Widespread riots after Death of George Floyd V.2

[deadshot138]

I'm still amazed by the lax response by authorities to the riots. All talk about the US being a police state is obviously bunk. Protesters are allowed to basically burn down entire blocks of businesses with minimal resistance. Understand the difference between what's happening in the US and the reaction to such violence in an actual police state. Cities are burning and the response from the state is to watch. Guess there really is freedom in the US. I mean, all talk about police brutality in this context is hilarious. What do you actually expect to happen? Monopoly on violence is the main purpose of the state, because without it there is none.

Its simple. If you try to stop the rioters, you're racist. Even though they're white antifa supremacists from a different state.

 

[Winter-John]

We went over to the protests at the local courthouse the other night. There was a big crowd. No violence, no looting, the local cops joined in with the chants. At the end of the night it was more of a party than a protest. Obviously we don't have the same kind of racial tensions here, but I think it should be pointed that not every protest has descended into violence and anarchy.

 

[ElKarlo]

wheres all the gun americans.

That was messed-up. If they're attacking like that, defending yourself via firearm discharging is justified. Rooftop koreans knew what was up

 

[brackis1]

We went over to the protests at the local courthouse the other night. There was a big crowd. No violence, no looting, the local cops joined in with the chants. At the end of the night it was more of a party than a protest. Obviously we don't have the same kind of racial tensions here, but I think it should be pointed that not every protest has descended into violence and anarchy.

Where?

 

[Orgasmo]

Watched the video of the Fed Ex truck guy. He was still alive all fucked up between the trailers. The pain must have been unimaginable. And the cop standing over him was laughing according to whomever was taking the video. Maybe there IS a problem between law enforcement and minorities in America.

Maybe he shouldn't have been looting the truck.

 

[nac386]

This is as close to advocating for violence as you can get, without actually saying it. The advice she's giving is not protest advice, it's riot advice.

 

[deadshot138]

Maybe he shouldn't have been looting the truck.

That's a given and he played a stupid game and won a stupid prize.

 

[Hard To Tell]

lol at the mods deleting posts linking FBI crime statistics. Fucking pathetic.

 

[Madmick]

It's clear that you see all the protesters as criminal and thus any action done by the police to anybody among them (some who aren't even protesters like the Wave3 news team) as legitimate. In my posts I've made a distinction between protesters and looters/vandals. That fact that you can't do that is partisan blindness. I made a statement in my first response to you that I don't agree with looting, property destruction, or violence against others. Yet here you are gripping onto it. That's being intellectually dishonest.

Wrong.

It's clear you don't have a cogent rebuttal to my argument, and that's why you're casting this strawman. It's also clear you don't understand my argument because at no point have I asserted (or insinuated) that all the protesters are criminals. My argument is predicated on the fact there are rampant looters and criminals taking part in the protest including some doing so on behalf of the protest. Saying you disapprove of them is meaningless. Disapproval offers no value towards a remedy. They exist, and they are the cause of the police misconduct you are freshly alleging.

Thus, if one wants this to end, they must address the cause of this chaos. That is the protesters, and more broadly the rhetoric which has fomented them.

You insist the real cause are the cops like those who arrested Floyd, but they have been fired or arrested on criminal charges, and clearly aren't directly responsible for the conduct of these citizens. Furthermore, I have pointed out that those who disapprove of police misconduct have (and have had) access to a peaceful, democratic political system to advance their cause. Throwing a tantrum that harms everyone because progress doesn't satisfy their ideological rigidity only demonstrates that these people aren't capable of participation in the very kind of just, fair, impartial state they demand.

They insist the government are the bullies, the police their unpunished bulldogs, but they are protesting this so-called violent rule with violence. What's the key difference? The police are afforded the right to violence by the citizenry themselves. They are agents of the state, and they reflect the authority of this state, made up by its citizens, which is the authority to deploy violence to maintain the order of its sovereign laws. If they abuse this authority, we subject them to the same rule of law. If you don't like how they are handled, or argue that it is unjust, then you work to influence different outcomes peacefully and democratically.

These protesters haven't earned and aren't licensed with any such authority. Thus, they are terrorists.

One enables the terrorists by not denouncing them if one refuses to do so simply because he disapproves of these state-ordained outcomes. Saying "police misconduct is the heart of the matter" achieves precisely this. It justifies the acts of these terrorists by shifting the blame to the state.

The blame for the calamity of these protests lies with the protesters alone.

 

[HeffDoesWant]

Why aren't more people talking about how huge the guy was? People are saying pressure on the head or neck wasn't necessary, but the guy was like 6'7" 300 + lbs. Maybe it was and it just sucks he had medical problems?

They are not though. Everyone agrees that the officer used excessive force and he's been charged. What these stats highlight is that black brutality is actually way more prevalent and way more of a problem than any wrong doing by others. They are used to challange and disprove the false narrative that black people are disproportionately the victims of racial violence and murder. They are OVERWHELMINGLY the perpetrators.

Hard to tell meet superpunch

Police brutality is bad, very bad, but if I hit you in the face that doesn’t give you the right to hit a random woman in the face because of outrage. It’s not rocket science.

Can you quote when I said otherwise??

Feels like you've won an argument no one else is having.

 

[Rob Battisti]

I forget, did Trump label ANTIFA a terrorist organization? Can’t see how we can’t do that now.

 

[Winter-John]

Where?

Over in Missoula. Obviously there aren't a lot of black folk here but it was a pretty good turnout.

 

[MTT]

Has evidence been put forth that the officer charged was racially biased in his motives via past complaints? There was a photo of him in a MAGA hat that seemed to be debunked (as if MAGA hat is proof of anything). I haven't seen anything since - a man of different color killing someone isn't racist. Maybe this information is out there but so much emotion I can't find it. Is it possible this guy was a poorly trained lunatic unfit for the position and not racist? In a good society, that would be an important distinction to make if fixing a problem was the end goal. Any black leaders asking these uncomfortable but critical questions? It seems auto assumed everything the media and now local government puts forward is fact - ie these are out-of-state white supremacists inciting riots. As if eyeballs don't exist. Very weird times.. a disservice to any injustice that could exist if these things aren't confronted.

 

[ElKarlo]

This is as close to advocating for violence as you can get, without actually saying it. The advice she's giving is not protest advice, it's riot advice.

Oh woe is I. My poor district, full of poverty and colored people, now that it's burned down by white supremacists, what shall we do?

 

[Mike]

What's the solution?

To complain and feel outraged I guess. Whoever is the most outraged wins!

 

[ElKarlo]

lol at the mods deleting posts linking FBI crime statistics. Fucking pathetic.

Yep statistics and math are racist now. So soon will be videos of riots

 

[deltapapha]

Here is an example of the knee to neck maneuver used by cops last night. Seattle PD

anyone have any knowledge of that technique used by cops besides just what they have read since the Floyd death?

 

[original doom]

are they really spinning the white supremicist angle ?

 

[Magooglie]

Wrong.

It's clear you don't have a cogent rebuttal to my argument, and that's why you're casting this strawman. It's also clear you don't understand my argument because at no point have I asserted (or insinuated) that all the protesters are criminals. My argument is predicated on the fact there are rampant looters and criminals taking part in the protest including some doing so on behalf of the protest. Saying you disapprove of them is meaningless. Disapproval offers no value towards a remedy. They exist, and they are the cause of the police misconduct you are freshly alleging.

Thus, if one wants this to end, they must address the cause of this chaos. That is the protesters, and more broadly the rhetoric which has fomented them.

You insist the real cause are the cops like those who arrested Floyd, but they have been fired or arrested on criminal charges, and clearly aren't directly responsible for the conduct of these citizens. Furthermore, I have pointed out that those who disapprove of police misconduct have (and have had) access to a peaceful, democratic political system to advance their cause. Throwing a tantrum that harms everyone because progress doesn't satisfy their ideological rigidity only demonstrates that these people aren't capable of participation in the very kind of just, fair, impartial state they demand.

They insist the government are the bullies, the police their unpunished bulldogs, but they are protesting this so-called violent rule with violence. What's the key difference? The police are afforded the right to violence by the citizenry themselves. They are agents of the state, and they reflect the authority of this state, made up by its citizens, which is the authority to deploy violence to maintain the order of its sovereign laws. If they abuse this authority, we subject them to the same rule of law. If you don't like how they are handled, or argue that it is unjust, then you work to influence different outcomes peacefully and democratically.

These protesters haven't earned and aren't licensed with any such authority. Thus, they are terrorists.

One enables the terrorists by not denouncing them if one refuses to do so simply because he disapproves of these state-ordained outcomes. Saying "police misconduct is the heart of the matter" achieves precisely this. It justifies the acts of these terrorists by shifting the blame to the state.

The blame for the calamity of these protests lies with the protesters alone.

You still have not addressed the police inflicting violence on news reporters, elderly people/people not involved in the protests, and peaceful protesters, which my post was specifically and originally about and you got broadly upset about because I decided to share that the police were doing wrong actions to the wrong people. You set up an entire argument on why police can inflict violence on looters and vandals, which I do not actually argue against, and yet still do not address what my original post was about. Talk about setting up a strawman, you just did it. Looters and vandals are responsible for their actions. And so are police. You are simply not holding police accountable for their actions. You may accuse me by saying having disapproval offers no value towards a remedy, but you simply have no disapproval towards any actions by the police which also offers no value towards a remedy. You don't even see that there is a problem with the actions that some of the police have taken.

 

[original doom]