Which Party is Most Responsible for the Violent Protests? (1 Viewer)

[parasaurolophus]

Really?  The kid of a friend of mine died at UNCC going after a shooter and he's considered a hero.  Many say he saved lives.  Was the guy that chased down the shooter at that Texas (I think?) church frowned upon?

The UNCC shooter wasnt running away when he was tackled. He was in a classroom, shooting. That's a terrible example to bring up.

I already mentioned the texas church shooting. It was originally reported incorrectly. He was not chased down and killed. He was shot at the church after he fired on Willeford and then they followed him. The two following him were on the phone with the police and then Kelley ran off the road and succumbed to the injuries he sustained at the church. 

Neither example involved chasing down and harming people that had retreated. 

 

[The Commish]

The UNCC shooter wasnt running away when he was tackled. He was in a classroom, shooting. That's a terrible example to bring up.

I already mentioned the texas church shooting. It was originally reported incorrectly. He was not chased down and killed. He was shot at the church after he fired on Willeford and then they followed him. The two following him were on the phone with the police and then Kelley ran off the road and succumbed to the injuries he sustained at the church. 

Neither example involved chasing down and harming people that had retreated. 

ok..thanks...I thought we were talking about "chasing people down" the below is what I was responding to...the lines keep moving it seems...I'll bow out.  Will be interesting to see what the courts decide.

  12 hours ago, parasaurolophus said:
We, as a society, typically consider chasing people down as beyond the scope of self defense morally and legally. 

I dont believe it is written into law anywhere that would be ok for ordinary citizens to do.

 

[parasaurolophus]

ok..thanks...I thought we were talking about "chasing people down" the below is what I was responding to...the lines keep moving it seems...I'll bow out.  Will be interesting to see what the courts decide.

If anybody is moving the line it is you. Chasing people down means chasing people down. 

That isn't some gray area term with lots of meanings. There would need to be a chase and at some point the person being chased would need to be overtaken. 

A situation where one person is standing in a classroom firing rounds and he is tackled would not in any context ever be described as chasing him down. 

A situation where a car followed another car(while on the phone with police) and always maintained a distance even until the very end when police arrived would not be chasing somebody down. 

 

[The Commish]

If anybody is moving the line it is you. Chasing people down means chasing people down. 

That isn't some gray area term with lots of meanings. There would need to be a chase and at some point the person being chased would need to be overtaken. 

A situation where one person is standing in a classroom firing rounds and he is tackled would not in any context ever be described as chasing him down. 

A situation where a car followed another car(while on the phone with police) and always maintained a distance even until the very end when police arrived would not be chasing somebody down. 

ok...thanks

 

[TripItUp]

It's pretty telling that over 40% of the votes are Democratic Party in a forum that is 90% Democrat.

Shame on the Democrats.

 

[GoBirds]

It's pretty telling that over 40% of the votes are Democratic Party in a forum that is 90% Democrat.

Shame on the Democrats.

Hard for anyone to deny this one. Very disappointing behavior. 

 

[dkp993]

forum that is 90% Democrat.

A yeah, not true.   90% anti Trump? Absolutely true.  But to your point the forum isn’t 40% D so your point does have merit.  

 

[CletiusMaximus]

For his sake, I hope this 17 year old boy gets himself a real criminal defense lawyer, preferably a good local experienced defense lawyer who knows the judge and prosecutor and can bring some sense to the process.  If my son faced life in prison, I would not want an out of state, non-criminal, celebrity lawyer, seemingly focused on politics and social media, defending him.  I would be particularly suspicious of a lawyer with significant skeletons in his closet like the Pierce Bainbridge firm has.  I guess we'll know more  later this month. The prosecutor (Thomas Binger) is ambitious, having run for DA in a nearby city (Racine) a few years ago.  He will not want to lose a high-profile case like this one.  The difficulty is that, while the great majority of these cases don't go to trial (probably 95% or more settle short of trial), that becomes very difficult when a high profile lawyer has drawn a line in the sand publicly.

For what its worth, here are the six charges:

Anyone can sign up for a free account on Wisconsin's court access website and follow along -- Kenosha County Case Number 2020CF000983 State of Wisconsin vs. Kyle H. Rittenhouse

It seems maybe this is the default place to talk about the Kyle Rittenhouse criminal prosecution.  It will likely be a long process.

In any event, there has been a very positive development from the defendant's perspective - he hired an actual criminal defense lawyer yesterday, Mark Richards from Kenosha.  For this kids' sake, I hope his charlatan nutjob celebrity lawyers will now step aside, and more importantly, I hope they haven't plundered his entire defense fund, because he'll most likely need it.

 

[Phil Elliott]

After defunding police, Mpls city council pressures police chief to deal with increased crime. 

 

[Summer Wheat]

After defunding police, Mpls city council pressures police chief to deal with increased crime. 

Murders and shootings up over 50% in New York City since July.

 

[Rich Conway]

Murders and shootings up over 50% in New York City since July.

I'm not doubting you; you're a good poster, but you gotta include a link for something like this.

 

[parasaurolophus]

I'm not doubting you; you're a good poster, but you gotta include a link for something like this.

He was wrong. Shootings are up almost 100%.

Eta: tongue in cheek about being "wrong" in case that wasnt obvious. 

 

[Summer Wheat]

I'm not doubting you; you're a good poster, but you gotta include a link for something like this.

New York Times. This is just for July.

The latest information released by the New York City Police Department paints a grim picture of the continued rise in shootings and deadly crime in 2020.

Data provided by the department for July shows a 177 percent increase in shootings from the same month in 2019. That's a total of 244 shootings up from 88 the year before.

 

[Juxtatarot]

The PBS Frontline episode that aired Tuesday called Policing the Police (hyperlink goes to episode) does a good job of framing the issue from the liberal point of view.  I recommend it particularly for those that are more likely to disagree with the liberal side.  Not that it will completely change your opinion -- more for understanding.

 

[Stoneworker]

The PBS Frontline episode that aired Tuesday called Policing the Police (hyperlink goes to episode) does a good job of framing the issue from the liberal point of view.  I recommend it particularly for those that are more likely to disagree with the liberal side.  Not that it will completely change your opinion -- more for understanding.

With all due respect (sincerely)...if thoughtful police reform advocates spent a mere fraction of their time policing the radical left police abolitionists as they do trying to educate the public on what defunding "really means"...then I have zero doubt we could make a ton of progress in a very short period of time.

Most "non-liberals" understand exactly that a) there exist structural issues that result in racial discrimination in many jurisdictions, b) pure law enforcement has been conflated with social issues that are more effectively addressed by other professionals (e.g. homelessness, drug addiction, etc.), c) proper allocation of resources needs to be sorted out and d) all those things (among others) need to be addressed quickly.

The recent police reforms from the Breonna Taylor settlement I'm sure would be supported enthusiastically by the vast majority of "non-liberals."

IMHO the issue is not understanding, it is that thoughtful liberal reformers need to get control over a very powerful radical element that in many major cities has hijacked the effort at consensus-driven reforms. And then substitute their well-reasoned voice for the radical one that is currently louder and seemingly more powerful at communicating what "defunders" really want.

 

[Juxtatarot]

With all due respect (sincerely)...if thoughtful police reform advocates spent a mere fraction of their time policing the radical left police abolitionists as they do trying to educate the public on what defunding "really means"...then I have zero doubt we could make a ton of progress in a very short period of time.

Most "non-liberals" understand exactly that a) there exist structural issues that result in racial discrimination in many jurisdictions, b) pure law enforcement has been conflated with social issues that are more effectively addressed by other professionals (e.g. homelessness, drug addiction, etc.), c) proper allocation of resources needs to be sorted out and d) all those things (among others) need to be addressed quickly.

The recent police reforms from the Breonna Taylor settlement I'm sure would be supported enthusiastically by the vast majority of "non-liberals."

IMHO the issue is not understanding, it is that thoughtful liberal reformers need to get control over a very powerful radical element that in many major cities has hijacked the effort at consensus-driven reforms. And then substitute their well-reasoned voice for the radical one that is currently louder and seemingly more powerful at communicating what "defunders" really want.

It's apparent you didn't watch the episode.  I encourage you to do so.

 

[Stoneworker]

It's apparent you didn't watch the episode.  I encourage you to do so.

Thanks but I'm not into dialogue by proxy.

 

[gianmarco]

With all due respect (sincerely)...if thoughtful police reform advocates spent a mere fraction of their time policing the radical left police abolitionists as they do trying to educate the public on what defunding "really means"...then I have zero doubt we could make a ton of progress in a very short period of time.

Most "non-liberals" understand exactly that a) there exist structural issues that result in racial discrimination in many jurisdictions, b) pure law enforcement has been conflated with social issues that are more effectively addressed by other professionals (e.g. homelessness, drug addiction, etc.), c) proper allocation of resources needs to be sorted out and d) all those things (among others) need to be addressed quickly.

The recent police reforms from the Breonna Taylor settlement I'm sure would be supported enthusiastically by the vast majority of "non-liberals."

IMHO the issue is not understanding, it is that thoughtful liberal reformers need to get control over a very powerful radical element that in many major cities has hijacked the effort at consensus-driven reforms. And then substitute their well-reasoned voice for the radical one that is currently louder and seemingly more powerful at communicating what "defunders" really want.

I'm going to disagree with the bolded.  Because if "non-liberals" felt that way and "liberals" want reform, then why haven't we started seeing any sweeping changes that involved some or even really any of the changes you discussed? 

Most of the "non-liberal" stance involving police reform seems to be the same:  "if everyone just complied, we would eliminate most of the problems".  They are much more about status quo than making any changes.

I'd love to see any discussions or recommendations from "non-liberals" advocating for the changes you bolded.  It would be a welcome sight and I'd be completely behind it.

 

[Stoneworker]

I'm going to disagree with the bolded.  Because if "non-liberals" felt that way and "liberals" want reform, then why haven't we started seeing any sweeping changes that involved some or even really any of the changes you discussed? 

Most of the "non-liberal" stance involving police reform seems to be the same:  "if everyone just complied, we would eliminate most of the problems".  They are much more about status quo than making any changes.

I'd love to see any discussions or recommendations from "non-liberals" advocating for the changes you bolded.  It would be a welcome sight and I'd be completely behind it.

Wasn't the Breonna Taylor settlement the beginning of "sweeping changes?"

I'm going to respectfully disagree with the bolded. Part of this is just semantics. There are huge number of moderate GOP/independents that are very much not about the status quo. They're just not actively parading in the streets...and many are genuinely fearful of some of the recent city council antics.

Further to the right is where the status quo heels start getting dug in.

 

[gianmarco]

Wasn't the Breonna Taylor settlement the beginning of "sweeping changes?"

I'm going to respectfully disagree with the bolded. Part of this is just semantics. There are huge number of moderate GOP/independents that are very much not about the status quo. They're just not actively parading in the streets...and many are genuinely fearful of some of the recent city council antics.

Further to the right is where the status quo heels start getting dug in.

Re: Breonna Taylor: In that city, absolutely. What are other cities waiting for? 

 

[Stoneworker]

Re: Breonna Taylor: In that city, absolutely. What are other cities waiting for? 

You tell me. Maybe for the riots to stop and the idiot city council members to resign.

 

[gianmarco]

The PBS Frontline episode that aired Tuesday called Policing the Police (hyperlink goes to episode) does a good job of framing the issue from the liberal point of view.  I recommend it particularly for those that are more likely to disagree with the liberal side.  Not that it will completely change your opinion -- more for understanding.

Excellent show. Truly worth the watch for anyone.

ETA -- If you have a firestick, for example, you can download the PBS app for free and watch it on there.

 

[BladeRunner]

New York Times. This is just for July.

The latest information released by the New York City Police Department paints a grim picture of the continued rise in shootings and deadly crime in 2020.

Data provided by the department for July shows a 177 percent increase in shootings from the same month in 2019. That's a total of 244 shootings up from 88 the year before.

So, defending the police is working.  Good for New York.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

For anyone still following the Kyle Rittenhouse saga, an Illinois judge ordered his extradition to Wisconsin today.  

 

[quick-hands]

https://www.wnd.com/2020/11/leaked-zoom-calls-federal-workers-conspiring-shut-white-house-contested-election/