631–640 of 799 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The other officers (excluding the one who was standing) involved should also be arrested.
In your opinion. Is that particular detail worth burning down cities over?
Seriously? They let him slowly kill a dude right next to him! This isn't a situation where he just whipped out a gun and instantly shot someone, that kind of thing would be hard to stop in time, they had literal minutes where they could've stepped in, and chose not to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You've got it backwards. Voting and promoting change is what has not worked. Economic damage is likely to be the only thing that's going to persuade the elites to throw the working class a bone. You're witnessing the anger of the masses in its most pure form here.
Voting has changed things. Every legislative change comes from your representatives, not some unelected force that only reacts to violence. You just don’t like the priorities of everyone else so you’re claiming it hasn’t worked.
That bit is correct. Yes, it does work -- for some. But the masses that are angry are whom it didn't work for. When it starts working for the other 90% people wont be as angry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s no wonder that the protests over the last 20 years haven’t worked to garner more support considering that those who do participate are treated with violent retaliation. Maybe if those of us begging to be heard were allowed to speak, and scream and chant, it would inspire more people to unite, organize and vote.
Occupy Wall Street was not meant with violence and it was huge headline grabbing protests that went on for weeks. It didn’t do anything meaningful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The rate seems small because you're apply it across the whole population. So, your number 2 choice is not quite accurate. The question is are people ok with many of their parents and grand parents dying this year? > 0.026% is a number that means "most people don't know anyone well who died of covid19" My wife's grandmother had COVID-19. At 80 years old, she was a lucky one and was asymptomatic. She's in a nursing hom…
??? The number includes everyone who has tested positive, what do you mean by ‘applying it across the whole population’ ?
> An extra person will die this year (beyond the usual 3 who die every year). It could be anyone, but you're told its most likely to be somebody who would die in the next 5 years.
The death rate is not an equally weighted distribution over the whole population. In fact, it's very weighted towards middle age and up, with younger people dragging it down. So in your example it's likely to be more than an extra person in the typical age of older parents and grandparents.
You should not underestimate the extent of undercover/false flag instigators of violence at protests. At least here in Belgium this is a practice that is uncovered nearly every time when some violence erupts at demonstrations. The individuals that start the aggression are later photographed to be chilling and changing attire behind police lines. Usually people at large anti-establishment rallies know very well there…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree that any responsibility should fall to the protesters. The right to protest is baked into the first legal document the country as a political entity wrote. For the last 250 years politicians and cops have had the knowledge that Americans care a great deal about their right to stand in front of a statehouse and shout to their heart's content. They should create their own policies to deal with that fact. If…
Now that being said, black lives matter in particular suffers from (in my opinion) a lack of leadership and organization. A universal problem with "leaderless movements" is that they quickly devolve to the lowest common denominator level. Anyone can put out their slate and call themselves an "activist" and it's inevitable that some dim person will come along and try to make a name for themselves by taking things fart…
On the one hand, the latter avoid the weaknesses of the former, in that they can neither easily be 'taken over' by outside forces nor provide a single point of weakness for their enemies to target.
And that's useful for both software and protest movements, since it leave a single target for the opposition to go after, whether that's through legal threats, harassment, arrest or assault/murder.
At the same time, it also makes the system prone to abuse by bad actors, since there's no one able to either get rid of them or distance the group from them in general.
Hence the extremists taking over political movements and protests, and the trolls/extremists/criminals becoming an increasingly prominent part of any decentralised community or social network setup online.
This in turn leaves both open to attack from their opponents and the media, who can point at the worst elements and say "See? These people are all evil/sociopathic/crazy/whatever' based on it.
It's like to some degree, avoiding bad actors and running a robust and uncensorable system are fundamentally incompatible with one another, in the same way as usability and security are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe not all of them, but you only need a few people like the over-enthusiastic COD cosplayer cop [1] in management positions to kick things off. Considering the vast, vast amount of footage of excessive force from the police in the last few days, I think it's likely the police want a riot. If they don't then they're beyond incompetent since they keep causing riots regardless. [1] https://tuckbot.tv/#/watch/gtg2cb
You know, humans have a lot of built-in reactions that are very hard to resist in the face of certain stimuli. It's hard enough to get people to talk peaceably in an online forum where we aren't smelling pheromones, feeling an adrenaline rush in reaction to physical threats to our well being, etc. It's vastly harder to stay calm and behave "competently" in the face of that sort of thing. My ex was career military. On…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In your opinion. Is that particular detail worth burning down cities over?
> In your opinion. Seriously? They let him slowly kill a dude right next to him! This isn't a situation where he just whipped out a gun and instantly shot someone, that kind of thing would be hard to stop in time, they had literal minutes where they could've stepped in, and chose not to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s no wonder that the protests over the last 20 years haven’t worked to garner more support considering that those who do participate are treated with violent retaliation. Maybe if those of us begging to be heard were allowed to speak, and scream and chant, it would inspire more people to unite, organize and vote.
Occupy Wall Street was not meant with violence and it was huge headline grabbing protests that went on for weeks. It didn’t do anything meaningful.
How do you know? Do you have an alternate timeline of history to compare it to?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Your motorcycle isn't your shelter Not seen news come out of people's homes destroyed. If we're going to participate in a damages competition, though, let's do that - the cops shot out a couple people's eyeballs, but only after of course kicking off this whole thing by murdering black people with no consequences. There, that settles that.
> murdering black people with no consequences. Can you elaborate? All four of the police officers were immediately fired. The primary officer that was kneeling on him was charged with murder and manslaughter and will go to prison. Likely charges will be brought on the other three.
How is it sustainable that nationwide protests need to happen before an officer is charged for murder? Does that not seem like a broken system?