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

621–630 of 835 posts

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

#621

Post by monoideism »

RangerScience wrote: post #361
monoideism wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That looks very suspicious, but if this were really a widespread technique by the police, I'm assuming there would be more than a single video taken. I mean, we know the black bloc and similar groups engages in these tactics, they've been doing it since Seattle WTO 1999. I've seen it in person to protests I've been to (as a protester). It's very hard for me to believe that all of a sudden those people are no longer a…

> we know the black bloc and similar groups engages in these tactics How do you know this? What's the process by which you established this as a known thing?

> What's the process by which you established this as a known thing?

Primary, by power of observation. But OK, I'll make this as vague and 100% foolproof as I can, to start: there are people who dress in black, and masks, and destroy stuff and commit violence at protests. That's from actual observation. It's not just 1-2, there are groups of them. That's my personal observation from being at 2 protests with such groups.

Now, combine that with all the sources references in this Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_bloc

Along with many, many, many dozens of media reports like this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr0i6piW_ak

I'm able to discern a certain pattern.

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

#622

Post by electriclove »

rukittenme wrote: post #450
jascii wrote: 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…

I've had the opposite experience in Chicago. I live in a high rise in the loop. I was able to watch the "protests", "riots", whatever from above. I'm sure I'll get flagged but these are my honest impressions on the behavior of the CPD and the protestors. My biggest takeaway is local events translate to global action in the crowd (police or protestors). And it leads to all this misunderstanding. "What I was just stand…

Thanks for sharing your experience. It seems in line with what I'm reading elsewhere.

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

#623

Post by monoideism »

vb6sp6 wrote: post #302
monoideism wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That looks very suspicious, but if this were really a widespread technique by the police, I'm assuming there would be more than a single video taken. I mean, we know the black bloc and similar groups engages in these tactics, they've been doing it since Seattle WTO 1999. I've seen it in person to protests I've been to (as a protester). It's very hard for me to believe that all of a sudden those people are no longer a…

"This doesn't happen" (shows a video of it happening) "This isn't widespread" So how many videos do you need to see? 2? 10? 15???

Yeah, at least 5. I've seen >50 videos of rioters destroying and looting, maybe 5 of them engaging in violence, and maybe 10 of police engaging in excessive force, so I feel pretty comfortable having established that there's a pattern in those activities.

I'd like to see about 4-5 of such videos. The more the merrier. I'm totally open to changing my mind.

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

#624

Post by klahtnun »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #579
bananaphone234 wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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-...

And if you haven't seen many clear examples of opportunistic looting and people clearly thrill-seeking, you're living in a bubble:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MS5C38kayWI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5sKN2vOtZM

https://tuckbot.tv/#/watch/gvc5pt

https://tuckbot.tv/#/watch/gvimlx

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RokxrLLBjKA

And many more examples are available...

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

#625

Post by AnimalMuppet »

ashtonkem wrote: post #544
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's fair. Still, "nuh uh" is not an effective rebuttal. Asking for evidence is better than "you're wrong" or "you're a liar". "Here's evidence that you're wrong" is even stronger.

You’re just reversing the burden of proof with more words. The expectation you’re setting up is that we have to refute every single bit of nonsense tossed out; an impossible and exhausting process.

I agree that the original claimant has the burden of proof. But this isn't high school debate. The people reading your posts aren't debate judges (for the most part), they're just people. They aren't (for the most part) going to apply strict debate judging rules to the exchange. And if all you say is "is not!", to people reading the exchange, you look like you have no evidence and therefore have fallen back to arguing like a five-year-old. It's not a convincing look, even if you're right, and even if the other side actually has the burden of proof.

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

#626

Post by DiffEq »

dang wrote: post #607
DiffEq wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a reading comprehension disability? I am pretty sure I did not say they should have killed him.

Between this attack and the flamebait in your other comments, you're crossing into bannable territory. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here.

An Attack? Pointing out the truth is an attack and flame bait? I see - only the hive mind is allowed.

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

#627

Post by davidw »

inetknght wrote: post #597
davidw wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm old enough to have seen it plenty in the past.

Can you describe how fascism has worked in the past? Can you imagine how it might be applied today with modern technology, laws, and court precedents? This isn't fascism of the past.

My reference was to people casually tossing around the word for "people on the right they dislike", when it wasn't really warranted.

I'm not good at predicting much of anything, but best guess is that the model is something more like Venezuela/Hungary/Turkey/Russia rather than the variety from the 1930ies.

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

#628

Post by salawat »

acdha wrote: post #594
salawat wrote: post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, it absolutely is the best deterrence. Numerical advantage of firearms means the first person to shoot downright loses. Both sides will do everything they can to not be the aggressor. When you have disparity in ability to apply force vs ability to weather the response, that's when the violence actually happens. Nobody comes looking for a fair fight. Therefore you never find them when the stakes areas high as…

That sounds better on a bumper sticker than when you think about it even slightly longer. The police have tons of guns, armored vehicles, and the backing of the largest military in the world. If you threaten them, do you really think they’re going to back down instead of getting bigger guns?

The big bad military isn't going to end up doing squat, because the moment they are employed, odds are unless there are a hell of a lot more people out there perfectly fine with watching what are largely peaceful protests get steamrolled. Furthermore, it'll be a tacit admission that the State's legitimacy is significantly compromised.

Many in the military are, contrary to popular belief, quite patriotic, and very concerned withthe integrity of the system. It is not a foregone conclusion a dearth of volunteers to put the boot to countrymen may manifest.

Furthermore, to the sibling poster's assertion that's a great way to ensure gun control laws get passed, when the State's legitimacy is already in question, further clenching of the iron fist (particularly from the American viewpoint I grew up with) will exactly not yield the quiet compliance one might imagine. In fact, it would result in quite the opposite given any active attempt at confiscation.there's also the problem of who you intend on having do said confiscation, and just how bulletproof they are, and where on the "persons I'll comply with" spectrum they'll fall on .

Also, again, once the guns go, all the other far more destructive, nigh-impossible to regulate means of destruction and mayhem creation get put on the table. You don'thonestly think that all that new anger will just go home and sulk while you have the government of the United States running around fielding the least hyperbolic stormtrooper initiatives on American soil, do you?

If you think things are bad and violent now. Get back to me when you start actually pulling the pages from the dictator's population subjugation handbook.

This entire endeavor is remarkable in that it is trivial for this turmoil to bedissipated bythepolice deescalating and being open to a a greater degree of civic oversight,and being held to a higher standard. Or so the protestor supporters seem to repeat. The refusal to make a meaningful gesture in that direction suggests to me that it what we're going through is a macro-event. Something that's been building for a long time, and isn't going to ground out without substantive structural change.

It's anyone's guess how this'll go; but I'm wagering the first time the military proper gets involved it may be a sign of the end days of the country I was brought up loving.

Then again, I've been wondering if that was the case since 2001... So... Yeah. Take it or leave it.

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

#629

Post by LynxInLA »

rayiner wrote: post #484
throwablePie wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Race relations between Oakland's black residents and Oakland police have been fraught for decades (probably at least since the founding of the Black Panther Party in Oakland in the 60s). But that doesn't justify the violent actions you've described. Unfortunately, some senior "dog whistle" politicians have labeled protesters "thugs" and "looters" and have called for "shooting" and "no quarter." These loose words are…

While I think Cotton is a jackass, I can’t help but notice how your first paragraph is about Oakland, California, and your second paragraph is about a guy who is a Senator in Kentucky.[1] Oakland has had a Democratic mayor since 1977. California routinely has a super-majority of Democrats in the state legislature, and the last Republican Federal Senator from the state left office almost 30 years ago. I don’t think it…

Not to take too much away from your point, but Cotton is the junior Senator from Arkansas

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

#630

Post by testbot123 »

grandmczeb wrote: post #585
testbot123 wrote: post #581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why you're being downvoted. There is documented evidence of this: > "To see this - traffic blocking the main intersection of a level 1 trauma centre, blocking the entrance and exit to our hospital. Blocking patients from receiving care that they need, makes me angry. It hurts. It hurts a lot," said one healthcare worker on Facebook. > WLNS reports another posting: "You are currently blocking ambulances, phys…

That first story is repeating a (false) rumor. Even the second story you posted directly contradicts it. > Sparrow spokesperson John Foren said there are no access problems and ambulances can “get in and out. There’s no problem.” https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/0...

You're correct, I apologize.
Post reply on HN