Sitting while Black

[Inkachu]

Read the thread before asking ignorant questions.

How about if you learn some manners before addressing me again? Thanks.

 

[Inkachu]

A security guard has a right to keep his place of business secure, that is what they are hired for.

Those rights, would not extend to going outside the place of business, to tell someone to leave a public area.

Don't see why this is so hard to grasp.

Nothing is "hard to grasp" here, but thanks for the rudeness anyway.

For someone who doesn't live in St Paul and has never heard of the "Skyway" until today and is trying to ascertain what sort of area this is, these are completely valid questions. Is it considered the same sort of area as a sidewalk (public)? Or more like the walkway inside a mall (private)? Apparently some areas of the Skyway are considered public and some are considered private. Every source so far has said that he was in a private area (only that he claimed he didn't see signage stating as much).

 

[CaDan]

Note: Since the link was changed, all I have to go on right now is the police reports.

He was trespassing in an area not open to the public, and refused to cooperate with security and then with police. You make it sound like he jumped up and headed off as soon as he was confronted. Not what happened. If he HAD simply gotten up and left as soon as he was asked to, the rest wouldn't have occurred. Acting like a maniac (fighting, screaming, yelling) didn't exactly help his cause, either. Also, he claimed he was there to pick up his children from a daycare inside the building, but when the officers asked if they needed to call someone else to pick up his children, he said his kids weren't even there (?).

Lots of other information provided throughout the thread, including information on the easement for public use throughout the Saint Paul skyway system.

But thanks for playing!

 

[SummerMadness]

So, the police reports were falsified? Because both the security guard and police officers stated he refused to answer when questioned repeatedly over the course of several minutes. It wasn't until he was up and walking and was confronted by the additional officers that he started talking. He immediately informed the guard about why he was there? Again, I'm going by the police reports, that's all I've seen so far about this story.

As I said before, read the thread before asking ignorant questions. Saying your question in ignorant is a statement of fact, it's not a personal attack.

How about if you learn some manners before addressing me again? Thanks.

I did not address you rudely. You are asking questions that have been answered and/or addressed in the thread already, so it is obvious that you have not read the thread. Here is a place to start: watch the video and read the police report, compare the two. Read the statutes and laws already posted here. If you do all these things, then you will realize your questions have been already addressed.

 

[CaDan]

Nothing is "hard to grasp" here, but thanks for the rudeness anyway.

For someone who doesn't live in St Paul and has never heard of the "Skyway" until today and is trying to ascertain what sort of area this is, these are completely valid questions.

All of which have been answered in thread. But you decided to comment with unfounded opinions before reading that. Why is that the case? That is, why--before reviewing the evidence provided--did you decide that the scary Negro had to be in the wrong and the cops and security guard were in the right?

Consider why that was your immediate opinion.

Consider why that is apparently the immediate opinion of America.

 

[CaDan]

As I said before, read the thread before asking ignorant questions. Saying your question in ignorant is a statement of fact, it's not a personal attack.

I did not address you rudely. You are asking questions that have been answered and/or addressed in the thread already, so it is obvious that you have not read the thread. Here is a place to start: watch the video and read the police report, compare the two. Read the statutes and laws already posted here. If you do all these things, then you will realize your questions have been already addressed.

How dare you address the White lady like that!

 

[CaDan]

IMHO even if I'm walking down Main Street USA, if a security guard or police officer sees the need to ask me where I'm going or what my business is in that area, I have no problem complying because I'm not doing anything wrong. Likewise, all this guy had to do was say "Sure, no problem" and get up and move along instead of first ignoring the security guard and police, and then getting belligerent and hollering about racism. Everyone knows that certain people have a problem with authority, especially if that authority happens to be white and hold a police badge. Instead of having the mindset of being peaceable and avoiding conflict, they act antagonistic and passive aggressive, sort of "daring" the oppressive white cops to do something, and then they scream and holler when their childish behavior is acted upon. It's the equivalent of telling your child to get away from the stove a dozen times, then when you finally lose your cool and your child dashes into the next room and says "I am getting away, I am getting away!" They had it coming for ignoring authority and direct commands. By the way, the commands were not at all unreasonable. "My name is ___ and I'm here to ___". OK, thank you, have a good day.

If some black cop came up to me and said "This area isn't for the public, you need to move along", their race wouldn't even enter my mind as being a factor. I'd say "Oh okay, sure" and go somewhere else and go about my day. Kinda preferable to winding up in jail for the sake of making some kind of socio-political statement. If I decided to ignore said cop while they repeatedly ask for my name or my business, and then try to walk away while they're still questioning me, and then start screaming "racist!" when they eventually stop me, and I wind up in jail... who put me there? I DID.

You can't say that you want racism to end and then refuse to be part of ending it.

And these scenarios happen precisely how often to White ladies? How about never.

 

[stamperben]

All of which have been answered in thread. But you decided to comment with unfounded opinions before reading that. Why is that the case? That is, why--before reviewing the evidence provided--did you decide that the scary Negro had to be in the wrong and the cops and security guard were in the right?

Consider why that was your immediate opinion.

Consider why that is apparently the immediate opinion of America.

I'd make that opinion one of a WASP America. The rest of us have an idea as to the why of the matter...

 

[CaDan]

Security guards have the authority to question and detain people; why would they not have the authority to ask someone to leave an area?

Please provide a citation to Minnesota law that gives them that authority and the circumstances when they may exercise it.

Thanks!

 

[cow451]

Security guards have the authority to question and detain people; why would they not have the authority to ask someone to leave an area?

They do not have the authority to detain anyone for just any reason. It is not illegal to remain anonymous unless one is informed that a crime is being investigated and that one's identity is pertinent to such investigation.

 

[Joykins]

And these scenarios happen precisely how often to White ladies? How about never.

White ladies are usually street harassed on the basis of sex alone.

 

[nightflight]

White ladies are usually street harassed on the basis of sex alone.

That doesn't count!

 

[PreachersWife2004]

White ladies are usually street harassed on the basis of sex alone.

Ooh! Male supremacy!

 

[Joykins]

Look what happened to the nice Muslim lady

NYC cops arrest human rights lawyer waiting outside restaurant while her kids used restroom

 

[bhsmte]

Look what happened to the nice Muslim lady

NYC cops arrest human rights lawyer waiting outside restaurant while her kids used restroom

I guess if you practice this sort of stuff enough, you eventually get the wrong person.

 

[abysmul]

Look what happened to the nice Muslim lady

NYC cops arrest human rights lawyer waiting outside restaurant while her kids used restroom

Yet another reason why LEOs should have cams on them running all the time.

 

[CaDan]

And . . . the City Attorney has stated the area was not "employees only" and was open to the public according the the Pioneer Press.

City attorney: FNB seats in skyway are public | NewsCut | Minnesota Public Radio News

You can go the the PressPatch to see the rest of the story, but there is a disturbing video of Public Negritude there.

Also reported is that that the building owners are messing around trying to prevent reporting by lying about public use of the space.

 

[CaDan]

I haven't seen any such clear evidence. Ca Dan keeps referring to a public easement grant and then magically leaping to the idea that this public easement includes everything everywhere and there's just no support for that position. The signs informing the public that the seating is off limits were posted and the security guards were doing their jobs in enforcing the owners' valid and legal rules.
Mr. Lollie's behavior is what lead to his arrest and the severity of it. Justifed or not, NO ONE has a right to resist arrest. If you are wrongly arrested you sue after the fact, you do not fight with the police.

All your statements here are false.

 

[CaDan]

This is now a test of honesty.

If you argued that Mr. Lollie had no right to sit on that bench. If you argued that the skyways are not subject to a public easement. If you argued that the guard for the First National Bank Building had the right to roust Mr. Lollie.

You were wrong. Wrong on the facts and wrong on the law.

If you are an honest person, you will admit your error. If you are a Christian, you now know you have borne false witness. This is your chance to repent. Your God is a forgiving God and you can look to God's mercy and forgiveness.

 

[HorsieJuice]

This is now a test of honesty.

If you argued that Mr. Lollie had no right to sit on that bench. If you argued that the skyways are not subject to a public easement. If you argued that the guard for the First National Bank Building had the right to roust Mr. Lollie.

You were wrong. Wrong on the facts and wrong on the law.

If you are an honest person, you will admit your error. If you are a Christian, you now know you have borne false witness. This is your chance to repent. Your God is a forgiving God and you can look to God's mercy and forgiveness.