Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

niemanlab.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 835 posts

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#121

Post by Pfhreak »

colechristensen wrote: post #111

Some people say police attacking journalists are isolated incidents by a few bad eggs, most of them are doing the right thing. Some people say protestors becoming violent, vandalizing, and looting are isolated incidents by a few bad eggs, most of them are doing the right thing. Really similar thought processes go into those two, usually by people you can sort into camps of opposing worldviews. They're both right and…

One of those groups has access to military hardware, live ammunition, and legal (or cultural) protections from prosecution.

It's dangerously to boil down the arguments from both sides and say, "Look, these two things are the same!" because even if both sides were saying, "It's a few bad apples", the implications of that would be wildly different.

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#122

Post by Loughla »

lostmsu wrote: post #119
Loughla wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the part of that which isn't paywalled simply says that doing something illegal, or doing something legal in a threatening manner, can be broken up by police. Maybe it's in the full-text, but where does it say police can attack non-violent bystanders? Because I'm not seeing it in there.

I did not see behind paywall to, but here's a relevant quote: > However, the second element is more difficult because it concerns gathering for lawful purposes and only becomes a violation when the gathering turns violent, boisterous, or tumultuous. After it turns violent, police generally issues an order to disperse, and then proceeds to anti-riot measures. If you don't disperse after that lawful order, you are viol…

You have to have an account with that site to see the full text, otherwise it cuts off at about paragraph 4 or so.

But anyway, to respond to your statement -----

>but where does it say police can attack non-violent bystanders? Because I'm not seeing it in there.

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#123

Post by imperio59 »

Loughla wrote: post #70
imperio59 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where have you seen cops forcing weapons into the hands of someone on the ground? I haven't seen that. Definitely seen excessive use of force against seemingly peaceful protesters, but context is everything, and a 10 second snippet does not tell the full story of the interactions between that protester and that cop for the 45 minutes leading up to those 10 seconds. I tend to reserve my judgement on those types of vid…

So the video of the man being held down and a baton being forcibly placed into his hand, is the one I'm assuming you're calling out. What possible context would make that okay? In what possible scenario is putting a man's hand on a weapon for the sole purpose of harming him reliant on context? These are not meant at all to be snarky, these are my very real questions, because I'm confused by your statements.

I didn't say it was OK I said I hadn't seen it personally. It is obviously not OK.

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#124

Post by rsynnott »

tw000001 wrote: post #76
hrishid wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given how certain kinds of rhetoric from the political left demonizes police offers, it seems likely that many of them have found a home on the right.

This is something people are severely underestimating. If you slander and dehumanize 40-60% of the population with accusations of white supremacy, you're going to create a white supremacist movement where one did not previously exist.

... Wait, your contention is that normal people are BECOMING WHITE SUPREMACISTS _for the purpose of spiting journalists_?

... What? I mean, what?

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#125

Post by danieka »

imperio59 wrote: post #44
chadlavi wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That, and the journalists are literally there to record evidence of their abuse. Police don't like it too much when you record evidence of them, say, beating a peaceful protester, or forcing a weapon into the hands of someone already pinned to the ground.

Where have you seen cops forcing weapons into the hands of someone on the ground? I haven't seen that. Definitely seen excessive use of force against seemingly peaceful protesters, but context is everything, and a 10 second snippet does not tell the full story of the interactions between that protester and that cop for the 45 minutes leading up to those 10 seconds. I tend to reserve my judgement on those types of vid…

Baltimore Cops Carried Toy Guns to Plant on People They Shot, Trial Reveals (2018)

That's institutionalized malice aforethought in my book.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/8xvzwp/baltimore-cops-car...

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#127

Post by elliekelly »

sixothree wrote: post #93
zubspace wrote: post #36

Here's another article uncovering the brutality of the police [1]. Some of the scenes are really inhuman [2] and I feel sorry for the poor people trying to make their voices heard. I hope, that both sides, the protesters and police force will find a way, to exit that spiral of violence. But right now it looks like this won't happen. It's a shame. If the state acts harder against protesters, journalists and civilian b…

Third party oversight. This country was founded on checks and balances. There are no checks to their power as it stands now.

> Third party oversight.

Aren't the journalists supposed to be the third party oversight? Showing and telling the rest of us what's happening so that when one side oversteps we as a society can take action to correct it?

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#128

Post by jeffbee »

chooseaname wrote: post #56
evan_ wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/11142215334617907... > The press is doing everything within their power to fight the magnificence of the phrase, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! They can’t stand the fact that this Administration has done more than virtually any other Administration in its first 2yrs. They are truly the ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE!

> ...this Administration has done more than virtually any other Administration in its first 2yrs. Mr President, that's going to need some fact checking.

Indeed. I can't think of an administration that has accomplished less. Even Andrew Johnson managed to buy Alaska.

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#129

Post by Jade_Jet »

tw000001 wrote: post #76
hrishid wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given how certain kinds of rhetoric from the political left demonizes police offers, it seems likely that many of them have found a home on the right.

This is something people are severely underestimating. If you slander and dehumanize 40-60% of the population with accusations of white supremacy, you're going to create a white supremacist movement where one did not previously exist.

Considering that the police force were initially created for slave patrols, it’s not really surprising that white supremacy is a part of police culture.

https://time.com/4779112/police-history-origins/

Edit: Note that this is not a right/left thing. This is just literally history that gets ignored in our schools.

Re: Police attacks against journalists across the U.S. since May 28

#130

Post by jonlucc »

itsspring wrote: post #20

When "Freedom of the Press" is under attack, newspapers/press/media have had their legal counsel file lawsuits against the government. But with the demise of revenue for many newspapers (and many going out of business), I wonder if they will take those expensive steps.

If they don't respond in their reporters' interest, they won't have reporters risking arrest and hazard to report for them.
Post reply on HN