Earlier quoted context omitted.
Police Brutality isn't a new problem. They should have waited until covid-19 was gone. Now we're likely to see a 2nd peak because of these protests.
People are angry, rightfully so, about the recent heinous police brutality. You certainly can't tell them "hey, you can be angry but maybe next year": as I said, police brutality and systemic injustice at large don't care about the pandemic. And yes, there's probably going to be profound effects on disease control: but let's not also forget that it is also black community bearing the brunt of the pandemic, because of…
Tear Gas Is Way More Dangerous Than Police Let On - Especially During COVID
131–140 of 142 posts
Re: Tear Gas Is Way More Dangerous Than Police Let On - Especially During COVID
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not about escalating use of chemical weapons, it's about escalating the use of violence . It's not hard to see that the same tit-for-tat mentality in chemical weapons escalation could easily apply to any form of violence. Sure, protesters don't have chemical weapons like tear gas, but they could start with bleach, or a mixture or bleach & ammonia, or Molotov cocktails. It's not like the list of home-made destruc…
What authority does protesters have for escalating violence?
However, if you do want to get into "authority", just look at the many officers around the country in the last few week that have been suspended or fired for unjustified use of force against protesters after being caught on camera. They had no authority for that use of force. Authority has limits, and those limits do not prevent the escalating pattern of violent behavior. But again, that isn't the point: Authority is irrelevant when speaking of observed behavioral patterns like this. The pattern exists, authority doesn't prevent that, and a failure to recognize that pattern or simply brush it aside by saying, "well the police had authority to do it" is not helpful, not if you're interested in actually solving the problem
Let me put it into technical terms if that helps you understand it better: Imagine a buffer overflow results in a escalated permissions for code execution. Here I am saying "This is what's happening." While there you are saying, "But that code had no authority to execute like that!" It is both true, and irrelevant. It is happening, and recognizing that problem helps in moving towards a solution.
Re: Tear Gas Is Way More Dangerous Than Police Let On - Especially During COVID
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except you're still killing grandma which is just as bad as police brutality.
Is the argument, then, that protestors should wait until police brutality results in another death when it is more convenient to protest?
Is the argument that we should accept another 100,000 COVID-19 deaths to prevent even one more police death?
Re: Tear Gas Is Way More Dangerous Than Police Let On - Especially During COVID
#134> Especially During COVID Public gatherings are supposedly extremely dangerous right now. The fact that everyone is suddenly all for mass protests suggests we got the severity of Coronavirus wrong and people are using this as a convenient out for backing off shelter in place orders without losing face. In February the "Philly had a parade, St Louis Stayed home" article was being shared by here and everywhere else. Fr…
It's not like you can postpone protests. It either happens now directly after Floyd's death, or another injustice goes ignored by basically everybody and police brutality as people know it continues unabated. I'm not really sure what you're saying here. It sounds like you're against protests and you believe Covid19 was totally exaggerated.
Re: Tear Gas Is Way More Dangerous Than Police Let On - Especially During COVID
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
No its specifically about field commanders. When a field commander sees gas they respond with gas because the taboo has been broken and they may have insufficient data to know that its less-than-lethal. Protesters are not armed with WMDs that they can radio in before the smoke clears. It can certainly escalate a situation but its unlikely to break the WMD taboo which is what the treaty cares about.
Escalation is still an issue with protests. Police respond with tear gas, protestors respond with bleach (like in Austin). Police respond with rubber bullets, protestors respond with bricks. Police respond with batons, protestors respond with baseball bats. Etc. Eventually, this tit-for-tat ends up with lead bullets and dead people. Tactics like those used in Denver, ones of deescalation, have been far more successfu…
Protesters, and police sometimes have incompatible goals (say crowd wants to block traffic somewhere, and police ordered to prevent it), and the conflict is inevitable in such circumstances. It's a little naïve to claim that it would not happen if one, or even both sides would come unprepared for violence. Deescalation is preferred way, but it works as much as either protesters would be ready to back off (and some protesters may see it as a surrender), or political power giving orders to police is ready to let protesters get what they want (and it's not always possible for them for variety of reasons). Also, ability to show force often plays a role in deescalation strategies.
Re: Tear Gas Is Way More Dangerous Than Police Let On - Especially During COVID
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but to avoid combating parties one-upping each other with chemical warfare That policy makes sense and seems applicable to protests to prevent peaceful protests from escalating and becoming violent.
How? There's no risk of escalation in the chemical weapons regime from the protestors, nor is there any chance of the police using lethal chemical weapons such as sarin gas. The logic around chemical weapons in the Geneva conventions was specific to escalation around chemical weapons. It wasn't a fully general argument about the use of force. Any force used by police could cause escalation, but we do allow the police…
The seemingly unanswerable tactic will be used as often as possible. This prioritizes the existence of the government over irs compliance with the will of the people.
At this point, and this may be controversial, but I wouldn't blink an eye if a form of chemical attack were perpetrated against police forces. Yes, I understand the consequences of that statement. Yes, I realize those are people's sons, daughters, wives, husbands, etc who would be harmed.
I cannot judge a group for giving back as much as they get. The protesters didn't start gassing people. The police did. Rendering the air unbreathable is the ultimate in scummy tactics. It shows a wanton disregard for everyone's well-being, and when you come to the fight with a gas mask knowing you'll be crippling an enemy to take advantage of their weakness/ill-equippedness, I'm sorry. It may be tactically and strategically sound, but the inhumanity of it instantly puts you on the low ground. You are at war (whether international formalities are accommodated for or not) with your own population at that point. There is no legitimacy in my eyes that justifies resorting to gas weaponry; and may they who do reap what they sow 7 fold. Ranks right up there with poisoning the water supply in my book.
To be human is to understand that the occasional bout of violent opposition will happen in your lifetime. To poison the very air we breathe is to abandon all standard of decency, and deserves to be returned in kind.
>Zero percent chance of police pumping in something lethal
Tell that to these folks.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_theater_hostage_crisi...
Or to all the folks with asthma to which tear gas can be lethal.
Re: Tear Gas Is Way More Dangerous Than Police Let On - Especially During COVID
#137If used properly, tear gas is less dangerous than at least some of the alternatives. Imagine actual riots, not peaceful protestors. The alternatives might be literally deafening sound, rubber bullets, tasers, batons, water cannons, and real guns; all of these can hurt people.
If we're at the point of debating which weapons are or are not allowed to be used on a civilian population, then the government has already failed in its most basic responsibilities.
Re: Tear Gas Is Way More Dangerous Than Police Let On - Especially During COVID
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or maybe the fact that everyone is suddenly all for mass protests suggests that police brutality is a horrible forever unaddressed injustice that doesn't care if there's a pandemic or not?
Then where were the protests when similar incidents happened dozens of times before COVID? Has there been anything on this scale since Rodney King?
Re: Tear Gas Is Way More Dangerous Than Police Let On - Especially During COVID
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but to avoid combating parties one-upping each other with chemical warfare That policy makes sense and seems applicable to protests to prevent peaceful protests from escalating and becoming violent.
No its specifically about field commanders. When a field commander sees gas they respond with gas because the taboo has been broken and they may have insufficient data to know that its less-than-lethal. Protesters are not armed with WMDs that they can radio in before the smoke clears. It can certainly escalate a situation but its unlikely to break the WMD taboo which is what the treaty cares about.
Re: Tear Gas Is Way More Dangerous Than Police Let On - Especially During COVID
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not about escalating use of chemical weapons, it's about escalating the use of violence . It's not hard to see that the same tit-for-tat mentality in chemical weapons escalation could easily apply to any form of violence. Sure, protesters don't have chemical weapons like tear gas, but they could start with bleach, or a mixture or bleach & ammonia, or Molotov cocktails. It's not like the list of home-made destruc…
What authority does protesters have for escalating violence?