11/21/24
April 10, 2007
Hidden: Panthers' Belfour and Peltonen arrested: Once again proving that you can't teach an old dog new tricks.
posted by wingnut4life to hockey at 04:20 AM - 43 comments
Eddie in trouble for drinking? Shocking.
posted by insomnyuk at 08:25 AM on April 10, 2007
Too bad he doesn't have a billion dollars to get out of it anymore.
posted by stevis at 08:49 AM on April 10, 2007
What the hell. Am I reading this right? The 41-year-old native of Carman, Man., refused and walked toward the officer "in a fighting stance" and pushed him, a Miami Beach police report said. Belfour pulled away from the officer trying to arrest him and grabbed his shirt. Belfour then fell forward on the ground, kicking and refusing to place his hands behind his back, the report said. No battery charge? In comparison: Foley got out of the car and started walking toward the officer, as he approached the officer in a menacing manner, the officer fired at the suspect. Foley acknowledged he'd been shot, Brugos said, but continued to move toward the officer, who fired again. Foley then fell to the ground. Foley has had previous run-ins with law enforcement, He was accused of resisting arrest, battery on a police officer and being drunk in public. On that same note, while playing for the Dallas Stars in 2000, Belfour pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of resisting arrest following a scuffle with a security guard at an upscale hotel. There are 2 differences between these situations. 1 Belfour didn't get shot and let's see who knows number 2. The Foley thread here at Spofi was over 100 posts long. Let's see how long this one gets.
posted by Bishop at 09:36 AM on April 10, 2007
Ok, so Eddie is an angry drunk, we already new that. I don't care, I still like the guy. At least he was not breaking things off of fire trucks. WTF Peltonen? On preview: #2, Belfour's a goalie?
posted by MrFrisby at 09:46 AM on April 10, 2007
You know, I was debating adding my two cents to this thread. I was actually going to say " Where's Bishop?", left the thread, returned and here you are. I must admit, my immediate thought was Foley was shot while walking toward the officer. Where's the outrage? I'm normally of the opinion that public people are sometimes held to a different standard. It's not fair, but there it is. So I have to live in a fishbowl and I'm not a public figure. But I must admit, all of the posts who piled on Foley, PacMan Jones, or any other pro athlete who does something stupid and happens to not be of majority European ethnicity are proving Bishop's point by the absence of posts here. I also normally try to avoid posting in certain threads, if I see a train wreck approaching, my first instinct is to run madly in the other direction. My two cents became five, sorry for the rambling post.
posted by yzelda4045 at 09:58 AM on April 10, 2007
Bishop - as much as I agree with you that the Cops are more likely to shoot a black athlete as a white athlete, I'm not so sure the two cases are comparable as simply as that. I mean, I could go find a story written in such a manner that shows an unarmed white guy getting shot by the Cops, but I'm not sure it would prove anything. It would be two examples of bad cops, but not necessarily great evidence for, or against, the world-wide/cross-county/extra-state battle of racist cops vs. black people. But I'm also not sure if you're suggesting that it would be more fair if Belfour had been shot. That doesn't sound very 'solution-y' to me. And I would suggest that the most important difference is that the Cops were called on Belfour who was quite obviously drunk in a bar. I think the situations are different. However, I agree with you that the Foley shooting was criminal.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 10:31 AM on April 10, 2007
...,walked toward the officer "in a fighting stance" and pushed him. Belfour was funnier when he was offering cops extraordinary bribes rather than trying to fight them. Now he's just a mean drunk. Poor Florida.
posted by 86 at 10:36 AM on April 10, 2007
There are 2 differences between these situations. 1 Belfour didn't get shot and let's see who knows number 2. I'll play. I'm guessing the officer involved felt he could control the situation without escalating to the level of drawing his firearm. Of course, I wasn't there and don't know what was going through the police officer's mind. I'm assuming neither were you, but I could be wrong. I respect the very difficult job that our police do every day, and trust that they don't often pull/fire their weapons in a bar/restaurant regularly. As I recall, the situation with Foley was on a dark city street whereas this situation was IN a popular bar. Of course, I could be wrong, as I said, I wasn't there, I'm just reading the article and making suppositions based on the information in that article. Am I close?
posted by tommybiden at 10:42 AM on April 10, 2007
But I must admit, all of the posts who piled on Foley, PacMan Jones, or any other pro athlete who does something stupid and happens to not be of majority European ethnicity are proving Bishop's point by the absence of posts here. What did you (or Bishop) expect? That people would be posting saying, 'Jeez, how come Belfour and Peltonen didn't get shot? The cops should have shot them both!"? I understand the point about some cops getting trigger-happy when dealing with young, obviously able-bodied black men. But when a cop doesn't get trigger-happy and shoot an unarmed person, that's a case of things going right. Somehow it seems...off, to me, to say that there's something wrong here.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 11:51 AM on April 10, 2007
If all cops shoot black athletes when in confrontations with them, how the hell did the City of Cincinnati police officers miss all those guys last year? Marksmanship must not be a skill required to be a cop there. I can't tell you if all the Bengals that were charged with crimes were black, nor do I care what colour they were. It just seems bizarre that none of them were shot, when you would think at least one officer must have had a clear shot at at least one of them. There ought to be an investigation into these non-shootings.
posted by tommybiden at 12:04 PM on April 10, 2007
But I must admit, all of the posts who piled on Foley, PacMan Jones, or any other pro athlete who does something stupid and happens to not be of majority European ethnicity are proving Bishop's point by the absence of posts here. Or maybe it's just the fact that Hockey is not very popular in comparison to the other professional sports. The NHL shut down and hardly anyone noticed. I love watching hockey in person, but it does not translate well through the T.V. (same with baseball)
posted by yay-yo at 12:15 PM on April 10, 2007
Maybe a skinny 41 year old drunk doesn't instill fear in you as a cop while a 20 something jacked up linebacker does. I know which one would or wouldn't scare me.
posted by Debo270 at 12:58 PM on April 10, 2007
Take note of Tommy's response. Notice how he states the Foley incident occurred on a "dark city street", but then admitted he didn't know. He was in his own front yard when he got shot man. And by looking at your examples, are you saying since all black athletes don't get shot, we should be satisfied? The point of my post was to gauge the response of the community toward a white man "approaching and then kicking/pushing" a police officer as opposed to a black man approaching a police officer (i know reaching in his waistband just like Sean Bell was "going to get" a gun). That's always the excuse. I'm obviously not saying, "how come Belfour didn't get shot". I merely saying, notice that he didn't. When is the last time we had a story posted about a cop getting "trigger happy" on a white athlete? And where are the "thug" and "punk" references. "Oh it's just Eddie being Eddie". He's an angry drunk. If this was a black athlete this thread would have been 20 posts long in it's first hour. Instead of outrage towards an upstanding member of the NHL's community, there is mostly reactions to my comparison. Ok, so Eddie is an angry drunk Now he's just a mean drunk Notice these 2 remarks. Here are the key words. SO and JUST. Note how these remarks tend to dismiss or play down the fact that he resisted arrest and then kicked and struggled with the policeman. When I said all Foley did was walk towards the cop, I was asked why I would immediately take the side of the "criminal". Belfour didn't get shot, he only got arrested, there are already a few who are saying it's no big deal. I guess my question is, where is the "I can't believe a pro athlete would do such a thing" crowd. Or since it was "ok" for the cop to shoot Foley, how come nobody is saying Belfour should have been shot? Debo when the hell did it become ok to shot someone based on a policeman's personal fear of them? You just made my point. Fear the big Black guy, he's going to get you, so shoot him. Yet another comment about my post instead of being up in arms about Belfours behavior. Just above this thread is a thread about Pacman Jones being suspended for a fucking year for being convicted in a court of law how many times? Does any 1 know?
posted by Bishop at 01:16 PM on April 10, 2007
Dude, we get the point, but you chose to ignore lbb's point, which would be mine: Foley incident: handled incorrectly by police Belfour incident: handled properly (AFAIK) by the police Why would anyone's immediate reaction be: "Why didn't the cops fuck this up?" Do black males get a raw deal from cops? Yes. Film at 11. Are American attitudes toward this disappointingly unfair and disinterested? Yes. Does Sportsfilter reflect that? Probably so. Let me know when the windmills start to fall over.
posted by yerfatma at 01:23 PM on April 10, 2007
>Maybe a skinny 41 year old Just a quibble. 5'11", 200 pounds. But I see your point.
posted by Philfromhavelock at 01:23 PM on April 10, 2007
So Bishop, let me make sure I understand your point: You are saying the only difference between these two situations and what led to one man getting shot and another not was one of the men in question was black? You usually make some good points here but that is about as far fetched as you can get. It definitely had nothing to do with the fact that one of these happened in a crowded bar with people and other cops around or that Foley would be an intimidating figure approaching you and a stumbling 41 year old drunk would not. Probably the area where these two completely different situations occurred had no influence either. I come on this site a lot, why does someone feel it is necessary to make race the issue with everything? I guess that if pacman was white he wouldn’t have been suspended a year???
posted by Debo270 at 01:33 PM on April 10, 2007
Debo when the hell did it become ok to shot someone based on a policeman's personal fear of them? You just made my point. Fear the big Black guy, he's going to get you, so shoot him. Not ok but lets look at this. You are a cop in a bad area of town. It is late. A large man is approching you(white or black.) You say"stop right there or I will shoot and draw your gun. He keeps coming. After a few more warnings, you fire, hit him, and he keeps coming. That would scare the shit out of me. You are a cop and an old drunk who you have asked to leave the bar refuses. You have several people backing you up and do not see him as a threat. You know he is drunk and he puts up his hands like a old school boxer. I would probably be laughing at him. -Is what the eagle did right- no -Was it any worse than what Foley did? prob not -Were the two totally different situations? YES Where is our friend the cop to help explain this??
posted by Debo270 at 01:42 PM on April 10, 2007
You are a cop in a bad area of town. It is late. A large man is approching you(white or black.) You say"stop right there or I will shoot and draw your gun. He keeps coming. After a few more warnings, you fire, hit him, and he keeps coming. That would scare the shit out of me. Bzzzzt. Foley was not shot in a bad area of town, he was shot in his own front yard (he plays football and has a decent salary, remember) after he'd been followed there by an off-duty cop. Poway is most definitely not a bad area; there are a number of local pro athletes living there, including Tony Gwynn.
posted by LionIndex at 02:12 PM on April 10, 2007
Debo when the hell did it become ok to shot someone based on a policeman's personal fear of them? You just made my point. Fear the big Black guy, he's going to get you, so shoot him. Bishop, you have a valid point here -- and I have agreed with you on this in the past -- that a fear based on racist sterotypes rather than an actual threat is a very bad thing, and when the person made fearful has a weapon and a license to kill, that's about as bad as it gets. However, you're trying to connect these two incidents in some ways that I don't believe they are connected. There's more difference between the two situations than just the race of the civilian: most importantly, they were different cops. Different cops, different PDs, different states. If you want to compare the reaction of the same cop to two drunk, physically able, maybe belligerent guys, one of whom is white and one of whom is black, then you've maybe got something. But how does Foley's shooting have anything at all to do with Belfour's not getting shot? And how do the reactions to Foley's shooting have anything to do with the reactions to Belfour's non-shooting? You're down the rabbit hole on this one, seriously.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 02:36 PM on April 10, 2007
Take note of Tommy's response. Notice how he states the Foley incident occurred on a "dark city street", but then admitted he didn't know. He was in his own front yard when he got shot man. Bishop, I did not state that the Foley incident occurred on a dark city street, I said I recalled it had occurred there. Those are two different things, and I stated in the very next sentence, I could be wrong about the location. Assuming you are correct about him being in his front yard, and the facts as stated by you that there are only 2 things different about these incidents, I assume you have all the facts on both cases, and are all knowing. Do you know how well lit the front yard was. Could you tell me how many candlefeet of power the yard was lit with man? I don't think anyone thinks its "ok" for a police officer to shoot anyone just for the sake of shooting them. I think for the vast majority of police officers the decision to pull or not pull the trigger is something that weighs on them tremendously, and they only have seconds to make that decision. Overall, to try to connect these two situations is bringing us to opening night in the theatre of the absurd.
posted by tommybiden at 02:49 PM on April 10, 2007
I don't recall the exact details of the Foley incident. I do seem to remember it caused quite the debate on Spofi as to the justification of the shooting. And I can't say for sure what happened in this case as I was not present at the time. I can comment on the very limited exposure I've had to these situations through various documentaries/television specials and it seems to me that as long as there is some form of communication with the suspect, the police seem to be able to remain more calm and in control. On those same shows, the times when more excessive force is shown seem to follow attempts to make contact with no response or more obvious immediate threats to the cops and/or victims present. I guess what I mean is that if Belfour was resisiting but also verbalizing his resistance, the police knew right away that they were dealing with an obvious drunk who chances are would not be in a position to severely endanger himself, officers or innocent on lookers before the police would be able to subdue him. You also have more people there to assist if the situation began to spiral out of control. In the Foley case, and Bishop please understand I am in no way supporting the police officer or his actions, does anyone know/remember if Foley was responding to the calls of the officer? If I am a cop and I am shouting for someone to stop while pointing my weapon at them and they continue at me with no expression of intent, verbally or otherwise, I may be inclined to fear for my safety and take appropriate measures as per my training. If after firing one shot, my suspect continues at me, again with no expression of intent, I may be inclined to shoot again. I don't know. I think the incidents are different enough that you can't use this as proof of police bias against African-Americans. (there are far better examples I'm sure) As many pointed out above, different cops, departments, in a more public venue, and the police were notified ahead of time as to what the scene would be and were better prepared to handle. I think both cases further illustrate that some professional athletes believe they are above law and can come and go as the please without consequence. Just my humble opinion.
posted by ampto11 at 04:38 PM on April 10, 2007
Wow, look at the amount of responses to what I wrote, then count them against the responses about what Belfour did. Sickening. Meanwhile, the fucking ridiculous yahoo snippet (i thought that was frowned upon) thread about punishing the young black guys in the NFL has grown to 20 posts within the first 2 hours. 1 poster going as far as saying Pacman should be made to attend mini camp and training camp without pay (work for us for free) I wonder where that type of thinking stems from. Now observe how many people commented on what Belfours punishment should be? Look at how outraged every is at Belfours actions. Then every time some shit like this is pointed out, some assfarmer brings up how many white people slam Pete Rose Spofi.
posted by Bishop at 05:18 PM on April 10, 2007
So, what is your fucking point? Blacks have it harder than whites in America? Well, no shit. Blacks have been discriminated against widely in America, and in many cases still are? Not exactly earth-shattering. That even those in white America who see themselves as open-minded, tolerant and fair may still harbor some silent, subconcious fear of the black man, as he's been demonized over the years? Anybody here not know that already? It happens. It's happened since the first black man was brought over here, locked in chains in the bottom of a boat. It's gonna happen, unfortunately, far beyond my lifetime. What are you changing by ranting and raving on a sports website about the inequities between the reporting and response of a white guy's crime and the reporting and response of a black guy's crime? Not a fucking thing, that's what. All you're doing is pissing people off, seizing on any little misstatement to further an argument that can't and won't be won by either side, and remind us all about your civil rights cred, which is indeed impressive. My suggestion? If you're not already, get involved. Do something real, not something on an internet sports blog. Work with the church, work with the government, work with the police department's citizen action committee. Damn near every community in America has one, and one of their prime duties is to assist in police - public confrontations, concerns, and conflicts. Or, just keep screaming here, and see how much fulfillment that brings you. I have a feeling it's not doing anything to help the cause you seem most passionate about.
posted by The_Black_Hand at 06:35 PM on April 10, 2007
Something not mentioned in the story, but reported elsewhere, was that after Belfour lunged at the cop, the cop tazered him.
posted by GOD at 06:37 PM on April 10, 2007
What are you changing by ranting and raving on a sports website about the inequities between the reporting and response of a white guy's crime and the reporting and response of a black guy's crime? Maybe the perception of some people who otherwise might totally overlook the inequity in the situation and never realize that these perceptions really exist, not just on TV, and that there are real consequences of fairness involved. There are 15,000 people (or so) in this community -- if Bishop spent 15 minutes today, how many of those people would he have to reach to accomplish something "real?" Bishop's ranting might not satisfy him a bit. But it might open, hey, even a dozen eyes to the notion that some responses to people and situations should be challenged. If he hadn't said something, I might have just listened to the outrage at Jones and the tisking chuckle at Belfour and not for a moment considered that there might be something wrong with it. And maybe there really isn't, since these are totally different situations, but at least he's got me thinking about how I feel and why I feel that way. Baby steps. The same ones that shifted the very firm understanding that women belong in the kitchen. My dad's generation is still struggling with that one.
posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 06:56 PM on April 10, 2007
Wow, look at the amount of responses to what I wrote, then count them against the responses about what Belfour did. Sickening. Sickening? You deliberately set out to derail the thread; don't bitch because you succeeded.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 07:54 PM on April 10, 2007
Maybe the perception of some people who otherwise might totally overlook the inequity in the situation and never realize that these perceptions really exist, not just on TV, and that there are real consequences of fairness involved. Can you enlighten me on the inequity of this situation? And these perceptions? Keeping in mind that post #3 was in regards to an Ed Belfour and Steve Foley comparison. There are 2 differences between these situations. 1 Belfour didn't get shot and let's see who knows number 2. If you really think that Mr. Bishop's, simplification of these two events, is enlightening... I suggest that you spend about five minutes trying to find maybe more than one difference between the two cases. If he hadn't said something, I might have just listened to the outrage at Jones and the tisking chuckle at Belfour and not for a moment considered that there might be something wrong with it. You see, there is no outrage at Jones here, the discussion was about the inequities between Ed Belfour and Steve Foley... actually the thread was simply about Belfour being drunk at a bar, getting beligerant and getting arrested...before someone made you question why you were thinking about that and not about what color Belfour's skin is. My hunch is that TBH's definition of real is one that involves a sincere attempt to solve problems when they occur and not a sincere desire to create them at any given moment.
posted by tselson at 10:55 PM on April 10, 2007
Well, then I'll stop creating problems, too. After this: This post wasn't likely to engender much conversation over what Belfour's arrest means to Florida's chances next year. Bishop saw an angle to this story that was provocative and he asked some questions. If you want to ignore his angle, fine. If you want to respond by telling him that you don't see the connections he's making and here's why, fine. If you don't want to discuss social issues because this is a sports site, then there should be stronger limitations on FPP's that address non-sports events that happen to involve athletes. I object to telling Bishop to go join the Peace Corps and leave us alone. No racial issues here, move along. Maybe there is an underlying racial issue to some of these stories, and even if the answer is "probably not," I don't see the harm in putting a check on them. And some good exploration just might come about from it, even if it is only among a handful of sports fans and not a whole congregation of townspeople. The guy spends a few minutes putting his two cents in and in response he gets career advice? I don't see Bishop's behavior in this context as any worse than the myriad of folks who come repeatedly into threads about the Yankees and scream how the Evil Empire spends too much money, and you can't buy a championship. Is it a more worthy endeavor here to engender hatred of the Yankees than hatred of racism?
posted by The Crafty Sousepaw at 11:09 AM on April 11, 2007
Is it a more worthy endeavor here to engender hatred of the Yankees than hatred of racism? Doesn't work for me. The lack of nuance and the fact 90% of his participation in this community is to scream about how no one understands isn't doing anything for anyone. It just comes off irrational and makes cogent, meaningful discussion less likely.
posted by yerfatma at 11:33 AM on April 11, 2007
I agree with TCS. A good chunk of people on this board wouldn't see a racial issue unless someone was yelling racial epithets while wearing a white sheet. The fact that Bishop may point out places where he thinks it exists should result in agreement or not. It is certainly no reason to condescendingly suggest more appropriate activities where he should spend his time.
posted by bperk at 11:43 AM on April 11, 2007
I'm not trying to speak for anyone else, but what I feel about Bishop's "commentary" seems to possibly be reflected in other posts ... TCS, you seem to be granting Bishop a lot of rope. I agree in that I don't have a problem with him raising the question - but the tact of presentation and repeated badgering is overboard. I didn't comment at the time in the Foley thread, and I'm sure Bishop will tell me that's because I don't care about a black man getting shot. But the truth of the matter is I wasn't going to post about Belfour either, even though I think his actions are pretty damn stupid. And, if I HAD posted about Foley, it would've along the lines of "Man, I wouldn't have wanted to be in that cop's shoes, but it definitely seems like this should've been handled better, particularly avoiding shooting Foley." The question was posed "what Belfours punishment should be?" My response, taken in context to the rest of this argument, is that I wholeheartedly agree that the Foley shooting was unjust. And, I recognize that racial discrimination opens the door for the possibility of a lack of balanced punishment. However, keeping in mind that Foley being shot was NOT deserved, Belfour's punishment should be way fucking less than the punishment for someone who, having just put multiple lives in jeopardy by driving very aggressively while drunk, assertively advances toward someone while their friend appears to be making an attempt to run that same person down with a car. *Raising the idea that there's a potential for racial incongruity here = one thing, respectable *Following that up by telling me multiple times that I'm racist because I refuse to agree that the only reason one guy got shot by a cop is because he's black or because I failed to immediately make a post that says "SEE, THIS is how Foley should've been treated" = something else entirely that makes me feel very, very sorry for Bishop
posted by littleLebowski at 12:50 PM on April 11, 2007
having just put multiple lives in jeopardy by driving very aggressively while drunk, assertively advances toward someone while their friend appears to be making an attempt to run that same person down with a car. Dude the only person that saw him driving "aggressively enough to kill someone" is the person who had to come up with an excuse real quick for why he just tried to KILL him. Get it? That justifies it. Just like "reaching into his waistband" justifies it. Get it? If the act committed by the off duty cop was criminal to the point where he would commit murder, did you ever think that he may lie as well? WTF do you think he is going to say? Man I was scared so I just shot that nigger? NO, that's the end of his career. Get it? This argument and view point towards it always offends the same ones. I know that's not a coincidence. TBH, why would I go preach at a church when I'm trying to reach my fellow members here. Sure every time this is discussed, people tend to lean more towards my delivery than my view point. Just once stop looking at how pissed off I am and sit in my shoes. Can you? If this was a Black athlete thread, there would be way more people here discussing the fact that he resisted arrest (pushing and kicking policemen). Go review the Foley thread and look at how many members here pointed out that he "walked toward the cop in a menacing manner" just to justify the shooting. There is not 1 person discussing how outraged they are by Belfour behaving in a criminal manner. Look say no 1 is talking about it because I derailed the thread. Make whatever excuses you like. The fact remains, He is JUST an angry drunk, that's all, nothing more. He's not a criminal, thug, gansta or a role model for young hockey players. He is not disgracing the NHL or it's reputation. Will he even be suspended for fighting police? NO, NHL is majority white, they're not thugs or ganstas when they fight twice a game. It's tradition to fight, to knock each other unconscious. There are even "greatest hockey fight" threads here at Spofi. It's ok. Fighting in the NHL is allowed because a white man says so, fighting is not allowed in the NBA or NFL because a white man says so. Therefore the majority of white people here at Spofi have the right to judge what is criminal behavior concerning Pro athletes. Trust me it's probably just a coincidence that the majority black populated sports are more scrutinized than the majority white populated. Not to mention if NASCAR was majority black populated and the drivers where intentionally trying to crash each other at over 150 mph, they would be the road rage havingest, drive by shooting comparingest gang members in sports. But as long as it's majority white populated, hey "rubbin's racing". I saw a thread here a while back about why NASCAR isn't more integrated. Shit, because the black guys wouldn't last long. Wouldn't be to long before an "off duty" white cop followed one of them home and shot them for driving to fast. Then to justify it all he has to do is say "he was reaching for something". Look at Rodney King, he was driving like Foley, then resisted like Belfour and he was beaten within an inch of his life. One day that might be me, so here is a big screw you to my fellow Spofi members that don't "feel like hearing about it". The racism is not only in the particular situations that are referenced, but more so in the way WE Spofi members view them. Why should I go to church and preach to the choir, when the one's who's eyes I'm trying to open are reading this right here on this "measly lil old sports website" as TBH put it.
posted by Bishop at 02:08 PM on April 11, 2007
Go review the Foley thread and look at how many members here pointed out that he "walked toward the cop in a menacing manner" just to justify the shooting. There is not 1 person discussing how outraged they are by Belfour behaving in a criminal manner. I pointed this out to you twice. You ignored it twice. I'll try one more time. Foley got shot. A discussion then ensued regarding whether or not the shooting was justified, with IIRC considerable disagreement. Some people justified the cop's actions, and made reference to Foley's alleged behavior in doing so; some people felt it was an inappropriate use of force. The important thing, though, was that something happened, and people commented on it, and Foley's alleged behavior became a subject for comment because something happened, and because people made comments to the effect that it should not have happened. Belfour did not get shot. He got tasered, wrestled down and cuffed. Nobody said, "Hmm, wow, they were kinda rough on that guy, weren't they?" Nobody challenged the cops' use of force in this case. If they had, do you honestly think no reference would have made to Belfour's behavior, to defend the cops' actions?
posted by lil_brown_bat at 03:31 PM on April 11, 2007
It is certainly no reason to condescendingly suggest more appropriate activities where he should spend his time. I'm guilty of assumption here, because I think you're talking about my statement(s). If you're not, sorry...my mistake. If you are, you're wrong. Dead wrong. This broken record plays all too often, and whether you, TCS, Bishop, or anybody think it's helping or not, my personal opinion (and that's certainly all it is) is that it's not doing much at all to change minds, especially when you consider the style of delivery. When I suggested that Bishop's time and passion would be better spent in real-world activities, I was dead serious. I feel that a person can do better from within their community, trying to make things right, than to scream at the top of their lungs about the racial inequalities we see in America on a sports website (not a "measly lil ol' sports website," Bishop, which I never said in the first place. If you're going to quote me, please do it accurately.). By "community," I mean the place where you live. Sure, I spend a lot of time on SpoFi, probably too much, but I don't live here. I live in South Bend, Indiana, and when something happens in my community that bothers me, I try to do something about it. My motives in suggesting that Bishop channel his considerable passion and righteous anger were sincere, and I stand by them.
posted by The_Black_Hand at 04:04 PM on April 11, 2007
Yes, TBH, I was referring to your comment because I don't believe you should presume to know how Bishop should spend his time based on his posts on a sports site. You don't know the sum total of what issues in the world are important to him based on his posts. You also don't know anything about how he spends his time. Why give him unsolicited advice about how his energies could best be expended? That rhetorical tool has been used on me on this forum. I thought it was dismissive - it sounds like saying since this is so important to your life, why don't you go away and fight this battle somewhere else.
posted by bperk at 04:53 PM on April 11, 2007
Not to mention if NASCAR was majority black populated and the drivers where intentionally trying to crash each other at over 150 mph, they would be the road rage havingest, drive by shooting comparingest gang members in sports. But as long as it's majority white populated, hey "rubbin's racing". I saw a thread here a while back about why NASCAR isn't more integrated. Shit, because the black guys wouldn't last long. Wouldn't be to long before an "off duty" white cop followed one of them home and shot them for driving to fast. Seriously, this is what you're going with? The NASCAR hates black people angle? Quick question Bishop, has there ever been a police shooting where the victim and the officer were both black? Which one is the racist in that scenario? Or are those the only times a black man is truly guilty of committing a crime and an officer justified in using his weapon? Look, it's obvious that racism is still an issue in this country. Unfortunately, it will probably remain an issue for years to come. That doesn't mean that everything is centered on race, especially in sports. People commit crimes, white and black, hispanic too. No race is without it's shady characters. To suggest, as you seem to do quite often, that most arrests, suspensions, shooting, etc. where black people are involved is motivated by hatred and racisim is, in my opinion, inaccurate and counter productive. I don't want to undermine your passion or beliefs and I sincerely hope I've never done that to anyone here. I come on here most days and enjoy reading the discussions. From time to time I'll post something if I am motivated by the discussion. I respect that you have the right to feel the way you do, as everyone should. But I reserve the right to disagree with the tone and approach you take in expressing your opinion. You don't seem very receptive to others opinions if adverse to your own. What I hear from you is that all white poeple are absolved from any wrong doing because they're white, and all black people will eventually be shot to death in their front yard by an off duty white cop.
posted by ampto11 at 05:01 PM on April 11, 2007
"Hmm, wow, they were kinda rough on that guy, weren't they?" Likewise if that's all that happened to Foley (getting tasered) would I even be using it as a reference? If Foley only got tasered who could say it was just or unjust? Only the people that were there. I think a few people who don't even agree with me half the time, think that the shooting of Foley was criminal. We still haven't addressed the simple fact that in the NBA/NFL the common theme is punish the criminals, it's about time ( the thread is merely about their punishments, it's not even an article) If it was any other topic 5 people would have jumped all over the poster about posting a yahoo snippet (please don't make me link examples, you know it's true.) While over here in the NHL it's all good, he's just an angry drunk. No need to send messages. No need to label the offenders criminals, gangstas or thugs. As a matter of fact let's just continue talking about the comparisons made by Bishop. So what Belfour disobeyed police like Foley did. He's not a big scary gangsta with a posse, wearing gang colors and bling. What I hear from you is that all white people are absolved from any wrong doing because they're white, and all black people will eventually be shot to death in their front yard by an off duty white cop. Of course that's all you hear, odds are you'll never have to stare at the working end of a police issued pistol merely because you "look like" the stereo-type of a hand gun carrying hiphop dope dealer. You'll also never get a call that one of your family members was shot over 10 times by police just because the police "thought" he might be getting ready to commit a crime. Until you suffer such loss, trust me, I don't expect you to ever understand what I'm saying. And I definitely don't expect for you to actually see what I'm writing. I only expect you to see how I'm writing it. It's kind of like disliking a pro athlete so much because of their swagger, or the way they dress, talk or carry themselves that it causes some of us to over look the contributions they make to the game itself.
posted by Bishop at 05:37 PM on April 11, 2007
And I definitely don't expect for you to actually see what I'm writing. Step back and realize this is the kind of thing crazy people say. I think you have something important to contribute here, but prolonged rants about how we should think about issues probably isn't doing it.
posted by yerfatma at 06:07 PM on April 11, 2007
All I have to add is that Ray Emery would totally demolish Ed Belfour in any form of brawl.
posted by qbert72 at 06:17 PM on April 11, 2007
See: meaning considering my view point instead of putting so much stock into it's delivery. Hey, but thanks for all your input. It's been more than helpful. Do black males get a raw deal from cops? Yes. Film at 11. Are American attitudes toward this disappointingly unfair and disinterested? Yes. Does Sportsfilter reflect that? Probably so. Let me know when the windmills start to fall over. posted by yerfatma at 1:23 PM CDT on April 10 Sounds important enough to you. Next time just say who gives a fuck. Or add something to the posted topic. I never understood the ones who just cry about someone else crying. LBB, THB, they may disagree, but they add their view point. Simply saying move along, no one gives a fuck is something I would expect from the likes of Don Imus (just before he runs to Jesse or AL).
posted by Bishop at 11:01 PM on April 11, 2007
I sure am glad that I posted this story...
posted by wingnut4life at 04:24 AM on April 12, 2007
Simply saying move along, no one gives a fuck is something I would expect from the likes of Don Imus (just before he runs to Jesse or AL). You got me. Let me put my white hood back on so you can't hear me. No one on the Internet is reading a 1,000 word screed, and they definitely aren't reading a dozen of them. So whale away, but realize it's become an echo chamber. When you honestly try to engage in respectful dialogue and listen to the viewpoints of others, do let me know.
posted by yerfatma at 06:07 AM on April 12, 2007
There's the Ed I know and love. He was probably reminiscing about his glory days and hating the fact that he is playing for Florida right now.