I won't say that doesn't happen, but there were a lot of incidents that made it in the news that were just plain dumb on the "victim's" part.

They don't understand that any signs of non compliance can lead to an escalated case where an officer in duty can be shot. The threshold for "Maximum Tolerance" varies. When the authorities say you stop and get on your knees. Just fucking do it. If they seem tense, don't fucking move. But no. Here in America we exercise our "Rights" muscle just so we can be an absolute dick. When an officer takes you down or shoots you because it since they deemed that your actions might pose a grave threat to their safety, you or those who want to take advantage of the situation will twist things. They call foul play, excessive force and the worst case, cry racism and take to the streets.  People just really have narrow minds or like to twist the arm of the authorities just so they can drive their destructive agendas.

I'll pay 10 bucks these anarchists won't even set foot at being cops, or if they do, they would to a real fucking shit job at it.

And the ones who were unarmed, complied, and still killed??

its not. Obama an his identity politics did his best to pull us apart from each other, but we survived. Now growing back together.

There are some (of all races) who make it their full time job to find something racist in everything. The media which still thinks it is the racist ara of Obama then plays that game. But people as a hole are waking up.

"I won't say that doesn't happen"

If you're baiting me into saying there are no rotten cops then I'm sorry to disappoint you. However you must accept that cops are also human beings who value their life.

Oh please, no one is baiting you. When I read things like "they should've complied" it reminds me of comments like "she shouldn't have dressed liked that". Victim blaming. 

Looks like you really have no idea how it actually is on the field. Must be nice only knowing 1 side of the coin.

I don't wish to continue arguing when the best thing you can only throw back is Victim Blaming.

I always thought it was people from Latin America that were descended from people of those countries, but it's hardly easy to trace that anyway. Equally, I don't understand the difference between Latino and Hispanic. I always thought those demographics were more or less the same.

In answer to the OP, I think it stems to how the slave trade operated in the US compared to other countries. Although whether this is actually the case I don't know. Coming from the UK, bizarrely I'd say most Brits (including me) know more about the US slave trade than our own. Hard to say but in the Uk the main social conflict always seems to be more rich v poor than in the US where it's more centres around race.

As a black Brazilian Lawyer I find it very interesting how many in our country keeps denying the rampant racism that still exist in Brazil.

Even when you tell about Dilma's cabinet having just one black might be an indicative of how the government gives the example about a black face in top position for the other black brazilians. In this sense, it is completely different of what happens in the USA, which is an example for Blacks, since there there were only 400.000 slaves, whereas in Brazil there were 4.9 million.

But the argument in Brazil is always the same: there are not enough qualified black professionals to be appointed to higher positions. The same you will you see in Petrobras, Banco do Brasil, BNDES, all funded partly with public money, from blacks, whites, browns, asians, mulatos, that is to say, people from all walks of life.

Therefore, all who contribute to this country should have a fair share of positions in government, in public service and in the private sector.

The problem is that the bar is always set higher for blacks to get a job, while a white person will not need to have much credentials to be hired in Brazil, since meritocracy, brazilian-style, is bases in contacts, privilege, good-looks and a lot of deep-seated prejudice and resentment against any qualified black professional.

See the example of Fundação Estudar, which sees itself as a meritocratic foundation. Well, I have seen its website and I am rather appalled to notice that so far no genuine black student (dark skinned) has gotten a scholarship from that foundation.

As it calls itself a 'meritocratic foundation', one might think that the reason for no black to have gotten a scholarship from it is that blacks in Brazil has no merit at all, and just white students are driven, born to be leaders, smart and have merit.

Curiously, the son of the owner of Cosan, a blond millionarie by all accounts, was granted a scholarhip from Fundação Estudar. Someone who can pay for a place in Harvard, Cambridge, Oxford, Wharton, MIT, Columbia, all together if he wants.

This is a clear example of the Brazilian racism, a place where the best opportunities, best jobs, best research opportunities are given to the white kids, with the right contacts, born of privilege and who have always been told that they are great and will be successful by their peers.

Well not like you brought anything novel to the table, "they should've complied" is a bumper sticker, mug, and t shirt phrase these days. 

From what I know, Hispanic refers to Spain, Hispanic America would be countries in America that were ones ruled by Spain. Hispanic could also refer to Portugal as once Hispania was the whole Iberian Peninsula but that would be reaching as I think they refer themselves as Lusitanos and you could call them both Iberian. 

Latin people could be from europe or america. EuroLatin countries would be countries like Italy, France, Spain and Portugal. Latin America would be countries with culture/languaje derived from those. 

Anyway, it seems like US uses Latino to refer to people which have ties to countries in Latinamerica and Hispanic as the same (related to countries instead of a racial thing)