#the chokehold they have on the scene is unwarranted

[fairy-ganj-mother]

so sick of the edm community and it breaks my heart</3 i've been going to these kinds of events for 10 years this year and lately I come away feeling disillusioned and frustrated after shows. I'm sick of meeting fucking wooks because like it's not "nice to meet you" anymore when we've met 10 times in the last 6 months and I remember every time but you're too fucked up to remember any of it. I'm sooooooo sick of a lineup of five white guys being billed as "diverse" because they all make very slightly different dubstep. I'm sick of the oversaturation of edm that all sounds the same bc people are just tryna make a living off partying instead of actually innovating and pushing new sounds. everyone is either on too high of a horse or just straight too high to interact with. I don't want to say it wasn't like this bc it probably was but I def wasn't as acutely aware of this part of the scene 10 years ago when we still practiced PLUR and shit.

[vapolis]

listen , , , i never played the old demo but in my heart of hearts i know i would still be obsessed w D nonetheless bc of how u have written them presently. their genuine kindness is sooo unnerving to my merc bc as you've established, the merc isn't really someone who's been treated with kindness and tenderness (QWQ) but . my merc is a simp and alas D's allure and kindness is irresistible. they have had to be at another person's heel and is treated like a feral mutt (which. isn't entirely unwarranted .) but being treated as an equal and as another human being makes them sooooo wistful it makes themself want to bite themself as a way of scolding themselves aihowdfjsdf.

also the nsfw snippet you posted of dante a while back was DIABOLICAL and has been living in my mind rent free. i hope dante haunts u in the most sexy manner possible . because what the actual FUCK compelled u to write that it's been living in my mind rent free and it makes me insane fr.

(also. ik people love jax. and he is sexy . but how could u want him when d and royal are right there. offering kindness and tenderness and show-stopping sex appeal. [tho its a bit unfortunate on royal's part bc as the last chap has shown us he is like a housecat trying to step into the alley in my heart shdfoHSDFO].)

i love ur IF so much u dont understand how much its haunted me (orla is also mother of the year and could order me around like the dog i am but that's neither here or there).

i'm rambling but i really do think d offers a sense of warmth none of the other RO's do (in the sense that the merc is viewed as an equal who is Struggling and in the trenches rather than. the merc. orla's dog. a ticking time bomb.) which again! is valid but also :(((( they are baby. to me . they have done nothing wrong ever <3 i just love d so much bc of the way u convey their genuine kindness and desire to connect with the merc it makes me froth at the mouth and sob fr i hope ur days are kind 2 u and that u experience nothing but contentment in life

I love long rambly asks about D like u get it!! they're nice and kind and (at least seem to) genuinely care like no other right now. I'm very excited to get more into that dynamic bc it's different. It's lighter and they're on equal footing and scenes w D always take a turn even for me lmao also so real abt that nsfw scene... both dante's and delilah's have a different kind of chokehold on me personally.

royal is probably most like D in that sense that they give kindness eaily even if last chapter ended badly w them.

anyways tysm for all that!! this ask will be rent free for a little while as I chip away at the chapter and I'm very happy you enjoy the IF (and D) as much as you do <33

[texasprelawland-blog]

The Legal Tension Between Police Brutality Law And Our Constitutional Rights

By Laura Fagbemi, Rice University Class of 2022

June 16, 2020

In May of 2020, Americans witnessed the horrific murder of George Floyd, an unarmed Black man who was suffocated by White policeman Derek Chauvin. Floyd’s death is only the most recent in the centuries-long legacy of unwarranted murders of unarmed, unaggressive Black Americans, including those of Breonna Taylor and Ahmaud Arbery in the past few months. After the recording of Floyd’s death was distributed on social media via a viral cell phone video, public outrage erupted in every state in the U.S.As protests against police brutality and systemic racism swell in every corner of the country, Americans ask why this keeps happening.

Legally, the justification of the use of deadly force is the most crucial evaluation an officer should make before electing to use violence against a suspect.Federal laws that dictate when force is warranted are often vague. While some individual police departments are beginning to employ more specific policies that guide use of force – for instance, Seattle PD has elected to have its officers utilize de-escalation tactics whenever possible instead of using force [1] – national regulations on police use of force remain indeterminate. According to the National Institute of Justice, “there is no single, universally agreed-upon definition of use of force.” [2]

Two Supreme Court decisions – Tennessee v. Garner and Graham v. Connor –laid the groundwork for determining when police use of deadly force can be legally deployed. In Tennessee v. Garner, the Court ruled that deadly force may only be used to prevent the escape of a fleeing subject if the officer has a belief that the accused poses a significant threat of death or serious physical harm to the officer or others. [3] The Graham decision held that substantive due process was not the correct constitutional protection from police brutality. [4] Instead, the Court ruled that the applicable constitutional assessment was whether the use of force was “objectively reasonable” under the Fourth Amendment, which protects American citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures.[1]

The term “reasonable,” though, can be difficult for officers to interpret when the guidelines on what it entails are unclear. William Rehnquist, who was Chief Justice at the time of the Graham decision, wrote that reasonableness in the context of police use of force is not a concrete concept: “the ‘reasonableness’ of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight.” [4] However, it is often not the officer who ultimately determines whether their own use of force was reasonable, but instead the citizens on the jury who will evaluate an officer’s use of force once it has already been deployed. [5] The fact that there are few specific guidelines effectively means deployment of force is left up to an individual officer’s personal judgement, and that judgement will be reviewed in a court of law after the fact. Ultimately, police use of force is not particularly regulated on the front-end; instead, it is judged once it has already taken place.

As it becomes increasingly statistically relevant that Black Americans are more likely to become victims of police brutality than White Americans, much public focus has shifted towards the epidemic of racial bias in policing. [6] [7] Because of the low degree of specificity included in laws on police violence and the lack of front-end accountability on when and how police violence should be deployed, bias related to who becomes a victim of excessiveforce is relatively common.The crucial element that characterizes both of the legal standards for deadly force that were introduced by Tennessee v. Garner – fleeing apprehension and defense of life – is the fact that it doesn’t matter whether there is a real threat to an officer when force is deployed. What matters is the officer’s “reasonable” belief that there is a threat, as was ruled in Graham. If an officer has conscious or even subconscious racist tendencies which cause them to view people of certain races to be more threatening, they may feel that it is “reasonable” to use deadly force against a Black suspect when they would have found it “unreasonable” to use deadly force against a White subject under the exact same circumstances.

In public discourse about racially motivated instances of police violence or deadly force, there is often an emphasis on the criminal history of the victim, which is frequently perceived to be a justification for use of force against them. For instance, after 18-year-old unarmed Michael Brown was shot by a police officer, allegedly with his hands up in surrender, the New York Times referred to him as “no angel,” citing an instance of petty theft, dabbling in drugs and alcohol, and his production of “vulgar” rap lyrics as evidence. [8] However, none of these things are legally relevant to his murder. The fact that Brown had previously engaged in non-violent crime does not make it legally more “reasonable” that he, without a weapon, was shot six times, because these previous actions were not part of the encounter that Brown had with the police officer who murdered him.

Similarly, Eric Garner, a Black man who was choked to death by a police officer in 2014, had been accused of selling 10,000 untaxed cigarettes before he was put into a chokehold. Once it was made clear that Garner had fewer than 100 cigarettes on his person when he was killed, the officer who made the accusation later admitted it to be an exaggeration. [9] Hypothetically, though, what would it have meant if Garner had committed a non-violent crimeas the catalyst for his apprehension? If Garner had been selling 10,000 untaxed cigarettes, would this warrant his summary execution? According to New York Tax Law Code Section 1814, having 10,000 or more untaxed cigarettes constitutes a class E felony, the punishment for which would be 2-5 years in jail, not the death penalty. [10] And yet, the officer who murdered Garner was never indicted because he had “feared he would be pushed through a storefront window” and elected to suffocate Garner to death. Prosecutors felt that they could not prove the officer had “willfully used objectively unreasonable force,” so the case was dropped. [11] The Tennessee and Graham rulings effectively allow police to play judge, jury, and executioner, that is, if officers individually evaluate it to be “reasonable” to do so.

The legal dissonance surrounding police use of force thereby becomes broader: not only are the laws surrounding police use of force vague, but their vagueness often allows police to disregard some of the most essential laws in America: our constitutional rights.In the United States, the death penalty requires a trial, and under the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution, the accused has the right to a speedy and public one. [12] The Fifth Amendment requires that no one should be deprived of “life, liberty, or property” without due process of law. [13] If a police officer makes an accusation, a suspect does not use force to antagonize the officer, and the officer still chooses to deploy deadly force, one might conclude that the officer has deprived the suspect of two constitutional rights. However, this is not legally true, due to the power of the Graham decision’s standard of “reasonability.”

The vague and indeterminate nature of laws on police use of force has allowed for racial bias to slip through the cracks and into the policing system. Because of the legal climate surrounding police use of force, the pervasive issue of police brutality is not only the consequence of biased individual officers, but also of the legal circumstances surrounding the entire policing system. By permitting police to chiefly define what constitutes excessive or unreasonable force, the Supreme Court has effectively curtailed its own juridical supervision of the policing system, and, as a result, racial bias found among individual police officers can mean increased levels of violence and excessive force upon Black citizens. With the influx of protests demanding justice for George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and countless other victims of racialized police brutality, laws on police use of force are under fire, and it’s possible that we will be seeing a restructuring of these laws very soon.

________________________________________________________________

Laura Fagbemi is a rising junior at Rice University majoring in Social Policy Analysis and English. She works as a research assistant in the Rice University Sociology Department and is involved with several student-run initiatives centered around advocacy and policy building. She plans on attending law school after her graduation in 2022.

________________________________________________________________

1.     Best, Carmen. (September 15, 2019). “Seattle Police Department Manual: 8.100 – De-Escalation.” Retrieved June 5, 2020 from https://www.seattle.gov/police-manual/title-8---use-of-force/8100---de-escalation.

2.     National Institute of Justice. (March 5, 2020). “Overview of Police Use of Force.” Retrieved June 6, 2020, from https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/overview-police-use-force.

3.     Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U. S. 1 (1985). Retrieved June 5, 2020, from https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/471/1/

4.     Graham v. Connor, 490 U. S. 386 (1989). Retrieved June 5, 2020, from https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/490/386/.

5.     “Excessive Force.” Legal Information Institute: Cornell Law School. Retrieved June 7, 2020, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/excessive_force.

6.     Oppel Jr., Richard A. and Gamio, Lazaro. (June 3, 2020). “Minneapolis Police Use Force Against Black People at 7 Times the Rate of Whites.” The New York Times. Retrieved June 7, 2020, from https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/03/us/minneapolis-police-use-of-force.html.

7.     Edwards, Frank., Lee, Hedwig, and Esposito, Michael. (August 20, 2019). “Risk of being killed by police use of force in the United States by age, race-ethnicity, and sex.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. Retrieved June 6, 2020, from https://www.pnas.org/content/116/34/16793.

8.     Eligon, John. (August 24, 2014). “Michael Brown Spent Last Weeks Grappling With Problems and Promise.” The New York Times. Retrieved June 7, 2020, from https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/25/us/michael-brown-spent-last-weeks-grappling-with-lifes-mysteries.html.

9.     “Officer says he exaggerated charges against Eric Garner after his death.” (May 21, 2019). CBS News. Retrieved June 6, 2020, from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/daniel-pantaleo-administrative-trial-nypd-partner-says-he-exaggerated-charges-against-eric-garner-after-his-death/.

10.  “New York Consolidated Laws, Tax Law – Tax § 1814. Cigarette and Tobacco Products tax.” FindLaw for Legal Professionals. Retrieved June 7, 2020, from https://codes.findlaw.com/ny/tax-law/tax-sect-1814.html.

11.  Benner, Katie. (July 16, 2019). “Eric Garner’s Death Will Not Lead to Federal Charges for N.Y.P.D. Officer.” The New York Times. Retrieved June 8, 2020, from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/16/nyregion/eric-garner-case-death-daniel-pantaleo.html

12.  “The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution.” Legal Information Institute: Cornell Law School. Retrieved June 7, 2020 from https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/sixth_amendment

13.  “The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.” Legal Information Institute: Cornell Law School. Retrieved June 7, 2020 from https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fifth_amendment

14.  Taylor, Alan. (June 3, 2020) “American Protest: Images From the Past 24 Hours.” The Atlantic.Retrieved June 8, 2020, from https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2020/06/american-protest-images-past-24-hours/612595/#img07

[1] Use of force by the police during an investigation or an arrest is legally a type of seizure.

Photo Credit: RGB

[liberty-and-injustice-for-all]

Unit 3 Blog Post

In Crash, there are two instances of “Color-Blind Racism.” The first example is when Farhad and his daughter try to buy a gun. Although Farhad and his daughter are Persian, the shopkeeper assumes they are Islamic. He calls Farhad “Osama” and tells him to “plan jihad on your own time.” The second example is when Brendan Fraser’s character, Rick, is discussing how he can gain positive publicity by pinning a medal a “black” firefighter. When one of his employees tells him the firefighter is actually Iraqi, Rick responds, “He's Iraqi? Well, he looks black.”

In the Unit 2 notes for Color-Blind Racism, it says, “If you’re not white you’re black.” I think these are both perfect examples of this notion because both Rick and the shopkeeper do not care about the actual races of the firefighter and Farhad. They see that each is not white, and immediately treat them inferiorly. Rick tries to use the firefighters “non-whiteness” to his advantage, whereas the shopkeeper uses Farhad’s “non-whiteness” as a reason to kick him out of his store. I believe these are accurate portrayals of reality. Quite often in America, as soon as you are perceived as non-white, you are a possible threat. This is especially noticeable at the TSA security check at the airport. In 2012, more than 30 federal officers at Logan International Airport in Boston reported that the airport program “intended to spot telltale mannerisms of potential terrorists...has become a magnet for racial profiling, targeting not only Middle Easterners but also blacks, Hispanics and other minorities” (Schmidt and Lichtblau).

In Crash, there are many instances of dominance versus submissiveness. One example of dominance is when Officer Ryan sexually assaults Christine after pulling over her and her husband. Sine Officer Ryan is in a position of power he is able to perform this atrocious and illegal act without repercussions. I think this is an interesting example of dominance versus submissiveness because it is obvious that Officer Ryan has the upper hand over Christine and Cameron, but he also has the upper hand over his partner, Officer Hanson. Officer Hanson is visibly upset by the assault, and he has the power to stop it, yet he remains silent for fear of angering his more dominant partner. Unfortunately, I believe this is an accurate portrayal of reality. In December of 2015, former Oklahoma City Police Department patrol officer, Daniel Holtzclaw was convicted for his, “common pattern and practice of sexually assaulting African-American women” (Court Document 1, Page 3) while on the job.

This example has an interesting twist. Later on in the movie, Officer Ryan is the first respondent to Christine’s car crash. She is noncompliant at first, but eventually lets him touch her and pull her out of the car. While I understand that the intention of the movie makers was to explain the complexity of humans and their actions, I disliked this scene. I do not think that a sexual assailant deserves “redemption” in any form or quantity, especially in the style of brave heroism. While it made for a dramatic turn of events, I dislike the way it was written and produced.

Following her molestation, Christine berates her husband for not defending her. I thought this was a very interesting way to explore the complexity of masculinity. Christine expects her husband to be masculine and stand up to the cop for her. All of the tension is thrust onto Cameron’s shoulders; not stopping the cop saved him his life but cost him his masculinity in the eyes of his wife. I find it interesting that having her husband be masculine, strong, and defensive is so important to Christine that she would rather Cameron risk his life to fit this expected persona. Officer Ryan instructed Cameron to keep his hands on the vehicle and to remain still. Police officers are instructed to take action when a pulled-over pedestrian is noncompliant or moves when they are not supposed to. Police officers, especially ones like Officer Ryan, have been known to abuse this power and become aggressive and dangerous, especially when dealing with minorities. One of the most famous instances of this is the death of Eric Garner. After two police officers tried to handcuff Garner, he yanked his hands away and threw them up, saying “don’t touch me” (Eric Garner video - Unedited version). After refusing to comply with the officers, he was placed in a prohibited chokehold by Officer Pantaleo and slammed on to the ground, resulting in his death. I believe Eric Garner’s was completely unwarranted, yet Pantaleo was not indicted. In Crash, Cameron was right to remain still, despite Officer Ryan’s actions. Although I do not have personal experience, this is the reason why I believe Christine’s reaction was unrealistic. Following the recent wave of wrongful deaths of black men and women committed by white police officers, I find it hard to believe that a woman would blame her black husband for complying with a white officer’s instructions.

Works Cited:

Schmidt, Michael S., and Eric Lichtblau. "Racial Profiling Rife at Airport, U.S. Officers Say."The New York Times. The New York Times, 11 Aug. 2012. Web. 06 Mar. 2017.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5711616cb09f955a7ba80779/t/571618c9c6fc084899f624e9/1461065929844/Gardner+Adaira+Federal+Case.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpGxagKOkv8