371–380 of 456 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? It is my understanding that in Minnesota the governor did not even have control over the local policing, that was left to local leadership (mayor + police chief). He only took over control today, which was a very rare move. So I am not following how the president has much authority over local police activities. That is why Trump is referencing the National Guard and not an actual police force.
I don't think I'm implying the president has direct control over local authorities. I'm simply saying that policing in the US is complex and saying "it doesn't matter who you elect" clearly isn't true. The executive branch has huge soft power over how policing is done in the US. For example, the rise of militarized police is largely due to donated spare Iraq war equipment. The executive branch chose to donate this.
I think there's a lot more to it than that. There's also the matter of a lot of war vets becoming police officers, the approach to policing they learned in the military, and their lasting effect on police department culture.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you actually kidding me? Do you know who else decided to shoot rioters? Iran, Syria, China. Are you saying this is what we've come to? In that case, more power to these rioters to rid us of this disgusting state.
Its basically an opinion of so many people that 1776 was a nice and pleasant meeting between locals and British Government. The locals sat down and said: "sorry we do apologize but we do not want you here anymore; please kindly go". And then Brits responded: "sure! we spent centuries conquering the whole world, hundreds of thousands of our brothers and fathers died in the process, but since you so peaceful and ask so…
the locals sat down and said "we know you've made treaties with the natives to not expand anymore, but we want that land! So if you could get gone and let us get to our genocide we'd appreciate it."
and the Brits responded" "sure..."
Just a little different... High school history doesn't like to mention it was a battle between new and old aristocrats, but the whole slavery and 3/5ths of a person business and initial land owners only sort of system kind of shows the truth.
Native Minnesotan here — living in Minneapolis — that has lived on both coasts: With all that's happening the last few days, please don't generally associate Minnesotans with the violent riots that have captured the attention of everyone. The peacefulness of the protests and gatherings has been overshadowed by the violence. There are countless examples of Minnesotans standing up to those who choose to loot and destro…
> But burning down the precinct? Yeah, I can get behind that How is this not glorifying violence? Replace "precinct" with "school" or "church" , makes it more obvious. .. especially since the precinct was still occupied when it was attacked.
Am I correct in assuming this is actively recording footage that will be processed later to identify the paths of criminals? edit: Interesting, I left this post an hour ago and it was getting upvotes, now it's negative with no negative responses. I wish the down arrow only worked on posts you replied to first.
You are correct, and you should be more worried about pervasive surveillance than about the government taking your guns.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If me, and 3 buddies - all white took a white man behind a car, kneeled on him until dead while on-lookers video-taped it. How long before the cops show up? Same scenario w/ a black guy. how long? Same scenario w/ 3 Cops and a white guy? Same scenario w/ 3 cops and a black guy? I'm betting if you could do a study on all these scenarios of 'time to act/prosecute'... you'd find some major biases. Would they need to do…
When cops who choke a white person to death aren't charged, there's far less outrage. For example, David Glen Ward was killed by a police choke hold six months ago. The deputy responsible was fired, but no charges have been filed. https://www.kqed.org/news/11818476/deputies-blunt-force-neck...
1) The guy was armed and leading a high speed chase
2) I don’t think there is a long, long, documented history of cops murdering the unarmed white guys without any real consequence
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>So, what specifically is it that we don't like about this situation? The ongoing militarization of state level police forces without the democratic consent of the governed for a start?
> democratic consent of the governed Just playing devil's advocate - but this is democratically consented to. Your elected politicians have specifically allowed the sale or transfer of retired military equipment to state and local police forces, for multiple reasons but the least-of-which was cost savings vs. scrapping all the prepaid equipment. Similar, but admittedly not quite the same, to the sale of demilitarized…
Just as a random question, how many people do you think know that these guys (https://longreads.com/2019/06/21/nothing-kept-me-up-at-night...) are flying above American cities
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does rioting destroy things? Yes. But read that sentence from me again: "People aren't rioting because they want to destroy things". People are rioting because they see this as the only way forward, not because they want a new TV. They may get that TV in the process, but it's not the motivation.
Protesting and rioting are separate, and often done by separate people. One gives cover to the other. But it doesn’t need to lead to the other.
This was very predictable. Tools invented for military operations abroad eventually, predictably find their way back domestically. Despite that, its a dangerous thing to happen. I am aware of how unlikely it is for the current US Government to use the drone offensively, but once you have a massive fleet of drones flying over the US, patrolling "troubling" neighborhoods constantly, the temptation to use those abilitie…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I assume the business owner had insurance? He wasn't, he was just about ready to open when the pandemic hit. > ...it’s probably a blessing in disguise that may save him from bankruptcy, who knows? Of course, so what are your dreams in life? When you're about to reach the culmination of a lifetime of hard work and sacrifice, we might as well just arson your project, save you from your own ineptitude. What kind of re…
> > I assume the business owner had insurance? He wasn't, he was just about ready to open when the pandemic hit. This is what happens when you don’t hedge risk with insurance. Not sure what else to say dude. My dreams will be insured because I’m not stupid or a gambler. I’m not defending anyone, the riots are happening whether I agree with them or not. I live here, you don’t. I have to deal with the aftermath, you do…
> I live here, you don’t. I have to deal with the aftermath, you don’t.
But have you had your home or business arsoned by these pricks? You've been lucky. I doubt your tune would be the same if not.
> I bet you’ve never seen adversity in your life, otherwise you’d have sympathy for the people that are rioting because they might be the next one laying face down dead under a cops boot.
When these rioters have killed more innocent people in a handful of days than the police department does a year; guess you'll find a way to justify that. Two can play at the "here's my insinuation about your character" game. I have empathy for them, but there is nothing that would cause me to victimize a random community out of pure opportunism like these rioters. There could be a purely racist attack against my family, and I would not think for a second to torch a random business that just happened to be in the same city as the perpetrator.
Before all of this, there is a distinction between people who are protesting, and people who are just looting and arsoning random businesses because the chaos invites it. I'm not going to sit here insinuating that these are the same groups of people.
Hardly anyone is for the murder of George Floyd, but basically everyone is for the basic functioning of society, and at some point one will take precedence over the other.