|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On June 02 2020 12:26 DucK- wrote:
So hk government's response to the riots/protests were slammed by US government and now they're doing pretty much similar things. Ain't this all a joke lol
Trump has said many times across the years that he admires China’s show of power and laments the USA inability to show the same power. This is the man who respects Tiananmen Square as a show of national force, what did you expect.
I might be remembering wrong but Trump himself never made a particularly strong statement regarding Hong Kong, only that Xi should personally meet with protestors because that would solve everything (lol).
It isn’t surprising that when given the option, he would try to aggressively beat down the American population and present it as an unlawful uprising against the American people.
|
On June 02 2020 13:00 Starlightsun wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 12:06 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 11:33 iamthedave wrote:On June 02 2020 11:14 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 10:12 NewSunshine wrote:On June 02 2020 09:52 farvacola wrote:
Force will probably be used against peaceful demonstrators regardless, particularly if Trump is allowed to escalate things. Force above and beyond firing cans of teargas directly at demonstrators, shoving them to the ground, and running cars into them, you mean. Can't wait to see what's next. I'm also positive our resident fans of the 2nd amendment will support the peaceful protesters in their endeavors if the government suddenly comes down on them with full military might. This is precisely such a situation where its invocation makes real sense. Pretty sure making use of the 2nd amendment in a situation like this would be an absolutely terrible idea. It is LITERALLY what the 2nd amendment is for. This situation is WHY the 2nd amendment exists. It's the defense Americans trot out whenever people talk about taking their guns away. I hope people do. If the American government wants real anarchy, I think the people of the US should give it to them. Reading comments like this is truly frightening. A live-fire exchange between civilian protesters and the military here would not lead to anything good. There are already tons of people who believe that the protests are going way overboard, and that police action against them is mostly justified. Actually shooting at cops / military would only serve to further solidify such beliefs, while also leading to a lot of completely meaningless deaths. The point of the second amendment isn't to avoid conflict, it is to meet it head on and end oppressive practices. It is why all the y'allqaeda folks brought it to their haircut rallies in Michigan etc I mean, if it comes to an actual confrontation, who is stronger kind of thing rather than using whatever means to make a point -- there is absolutely no way civilian militias of any sort have any chance at all to win. And actually shooting at the cops / military isn't very likely to make a good talking point, so... I agree with you for the time being but I have to ask, do you think it's ever justified for the citizens to take up arms against the state? Just a month ago I found those scenarios by gun owners ridiculous, but now that the state is actively murdering and terrorizing citizens, and the president is mobilizing the military to "dominate" citizens, I'm not so sure anymore.
Can you give some examples of the state "actively murdering and terrorizing citizens"? Don't go around throwing words like that.
There are ways more videos of rioters and looters savagely destroy businesses (and neighborhoods). About time that business owners and the citizens, not the forces, shoot back and murder those rioters.
Waiting until those "protests" come to your area.
User was warned for this post
|
I snuck into the restricted area of Chicago today to do some personal documenting and then joined a peaceful protest. I wanted to ask cops how they felt about everything, so I went past the boundary where you're supposed to get ID checked and headed for the station. No one ID'd me.
When I was alone, I decided to approach a police station in a black hoodie, bandanna, and while writing notes down... Not my best move, but oh well. I could hear the police on the other side of the street talking about me. They said "look, that must be some kind of scout." About a minute later, as I listen to the police radio chatter, I hear them report me as "suspicious man, looks like some sort of antifa scout or something" and then gave my location.
I went around the corner, and tried to ask the next group of cops, who were in a van blocking the road. One of them subtly threatened to shoot me when I asked for a bit of their time. He said "If this was a different country, you'd be shot right now!" and displayed a gun in his van through the window. Felt like it was a good idea to leave after that, so I headed to a explicitly peaceful protest made mostly by students. It got about 1000 people at minimum, and was a bunch of feel good "we've got the power" garbage, especially with the ~100 police watching us ready to beat they protestors should things turn even remotely rowdy.
I was able to talk to some cops after the protest, and wrote down my findings. Here's the album containing the notes I took on everything today. Last 4 pages are from the conversations with cops.
If there are any questions as to the meaning of the garbled handwriting, I can edit in translations after.
|
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On June 02 2020 14:04 Arceus wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 13:00 Starlightsun wrote:On June 02 2020 12:06 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 11:33 iamthedave wrote:On June 02 2020 11:14 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 10:12 NewSunshine wrote:On June 02 2020 09:52 farvacola wrote:
Force will probably be used against peaceful demonstrators regardless, particularly if Trump is allowed to escalate things. Force above and beyond firing cans of teargas directly at demonstrators, shoving them to the ground, and running cars into them, you mean. Can't wait to see what's next. I'm also positive our resident fans of the 2nd amendment will support the peaceful protesters in their endeavors if the government suddenly comes down on them with full military might. This is precisely such a situation where its invocation makes real sense. Pretty sure making use of the 2nd amendment in a situation like this would be an absolutely terrible idea. It is LITERALLY what the 2nd amendment is for. This situation is WHY the 2nd amendment exists. It's the defense Americans trot out whenever people talk about taking their guns away. I hope people do. If the American government wants real anarchy, I think the people of the US should give it to them. Reading comments like this is truly frightening. A live-fire exchange between civilian protesters and the military here would not lead to anything good. There are already tons of people who believe that the protests are going way overboard, and that police action against them is mostly justified. Actually shooting at cops / military would only serve to further solidify such beliefs, while also leading to a lot of completely meaningless deaths. The point of the second amendment isn't to avoid conflict, it is to meet it head on and end oppressive practices. It is why all the y'allqaeda folks brought it to their haircut rallies in Michigan etc I mean, if it comes to an actual confrontation, who is stronger kind of thing rather than using whatever means to make a point -- there is absolutely no way civilian militias of any sort have any chance at all to win. And actually shooting at the cops / military isn't very likely to make a good talking point, so... I agree with you for the time being but I have to ask, do you think it's ever justified for the citizens to take up arms against the state? Just a month ago I found those scenarios by gun owners ridiculous, but now that the state is actively murdering and terrorizing citizens, and the president is mobilizing the military to "dominate" citizens, I'm not so sure anymore. Can you give some examples of the state "actively murdering and terrorizing citizens"? Don't go around throwing words like that. There are ways more videos of rioters and looters savagely destroy businesses (and neighborhoods). About time that business owners and the citizens, not the forces, shoot back and murder those rioters. Waiting until those "protests" come to your area.
Is this a serious question? The US has a long, LONG history of deadly force against its own citizens. So long, in fact, that it should come as a surprise to absolutely no one should feel a need to question it as a general phenomenon. The police uses state-sanctioned violence - that is the function of police. When police officers harm or murder someone (especially without consequences), then, that is the state murdering and terrorizing its citizens. Driving cars into crowds at speed qualifies. Shooting and tear-gasing unarmed and non-violent citizens qualifies. The very thing that kick-started these riots was such an event. News and social media has been so crowded with reports of these events that I have a hard time believing you actually need to ask.
Also, why are you advocating for murder? It boggles the mind that you seem to think the punishment for destroying property should be "being murdered" - is the only resolution to conflict you can envision killing the protesters?
|
I just got this email from my mom. My parents live right in the thick of it. My mom is a doctor at a city clinic and my Dad manages a non-profit organization dedicated to restorative justice programs and helping people sue police for malpractice:
We are both physically fine and so is our dwelling. Psychologically, we are pretty tired, but we have had two nights of sleep that were quieter.
The National Guard is here. They are not letting anyone remain outside after 8pm. Those that do get asked to leave or, if there are issues, arrested.
Steve and I went down to ground zero yesterday to help with some clean up and saw what looked like an area hit by bombs in a war.
It’s been a bit overwhelming.
Dad is working hard on supporting his lawyers and the ACLU calling for a more accurate charge of second degree murder. And to get the rest of them arrested.
I am busy supporting overly stressed residents and patients.
One of our community clinics was destroyed completely, at ground zero. Ours and another had our pharmacies looted.
We are safe. Things are quiet.
We love you all, we know we raised responsible, moral humans. And two of you have chosen responsible, moral partners.
We will come out at the end of this intact.
Mom
|
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On June 02 2020 15:00 puppykiller wrote:
I just got this email from my mom. My parents live right in the thick of it. My mom is a doctor at a city clinic and my Dad manages a non-profit organization dedicated to restorative justice programs and helping people sue police for malpractice:
We are both physically fine and so is our dwelling. Psychologically, we are pretty tired, but we have had two nights of sleep that were quieter.
The National Guard is here. They are not letting anyone remain outside after 8pm. Those that do get asked to leave or, if there are issues, arrested.
Steve and I went down to ground zero yesterday to help with some clean up and saw what looked like an area hit by bombs in a war.
It’s been a bit overwhelming.
Dad is working hard on supporting his lawyers and the ACLU calling for a more accurate charge of second degree murder. And to get the rest of them arrested.
I am busy supporting overly stressed residents and patients.
One of our community clinics was destroyed completely, at ground zero. Ours and another had our pharmacies looted.
We are safe. Things are quiet.
We love you all, we know we raised responsible, moral humans. And two of you have chosen responsible, moral partners.
We will come out at the end of this intact.
Mom
Your family seems like great people. Enormous respect for people doing such important jobs in a time when it is (especially) needed. Hope everything will turn out okay for them.
|
On June 02 2020 13:00 Starlightsun wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 12:06 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 11:33 iamthedave wrote:On June 02 2020 11:14 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 10:12 NewSunshine wrote:On June 02 2020 09:52 farvacola wrote:
Force will probably be used against peaceful demonstrators regardless, particularly if Trump is allowed to escalate things. Force above and beyond firing cans of teargas directly at demonstrators, shoving them to the ground, and running cars into them, you mean. Can't wait to see what's next. I'm also positive our resident fans of the 2nd amendment will support the peaceful protesters in their endeavors if the government suddenly comes down on them with full military might. This is precisely such a situation where its invocation makes real sense. Pretty sure making use of the 2nd amendment in a situation like this would be an absolutely terrible idea. It is LITERALLY what the 2nd amendment is for. This situation is WHY the 2nd amendment exists. It's the defense Americans trot out whenever people talk about taking their guns away. I hope people do. If the American government wants real anarchy, I think the people of the US should give it to them. Reading comments like this is truly frightening. A live-fire exchange between civilian protesters and the military here would not lead to anything good. There are already tons of people who believe that the protests are going way overboard, and that police action against them is mostly justified. Actually shooting at cops / military would only serve to further solidify such beliefs, while also leading to a lot of completely meaningless deaths. The point of the second amendment isn't to avoid conflict, it is to meet it head on and end oppressive practices. It is why all the y'allqaeda folks brought it to their haircut rallies in Michigan etc I mean, if it comes to an actual confrontation, who is stronger kind of thing rather than using whatever means to make a point -- there is absolutely no way civilian militias of any sort have any chance at all to win. And actually shooting at the cops / military isn't very likely to make a good talking point, so... I agree with you for the time being but I have to ask, do you think it's ever justified for the citizens to take up arms against the state? Just a month ago I found those scenarios by gun owners ridiculous, but now that the state is actively murdering and terrorizing citizens, and the president is mobilizing the military to "dominate" citizens, I'm not so sure anymore.
The way I see it, just because something is 'justified' doesn't always mean it's a good idea to go ahead and do it. I imagine there's been a number of situations in as short of a time span as the last 24 hours where you could make a case for ordinary folks being 'justified' to take up arms against what policemen did -- but thank god no one actually pulled a gun out and started shooting coppers. I am completely convinced it would just lead to more deaths and achieve nothing. It would give more fuel to the arguments about how the protesters are monsters with no respect for any values at all and only out there to cause mayhem and chaos, also make any efforts to crack down on the protests even harder look more 'justified' in turn.
It's a difficult situation for sure, and I haven't got many ideas on how it can be realistically made better -- but I am quite positive that guns and killing are not the way to do it.
|
Another video of police abusing authority. The language is rough so be warned. I put it in spoiler as well.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Osaka27166 Posts
Honestly, anyone can go on any social media platform and find examples of any group acting badly. I am not sure what posting videos of it without comment is supposed to do.
|
That is exactly it.
When you have an extremely angry and frustrated population clashing with police departments that are poorly trained at de-escalating situations, violence just increases in intensity. At this point, you expect everyone involved to be acting fairly badly at best. The videos don’t mean much, the situation has deteriorated to straight chaos.
The only way to resolve this issue is to either subjugate the population by killing a whole host of them and hoping people are scared into compliance or actually try to de-escalate the situation. Trump is transparently choosing the former at this rate.
That is despite countless studies showing that police departments that respond to protests with force always end up escalate what are normally fairly peaceful protests into riots. It isn’t hard to de-escalate these protests, in fact it says a lot that no one in government has gone out to offer some form of obvious solution (police reformation) and instead are going straight to the national guard and military.
|
On June 02 2020 16:23 StalkerTL wrote:
That is exactly it.
When you have an extremely angry and frustrated population clashing with police departments that are poorly trained at de-escalating situations, violence just increases in intensity. At this point, you expect everyone involved to be acting fairly badly at best. The videos don’t mean much, the situation has deteriorated to straight chaos.
The only way to resolve this issue is to either subjugate the population by killing a whole host of them and hoping people are scared into compliance or actually try to de-escalate the situation. Trump is transparently choosing the former at this rate.
That is despite countless studies showing that police departments that respond to protests with force always end up escalate what are normally fairly peaceful protests into riots. It isn’t hard to de-escalate these protests, in fact it says a lot that no one in government has gone out to offer some form of obvious solution (police reformation) and instead are going straight to the national guard and military.
I think this is spot on.
|
On June 02 2020 16:17 Manifesto7 wrote:
Honestly, anyone can go on any social media platform and find examples of any group acting badly. I am not sure what posting videos of it without comment is supposed to do.
It's not group A vs group B. You're talking of the f***ing police here, people that are supposed to represent the law. Not your average thug. There shouldn't be any equivalence between a protester using violence and a policeman using violence.
Edit: and as the riots are targeted against police violence it seems to be the least to document such violence.
|
I think everyone expects non-military US police to behave poorly and purposely escalate situations despite countless federal studies showing that it does nothing but fan further violence.
I might be reading Manifesto’s post incorrectly but he seems to be suggesting that the situation has deteriorated so badly that it’s not going to be hard to find proof of people of all types going rouge and doing bad shit. Which is true.
The obvious solution here is no longer on the protestors or police, it’s on the federal government and congress to either beat down the protests or offer an olive branch to try and make sure George Floyd is the last to die in the way he did. Trump has made it clear that he wants to beat down the protests.
|
Osaka27166 Posts
I’m just wondering what the point of posting it in this thread is. I’m not drawing equivalencies between the two parties. I don’t think this thread is supposed to be a repository for that media, so how does posting a video without discussion fit in the thread? That’s all.
|
On June 02 2020 17:58 Manifesto7 wrote:
I’m just wondering what the point of posting it in this thread is. I’m not drawing equivalencies between the two parties. I don’t think this thread is supposed to be a repository for that media, so how does posting a video without discussion fit in the thread? That’s all.
Well there's still people that say things like:
On June 02 2020 14:04 Arceus wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 13:00 Starlightsun wrote:On June 02 2020 12:06 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 11:33 iamthedave wrote:On June 02 2020 11:14 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 10:12 NewSunshine wrote:On June 02 2020 09:52 farvacola wrote:
Force will probably be used against peaceful demonstrators regardless, particularly if Trump is allowed to escalate things. Force above and beyond firing cans of teargas directly at demonstrators, shoving them to the ground, and running cars into them, you mean. Can't wait to see what's next. I'm also positive our resident fans of the 2nd amendment will support the peaceful protesters in their endeavors if the government suddenly comes down on them with full military might. This is precisely such a situation where its invocation makes real sense. Pretty sure making use of the 2nd amendment in a situation like this would be an absolutely terrible idea. It is LITERALLY what the 2nd amendment is for. This situation is WHY the 2nd amendment exists. It's the defense Americans trot out whenever people talk about taking their guns away. I hope people do. If the American government wants real anarchy, I think the people of the US should give it to them. Reading comments like this is truly frightening. A live-fire exchange between civilian protesters and the military here would not lead to anything good. There are already tons of people who believe that the protests are going way overboard, and that police action against them is mostly justified. Actually shooting at cops / military would only serve to further solidify such beliefs, while also leading to a lot of completely meaningless deaths. The point of the second amendment isn't to avoid conflict, it is to meet it head on and end oppressive practices. It is why all the y'allqaeda folks brought it to their haircut rallies in Michigan etc I mean, if it comes to an actual confrontation, who is stronger kind of thing rather than using whatever means to make a point -- there is absolutely no way civilian militias of any sort have any chance at all to win. And actually shooting at the cops / military isn't very likely to make a good talking point, so... I agree with you for the time being but I have to ask, do you think it's ever justified for the citizens to take up arms against the state? Just a month ago I found those scenarios by gun owners ridiculous, but now that the state is actively murdering and terrorizing citizens, and the president is mobilizing the military to "dominate" citizens, I'm not so sure anymore. Can you give some examples of the state "actively murdering and terrorizing citizens"? Don't go around throwing words like that.
So clearly some people still don't believe that the US is engaged in a massive violent crackdown repressing political dissidents and media. In that way, the constant stream of videos providing evidence the US is violently cracking down on peaceful political dissent and the people filming that crackdown is unfortunately necessary until the people denying it aren't allowed to flagrantly deny reality (like they have for decades) imo.
|
On June 02 2020 11:38 Bagration wrote:
This is the end of Pax Americana. The normalcy had been eroding since Trump took office, it really deteriorated during the pandemic, and now this. There's no unifying leadership, there's few strong institutions that are universally uniting, and Trump is guaranteed to take a crisis and make it worse.
I'm not saying that the USA will suddenly disappear or anything, but this is a Suez Crisis moment, where a superpower suddenly realizes that its old power is gone. Back in 1956 it was the British Empire. Now it is the USA. The multi-polar world order begins now
Yes this is the pivotal moment i think so as well,more so due to the epidemic then the protests btw though in the end neither of those 2 are the real underlying cause.
Yesterday trump did the only thing he could do,a soft response would have escelated the situation even more. It would not have satisfied the protesters in any way.
A new cold war i dont think will happen though,china and the usa depend way to much on eachoter economically. Its a fundamentally different situation then with the usa and the ussr. And while china is officially a communist country,the systems in the usa and china are not all that different from eachoter in the end. They will probably co-exist peacefully during this century.
|
On June 02 2020 12:17 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 12:15 iamthedave wrote:On June 02 2020 12:06 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 11:33 iamthedave wrote:On June 02 2020 11:14 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 10:12 NewSunshine wrote:On June 02 2020 09:52 farvacola wrote:
Force will probably be used against peaceful demonstrators regardless, particularly if Trump is allowed to escalate things. Force above and beyond firing cans of teargas directly at demonstrators, shoving them to the ground, and running cars into them, you mean. Can't wait to see what's next. I'm also positive our resident fans of the 2nd amendment will support the peaceful protesters in their endeavors if the government suddenly comes down on them with full military might. This is precisely such a situation where its invocation makes real sense. Pretty sure making use of the 2nd amendment in a situation like this would be an absolutely terrible idea. It is LITERALLY what the 2nd amendment is for. This situation is WHY the 2nd amendment exists. It's the defense Americans trot out whenever people talk about taking their guns away. I hope people do. If the American government wants real anarchy, I think the people of the US should give it to them. Reading comments like this is truly frightening. A live-fire exchange between civilian protesters and the military here would not lead to anything good. There are already tons of people who believe that the protests are going way overboard, and that police action against them is mostly justified. Actually shooting at cops / military would only serve to further solidify such beliefs, while also leading to a lot of completely meaningless deaths. The point of the second amendment isn't to avoid conflict, it is to meet it head on and end oppressive practices. It is why all the y'allqaeda folks brought it to their haircut rallies in Michigan etc I mean, if it comes to an actual confrontation, who is stronger kind of thing rather than using whatever means to make a point -- there is absolutely no way civilian militias of any sort have any chance at all to win. And actually shooting at the cops / military isn't very likely to make a good talking point, so... The police are already shooting unarmed, peaceful protestors. We're not getting mass deaths like Tianaman square, but this is the goverment deploying thuggish violence against people protesting a crime committed by a government institution against a civilian. And how would shooting back at them be in any way helpful? It isn't, the 2nd amendment comments are for the most part sarcastic takes on the reasoning used by gun enthusiasts. That they need their guns to protect themselves from a potential tyrannical government.
Which is what the protests now apparently need. Except they would be black people armed to the teeth, not white. And that makes a whole lot of white folk very uncomfortable.
Edit: Think back to the protests a while ago where armed militia's protested for the right to get a haircut and drink a starbucks frapachino, how would these protests have gone if people armed like that walked with the protesters?
Either there would have been little to no police violence or the US would have had a Tiananmen Square event.
|
On June 02 2020 14:40 Howie_Dewitt wrote:I snuck into the restricted area of Chicago today to do some personal documenting and then joined a peaceful protest. I wanted to ask cops how they felt about everything, so I went past the boundary where you're supposed to get ID checked and headed for the station. No one ID'd me. When I was alone, I decided to approach a police station in a black hoodie, bandanna, and while writing notes down... Not my best move, but oh well. I could hear the police on the other side of the street talking about me. They said "look, that must be some kind of scout." About a minute later, as I listen to the police radio chatter, I hear them report me as "suspicious man, looks like some sort of antifa scout or something" and then gave my location. I went around the corner, and tried to ask the next group of cops, who were in a van blocking the road. One of them subtly threatened to shoot me when I asked for a bit of their time. He said "If this was a different country, you'd be shot right now!" and displayed a gun in his van through the window. Felt like it was a good idea to leave after that, so I headed to a explicitly peaceful protest made mostly by students. It got about 1000 people at minimum, and was a bunch of feel good "we've got the power" garbage, especially with the ~100 police watching us ready to beat they protestors should things turn even remotely rowdy. I was able to talk to some cops after the protest, and wrote down my findings. Here's the album containing the notes I took on everything today. Last 4 pages are from the conversations with cops. If there are any questions as to the meaning of the garbled handwriting, I can edit in translations after. First of all, stay safe man. The hoodie and bandanna probably arn't a good idea if your trying to do journalistic work as you found out yourself.
One thing that stood out to me, and something that was talked about here in the thread aswell, is the cop talking about how you can't paint all of them with the same brush and that no one agrees with what happened in Minneapolis. But they don't show it.
Where are the good cops protesting when bad cops get away with shit? This general 'hate' for the police wouldn't be nearly as bad if people saw other police officers protesting in the streets or going on strike when the bad apples are protected time and time again.
They of all people should not be silent on this.
|
On June 02 2020 14:40 Howie_Dewitt wrote:I snuck into the restricted area of Chicago today to do some personal documenting and then joined a peaceful protest. I wanted to ask cops how they felt about everything, so I went past the boundary where you're supposed to get ID checked and headed for the station. No one ID'd me. When I was alone, I decided to approach a police station in a black hoodie, bandanna, and while writing notes down... Not my best move, but oh well. I could hear the police on the other side of the street talking about me. They said "look, that must be some kind of scout." About a minute later, as I listen to the police radio chatter, I hear them report me as "suspicious man, looks like some sort of antifa scout or something" and then gave my location. I went around the corner, and tried to ask the next group of cops, who were in a van blocking the road. One of them subtly threatened to shoot me when I asked for a bit of their time. He said "If this was a different country, you'd be shot right now!" and displayed a gun in his van through the window. Felt like it was a good idea to leave after that, so I headed to a explicitly peaceful protest made mostly by students. It got about 1000 people at minimum, and was a bunch of feel good "we've got the power" garbage, especially with the ~100 police watching us ready to beat they protestors should things turn even remotely rowdy. I was able to talk to some cops after the protest, and wrote down my findings. Here's the album containing the notes I took on everything today. Last 4 pages are from the conversations with cops. If there are any questions as to the meaning of the garbled handwriting, I can edit in translations after.
Stay safe out there dude.
|
On June 02 2020 14:55 Zealously wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2020 14:04 Arceus wrote:On June 02 2020 13:00 Starlightsun wrote:On June 02 2020 12:06 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 11:33 iamthedave wrote:On June 02 2020 11:14 Salazarz wrote:On June 02 2020 10:12 NewSunshine wrote:On June 02 2020 09:52 farvacola wrote:
Force will probably be used against peaceful demonstrators regardless, particularly if Trump is allowed to escalate things. Force above and beyond firing cans of teargas directly at demonstrators, shoving them to the ground, and running cars into them, you mean. Can't wait to see what's next. I'm also positive our resident fans of the 2nd amendment will support the peaceful protesters in their endeavors if the government suddenly comes down on them with full military might. This is precisely such a situation where its invocation makes real sense. Pretty sure making use of the 2nd amendment in a situation like this would be an absolutely terrible idea. It is LITERALLY what the 2nd amendment is for. This situation is WHY the 2nd amendment exists. It's the defense Americans trot out whenever people talk about taking their guns away. I hope people do. If the American government wants real anarchy, I think the people of the US should give it to them. Reading comments like this is truly frightening. A live-fire exchange between civilian protesters and the military here would not lead to anything good. There are already tons of people who believe that the protests are going way overboard, and that police action against them is mostly justified. Actually shooting at cops / military would only serve to further solidify such beliefs, while also leading to a lot of completely meaningless deaths. The point of the second amendment isn't to avoid conflict, it is to meet it head on and end oppressive practices. It is why all the y'allqaeda folks brought it to their haircut rallies in Michigan etc I mean, if it comes to an actual confrontation, who is stronger kind of thing rather than using whatever means to make a point -- there is absolutely no way civilian militias of any sort have any chance at all to win. And actually shooting at the cops / military isn't very likely to make a good talking point, so... I agree with you for the time being but I have to ask, do you think it's ever justified for the citizens to take up arms against the state? Just a month ago I found those scenarios by gun owners ridiculous, but now that the state is actively murdering and terrorizing citizens, and the president is mobilizing the military to "dominate" citizens, I'm not so sure anymore. Can you give some examples of the state "actively murdering and terrorizing citizens"? Don't go around throwing words like that. There are ways more videos of rioters and looters savagely destroy businesses (and neighborhoods). About time that business owners and the citizens, not the forces, shoot back and murder those rioters. Waiting until those "protests" come to your area. Is this a serious question? The US has a long, LONG history of deadly force against its own citizens. So long, in fact, that it should come as a surprise to absolutely no one should feel a need to question it as a general phenomenon. The police uses state-sanctioned violence - that is the function of police. When police officers harm or murder someone (especially without consequences), then, that is the state murdering and terrorizing its citizens. Driving cars into crowds at speed qualifies. Shooting and tear-gasing unarmed and non-violent citizens qualifies. The very thing that kick-started these riots was such an event. News and social media has been so crowded with reports of these events that I have a hard time believing you actually need to ask. Also, why are you advocating for murder? It boggles the mind that you seem to think the punishment for destroying property should be "being murdered" - is the only resolution to conflict you can envision killing the protesters?
Well, "destroying property" is probably the worst crime there is according to liberal societies as there is nothing more holy than this.
Moreover, he can advocate murder because he got weapons. In fact, there are fucking 300 millions weapons in your country of "freedom", for god sake, independantly of this most likely racist crime, I would freak out too if I was a cops in a country where everybody has a weapon.
Add to this that USA is not like France in which the police is quite a old institution which represents since the beginning the hand of the state "la justice du roi" founded by Louis XIV. In the us, it is derived from militias in which the culture is way more focused on private justice which creates a culture of a conflict between two individuals rather than between the state and a citizen. Arceus embodies very well this conception which is still prevalent and leads to more violence. And obviously, this militia culture gives more freedom for racists cops in some departments of police.
Anyway, in the country in which sometihng like the Pinkerton National Detective Agency has existed, the roots of police violence are deep and way larger than this identitary conflict.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
