Black Lives Matter
-
@raznomore said in Black Lives Matter:
I totally get that the far left will hijack causes when they see it as a way to up set or rattle the right. I know people are like Shield Snorters and when they see something shiny they will gravitate towards it. Like when one person loots and seemingly gets away with it others will follow. Its not a valid means of protest or anything. It's just looting. There are people lining up to protest based on their potential to garner more likes and followers. But these idiots do not invalidate what to me is a completely valid cause/argument. That black lives matter.
That, to me is not an indictment on humanity or reverse racism. Yes all lives matter. But one particular pocket of the American community feels they are being unfairly targeted. This should be a time where the wider community takes stock and looks at these concerns and publicly says as much. But what the black community is confronted with is "stats" and "All lives matter" as a counter punch. There is not need to counter punch. The government seems to be geared towards calling nonsense on all of their concerns instead of hearing them out. Im not interested in looking at the potential election connotations behind Trump backing law enforcement without impunity.
What I see is what I get. People are hurting. People are most definitely exploiting that hurt and people are ignoring that hurt.
The conundrum for me with Black Lives Matter is that it is somewhere between a generic platitude like Pro-Choice or Save The Earth and a political movement. Activists in the movement tend to switch depending on whatever is convenient at the time. Things are further exacerbated by the lack of centralized leadership or policies from the movement as a whole and individual city chapters endorse and disendorse individual rallies and marches almost at random. Very few detail the reforms they are seeking although these two which do are downright insane.
For what is being presented as a divisive issue I don't think I've seen the public more united in agreeing that this is was a dog act and utterly reprehensible. The full video of the incident helps, as does the lack of any obvious resistance or conflict as there were in previous cases. How we avoid this from happening again is where things get sticky.
So when some of the policy suggestions from BLM affiliates is given even basic analysis, or the scale of the problem is brought into context with crime statistics the argument predictably retreats back to the three word slogan 'Black Lives Matter'. This is not helpful to anyone.
-
@rotated said in Black Lives Matter:
@raznomore said in Black Lives Matter:
I totally get that the far left will hijack causes when they see it as a way to up set or rattle the right. I know people are like Shield Snorters and when they see something shiny they will gravitate towards it. Like when one person loots and seemingly gets away with it others will follow. Its not a valid means of protest or anything. It's just looting. There are people lining up to protest based on their potential to garner more likes and followers. But these idiots do not invalidate what to me is a completely valid cause/argument. That black lives matter.
That, to me is not an indictment on humanity or reverse racism. Yes all lives matter. But one particular pocket of the American community feels they are being unfairly targeted. This should be a time where the wider community takes stock and looks at these concerns and publicly says as much. But what the black community is confronted with is "stats" and "All lives matter" as a counter punch. There is not need to counter punch. The government seems to be geared towards calling nonsense on all of their concerns instead of hearing them out. Im not interested in looking at the potential election connotations behind Trump backing law enforcement without impunity.
What I see is what I get. People are hurting. People are most definitely exploiting that hurt and people are ignoring that hurt.
The conundrum for me with Black Lives Matter is that it is somewhere between a generic platitude like Pro-Choice or Save The Earth and a political movement. Activists in the movement tend to switch depending on whatever is convenient at the time. Things are further exacerbated by the lack of centralized leadership or policies from the movement as a whole and individual city chapters endorse and disendorse individual rallies and marches almost at random. Very few detail the reforms they are seeking although these two which do are downright insane.
For what is being presented as a divisive issue I don't think I've seen the public more united in agreeing that this is was a dog act and utterly reprehensible. The full video of the incident helps, as does the lack of any obvious resistance or conflict as there were in previous cases. How we avoid this from happening again is where things get sticky.
So when some of the policy suggestions from BLM affiliates is given even basic analysis, or the scale of the problem is brought into context with crime statistics the argument predictably retreats back to the three word slogan 'Black Lives Matter'. This is not helpful to anyone.
What the stats tell me is that if by #BLM we're talking homicides the audiences need to be the US Black Community itself, in much the same way that the serious knife crime problem in London is in reality a problem of black on black, principally young men.
If the aim is to improve (more) the economic lot of Black people in the US, it would seem the audience needs to be the city councillors, in the relevant areas, who are responsible for the education and welfare programmes therein. From what I have read that's principally the Democratic Party.
I think the policing problem is best seen as separate to BLM.
The prevalence of guns in the States makes policing there something I'd not want to do. But what seems to me a glaring problem, which needs addressing, is that there is no proper independent scrutiny of complaints against the police. Scum like Chauvin need to know they're accountable.
-
Full footage including before arrest and after shooting. The shooter was the one who had the taser fired at him. (I
I wonder if the lethality percentage of the taser changes if it hits someone directly in the head?Debrief starts at 1.04. Pretty interesting to see behind the scenes, a lot of support from fellow officers.
Imagine the thoughts going through your head after the shooting, being pretty sure you did your job correctly but maybe knowing that might be irrelevant as you were born with the wrong skin colour for this day and age in police enforcement.
-
@Rembrandt said in Black Lives Matter:
And charged with murder which could result in life imprisonment or the death penalty...or could be acquitted for another round of riots.
I can't see how he'll be convicted. Definitely let off on appeal if there's a travesty of justice. The legal test for police in the USA is reasonableness of the threat as they perceive it. Footage of Mr Brooks resisting arrest, taking a taser and firing it at police won't make it a difficult defence.
-
@antipodean said in Black Lives Matter:
@Rembrandt said in Black Lives Matter:
And charged with murder which could result in life imprisonment or the death penalty...or could be acquitted for another round of riots.
I can't see how he'll be convicted. Definitely let off on appeal if there's a travesty of justice. The legal test for police in the USA is reasonableness of the threat as they perceive it. Footage of Mr Brooks resisting arrest, taking a taser and firing it at police won't make it a difficult defence.
You don't think we are at the point where political interference may impact judicial decisions? I hope you are right. Lose lose situation anyway.
-
@rotated said in Black Lives Matter:
Activists in the movement tend to switch depending on whatever is convenient at the time. Things are further exacerbated by the lack of centralized leadership or policies from the movement as a whole and individual city chapters endorse and disendorse individual rallies and marches almost at random. Very few detail the reforms they are seeking although these two which do are downright insane.
There are a few places putting forward a researched policy platform, like https://www.joincampaignzero.org/
I think that campaign is going about it the right way, making the issue police violence in general rather than violence towards people of a particular skin colour.
The only reason I know about that is one of the key campaigners went on the Bill Simmons pod a few weeks ago.
It's those sort of voices and groups that need more attention as it moves the conversation beyond just slogans and lazy stats to tangible actions that we can all debate.
-
@Rembrandt said in Black Lives Matter:
@antipodean said in Black Lives Matter:
@Rembrandt said in Black Lives Matter:
And charged with murder which could result in life imprisonment or the death penalty...or could be acquitted for another round of riots.
I can't see how he'll be convicted. Definitely let off on appeal if there's a travesty of justice. The legal test for police in the USA is reasonableness of the threat as they perceive it. Footage of Mr Brooks resisting arrest, taking a taser and firing it at police won't make it a difficult defence.
You don't think we are at the point where political interference may impact judicial decisions? I hope you are right. Lose lose situation anyway.
That's why I said on appeal. In the current climate it's difficult to see how anyone is going to get an impartial jury.
-
I'm seeing an argument that officer Rolfe may have kicked him after he had shot the guy. Hard to tell for sure in that video but one thing that appears to be missing from all of this is his bodycam footage during the scuffle and up to the shooting. Note that it is the 2nd officers bodycam we get at the start and its that bodycam that falls off. After the shooting the footage starts again with Rolfe's bodycam looking like he is reconnecting his bodycam. Would be interesting to see his footage up to when it supposedly came off or if there is any footage of the supposed kick.
-
@Rembrandt said in Black Lives Matter:
Full footage including before arrest and after shooting. The shooter was the one who had the taser fired at him. (I
I wonder if the lethality percentage of the taser changes if it hits someone directly in the head?Debrief starts at 1.04. Pretty interesting to see behind the scenes, a lot of support from fellow officers.
Imagine the thoughts going through your head after the shooting, being pretty sure you did your job correctly but maybe knowing that might be irrelevant as you were born with the wrong skin colour for this day and age in police enforcement.
I watched most of that up until they shot him.
My first question is why the fuck didn't they just breathalise him to start with? He was clearly DUI but that was about 25 minutes of him trying to be polite before they actually test him. I was getting annoyed just watching it.As for tasers in the head - can cause brain injury - whether that is more lethal than a taser in the chest (can cause cardiac arrest) I don't know.
That was an unarmed drunk that they shot. They had even checked him for weapons. I don't believe that is doing your job to protect and serve correctly. He even said that he would walk home. Who were they protecting from him?
That was a reflex, trigger happy killing. IMO. -
@Frank said in Black Lives Matter:
@Snowy said in Black Lives Matter:
That was an unarmed drunk that they shot.
He was holding a taser gun which he had taken from the cops and pointing it at them as he ran away.
Some distance away. They work for 3m. The cops knew that and knee jerked with lethal force.
-
To me it’s similar to the no follow policy in NZ. Car chases are the equivalent of this situation imo. The driver is driving the weapon. The police see the potential for collateral damage and also have the car occupants safety in mind as well. So they give up chase.
I don’t think there is a time where shooting someone in the back is ok when the perpetrator is unarmed. They needed to either run him down or give up chase. Shooting him was not the right option. Regardless of the lead up. He was running away and was not a threat to the officers at that stage.
I think this is voluntary manslaughter. It’s a split second decision. A knee jerk as Snowy said. It’s not the same as the George Floyd situation. That was a prolonged, tortuous attack. It’s not the same as the Ahmad Arbery case either as those 2 men charged brought guns along. They were not law enforcement and planned to use them if required. They were never required but used them anyway.
-
Why does the victim need money? Surely she needs justice and psychological support not financial assistance.
-
@Billy-Tell said in Black Lives Matter:
Why does the victim need money? Surely she needs justice and psychological support not financial assistance.
Well for a while there justice wasn't going to happen as the optics were wrong. Money might have helped ease some of that pain or perhaps be used for relocation expenses (or even psych services) if this is likely an ongoing problem.
-
@Billy-Tell medical and counseling and eventually legal representation. For her, this thing is just beginning.
But mostly because members of the public wanted to give
-
@Rembrandt said in Black Lives Matter:
Including this here as its this current BLM movement which has led to calls to cancel Paw Patrol for having a positive reference to police.
Mainstream media at its finest. Not satire.
Hahaha holy shit that article is hilarious. Can be summarised as "hard left academics say they are bad, but for some reason parents still let their kids watch AND buy them toys".
Also, the central theme of Paw Patrol is saving people when they have an accident or get stuck somewhere. There's basically no "good guys punishing bad guys" involved at all. But it has a Police themed dog in it so it must be bad right?