[RD] George Floyd and protesting while black

[Commodore]

Is it possible to be legally arrested and not be aware of what crime you are being arrested for? In the UK being told what crime is a required part of the arrest procedure.

It is in the US as well. You have a Constitutional right to be informed of the charges being brought against you. But, as already stated, there is a difference between arrested and detained in our legal system. You can be detained by law enforcement without charges for a limited time before they either have to charge you or release you. That time period is generally 24 hours, but under special circumstances they can request to keep you detained without charges for up to 96 hours.

 

[Bamspeedy]

Interesting, and it seems complicated. However I cannot see how the interaction described above could be “brief and cursory”.

[EDIT] Also it seems very different in the UK. It seems like any deprivation of liberty of movement is an arrest. Then it is the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 that can make the arrest legal, and that requires a police officer must inform a person that they are under arrest and the reason why. A failure to do so will render the arrest unlawful.

Reading the miranda rights I would consider arrested, so I guess he was. I know you can be arrested for (24-48?) Hours without being charged, dont know how long you can be not charged, but at least told 'on suspicion of committing x crime'. 90 minutes was this situation.
Most times arrested are told at time of arrest, but some situations and jurisdictions it's not legally required to do so immediately.
He said he wasn't told, but did he ask?

Without knowing which agency this was, not sure they are required to follow the same rules as regular police (CIA for example has more powers than a street cop, right or wrong, that's the reality).

Let's not pretend Mr. Pettibone wasn't dressed suspiciously, in all black with helmet at that time of night (I would say with the mask, but with this virus thing, that alone doesn't mean anything. ) Not in a large group of protesters. Looks more like a vandalism group of 3 people than a peaceful group of protesters.

 

[cardgame]

Let's not pretend that it wasn't a kidnapping.

 

[gay_Aleks]

They have been detained for extremely reasonable reasons, however, like graffitting buildings. Does no one respect private property in this country?

https://twitter.com/BobbySpumoni/status/1283832611450712064

 

[Bugfatty300]

Let's not pretend that police vandalism and robbery isn't a massively greater threat to the private property of average Americans.

 

[Samson]

They have been detained for extremely reasonable reasons, however, like graffitting buildings. Does no one respect private property in this country?

https://twitter.com/BobbySpumoni/status/1283832611450712064

It is amazing that there is such uniformity of views on the left in Portland. No Marxists, no Leninists, no Maoists, just anarchists.

Spoiler The list of political views of graffiti artists :

 

[Bugfatty300]

Things really got out of hand... the Feds can even take Violent Anarchists to small claims court.

 

[Crezth]

That's because Americans in general are pretty tame. We definitely aren't as tough as we used to be as a people. We've become all bark and no bite.

Well, the white folks, anyway. We see how mad they get when black folks show a backbone... I guess they're jealous?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

It's not an ad hominem just because you feel like it is. Facts don't care about your feelings.

I presented facts though, specifically that posts targeted an argument about me rather than what I've said. That's objectively ad hominem and no matter how much you cry otherwise it won't change reality. Nor will it change my disinclination to respect posts that include it. There's some irony to doing this while talking about other people's credibility as an "argument" though. So when you're ready to discuss competently, to use your own words:

"Try again".

We've all seen the context. The context makes it worse. Stop trying to deflect.

In context some police actions were justified and others were not.

At any rate, antifa is a term stressed at "anti", so anti-antifa is also stressed there; one isn't fa if they just regard antifa as negative.

The problem with antifa is its own actions. It's an inane concept to create an organization called something like "anti-rape" and then go around assaulting people, burning property, etc...then complain that anybody complaining about such an organization must be "pro-rape". But this is in essence the behavior of antifa/BLMarxists.

Interesting, and it seems complicated. However I cannot see how the interaction described above could be “brief and cursory”.

I can't either. The story as described seems illegal.

Let's not pretend that police vandalism and robbery isn't a massively greater threat to the private property of average Americans.

Police do very little vandalism, the problem is much more the robbery. It's still kind of shocking to me that civil forfeiture isn't emphasized more often by media/anti police protests. I know they mention it here and there, but it's among a few obviously devastating angles to take in making a case against them.

 

[Sonereal]

The problem with antifa is its own actions. It's an inane concept to create an organization called something like "anti-rape" and then go around assaulting people, burning property, etc...then complain that anybody complaining about such an organization must be "pro-rape". But this is in essence the behavior of antifa/BLMarxists.

lmao

For the record, an anti-rape organization that went around assaulting rapists and burning down the property of rapists would be extremely based and I can't wait to support the GoFundMe.

 

[Crezth]

I presented facts though, specifically that posts targeted an argument about me rather than what I've said. That's objectively ad hominem and no matter how much you cry otherwise it won't change reality. Nor will it change my disinclination to respect posts that include it. There's some irony to doing this while talking about other people's credibility as an "argument" though. So when you're ready to discuss competently, to use your own words:

"Try again".

Quoted statement is factually incorrect. You did not present facts, you provided an assertion. It's clear he's making a comparison between you and a hypothetical figure in a historically similar situation and comparing how your views are similar. That's not "objectively" ad hominem unless you have some subjective definition of objective. You can try addressing the actual argument instead of retreating to a churlish metanarrative.

In context some police actions were justified and others were not.

Again, apply this to Chinese police or the Gestapo and see where you end up.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

For the record, an anti-rape organization that went around assaulting rapists and burning down the property of rapists would be extremely based and I can't wait to support the GoFundMe.

That removes the comparative validity of the example though. Antifa/BLMarxists don't act in accordance with their name, which is the point.

I'd not recommend condoning violence either, given that some accused are not guilty.

 

[Crezth]

Are you going to respond to any of the other dozen points I made or are you just going to pretend you didn't see them churlishly?

 

[Senethro]

So churlishly

 

[gay_Aleks]

That removes the comparative validity of the example though. Antifa/BLMarxists don't act in accordance with their name, which is the point.

I'd not recommend condoning violence either, given that some accused are not guilty.

Wouldn't be so churlish, if I were you. What's a state snatching its citizens off the streets, if not fascist? Beyond that: how can one not condone violence, considering the lack of justice we've seeing with regards to rape victims? If one wished to have peace, they would actually deal with this issue, which the cops clearly do not, and we've got some serious evidence of that.

 

[W|M]

In context some police actions were justified and others were not.

no

The problem with antifa is its own actions. It's an inane concept to create an organization called something like "anti-rape" and then go around assaulting people, burning property, etc...then complain that anybody complaining about such an organization must be "pro-rape". But this is in essence the behavior of antifa/BLMarxists.

The problem with cops are their own actions. It's an inane concept to create an organization called something like "anti-crime" and then go around assaulting people, burning property, etc...then complain that anybody complaining about such an organization must be "pro-crime". But this is in essence the behavior of cops/pigs.

Police do very little vandalism, the problem is much more the robbery. It's still kind of shocking to me that civil forfeiture isn't emphasized more often by media/anti police protests. I know they mention it here and there, but it's among a few obviously devastating angles to take in making a case against them.

you may notice that murder is given a much higher priority than everything else

 

[Yeekim]

Wouldn't be so churlish, if I were you. What's a state snatching its citizens off the streets, if not fascist?

Could be communist, monarchist or even anarchist.

Beyond that: how can one not condone violence, considering the lack of justice we've seeing with regards to rape victims? If one wished to have peace, they would actually deal with this issue, which the cops clearly do not, and we've got some serious evidence of that.

Indeed. Random violence is always the answer. I recommend self-flagellation.

 

[gay_Aleks]

Could be communist, monarchist or even anarchist.

Yes, but since we're talking about the United States of America...

Indeed. Random violence is always the answer. I recommend self-flagellation.

Oh, it's not random at all, it's clearly directed against rapists.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Wouldn't be so churlish, if I were you. What's a state snatching its citizens off the streets, if not fascist? Beyond that: how can one not condone violence, considering the lack of justice we've seeing with regards to rape victims? If one wished to have peace, they would actually deal with this issue, which the cops clearly do not, and we've got some serious evidence of that.

Due process is fundamental to US law for a reason. Vigilante justice isn't actually justice, it's crime in its own right.

The problem with cops are their own actions. It's an inane concept to create an organization called something like "anti-crime" and then go around assaulting people, burning property, etc...then complain that anybody complaining about such an organization must be "pro-crime". But this is in essence the behavior of cops/pigs.

The frequency at which this happens is being misrepresented. There are legit reforms needed for police institutions though, and I've said that several times already.

you may notice that murder is given a much higher priority than everything else

True, to the extent that people complain about it even in cases where no murder occurred.

Yes, but since we're talking about the United States of America...

...the most likely conclusion is communist .

 

[Crezth]

That removes the comparative validity of the example though. Antifa/BLMarxists don't act in accordance with their name, which is the point.

I'd not recommend condoning violence either, given that some accused are not guilty.

Target is a giant corporation that supports the state that kills black lives so it kind of seems like targeting Targets is actually a practical political goal for people who want to oppose an oppressive state. It's like throwing tea into the harbor.