Police shootings, vigilante shootings, and Black Lives Matter

AbusesToilets · 24-09-2020 2:09pm

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

That depends on the colour of your skin in US and soon enough on the makeup of the supreme court.

Trump literally just told the world he will not commit to peaceful transfer of power if he loses.

People being snatched off streets by unmarked federal (maybe?) officers. Kids of immigrants disapearing into federal system

countless black people being literally killed in the streets en masse with videos to prove it.

and then theres 200,000 dead due to Covid

I just showed that all of your "tyranny" check boxes have now been checked.

BTW its not just tyrany it is now plain old fascism they have under Trump

So that's no to all those conditions. Your hysteria is noted

Tell me how · 24-09-2020 2:15pm

Incredible to think a President who advocates for violence against protesters, says that he is the ultimate authority, allocates aid based on which states supports him, refuses to say that he will go peacefully should he lose the election and suggests some of his fans might demand he serves a 3rd term isn't a tyrant in the eyes of some.

I guess when you sign up to a fan club, you take that seriously.

Manic Moran · 24-09-2020 3:22pm

People being snatched off streets by unmarked federal (maybe?) officers.

Definitely federal, if you're referring to Portland. They are wearing their identifying insignia on their sleeves. Example https://twitter.com/Eleven_Films/status/1283967750981873670

That said, there is nothing saying you must be arrested by a uniformed/marked officer, as long as they identify themselves. Plain-clothes police have been a thing for quite a few years.

Potatoeman · 24-09-2020 3:31pm

Nody wrote: »

You mean things such as military clad government forces abducting people in unidentified vehicles which is against the countries constitution? Or perhaps you're referring to encouraging militant vigilantes among your own supporters to kill people? You know; those kind of things as are done in Belarus today and oh, wait, USA as well...

It’s when the people disappear after being picked up you have to worry.

Potatoeman · 24-09-2020 3:49pm

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

You repeatedly post one liners, do not engage in discussion as poster after poster demolish your Trumpian nonsense.

I posted clear examples of Trump being a tyrant by your own definition. Are you capable of engaging in debate? Or are just here to regurgitate Trump's incoherent talking points?

If he wins the election and tries to extend his term to a third term the military will remove him after his second term is over. The next democrat to win can just undo anything he passes. It’s always been like this in the US.

AbusesToilets · 24-09-2020 3:59pm

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

You repeatedly post one liners, do not engage in discussion as poster after poster demolish your Trumpian nonsense.

I posted clear examples of Trump being a tyrant by your own definition. Are you capable of engaging in debate? Or are just here to regurgitate Trump's incoherent talking points?

You offer nothing but hyperbole and exaggeration. What is the point of engagement with that? Where is the tryanny when those you claim were rounded up get bailed out shortly afterwards? Not really on the level of places like the USSR where you'd catch a bullet in some damp cell or get sent to Siberia is it? It's all political theatre.

Brian? · 24-09-2020 4:23pm

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Have a read through the histories of Eastern Europe when the USSR came a calling, pretty solid example of a tryanny.

I get it Brian, you want to either a) have some gotcha moment, where you triumphantly declare hypocrisy; or b) make some convoluted point about Trump being a Kroger brand tyrant. I don't see it myself but YMMV

You clearly don’t get it.

You think people should have guns to resist tyranny. You constantly criticise people protesting against tyranny.

It’s ridiculous to hold both views at once.

AbusesToilets · 24-09-2020 4:33pm

Brian? wrote: »

You clearly don’t get it.

You think people should have guns to resist tyranny. You constantly criticise people protesting against tyranny.

It’s ridiculous to hold both views at once.

Except it's not tryanny, far from it.

Brian? · 24-09-2020 6:43pm

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Except it's not tryanny, far from it.

According to your absurd definition of tyranny.

AbusesToilets · 24-09-2020 7:02pm

Brian? wrote: »

According to your absurd definition of tyranny.

If you consider a rational observation of the situation absurd, sure man.

Brian? · 24-09-2020 7:19pm

AbusesToilets wrote: »

If you consider a rational observation of the situation absurd, sure man.

It’s not at rational to define tyranny the way you have.

It’s clearly a sliding scale with your definition somewhere at the higher end.

AbusesToilets · 24-09-2020 7:26pm

Brian? wrote: »

It’s not at rational to define tyranny the way you have.

It’s clearly a sliding scale with your definition somewhere at the higher end.

Is there still the rule of law in the country? Yes

Does the Constitutional still stand? Yes

Are people being illegally detained without due process a la internment camps or the like? No

Are people being executed/ killed for their political views by agents of the state in a coordinated manner? No

Are people able to exercise their free speech without fear of reprisals from the Government? Yes.

Are people able to engage in politics without fear of punishment or violence? Yes

Please show me the widespread actions which you claim constitute evidence of a Tyranny existing in the US.

Brian? · 24-09-2020 7:34pm

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Is there still the rule of law in the country? Yes

Does the Constitutional still stand? Yes

Are people being illegally detained without due process a la internment camps or the like? No

Are people being executed/ killed for their political views by agents of the state in a coordinated manner? No

Are people able to exercise their free speech without fear of reprisals from the Government? Yes.

Are people able to engage in politics without fear of punishment or violence? Yes

Please show me the widespread actions which you claim constitute evidence of a Tyranny existing in the US.

You’ve made up a definition of tyranny and are continually defending it as if it’s a fact. It isn’t. It’s an opinions and a pretty poor one.

Tyranny is an oppressive government. Simple.

I’d be happy to debate you in relation to the actual definition of tyranny, but your definition is off the charts ridiculous.

AbusesToilets · 24-09-2020 7:45pm

Brian? wrote: »

You’ve made up a definition of tyranny and are continually defending it as if it’s a fact. It isn’t. It’s an opinions and a pretty poor one.

Tyranny is an oppressive government. Simple.

I’d be happy to debate you in relation to the actual definition of tyranny, but your definition is off the charts ridiculous.

I don't believe I made up a definition of tyranny. I was asked what actions I would consider as grounds to justify armed resistance. I offered my opinion. Perhaps you missed that part in your rush to hysterics.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tyranny

Definition of tyranny

1 : oppressive power every form of tyranny over the mind of man— Thomas Jefferson especially : oppressive power exerted by government the tyranny of a police state
2a : a government in which absolute power is vested in a single ruler especially : one characteristic of an ancient Greek city-state
b : the office, authority, and administration of a tyrant
3 : a rigorous condition imposed by some outside agency or force living under the tyranny of the clock— Dixon Wecter
4 : an oppressive, harsh, or unjust act : a tyrannical act workers who had suffered tyrannies

Go on so, please demonstrate the subjugation of the American people by Trump. Can't say I've noticed it myself lately.

Water John · 24-09-2020 8:37pm

Interesting interview here with Opal Tometi, one of the three women who founded BLM:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/sep/24/opal-tometi-co-founder-of-black-lives-matter-i-do-this-because-we-deserve-to-live

They can hardly be characterised as a threat to the state.

AbusesToilets · 24-09-2020 8:57pm

Water John wrote: »

Interesting interview here with Opal Tometi, one of the three women who founded BLM:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/sep/24/opal-tometi-co-founder-of-black-lives-matter-i-do-this-because-we-deserve-to-live

They can hardly be characterised as a threat to the state.

“I say look at the data. In 93% of the protests, nothing like that has happened. But beyond that I’ll be really honest: I’m not really concerned about broken glass. I’m concerned about people’s broken faces, their broken bodies, because they had the audacity to stand up for human rights. Property can be replaced, people cannot … I know it can be very confusing for people, but it really shouldn’t be.”

Some comfort to those whose saw their livelihoods destroyed

Retr0gamer · 28-09-2020 9:48am

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Some comfort to those whose saw their livelihoods destroyed

I know. All those people of colour that have lost so much to police brutality. Sometimes their lives and the knock of affect to their families. I'd trade lives for a bit of property damage any day of the week.

Retr0gamer · 28-09-2020 9:52am

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Are people being illegally detained without due process a la internment camps or the like? No

Except they are being detained in prison for protesting. Doesn't matter if it's a internment camp, they are being detained for practicing their democratic rights

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Are people able to exercise their free speech without fear of reprisals from the Government? Yes.

Only if you ignore the police brutality against peaceful protesters which is happening even if you choose to ignore it. How you can even say this is utterly delusional and baffling.

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Are people able to engage in politics without fear of punishment or violence? Yes

Being tear gasses, beaten, shot at with paintballs, rubber bullets and actual bullets and supporting vigilantes not count?

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Please show me the widespread actions which you claim constitute evidence of a Tyranny existing in the US.

What's the point, there's hundreds of verified reports of this happening. You'll just do your usual ostrich impression and choose to ignore it.

AbusesToilets · 28-09-2020 2:26pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Except they are being detained in prison for protesting. Doesn't matter if it's a internment camp, they are being detained for practicing their democratic rights

Only if you ignore the police brutality against peaceful protesters which is happening even if you choose to ignore it. How you can even say this is utterly delusional and baffling.

Being tear gasses, beaten, shot at with paintballs, rubber bullets and actual bullets and supporting vigilantes not count?

What's the point, there's hundreds of verified reports of this happening. You'll just do your usual ostrich impression and choose to ignore it.

Being arrested for breaking curfew and rioting is not indicative of the collapse of the legal system. Figures you would see the police as acting in the wrong to disrupt riots. As is abundantly clear, the lives of those suffering at the hands of the rioters matter not a jot.

Amazing how posters can go and on about police brutality, when again and again these incidents are shown to have been driven by the actions of the people involved. How dare the police try to break up a riot. How dare the police try to arrest someone passed out drunk driving. Ludicrous reasoning.

AbusesToilets · 28-09-2020 2:29pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I know. All those people of colour that have lost so much to police brutality. Sometimes their lives and the knock of affect to their families. I'd trade lives for a bit of property damage any day of the week.

What's a person of colour?

Nice of you to handwave away $1bn worth of destruction

briany · 28-09-2020 8:25pm

It's been skillful enough what those on the right have been doing. The killing of George Floyd was an indefensible act, and there probably wouldn't even be a member of the KKK who could feel like it was. So, the approach has been instead to focus on those engaging in looting to thoroughly delegitimise the protests around it and the shooting of other black people.

So, it's a simple enough equation, really, looting is bad. Destruction of property is bad. Those people should stop, and if they do not stop, they should face the lawful consequences currently meted out to people engaging in that type of vandalism.

BUT

It cannot be assumed that those engaging in looting speak for those protesters who simply want reform in the way police operate, because there are many voices in a crowd. It's massively disingenuous for the likes of for any news outlet to focus solely on those looters. I think everyone can get on board with the idea that police should not use excessive force and if there is any prejudice leading to such, it cannot be tolerated.

HOWEVER

The 99 percent rallies didn't achieve much, and they were very peaceful. It seems to be case of damned if you do and damned if you don't. Wreck stuff and you're just a bunch of thugs hijacking a cause. Protest peacefully and you're just a bunch of hippies with should probably find more constructive things to do on a workday. Kneel, and you're unpatriotic. Is there a way to protest that is forceful enough to enact real change yet does not inconvenience the establishment in some way?

AbusesToilets · 28-09-2020 9:03pm

briany wrote: »

It's been skillful enough what those on the right have been doing. The killing of George Floyd was an indefensible act, and there probably wouldn't even be a member of the KKK who could feel like it was. So, the approach has been instead to focus on those engaging in looting to thoroughly delegitimise the protests around it and the shooting of other black people.

So, it's a simple enough equation, really, looting is bad. Destruction of property is bad. Those people should stop, and if they do not stop, they should face the lawful consequences currently meted out to people engaging in that type of vandalism.

BUT

It cannot be assumed that those engaging in looting speak for those protesters who simply want reform in the way police operate, because there are many voices in a crowd. It's massively disingenuous for the likes of for any news outlet to focus solely on those looters. I think everyone can get on board with the idea that police should not use excessive force and if there is any prejudice leading to such, it cannot be tolerated.

HOWEVER

The 99 percent rallies didn't achieve much, and they were very peaceful. It seems to be case of damned if you do and damned if you don't. Wreck stuff and you're just a bunch of thugs hijacking a cause. Protest peacefully and you're just a bunch of hippies with should probably find more constructive things to do on a workday. Kneel, and you're unpatriotic. Is there a way to protest that is forceful enough to enact real change yet does not inconvenience the establishment in some way?

You can vote for people who aren't corrupt and who act in the best interests of the community.

Potatoeman · 29-09-2020 4:27pm

briany wrote: »

It's been skillful enough what those on the right have been doing. The killing of George Floyd was an indefensible act, and there probably wouldn't even be a member of the KKK who could feel like it was. So, the approach has been instead to focus on those engaging in looting to thoroughly delegitimise the protests around it and the shooting of other black people.

So, it's a simple enough equation, really, looting is bad. Destruction of property is bad. Those people should stop, and if they do not stop, they should face the lawful consequences currently meted out to people engaging in that type of vandalism.

BUT

It cannot be assumed that those engaging in looting speak for those protesters who simply want reform in the way police operate, because there are many voices in a crowd. It's massively disingenuous for the likes of for any news outlet to focus solely on those looters. I think everyone can get on board with the idea that police should not use excessive force and if there is any prejudice leading to such, it cannot be tolerated.

HOWEVER

The 99 percent rallies didn't achieve much, and they were very peaceful. It seems to be case of damned if you do and damned if you don't. Wreck stuff and you're just a bunch of thugs hijacking a cause. Protest peacefully and you're just a bunch of hippies with should probably find more constructive things to do on a workday. Kneel, and you're unpatriotic. Is there a way to protest that is forceful enough to enact real change yet does not inconvenience the establishment in some way?

Look what Gandhi achieved. The problem with violent protest is that the opposition can do the same thing and you have an escalation of tit for tat violence where no one wins.

Quin_Dub · 29-09-2020 6:56pm

Grand juror from the Brionna Taylor case requests that the full transcript of the hearings be made public.

Seems to be suggesting that the DA misrepresented the proceedings. Could get messy (or messier still really)

An attorney for a grand juror who considered charges in the death of Breonna Taylor said Tuesday that the Kentucky attorney general “may not have presented” all the evidence, but said he could not detail what was missing until a recording of the proceedings is released and his client is allowed to speak about the process.

Kevin Glogower, who represents the unidentified grand juror, said Attorney General Daniel Cameron (R) framed responsibility for the charging decision differently Monday than when he announced it in the past week. Cameron initially said the jury agreed with prosecutors that the only warranted charges were for wanton endangerment against one officer, but he later said those charges were the only indictments his office recommended.

“The primary concern that our client has is, if you watched the press conference after the reading of the indictment, the attorney general laid a lot of responsibility at the grand jurors’ feet,” Glogower said at a news conference Tuesday. “If you look at the statement that the attorney general’s office released yesterday, they attempted to walk that back.”

Foxtrol · 29-09-2020 7:56pm

briany wrote: »

It's been skillful enough what those on the right have been doing. The killing of George Floyd was an indefensible act, and there probably wouldn't even be a member of the KKK who could feel like it was. So, the approach has been instead to focus on those engaging in looting to thoroughly delegitimise the protests around it and the shooting of other black people.

So, it's a simple enough equation, really, looting is bad. Destruction of property is bad. Those people should stop, and if they do not stop, they should face the lawful consequences currently meted out to people engaging in that type of vandalism.

BUT

It cannot be assumed that those engaging in looting speak for those protesters who simply want reform in the way police operate, because there are many voices in a crowd. It's massively disingenuous for the likes of for any news outlet to focus solely on those looters. I think everyone can get on board with the idea that police should not use excessive force and if there is any prejudice leading to such, it cannot be tolerated.

HOWEVER

The 99 percent rallies didn't achieve much, and they were very peaceful. It seems to be case of damned if you do and damned if you don't. Wreck stuff and you're just a bunch of thugs hijacking a cause. Protest peacefully and you're just a bunch of hippies with should probably find more constructive things to do on a workday. Kneel, and you're unpatriotic. Is there a way to protest that is forceful enough to enact real change yet does not inconvenience the establishment in some way?

It was easy, they just rolled over the playbook from the civil rights era. The same things were spread about MLK during that time, he spoke and wrote a lot on the subject.

https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1305250193194049539?s=20

Foxtrol · 29-09-2020 7:59pm

Potatoeman wrote: »

Look what Gandhi achieved. The problem with violent protest is that the opposition can do the same thing and you have an escalation of tit for tat violence where no one wins.

It is a regular occurrence in the US that non-violent protests are met with violence from the police.

As far as success of movements that weren't totally 'non-violent' look at what the anti-apartheid or civil rights movements achieved.

AbusesToilets · 30-09-2020 12:12am

SNIP. Don't bring up mod actions here please.

Potatoeman · 30-09-2020 1:24pm

Foxtrol wrote: »

It is a regular occurrence in the US that non-violent protests are met with violence from the police.

As far as success of movements that weren't totally 'non-violent' look at what the anti-apartheid or civil rights movements achieved.

Winnie Mandela versus Nelson Mandela. Who comes out better from that comparison?

Foxtrol · 30-09-2020 1:45pm

Potatoeman wrote: »

Winnie Mandela versus Nelson Mandela. Who comes out better from that comparison?

Nelson Mandela was part of a group that was involved in organised violent acts.

Despite how right wing media tries to portray them, this can't be said about the BLM movement. The worst I've seen are a few outliers loosely associated with the group refusing to condemn or excusing violence/looting (with nearly every person connected to the movement consistently calling for non-violence and condemning violence/looting).

Potatoeman · 30-09-2020 2:25pm

Foxtrol wrote: »

Nelson Mandela was part of a group that was involved in organised violent acts.

Despite how right wing media tries to portray them, this can't be said about the BLM movement. The worst I've seen are a few outliers loosely associated with the group refusing to condemn or excusing violence/looting (with nearly every person connected to the movement consistently calling for non-violence and condemning violence/looting).

Yes, he was and he got out of prison and looked for a peaceful solution.

Reports have 500mil to 1 billion of property damage. That is not peaceful.

Police shootings, vigilante shootings, and Black Lives Matter

Comments