America

[Stom]

So...

That is full of huge leaps of faith and lacks any understanding of sociology. I wouldn’t read anything into that at all, except someone else is irritated by BLM, WI are a pretty poor group at representing the cause they say they stand for.

Systemic racism doesn’t mean that cops are being trained to be racist, that just shows a complete misunderstanding of the problem. Black men are incredibly more likely to be pulled over then white men. And this wouldn’t have blown up if it hadn’t been the 3rd death in short time.

Just because someone knows they’re posting an unpopular opinion doesn’t make it true.

[Donny osmond]

So...

That is full of huge leaps of faith and lacks any understanding of sociology. I wouldn’t read anything into that at all, except someone else is irritated by BLM, WI are a pretty poor group at representing the cause they say they stand for.

Systemic racism doesn’t mean that cops are being trained to be racist, that just shows a complete misunderstanding of the problem. Black men are incredibly more likely to be pulled over then white men. And this wouldn’t have blown up if it hadn’t been the 3rd death in short time.

Just because someone knows they’re posting an unpopular opinion doesn’t make it true.

You never let me down Stom

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

[Puja]

As Stom said. An egregious misuse of statistics, bad science, and strawmen ("Institutionalised racism? Hah! Show me one law which exclusively targets black men! See? Doesn't exist!") to try and build the theory that the OP already believes.

In fairness, it's entirely possible that he makes some good points in the bottom 3/4 of the thread, but I lost all interest in reading after about the third logical fallacy that was presented as a "Checkmate Atheists!" moment and stopped reading.

Puja

[Mikey Brown]

I can see the angle this guy is going at, but he seems awfully confused about what is actually bothering him. A brief look at his twitter and he seems to think the fact the police kill a load of white people somehow negates all of this.

There’s no logical reason people should carry the scars of slavery for generations after it ends. There’s no logical reason for black men to fear police on the streets. It’s simply a statistic that more white people are killed per 10,000 than black, then goes on to mention the enormous number of black arrests as if there’s no connection.

The cyclical nature of systems that keep poor people down is nothing to do with anything. The fact mass media and politics thrives on poor white people and poor black people viewing eachother as enemies, that’s somehow a mark against who? BLM?

Are BLM even a recognised organisation, anyway? Isn’t it just a short-hand for the movement protesting against unlawful police killings and brutality? I genuinely don’t know, but that was my understanding. But it’s some sort of gotcha that they aren’t partaking in activism regarding issues in other countries? Or marching for the police to arrest black murderers of black men, as if the police aren’t already keen to do that?

God. I didn’t even mean to respond to this. I can see the logic in a lot of it, sort of, but overall he seems a bit confused about who he is arguing against.

[Donny osmond]

I can see the angle this guy is going at, but he seems awfully confused about what is actually bothering him. A brief look at his twitter and he seems to think the fact the police kill a load of white people somehow negates all of this.

There’s no logical reason people should carry the scars of slavery for generations after it ends. There’s no logical reason for black men to fear police on the streets. It’s simply a statistic that more white people are killed per 10,000 than black, then goes on to mention the enormous number of black arrests as if there’s no connection.

The cyclical nature of systems that keep poor people down is nothing to do with anything. The fact mass media and politics thrives on poor white people and poor black people viewing eachother as enemies, that’s somehow a mark against who? BLM?

Are BLM even a recognised organisation, anyway? Isn’t it just a short-hand for the movement protesting against unlawful police killings and brutality? I genuinely don’t know, but that was my understanding. But it’s some sort of gotcha that they aren’t partaking in activism regarding issues in other countries? Or marching for the police to arrest black murderers of black men, as if the police aren’t already keen to do that?

God. I didn’t even mean to respond to this. I can see the logic in a lot of it, sort of, but overall he seems a bit confused about who he is arguing against.

[emoji16]

I basically agree with you, but he did give some food for thought.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

[Stom]

I can see the angle this guy is going at, but he seems awfully confused about what is actually bothering him. A brief look at his twitter and he seems to think the fact the police kill a load of white people somehow negates all of this.

There’s no logical reason people should carry the scars of slavery for generations after it ends. There’s no logical reason for black men to fear police on the streets. It’s simply a statistic that more white people are killed per 10,000 than black, then goes on to mention the enormous number of black arrests as if there’s no connection.

The cyclical nature of systems that keep poor people down is nothing to do with anything. The fact mass media and politics thrives on poor white people and poor black people viewing eachother as enemies, that’s somehow a mark against who? BLM?

Are BLM even a recognised organisation, anyway? Isn’t it just a short-hand for the movement protesting against unlawful police killings and brutality? I genuinely don’t know, but that was my understanding. But it’s some sort of gotcha that they aren’t partaking in activism regarding issues in other countries? Or marching for the police to arrest black murderers of black men, as if the police aren’t already keen to do that?

God. I didn’t even mean to respond to this. I can see the logic in a lot of it, sort of, but overall he seems a bit confused about who he is arguing against.

There were some big problems with people involved in BLM, which is a real organisation, and their actions have not been forgotten, even though they happened 4 or more years ago and I can't even find a record of it on their Wikipedia page under criticism.

They seem mainly to attract hate from groups I disagree with, such as Rudy Guiliani or people who don't like when you criticise Israel, as if criticism of a government is a racist act. Yeah, fuck off with that.

Reading a bit about them, they seem to have addressed some of the bigger problems with their movement, which is a very good thing, and those problems can be simply laid at the fact it was a brand new movement and they all have teething problems.

So I'm happy to accept them as an honest organisation now and have no problem with them.

[Puja]

Jesus Fucking Christ America



For those without energy to view a video, there is an elderly man waving a sign as riot police march forward. One of them shoves him and he stumbles back and cracks his head on the concrete. He lies still and there's a visible pool of blood forming at the back of his head. The cop who shoved him looks like he's going to stop and check, but the cop behind him grabs him by the back of the flak jacket and pushes him back into line. The riot police march past the supine, bleeding pensioner, pausing only to turn on the camera crew making the video and demand they move along

Puja

Yes, its shocking. The 2 officers involved have been suspended pending an investigation.

This feels symbolic of our previous discussion - not all the police in that video are involved in causing serious head injury to an unthreatening OAP, but not a one of them rebuked them, not a one of them went to give first aid. The only ones that broke from the pack were those who went to shut down the camera crew. And, let's face it, the only reason those two officers are facing punishment is because it was caught on a really good video - before that, the official line from Buffalo PD was that a man had "tripped and fallen" during a "skirmish involving protesters". They aren't facing punishment because other cops said, "Jim shoved an old man down so he cracked his skull and Dave told him not to help him."

Not all of the police in the video assaulted an OAP. All of them are complicit.

And, as if they realised someone on the internet needed their point illustrated in a ridiculous way, it is now being reported (by the Buffalo Police Benevolent Association) that all 57 of Buffalo's police emergency response team (the cops marching in that video) have "resigned in disgust because of the treatment [being suspended pending investigation] of two of their members."

When I said that every cop in that video was complicit, I wasn't expecting them to literally resign in a show of support to the two who actually carried out the assault! That is madness. Utter madness.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/918557/e ... earold-man

Puja

[cashead]

Yes, its shocking. The 2 officers involved have been suspended pending an investigation.

This feels symbolic of our previous discussion - not all the police in that video are involved in causing serious head injury to an unthreatening OAP, but not a one of them rebuked them, not a one of them went to give first aid. The only ones that broke from the pack were those who went to shut down the camera crew. And, let's face it, the only reason those two officers are facing punishment is because it was caught on a really good video - before that, the official line from Buffalo PD was that a man had "tripped and fallen" during a "skirmish involving protesters". They aren't facing punishment because other cops said, "Jim shoved an old man down so he cracked his skull and Dave told him not to help him."

Not all of the police in the video assaulted an OAP. All of them are complicit.

And, as if they realised someone on the internet needed their point illustrated in a ridiculous way, it is now being reported (by the Buffalo Police Benevolent Association) that all 57 of Buffalo's police emergency response team (the cops marching in that video) have "resigned in disgust because of the treatment [being suspended pending investigation] of two of their members."

When I said that every cop in that video was complicit, I wasn't expecting them to literally resign in a show of support to the two who actually carried out the assault! That is madness. Utter madness.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/918557/e ... earold-man

Puja

ACAB.

Reminder that when the NYPD went on strike in 2017, crime went down in the city.


And for anyone that's planning on posting any more copaganda because apparently #notallcops, the pigs are just waiting until the cameras are gone.

https://news.wttw.com/2020/06/05/police ... ng-protest

[cashead]

Also, remember the arrow guy? Tried to shoot at protesters in Minneapolis with a bow and arrow, got the shit knocked out of him so hard he had gravel marks all over his face, and then had his car set alight?

Charged with three felonies.

https://www.sltrib.com/news/2020/06/04/ ... bow-arrow/

[cashead]

Fuck the police





























Original tweet thread starts here:

[cashead]

Because it's the End Times and everyone's making one last appearance, here's an unexpected Stonewall cameo!





https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2020/06/iow ... rotestors/

http://iowainformer.com/politics/2020/0 ... th-begins/

[Which Tyler]

https://www.businessinsider.com/unident ... few-2020-6

As part of President Donald Trump's crackdown on protests against racism, federal agents wearing no insignia have been patrolling the streets of Washington, DC.
The officials have refused to identify themselves, but reporters have established that they're from the Bureau of Prisons.
In a statement to news outlets, the bureau said the officials were not wearing identifying clothing "as they are serving a broader mission."
Law-enforcement experts said that officials operating with no identifying insignia could evade accountability and spread confusion.

[ARTICLE CONTINUES]

[Sandydragon]

Yes, its shocking. The 2 officers involved have been suspended pending an investigation.

This feels symbolic of our previous discussion - not all the police in that video are involved in causing serious head injury to an unthreatening OAP, but not a one of them rebuked them, not a one of them went to give first aid. The only ones that broke from the pack were those who went to shut down the camera crew. And, let's face it, the only reason those two officers are facing punishment is because it was caught on a really good video - before that, the official line from Buffalo PD was that a man had "tripped and fallen" during a "skirmish involving protesters". They aren't facing punishment because other cops said, "Jim shoved an old man down so he cracked his skull and Dave told him not to help him."

Not all of the police in the video assaulted an OAP. All of them are complicit.

And, as if they realised someone on the internet needed their point illustrated in a ridiculous way, it is now being reported (by the Buffalo Police Benevolent Association) that all 57 of Buffalo's police emergency response team (the cops marching in that video) have "resigned in disgust because of the treatment [being suspended pending investigation] of two of their members."

When I said that every cop in that video was complicit, I wasn't expecting them to literally resign in a show of support to the two who actually carried out the assault! That is madness. Utter madness.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/918557/e ... earold-man

Puja

The other officers wouldn’t have gone to his aid because they would have been trained to keep moving forward and leave the first aid to those following up. That’s pretty standard. You’ll note that one of the officers near the incident uses his radio to call for medical support.

The assault itself deserves punishment. The fact it was captured in video and was obviously so unprovoked and disproportionate will make the decision to suspend and investigate easier. Often these things are less clear cut.

[Son of Mathonwy]

Posting this as I think it's a very brave and thoughtful thread.

From twitter user @amirpars_

It's an interesting counterpoint. I wish someone would check his numbers (or I had the time to).

If true, Americans should be protesting even more against their brutal police, who may be the stormtroopers in a class war as well as a race war.

[Donny osmond]

Posting this as I think it's a very brave and thoughtful thread.

From twitter user @amirpars_

It's an interesting counterpoint. I wish someone would check his numbers (or I had the time to).

If true, Americans should be protesting even more against their brutal police, who may be the stormtroopers in a class war as well as a race war.

Thanks for reading and not dismissing. I have no idea about his numbers either, I just like how he's trying to see a bigger picture. I didn't read it like he's trying to excuse or deny police violence, just saying it's a more complex picture than most are allowing.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

[Sandydragon]

Posting this as I think it's a very brave and thoughtful thread.

From twitter user @amirpars_

It's an interesting counterpoint. I wish someone would check his numbers (or I had the time to).

If true, Americans should be protesting even more against their brutal police, who may be the stormtroopers in a class war as well as a race war.

Thanks for reading and not dismissing. I have no idea about his numbers either, I just like how he's trying to see a bigger picture. I didn't read it like he's trying to excuse or deny police violence, just saying it's a more complex picture than most are allowing.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

And he is right. I posted below that police use of force protocols allow for a far higher level of police shootings than in any other democratic and wealthy country. Just as there are shootings of black men for no good reason; Latino and white men are also shot without any logical rationale. But the vast majority of all men who are shot by police are carrying firearms. That’s the root cause of the problem.

[Son of Mathonwy]

It's an interesting counterpoint. I wish someone would check his numbers (or I had the time to).

If true, Americans should be protesting even more against their brutal police, who may be the stormtroopers in a class war as well as a race war.

Thanks for reading and not dismissing. I have no idea about his numbers either, I just like how he's trying to see a bigger picture. I didn't read it like he's trying to excuse or deny police violence, just saying it's a more complex picture than most are allowing.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

And he is right. I posted below that police use of force protocols allow for a far higher level of police shootings than in any other democratic and wealthy country. Just as there are shootings of black men for no good reason; Latino and white men are also shot without any logical rationale. But the vast majority of all men who are shot by police are carrying firearms. That’s the root cause of the problem.

It may not be the only root cause but it's certainly essential to the problem. Take away gun ownership and the police will far less reason to go in, guns at the ready, or shoot first think second. But it's in the constitution (at least it is interpreted as such) so it's not going away any time soon. And certainly not under the Repubicans.

[Stom]

Thanks for reading and not dismissing. I have no idea about his numbers either, I just like how he's trying to see a bigger picture. I didn't read it like he's trying to excuse or deny police violence, just saying it's a more complex picture than most are allowing.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

And he is right. I posted below that police use of force protocols allow for a far higher level of police shootings than in any other democratic and wealthy country. Just as there are shootings of black men for no good reason; Latino and white men are also shot without any logical rationale. But the vast majority of all men who are shot by police are carrying firearms. That’s the root cause of the problem.

It may not be the only root cause but it's certainly essential to the problem. Take away gun ownership and the police will far less reason to go in, guns at the ready, or shoot first think second. But it's in the constitution (at least it is interpreted as such) so it's not going away any time soon. And certainly not under the Repubicans.

I agree to a point. But it’s also pretty terrible that an officer can fail part of his exam and still work as a cop. I mean, wtf! He’s found incapable of doing his job but is still employed in a role where he needs to keep people safe.

[Stom]

And on top of that, if you shift the debate toward something else, you run the risk of failing to get rot abs branch reform of the police, which surely has to be the aim.

[Mikey Brown]

the vast majority of all men who are shot by police are carrying firearms. That’s the root cause of the problem.

I sort of get what you’re saying here but this seems like an absurd over-simplification.

Maybe it’s a chicken and egg thing. Is thIs demented nationwide obsession with guns a byproduct of a culture that seems to glorify ‘protecting’ yourself (or your family, land, honour, heritage, whatever) with acts of obscene violence or is it the cause?

Anyone read up on the abuse of ‘qualified immunity’? I hadn’t heard the term before, but seen it mentioned alongside some pretty ridiculous stats about the conviction rate of police involved in assaults/deaths. Seems to have appeared in the 60s (funny that) and gradually become a literal ‘get out of jail free’ card to be played in such instances as these.

[Digby]

Thanks for reading and not dismissing. I have no idea about his numbers either, I just like how he's trying to see a bigger picture. I didn't read it like he's trying to excuse or deny police violence, just saying it's a more complex picture than most are allowing.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

And he is right. I posted below that police use of force protocols allow for a far higher level of police shootings than in any other democratic and wealthy country. Just as there are shootings of black men for no good reason; Latino and white men are also shot without any logical rationale. But the vast majority of all men who are shot by police are carrying firearms. That’s the root cause of the problem.

It may not be the only root cause but it's certainly essential to the problem. Take away gun ownership and the police will far less reason to go in, guns at the ready, or shoot first think second. But it's in the constitution (at least it is interpreted as such) so it's not going away any time soon. And certainly not under the Repubicans.

Is the bigger part of the gun problem the police face legal guns? I'm all for reducing the range of guns available and restricting much, much further who can have even those, but I'm not sold it'd make the police's job much different for a long period of time.

I would add they need to look at police salaries, far too many officers are working a stupid number of hours and even 2+ jobs, and feeling undervalued over generations now. I'm sure there will be groups offering decent money at the local level, but with no factual basis to back it up and going simply with an assumption the police will largely be in that group whose salaries stagnated around 2007/8. It's not wholly straightforward because whilst they need more money we'd want a lot more from them in terms of quality/standard of work, but it does seem nuts to design a system that has pissed off, tired, stressed, poorly trained people given guns and being told to go out and police communities with in your face policing. Obviously in your face policing can mean a lot of things, many of them rather useful, but it shouldn't be a surprise when a lot of tired, stressed, over-worked, badly trained and not very bright to begin with individuals get it wrong. Society has some systemic problems.

[Digby]

the vast majority of all men who are shot by police are carrying firearms. That’s the root cause of the problem.

I sort of get what you’re saying here but this seems like an absurd over-simplification.

Maybe it’s a chicken and egg thing. Is thIs demented nationwide obsession with guns a byproduct of a culture that seems to glorify ‘protecting’ yourself (or your family, land, honour, heritage, whatever) with acts of obscene violence or is it the cause?

Anyone read up on the abuse of ‘qualified immunity’? I hadn’t heard the term before, but seen it mentioned alongside some pretty ridiculous stats about the conviction rate of police involved in assaults/deaths. Seems to have appeared in the 60s (funny that) and gradually become a literal ‘get out of jail free’ card to be played in such instances as these.

If you want to address qualified immunity you need to look at how easy it is to sue an individual in the US. And we don't just see the problem in the police, malpractice insurance is a big thing for doctors for a reason, it's even reasonably normal to sue your own attorney. The problems, or at least contradictions, in how to have society function run deep.

[Mikey Brown]

the vast majority of all men who are shot by police are carrying firearms. That’s the root cause of the problem.

I sort of get what you’re saying here but this seems like an absurd over-simplification.

Maybe it’s a chicken and egg thing. Is thIs demented nationwide obsession with guns a byproduct of a culture that seems to glorify ‘protecting’ yourself (or your family, land, honour, heritage, whatever) with acts of obscene violence or is it the cause?

Anyone read up on the abuse of ‘qualified immunity’? I hadn’t heard the term before, but seen it mentioned alongside some pretty ridiculous stats about the conviction rate of police involved in assaults/deaths. Seems to have appeared in the 60s (funny that) and gradually become a literal ‘get out of jail free’ card to be played in such instances as these.

If you want to address qualified immunity you need to look at how easy it is to sue an individual in the US. And we don't just see the problem in the police, malpractice insurance is a big thing for doctors for a reason, it's even reasonably normal to sue your own attorney. The problems, or at least contradictions, in how to have society function run deep.

I’m sure it’s massively complicated. I wasn’t meaning to suggest I know anything much about it, I just keep seeing the term crop up and it seems like it plays a big part in some of the stats we see.

I’m not sure if other people have been following this thread, up to 300 incidents now, of alarming bits of footage from the protests.



Again, these are guys we know go out with the explicit mission statement of creating false flag situations and violently challenging anyone they consider ‘Antifa’.

Cool stuff.

[Sandydragon]

And he is right. I posted below that police use of force protocols allow for a far higher level of police shootings than in any other democratic and wealthy country. Just as there are shootings of black men for no good reason; Latino and white men are also shot without any logical rationale. But the vast majority of all men who are shot by police are carrying firearms. That’s the root cause of the problem.

It may not be the only root cause but it's certainly essential to the problem. Take away gun ownership and the police will far less reason to go in, guns at the ready, or shoot first think second. But it's in the constitution (at least it is interpreted as such) so it's not going away any time soon. And certainly not under the Repubicans.

I agree to a point. But it’s also pretty terrible that an officer can fail part of his exam and still work as a cop. I mean, wtf! He’s found incapable of doing his job but is still employed in a role where he needs to keep people safe.

Completely agree regarding qualifications. Sadly the entry qualification requirement has been reduced in recent years, which doesn’t help.

I’m not suggesting that wider spread gun ownership (legal and otherwise) is the only problem, but it is a real problem. The perception, often correct, that a neighbourhood is a war zone leads to aggressive tactics and therefore mistakes.

[morepork]

The militarization of the police stepped up in response to race riots in the 1950s and 60s. Much of police training has been focused on counterinsurgency since. It's not exactly a fucking surprise that a core principle of this race-based.