Live data from Hacker News

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

niemanlab.org

571–580 of 835 posts

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

#571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such utter fucking bullshit. You can watch hundreds of videos of peaceful protesters being attacked by police. They are not looting. What you are saying is an outright lie. Conservatives are just practicing the same racist tribalism t hey always have. There is no structural logic to how they behave except "us vs them" and right now the police are hurting the right people. It is not and has never been about pr…

err.. There are so many videos of people grabbing stuff from stores and running. That is looting. Now, If you make the argument that these people are not protesters but opportunistic thieves, then we can all move on. Looting & destroying someone else's property as a response to injustice is almost as bad as the injustice itself. This is not to say all protesters are looters, but that thieves take this opportunity to…

I agree that looting/destroying property is bad (obviously...), but I disagree that it's a problem that's even within an order of magnitude of the behavior I've seen out of the police. Property can be replaced. It's called insurance.

However...our right to not be inflicted with cruel and unusual punishment, our right to assemble, and our right to freedom of speech is in grave danger here. That's why I can't stand that everyone is focused on the looters.

Speaking of the constitution, whered the 2nd amendment people go? I thought I'd have some allies in them.............

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

#572
post #370
post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any concrete examples where the protesters instigated the violence? I have not been able to find any.

I don't understand how you can think that all violence everywhere was started by the police. Yes, the police has probably been guilty of that, but do you really think all protestors are unanimously and inherently peaceful in every single place? Even in Sweden most protests are filled with bad actors and professional rioters who just want to cause a stir.

> Even in Sweden most protests are filled with bad actors and professional rioters who just want to cause a stir.

That sounds very much like your own biased opinion rather than the statement of fact you are presenting it as. I'm open to any evidence of that rather outrageous sweeping statement though.

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

#573

I had been heartened by the right's recent upswing in fierce support for the first amendment, but unfortunately I've seen little of that support during the protests as freedom of assembly and freedom of the press have been attacked. For example Rand Paul has not tweeted in a week. Sadly, as always, these kind of principled arguments, on both sides, are a sham to advance whatever the partisan battle of the week is.

That's because their support was always fake. It's about non-existent "censorship" of conservatives, nothing more.

This is, of course, ridiculous. There are serious people who genuinely care about that issue.

More generally, there is always nearby the temptation to definitionally exclude one's political opponents from serious discussion by the lazy insinuation that they don't really believe what they say they believe, that their side is more opportunistic and cynical than yours, and that, therefore, what work even needs to be done to argue the point? After all, there are only two staked-out positions: those who agree with me already and those who are lying about their motives!

Try to resist this. It goes nowhere. It leads to nothing. And I assure you that, whatever the issue, there really are people who see it differently than you. I know that can be hard to accept, but it's almost always true.

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

#574
post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

rioting is indeed not free speech, but surely attacking the press, one of the fundamental institutions in any democracy, is a violation of free speech. And not only have the people in question not spoken up in defense of the press, they've actually routinely declare them the enemy of the people.

Fully Agree. The press should not be attacked. There is no excuse for it.

When everyone has a camera, social media audiences, live streams, YouTube channel, websites, and blogs/micro-blogging, what is the definition of Press and why do Press get to ignore restrictions and closed off areas?

Are the only Press allowed to be Press those that are part of a large national news network? Is Alex Jones Press if he shows up to these with a guy with a camera and enters areas civilians are not allowed to be in?

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

#575

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If an officer is going to respond to hurt feelings with violence after some hour-mark, then: 1. police forces need to limit their time, and forces that do not need to held accountable 2. they need to not be police They _need_ to be held to a higher standard than everyone else.

No disagreement

Then what was your point? You might as well delete your comment.

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

#576
post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"have labeled protesters "thugs" and "looters" " Referring to looters as 'looters' is not problematic. Calling for shootings, using code-words like 'thugs' and referring to peaceful protesters as 'looters' is a problem - but let's not lose context here: there are riots and rioters are bad news. I think in these ugly times it's even more important to be cool and clear about things.

In any given group, you can’t know with certainty whether past or future looters are present; looting is an action and not a quality. It is subjective. Is removing anti-riot barricades ‘looting’ if protesters remove them from the street and out of the control of authorities in order to exercise their right to protest? Branding someone a rioter empowers the utterer and subjugates the one deemed rioting in your framing…

>>>>>>>>>> "looting is an action and not a quality." - no, it's absolutely a crime, and a 'quality' of an individual to the extent that we definitely consider it very immoral, and we have laws against it. It's not 'protesting' in any sense of the term.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Branding someone a rioter empowers the utterer and subjugates the one deemed rioting in your framing" - a 'riot' is not a 'framing' - it's for the most part an objective fact. People trying to protest are not rioters, people smashing stores are rioters.

No doubt the press and various people will try to 'frame' in one direction or the other, but there's no escaping reality.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Chasing fleeing ‘looters’ is a situation for disaster" of course it is, it's crazy irrational, and I hope that would be illegal everywhere, though I'm not sure. I also would hope that nobody would frame that as 'defending one's property' because it's not.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "I just don’t see how property damage is a mortal harm that justifies what I’m seeing."

Now this is a really meaty question. I agree with you, and I think most people would agree - however - in these cases the police are not using mortal aggression. There are literally riots and looting all over the country, and the police are using pepper spray, shields etc. - there were lethal responses where shots were fired (and FYI police and civilians have died amidst the riots). Also - things like rubber bullets can kill, but that's due to a probabilistic problem, not any kind of intention. Maybe the police should not use those things, but it's more of a very specific question about safety.

>>>>>>>>> "The defenders are unknowingly or knowingly participating in a counter-protest movement against the current legitimate George Floyd protests. "

There are a few things to unpack here:

'The defenders' if you mean police, then they are very lawfully authorized by you and I, the community, to move the rioters and looters out of the area, arrest them etc.. We should not for a second confuse them with some crazy folks with guns or weapons attacking protestors, that's clearly immoral and illegal. And we should also not confuse 'protesters' with 'rioters'.

As far as 'right-wing narrative' - although that is true, if anyone can't see that that there is a massive and systematic 'social narrative' (left wing?) being driven by millions of participants, even those who should be neutral, is living in a bubble.

Most importantly - there is rioting and looting. This is not being done by the police, or by some secret Russians, this is being done by people within the protest movement and it's clearly wrong. It's definitely happening and it's absolutely reasonable to point that out, and to do so is not to necessarily support some kind of narrative.

In fact, to not characterize rioters and looters as such, would be an offense against the truth, just as characterizing protesters standing on a corner with signs as 'rioters' would be as well.

Because there are a lot of people driving narratives of some kind or another (pretty much every political force and most in the press), doesn't mean we're entitled to just 'go with it', we have a responsibility to try to stay 'clear-eyed', perhaps more than ever.

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

#577
post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't remember hearing anything about police dispersing those crowds with tear gas. I wonder why.

I'm gunna go ahead and assume it was due to the the lack of violence and looting.

I'm gunna go ahead and assume it was due to them being conservative white guys with guns.

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

#578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one disagrees that in any group only a small number of bad actors are causing this issue. However, when a civilian acts inappropriately there are legal consequences. When a police office acts inappropriately there are few legal consequences and they are very-very-rarely enforced. I'll ask the question differently, "Is destruction of property what you expect from rioters?" Yes, 1% or less of rioters are going to be…

Aha, but the analogy that you made with those questions has a critical error. The correct analogy would be questions that read: Is destruction of property what you expect from civilians? Yes, sadly, 1% or less[1] of civilians are are going to be stupid and riot instead. And that is unacceptable. Should they be reprimanded? Absolutely. And we have specialized government entities that can utilize appropriate-force to r…

From what I can tell your only change was to add the word “unwarranted” before destruction.

Could you please help us understand your position on “Should abusive officers be reprimanded?”

And if we agree they should be reprimanded, what are your thought on how we build that system?

The system where we the civilians who witness or are victims of the abuse and other “good cops” who witness the abuse, can get legal ways to highlight and reprimand those few abusive police officers[0]?

[0] such that the person/people accusing (with evidence) the abusive police without worrying other police officers will “hold it against” the accuser.

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

#579
post #133

Disclaimer: I am a bleeding heart liberal and this may filter my observations. I have been to a few rallies/vigils/marches lately and all incidences of violence that I have witnessed either in person or through media has been instigated by the police. As far as I know,every documented case where a formerly peaceful crowd turns into chaos has been started with police shooting pepperspray, teargas, or whatever into the…

From what I've seen is everything is peaceful during the day time, but after the curfews or when it becomes an unlawful gathering (i.e. blocking interstates etc.) is when police intervene. Which is what they job is supposed to be. The methods used for crowd control are acceptable when things reach the above mentioned criteria. Protests during daylight hours, and not breaking other laws is fully protected by 1st amend…

If you’ve never seen videos of police tear gassing peaceful protestors, or driving into them with their cars, you’re living a very sheltered life.

https://www.npr.org/2020/06/01/867532070/trumps-unannounced-...

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

#580
post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except for the "Open States Up" protests that occurred that had hospital personal begging the protestors to let the emergency vehicles through. But that's a different type of crowd.

I don't remember hearing anything about police dispersing those crowds with tear gas. I wonder why.

Do you think this might have something to do with it? https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-16/nations-bigg...
Post reply on HN