[RD] George Floyd and protesting while black

[gay_Aleks]

By complete 'accident', the Cambridge, Massachusets police tells of violent purges, if any reforms are passed by the local government:

Link to article: https://www.cambridgeday.com/2020/07/12/police-union-deletes-warning-of-possible-purge/

As ever, it's either your typical brand of liberal democracy, or a police state. [One will be forgiven, of course, if they find it difficult to see the difference.]

 

[Estebonrober]

more on the theme from above. . .

https://theintercept.com/2020/07/15...aJtmUtuaoE8D9M0osad0l0v1dxc6qKCjJipOH2ZK0_OK8

While Trump’s threatened designation of antifa as a terror organization has not come about for important legal and logistical reasons, that was never really the point, German argued. “They know as well as anybody does, because they’re not stupid people, that there is no organization called antifa,” the former FBI agent said. “It’s an absurdity what they’re talking about, but they’re using it as this umbrella term to justify militant or vigilante violence against these groups, and also police violence against these groups. They’re identifying the enemy — and that’s what’s very dangerous.”

This is epic levels of bad police state bullfeathers. There has been no arrests of confirmed antifa affiliated personnel to this day but there have been dozens of right wing extremists arrested and charged for everything from attacking protesters, to killing police, to property destruction. Wonder why none of this concerns police or the FBI? It it it couldn't be more white supremacist bullfeathers could it? could it?

 

[gay_Aleks]

The irony here is that they are chasing after the actually dissenting voices in our society under the guise that they're part of 'Antifa', but the brave free speech warriors that are in our noble shinin' hill of a forum are nowhere to be found. Curious.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Don’t be so churlish. You said they were different, I asked why they were different. Don’t make it into something it’s not because you’re reading into things. You would agree this photo, without any particular context, has become known worldwide.

It would not be known worldwide without the context.

So I ask, now that you’ve seen photos of patrol cars ramming protesters

Context matters. There are situations under which a patrol car doing this is reasonable, such as if a large crowd of people is simultaneously obstructing movement and threatening the person in the vehicle.

cops shootings reporters and tear gas being used on peaceful crowds - the violent incidents of protest notwithstanding

Are they peaceful or not? The quote above seems confused. I'm not inclined to give the "protestors" the benefit of the doubt in this regard given that they've been caught lying about this with similar distressing frequency as the police themselves.

all of these things are true and it is incorrect to state there has not been a repeated prevalence of violence across the US against peaceful protesters - what excuses can you make?

I ask for evidence, not assertions.

So, how is it different?

Absolute numbers killed, % law enforcement killed relative to the protests, % of protestors killed by people other than police.

I have no sympathy for people doing a surround and pound on a vehicle having said vehicle hit the gas. Comparing that to the massacre in China is far gone from reality.

The irony here is that they are chasing after the actually dissenting voices in our society under the guise that they're part of 'Antifa', but the brave free speech warriors that are in our noble shinin' hill of a forum are nowhere to be found. Curious.

Violent crime is not speech though.

 

[Estebonrober]

It would not be known worldwide without the context.



Context matters. There are situations under which a patrol car doing this is reasonable, such as if a large crowd of people is simultaneously obstructing movement and threatening the person in the vehicle.



Are they peaceful or not? The quote above seems confused. I'm not inclined to give the "protestors" the benefit of the doubt in this regard given that they've been caught lying about this with similar distressing frequency as the police themselves.



I ask for evidence, not assertions.



Absolute numbers killed, % law enforcement killed relative to the protests, % of protestors killed by people other than police.

I have no sympathy for people doing a surround and pound on a vehicle having said vehicle hit the gas. Comparing that to the massacre in China is far gone from reality.



Violent crime is not speech though.

“police brutality is not worthy of my contempt until they are murdering people in vast numbers for no reason! Then I’ll speak up!”

Face it. You would be sitting at a desk in Germany in 38’ going “this looks fine to me, these people need a strong hand”.

 

[El_Machinae]

Comparing numbers is fine, but doesn't tell the whole story. Police officers have a homogeneity of training that protesters don't.

Eight guys torching a car is fundamentally different from 8 cops pepper-balling people on their porches.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

“police brutality is not worthy of my contempt until they are murdering people in vast numbers for no reason! Then I’ll speak up!”

Face it. You would be sitting at a desk in Germany in 38’ going “this looks fine to me, these people need a strong hand”.

Making openly dishonest interpretations and arguing against things nobody wrote isn't helpful.

Comparing numbers is fine, but doesn't tell the whole story. Police officers have a homogeneity of training that protesters don't.

The #1 issue leading to this thread is that police are not being held to consistent standards. A random dude doing that to Floyd or Timpa would be seeing murder charges in both cases, not having them dropped in one case.

Eight guys torching a car is fundamentally different from 8 cops pepper-balling people on their porches.

The only significant difference between those examples is that in one case people are targeted, which makes it worse. If there is someone inside the car being attacked the difference is not meaningful.

As for being attacked on porches, again context matters. Though pepper ball is assault at worst and isn't what people normally think of when they hear someone was shot on their porch. I'm not sure the pepper ball shot by a rando civilian would even be a larger sentence than destroying a vehicle. Maybe?

 

[El_Machinae]

The only significant difference between those examples is that in one case people are targeted, which makes it worse. If there is someone inside the car being attacked the difference is not meaningful.

No, they're different. One is representative of training and legislation and regulations. The other is representative of a statistical portion of the population.

If this were statistics, I would say that if you think the means are the same, the standard deviations aren't.

 

[Crezth]

Making openly dishonest interpretations and arguing against things nobody wrote isn't helpful.

Again, there’s no need to be churlish. For all your talk of evidence, you’ve offered zero evidence that the context for Chinese suppression of free speech and the American suppression of Black speech is different. You have made assertions, and so have I.

So we look at police cars ramming protesters that don’t seem to be doing anything - you insist that is proof of nothing without context. Then we look at the context which is that many peaceful protesters have been attacked, a claim you scoff at despite having evidence of protesters being beaten: you say there’s no proof the protesters were peaceful, so I ask where is the proof the Tiananmen protesters were peaceful? And you brush that aside with “Well, everyone knows about that.” Do they? What do they know? What actual evidence do they have?

It’s absolutely fair to suggest you’d be punching Jewish passports for deportation to the East without a second thought, because many Germans did in fact believe the context that was supplied to them that it was the Jews who were causing trouble. Speaking anecdotally I have many friends who have been attacked by the police at these protests, and every one of those friends was peacefully and mild-manneredly marching when the police attacked them. If you think all the BLM protests are riots you’re drinking the kool aid, and worst still doing it for no evidence but a lack of evidence that they aren’t criminals. That’s just what every authoritarian regime wants.

Many people in China justified Tiananmen as soon as it happened. Most people in China to this day think the Hong Kong protests are just rioters and they need to be stomped with the boot of the law. If we go by everyone’s official numbers, more BLM protesters have been killed by US police than Hong Kong protesters by Chinese police, and the US reporting on this is extremely inconsistent and difficult to find. You might say the Hong Kong numbers are fudged (without any evidence) but then you’d have to show the US numbers are not fudged, and somehow I think you’re not prepared to do that.

 

[gay_Aleks]

In the meantime, however, it would appear that you have masked jackbooted agents of the state take away citizens. No identification, no nothing.

https://twitter.com/sparrowmedia/status/1283436911307218948

 

[Commodore]

By complete 'accident', the Cambridge, Massachusets police tells of violent purges, if any reforms are passed by the local government:

Link to article: https://www.cambridgeday.com/2020/07/12/police-union-deletes-warning-of-possible-purge/

As ever, it's either your typical brand of liberal democracy, or a police state. [One will be forgiven, of course, if they find it difficult to see the difference.]

I had to laugh at the part of their little copypasta they want people to send to their representatives that talks about cops' Constitutional rights somehow being denied.

My response to that is this: Hey, you cops want to walk, talk, and act like you're soldiers, well guess what? Part of being a soldier is having some of your Constitutional rights either limited or denied so the rest of the country can safely exercise those rights. So if you want to take on the mantle of "protector" then you have to accept that, at least in part and due to the necessities of the role, the Constitution no longer applies to you in the same way it applies to the average citizen.

 

[gay_Aleks]

It brings me no joy to report that, at times like these, the cops have the upper hand over the Constitution as far as these things go.

 

[Commodore]

Makes me wonder if there needs to be a separate, much stricter justice system for law enforcement much like there is for the military. I really feel that fear of UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) and the severe punishments it can dish out goes a long way to maintain good order and discipline among soldiers. UCMJ jurisdiction also supercedes all other jurisdictions in its application. For example: if you are a soldier and the local law says the age of consent for sex is 16, you will still face punishment under UCMJ if you hook up with a 16 year old because UCMJ says the age of consent is 18. UCMJ also applies to a soldier 24/7, so it doesn't matter if they are on or off duty when they commit a violation.

I think establishing something like UCMJ for cops could go a long way towards reining in the worst of police behavior.

 

[Crezth]

In the meantime, however, it would appear that you have masked jackbooted agents of the state take away citizens. No identification, no nothing.

https://twitter.com/sparrowmedia/status/1283436911307218948

Every libertarian in this thread is agreed that being spirited away by secret police in unmarked vans is cool and good, right?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Again, there’s no need to be churlish. For all your talk of evidence, you’ve offered zero evidence that the context for Chinese suppression of free speech and the American suppression of Black speech is different. You have made assertions, and so have I.

What you quoted was a response to a post that was outright a dishonest representation of what I said though, and it's not the first or even 3rd+ time it's happened. It's tiresome.

It doesn't benefit arguments to slip in racially charged language for no reason either.

The nature of the protests and especially scale of human lives lost in the massacre were different in China. More than every unarmed person killed by cops in the USA in our lifetime, combined/including protests, possibly by a huge margin (depending on how many you accept died back then). In contrast, US protests are a mix of legitimate issues with law enforcement, petty thieves/thugs taking advantage, a large band of Marxists wearing the controversy like a mask, and outright rioters. In more than one of the clips shown, the police were either provoked or outright attacked either on or off the displayed footage.

So we look at police cars ramming protesters that don’t seem to be doing anything - you insist that is proof of nothing without context.

I saw several people beating on the vehicle while others were in front of the vehicle. I would advise anybody being dangerously mobbed like that to protect themselves.

Then we look at the context which is that many peaceful protesters have been attacked, a claim you scoff at despite having evidence of protesters being beaten:

I scoff at numerous media sources which have already been demonstrated to be lying about the nature and the severity of both the protestor actions and police actions, repeatedly.

It’s absolutely fair to suggest you’d be punching Jewish passports for deportation to the East without a second thought

Actually, it's straight ad hominem trash not worthy of the time it takes to read nor any respect whatsoever .

If we go by everyone’s official numbers, more BLM protesters have been killed by US police than Hong Kong protesters by Chinese police, and the US reporting on this is extremely inconsistent and difficult to find.

Pick one or the other.

Every libertarian in this thread is agreed that being spirited away by secret police in unmarked vans is cool and good, right?

Is that what's going on in that picture?

 

[Senethro]

Even if the protesters were bad, that doesn’t make the police good.

I’m also of the opinion that even bad people deserve good police!

 

[REDY]

I wonder, is attack on US officer more serious offense than on normal US citizen? In my country it is, but policemen does not have any ïmmunity.

 

[Crezth]

The nature of the protests and especially scale of human lives lost in the massacre were different in China. More than every unarmed person killed by cops in the USA in our lifetime, combined/including protests, possibly by a huge margin (depending on how many you accept died back then).

Quoted statement is not supported by any demonstrated evidence. For example: we know that a much bigger proportion of the American population is in forced labor camps (every government that has had them has called them penitentiaries) than in China. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/uk/06/prisons/html/nn2page1.stm

As for deaths that happened during the civil war, well, that’s not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about the repression of current governments. If you really want to go back to the beginning of time, I promise America won’t look that rosy. Either way you still need to prove objectively that China is worse.

In contrast, US protests are a mix of legitimate issues with law enforcement, petty thieves/thugs taking advantage, a large band of Marxists wearing the controversy like a mask, and outright rioters. In more than one of the clips shown, the police were either provoked or outright attacked either on or off the displayed footage.

Again I could say all of this about Hong Kong. I could even say it about Tiananmen, the Tibetans, and the Uighurs. Every single instance of resistance against the Chinese State was blamed on radicals and lawbreakers. You are making an arbitrary choice by lending credence on the one hand to anti-Chinese resistance while denouncing peaceful anti-American protests which you can see be attacked by police in real time. All I have to do on my end is say “In Hong Kong protesters set a man on fire” and China’s authority is immediately legitimized according to your logic.

I saw several people beating on the vehicle while others were in front of the vehicle. I would advise anybody being dangerously mobbed like that to protect themselves.

Like Hong Kong police when protesters smack their hands on cop cars? I do admit it shows a lot of what you’re on about when you watch a cop car drive through a barricade to hit protesters and suggest those cops were protecting themselves. Like I said you’d be a great spin doctor for a police state. They need people like you.

I scoff at numerous media sources which have already been demonstrated to be lying about the nature and the severity of both the protestor actions and police actions, repeatedly.

Ah yes the media lies, so I will choose to view the protesters as in the wrong. They’d love you in a police state.

Actually, it's straight ad hominem trash not worthy of the time it takes to read nor any respect whatsoever .

How is it ad hominem? It’s a practical and straightforward comparison of your position to a historical one. For all anyone here knows you would make a great German pencil pusher.

Pick one or the other.

So nothing to say about US police killing more BLM protesters than Chinese police killing Hong Kong protesters?

Is that what's going on in that picture?

I get the feeling your self preservation sense is a bit dulled if you can watch two men fully armed in battle fatigues with face masks pick a guy off the street without charging him, shove him into their van and drive off into the dead of night, and think to yourself this is totally cool and normal to have.

I guess we’ve already gotten to the point where you can’t point to anything here that isn’t like a police state without churlishly complaining about it.

I mean to be fair everyone in this thread already knows what your position is: uncompromising support for the police in crushing black protesters. You’re keen to throw a few cops to the wolves as a symbolic gesture but when push comes to shove and batons and gas start raining down on peaceful protesters you are A-OK with it. In fact you deny peaceful protesters are peaceful. You are just what allows authoritarianism to triumph.

 

[Takhisis]

I ask for evidence, not assertions.

Introjection!

 

[TheMeInTeam]

As for deaths that happened during the civil war, well, that’s not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about the repression of current governments. If you really want to go back to the beginning of time, I promise America won’t look that rosy. Either way you still need to prove objectively that China is worse.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tiananmen_Square_protests

I'm talking about police brutality specifically, and earlier so were you.

Again I could say all of this about Hong Kong. I could even say it about Tiananmen, the Tibetans, and the Uighurs. Every single instance of resistance against the Chinese State was blamed on radicals and lawbreakers. You are making an arbitrary choice by lending credence on the one hand to anti-Chinese resistance while denouncing peaceful anti-American protests

I didn't denounce the peaceful protestors though, aside from those who protested over farcical situations like Atlanta taser man somehow being handled poorly.

Like Hong Kong police when protesters smack their hands on cop cars? I do admit it shows a lot of what you’re on about when you watch a cop car drive through a barricade to hit protesters and suggest those cops were protecting themselves.

You have evidence that police were driving with intent to ram, the protestors somehow knew this and...threw themselves in front to be rammed? If not, what are you going for with this?

How is it ad hominem? It’s a practical and straightforward comparison of your position to a historical one.

Words have meaning in reality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem.

So nothing to say about US police killing more BLM protesters than Chinese police killing Hong Kong protesters?

How do you identify the Marxist subset protestors compared to other protestors, or how does the source you're using identify said Marxists?

I get the feeling your self preservation sense is a bit dulled

Let me help you out with words: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem --> Quoted is exactly the kind of drivel that is ad hominem, and does nothing to contribute to the topic or argument of either person.

Context matters by the way.

I mean to be fair everyone in this thread already knows what your position is: uncompromising support for the police in crushing black protesters.

Playing pretend doesn't strengthen your argument. "To be fair" is a nice bit of humor though.

You’re keen to throw a few cops to the wolves as a symbolic gesture but when push comes to shove and batons and gas start raining down on peaceful protesters you are A-OK with it. In fact you deny peaceful protesters are peaceful.

If protestors were "peaceful" to the extent claimed, we wouldn't have situations like a single city claiming $500,000,000 in damages due to "protests". That's not what peaceful protest looks like, and these kinds of damages are not restricted to that one city.

Never mind what I've said about police reform policy changes in this + other threads, apparently that doesn't count and it's kosher for the echo chamber to like it as you repeatedly lie about my outright stated position as if that somehow contributes to the discussion.

In fact you deny peaceful protesters are peaceful. You are just what allows authoritarianism to triumph.

Were the billions of dollars of damages actions of peace? Should the law stop applying now? Isn't that what got Floyd killed, the law not counting when it should have counted?

Edit: I forgot to mention that the decision to tell Minnesota to shove it with its aid request was the obviously correct one in this case. I expect similar outcomes if cities like Seattle are brave enough in their hypocrisy to try that.