Drathnoxis said:
This thread is completely retarded. There really is no reason for this to be a public issue. It was a private misunderstanding with both parties making mountains out of molehills. Nobody was harmed. And yet here we are, trying these two in the court of public opinion. More words and evidence have been presented in this thread than were contained in the entirety of the conflict that we are judging. It could have been resolved near instantly with proper communication and yet this will be dragged out for who knows how many weeks on the internet.
I wish they'd bring back R&P so I wouldn't get curious about titles and be inadvertently drawn into crap like this.
A private misunderstanding that I and many others who look like us share, and who had experienced the cops used as a leveraging chip to order one to capitulate.
Do you know why it needs to be public? Because a lot of people do not believe minorities when they say they are arrested for nothing.
Honestly play it out. With out that video, should any minority roll the dice that they are going to get a 'human' cop who will talk out the situation and try to find a common ground? Or should said minority heed the myriad of cases where the police report one thing, and the video evidence shows the fabrications?
You have the luxury to see this as a private misunderstanding. For us 'Michel's? It's business as usual.
And before you say anything, you have to realize you're talking to a man who nearly had a gun drawn on him by the cops because he was giving another person's credit card to another officer outside the police station. It's simply a different world, and people must understand that.
generals3 said:
But how did he gain access to it? he wasn't a resident and his friend was coming from the outside, it's quite obvious he slipped through. That doesn't mean he should have any more access than anyone not authorised to enter the building who didn't already slip through. All this nonsense could have been avoided by answering one or two reasonable questions. He was not asked unreasonable things and he was in the wrong to begin with. Getting inside a property you shouldn't have access to puts you in the wrong, the fact that someone who is authorised to let you in is supposed to come at some point in the future doesn't change the fact that at that point in time you're not supposed to be there.
The fact people defend someone in the wrong because he "bravely stood up" to someone calmly asking reasonable questions is absurd. And it's even more absurd the white guy gets shamed just for calmly asking asking reasonable questions.
Two things.
The guy is using a method that literally millions of Americans without malice use every day. It's a Mores at this point. No one bats an eye when a woman tailgates. Why? Because we're programmed to feel churlish for not holding the door open for her proper. She's a lady after all.
It feels very familiar that the lines of the Mores are always tested with certain individuals of this population. That's what drives people up the wall.
And two, it doesn't matter how polite your questions are. I can politely refuse. I can rudely refuse. But no matter how pretty you want to make Cukor's actions, Michel is under no duty to respond.
Really look at the pains you take to color how Cukor is speaking. It paints a great picture, but it's not actually important to this case. If Cukor was rude and confrontational, would that suddenly make Michel's right not to answer more understandable? Should I get every girl's number I ask for because I'm being so very charming?
Because I just rewatched the video. Again. It's on the first post. Michel spoke in a tone matching Cukor's. He calmly spoke as well and suggested that it could just be over if Cukor just walked away. He used no curses until his friend came around, and that was after being called a Trespasser and enduring his smirk.
I can easily say Cukor was being a dick. Does that change is ability to ask questions?
No. But even if he was a saint in asking questions, that still doesn't give Michel any more reason to answer his questions.
That's the difference. I cringe at Michel cursing in front of the kid. No matter how mad you are, that lowers my opinion of you if you do something like that and don't apologize. Even if I get that anger, being in a similar situation all of the time and having the world always expect you to handle it with niceness and calm tones, no matter what it could actually mean for you. I think they are both dicks.
But I recognize that Cukor still has the ability to ask questions. His ability does not change or hinge on my personal opinion of him. And Michel still has the ability to deny answering question. Same goes. I think it would be absurd for Michel to call up the cops because someone is insisting on making him answer his questions. I equally think it's absurd that Cukor would call the cops to make someone answer his questions... oh, and while already tainting the police's perception by labeling him doing an illegal act.
And actually, this is what it comes down to. Like I said before, Michel calmly asked Cukor to disengage. Cukor did not. Cukor calmly asked Cukor to ring Michel's friend. Michel said he didn't have to do that. Both sides asked reasonable things, both sides did not comply.
And we will all read our personal bias into this situation. Before you accuse, admit your own.
