George Floyd Thread

[Boopa1219]

10 minutes ago, southsideirish71 said:

• Ban chokeholds and strangleholds  Fine no problem

• Require de-escalation De-escalation is fine as long as its not an imminent threat. 

• Require warning before shooting  Well this depends on the situation.  I am not going to wait 20 minutes and banter with the suspect if he is openly shooting at me, or pointing a firearm at me, or is branishing a deadly weapon and moving toward me.  This is not the old west where I am going to quick draw mcgraw him.  There is a difference between pulling a weapon and warning a suspect to de-escalate.  There is another where I am not going to wait to see if he shoots me first before I return fire.  

• Exhaust all other means before shooting  Well this depends on the situation. If you feel your life or another life is in danger waiting for the person to be talked off a ledge is pointless. I agree in principle this is good, and most officers never want to discharge their weapon.  

• Duty to intervene and stop excessive force by other officers Fine no problem

• Ban shooting at moving vehicle A car can be a weapon.  There is a difference between someone shooting at a fleeing car vs a car charging at you.  So if the point is to stop shooting a fleeing vehicle sure.  If its a car charging at me.  Sorry I am shooting the bad guy and not telling them well I didnt shoot him but send my widow some flowers.

• Require use-of-force continuum This is fine.  But once again.  This cant turn into what LA was proposing.  I see a bad guy with a gun.  The police should leave to descalate the situation.  Well great.  Until the bad guy shoots your family member and you find out that a cop took off because the bad guy had a gun.  

• Require comprehensive reporting each time an officer uses forces or threatens to do so This already pretty much happens

These are 8 steps I’d like to see taken but that’s just the first step, there’s more to be done. 
 

I’ve seen s lot if videos of cops doing this online but not on TV or other news outlets.

 

[StrangeSox]

2 minutes ago, Joshua Strong said:

I can’t feel if you’re being facetious but yes, not just in Minneapolis but nationwide, worldwide. 

There's at least a few good ones on the city council in Minneapolis

 

 

But overall, yes, our political leaders across the country have largely failed the test yet again.

[caulfield12]

https://www.startribune.com/minn-officials-push-for-systems-change-at-minneapolis-police-dept/570958652/
 

“We are going to establish peace on the streets when we address the systemic issues,” Walz said.

The move is the first time the Human Rights Department has launched a systemic investigation into the largest police department in the state.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey said an agreement with the state could be a needed catalyst for change that he considers to have been hindered over the years by the Minneapolis Police Federation, the department’s powerful police union.

“For years in Minneapolis, police chiefs and elected officials committed to change have been thwarted by police union protections and laws that severely limit accountability among police departments,” Frey said. “Breaking through those persistent barriers, shifting the culture of policing, and addressing systemic racism will require all of us working hand in hand.”

Minneapolis police union president Lt. Bob Kroll did not immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday. Kroll has been an outspoken critic of the city’s liberal leadership, which he faults for being anti-police and holding back on needed resources and manpower. In a letter to the rank-and-file, he blasted the city’s handling of the riots following Floyd’s death, saying officers had been made “scapegoats” for the continued violence.

Kroll was under fire from two of the state’s largest labor organizations. Education Minnesota and the state AFL-CIO called for his resignation.

[StrangeSox]

1 hour ago, southsideirish71 said:

Actually I was born in Ireland. I lived on the south side and I am Irish and I am a US citizen.   I also worked in law enforcement as well.  Most of the people I have encountered in law enforcement are in it for the right reasons.  They care about their job, they care about doing the right thing.  Just like any career like this you have people that should never be the police.  There is a sect that joins the police for the same reason they join the military.  The fantasy of power.  They are usually easy to identify, but once again.  The union makes it hard to weed them out.   Just like its hard to weed anyone out when you have a contract and collective bargaining.    The funding you speak of for the "military" style weapons are typically  part of grants  usually part of a federal program.  This is not the local tax dollars buying tanks.  Its a grant that gives you access to a specific item or items.  The local tax dollars are more for operational costs.  The police were uniforms.  Outside of the tactical side of the house which is special operations such as srt/swat the average police office wears a normal uniform and has a police car.  The police cars are manufactured by Ford/Chevy and are not military style.  They have a hopped up engine, some stabilizing bars, a barrier for the detained, a terminal.  They are typically painted ether to be very visible as a deterrent or dark for the ability to mask themselves typically for traffic interdiction.  They were bullet proof vests which are bulky.  They have their firearm, their secondary, a mag light, the less than lethal weapons, their star.   I dont know what you want them to wear.  

 

1 hour ago, southsideirish71 said:

Well Mr Day in Court.  Most of these are settled.  Like the one where a police friend of mine saw a car at 3am driving with its lights off.  He pulls behind it puts on the spotlight and runs the plate.  The car comes up stolen.  He then turns his lights on and the car takes off at a high rate of speed.  He pursues for about a mile then gets told to abandon the chase due to danger.  About 5 miles away, that same car who ran away at a high rate of speed blows out a tire and the car flips.  They arrest the two teenagers.  The parents get a lawyer and sue the police dept and the officers involved.  They settled it to make it go away.  Now would the police officer like to have his day in court. Sure.  His employer however wants to mitigate every case.  

And I am glad you are okay with the rioters because they have been oppressed.  I hope you were okay back in the 70s with my countrymen blowing up department stores in England because we were oppressed as well.   

Most of these never make it that far thanks to the thin blue line. We've video evidence of thousands of police abusing our fellow citizens in just the past few days, ranging from simple petty vandalism of smashing in car windows to violent beating random people walking home from work. Where are all the good cops turning the bad apples out of their ranks, naming and reporting them, testifying against them? They're still marching right along side them, probably also launching tear gas and rubber bullets into crowds of protesters.

 

1 hour ago, Balta1701 said:

This has been trending all day: https://www.gq.com/story/deray-mckesson-interview-8-cant-wait

 

•  

Banning the court-created Qualified Immunity is crucial as well.

[pcq]

I condemn all violence and vandalism however looting is a proud and standing tradition in US government. UAL received $85B and laid off all of their employees. 

[Butter Parque]

13 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

There's at least a few good ones on the city council in Minneapolis

 

 

But overall, yes, our political leaders across the country have largely failed the test yet again.

That is a very extreme idea.

You'd disband the police and then train-and-hire volunteers to patrol the most violent neighborhoods with the expectation of exclusively using non-violent tactics in order to keep the peace and maintain safety for the residents.

My guess is that by enacting that plan, George Floyd types are going to be left more vulnerable to violence than they are currently.

 

[Harry Chappas]

21 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

There's at least a few good ones on the city council in Minneapolis

 

 

But overall, yes, our political leaders across the country have largely failed the test yet again.

Should every citizen have respect for the rule of law and others that would be great. 

 

Unfortunately we have seen in the last week how people will react to their own vices.....and I am not speaking about protesters.    

[Jose Abreu]

For those who were asking about this earlier, here’s a twitter thread with 163 and counting unnecessary acts of violence by the police against protestors that are largely being unreported in the news: 

 

[caulfield12]

2 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

There's at least a few good ones on the city council in Minneapolis

 

 

But overall, yes, our political leaders across the country have largely failed the test yet again.

The tricky part of all this is unions, which are slowly being destroyed in this country.

It’s another of the many reasons so many corporations have outsourced manufacturing abroad, let’s be honest.  Lower costs, no complaints.  Robots, soon.  Obedient workers (like here in China) who can’t question the system, where suicide is the most common firm of redress.  Out of sight, out of mind, right?   Nobody really wants to know the conditions for those workers assembling our Iphone or the latest pair of Nikes.

More typically, having seen both sides of a public sector teacher’s union...are those who have never been a police officer or teacher, who can’t understand why, for example, a student would deliberately make false allegations in order to get a really good teacher that’s challenging and attempting to discipline them strictly out of the classroom.  

As, a society, it means we need to pay more, but also provide incentives for excellent performance in ways that are not so easily measured or quantified...and that’s where it gets challenging.  In order for unionized workers to give up some of their security/immunity/tenure...what is society willing to give back in exchange?   All I hear is complaints about vacation time and pensions, but there are two sides to every coin.

So how do we as a society create incentives to go into a law enforcement or teaching career if we are stripping away a lot of the protections?    Just wait for RoboCop and RoboTeacher to become realities?   Is that really going to be better...because we can code and create an algorithm for an AI-driven entity to follow, but there’s going to be a cost which we as a society definitely won’t like.  It can even be programmed to follow Balta’s Eight Directives, but do so in a way we disagree vehemently with...as southsideirish has explained.

[StrangeSox]

2 minutes ago, Butter Parque said:

That is a very extreme idea.

You'd disband the police and then train-and-hire volunteers to patrol the most violent neighborhoods with the expectation of exclusively using non-violent tactics in order to keep the peace and maintain safety for the residents.

My guess is that by enacting that plan, George Floyd types are going to be left more vulnerable to violence than they are currently.

 

Yes, it is a radical proposal. The idea of depolicing is that the funding would be shifted to community services like education, housing, food, and health care that would reduce the things that drive crime and violence in the first place. You don't just flip a switch and disband all police forces and police powers over night. What you do is you start shifting resources and, crucially, responsibilities away from the police. You move them to actual social workers, health care workers, jobs programs, things that can actually attack the causes of most crime at its root. Tasking the police with handling all of that after the fact is setting up for failure and violence over and over and over again.

If you want a more thorough examination of the idea of depolicing, a recent book examining the idea has been made available for free download by the publisher:

https://www.versobooks.com/books/2426-the-end-of-policing

There's a recent interview with the author here to give a flavor.

https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2020/06/03/457251670/how-much-do-we-need-the-police

Quote

 

One of the arguments you make in The End of Policing is that police are being asked to do too much. They're basically being tasked with addressing every social problem that we have. So what are police asked to do? And what should they be asked to do?

One of the problems that we're encountering here is this massive expansion in the scope of policing over the last 40 years or so. Policing is now happening in our schools. It's happening in relation to the problems of homelessness, untreated mental illness, youth violence and some things that we historically associate police with.

But the policing has become more intensive, more invasive, more aggressive. So what I'm calling for is a rethink on why we've turned all of these social problems over to the police to manage. And as we dial those things back, then we can think more concretely about what the rest of policing should look like and how that could be reformed.

 

You brought up homelessness. In many cities police are tasked with dealing with people experiencing homelessness — but they don't have many options besides basically moving people or arresting them.

Well, we've created this situation where our political leaders have basically abandoned the possibility of actually housing people. Which, of course, is the real solution, supportive housing for those who need extra support. But basically, we have a massive failure in housing markets that is unable to provide basic shelter for millions of Americans.

So instead of actually addressing that fundamental problem, we have relabeled it as a problem that is the fault of the disorderly people who we label as morally deficient. And then we use police to criminalize them, to control their behavior and to reduce their disorderly impact on the rest of us. And this is perverse and unjust. So then it places police in this completely untenable situation, because they completely lack the tools to make this problem any better. And yet we've told them it's their problem to manage. ...

Part of our misunderstanding about the nature of policing is we keep imagining that we can turn police into social workers. That we can make them nice, friendly community outreach workers. But police are violence workers. That's what distinguishes them from all other government functions. ... They have the legal capacity to use violence in situations where the average citizen would be arrested.

So when we turn a problem over to the police to manage, there will be violence, because those are ultimately the tools that they are most equipped to utilize: handcuffs, threats, guns, arrests. That's what really is at the root of policing. So if we don't want violence, we should try to figure out how to not get the police involved.

There are obviously a lot of people who agree broadly with the notion that the way that policing happens in this country is a problem and that there needs to be some sort of change. But they're pretty invested in the idea that police are needed to maintain public safety. People ask the question, without police, what do you do when someone gets murdered? What do you do when someone's house gets robbed? What do you say to those people who have those concerns?

Well, I'm certainly not talking about any kind of scenario where tomorrow someone just flips a switch and there are no police. What I'm talking about is the systematic questioning of the specific roles that police currently undertake, and attempting to develop evidence-based alternatives so that we can dial back our reliance on them. And my feeling is that this encompasses actually the vast majority of what police do. We have better alternatives for them.

Even if you take something like burglary — a huge amount of burglary activity is driven by drug use. And we need to completely rethink our approach to drugs so that property crime isn't the primary way that people access drugs. We don't have any part of this country that has high-quality medical drug treatment on demand. But we have policing on demand everywhere. And it's not working.

Obviously, a big part of what is on people's minds right now is the role that police have in dealing with protesters, dealing with different types of political unrest. In your book, you talk a lot about the history of how police have been used to quell social unrest. Can you talk about that history a little bit?

Well, I think that one of the myths we have about policing is that it is politically neutral, and that it is always here to sort of create order in a way that benefits everyone. But the reality is that America's social order has never been entirely equitable. We have a long history of exploitation of the Indigenous population, of African Americans through slavery, Jim Crow and today.

And while we're not using police to manage slavery or colonialism today, we are using police to manage the problems that our very unequal system has produced. We're invested in this kind of austerity politics that says the government can't afford to really do anything to lift people up. We have to put all our resources into subsidizing the already most successful parts of the economy. But those parts of the economy are producing this huge group of people who are homeless, unemployed, have untreated mental health and substance abuse problems. And then we ask the police to put a lid on those problems — to manage them so they don't interfere with the "order" that we're supposedly all benefiting from.

But if you're one of those poor people, one of those folks with a mental health problem, someone who's involved in black market activities to survive, then you experience this as constant criminalization.

 

[...]

 

 

[pcq]

4 minutes ago, Harry Chappas said:

Should every citizen have respect for the rule of law and others that would be great. 

 

Unfortunately we have seen in the last week how people will react to their own vices.....and I am not speaking about protesters.    

The big box stores have been busy with shoppers getting a 100% discount. My own focus would be west side neighborhoods which have not changed much since MLK-1968. I resent white people who don't want to be bothered with having to hear about disadvantaged people. 

[caulfield12]

13 minutes ago, pcq said:

I condemn all violence and vandalism however looting is a proud and standing tradition in US government. UAL received $85B and laid off all of their employees. 

Ah, yes, the Legalized looting of our government.  Billionaires taking a massive tax loss to avoid paying any taxes over a decade.  Mortgage companies and banks not being held responsible for creating more systemic risk...moral hazards leading to bailout after bailout for flawed corporate/capitalistic structures with no end in sight.   Everyday Americans being held prisoner by those meant to represent their best interests, but watching them invariably corrupted by power and/or lobbying.

 

Nearly 82% of the benefits from the tax law change will go to people making $1m or more annually in 2020, according to an analysis by the joint committee on taxation (JCT). Overall, 95% of individuals who benefit from the change make $200,000 or more.

Taxpayers will lose nearly $90bn from the change, which suspends a restriction introduced in the 2017 tax bill.

The change allows owners of businesses known as pass-through entities to lower their taxes by deducting as much as they want against income unrelated to the business.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/15/tax-change-coronavirus-stimulus-act-millionaires-billionaires

[Texsox]

3 hours ago, raBBit said:

What is your source here? Not consistent with what's been reported and the dialogue in the truckers community. Seems like this guy was unaware of the protest occurring on the highway and was just doing his job when he caught a beating from the protesters. Luckily some of the protesters protected him from further damage. 

The highway was supposed to be shutdown/barricaded and wasn't yet as acknowledge by city officials. The truck driver didn't bypass any barricades or anything like that. Minnesota's Safety Commissioner said he had no intent to harm protesters. 

The local gas station owner he was en route to (a black man) said that this individual was not racist and stated that the driver was making a badly needed delivery for him. 

https://www.startribune.com/truck-driver-didn-t-intend-to-hit-protesters-on-35w-bridge-state-officials-say/570925582/

https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/george-floyd/kare-11-investigates-semi-driver-didnt-target-protesters/89-0cf459f3-af33-45a0-a8f3-76fb2754bc25

Minor correction, he had just made a delivery to that station and was empty. 

[Texsox]

I can't find the quote now, but it was from the 60s I believe. Basically it spoke about the challenge of getting folks who are 100% against racism and all it's ugliness but also very much for respecting the law on board and working for change. I had never considered that before. 

Supporting the goal without supporting the path is probably the least anyone can do. Better, is finding an active path towards the goal you can take. I appreciate the corporations who have made public announcements in support of the protests and have gone slightly out of my way to shop there and tell them why. I'm looking at you REI (most recent). 

[StrangeSox]

Just now, Texsox said:

I can't find the quote now, but it was from the 60s I believe. Basically it spoke about the challenge of getting folks who are 100% against racism and all it's ugliness but also very much for respecting the law on board and working for change. I had never considered that before. 

Supporting the goal without supporting the path is probably the least anyone can do. Better, is finding an active path towards the goal you can take. I appreciate the corporations who have made public announcements in support of the protests and have gone slightly out of my way to shop there and tell them why. I'm looking at you REI (most recent). 

Letter from a Birmingham Jail has a few things to say about it but this paragraph gets to the heart of it.

https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html

I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection

[caulfield12]

12 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

Yes, it is a radical proposal. The idea of depolicing is that the funding would be shifted to community services like education, housing, food, and health care that would reduce the things that drive crime and violence in the first place. You don't just flip a switch and disband all police forces and police powers over night. What you do is you start shifting resources and, crucially, responsibilities away from the police. You move them to actual social workers, health care workers, jobs programs, things that can actually attack the causes of most crime at its root. Tasking the police with handling all of that after the fact is setting up for failure and violence over and over and over again.

If you want a more thorough examination of the idea of depolicing, a recent book examining the idea has been made available for free download by the publisher:

https://www.versobooks.com/books/2426-the-end-of-policing

There's a recent interview with the author here to give a flavor.

https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2020/06/03/457251670/how-much-do-we-need-the-police

 

In many ways, this is the Sweden/Finland/Norway/Denmark model, mixed with a Michael Moore best practices documentary.

Definitely higher taxes, more equitable overall societies (1950’s and 60’s individual and corporate rates)...by investing in better teachers and systems, creating more opportunity, decriminalizing some or many drugs, cutting down on the prison/industrial/military complex, you’re on your way...to what the beneficiaries of our current system will argue is socialism.

Otoh, if we wipe out 70-80% of the American people continuing along on our current downward trajectory of debt service and worker displacement/redundancy, there will be an increasingly diminishing domestic consumption market for the producers of any particular good or service.

 

[Texsox]

4 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

Letter from a Birmingham Jail has a few things to say about it but this paragraph gets to the heart of it.

https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html

I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection

It certainly can be taken to an extreme. 

But, if we really took King's quote to heart we would all be looting. I can't believe I have to toss a brick through a window to support equality and the end of racism. 

[pcq]

I predict nothing will change except for a few more law and order talking points and bizarro behavior at the White House. 

[caulfield12]

https://eand.co/its-the-twenty-first-century-why-is-everything-still-so-goddamned-racist-5ea49ed03ed5
Why Racism Still Defines Our Lives and Poisons Our Societies — And Why It’s So Hard to Unravel

If you really want to be challenged/irritated on the issue of white privilege and white guilt...and find yourself incapable of listening to grievances put forth by people of color...here is a perfect 12 minute read that will definitely provoke some sort of emotional reaction.

When I read it, I was actually thinking “how would Balta respond to THIS dude???”

[southsideirish71]

42 minutes ago, Butter Parque said:

That is a very extreme idea.

You'd disband the police and then train-and-hire volunteers to patrol the most violent neighborhoods with the expectation of exclusively using non-violent tactics in order to keep the peace and maintain safety for the residents.

 My guess is that by enacting that plan, George Floyd types are going to be left more vulnerable to violence than they are currently.

 

Good luck with that.  The first gang banger who decides to disobey your volunteer non-violent force.  Good luck arresting anyone that has a weapon.  It will be the wild west.  

[SoxAce]

I would just like to say @Joshua Strong, your post have been very good to read in this thread and you definitely "get it". Thank you. 

[southsider2k5]

47 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

Letter from a Birmingham Jail has a few things to say about it but this paragraph gets to the heart of it.

https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html

I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection

I was just talking about this letter yesterday when people were misquoting Martin.  It reads like was written for right now, 55 years later.

[southsider2k5]

44 minutes ago, Texsox said:

It certainly can be taken to an extreme. 

But, if we really took King's quote to heart we would all be looting. I can't believe I have to toss a brick through a window to support equality and the end of racism. 

If you read the whole letter, he isn't calling for everyone to loot, or any other law breaking,. but he is making it clear that the longer you ignore racial equality, the more likely you make it that you will see this kinds of incidents happen.

[Texsox]

52 minutes ago, pcq said:

I predict nothing will change except for a few more law and order talking points and bizarro behavior at the White House. 

The change I'm seeing are corporations making strong statements. That might seem minor, but those are the same folks who fund political campaigns. It also shows where the economics is lining up. The cynic in me believes that twenty years ago it would have hurt financially for a main stream company to come out against the police and racism. Now it seems that the economics has switched. Follow the money as they say. 

I'm praying we'll look back on Trump's term in office as when racism jumped the shark. 

[Jack Parkman]

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

If you read the whole letter, he isn't calling for everyone to loot, or any other law breaking,. but he is making it clear that the longer you ignore racial equality, the more likely you make it that you will see this kinds of incidents happen.

Bingo.

Also, though an incident of police brutality started the protests, it's about far more than only that at this point, given the number of people protesting in cities around the country. 

Besides overt racism, it's also about the following: 

Widespread economic disenfranchisement

Mass Incarceration

Commodification of every aspect of human life

Placing a greater value on money, goods and services than human life. 

Placing too much value on individualism and not nearly enough on community and the humanity of their fellow human beings. 

And all of these things affect black people, then other minority groups a lot more than your average white folks....but even a subset of them are not immune from these injustices. 

All of the above are sins of the United States at this point in our history

Edited June 3, 2020 by Jack Parkman