Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Another killing at the hands of the Police


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, tri-man 47 said:

And what a missed opportunity for the president.  He could have walked through the Square and talked/listened to the protesters and/or joined the pastors and BLM folks at the church.  That would have been a powerful moment ...possibly the powerful moment the nation needed.  Alas ...

Zero chance the Secret Service allows that. Absolutely none.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 14k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Members 16,204 31,897 posts Gender:Not Telling Report post Posted 4 minutes ago I have been contacted by several posters for my thoughts.  I struggled with coming back ev

The entire written statement from General Mattis should be required reading:

Spent the day at the DC marches yesterday. It was mostly peaceful, respectful. Angry at times, but definitely peaceful. We had a hiccup at one point after a group gathered at the Lincoln for some spee

This dude is a hero. He let in peaceful protesters in DC when they had nowhere else to go.

https://twitter.com/IanBGlenn/status/1267809274639446016?s=20 (Video from this morning)

https://twitter.com/blackwomenviews/status/1267716219798462464?s=20 (Video last night when he first let them in)

  • Love 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, General Malaise said:
8 minutes ago, Andy Dufresne said:

Zero chance the Secret Service allows that. Absolutely none.

Why did they allow George W. Bush to walk around in the aftermath of Katrina, hugging citizens who had their lives ruined?  Or same question, same president, 9/11?  

And at a certain point, doesn't the President have a final say in what he is allowed to do? I can't imagine the President can't override the concerns of his security detail.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mcintyre1 said:

And at a certain point, doesn't the President have a final say in what he is allowed to do? I can't imagine the President can't override the concerns of his security detail.

Be reasonable. You know it's just not the type of potentially dangerous situation you put the President in. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Andy Dufresne said:

Be reasonable. You know it's just not the type of potentially dangerous situation you put the President in. 

I agree that it is something he would never do, and not in the context of our moment. I don't agree that it is something "some President" would never do. I was just saying that, ultimately, the President makes that call, not the Secret Service.

I also don't think the Katrina comparisons are the right ones to make right now. While there were certainly tensions at that time, they don't hold a candle to the powderkeg we're looking at right now. You are ultimately correct that there's no way he's walking up to the protesters. There's no chance they listen to him, and there's no chance he's changing their minds.

Edited by mcintyre1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ren hoek said:

Who?

Biden. Today. In his speech.

--

Biden calls on Congress to pass police reforms:

- outlaw chokeholds

- stop transferring weapons of war to police

- better oversight & accountability

Commits to creating national police oversight commission in the first 100 days of presidency.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Andy Dufresne said:
21 minutes ago, tri-man 47 said:

And what a missed opportunity for the president.  He could have walked through the Square and talked/listened to the protesters and/or joined the pastors and BLM folks at the church.  That would have been a powerful moment ...possibly the powerful moment the nation needed.  Alas ...

Zero chance the Secret Service allows that. Absolutely none.

This is true....not because the SS doesn't allow that sort of stuff.  They do, all the time, as long as the culture/circumstances are right to do so.  The only place they let their guard down even a little bit these days are at his rallies.  Same with Pence, but to a lesser extent.  Given his contribution to this fiasco, there's not a chance they let him walk among anyone.  Their position speaks volumes.

Edited by The Commish
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, whoknew said:

Biden. Today. In his speech.

--

Biden calls on Congress to pass police reforms:

- outlaw chokeholds

- stop transferring weapons of war to police

- better oversight & accountability

Commits to creating national police oversight commission in the first 100 days of presidency.

He had some more points, he simply couldn't remember them

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Commish said:

This is true....not because the SS doesn't allow that sort of stuff.  They do, all the time, as long as the culture/circumstances are right to do so.  The only place they let their guard down even a little bit these days are at his rallies.  Same with Pence, but to a lesser extent.  Given his contribution to this fiasco, there's not a chance they let him walk among anyone.  Their position speaks volumes.

That's my thinking.   The SS could have allowed it to happen, but not with the risk of the hostility that would quite certainly have occurred. And so yes, that speaks volumes about the disconnect between Donald Trump and the American people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I didn't realize Donald Trump, Jr. shared the fake Antifa tweet .  

Quote

The fake account, @ANTIFA_US, tweeted Sunday, "ALERT Tonight's the night, Comrades Tonight we say "F**k The City" and we move into the residential areas... the white hoods.... and we take what's ours #BlacklivesMaters #F**kAmerica."

"Absolutely insane," Trump Jr. wrote on Instagram, sharing a screenshot of the tweet, "Just remember what ANTIFA really is. A Terrorist Organization! They're not even pretending anymore."

 

  • Love 1
  • Thinking 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, whoknew said:

Biden. Today. In his speech.

--

Biden calls on Congress to pass police reforms:

- outlaw chokeholds

- stop transferring weapons of war to police

- better oversight & accountability

Commits to creating national police oversight commission in the first 100 days of presidency.

Why did none of this happen when he was in power, after the Ferguson/Baltimore/Occupy/Standing Rock protests? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Andy Dufresne said:

I think you can recognize that the conditions are radically different.

Well, I'd also say the man in place is also radically different, but regardless, this is all like some weird collective fever dream we're all sharing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Juxtatarot said:

The Obama era Justice Department was very active in reform.

And don't forget that Obama tried to actually pass legislation.  While he did some things straight out of the executive office not to the extreme that Trump is however.

I keep saying to  Trump supporters that all these things you cheer him doing, you realize he is opening the door to someone you don't like doing the same thing.  The next D prez will hopefully call everything a national emergency and just do these things on police reform, education, wages and climate change

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Are you pleased he’s proposing it now? 

No.  Biden already torched his credibility on this a long time ago.  We are being asked to trust the architect of mass incarceration and militarized policing that eulogized Storm Thurmond.  Give me a break.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jon_mx said:

Obama had zero skill in speaking to the right.  He never tried.  Clinton and Reagan possessed the skill to attract support from the other side.  Obama's biggest failure was because he lacked such ability. 

Maybe he should have yelled more 3 word, 3 syllable phrases.  

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

No.  Biden already torched his credibility on this a long time ago.  We are being asked to trust the architect of mass incarceration and militarized policing that eulogized Storm Thurmond.  Give me a break.  

Didn’t the Obama administration enact regulations to remove police access to certain military weapons of war?  I would think that would be something you would support. (Also, those regs were apparently rolled back by the Trump administration.)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Skoo said:

And these ones are about someone getting murdered by a cop in plain sight.
 

Neither calls for storming the capital with guns.

The cop was arrested and justice is going to be served.  In the later case there were no burning down of businesses, no looting, no violence.  The most violent protests tend to be from the left. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, timschochet said:

Well my family’s shopping center in Lakewood escaped the night before but not last night. Broken glass, our donut tenant got their cash register looted. That’s all the damage I’m aware of but I’m headed there right now. 
 

I don’t think it was Antifa...

Were any donuts missing?  :oldunsure: 

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Members

16,204

31,897 posts

Gender:Not Telling

Report post

Posted 4 minutes ago

I have been contacted by several posters for my thoughts.  I struggled with coming back even on a limited basis to share them, yet I do not want to be antisocial to the good folks here.  Given that I decided to relent for one post.

 

The death -  Everyone wants to concentrate on the one officer with his knee on George Floyd's neck, because it is visual and shocking.  I agree.  it was beyond any lawful force.  it was beyond any color of law. it was punitive and officers are not authorized to be punitive.   He should have been fired, and was, and should be prosecuted, and is.  Some, those who do not understand the law, want 1st degree charged.  It seems more forceful to them and so more satisfying.  It is also likely not apt.  I believe he was correctly charged, more or less.

Now, as to the officers who where not front and center on the video.  Those officers where compressing his chest and his diaphragm, respectively.  They did not do something less heinous than Officer Chauvin. They are equally culpable and should be charged the same.  Anyone who has ever been at the bottom of a dog pile knows how hard it is to breath with folks on top of you.  Anyone who has every had their breath knocked out of them knows how hard it is to breath if you can't get your diaphragm working.  The outrage missed them a bit because of their lack of camera time, but they are equally culpable.  It may end up being that they are more culpable for the actual death.  It may turn out that Officer Chauvin was pinning him down so that they could or did crush the life from him like pressing with stone back in the days of the witch trials, who knows"

The officer standing bye, preventing aid to the dying man.  He had a duty too to intervene, on behalf of Mr. Floyd.  He should be charged with that and probably as aiding and abetting the death. 

The time delay in charging -   Folks want to argue this shows disparity.  They say that it is not like other probable cause charges.  I agree.  In other murder instances the evidence is usually not on film, the perpetrator is not known, and the perpetrator may be able to obscure evidence or flee.  They need to be captured and arrested immediately. Not so here. There is no evidence to obscure and no escape possible. Also, this is a matter of exceeding color of authority, a slightly different evaluation on intent, force, recklessness.  Still, I get it.  Here is and was my concern, if charges are brought due to public pressure to stop riots rather than based upon an evaluation of evidence it is extremely likely that defense attorneys will argue that the prosecution was not based upon evidence but public pressure.  That will not get the officers off, but it may well be sufficient for a change of venue so that these officers do not answer to their community.  I remember the Rodney King prosecution happening in Simi valley, a key to his acquittal.  That change of venue likely changed the outcome.  That was a mistake not to be repeated.

Protests -  I support them.  I like mine orderly, and informative, essentially teaching moments with a call to specific, productive action.  Protest that have their only message being four word slogans repeated ad nauseum do not appeal to me, but then maybe they are not meant to, and that too is fine.

Riots/Looting -  Not protesting.  it disgusts me.  It is unlawful, dangerous, damaging of individual businesses, hardworking persons, and communities.  I wonder, after a solid night of looting when the neighbors come over the next day to watch a movie do they comment on the new big screen T.V.?  BTW, looters and rioters, and even disruptive protestors, if you interfere with me or mine unlawfully do not be surprised at my response if it is also unruly.  When one precipitates a crisis it is the height of foolishness to then complain how I react to an unanticipated crisis. You had time to contemplate your response, me, not so much.

Police Reform - Attitude begins when they don  their modern armor, their uniforms.  Jack boots, mirror glasses to hide their eyes and humanity, combat fatigues essentially, multiple weapons, tough guy black leather gloves, often more, all in dark and intimidating colors.  How about no jack boots but just shoes.  No mirrored sunglasses and sunglasses must be off when interacting verbally  with citizens.  No black leather gloves.  Uniforms designed in less intimidating colors, Sherwood forest green perhaps or maybe seafoam.  Maybe they won't feel like warriors, but like civil servants.

Their guns should go back to revolvers so that they do not have shoot em up fantasies.  Six shots for defense. If the situation looks like it will call for more, or does, an arrest team with greater firepower should be available.  Whenever guns are drawn or even unsnapped that ought to send an immediate call to a supervisor and to an arrest control team. Lets work on this technology. The supervisor ought to be able to view their always on bodycam in real time upon that notification, so too the responding arrest control team.  The officer will then be encouraged to think tactically rather than respond aggressively.

There should be less Terry stops, less frisking of citizens generally and specifically in traffic stops, fishing for other offenses.  Citizens with a bit of weed on them should not have to consider running or resisting frisks and other charges when they jay-walked or ran a red light.  Take the ticket and move on.  In the same vein policies on arrest should be clarified.  Currently many forces have an arrest option on misdemeanors.  Options are open to discretion and discretion can be abused.  Misdemeanants ought to be ticketed and released on scene.  Felons ought to be taken into custody.  This would lead to less conflict.

Police vehicles should be a nonthreatening and high visibility color except for undercover vehicles.  Again, attitude carries throughout the day.

Police dogs should not be shepherds, rotties, pits, or any other large, intimidating animal absent control by a swat or arrest team.  Drug dogs, search and rescue dogs, bomb sniffers, tracking animals should be friendly, non-visually intimidating breeds, labs, retrievers, spaniels, poodles.  Again this about not presenting intimidating power unless and until it is needed.

Shifts.  Officers should have one shift each week where they will not be confronting the population.  They can work reports, interact positively, teach, whatever, but there should be some decompression time.  They also should work arrest positions for three months with a one month rotation away from that before returning.  

Training -  Ought to start with extensive exposure to films of what happens when it goes bad.  Films from this incident would be effective, so too from Rodney King, and from Ferguson and others.  They need to know how quickly things can conflate when they #### up.  Training needs to emphasize conflict resolution, not imposition of order by force.

Unions and Union contracts.  Cops should negotiate for whatever they can get.  Cities need to hold their last two yearly paychecks based upon whether they had to pay any settlements that year.  Settlement amounts should come from all officers, equally.  That way they will have an interest in having their membership not protect bad officers, but to eliminate them.  No settlements, great, they get paid in full.  Settlements, well it may be a lean Christmas.  Incentivize self policing of the police instead of closing the ranks around bad officers.

Recruiting - Tuition incentives or waivers for diversity hires so that they can get through POST training and academies.  If you want more of something, incentivize it.

Discipline - Should be with the Chief and the Chief's employment should be at will and subject to review by Council.  Chiefs should not have golden parachutes in their contracts. Chiefs should not fear the Unions when they discipline.  If their discipline is not adequate then they are directly answerable to their Councils and those politicians are, of course, answerable to the voters.  Bad officers will get removed.  Oh, discipline should be subject to open records requests.

 

Be nice to one another.  Cooperate with Joe a bit better, he is a pretty amiable host.

Edited by Ditkaless Wonders
  • Like 13
  • Thanks 2
  • Love 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ditkaless Wonders said:

 

Members

16,204

31,897 posts

Gender:Not Telling

Report post

Posted 4 minutes ago

I have been contacted by several posters for my thoughts.  I struggled with coming back even on a limited basis to share them, yet I do not want to be antisocial to the good folks here.  Given that I decided to relent for one post.

 

The death -  Everyone wants to concentrate on the one officer with his knee on George Floyd's neck, because it is visual and shocking.  I agree.  it was beyond any lawful force.  it was beyond any color of law. it was punitive and officers are not authorized to be punitive.   He should have been fired, and was, and should be prosecuted, and is.  Some, those who do not understand the law, want 1st degree charged.  it seems more forceful to them and so more satisfying.  it is also likely not apt.  I believe he was correctly charged, more or less.

Now, as to the officers who where not front and center on the video.  Those officers where compressing his chest and his diaphragm, respectively.  They did not do something less heinous than Officer Chauvin. They are equally culpable and should be charged the same.  Anyone who has ever been at the bottom of a dog pile knows how hard it is to breath with folks on top of you.  Anyone who has every had their breath knocked out of them knows how hard it is to breath if you can't get you9r diaphragm working.  The outrage missed them a bit because of their lack of camera time, but they are equally culpable.

The officer standing bye, preventing aid to the dying man.  He had a duty too to intervene, on behalf of Mr. Floyd.  he should be charged with that and probably as aiding and abetting the death. 

The time delay in charging  Folks want to argue this shows disparity.  They say that it is not like other probable cause charges.  I agree.  In other murder instances the evidence is usually not on film, the perpetrator is not known, and the perpetrator may be able to obscure evidence or flee.  Not so here.  Also, this is a matter of exceeding color of authority, a slightly different evaluation on intent, force, recklessness.  Still, I get it.  Here is and was my concern, if charges are brought due to public pressure to stop riots rather than based upon an evaluation of evidence it is extremely likely that defense attorneys will argue that the prosecution was not based upon evidence but public pressure.  That will not get the officers off, but it may well be sufficient for a change of venue so that these officers do not answer to their community.

Protests  I support them.  I like mine orderly, and informative, essentially teaching moments with a call to specific, productive action.  Protest that have their only message being four word slogans repeated ad nauseum do not appeal to me, but then maybe they are not meant to, and that too is fine.

Riots/Looting  Not protesting.  it disgusts me.  It is unlawful, dangerous, damaging of individual businesses, hardworking persons, and communities.  I wonder, after a solid night of looting when the neighbors come over the next day to watch a movie do they comment on the new bid screen T.V.?  BTW, looters and rioters, and even disruptive protestors, if you interfere with me or mine unlawfully do not be surprised at my response if it is also unruly.  When one precipitates a crisis it is the height of foolishness to then complain how I react to an unanticipated crisis. You had time to contemplate your response, me, not so much.

Police Reform

Attitude begins when they doff their modern armor, their uniforms.  Jack boots, mirror glasses to hide their eyes and humanity, combat fatigues essentially, multiple weapons, tough guy black leather gloves, often more, all in dark and intimidating colors.  How about no jack boots but just shoes.  No mirrored sunglasses and sunglasses must be off when interacting verbal  with citizens.  No black leather gloves.  uniforms designed in less intimidating colors, Sherwood forest green perhaps or maybe seafoam.  

Their guns should go back to revolvers so that they do not have shoot em up fantasies.  Six shoots for defense.  if the situation looks like it will call for more, or does, an arrest team with greater firepower should be available.  Whenever guns are drawn or even unsnapped that ought to send an immediate call to a supervisor and to an arrest control team.  The supervisor ought to be able to view their always on bodycam in real time up[on that notification, so to the responding arrest control team.  The officer will then be encouraged to think tactically rather than respond aggressively.

Police vehicles should be a nonthreatening and high visibility color except for undercover vehicles.  Again, attitude carries throughout the day.

Police dogs should not be shepherds, rotties, pits, or any other large, intimidating animal absent control by a swat or arrest team.  Drug dogs, search and rescue dogs, bomb sniffers, tracking animals should be friendly, non-visually intimidating breeds, labs, retrievers, spaniels, poodles.  Again this about not presenting intimidating power unless and until it is needed.

Shifts.  Officers should have one shift each week where they will not be confronting the population.  the can work reports, interact positively, teach, whatever, but there should be some decompression time.  They also should work arrest positions for three months with a one month rotation away from that before returning.

Training  Ought to start with extensive exposure to films of what happens when it goes bad.  Films from this incident would be effective, so too from Rodney King, and from Ferguson and others.  They need to know how quickly things can conflate when they #### up.  Training needs to emphasize conflict resolution, not imposition of order by force.

Unions and Union contracts.  Cops should negotiate for whatever they can get.  Cities need to hold their last two yearly paychecks based upon whether they had to pay any settlements that year.  Settlement amounts should come from all officers, equally.  That way they will have an interest in having their membership not protect bad officers, but to eliminate them.  No settlements, great, they get paid.  Settlements, well it may be a lean Christmas.

Recruiting - Tuition incentives or waivers for diversity hires so that they can get through POST training and academies.  

Discipline - should be with the Chief and the Chief's employment should be at will and subject to review by Council.  Chiefs should not have golden parachutes in their contracts. 

 

Be nice to one another.  Cooperate with Joe a bit better, he is a pretty amiable host.

Thank you GB. Please post more often. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bigbottom said:

Didn’t the Obama administration enact regulations to remove police access to certain military weapons of war?  I would think that would be something you would support. (Also, those regs were apparently rolled back by the Trump administration.)

Obama’s order actually carved out an exception for local police forces to acquire the Bearcats used in Ferguson.  

Images of police in armored vehicles patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Mo., last summer like soldiers in a war zone contributed to President Obama's executive order this week to curb the flow of military-grade gear to local law enforcement.

So it would be natural to assume the Massachusetts company that manufactured some of those $350,000 bulletproof trucks is worried about losing business.

It isn't.

The president's decision to curtail federal funding for what he called "equipment made for the battlefield" won't apply to certain vehicles made by Lenco Armored Vehicles in Pittsfield, whose eight-ton BearCats are used by all four military branches and rank among the most popular police SWAT trucks in the country. ..

The ban explicitly states that it only covers vehicles like tanks that "utilize a tracked system instead of wheels for forward motion," and the BearCat operates on wheels, not a track...

The exclusion of BearCats and similar wheeled vehicles from the new White House list of prohibited equipment could allow law enforcement agencies to continue buying them on Uncle Sam's dime — and using them on the scenes of protests like those in Ferguson, where Lenco trucks rolled through town with snipers on the roof, and more recently in Baltimore.

"We had a grand gesture of a presidential directive to rein in military armament, but every single item — including the armored personnel carriers — is toothless," said Peter Kraska, who studies police militarization as the graduate program chair at Eastern Kentucky University's School of Justice Studies. "They literally will lead to no changes."

Being slightly less awful than Trump isn’t good enough anymore.  Democrats have generally been fine to watch the police state spiral out of control.  It is largely Dem govs/mayors presiding over much of this.  The Dem House approves Trump’s massive military budgets and surveillance powers.  They are complicit and an equal part of the problem.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Andy Dufresne said:

Be reasonable. You know it's just not the type of potentially dangerous situation you put the President in. 

A few days after the Kent State massacre in 1970 Richard Nixon went to the Lincoln Memorial and talked to anti-war protestors. 

  • Thinking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Natasha Bertrand@NatashaBertrand

 

“Attorney General William P. Barr personally ordered law enforcement officials on the ground to extend the perimeter around Lafayette Square just before President Trump spoke Monday, a Justice Department official said.”

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The General said:

What did Obama do to escalate this? Was it the tan suit?

what happened under his leadership, under his administration and presidency is his to own

he had 8 years to deescalate and yet here we are 3 1/2 years later, with maybe worse problems that I've seen in 25 years with the allowed violence/rioting/looting

again, in almost every year, after Obama tensions were worse than before those 8 years  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Andy Dufresne said:

Zero chance the Secret Service allows that. Absolutely none.

he's the President - he could have done it and it WOULD have been impressive

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Insomniac said:

A few days after the Kent State massacre in 1970 Richard Nixon went to the Lincoln Memorial and talked to anti-war protestors. 

As a planned & controlled event, sure.

It's something Trump should do - but it wasn't going to happen the other night 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tri-man 47 said:

That's my thinking.   The SS could have allowed it to happen, but not with the risk of the hostility that would quite certainly have occurred. And so yes, that speaks volumes about the disconnect between Donald Trump and the American people.

Right....the SS has final say on all of that.  To overrule them there's a pretty lengthy process.  I have an inquiry in to my buddy on Pence's detail to see what that entails.  I'll report back what he says.  He was on Trump's travel detail at the very beginning and asked for a transfer off, so he got stuck with Pence.  Before that he was at Camp David.  He opines for that position today though during the time he was miserably bored most days.  :lol: 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Turns out only damage to one door at the donut shop, not broken windows everywhere as I feared. Things are very calm this morning. Hopefully they stay that way. 

As an aside is it an old school donut shop or a lousy chain

Edited by HellToupee
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Insomniac said:

A few days after the Kent State massacre in 1970 Richard Nixon went to the Lincoln Memorial and talked to anti-war protestors. 

If he went there today, he would see the Lincoln and War memorial covered with graffitti.  Maybe go to Saint Patricks Cathedral.  That was vandelized too.  Very classy.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

what happened under his leadership, under his administration and presidency is his to own

he had 8 years to deescalate and yet here we are 3 1/2 years later, with maybe worse problems that I've seen in 25 years with the allowed violence/rioting/looting

again, in almost every year, after Obama tensions were worse than before those 8 years  

What did he do to escalate tension?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

The cop was arrested and justice is going to be served.  In the later case there were no burning down of businesses, no looting, no violence.  The most violent protests tend to be from the left. 

The left coincidentally represents a majority of the people that are suffering Covid-19, mass unemployment, slashing of welfare state, being told to "return to work" with no health insurance or sick leave, and getting murdered and abused by police.  I'm struggling to remember what the grievances of the oppressed were the last time the "left" was in power nationally, I think it had to do with deficit spending?

  • Like 4
  • Thinking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

what happened under his leadership, under his administration and presidency is his to own

he had 8 years to deescalate and yet here we are 3 1/2 years later, with maybe worse problems that I've seen in 25 years with the allowed violence/rioting/looting

again, in almost every year, after Obama tensions were worse than before those 8 years  

You didn't answer his question.  I know that's your shtick, but it's telling.  What we are seeing today in the streets isn't significantly different than what we saw in 1992 with Rodney King.  This has been going on for decades and decades.  Clearly that's something you don't want to acknowledge for whatever reason as you double down on "but Obama" at every opportunity.  

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Andy Dufresne said:

As a planned & controlled event, sure.

Not at all. It was early in the morning when he couldn't sleep. Later, he went to the capitol building. It was a very weird event.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, formerfourdigit said:

The left coincidentally represents a majority of the people that are suffering Covid-19, mass unemployment, slashing of welfare state, being told to "return to work" with no health insurance or sick leave, and getting murdered and abused by police.  I'm struggling to remember what the grievances of the oppressed were the last time the "left" was in power nationally, I think it had to do with deficit spending?

Seems like a short memory.  The BLM movement started during the Obama years.  The left were rioting over the same things, but those cases were a lot less clear cut than this one.  And cops were being targered by assassins.  

Edited by jon_mx
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

what happened under his leadership, under his administration and presidency is his to own

he had 8 years to deescalate and yet here we are 3 1/2 years later, with maybe worse problems that I've seen in 25 years with the allowed violence/rioting/looting

again, in almost every year, after Obama tensions were worse than before those 8 years  

If Obama would have just banned the internet we could have all gone back to believing the cops were justified when they killed someone just like back in the old days.  

  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m going to go out on a limb and say anything Obama did regarding “building up a militant police force” or and “law and order” steps he took were deemed not enough by most republicans and too much by progressives.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...