Black Lives Matter
-
@R-L said in Black Lives Matter:
@pakman I found it an emotional story, deep sigh yourself.
Bloody quick litte fella, too!
-
@Rembrandt The UN does have a point about the general protections afforded people under the Constitution, but they seem to fall for the old trick of "this is what it's named, so that's what it is". Like the Peoples Democractic Republic of which invariably is none of those things.
-
@Siam said in Black Lives Matter:
@Rembrandt "peaceful assembly"π€
-
@antipodean said in Black Lives Matter:
@Rembrandt The UN does have a point about the general protections afforded people under the Constitution, but they seem to fall for the old trick of "this is what it's named, so that's what it is". Like the Peoples Democractic Republic of which invariably is none of those things.
I'd go a step further and suggest that there is a radical communist leaning in the UN (as we saw blatantly with the WHO) and that this is intentional.
-
I think BLM will be looked back in history as the straw that broke the camel's back.
The States is fucked.
There's no value in truth, no trust in science, facts or data.
Corporations have donated hundreds of millions of dollars (heard that bank of America gave a billion - surely not?) to a slogan. A movement with no leader, no coherent objectives and no articulate vision for the future. How will it be spent?But worst of all blm has pitted the people against the police on a cause where all the data says that cops kill more whites, and black cops kill more blacks than white cops do.
I can't find one optimistic commentator, from the bunch of sane ones out there.
We know the 2 parties can't and won't talk it out. Theres no dialogue. People genuinely get fired for affirming all lives matter.
History is being denied and manipulated and all the "popular" actions out there are exactly Maoist Stalinist and Orwellian.
It's happened.
The US is somewhat under communist ideology as of this week and there's no apparent method of righting the ship because speech on the matter is forbidden.
We're watching a world changing decline of the dominant country and culture.
COVID economic realities will kick in full swing in Sept just to spice things up.
The blatant disregard for truth is astounding.
To those thinking I'm henny penny, do you care to explain exactly how they get out of this?
-
I think in 2 years' time the US will be back to where they were pre COVID.
It's a perfect storm right now. More people have got time on their hands and the protests are bigger because of that.
But you can't feed yourself or your families on protest. No matter how many free pizzas celebrity YouTubers are handing out. All those wannabe ideologists and supposed ANTIFA groupies eventually have to go back to Berkeley or whatever liberal-leaning education institute they go to.
The gluttonous monster of capitalism and consumerism isn't going anywhere. As soon as they open back up for business, as usual it'll be just that. Business as usual.
they'll just be a few statues and and flags lighter.
-
@raznomore said in Black Lives Matter:
they'll just be a few statues and and flags lighter.
And possibly a few anti-discrimination laws too.
California wanting to remove this from their constitution:
SEC. 31. (a) The State shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.
Cause nothing says making progress on racism more than re-legalizing racial discrimination
-
@Siam said in Black Lives Matter:
(heard that bank of America gave a billion - surely not?)
Yes they have, but not to BLM, they are using it to help local communities in the US and around the world address racial and economic inequality. It is spread over 4 years.
In a normal year they would give out $200m to causes like this anyway, so itβs about a 25% increase. At BoA local and business unit managers get to manage the corporate philanthropy budgets, so the actual causes and initiatives, and the results, may be variable.
-
@Crazy-Horse said in Black Lives Matter:
@hydro11 police don't always know where people live. And what about lost evidence?
But in this instance, they did know.
-
@Crazy-Horse said in Black Lives Matter:
@hydro11 said in Black Lives Matter:
@Bones said in Black Lives Matter:
@hydro11 said in Black Lives Matter:
@Bones said in Black Lives Matter:
@hydro11 said in Black Lives Matter:
@Bones said in Black Lives Matter:
@hydro11 thought you said if they have a weapon and are running away, they should be let go? Sorry if mistaken.
If someone is running away, they are not flashing a gun at Police. Those situations are different.
This is confusing...how do the police find out they have a weapon then?
Sorry but isn't that really trivial? You pull someone over. You breath test them. They are over the limit. You ask them to step out of the car with their hands where you can see them. You put them in hand cuffs. If there are sudden movements you taser them. You check for weapons once you have arrested them.
If you have reason to believe they have a gun, you deal with the situation differently.
I would have thought what I said was Policing 101 and I don't think there is any debate about that process.
Sounds idealistic to me.
When you train someone, you have to teach them the ideal. You then have to teach them how to respond to different situations.
I don't see what the alternative is? Treat everyone breathalyzed as if they are going to shoot you with a gun at any moment? My ideal is actually more strict than what a NZ Police officer would do but is appropriate for America. I don't believe should assume someone has a weapon unless they have found one or have other evidence.
Survival 101 as a cop, and more so in the US - treat everyone as high risk or unknown risk. You get complacent, you get injured or killed. A cop never knows who they are dealing with.
Well, that's the mentality people have a problem with. Treating people like they are enemy combatants and treating your neighbourhood like it is a war zone. New Zealand Police do not operate like that.
-
@antipodean said in Black Lives Matter:
@hydro11 said in Black Lives Matter:
Already covered this. If they are a threat to the public or an officer's safety, that is one thing. If they are fleeing, that is another.
Strangely it appears the police officer on the scene perceived a threat to his safety.
@hydro11 said in Black Lives Matter:
Sorry but isn't that really trivial? You pull someone over. You breath test them. They are over the limit. You ask them to step out of the car with their hands where you can see them. You put them in hand cuffs. If there are sudden movements you taser them. You check for weapons once you have arrested them.
You've just described the incident. Unfortunately he decided to resist and flee.
@hydro11 said in Black Lives Matter:
Yeah but my argument is that coming back the next day to do a SWAT raid is a better option than straight up shooting someone who is fleeing from Police and is not posing a danger to public safety.
Back to where? He's from a different State.
How do you know the Police officer perceived a threat to his safety? Maybe he perceived a threat to the public's safety?
If a state line is affecting the Police from adequately arresting someone for a DUI without shooting them, that is absolutely 100% something worth protesting about.
-
@antipodean BTW what are you even on about with all this state and jurisdiction nonsense? I have just read that Brooks lived in Atlanta which was where he was shot. He wasn't resident in another state at all. Do you have a source for any of your claims that Brooks was from a different state?
-
@hydro11 said in Black Lives Matter:
@antipodean said in Black Lives Matter:
@hydro11 said in Black Lives Matter:
Already covered this. If they are a threat to the public or an officer's safety, that is one thing. If they are fleeing, that is another.
Strangely it appears the police officer on the scene perceived a threat to his safety.
@hydro11 said in Black Lives Matter:
Sorry but isn't that really trivial? You pull someone over. You breath test them. They are over the limit. You ask them to step out of the car with their hands where you can see them. You put them in hand cuffs. If there are sudden movements you taser them. You check for weapons once you have arrested them.
You've just described the incident. Unfortunately he decided to resist and flee.
@hydro11 said in Black Lives Matter:
Yeah but my argument is that coming back the next day to do a SWAT raid is a better option than straight up shooting someone who is fleeing from Police and is not posing a danger to public safety.
Back to where? He's from a different State.
How do you know the Police officer perceived a threat to his safety? Maybe he perceived a threat to the public's safety?
I didn't state I knew, I said it appeared. The evidence for that is the officer's actions immediately following having a stolen taser's projectiles fired in his direction.
If a state line is affecting the Police from adequately arresting someone for a DUI without shooting them, that is absolutely 100% something worth protesting about.
Has anyone argued he was shot to prevent him getting over the county line?
-
@hydro11 said in Black Lives Matter:
@antipodean BTW what are you even on about with all this state and jurisdiction nonsense? I have just read that Brooks lived in Atlanta which was where he was shot. He wasn't resident in another state at all. Do you have a source for any of your claims that Brooks was from a different state?
His Ohio drivers licence?
-
Chicagoan mate, who's friendly with a few cops, tells me the witch hunt mentality is causing them to draw back.
A reasonable conclusion will be that violence/crime will go unchecked.
My take is that will likely lead to more black deaths.
Hard to see how leaders would disassociate from the visual which fired things off, but if black lives matter BLM really would be best to step away from the police debate.