Police shootings, vigilante shootings, and Black Lives Matter

Chips Lovell

Mod Note

Please heed the charter folks:

Topics should not be verbatim quotes from some article without comment from the thread starter. Add a comment before or after the post, offering your opinion and/or analysis on the subject. Articles from blogs, newpapers, magazines etc cannot be put up in full in the politics forum due to copyright reasons. You can provide a link to the article and quote the opening paragraph or one that provides a summary of the key points. When posting or linking to a video please provide a summary of the content as not everybody has access to video sites or the time to view them.

No more videos without explaining the point they make.

everlast75

There seems little point in arguing with some folk on here regarding the protests when they believe that black people don't have a reason to protest in the first place.

If they don't believe that, then of course you're not going to convince them that anything that happens when protesting is acceptable.

Podge_irl

AbusesToilets wrote: »

You're only seeing a snapshot of all interactions though, with a deliberate aim to strengthen the narrative that police are overly violent towards black people. There's ~10 million police interactions per annum iirc, with ~1000 shootings. The vast majority of those are justified, good shoots. You see one questionable event and a city burns. Meanwhile 20 people get shot over a weekend in certain cities, and nothing.

I don't know how anyone can honestly make that claim. The vast majority of questionable to outright criminal incidents that were caught on camera would have been viewed as completely legitimate going on the police accounts. Without video evidence those would have been taken as the truth. The police lie - it is consistent and widespread and they get away with it.

FrostyJack

Tell me how wrote: »

This child should have been at home playing call of duty instead of inserting himself in to a dangerous situation.

If his focus was on defending himself, that's the option he should have taken.

I am not arguing that, I said he shouldn't be there, and he clearly has issues, Trump having clowns like McCloskey's at the convention and now after the incident praising Kyle incite people like him to go put themselves in that position. This is why troops shouldn't be on the streets as incidents like this happen. That said it is the initial shooting that we are not exactly clear about and the hyperbole in the media afterwards. Any incident now in America has to have 2 sides, if this was a Biden supporter at a MAGA rally, everyone on the left would be saying this was incited by the MAGA racists and he was just defending himself, this is what I am highlighting. Sometimes you can be anti-Trump and see things nuanced, otherwise you are as bad as them.

Tell me how

FrostyJack wrote: »

I am not arguing that, I said he shouldn't be there, and he clearly has issues, Trump having clowns like McCloskey's at the convention and now after the incident praising Kyle incite people like him to go put themselves in that position. This is why troops shouldn't be on the streets as incidents like this happen. That said it is the initial shooting that we are not exactly clear about and the hyperbole in the media afterwards. Any incident now in America has to have 2 sides, if this was a Biden supporter at a MAGA rally, everyone on the left would be saying this was incited by the MAGA racists and he was just defending himself, this is what I am highlighting. Sometimes you can be anti-Trump and see things nuanced, otherwise you are as bad as them.

I don't know, on a thread covering the BLM on a........ less restricted forum, a few posters, myself included, have said consistently that protesters who riot or commit acts of vandalism should be prosecuted but we are constantly told that we support it.

I think in some cases, not necessarily you, people move too quickly to saying 'they are all at it' and that prevents people stepping back to analyse if indeed this is the case and in many situations is exploited by people knowing they can do something and pass it off as 'both sides are at it'.

FrostyJack

Tell me how wrote: »

I don't know, on a thread covering the BLM on a........ less restricted forum, a few posters, myself included, have said consistently that protesters who riot or commit acts of vandalism should be prosecuted but we are constantly told that we support it.

I think in some cases, not necessarily you, people move too quickly to saying 'they are all at it' and that prevents people stepping back to analyse if indeed this is the case and in many situations is exploited by people knowing they can do something and pass it off as 'both sides are at it'.

Exactly, take the Covington kid, another guy rolled out at the RNC, everyone jumped at him and later on had egg on their face. You have to sit back and look objectively. I support the protests, but not the looting and property damage, though I do understand people doing that. The way I look at it is every car or building burnt is another vote for Trump. It is happening on his watch but he pawns it off the Democratic mayor or governor, so people that are likely to vote for him think " I don't want it to happen in my town". None of the reforms the protesters want will ever happen while Trump is in power so it is catch 22.

AbusesToilets

Podge_irl wrote: »

I don't know how anyone can honestly make that claim. The vast majority of questionable to outright criminal incidents that were caught on camera would have been viewed as completely legitimate going on the police accounts. Without video evidence those would have been taken as the truth. The police lie - it is consistent and widespread and they get away with it.

You find them questionable, others do not. In those cases, the best course of action is to allow the courts to judge. There are many on this board and in the BLM would seem to feel it's never justified for an officer to shoot a black person. I doubt the police lie at any greater rate than the criminals they interact with.

Retr0gamer

AbusesToilets wrote: »

You find them questionable, others do not. In those cases, the best course of action is to allow the courts to judge. There are many on this board and in the BLM would seem to feel it's never justified for an officer to shoot a black person. I doubt the police lie at any greater rate than the criminals they interact with.

They should lie though. Especially when it comes to taking someone's life. And just because the criminal's they deal with lie doesn't justify police lying or breaking the law.

You are justifying vigilantism and police brutality, both of which are not a good thing and both of which people are protesting about.

Truthvader

Biden is going to lose the election unless he puts his head up and tries to stop all the looting and rioting. Whatever way you cut it Trump supporters are not out burning looting and shooting. This is playing into Trumps hands as anyone just a teeny weeny bit rascist will vote Trump just to "protest" the protesters. If Biden could get the riots to stop he would romp home.

On the shootings; the only one I saw showed a guy trying to smash another over the head with a skateboard getting shot. Seems to me he deserved it. You dont attack other people plus you get a bonus Darwin award if you attack a man with a gun with a skateboard

brentanrodgers

Truthvader wrote: »

On the shootings; the only one I saw showed a guy trying to smash another over the head with a skateboard getting shot. Seems to me he deserved it. You dont attack other people plus you get a bonus Darwin award if you attack a man with a gun with a skateboard

That shooting you're referring to I do have problems with, I don't think it's murder but do I think there's some level of intent there looking for confrontation when showing up to one of these riots armed.

The other recent murder that I know of, an unarmed Trump supporter was shot point blank twice in the chest assassination style, they've found the culprit in that case and hopefully swift justice is issued. The footage online of that incident is conclusive imo - although I won't link it here.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/police-investigating-antifa-supporter-michael-reinoehl-in-portland-shooting-11598904528

Police Investigating Antifa Supporter Michael Reinoehl in Portland Shooting

A family member said she identified a man police told her they are investigating in the Saturday killing of a right-wing protester in Portland, Ore., as Michael Reinoehl, a 48-year-old former professional snowboarder who calls himself a member of Antifa on social media.

FrostyJack

brentanrodgers wrote: »

https://www.wsj.com/articles/police-investigating-antifa-supporter-michael-reinoehl-in-portland-shooting-11598904528

Police Investigating Antifa Supporter Michael Reinoehl in Portland Shooting

I like how the cops clear the medics working on him, they must have thought he was on the "left" side. Wonder if that contributed to his death.

brentanrodgers

FrostyJack wrote: »

I like how the cops clear the medics working on him, they must have thought he was on the "left" side. Wonder if that contributed to his death.

If you're talking about the video in the WSJ link, those aren't real medics, they're tropes who're part of the antifa crowd - I suppose they want to believe they're part of an offical militant movement or something, god only knows.

AbusesToilets

Retr0gamer wrote: »

They should lie though. Especially when it comes to taking someone's life. And just because the criminal's they deal with lie doesn't justify police lying or breaking the law.

You are justifying vigilantism and police brutality, both of which are not a good thing and both of which people are protesting about.

Where am I justifying vigilantism and brutality, exactly? Saying that police can be justified in shooting someone?

Retr0gamer

Truthvader wrote: »

Biden is going to lose the election unless he puts his head up and tries to stop all the looting and rioting.

News flash: Trump is the President, not Biden. The loot and rioting is all Trumps fault. He has done nothing to calm the situation and has in fact managed to make things worse.

All Biden can do is condemn the looting and violence which he has done consistently. Trump on the other hand is promoting vigilantism.

Retr0gamer

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Where am I justifying vigilantism and brutality, exactly? Saying that police can be justified in shooting someone?

I haven't gotten the energy or time to quite pretty much everything you've posted in this tread.

Let's just start with supporting shoot first and ask questions later policing.

Sonics2k

Truthvader wrote: »

Biden is going to lose the election unless he puts his head up and tries to stop all the looting and rioting. Whatever way you cut it Trump supporters are not out burning looting and shooting. This is playing into Trumps hands as anyone just a teeny weeny bit rascist will vote Trump just to "protest" the protesters. If Biden could get the riots to stop he would romp home.

Pray tell, how exactly is Biden supposed to stop all the looting and rioting? Biden isn't the President, he's not in charge at all. Trump is running the show and has the power.

brentanrodgers

Retr0gamer wrote: »

News flash: Trump is the President, not Biden. The loot and rioting is all Trumps fault. He has done nothing to calm the situation and has in fact managed to make things worse.

All Biden can do is condemn the looting and violence which he has done consistently. Trump on the other hand is promoting vigilantism.

No it's not, this uptake in political violence was going on well before Trump got into office. Trump hasn't helped things but he's not solely to blame.

Do you support BLM? One of their Chicago leaders called looting and destroying businesses "Reparations". Are you OK with that?

Obama's administration internally classified groups like antifa as domestic terrorists. I guess you can make a distinction between both groups but at this point the lines, at least for me, are really blurred.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/01/antifa-charlottesville-violence-fbi-242235

"Federal authorities have been warning state and local officials since early 2016 that leftist extremists known as “antifa” had become increasingly confrontational and dangerous, so much so that the Department of Homeland Security formally classified their activities as “domestic terrorist violence,” according to interviews and confidential law enforcement documents obtained by POLITICO.

Previously unreported documents disclose that by April 2016, authorities believed that “anarchist extremists” were the primary instigators of violence at public rallies against a range of targets. They were blamed by authorities for attacks on the police, government and political institutions, along with symbols of “the capitalist system,” racism, social injustice and fascism, according to a confidential 2016 joint intelligence assessment by DHS and the FBI."

FrostyJack

brentanrodgers wrote: »

If you're talking about the video in the WSJ link, those aren't real medics, they're tropes who're part of the antifa crowd - I suppose they want to believe they're part of an offical militant movement or something, god only knows.

There are number of EMT's , RN's and Paramedics at all these protests, they could be on either side of protest or just passers by, they were clearly trying to do at least first aid when they cops turned up and kicked all their gear out of the way.

AbusesToilets

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I haven't gotten the energy or time to quite pretty much everything you've posted in this tread.

Let's just start with supporting shoot first and ask questions later policing.

Please, demonstrate where I've advocated for that.

brentanrodgers

FrostyJack wrote: »

There are number of EMT's , RN's and Paramedics at all these protests, they could be on either side of protest or just passers by, they were clearly trying to do at least first aid when they cops turned up and kicked all their gear out of the way.

The person was wearing black bloc gear and part of that group. It's possible they were a professional but I doubt it, a friend of the deceased wouldn't have pulled her away off him if it was the case, nor would the police. You can see it pretty clearly here at 1.15 in the video.

https://twitter.com/ShepardAmbellas/status/1300244859681304577

Podge_irl

AbusesToilets wrote: »

You find them questionable, others do not. In those cases, the best course of action is to allow the courts to judge. There are many on this board and in the BLM would seem to feel it's never justified for an officer to shoot a black person. I doubt the police lie at any greater rate than the criminals they interact with.

You think none of the shootings people have had issue with over the last few years have even been questionable? The cases never (or exceedingly rarely) get to court, on no small part due to police reports of the incident which, as more videos surface, are being shown to be less and less reliable.

Also, police not lying at a greater rate than criminals is a pretty shocking standard to hold them to.

Brian?

Truthvader wrote: »

Biden is going to lose the election unless he puts his head up and tries to stop all the looting and rioting. Whatever way you cut it Trump supporters are not out burning looting and shooting. This is playing into Trumps hands as anyone just a teeny weeny bit rascist will vote Trump just to "protest" the protesters. If Biden could get the riots to stop he would romp home.

On the shootings; the only one I saw showed a guy trying to smash another over the head with a skateboard getting shot. Seems to me he deserved it. You dont attack other people plus you get a bonus Darwin award if you attack a man with a gun with a skateboard

The man with the skateboard was trying to tackle someone with a rifle he'd just witnessed shoot someone dead. He was attempting to apprehend a murderer and lost his life.

Stop watching edited videos and seek real information with context.

Tell me how

Brian? wrote: »

The man with the skateboard was trying to tackle someone with a rifle he'd just witnessed shoot someone dead. He was attempting to apprehend a murderer and lost his life.

Stop watching edited videos and seek real information with context.

You are arguing with the logic of someone who thinks murder is an appropriate response for a building being destroyed, but doesn't think a building being destroyed is an appropriate response for murder.

AbusesToilets

Podge_irl wrote: »

You think none of the shootings people have had issue with over the last few years have even been questionable? The cases never (or exceedingly rarely) get to court, on no small part due to police reports of the incident which, as more videos surface, are being shown to be less and less reliable.

Also, police not lying at a greater rate than criminals is a pretty shocking standard to hold them to.

Of course there have been bad shoots, but the majority aren't imo. I didn't reference police lying.

brentanrodgers

Here's what appears to be a full video of the Rittenhouse shootings in real time - to me it doesn't look like the first shooting was justified though he was being chased, the subsequent shootings do but it's a moot point really. Is there any additional footage of the initial shooting because that's what's important here.

AbusesToilets

Brian? wrote: »

The man with the skateboard was trying to tackle someone with a rifle he'd just witnessed shoot someone dead. He was attempting to apprehend a murderer and lost his life.

Stop watching edited videos and seek real information with context.

You can see inside his kind now? An impressive skill. I'll take my view from the videos I've seen, which show a kid being repeatedly attacked by a mob for having the temerity to put our a fire started by "peaceful" protesters. A kid defending himself from attack with a deadly weapon, who tried repeatedly to flee from a violent confrontation.

Brian?

AbusesToilets wrote: »

You can see inside his kind now? An impressive skill. I'll take my view from the videos I've seen, which show a kid being repeatedly attacked by a mob for having the temerity to put our a fire started by "peaceful" protesters. A kid defending himself from attack with a deadly weapon, who tried repeatedly to flee from a violent confrontation.

That's complete and total BS. He travelled across state lines illegally carrying a fire arm and shot 3 people.

He shot the first person for shouting at him. He has no right to use deadly force in that situation. None.

The 2nd and third people were shot for attempting to disarm and active shooter. It no longer matters if he felt threatened, he was a murderer at this point and the crowd were trying to stop more people getting hurt.

There is no "stand your ground" law in WI. He's a murderer.

His innocence is looking shakier and shakier as the days go on... But the usual suspects will continue to defend it I'd say.

FrostyJack

brentanrodgers wrote: »

Here's what appears to be a full video of the Rittenhouse shootings in real time - to me it doesn't look like the first shooting was justified though he was being chased, the subsequent shootings do but it's a moot point really. Is there any additional footage of the initial shooting because that's what's important here.

Watched that clip of 1st incident about 20 times, still undecided. At first I thought Kyle was a full car length away and just out of camera when he shot but last few views I could see the guy in red head gear was either running up behind him or sneaking up. Can't tell if Kyle was being chased or was surprised by him and turned and shot. Best case he panicked and shot when he saw he coming up. Doesn't look like he just shot him randomly. Not clever trying to sneak up on or chase a guy with a rifle. The last 2 shootings were justified self defense, he didn't have much of a choice. Think the old saying better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6 was used at that point. His legal team are trying to spin he was putting out fires when they took exception to it and attacked, though it is a possibility, it was definitely stupid of him to be even there.

AbusesToilets

Brian? wrote: »

That's complete and total BS. He travelled across state lines illegally carrying a fire arm and shot 3 people.

He shot the first person for shouting at him. He has no right to use deadly force in that situation. None.

The 2nd and third people were shot for attempting to disarm and active shooter. It no longer matters if he felt threatened, he was a murderer at this point and the crowd were trying to stop more people getting hurt.

There is no "stand your ground" law in WI. He's a murderer.

That's quite the narrative you're constructing, shows impressive creativity. Thankfully we have video to show the reality.

Tell me, what was the reason for the crowd to fire off a gun in the air; for them initially to chase Rittenhouse and attack him?