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

N.Y.P.D. Says It Used Restraint During Protests. Here’s What the Videos Show

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 51 posts

Re: N.Y.P.D. Says It Used Restraint During Protests. Here’s What the Videos Show

#41

Post by d0ugie »

mnm1 wrote: post #38

What I see is most cops not wearing masks. So from the get go they are out to kill people. That says more about their mindset than anything could and proves that it's not just one bad apple but the entire profession that's out to harm and murder people. Fuck them and their supporters.

Case closed then, F policing as a profession and everyone who sees it as a vital component to a civilized society? NYPD are well aware that they are vulnerable to this virus and in turn to spreading it not just to you but to other cops, but in order to keep a lid on rioting, while growing increasingly shorthanded in number, in tools, maneuvers, plainclothes units, or effecting arrests (regardless of the disinterest in those being prosecuted), they need all the oxygen they can get. I'm not saying that $42,500 is not enough money in NYC, just that this is an exigent need for oxygen, not biological warfare.

Re: N.Y.P.D. Says It Used Restraint During Protests. Here’s What the Videos Show

#42

Post by RickJWagner »

gruez wrote: post #18
RickJWagner wrote: post #16

There are 4 kinds of lies. Lies Damn lies Statistics Selectively chosen video snippets

Are there video snippets out there that show a different story? Or is this just a general plea of "well we don't know the whole story so we should reserve judgement until later(when everyone has forgotten about it)"? "Lies" implies there's an intent to deceive, but most of these cases the reason why the rest of the footage isn't available is because people only start recording when things go south, so everything lead…

Use Google, check for 'New York Cops attacked'. You should find several reputable news sites showing police officers being attacked and beaten.

Watch for yourself. Decide where you think the truth lies. I think I could videotape just about any street fight and selectively choose when and for how long to show a clip to fit an agenda....

Re: N.Y.P.D. Says It Used Restraint During Protests. Here’s What the Videos Show

#43

Post by refurb »

pmiller2 wrote: post #8
refurb wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I’m some sort of fascist, but I have zero problems with an officer using force to arrest someone who firebombed a police car, regardless of anyone was injured or she was an immediate threat after.

You may be some sort of fascist if you believe police disproportionately escalating violence is acceptable, but maybe not. At the very least, you're confused, IMO.

Disproportionately escalating violence? I'm not saying the cop should get a few punches in, but detaining and arresting a suspect is not "escalating violence".

Since you seem to a stickler for "proportional violence", would you be ok if the cop just located the suspects car and firebombed it? I mean, that's proportional, no?

Re: N.Y.P.D. Says It Used Restraint During Protests. Here’s What the Videos Show

#44

Post by refurb »

pmiller2 wrote: post #21
djsumdog wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If somebody incurs damage to government property There has been so much argument on the lines of "It's just property." I guess "They're just laws," as if they don't mean anything; as if laws were not the way we evolved socially to protect individuals from other individuals who wanted to cause harm. She set a car on fire! That is literally violence. It's literally destruction. Saying "oh, it's a thing and not a pers…

You are confused. A car doesn't feel pain. Unnecessary violence against humans is worse than unnecessary violence against property.

That logic makes no sense.

So if a group decided to plan explosives and demolish a empty government building, you'd be like "come on, buildings have no feelings, leave them be"?

Re: N.Y.P.D. Says It Used Restraint During Protests. Here’s What the Videos Show

#45

Post by refurb »

Synaesthesia wrote: post #7
refurb wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I’m some sort of fascist, but I have zero problems with an officer using force to arrest someone who firebombed a police car, regardless of anyone was injured or she was an immediate threat after.

I’ve seen so many examples of excessive and unwarranted force from the US police, by now hundreds of incidents.

I'm not excusing excessive force, I'm saying fire bombing in general is a felony and police should be able to arrest a suspect and use force if they don't comply (obviously reasonable force).

Re: N.Y.P.D. Says It Used Restraint During Protests. Here’s What the Videos Show

#46

Post by pmiller2 »

refurb wrote: post #44
pmiller2 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are confused. A car doesn't feel pain. Unnecessary violence against humans is worse than unnecessary violence against property.

That logic makes no sense. So if a group decided to plan explosives and demolish a empty government building, you'd be like "come on, buildings have no feelings, leave them be"?

You are trolling and putting words in my mouth. I'll not reply to this until you reframe your question.

Re: N.Y.P.D. Says It Used Restraint During Protests. Here’s What the Videos Show

#47

Post by pmiller2 »

refurb wrote: post #43
pmiller2 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may be some sort of fascist if you believe police disproportionately escalating violence is acceptable, but maybe not. At the very least, you're confused, IMO.

Disproportionately escalating violence? I'm not saying the cop should get a few punches in, but detaining and arresting a suspect is not "escalating violence". Since you seem to a stickler for "proportional violence", would you be ok if the cop just located the suspects car and firebombed it? I mean, that's proportional, no?

You are clearly trolling and I'll not reply until you reformulate your question.

Re: N.Y.P.D. Says It Used Restraint During Protests. Here’s What the Videos Show

#48

Post by pmiller2 »

refurb wrote: post #45
Synaesthesia wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve seen so many examples of excessive and unwarranted force from the US police, by now hundreds of incidents.

I'm not excusing excessive force, I'm saying fire bombing in general is a felony and police should be able to arrest a suspect and use force if they don't comply (obviously reasonable force).

There is no evidence in the comment about this incident that indicates the suspect resisted in any way. This is what I meant about "missing context."

Re: N.Y.P.D. Says It Used Restraint During Protests. Here’s What the Videos Show

#49

Post by djsumdog »

pmiller2 wrote: post #46
refurb wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That logic makes no sense. So if a group decided to plan explosives and demolish a empty government building, you'd be like "come on, buildings have no feelings, leave them be"?

You are trolling and putting words in my mouth. I'll not reply to this until you reframe your question.

It's not trolling, because that's EXACTLY what the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) did. They destroyed countless empty buildings. Is eco-terrorism justified if no one dies? What about all the people who loose their jobs? What about all the people that could have died?

Re: N.Y.P.D. Says It Used Restraint During Protests. Here’s What the Videos Show

#50

Post by xtiansimon »

RickJWagner wrote: post #42
gruez wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there video snippets out there that show a different story? Or is this just a general plea of "well we don't know the whole story so we should reserve judgement until later(when everyone has forgotten about it)"? "Lies" implies there's an intent to deceive, but most of these cases the reason why the rest of the footage isn't available is because people only start recording when things go south, so everything lead…

Use Google, check for 'New York Cops attacked'. You should find several reputable news sites showing police officers being attacked and beaten. Watch for yourself. Decide where you think the truth lies. I think I could videotape just about any street fight and selectively choose when and for how long to show a clip to fit an agenda....

> "Watch for yourself. Decide where you think the truth lies."

Capital "T" truth does not lie solely in a video clip. Just as with _literally everything_ online and everything digital, we need to be good _consumers_.

In the case of the George Floyd killing the is a witness video (over 10 minutes), security camera video (over 5 minutes), plus officer body camera. These of course have POV issues, audio issues which need to be considered. Despite these defects, there is the narrative of Officer Derek Chauvin kneeling on George Floyd's neck for over 8 minutes, which is evidence of the cause of Mr Floyd's death.

I have yet to read any comments here which take seriously how this firehose of brutality videos should be consumed--let alone making _any_ decisions about "truth".

When I was a young adult, the biggest issue concerning the internet was the potential danger of anonymous people online. Post Facebook, the danger was putting something online now, that you'll regret later.

Today, impact of the videos from the George Floyd killing is enormous.

What about the next video? I would like to hear more about thoughts on consuming videos, and presumed truth of any video.

And watching just some of those videos was sickening. All of this violence is sickening.

Post reply on HN