Police shootings, vigilante shootings, and Black Lives Matter

Foxtrol

AbusesToilets wrote: »

You think a riot in the Capital Building did billions of dollars? Right..

What's an acceptable level of speech to allow one to comment or make critical statements? Those riots by BLM "protestors" had SFA to do with equality or civil rights. It was opportunistic destruction and looting, coupled with rampant anti-white racism. In good company with the carry-on in DC.

My aggravation, as you say, is to do with the carry on of folks who suddenly found there voice to condemn this riot, after excusing and supporting them all summer. Rank hypocrisy

No matter how much you want it to be the case, no one of any significance excused or supported any violence even loosely connected to BLM over the summer. Even on boards, basically everyone quickly condemned any violence, looting etc. Every time it happened I and other posters quickly condemned them - it was really easy.

Not sure you have the self-awareness but in bold you are just describing your own 'rank hypocrisy', just in reverse. You had your voice all year ranting and raving about everything BLM related and then you went completely silent about this attack this week, which was on a scale beyond any event we saw during or even tangentially connected to any BLM protest.

Retr0gamer

All you do is go on about the riots. What about blm peaceful protests which were the vast majority of protests? Portraying about inequality and injustice towards coloured people. It think that's a worthy cause to protest peacefully for.

You are totally skewing the facts and cherry picking by just focusing on the riots which nobody is claiming were justified. You are also skewing facts by focusing on a so called blm group who the vast majority of protesters have no connection to. This blm group or charity maybe disingenuous as you say but the protests were not about this group that may or may not be oppurtunistic. People were out there protesting about inequality in the system and to say otherwise is either because person saying wants to push their own agenda based on their prejudices or is just pants on head stupid. Or both.

Carfacemandog

While they held the doors open for the terrorists trying to violently overthrow the US government on Wednesday, then helped them down the steps after to just walk away after tearing the building apart, murdering one officer and hospitalising another 60ish... this is how peaceful protesters were treated less than 2 miles away by those very same forces during the summer.

This is the same incident where Australian news crews were also attacked by police while trying to simply do their jobs.

It's pretty obvious why some people do not want to talk about the peaceful protests much at all, especially as comparing them to what we saw on Wednesday proved those protests absolutely correct.

Brian?

AbusesToilets wrote: »

As usual, your argument is wildly disingenuous. The tired claim that the majority of protests were peaceful, after Billions of dollars in damage occurred, along with the attendant violence. The attack on Congress was disgraceful, and those guilty will hopefully be punished appropriately. So were the riots that occurred under the banner of BLM this past year, yet there's far less energy in the media and here for a similar response. Instead you have celebrities bailing out criminals, and politicians telling us that violence is justified when you're fighting for civil liberties.

I don’t think my argument is disingenuous at never mind wildly so. Go vent your frustrations at the people who supported be violence during the BLM protests. You absolutely won’t find any of them here.

The BLM protests were peaceful in the majority. That’s an objective fact. The violence related to them cost billions? Is that an objective fact? Even if it’s true it’s irrelevant to the discussion.

The attack on congress was an attempt to over turn the democratic will of the people. Putting a monetary value on that is ridiculous.

Were these protestors any less hoodwinked and mislead than those who participated in the BLM marches? My opinion of the BLM is fairly well established, I think it's a scam. Does **** all to help black communities, rather exists to monetise white guilt. Trump supporters are similarly exploited.

The protesters at BLM protests weren’t hoodwinked at all. They have a legitimate grievance, unlike the Trump supports who are being sold lies.

Manic Moran

Foxtrol wrote: »

This is why your attempt at equivalence is so bad. The perimeter they used lethal force was the area where they were holding the politicians. In Portland they were declaring riots and sending out tactical teams when the fence outside an empty courthouse was breached.

That difference is probably why nobody was shot in Portland. There is a difference between -authorities- and 'good sense.' Federal authorities are permitted to use lethal force if necessary to protect places, as well as people. Feds in Portland made the correct choice that there wasn't any need to shoot anyone at that point. But they could have, if deemed necessary. The rules in place were not different in the two instances.

I don't generally see calls for cops to let rioters who smashed their way into buildings to do what they want so there wouldn't be hostility.

Did you advocate cops just letting George Floyd protesters do what they wanted?

Of course not, but the reality is that sometimes there is no practical alternative. Or did you miss the destruction of the police building in Minneapolis or the occupation of the CHAZ zone to include a police station?
Capitol Hill police were badly under-resourced for their problem, and they couldn't be strong enough everywhere. It does not take a general to see that you have to use economy measures and prioritize the places which actually needs redressing more urgently. If the cops in that part of the building didn't have the strength of numbers to enforce removal, then the next best thing is to contain, and the easiest way to do that is with co-operation.

Foxtrol

Manic Moran wrote: »

That difference is probably why nobody was shot in Portland. There is a difference between -authorities- and 'good sense.' Federal authorities are permitted to use lethal force if necessary to protect places, as well as people. Feds in Portland made the correct choice that there wasn't any need to shoot anyone at that point. But they could have, if deemed necessary. The rules in place were not different in the two instances.

Which is what I've been saying from the start, your initial bringing up of Portland is a false equivalence to what happened at the Capitol. Feds were more prepared, more aggressive, and there is no evidence that ANTIFA had the same intensions as the Capitol mob.

Of course not, but the reality is that sometimes there is no practical alternative. Or did you miss the destruction of the police building in Minneapolis or the occupation of the CHAZ zone to include a police station?
Capitol Hill police were badly under-resourced for their problem, and they couldn't be strong enough everywhere. It does not take a general to see that you have to use economy measures and prioritize the places which actually needs redressing more urgently. If the cops in that part of the building didn't have the strength of numbers to enforce removal, then the next best thing is to contain, and the easiest way to do that is with co-operation.

Again, your examples here, just like your examples earlier, aren't close to being good comparisons to the events that occurred last week.

Neither of those were high value locations, neither had long term intelligence to have plenty of time to prepare properly, and neither contained basically the whole of one branch of government, including a significant part of the line of succession.

Even if your examples were valid comparisons, I missed the cops taking selfies with protesters at CHAZ and Minneapolis, holding doors for them, holding their hands as they walked down stairs, giving them directions to the bathroom, and pointing the mob in the direction of the offices of high valued targets that they were supposed to be protecting. There is moving to contain and then there is acting like you're part of the mob. It is completely unsurprising that there is mounting evidence of significant numbers of cops and military were part of the mob - we saw uniformed cops acting that way.

Carfacemandog

Foxtrol wrote: »

Even if your examples were valid comparisons, I missed the cops taking selfies with protesters at CHAZ and Minneapolis, holding doors for them, holding their hands as they walked down stairs, giving them directions to the bathroom, and pointing the mob in the direction of the offices of high valued targets that they were supposed to be protecting. There is moving to contain and then there is acting like you're part of the mob. It is completely unsurprising that there is mounting evidence of significant numbers of cops and military were part of the mob - we saw uniformed cops acting that way.

I saw several of those things occurring around Portland actually ifi recall... albeit to the proud boy and oath keeper counter protesters/rioters than the rioters/protesters themselves.

Foxtrol

So 2 cops are suspended for getting too cosy with the protesters. If it was normal practice in this kind of situation as it has been implied in this thread then this wouldn't have happened.

No matter what the false equivalences people try, there are simply no examples of cops doing anything like this during any violence or law breaking during BLM protests.

https://twitter.com/AlexMillerNews/status/1348750694094942208?s=20

AbusesToilets

Brian? wrote: »

I don’t think my argument is disingenuous at never mind wildly so. Go vent your frustrations at the people who supported be violence during the BLM protests. You absolutely won’t find any of them here.

The BLM protests were peaceful in the majority. That’s an objective fact. The violence related to them cost billions? Is that an objective fact? Even if it’s true it’s irrelevant to the discussion.

The attack on congress was an attempt to over turn the democratic will of the people. Putting a monetary value on that is ridiculous.




The protesters at BLM protests weren’t hoodwinked at all. They have a legitimate grievance, unlike the Trump supports who are being sold lies.

The absolute dismissive arrogance to state that billions of dollars in damages to cities, which cost many businesses and workers their livelihoods as irrelevant.

Don't need to say anything else. You stand fully exposed for your beliefs and values with that statement.

Brian?

AbusesToilets wrote: »

The absolute dismissive arrogance to state that billions of dollars in damages to cities, which cost many businesses and workers their livelihoods as irrelevant.

Don't need to say anything else. You stand fully exposed for your beliefs and values with that statement.

It’s not irrelevant to the people who lost livelihoods. It’s irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

I really think it takes supreme neck to accuse me of being disingenuous and the post absolute nonsense like this.

You’re ascribing beliefs and values to me again I see. Why do you do that so often? Why not ask what I believe. I’m quite open about it.

AbusesToilets

Brian? wrote: »

It’s not irrelevant to the people who lost livelihoods. It’s irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

I really think it takes supreme neck to accuse me of being disingenuous and the post absolute nonsense like this.

You’re ascribing beliefs and values to me again I see. Why do you do that so often? Why not ask what I believe. I’m quite open about it.

What nonsense Brian? You said it, everyone can see that for themselves. I don't have to ascribe views to you, they're on display quite plainly.

Manic Moran

Just acknowledging the suspension of the selfie cop. Maybe it was against policy after all.

Overheal

Manic Moran wrote: »

Just acknowledging the suspension of the selfie cop. Maybe it was against policy after all.

I gave him the benefit of doubt at the time that it was a deescalation approach.

No confirmation who the arrest was. 2 Capitol officers arrested, 1 arrest they aren't saying which agency they were with yet. Which just makes me wonder if it's a guardsmen, if so that puts the integrity of the military itself in doubt.

Brian?

AbusesToilets wrote: »

What nonsense Brian? You said it, everyone can see that for themselves. I don't have to ascribe views to you, they're on display quite plainly.

So you’re happy to just make petty comments instead of actually debating now? I’d prefer to actually debate, I’ll leave you to whatever this is.

Potatoeman

Foxtrol wrote: »

Which is what I've been saying from the start, your initial bringing up of Portland is a false equivalence to what happened at the Capitol. Feds were more prepared, more aggressive, and there is no evidence that ANTIFA had the same intensions as the Capitol mob.



Again, your examples here, just like your examples earlier, aren't close to being good comparisons to the events that occurred last week.

Neither of those were high value locations, neither had long term intelligence to have plenty of time to prepare properly, and neither contained basically the whole of one branch of government, including a significant part of the line of succession.

Even if your examples were valid comparisons, I missed the cops taking selfies with protesters at CHAZ and Minneapolis, holding doors for them, holding their hands as they walked down stairs, giving them directions to the bathroom, and pointing the mob in the direction of the offices of high valued targets that they were supposed to be protecting. There is moving to contain and then there is acting like you're part of the mob. It is completely unsurprising that there is mounting evidence of significant numbers of cops and military were part of the mob - we saw uniformed cops acting that way.

The BLM, Antifa and Chaz groups all hate cops though. To an over the top level. Some of the signs and things screamed at them were crazy. It’s not surprising that the cops don’t mingle with them.

The press seemed to have an anti-police agenda too. Which is odd as these groups don’t like the press either. It’s the press on the ground now that are paying for this as police won’t go out of their way to protect them and might even fire a rubber bullet their way.

Nody

Potatoeman wrote: »

The press seemed to have an anti-police agenda too. Which is odd as these groups don’t like the press either. It’s the press on the ground now that are paying for this as police won’t go out of their way to protect them and might even fire a rubber bullet their way.

Seeing how the police have repeatedly arrested and driven away legit journalists with accreditation from major stations that's not hard to see. The police have gone out of their way to ensure that what they do don't get reported on what they actually do and bully journalists that have a legal right to be there and report on what's going on and that's not exactly something that's happened only recently either.

Retr0gamer

You'd almost swear the police had something to hide and were trying to cover their own asses rather than actually reforming and doing something about the very things people are protesting about and the journalists are reporting on.

Potatoeman

Retr0gamer wrote: »

You'd almost swear the police had something to hide and were trying to cover their own asses rather than actually reforming and doing something about the very things people are protesting about and the journalists are reporting on.

Reforming and training costs more money then defunding. Even the idea of using the money for social programs won’t wipe out crime. We’ll see the long term impacts of a demotivated police force in the years ahead.

Retr0gamer

Training and reform can be offset by the funding saved from all the military grade hardware that gets defunded. That's what it's always been about.

Gbear

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Training and reform can be offset by the funding saved from all the military grade hardware that gets defunded. That's what it's always been about.

And not pissing away dump trucks of cash pointlessly fighting the war on drugs might help too.

Foxtrol

Potatoeman wrote: »

The BLM, Antifa and Chaz groups all hate cops though. To an over the top level. Some of the signs and things screamed at them were crazy. It’s not surprising that the cops don’t mingle with them.

The press seemed to have an anti-police agenda too. Which is odd as these groups don’t like the press either. It’s the press on the ground now that are paying for this as police won’t go out of their way to protect them and might even fire a rubber bullet their way.

MAGA and Far Right hate any cops that try to police them to an even greater extent - they see them as traitors. They literally murdered one last week for trying to stop them from carrying out an insurrection. There are endless videos of the MAGA mob assaulting and abusing cops.

I'm actually shocked at how easily the MAGA groups fooled cops - it really doesn't bode well for the profession. They don't support them, they just support them when they brutalise and murder black people.

You final sentence also says everything we need to know about cops - because the press aren't being nice to them they/you feel it is fine for them to not protect or even shoot them.

Foxtrol

The right wing mindset is seen in the quote here. They believe they are above the law and thanks to the incompetence and/or collusion of those organising the defense of the Capitol building they were proved right

https://twitter.com/thenation/status/1347232193341513736?s=20

Manic Moran

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Training and reform can be offset by the funding saved from all the military grade hardware that gets defunded. That's what it's always been about.

The major end items which tend to cause much of the attention (most of the military cascade stuff isn't a problem) tends to be much cheaper, if not quite as capable, as the purpose-built police equipment. Look at the difference in cost between acquiring a new Bearcat and the conversion cost of an RG-33 MRAP.

There is certainly an argument that they take them out of the garage far too often, but that's a different matter entirely from the requirements to have them in the first place.

Potatoeman

Foxtrol wrote: »

MAGA and Far Right hate any cops that try to police them to an even greater extent - they see them as traitors. They literally murdered one last week for trying to stop them from carrying out an insurrection. There are endless videos of the MAGA mob assaulting and abusing cops.

I'm actually shocked at how easily the MAGA groups fooled cops - it really doesn't bode well for the profession. They don't support them, they just support them when they brutalise and murder black people.

You final sentence also says everything we need to know about cops - because the press aren't being nice to them they/you feel it is fine for them to not protect or even shoot them.

I never said it was fine, I am aware that actions have consequences and the result of biased media coverage against police has resulted in a reaction of attitude from some police.
The first case was open and shut, you couldn’t argue a wrongful death there, kneeling on someone’s throat and killing them. Some of the cases since have raised questions about what exactly people expect from the police.
I also don’t live over there so it’s very easy for us to say what we think they should change.

Brussels Sprout

Foxtrol wrote: »

They don't support them, they just support them when they brutalise and murder black people.

This is the raw truth of it really. MAGA types are fully supportive of the police just as long as they are policing "the other" in a heavy handed fashion.

It's the same way that MAGA types are fully supportive of democracy up until the point at which it seemed to them that "the other" were fairing better than them. At that point democracy itself became expendable.

Hakeem Jefferson said as much in this interesting piece:

Instead, we must characterize them as they are: They are a dangerous mob of grievous white people worried that their position in the status hierarchy is threatened by a multiracial coalition of Americans who brought Biden to power and defeated Trump, whom back in 2017 Ta-Nehisi Coates called the first white president. Making this provocative point, Coates wrote, “It is often said that Trump has no real ideology, which is not true — his ideology is white supremacy, in all its truculent and sanctimonious power.” So, when we think about those who gathered in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday and who will surely continue their advance in opposition to democratic rule, let it not be lost on us that they do not simply come in defense of Donald Trump. They come in defense of white supremacy.

Foxtrol

Potatoeman wrote: »

I never said it was fine, I am aware that actions have consequences and the result of biased media coverage against police has resulted in a reaction of attitude from some police.

Ok, you never said it was fine, however you said that police might purposefully not protect reporters or even more outrageously fire rubber bullets them in an incredibly nonchalant way. The fact that you believe this is what you're doing and seem fine with it is insane.

If that is their mindset - that they only protect people they like - then they shouldn't be anywhere close to being a cop.

The first case was open and shut, you couldn’t argue a wrongful death there, kneeling on someone’s throat and killing them. Some of the cases since have raised questions about what exactly people expect from the police.

Equal treatment - which going from your posts you already accept that the police don't provide.

I also don’t live over there so it’s very easy for us to say what we think they should change.

I do and have been at BLM protests. What we saw last week regarding soft touch preparation and policing for MAGA is exactly what the black community have been saying for years. It is a two tier policing system.

ancapailldorcha

AbusesToilets wrote: »

What nonsense Brian? You said it, everyone can see that for themselves. I don't have to ascribe views to you, they're on display quite plainly.

Ditch the petty sniping please.

Potatoeman

Foxtrol wrote: »

Ok, you never said it was fine, however you said that police might purposefully not protect reporters or even more outrageously fire rubber bullets them in an incredibly nonchalant way. The fact that you believe this is what you're doing and seem fine with it is insane.

If that is their mindset - that they only protect people they like - then they shouldn't be anywhere close to being a cop.



Equal treatment - which going from your posts you already accept that the police don't provide.



I do and have been at BLM protests. What we saw last week regarding soft touch preparation and policing for MAGA is exactly what the black community have been saying for years. It is a two tier policing system.

I don’t see the point of going to a BLM protest unless you live in the US and even then not during a lockdown.

Retr0gamer

Potatoeman wrote: »

I don’t see the point of going to a BLM protest unless you live in the US and even then not during a lockdown.

If you don't protest your voice won't be heard and nothing gets done. Go through the other channels has not worked for people of colour and therefore protest, which is a democratic right, is the only thing they have left to have their voice heard. The timing coinciding with covid19 is unfortunate but for something so serious you can't let the government off because of a pandemic. They didn't care that it was a pandemic when they murdered people of colour.

Foxtrol

Potatoeman wrote: »

I don’t see the point of going to a BLM protest unless you live in the US and even then not during a lockdown.

As I said, I do live in the US, in a very diverse city. Before I moved to the US I had no comprehension of how bad things still are here. Becoming close friends with non-white Americans really opened my eyes to what they've experienced growing up, along with some harrowing stories of their relatives. When protesting I really saw first hand how two tier policing works in the states, how the cops tried to escalate things at every point rather than do their jobs - the opposite of how they reacted last week in DC.

Agree on it not being ideal during COVID but my city wasn't on lockdown during the protests and everyone was outside, always masked, and socially distanced as much as possible. Protest organisers were also handing masks, hand santiser, and sun screen to help keep people safe (while hadly any cops wore masks). Overall it was safer than all the Christmas get togethers in pubs I saw popping up on social media over Christmas and a much better cause.