[RD] George Floyd and protesting while black

[Bugfatty300]

It's also remarkable, how there's another thread about people who pulled a gun in response to a lengthy harassment and were instantly branded dangerous maniacs, while a guy who answered a simple knock to the door holding a gun is just another innocent victim.

He's a victim because he was in his house minding his own business while the other people where in a public place needlessly brandishing a gun.

 

[EgonSpengler]

How many black Americans are killed by police? How many are killed by everybody else?
What impact might "doing away with police" have on the second figure?

On Friday, I was listening to a radio program about police budgets around the country. They mentioned Boston specifically, whose police budget is quadruple that of the city's health & human services dept. They estimate 15% of the department's budget is for paying officers overtime. Just one example of the rampant waste: Boston Police officers get paid for a minimum of 4 hours for every court appearance, even if they spend 10 minutes there, and of course it's frequently time-and-a-half. Naturally, the most recent proposal/demand from the union is to, wait for it, increase the budget. They mentioned Chicago, and I think Philadelphia, as other cities with similarly inflated police department budgets, but I'd imagine it's rampant. They went on to note that the police budget in Boston is spent largely on patrol officers, and relatively little is spent on investigative officers and resources.

WGBH, 23 July 2018 - "Boston police closed fewer cases even as homicide rates rose last year"
USA Today, 8 Aug 2018 - "Unsolved murders: Chicago, other big cities, struggle; murder rate a 'national disaster'"

There was a huge scandal recently about a Massachusetts State Police Troop (their term for a station) that was so egregiously abusing the overtime policies with falsified paperwork that they actually disbanded the entire unit. So the answer to your question is, depending on what happens next and what they're replaced with, 'doing away' with police, as they are presently conceptualized and constituted, could have potentially quite a large positive impact on the communities they currently abuse.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

I don't ever actually say this kind of thing, but. . .well played sir, well played. The point will fly over the libertarian's head but it could not be more succinct.

Wasn't that pretty much textbook "whataboutism"? And that deserves a "well played"? I'll remember that this is now the standard

 

[Yeekim]

He's a victim because he was in his house minding his own business while the other people where in a public place needlessly brandishing a gun.

No, he is a victim because he was killed by someone who was spooked by the gun he probably hoped would be useful somehow.

They went on to note that the police budget in Boston is spent largely on patrol officers, and relatively little is spent on investigative officers and resources.

I'd wager that is because writing parking tickets and such is a source of revenue for the city, as opposed to investigations, which are a cost.

So the answer to your question is, depending on what happens next and what they're replaced with, 'doing away' with police, as they are presently conceptualized and constituted, could have potentially quite a large positive impact on the communities they currently abuse.

I asked three questions and this answers none of them.
You are welcome to reform your law enforcement as you see fit, as there is clearly massive potential for improvement. You're still going to need one though.
EDIT: ... and changing its name from "police" to "citizen's militia" or "gendarmerie" or "praetorian guard" or whatever would probably be least meaningful of all changes.

 

[Estebonrober]

That's a good example of a firearm being a danger chiefly to its owner.
So a policeman was spooked by a guy who opened the door holding a gun and shot him.
Maybe the shooter was stressed out, badly trained, generally unsuitable to his job, or all three. I'd expect him to be charged and punished.
At least the victim was white, or I'm sure you'd claim this is an evidence of racism as well.
It's also remarkable, how there's another thread about people who pulled a gun in response to a lengthy harassment and were instantly branded dangerous maniacs, while a guy who answered a simple knock to the door holding a gun is just another innocent victim.

How many black Americans are killed by police? How many are killed by everybody else?
What impact might "doing away with police" have on the second figure?

Sir you are 200 pages into this thread every ignorant question in this post has been answered multiple times. The only reason you are still ignorant of those answers is willful. You do not intend to learn.

 

[Estebonrober]

Wasn't that pretty much textbook "whataboutism"? And that deserves a "well played"? I'll remember that this is now the standard

Yea the standards by libertarians on here are so low this doesn't deserve a response except for the fact that I thought it was a nice flip (I'm pretty sure thats not "whataboutism" but whatevs) of what was previously said and how it lines up with why the police can be garbage. They are often worse then the problem they are meant to solve.

 

[Yeekim]

Sir you are 200 pages into this thread every ignorant question in this post has been answered multiple times. The only reason you are still ignorant of those answers is willful. You do not intend to learn.

I'm not ignorant of the answers. They simply do not support the narrative that law enforcement - despite its appalling track record - is the chief threat to black lives in US.
Also, I do not appreciate the character attack.

 

[EnglishEdward]

The implication being if someone can't provide said list, it therefor must not be happening.

If you want to infer that, that is up to you. It is not my inference.

it could instead merely be that the secret deep fascist state is very good at offlining such lists and their authors.

 

[Kyriakos]

He's a victim because he was in his house minding his own business while the other people where in a public place needlessly brandishing a gun.

Another sad death, ultimately due to police being too scared for their lives.

That said, at least in this case the victim actually had a gun - unlike in most police kills - and was careless enough to walk outside of his house with it in hand as if ready to shoot someone.

Doesn't absolve the police at all - they were still incredibly reckless. But at least they could be said to fear they will be shot. Unlike with the taser guy or virtually everyone else they gun down.

*

The police should have insisted on getting more reliable info from the 911 caller, who clearly made up a story about violence. Also, in such cases, there's no logic in arriving with guns ready. Maybe fund some other service which doesn't use lethal weapons.

 

[Yeekim]

That said, at least in this case the victim actually had a gun - unlike in most police kills

I'm sure most police kills involve victims who are actually armed.
Not that this necessarily justifies them, ofc.

 

[EgonSpengler]

I'd wager that is because writing parking tickets and such is a source of revenue for the city, as opposed to investigations, which are a cost.

Yes, that's very likely. One of the overarching problems with our criminal 'justice' system is that it's often managed as a profit-making industry rather than as a public service, and the costs and benefits are therefore weighed in dollars. Much of our prison system is for-profit, for instance, and our system of granting bail to people awaiting trial is heavily weighted towards people who can pay money and against those who can't. The state of Florida is, as we speak, denying voting rights to felons who've served their sentences based on whether said citizens can pay money. The linkage between money and justice is deeply embedded, across the depth and breadth of this country.

I asked three questions and this answers none of them.
You are welcome to reform your law enforcement as you see fit, as there is clearly massive potential for improvement. You're still going to need one though.
EDIT: ... and changing its name from "police" to "citizen's militia" or "gendarmerie" or "praetorian guard" or whatever would probably be least meaningful of all changes.

Yes, what I wrote was an incomplete answer because a complete answer would require writing a book, and a pithy answer is really no answer at all. But I can write a little more, and maybe be a little bit clearer. I was challenging the core claim that police departments in fact keep crime under control. There's a strongly-held belief that police keep a lid on what would otherwise be a geyser of chaos and violence. I think the underlying premise demands scrutiny. I think I've seen people claim, for example, that the violence which took place inside the "cop-free" zone in Portland as evidence, if not proof, that The Thin Blue Line actually works. However, those same people conveniently overlook the fact that we're in a pandemic lockdown that is closing schools and shutting down Summer activities for young people; forcing people into social isolation, which we know is a threat to overall mental health; and creating an economic recession - all of which I think contribute to crime rates. (And now we also have a heat wave across much of the country, although I don't think Portland is experiencing that.)

USA Today, 12 Feb 2019 - "More cops: Is it the answer to fighting crime? Declining numbers of cops nationwide worry big city officials, but experts say there is little evidence that more cops equals less crime."

There was a follow-up study to New York City's implementation of its "stop & frisk" strategy that found the approach had no meaningful, positive results. In addition to being racist in its application - iirc, Black and Latino men were stopped & frisked at disproportionately higher rates than White men - there was no increase in the seizure of illegal paraphernalia, drugs or weapons. Even if you set aside the race issues, New York City police officers are just not, as a group, particularly good at spotting who's suspicious and who isn't, in the absence of probable cause that they can articulate in a report afterward. A state Superior Court case in Boston, and a review commissioned by the Boston Police Dept itself, found similar results, even though I think Boston wasn't experimenting with "stop & frisk" that NYPD did. iirc, one of the results of the review of Boston police officers' "contact reports" was a notable lack of articulable suspicion, observations, or probable cause - I guess they must have been hunches, "based on experience" or context, or whatever they might say to explain themselves after the fact.

I think it's also worth noting [EDIT: heh, funny typo] that the laws against choke-holds that are being implemented around the country are likely just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. iirc, when Eric Garner was choked to death by an NYPD officer, choke-holds had been banned by the department for years. The problems with policing are more deeply rooted than mere rules & regulations, and are unlikely to be cured by a 6-hour de-escalation training course for guys who've been throwing people on the ground for 20 years. There was a professor of sociology on a radio program about policing a few weeks ago who said something like, "Culture eats policy for breakfast." The upshot is that police departments need to be taken down to the proverbial studs and, in some cases, completely demolished and rebuilt. Any police department that displays the logo of the comicbook character The Punisher, for example, is probably beyond saving and should just be burned down and rebuilt from scratch.

I heard maybe a month ago that one of the big cities in the American Southwest was transferring some of its law enforcement budget to a newly-created city service that would focus on mental health crises and other calls to its 9-1-1 system that do not to need immediate violent intervention. I can't remember any of the details, what the new service was being called or which city it was. I think the idea was that you realign the duties of the police to incidents where force is actually warranted, then you realign your dispatching service to only deploy police to those incidents. Just as police officers now can call for an ambulance or the fire department when they find a situation that warrants those skills and tools, this new service would be tied into the city's overall emergency services system and could call for police support if they encounter a situation where violent force is required. One can imagine any number of incidents that can be handled by someone with authority conferred by the local government that don't need pepper spray, a handgun, steel handcuffs and a training regimen designed to make the person suspicious and alert to lethal danger at all times. Teenagers playing ball in the park after sunset and pool parties exceeding safe capacity maybe require a school headmaster with a whistle and a loud voice. Anyway, this proposed realignment of the city's emergency services was very, very recent. I don't know if the new service is even off the ground yet, and I imagine it will be at least a year before even preliminary results of this experiment are in.

 

[Sonereal]

Sigh.

You know, it was glaringly obvious that the police would get away with murder, when the issue got focused on BLM and then Antifa.

You just couldn't stay clear of making it a special interests issue. Not sure why - but it certainly helped the murderous police thugs

Can't believe that police lynchings of Black people would center the conversation of police lynchings of Black people wow, weird.

So communists must take real offense to the fact that the bourgeoise might not exist. Probably makes sense, after all their whole ideology is about combating this "common menace" if they found out it didn't exist then perhaps their worldview would be shaken at the very foundation UwU.

Just because the KKK has taken an anti-communist stance and I have posted anti-communist posts in the past proves nothing. Sorry man try harder. Their ideology is much more than just "anti-communism".

You know, if I was an adult, say over the age of 18, I would ask why I'm ideologically aligned with the staunchest anti-communists in history: the Klan, the NSDAP, and the US government. That would require critically engaging in reality though which seems to not be your forte because you're the first person I've come across in my life that doesn't believe "people who own and subsist off capital ownership" exist.

It's not even a clan talking point!!!

I'm talking about the Klan. Obviously your League of Legends clan is (probably) not as racist as the Klan, but I've been proven wrong about the goodness of humanity over and over again in Off-Topic so who knows!?

Somehow you think anti-communism is pro Klan.

Just think its pretty weird how willing you are to throw down with Klansmen, Proud Boys, and other racists and how entirely similar your talking parts are to these groups and all. Again, an adult would ask, "Why are my talking points so similar to the Klan, the Proud Boys, Atomwaffen, the Traditional Workers Party, believers of American Exceptionalism, etc?"

Their anti-communism comes with a lot of other baggage as well. Anti-communism is only a Klan talking point if it is used in the context of race.

A wise man once said, "No investigation? No right to speak!" Google "Greensboro Massacre".

"Anti-communism if used in the context of race"? I guess that makes sense given the Nazi propaganda around communism stemmed from the Judeo-Bolshevik mythology. Almost as if there's this long weird history and interconnection between racial and class politics in the West.

Again, I beg you, investigate before speaking.

That about ends any credibility to arguments put forth alongside such a statement.

Oh no, I've lost the vaunted obscure podcaster demographic. Whatever will I do?

Have you considered that perhaps the person in question isn't just a protestor? What are the facts of the case?

TheMeInJustifyingRandomDisapperearingActsByTheFedsBecauseBlacksAndRedsScareMe

Are you for real?
Who do you think records crime?
I've seen some dumb claims here over the years, but this easily counts among top three.

Oh, Yeekim, given your long posting history, I have no doubt you've seen your fair share of dumb claims over the years, believe me.

America's troubles in moving from NKVD to KGB.

I long for the Cheka.

If the Proud Boys attack other protesters the government should punish them.

Why would the government punish people its in ideological lockstep with Zerky?

I figured that out after you wanted the job of deciding what I can hear

I can't stop you from listening to white noise at 180 decibels while you shout about your freedoms, I promise.

And RussiaGate... So? Is there some reason you should be the only one spreading myths?

It's cute that this is the first time you've seem to have interacted with a communist because you think A.) I believe in Russiagate and B.) I'm a liberal and C.) That I don't think liberals are right-wing.

The more important advice I can give to a pitcher, Zerky, is that you have a stable and solid foundation to stand on before pitching. Otherwise you're going to go wide.

Selective reading and nonsense

This was some pretty good selective reading and nonsense, thanks for that. I can only lead a horse to water, but I can't tell the horse to stop eating sand.

I'm not your pal, guy

You're not my guy, buddy.

Sir you are 200 pages into this thread every ignorant question in this post has been answered multiple times. The only reason you are still ignorant of those answers is willful. You do not intend to learn.

Well now you're just describing Off Topic.

 

[Estebonrober]

I'm not ignorant of the answers. They simply do not support the narrative that law enforcement - despite its appalling track record - is the chief threat to black lives in US.
Also, I do not appreciate the character attack.

I'm pretty sure heart disease is the biggest threat to black lives. . .This is why this is a stupid stupid stupid position to take, it has no bearing on what the problem is or why it can and should be addressed. The character attack is because I consider this line of questioning disingenuous. It is common over here in America and every time you dig long enough you find racism.

 

[Powerwise]

Maybe fund some other service which doesn't use lethal weapons.

The problem here is finding reliable non-lethal weapons. Tazers will often prove totally ineffective against people for a couple of different reasons. The issue here is that guns are simply the most reliable means of putting a person down and eliminating a threat, be it real or perceived.

 

[Powerwise]

It is common over here in America and every time you dig long enough you find racism.

Everybody who disagrees with you is racist. Got it.

 

[Sonereal]

Everybody who disagrees with you is racist. Got it.

I'm glad that at least one person finally gets it. Thanks Powerwise.

 

[Estebonrober]

The problem here is finding reliable non-lethal weapons. Tazers will often prove totally ineffective against people for a couple of different reasons. The issue here is that guns are simply the most reliable means of putting a person down and eliminating a threat, be it real or perceived.

Everybody who disagrees with you is racist. Got it.

22 posts and already lining up to be shown to have racist beliefs. I mean its not like this dance is not done in this forum constantly. You are already justifying why its ok for the police state in the US to continue to exist. It won't be long until you start telling me about how the minority community is responsible for the majority of the crime and that's why they deserve to be patrolled by occupying armies.

 

[Powerwise]

I'm glad that at least one person finally gets it. Thanks Powerwise.

I'm totally new to this thread and all, and so I've not been following along (I don't want to read through 190+ pages of this crap just for the sake of "keeping up" on a Sunday morning), but saying "people who disagree with me are always racist if I dig deep enough" seems a bit smug to me. But those are just my (totally worthless) two cents on the subject.

 

[Kyriakos]

I think a serious issue with getting some non-lethal armed police/substitute to deal with theoretically non-dangerous for the police confrontations (as in ticket collection, or 911 calls), is that in the US any citizen may be carrying a gun anyway, so the police can well end up having to deal with superior firepower.
But since the 2nd amendment is not going to change, the police will just have to deal with it, cause they cannot be trusted with firearms in routine calls.

 

[Yeekim]

/snip/

Thank you for an interesting post. Of course crime rates are affected by a whole host of other factors besides numbers and tactics of police.
Also, I like the initiative of a new public service that would focus on calls that do not appear to require use of force.

I'm pretty sure heart disease is the biggest threat to black lives. . .This is why this is a stupid stupid stupid position to take, it has no bearing on what the problem is or why it can and should be addressed. The character attack is because I consider this line of questioning disingenuous. It is common over here in America and every time you dig long enough you find racism.

I would agree with your criticism if I was making an argument that police violence is a non-issue. It is a serious issue, it can be addressed and it should be addressed.
However, I don't think it is disingenuous to ask from people who apparently wish to save 200+ black lives annually lost to police in US (let's pretend for a moment that all of those deaths are unjustified) by simply "disbanding the police" ... what is the plan then for saving 7000+ black lives lost to everyone else? Never mind all other types of crime.
It looks like treating a migraine with a guillotine. And I'm really not trying to downplay how horrible the migraine may be.