Another day, another police beating in America

[GreyICE]

It looks like Murder Kami and me were posting at the same time. For the most part, it appears we are in agreement, however I did want to address a few things:

You do need a riot police. For obvious reasons.

You'd be surprised. It turns out that most riots are pretty much created by poor crowd control procedures. If you kettle the protesters (trap them and stop them from moving), initiate violence (thus normalizing violence), and appear and behave inhuman, you will be likely to trigger one. Let protesters march themselves, walk alongside them, show your humanity, much less likely. People march around for a few miles chanting slogans, they get tired. Most riots are the result of police action. Most riots are avoidable.

Same. Why? What's the context? Why shouldn't police be allowed to conduct a raid on, say, a drug-dealers home at night?

You know what's fun about night? It's dark. Cops are many times more likely to use force improperly AND to get shot during nighttime raids, because they can't see as well. Cops have been known to shoot and kill each other during nighttime raids. One group of cops had a shootout between the front door team and the back door team. Four dead, including the (unarmed) homeowner.

Also homeowners are far more likely to react improperly when woken up by their door being smashed down compared to when a group of cops knock on it at 10 AM. Breonna Taylor's boyfriend called 911 because his house was being broken into. He shot at what he thought was people breaking in to kill and rob them. She died, a cop was shot in the leg (apparently by another cop). Needless. No drugs or anything else in the house, just a dead EMT, a wounded cop, and several lives ruined.

Operations at night should only be conducted for IMMEDIATE dangers. These nighttime drug raids are only getting both police and ordinary citizens killed. That's simply the science.

If the dog is a threat, then off the dog. Simple. Dogs are weapons, in case you missed it.

10,000 dogs killed per year: https://www.criminallegalnews.org/news/2018/jun/16/doj-police-shooting-family-dogs-has-become-epidemic/

This is not normal. This is not how things should be. They're not killing a dog if it's a threat, they're killing a dog... to kill a dog.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I've sometimes been unsure how to bring this up as a problem without it coming off as a distraction to social issues such as systemic racism, but there is a big legislative cohesion breakdown when the feds and states consistently agree about the problem yet fail to address properly national activism that's been accompanied by these types of distresses since 1992, which itself is dated by the ongoing civil rights protests of the 60's I believe which treated peaceful protests as hostile provocations. The point there being that conflating the riots with the overall movement is effectively distracting and falsely blaming the same efforts born out of the 60's.

Though, yeah, I feel like the house or senate should be engaged a bit more on this, whether that means they taking upon themselves or more public attention towards them.

[Madner Kami]

Murder Kami

Really now?

[Captain Crimson]

Murder Kami

Really now?

Hey, murder is what she wrote!

[Draco Dracul]

One of the major reforms we need to see is that Police need to live where they work. While not the only reason, I think that's a major reason why over the last week we've seen dramatically different responses by police in the suburbs and smaller municipalities where living where you work is the norm and the major cities where the norm is that 90+% of cops live outside the city.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Also, I'm curious, do you support these riots? Even though they're accomplish nothing long-term past giving Mr. 45 ammo and helping the other side to dig their heels in.

How do you know what it is or isn't accomplishing long-term?

Property damage? Vandalism? Looting? Not the peaceful demonstrations, obviously, but setting buildings on fire? It emboldens Mr. 45 when he rails against anarchy. Do you support anarchism?

It accomplished something https://www.azfamily.com/news/us_world_news/all-4-officers-in-george-floyd-case-now-charged-chauvins-charge-upgraded-to-second-degree/article_34423453-1595-59b0-aaee-8cb0b8bc94b7.html

Not to go all MLK, but you really don't differentiate between the peace which is the presence of justice and the negative peace which is the absence of conflict.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Crisp
@nerdybyptw
·
Jun 2
conservatives a month ago: “why should we listen to the government and stay home? you are all sheep, this is a free country!”

conservatives today: “if you just follow the government mandated curfew, the paramilitary police stormtroopers won’t shoot you in the face, it’s simple”

[Makeshift Python]

There's a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state, the other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people.

[Captain Crimson]

Also, I'm curious, do you support these riots? Even though they're accomplish nothing long-term past giving Mr. 45 ammo and helping the other side to dig their heels in.

How do you know what it is or isn't accomplishing long-term?

Property damage? Vandalism? Looting? Not the peaceful demonstrations, obviously, but setting buildings on fire? It emboldens Mr. 45 when he rails against anarchy. Do you support anarchism?

It accomplished something https://www.azfamily.com/news/us_world_news/all-4-officers-in-george-floyd-case-now-charged-chauvins-charge-upgraded-to-second-degree/article_34423453-1595-59b0-aaee-8cb0b8bc94b7.html

Not to go all MLK, but you really don't differentiate between the peace which is the presence of justice and the negative peace which is the absence of conflict.

Where is your evidence this wouldn't have happened in the first place? Again, it accomplishes nothing but destruction, which is always a short-term solution.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Where is your evidence that it DOESN'T accomplish anything? You're the one making assertions without a shred of evidence.