|

11-02-2008, 10:03 PM
|
|
Junior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Brooklyn
4 posts, read 1,801 times
Reputation: 10
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gardier
...Lets stop the thugery!
|
That might be hard since most (not all, of course) rap/hip-hop is about "hustling" and "popping your enemies" (other drug dealers?).
|
|

11-03-2008, 09:53 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2008
1,391 posts, read 789,964 times
Reputation: 266
|
|
|
Desi..I commend you for trying to wait before passing judgement on these kids. And the reality is we do not 100% know what has happened, and just know what the media is currently reporting and what little the NYPD is stating. However, based on what we know...I stand by my statement...if more evidence comes out..great...but for now I have an opinion and am stating it. That's what we do in the forums! I stand by the cops on this, and thusfar have no reason to believe these 2 thugs were anything but that....when they were gunned down...the shooting miraculously stopped...coincidence?
|
|

11-03-2008, 10:54 AM
|
|
Not a member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2008
185 posts, read 130,393 times
Reputation: 48
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by glitch85
That might be hard since most (not all, of course) rap/hip-hop is about "hustling" and "popping your enemies" (other drug dealers?).
|
You mean the corporate hip-hop shoved down all out throats at all the Clear Channel stations across the U.S., Yep, cuz thats what "sells" according to the execs that know nothing of urban culture other than their own prejudice of which they reinforce by the music they promote (and the music they keep off the air).
Take a listen some time to the Non-Commercial WBAI 99.5 Hip Hop Takeover (which happens a few times a year), you'll hear a difference.
Although, isn't the Star Spangled Banner (our national anthem) about "popping you enemies"? (the British), or what about the vulgar sexual references in many 60's songs (during that whole free love era). OR you know, those Beatles "gettin high" and singing Strawberry Fields Forever (OK, fruit forever? THAT sounds rational  ), what was that other song ..."Say you want a Revolutio-o-on we-e-ell you know.." was that terrorist?
Maybe these artists of different genres were discussing relevant topics in a certain cultural context.
I admit, there's plenty of Corporate TRASH on the airwaves, but in MY "hood" I barely hear the radio anyways, I hear people with CD's , mp3s, and DJing on their own outside, many songs that you do NOT hear on the radio.
Now its one thing to rap intelligently about the social ills of society, shootings, or hardships, if its done intelligently, with wit, or slick rhyme......
And then theres computer generated garbage that the "artists"obviously don't write themselves, the so cold "American Cheese Food Product" of radio. But we all know that this isn't unique to hip-hop. Almost all corporate radio is filled with cheap "sexy" techno pop, followed by stale safe "alternative" water tunes, and the occasional overly synthesized fully "researched" bubblegum generic filled past-due girls/boy band, for that one time corporate cash-in.
If you have a problem with rap/hip-hop on radio (I feel your pain, I don't even bother with hot 97 OR power 105.1 anymore), than you should ask yourself, why are the yuppie bigwigs PLAYING this crap, and blocking real music? Rap that reflects its roots. Listen to the hip-hop shows on public or non-commercial radio. Check the Hip-Hop shows from NYU's radio Station, the station at CUNY - City College, EVEN what they throw in at the station in Brooklyn from Kingsboro Community College. THAT is the music of the streets. I think CUNY and NYU students do a better job picking an authentic playlist, than Corporate "Clear Channel"
|
|

11-03-2008, 10:57 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2008
1,391 posts, read 789,964 times
Reputation: 266
|
|
|
Desi your hip hop tirade was a bit much, but I udnerstand your point. Let's stick to topic though.
|
|

11-03-2008, 11:05 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
59 posts, read 65,816 times
Reputation: 20
|
|
|
Desi is speaking up for those who have no voice. Because most of you are passing judgement and have opinions without even knowing what really happened. The NYPD shot two guys in the back. There is no justification for that. And because their testimony is already proven to be false, its very questionable whether the two brothers were even carrying guns to begin with. Of course the cops are going to say that the two people they killed were shooting at them, to cover their own asses. It is prejudiced people like most of you on this board that allow the cops to get away with this type of behavior, instead of protecting the community they've been systematically slaughtering civilians.
|
|

11-03-2008, 11:19 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Wandering the halls aimlessly...Hello? Is anyone there?
307 posts, read 109,348 times
Reputation: 122
|
|
|
I felt compelled to reply as I have been in law Enforcement many years now and have seen a thing or two about "Perception of the events" as opposed to what really transpired.
Without going to much into any one part of this conversation, I know these to be facts.
1. The sons were both armed
2. They were involved in an altercation in a bar
3. They engaged police, demonstrating thier intent to kill
4. They were shot and killed
5. Thier mother was not a saint
My humble opinion? This was a justified shooting, irregardless of public perception or political agendas. The only problem with any shooting incident is that there are so many armchair quarterbacks out there. They twist, manipulate, and redirect the truth so they can get thier 15 minutes of fame. Hence we have the mother, fine example of a mother that she is, crying to the press or to anyone who will give her an ear. True she lost two sons at once, but she set that wheel in motion many years ago when she chose her lifestyle over the good of her kids.
I am a realist in that I believe wholeheartedly that her sons were eventually going to kill or be killed for some foolish reason or cause privy only to those who ran in thier circle or group. This woman will get no sympathy from me as none is warranted. She neglected those boys, allowed them to educate themselves, and lost them long before they were ever shot by the police. She should be sorry that she allowed that to happen.
So now the cops have to deal with killing two subjects and all the mental effects that has on a person, especially if they themselves are parents. Then they will have to face all the public scrutiny to include all the administrative sanctions that follow any deadly force incident. My sympathy lies with the police who were FORCED to shoot them, not the mother.
One final comment, would she demand the same course of action be taken if her sons killed several police officers?
|
|

11-03-2008, 11:24 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
59 posts, read 65,816 times
Reputation: 20
|
|
|
"I felt compelled to reply as I have been in law Enforcement many years now..."
Your arguement is meaningless as you obviously have some kind of bias in this case. The cops shot the two kids in the back, the BACK. How is it even possible for two men to shoot at the cops and get shot in the back? That right there throws all of your points out the window.
|
|

11-03-2008, 11:25 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
59 posts, read 65,816 times
Reputation: 20
|
|
|
"So now the cops have to deal with killing two subjects and all the mental effects that has on a person..."
and dont give me that guilty conscience Moderator cut: stuff! You Moderator cut: people dont Moderator cut: care, if you obviously try to cover Moderator cut: yourself for doing something reckless and completely unnecessary.
Last edited by Dark of the Moon; 12-23-2008 at 01:24 PM..
|
|

11-03-2008, 11:30 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
1,597 posts, read 1,084,870 times
Reputation: 577
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRisingSon
"I felt compelled to reply as I have been in law Enforcement many years now..."
Your arguement is meaningless as you obviously have some kind of bias in this case. The cops shot the two kids in the back, the BACK. How is it even possible for two men to shoot at the cops and get shot in the back? That right there throws all of your points out the window.
|
as opposed to your well balanced unbiased postings. Give me a break.
|
|

11-03-2008, 11:35 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Wandering the halls aimlessly...Hello? Is anyone there?
307 posts, read 109,348 times
Reputation: 122
|
|
Were you there?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRisingSon
Desi is speaking up for those who have no voice. Because most of you are passing judgement and have opinions without even knowing what really happened. The NYPD shot two guys in the back. There is no justification for that. And because their testimony is already proven to be false, its very questionable whether the two brothers were even carrying guns to begin with. Of course the cops are going to say that the two people they killed were shooting at them, to cover their own asses. It is prejudiced people like most of you on this board that allow the cops to get away with this type of behavior, instead of protecting the community they've been systematically slaughtering civilians.
|
If the "POLICE" are so bad here, why dont you move? Seems to me there are plenty of other countries that would take you in. You stay here because we have the most tolerant laws in the world and half of what kids do today in America would get them severely beaten or killed elsewhere in the world.
I read more on Gangs killing innocent civilians than Cops killing innocent civilians.
There are a lot of good folks who come from this womans situation and they turned out just fine as did thier kids.
One more thing....its easy to pass judgement right? I see you doing it about all Police....  Slaughter? Poor choice of words.
Peace
Winter
|
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
|
|