Talk:Edward M. Davis

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

There's also an Ed Davis, former car dealer, named to the Automotive Hall of Fame, as of '99 the only black to make it. Trekphiler 08:18, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite needed[edit]

Not sure the deal here, but BLP board was notified. Article could use serious haircut to cover "just the facts, mam". Major swaths of unsourced analysis/color commentary. Thanks, --Tom 17:31, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where Is The Support?[edit]

I have tried to look for support for the "legends" found in this article. It is a sandwich which quotes dates and times and then editorializes with obvious bias.

In the third paragraph, the writer waxes, "and which held strong institutional values and views within its ranks. The result was a department that saw itself as a bastion for peace and the traditional American values of old Los Angeles." What does this mean? are institutional values some commitment to the values of an institution (whatever they may be) or to the broader institutions of the government, e.g. the Constitution, the rule of law.

Likewise, what are the "traditional values of old Los Angeles? The definitions can be very different depending on the ground each individual stands. If these came from Chief Parker as the writer asserts, and they represent old Los Angeles, these are the values of the '50s which are hard to identify and can range from slavery, anti-hispanic, pre-civil rights to the complete opposite beliefs.

This is just fluff and there is no support "The result" is just someone's belief of some value. Certainly the institution can be identified for what it was after coming from where it came.

This is a wasted paragraph and adds nothing. Chief Davis was what he was and to allege any further by invoking a previous Chief is beyond the license here.

However, it seems what follows is telling of what the writer might hold as his/her values being injected without any evidence. Events are fine and each can draw their own conclusion. Editorializing is not appropriate. Particularly when it belies actual events.

In the fourth paragraph the writer begins, "As the power and numbers of street gangs increased, the community of Los Angeles became the victim of increasing escalations of violence, intimidation, and other felonies." Where does this come from? First their is no "community of Los Angeles". The City of Los Angeles is a massive city of nearly 500 square miles and is made up of dozens of "communities". Most of these have very little to do with each other.

This statement exposes the ignorance of most regarding gangs. I am not going to explain it now. Suffice to say that the period this writer attemppts to explain and gang proliferation was in South Central Los Angeles. The gangs were black and for the most part operated in the many communities of South Central Los Angeles and the victims were black residents.

Continuing the writer adds, "In response, Davis escalated police responses, authorizing the use of Terry stops, large raids on gang strongholds, created the infamous anti-gang unit C.R.A.S.H,..." There was no escalating of response as the writer lumps together. Catchy as it might sound, and cool to dazzle, Terry Stops were not called such in LAPD, as probable cause stops for short detentions were standard activities for police across America for years before Davis became Chief, and the U.S. Supreme only confirmed it as a proper police tactic. There was no escalation for any purpose as it was thr way police had always done business. There were no raids on gand strongholds, as there were no strongholds.

There was no creation of the "infamous" C.R.A.S.H. anti-gang unit. In 1973 TRASH was created and re-named CRASH several months later. I have written under Wikipedia CRASH page the actual history; but I made no changes. My comments can be seen there. All this is total urban legend and shame on Wikipedia.

Next the writer states, "and increasingly forceful and violent means of securing suspects such as chokeholds during arrests." Apparently it is being stated that to control these gangs, LAPD was directed by Davis to increase violence to "secure" suspects by chokeholds. Is this a substitute for handcuffing? Or is it a long recognized tool to overcome resistance in an escalation and descalation of force spectrum?

So-called choleholds had been used by law enforcement for decades before it became politically incorrect to do so. This writer is just piling falsity upon falsity.

Next is the classic, "Are you still beatinmg your wife or have you stopped beating her." Says the writer, "Although the chokeholds were less violent than older pre-War era methods of beating recalcritrent suspects..." This is just unacceptable. First, there are lawful beatings, and unlawful beating. But this writing that LAPD used to beat "recalcitrant" (resisting) suspects, but now they just choke them (don't confuse us with the facts like documentation with some neutrality).

The dangliging of a homosexual over a rail lists a German site as a source and it now is not even available through Google (at least on my computer. Can't Wikpedia do a little better for sources about LAPD tha using a German sex site?

I don't relish having to do what Wikipedia should be doing, and that is requiring minimal credibility for someone who is obviously ignorant, or has an agenda, or both. And I apply that to the contentas well as Wikipedia quality control. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asvrc100 (talk • contribs) 22:35, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Edward M. Davis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:42, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Edward_M._Davis&oldid=1204788988"