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

De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

fivethirtyeight.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 799 posts

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#421

Post by noobermin »

dx87 wrote: post #136
somebrody wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I said many. Here's many cops being very racist and very violent: https://www.instagram.com/p/CAqt_gHgAxk/?utm_source=ig_embed https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-video-appears-show-...

In a large enough group, you can find "many" people who are whatever you want to generalize the whole group as. Using your logic, saying "many" of the protesters are looting and attacking police and innocent bystanders is completely true. You're picking words that you know are deliberately misleading to push an agenda.

Moving the goalposts. He answered the question with evidence that backs up his claim of "many."

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#422

Post by vertex-four »

y2kenny wrote: post #407
vertex-four wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know as well as I do that there are alternatives to a contemporary legal system that are not a bunch of roving warlords. The current system is not the only system that can possibly work.

Can you elaborate on that? I can't really read the mind of either of you ("you know as well as I do"... what do you guys know?)

Theorising on alternatives to the contemporary Western legal system have been done for the last century by leftists, and a lot of that gets put into practice on a small scale where it can be. I've been involved in some of it myself. Part of the goal is to prevent creating permanent organisations, such as the police and the court and the prisons, that have a structural incentive to protect themselves against a community trying to hold them accountable.

In fact, note that the concept of a jury is intended to work this way (although is missing many elements, and exists under the permanent organisation of the court) - a temporary organisation gathering to find justice, then dispersing.

Unfortunately it's difficult to tell the exact outcome of implementing any of it on a wider scale, as the times leftism has actually been in power have largely been during times of war where a lot of theory was thrown out the window, or using leftist messaging to implement something closer to a dictatorship. All we know is that a lot of it works when implemented in our own communities.

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#423

Post by noobermin »

drocer88 wrote: post #274

The buck stops at the mayor's office. We need to hold these officials accountable. Blaming the police is like blaming the soldiers in a war. It's the regional ELECTED leaders responsible for the budgets and operations of the police departments who are the problem.

The police (particularly police unions) are very politically powerful with their endorsements and contributions to politicians. Many mayors across the country are afraid to discipline their police departments.

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#424

Post by pjc50 »

frabbit wrote: post #236
pjc50 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

White protestors were allowed to occupy a state building with guns without a single bit of teargas.

Not to mention the Malheur Refuge standoff where heavily armed protestors were handled with kid gloves. Maybe it's to do with having guns?

Given that one of the subjects of the protests is whether police can murder on mere suspicion of a weapon, I suspect not. The chances of a comparable hypothetical BLM armed occupation being allowed to live are small. If they surrendered they would likely be shot in the back of the head while handcuffed.

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#426

Post by bobmaxup »

genuinebyte wrote: post #414
bobmaxup wrote: post #409

Why not make universal laws that apply to anyone that can be proven to injure another human being with economic deterrents? For example, if you hit a man in the face, cause bruising, lets say that costs $1,000 across the board. $1,000 for any hematoma, $5000 or any broken bone. $25,000 for a GSW, $100,000 for a life-threatening injury, etc. To take it further, if you discharge a weapon at another human being, the fin…

The Rich would be allowed to level anyone they see fit with minimal financial loss.

The hypothetical policy wouldn't replace existing laws, it would just be an additional tax on violent behaviors that apply to cops, criminals, school children, etc.

Another thought I had around this was to just fire any police officer that fires their weapon at another human. If they truly believe that their life is in danger, they value their life more than their job.

Either of these things would at least add some actual cost to the idea associated with performing an action with extreme consequences on another human being's life.

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#427

Post by kthxbye123 »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #12
coldcode wrote: post #4

Of course it does. But politicians who ramp up the rhetoric and threaten to have people killed does not. Flint and Camden and other cities where the police sat down or walked with the protestors have no issues. People connecting to people with understanding rarely results in violence. I think places where the police still walk a beat (or other regular outreach over a wide area) and get to know the locals rarely have…

There were reports of planned riots in rural Polk County. Knowing they didn't have the resources to cover wide spread area, the sheriff instructed citizens to shoot anyone who broke into their home. I support this. Telling citizens you can't help them, and they must protect themselves is very different than threatening that the state itself will kill you. https://twitter.com/FOX13News/status/1267539936401592320

Complete nonsense - if you believe for one second that those “reports” were legitimate or that this was a genuine public safety measure you’re an absolute rube and a mark. This was just an elected official pandering to his electoral base of suburban fascists by validating their heroic-murder fantasies.

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#428

Post by dang »

iphone_elegance wrote: post #120
beloch wrote: post #78

We should expect police to us less use violence and improve their crowd management and deescalation skills. The increasing militarization of police is a trend that must be reversed. However, we should not neglect the other side of the equation either. This article is, in large part, about just that. The article points out that many protests in the U.S. went smoothly through the practice of police and protest organize…

it's a nice idea but instead we're about to go full tiananmen

Please stop posting unsubstantive/flamebait comments to HN. We ban accounts that do that, and eventually the main account as well.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#429

Post by noobermin »

Jommi wrote: post #377
thebradbain wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I'd love California to try a ballot initiative putting a 10-15%-of-budget cap on police spending in cities. I think it could easily pass, and if NYPD's 2017 strike is any indication, crime rate could actually go down [1]. NYPD ended their strike voluntarily because city officials were recognizing that maybe they weren't as necessary, after all! https://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-proacti.…

Less spending on police, even less trained officers, great right?

Less officers overall and train the remaining officers better. Besides, given that the police already get so much money and we still have problems, it seems like throwing more money at them isn't the answer.

Re: De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer

#430

Post by endogui »

komali2 wrote: post #235
ineedasername wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a minor issue. It detracts significantly from the really issue at hand, making it nearly impossible to engage with protestors in a dialog as the small number of folks intent on violence and looting take all of the resources and attention, severely undermining the point of the protests, especially because it provides those disinclined to sympathy for the real issue to paint all with the same brush and so dism…

Before it was looting, it was that kneeling at a football game distracts from the game. Before that, it was "no, no, protest will never work, you need to get more black people elected! Try to get a black president maybe!" Before that, it something else equally absurd. No matter how black people try to get their voices heard about police violence, there will be people who doggedly tear those voices down by any means n…

Kneeling during the national anthem at football games should have been an issue between the players and the NFL, but the kind of people who attend football games disapproved of it.

In Minneapolis today due to the videos which were captured even those anti-kneeling americans largely recognize the problem and support solutions. But by allowing the rump to be violent (or equivalently, serruptitiously distribute bricks and gasoline) the activists are losing public support.

Roughly 200 mostly commercial buildings burned in the main shopping area for (working class) Minneapolis over the weekend. The food and pharmaceutical desert is going to kill far more of the poor and marginalized than police violence would have, in a city that already votes D up and down the ticket.

The violence is not necessary, nor productive, nor are the situations comparable.

Post reply on HN