlier this month, was shot eight times, with most of the bullets hitting him in the back, according to an independent autopsy requested by his family’s attorneys.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2018/03/30/stephon-clark-was-shot-eight-times-mostly-in-his-back-according-to-autopsy-requested-by-his-family/?utm_term=.ae574d9a1fa6
Among other things, this is another example of a good reason to leave (or never join) Facebook.
Meantime Roseville Medical Center can best be portrayed by this Life Stinks hospital scene.
Actually, my doc is at this facility. Best doc I’ve ever had.
As your pal Mitt Romney said, ‘Corporations are people too, my friend.’ GOP and their cohorts pass laws allowing corporations to deny someone medical benefits because it bothers their religious values. That’s just fine because it’s their right! Corporations are allowed to hide trillions of tax dollars off shore so they don’t have to pay that evil US govt. That’s ok because, it is their right! Republicans pass laws that allow corporations to destroy the environment and cause great harm to the communities they abuse, but that’s ok because it’s the free market after all, and money is more important than the environment! Corporations routinely add burdensome do not disclose or non-competitive clauses into work agreements but that’s ok because corporations need to protect the bottom line! Corporations charge grossly inflated prices for prescription drugs that bankrupt millions and harms those who can’t afford them, but that’s ok because they need to cover their costs!
But when a corporation punishes a trumpster-speak employee for supporting the police shooting death of an unarmed black person then this comment gallery says they have stepped beyond that line in the sand! But if this person was a member of BLM and said that racist police indiscriminately murder black people, then the corporation would surely have a right to punish that employee, since they need to run a tight ship and must focus on profits! As your fearless cult leader would say, SAD!
GOP and their cohorts pass laws allowing corporations to deny someone medical benefits because it bothers their religious values.
And people like you fancy others are obligated to pay for your abortions. Because you’re puerile.
And pay for your Viagra ?
And you fancy this is something other than non sequitur just why?
If you think it is immoral for “others” to pay for abortions, why should it not be immoral for “others” to pay for Viagra?
I don’t care about Viagra one way or another. Come to think of it, discussion of Viagra in Catholic and evangelical circles is uncommon.
Insurance is risk-pooling. Risk pooling to address threats from aging and disease – be it medical insurance of long-term care insurance – presents some special challenges which addressing threats from accidents does not. Regulatory schemes to address market dysfunction or to attempt to re-allocate costs are quite rococo and, ultimately, an accumulation of barnacles. One thing such schemes must do is differentiate the following:
1. Medical care
2. Rehabilitation care
3. Nursing care
4. General assistance
5. Activities which draw on knowledge imparted in medical schools, schools for allied professions, &c.
6. Everything else.
Another thing that has to be done to regulate entry to actuarial pools in order that they might be stable. A third thing is to delineate the boundary between out-of-pocket costs and pooled consumption (which is a prudential economic question).
So, guess what? You medical insurance doesn’t cover your grocery bills. It won’t cover the cost of a handyman. It doesn’t pay for skilled nursing facilities, either, except for modest stints for rehabilitation. The question is, what sort of things which are done by physicians and surgeons or which might be produced by drug manufacturers do not fall under the rubric of ‘medical care’ properly covered by ‘medical insurance’? And, the answer is, there are all sorts of things you might exclude, because ‘produced with medical technology’ is not equivalent to ‘medical care’, viz.
1. Experimental procedures
2. Cosmetic procedures
3. Pleasure drugs
4. Abortions
Now, there have been additional controversies about what insurers should be required to include in their plans and when employers should be required to offer plans which must follow a certain template. The Democratic Party is shot through with people Barack Obama for whom the opposition does not exist as an agglomeration of moral agents with legitimate interests, people who should be compelled to see the world as is the mode among partisan Democrats. The fact that it’s grossly discourteous to commercial companies to require them to make these choices hardly occurs to them.
Agreed! But conservatives love to pick and choose favorites (whilst claiming to do the opposite) when it is opportune for them to do so.
Agreed! But conservatives love to pick and choose favorites (whilst claiming to do the opposite) when it is opportune for them to do so.
This is a nonsense statement.
understand the truth can set liars amiss. Hope reality eventually comes your way.
LB – don’t try to lump all the commenters on the blog into a single category. I support BLM’s right to free speech as well. Censorship is not good no matter what one’s beliefs are.
Except BLM doesn’t have a right to block highways, freeways and law abiding citizens from entering an arena to see an NBA game.
If she worked in a job with minimal to no interaction with other humans, it wouldn’t matter as much. But this women is a labor and delivery nurse with huge responsibilities. I wouldn’t want her within a mile of anyone in my family.
I wouldn’t want her within a mile of anyone in my family.
Strange as it may seem to you, there are people in this world who think that if you run from uniformed police officers, you’re asking for trouble. I think you’ll have to scrounge for a shift at a hospital when you’re not going to find any nursing working who take that view.
Is running from the police a capital offense? Should it be?
Nothing’s an ‘offense’ in that situation. The police are engaged in order maintenance, not in implementing a judicial decision. Also, to say someone is ‘asking for trouble’ is not to make a normative judgment on any specific outcome.
You start a fight in a bar, and so-and-so many blows to the head later, you’re on life support. It would be pretty inane to ask the question ‘should being an obstreperous lush be a capital offense’?
Obstreperous, one of my favorite words.
Justice Scalia comes to mind.
The thug should have considered that if he commits crimes, it likely will not end well.
When policemen across the country get away with murdering unarmed black men at the rate that they do, running from them reflects an instinct for self-preservation. Police departments need to do far better screening of their applicants to weed out ones who should never be allowed near a badge, let alone a gun.
When policemen across the country get away with murdering unarmed black men at the rate that they do, running from them reflects an instinct for self-preservation.
Only if you;re completely incapable of rational risk assessment.
and one would have to scrounge even more shifts to find nursing workers who take Faith’s pro-death, anti-hippocratic oath view.
No, you’d have to scrounge to find nurses who would subscribe to your fantasies about this nurse as if they were true. She said nothing to indicate that she adhered to any such view.
“He deserved it for being stupid.”
Maybe in Trumptopia/Dennisonville health providers believe their patients deserve to die. But please go find and list the numerous nurses that would support faithless’ lunatic, likely racist rantings.
I’d not let my wife use a healthcare provider that would knowingly have such refuse on their staff. Many others may feel similar and not allow such a person near their babies…..unless they are an idiot. Likely, there will be a business decision that will force Kaiser to remove her current position. Maybe they can move her to the morgue for the additional Americans that will die from less having insurance?
Maybe in Trumptopia/Dennisonville health providers believe their patients deserve to die. But please go find and list the numerous nurses that would support faithless’ lunatic, likely racist rantings.
You’re incapacity to understand the import of her words or mine is your impairment. It is not a delict adhering to anyone else.
Now, it’s not that difficult to understand her point and to understand how she conflated two modes of assessing someone’s acts because people do it all the time. Prudence is a virtue. People do imprudent things, and it has consequences. At the same time, people do immoral and criminal things, and for that there are condign punishments. Now, if the woman were precise and conscientious, she’d differentiate ‘that’s what happens’ from ‘that’s what should happen when institutions are acting in reflective equilibrium’. She doesn’t, either because she’s sloppy in how she speaks and uses words or because she really cannot differentiate them in her own mind. The thing is, even if she’s a vulgar moral scatterbrain, that isn’t a performance deficit. If it were, you’d have to fire about a third the working population of the United States.
I’d not let my wife use a healthcare provider that would knowingly have such refuse on their staff.
That’s fine. One less insufferable family member isn’t going to ruin their day.
No one deserves to be shot for running. Police need better training. His name was Walter Scott.
No one deserves to be shot for running.
He wasn’t shot for running. He was chased because he disobeyed instructions and ran. He was shot because the officers got the idea in their heads he’d pulled out a gun.
Is “disobeying instructions and running” a capital offense? Or (allegedly) breaking into cars deserving of an execution in the back? Why did these officers get it in their heads that he had a gun? Is every object in every person’s hands a gun? The police need to exercise a little constraint, and not be so trigger-happy.
We’ve addressed this issue at March 31, 2018 at 11:10 AM
You need to be a cop in an inner city for a week.
@Autumn, March 31, 2018 at 12:14 PM
“No one deserves to be shot for running. Police need better training. His name was Walter Scott.”
How about being shot to death for approaching an LEO in broad daylight with your pants around your ankles?
I think we’re all familiar with the potential danger posed in a situation like this by the legendary endowment of the African-American male, but this man still had his shorts on:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/sheriffs-deputy-investigation-fatally-shooting-unarmed-man-pants/story?id=54068246
I call BULLSH*T on you! You are not sooo stupid as to confuse saying true things about Blacks with racism or hate. No, here is what I think you are up to:
You are a Democrat who realizes that Democrats need blacks to be stupid, barefoot, pregnant, and broke. For the same reasons Bubba The WifeBeater needs his little woman, stupid, barefoot, pregnant, and broke – – – to control them. You can’t buy votes as easily from people who don’t “need” the welfare handouts, or who don’t qualify for them.
As such, you can not tolerate people saying true things about bad black behavior, because Democrats have to pretend that all black problems are caused by White Republicans, not the blacks themselves. If people start telling the truth about blacks, for example, that all that Black Girl Magic is total bullsh*t, and that paying black whores to pop out b*st*rd kids is bad for society, bad for the black whores, and bad for the black b*st*rd kids, then Democrats might lose their ability to buy black votes.
Sooo, Democrats got to nip it in the bud! Saying anything bad about a Black, whether true or not, IST VERBOTEN!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Squekkky is out doin her klanish selfie. No virtue or virtue signally with this one just a vicious old racist whatcha call it. Time for Mr. Smith to call me out for calling out his blawgie favorite on da racism.
@Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter, March 31, 2018 at 1:00 PM
“I call BULLSH*T on you! You are not sooo stupid as to confuse saying true things about Blacks with racism or hate.”
To whom are you addressing this, Girl Reporter?
Carey.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Here’s Stephon’s criminal record: “A criminal since his teen years, the 22 year old had a juvenile record of grand theft, robbery and receiving stolen property. As an adult, Clark pled guilty to felony armed robbery, assault, and child endangering in one case, and “pimping” a prostitute in another case for which he pled no contest. In a third adult case, Clark was arrested for domestic violence for punching a woman in the face, and in yet another case from this year, Clark was again arrested for domestic violence.” Great kid!
Busy man.
It was an amazing run of bad luck that he just happened to be doing some amateur track-and-field exercise in his black hoodie just when some other fellow in a black hoodie was breaking into cars.
Not sure how this will play out with the review of police conduct, and, of course, 22 is too young an age to shuffle off this Earth unless you’re frankly murderous. Still, doesn’t sound like this fellow has made one good decision in the last 8 years or thereabouts.
“Yeah but he was running from the police jumping over fences and breaking in peoples house…why run??!!! He deserved it for being stupid.”
Besides being incorrect, an incredibly sad statement for someone supposedly dedicated to saving lives. And a statement that could potentially open the hospital up to liability if a baby, especially a minority, dies or suffers an injury whilst under her care. The thought that an attorney would not enter this into evidence or that a jury might not influenced is naive at best. Having worked for a time in Medical Malpractice insurance, I wouldn’t want Kaiser to leave this person in any sort of caregiving job. And for the underwriter would a premium pricing correction be appropriate? Maybe something in billing or administrative might be more in line for garbage with cavalier (and possibly racist) attitudes about life and death.
“Would a posting denouncing the police as racist or deserving the same fate cause a termination?”
What an idiotic comparison!!!!! If you had to include a comparison, maybe a better one might be if one heard a firefighter agreeing that a total burning/destruction of a building with loss of life was deserved. Would we feel safe if that person was part of the company that would respond to a fire in your area?
With prior knowledge this type person worked in labor/delivery, I would never allow my wife to deliver or receive prenatal healthcare in this facility! Ultimately, Kaiser will likely be forced to make a business decision.
Besides being incorrect,
Bill, he was filmed jumping over fences and identified by eyewitnesses breaking into vehicles.
Therefore, he should be killed? Amazing….
The phrase “Besides being incorrect” is a factual statement, not a normative one. You’ve had time to learn that, pumpkin. Be better.
my bad on that part of that part of her seemingly pro-death statement. still not justification for the police actions. and not a reason for a healthcare company to retain a known liability.
@Nutchacha is insufferable, March 31, 2018 at 10:39 AM
“Bill, he was filmed jumping over fences and identified by eyewitnesses breaking into vehicles.”
Do you mind providing some evidence to substantiate your claims, here?
Or would you have us accept them on the basis of the dispositive facts that he lived in the neighborhood, was armed with a cellphone, and was black?
Thank you sir.
It’s hard to know what this nurse defines as “stupid” if she thought she’d be able to keep her comment secret in today’s world. Aside from that, employers may be pushing people into using social networks that have the most protection of their identity. These networks will also attract the most subversive and hateful elements, who will be eager to talk to ordinary workers who will feel freer to express their, sometimes, controversial opinions. But there’s another option too: workers could have social media protection clauses in their contracts that prevent employers from using their social media comments to fire them.
It’s not hard to know what she means by ‘stupid’. What’s not altogether clear is what sort of moral freight she loads on to activity she considers ‘stupid’.
He’s collared by a pair of cops and he runs away. When they were pointing pistols at him. Does ‘impetuous’ work for you?
The problem here is activist Christina Arechiga who ” with malice and for thought ” (my opinion) researched the lady’s identity , found her Facebook profile, then posted her information. Christina should be subject to civil penalties for her callous actions. I ask what embarrassing and illegal things would an examination of her past show.
As for the fired nurse The Constitution and rights there in deal with the government Only, not private business. In the workplace you have No right to free speech.
The aspirant Stasi asset is a disgusting creature. No one forced Kaisar to terminate a skilled employee to please a vicious little twerpette. The responsible parties are employees of Kaisar. Most likely some combination of HR, the GC’s office, and the PR office.
I was going to say it’s hard to feel sympathy for the victim, but somebody might investigate and expose me which could get me fired so I think I’ll refrain and just leave it alone and not say anything.
I won’t go that that medical place. They are stupid.
Ultimately it will likely harm all social media sites and chill perfectly legal Freedom of Speech exercises. Americans will self-censor or stop using social media. Even your local police department is trolling Facebook and other sites investigating perfectly legal First Amendment exercises.
It also appears that your comments on the internet can never be protected. Supposedly some internet providers archive your messages for 8 years or longer. So even if we had excellent privacy protections in 2018, any event or administration could still access all of your information – without a judicial warrant – in 2025.
In other words, your least favorite politicians could be in power in 2025 and access 100% of your private informatiin in 2018 (long as they scoop it up every 7 yesrs or so). Anyone can then archive your complete dossier for life.
The common response is “if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about”. If that is so, why again are we investigating the “Black Lives Matters” folks? Why did Tea Party supporters claim to be audited by the IRS? Why are we investigating non-violent environmental rights activists? What did they do wrong?
It’s highly likely that social media can never be made safe for users for very long! Judges will not provide substantial Judicial Review over the political branches wanting your information.
By the way, this woman was fired yesterday.
Stop and think about this. She has a conversation on social media with someone. Someone else takes a burn at what she says. That someone then doxxes her and tells her employer. The employer then rummages through her social media posts and puts her under various interdicts. It’s not only irrelevant to her job performance. There isn’t anything that would be even mildly scandalous to a normal person. Saying ‘he deserved it’ is shabby, but ordinary people are thoughtless and shabby from time to time. She didn’t tell a patient in the emergency room that.
What’s interesting here is that corporate practice gives positive feedback to an aspirant Stasi asset like Christina Arechiga and HR functionaries are now employed in enforcing the caste attitudes modal among…HR functionaries. It wouldn’t surprise me if the people working in Kaiser Permanente’s GC office were of an insufferable disposition on social questions. It’s difficult to believe they counseled HR that there was potential tort liability in one of their employees ex parte opinions about a public controversy. (Though who knows; the courts can be grotesquely silly).
If they are going to do this then the employment contract must contain a clear-cut standard for deciding what is and is not acceptable speech. Minus that, it is too iffy.