US Anti-Police Protests and Riots Thread III

[Fahran]

"CoMmUnITy pOliCinG"
i'm sorry 'ran i like you but "community policing" isn't actually a proper response to the problems of law enforcement
it's just the same old thing with a PR spin

Community policing is what has been demanded by some activists. That said, even among those not demanding a greater commitment to community policing, there's an ostensible consensus that defunding the police and funding social services is the broad means by which both criminality and police brutality can be addressed. There's some merit to the idea given what we know about criminality from sociological studies. Why not let folks try it out in whatever manner the local community elects to pursue? A couple hundred officers and as much income as tenable distributed from the wealthy and police to disenfranchised and poor areas, with volunteer communal institutions doing more of the heavy lifting. It'll give us some additional insight about the sociological function of policing and will let us know if these ideas work.

[Vassenor]

Are we really supposed to be feeling sorry for someone who charged an innocent person with a knife? Use of force is justified when someone's life is in danger.

As hers was. Which is why she called the police in the first place.

[Kowani]

"CoMmUnITy pOliCinG"
i'm sorry 'ran i like you but "community policing" isn't actually a proper response to the problems of law enforcement
it's just the same old thing with a PR spin

Community policing is what has been demanded by some activists. That said, even among those not demanding a greater commitment to community policing, there's an ostensible consensus that defunding the police and funding social services is the broad means by which both criminality and police brutality can be addressed. There's some merit to the idea given what we know about criminality from sociological studies. Why not let folks try it out in whatever manner the local community elects to pursue? A couple hundred officers and as much income as tenable distributed from the wealthy and police to disenfranchised and poor areas, with volunteer communal institutions doing more of the heavy lifting. It'll give us some additional insight about the sociological function of policing and will let us know if these ideas work.

my opinion of activists who continue to push the same ideas of community policing that have been pushed for the last few decades is, unsurprisingly, low
defunding and reallocating that money to social services, i have no criticisms of (except maybe the lack of a push for the reinstatement of federal revenue sharing, but that's next-level stuff)

[Ifreann]

Even When Residents Call For Their Help, Minneapolis Police Won’t Go Near 38th & Chicago

This is what a police less community looks like.

From the article

Scanner audio from Thursday morning tells the story of a domestic assault victim, calling 911 for help from her home near 38th Street and Elliot Avenue.

“Is it possible to have her move at least a block away maybe 38th and 10th. Copy she is bleeding and cut everywhere but we’ll call her back and ask her to move a block away,” the audio scanner says

.

Why should the wants and wishes of white ancoms from the suburbs override local POC residents?

What do those wishes have to do with anything?

And incidentally, saying "ancom" is redundant, the adjective is inherently implied by the noun. You may as well be saying "tall giraffe". Of course it's tall, it's a giraffe.

[Page]

"CoMmUnITy pOliCinG"
i'm sorry 'ran i like you but "community policing" isn't actually a proper response to the problems of law enforcement
it's just the same old thing with a PR spin

Community policing is what has been demanded by some activists. That said, even among those not demanding a greater commitment to community policing, there's an ostensible consensus that defunding the police and funding social services is the broad means by which both criminality and police brutality can be addressed. There's some merit to the idea given what we know about criminality from sociological studies. Why not let folks try it out in whatever manner the local community elects to pursue? A couple hundred officers and as much income as tenable distributed from the wealthy and police to disenfranchised and poor areas, with volunteer communal institutions doing more of the heavy lifting. It'll give us some additional insight about the sociological function of policing and will let us know if these ideas work.

An essential feature of meaningful community policing is that the community has proportional power over the police. Democratically elected review boards that do not simply keep track of what police do, but make decisions, like setting the parameters for acceptable use of force. It should be up to the community whether or not a cop is allowed to use a taser or pepper spray on someone passively resisting, whether or not a cop gets to chase a fleeing motorist, if things like public consumption of weed should be ignored, if instead of making arrests for non-dangerous crimes police issue notices to appear in court.

That would be real community policing.

[San Lumen]

Nope they are just being petty and spiteful. Stop acting like toddlers and do your job and if they wont do their jobs in all areas of the city resign from the force.

It's not them being petty and spiteful it's actually them respecting the people of the area, the people of the autonomous zones have decided they do not want police officers.

In this case it's like a US soldier deciding to walk through the part of Afghanistan that the Taliban has claimed, nothing good will come from that.

At this point these "Autonomous Zones" are more or less the left wing version of a right wing militia base in the woods, a place that local police officers are also not going to walk into unless they have permission because they don't want to be shot by a Neo Nazi.

Just like they're not going to enter these zones because they don't want to get shot by a Neo-Commie.

No one said that at all.

[Kowani]

A pilot program that has kept NYPD officers away from non-violent mental health crisis calls in favour of social workers in parts of Manhattan will expand to every precinct citywide

A pilot program that has kept NYPD officers away from many mental health crisis calls in parts of Manhattan will expand to every precinct citywide, Mayor Bill de Blasio (D) announced on Monday.

The program, tested this spring in three Harlem and East Harlem police precincts, relies on social workers and EMS to respond to non-violent mental health crisis calls.

“We’re now convinced that this approach is going to work citywide,” de Blasio said of the program during a budget briefing on Monday. “So, for mental health crisis calls, we’re going to take that civilian approach and use it in all precincts in the city in the course of the upcoming fiscal year.”

One in five New Yorkers struggle with mental illness, and 154,000 calls for help with mental illness came in to 911 dispatchers last year alone.

Police responses to some calls in the city have escalated to violence or even death, including the shooting deaths of Miguel Richards, Susan Muller and Deborah Danner. All of them suffered from mental illness; all were shot by NYPD officers during encounters inside their homes.

De Blasio said the COVID pandemic has made the importance of mental health — and how emergency calls are addressed — clearer than ever.

“If a family is in crisis, and it’s not a situation involving violence, we are going to send civilians to address those calls,” de Blasio added. “We have increasingly been using trained civilians prepared for exactly this kind of situation.”

The expanded citywide program is part of a multi-pronged approach to mental health, which also includes a new mobile treatment unit that will respond to more severe situations.

The unit will consist of 25 teams of highly trained professionals that can be quickly dispatched to the scene.

De Blasio also announced a new initiative that will train community-based organizations and peer counselors on how to handle mental health needs right in their community.

“The whole idea is to make sure that any community organization has mental health capacity built into it,” he added.

[The Republic of Fore]

Are we really supposed to be feeling sorry for someone who charged an innocent person with a knife? Use of force is justified when someone's life is in danger.

As hers was. Which is why she called the police in the first place.

Still doesn't change that charging someone with a knife in front of a police officer makes you a moron. If you want to avoid getting shot, try not doing that.

[The Lone Alliance]

Are we really supposed to be feeling sorry for someone who charged an innocent person with a knife? Use of force is justified when someone's life is in danger.

As hers was. Which is why she called the police in the first place.

Actually it's suggested that she didn't

Considering that no one else involved in the situation had a knife but her it's pretty hard to see her calling the police on herself.

If Bryant was really in danger from a knife welding person, where was this other knife and this other person, the person she tried to stab in front of the cop had no knife in her hand and was only armed with a small dog that she was holding in both hands and thus was in no position to attack Bryant in any way possible.

No one said that at all.

The police weren't the ones who created these Autonomous zones.

[Kowani]

Hundreds of cases in DC being investigated for shitty behaviour at the crime lab

Prosecutors say they are prepared to reexamine hundreds of open cases and convictions, if necessary, following a series of probes into the District’s crime lab, including an ongoing criminal investigation that centers on allegations that senior leaders concealed conflicting findings and pressured examiners to change results in a firearms case.

Testifying at a marathon D.C. Council oversight roundtable Thursday on the operations of the troubled Department of Forensic Sciences, defense attorneys and prosecutors alike expressed grave concerns about the lab’s firearms casework and agency leadership. They ultimately suggested the allegations against the lab could upend the criminal justice system in D.C.

The investigation into the lab, which is being carried out by the D.C. Office of Inspector General, is still ongoing and its findings have not yet been disclosed.

“I want to be clear about what’s at stake here: the integrity of scientific evidence in the District’s most serious criminal cases, faith in the validity of criminal convictions and public safety in the District of Columbia,” said D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine. He added, “This goes to the heart of the criminal justice system.” Racine’s office, along with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for D.C., first launched an audit of the lab’s firearms casework last spring following the discovery of errors in a 2015 case in which several lab examiners linked cartridge casings from two different killings to the same gun. DFS Director Dr. Jenifer Smith, who has led the agency since 2015, did not testify before the committee.

Council member Charles Allen, who chairs the council’s public safety committee, voiced “extreme displeasure” at Smith’s absence, calling it “deeply troubling” that she didn’t appear before the committee to answer questions. He noted that she signed an oath under penalty of perjury when she was being confirmed to her post to appear before District lawmakers in response to any request. Acting Deputy Mayor for Public Safety and Justice Chris Geldart, who was appointed to his post just three months ago, testified instead. He said the decision for him to appear before the committee instead of Smith was made by the mayor’s office.

In recent weeks, the deputy mayor said he has been “working to listen to anyone with concerns about DFS management and processes” and said he was interested in discussing “a way forward for the forensic science lab.”

In addition to the criminal probe, the lab had its accreditation to perform a wide array of forensic testing suspended earlier this month, halting some processing of evidence amid an ongoing spike in homicides in the District.

Geldart told the committee that the District has been informed by the ANSI National Accrediting Board that the lab’s accreditation would be withdrawn entirely on May 2, but that the lab planned to appeal the move.

The full withdrawal of lab accreditation comes just as jury trials in D.C. Superior Court are resuming following a pause during the coronavirus pandemic.

John Hill, chief of the Superior Court Division in the U.S. Attorney’s Office, said there are currently 900 pending cases that his office is prosecuting that rely in some form on DFS examination work.

“As trials resume, questions will have to be asked and answered regarding to what extent we rely upon the work that’s already been performed in those cases,” Hill said.

Racine, whose office prosecutes juvenile offenses in the District, said lawyers in his office are already doing preliminary work on what he said would be a “robust” review of convictions prosecuted by his office, in which DFS examiners conducted scientific analyses, identifying cases that will need to be looked into.

In addition, he said his office has six open juvenile homicide cases for which the District may have to hire costly private examiners to rework.

Katerina Semyonova, special counsel for policy and litigation at the Public Defender Service, which represents people accused of crimes in D.C. who cannot afford lawyers, said she is “deeply concerned” by the allegations against the lab. She said they indicate the lab has “corrupted criminal trials, led to inadvisable plea agreements and deprived District residents, who are charged in the criminal legal system, of a fair process.”

She said PDS doesn’t know how many cases have been affected by the multiple examiners whose work was flagged as either being faulty or subject to alleged management interference. To start with, Semyonova said PDS is asking the council to require the lab to disclose the names and cases of all defendants that were handled by those examiners.

“It is likely that the uncovered information is only the tip of the iceberg,” Semyonova said.

Jessica Willis, special counsel for forensics for the Public Defender Service, added, “I think right now we’re in a point of crisis — a crisis both for our clients who are sitting at the D.C. Jail, locked down 23 hours a day waiting for their trials in 2023, as well as for our clients who are currently in the Bureau of Prisons, because they’ve been convicted after a jury trial, where our attorneys and other defense attorneys didn’t have access to this information.”

The two cases in which the error was discovered — launching the initial investigation of the lab — are both now being challenged. Lawyers for Rondell McLeod and Joseph Brown, the two men charged in the 2015 killings, are seeking to dismiss the indictments, pointing to the faulty ballistics analysis. Prosecutors have maintained that other evidence links each man to the killing in which he is charged. A hearing in D.C. Superior Court is set for June 2.

In the broader ripple effect in the D.C. court system, federal prosecutors said the full impact was hard to discern since the inspector general’s investigation remains ongoing — and the review of casework carried out by the experts hired by prosecutors was stymied in part by the lab’s refusal to cooperate. The lab had repeatedly pointed to its status as an independent agency in resisting cooperating with prosecutors’ audit.

Still, the experts’ final report, which was filed in D.C. Superior Court last month, alleged that several DFS examiners erred in linking the disputed cartridge casings to the same gun and that, when confronted by the error, lab managers sought to conceal conflicting conclusions, including an exculpatory finding — apparently only documented in a PowerPoint presentation for senior leaders — that concluded the casings had not been fired in the same gun.

“It was upon learning this information that we became deeply concerned that in addition to the firearms examination unit, we may not be able to use any evidence or witnesses from any part of DFS,” Racine told the committee.

He added later, “by no means was the purpose of the audit to blow up the criminal justice system.”

Some of the documents cited in the report, including the PowerPoint review, were only turned over to investigators after prosecutors subpoenaed the lab last year. Much of the hearing was spent reviewing the complicated timeline.

“If there was a mistake, we’re human, it happens,” Allen said. “That’s why you have multiple sets of eyes on things.”

Far more concerning, he said, was what he called a pattern of “very troubling leadership decisions,” all centered around the final week of April 2020. Based on documents and chain of custody records, on April 28, a firearms supervisor and another firearms examiner reexamined the disputed casings under a microscope and determined they were not fired in the same gun as the lab had originally concluded.

That finding was included in an April 30 PowerPoint presentation titled “Confidential Case Review” and apparently provided only to senior leaders at the lab and never disclosed outside the agency.

The next day, one of the examiners, who had originally worked the case in 2017, abruptly changed his finding to “inconclusive” with no supporting documentation, which he told investigators he felt pressured to do while sitting in his manager’s office. A few days later, the “inconclusive” finding was reported to the lab’s accrediting board, according to the documents, and presented as the conclusion reached by the firearms supervisor after a full re-examination.

Only several days later, however, did the supervisor actually begin the re-examination that reported an “inconclusive” finding. The supervisor later told investigators he pushed to have an outside expert reexamine the case and that he felt “manipulated” by management into doing it himself.

“This one week … the end of April, beginning of May has significant impact on our entire criminal justice system,” Allen said.

When it came time for him to testify, Geldart, the deputy mayor, agreed that “there’s an issue” in the way the lab responded to the error, but he suggested the lab was following its quality corrective action plan when it completed multiple reviews of the evidence that were never disclosed outside the agency.

“I’m not justifying that process,” he said. “I don’t agree with that process. And I agree with you that there’s an issue in that.”

Geldart said he asked DFS leadership about the examiner who changed his finding from his manager’s office.

“I specifically asked the question of the leadership of what happened here,” Geldart said. “And I did not get the answer that somebody was pressured — that they knew of.”

Geldart added, “My jury is out on that. And there, you know, I’m waiting for the corroborating (evidence) on that.”

Overall, the deputy mayor agreed that there were “some leadership issues” within the agency, but he said he was waiting on the inspector general probe “to come out and tell me exactly how far-reaching this is.” At times appearing frustrated with Geldart’s responses, Allen said the hours of testimony Thursday pointed to a “significant leadership issue” that has gone unaddressed.

“Having sat through oversight hearings … where all of these issues have been minimized, I do not believe the DFS director has been forthright with me or this committee,” Allen said. In another exchange about the lab’s troubles — Allen quipped at one point that he needed a “flow chart” to keep track of all of the problems — the council member questioned Geldart about the lab’s ability to process evidence given the loss of accreditation.

Geldart said he isn’t sure if the accrediting board will even consider the lab’s appeal, and he said he has “no idea” how long the process will take.

For now, the city is relying on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to process gun evidence from D.C. crime scenes and paying private labs to analyze DNA evidence.

However, the deputy mayor said the loss of accreditation doesn’t actually mean the lab has to stop conducting all forensic work.

“There’s a whole lot of laboratories and a whole lot of states that aren’t accredited,” Geldart said. “So it’s not like (if) you don’t have accreditation, can’t do the work.”

The legislation creating the agency in 2011 and setting out rules for how it can operate states: “The Department shall be accredited by an appropriate, bona fide national accrediting organization.”

When confronted with the statute language by Allen, Geldart said, “I’ll have to go and look at that,” and later said, “That can be interpreted, council member, you can interpret that how you want.”

At one point, Geldart claimed the lab didn’t achieve accreditation until 2017. A news release on DFS’ own website indicates the lab was first accredited in 2013, about a year after the lab opened, and that accreditation is mandated in the District.

Geldart later agreed the suspension of accreditation was a problem.

“We have to be accredited; we have to have a respected laboratory,” he said. “And we have to get to the bottom of all this, and I share the sense of urgency.”

Allen’s committee also heard from a union representative, who represents rank-and-file DFS employees.

LaToya McDowney, the local union president with the National Association of Government Employees, shared concerns regarding “mismanagement, unethical behavior and a lack of transparency” in the agency’s management. She said the agency has retaliated against employees in the past for speaking out and sharing their concerns, and she described the atmosphere as a “toxic workplace.”

Allen said he understands that workplace perceptions of management often vary but that his office, too, has received complaints of an “allegedly hostile work environment at DFS where employees do not speak out for fear of reprisal or punishment by senior leadership.”

[Borderlands of Rojava]

because they are being petty and spiteful. There is no excuse to not do their jobs in certain areas.

No, they're attempting to avoid an area which is difficult to access due to it being an autonomous zone filled with anti-police demonstrators and where their presence would almost certainly ignite violence and endanger both officers and citizens.

So is it actually an autonomous zone or is that happening in the same reality as the East London no-go zone? Because there seems to be alot of misunderstandings over what an autonomous zone entails and also what is and isn't one.

[Galloism]

No, they're attempting to avoid an area which is difficult to access due to it being an autonomous zone filled with anti-police demonstrators and where their presence would almost certainly ignite violence and endanger both officers and citizens.

So is it actually an autonomous zone or is that happening in the same reality as the East London no-go zone? Because there seems to be alot of misunderstandings over what an autonomous zone entails and also what is and isn't one.

I mean, it's not like a legally legitimate autonomous zone. But none of them have been.

Here's from wiki:

Local impact
"Autonomous zone" and policing
A sign at an entrance to the barricaded area around the square read "You are now entering the Free State of George Floyd". The mantra "No justice, no street" was frequently used by protestors who occupied the intersection, who had presented a list of demands to the city before they would agree to have the intersection reopened.[52] Supporters of the occupation protest referred to the area as an "autonomous zone", while detractors used the term "no-go zone" to describe the area and occupation protest. The Minneapolis Police Department did not publicly acknowledge that the area was autonomous, but discussions between police officers picked up by scanners revealed a reluctance to enter the area.[41][97] Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey asserted in February 2021, that the square "is not an autonomous zone and will not and cannot be an autonomous zone”.[98]

Police officers largely avoided the area surrounding the square in the months after Floyd's death, furthering to the perception that the area was a "police-free" or "no-go" zone.[3] In some instances, the police were unwilling to enter the area to retrieve victims of crimes, and asked victims to exit the barricaded perimeter to receive aid. A volunteer team of medics inside the square treated many minor injuries and helped transport people to police and emergency medical services nearby.[41] Shooting victims from gunfire had to be dragged out of the square area to reach emergency vehicles.[99] After calling 9-1-1 to seek help, several domestic assault victims were told by police to move outside of the barricaded area in order to receive aid.[77] Police and residents near the square said that stolen vehicles were abandoned near the square and people fleeing police used the barricaded area to evade the pursuit of law enforcement.[100] Tow truck companies refused to haul away vehicles that had been stowed there.[93] Fearing violence, some food delivery service drivers refused to venture into the square area.[99]

[Borderlands of Rojava]

So is it actually an autonomous zone or is that happening in the same reality as the East London no-go zone? Because there seems to be alot of misunderstandings over what an autonomous zone entails and also what is and isn't one.

I mean, it's not like a legally legitimate autonomous zone. But none of them have been.

Here's from wiki:

Local impact
"Autonomous zone" and policing
A sign at an entrance to the barricaded area around the square read "You are now entering the Free State of George Floyd". The mantra "No justice, no street" was frequently used by protestors who occupied the intersection, who had presented a list of demands to the city before they would agree to have the intersection reopened.[52] Supporters of the occupation protest referred to the area as an "autonomous zone", while detractors used the term "no-go zone" to describe the area and occupation protest. The Minneapolis Police Department did not publicly acknowledge that the area was autonomous, but discussions between police officers picked up by scanners revealed a reluctance to enter the area.[41][97] Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey asserted in February 2021, that the square "is not an autonomous zone and will not and cannot be an autonomous zone”.[98]

Police officers largely avoided the area surrounding the square in the months after Floyd's death, furthering to the perception that the area was a "police-free" or "no-go" zone.[3] In some instances, the police were unwilling to enter the area to retrieve victims of crimes, and asked victims to exit the barricaded perimeter to receive aid. A volunteer team of medics inside the square treated many minor injuries and helped transport people to police and emergency medical services nearby.[41] Shooting victims from gunfire had to be dragged out of the square area to reach emergency vehicles.[99] After calling 9-1-1 to seek help, several domestic assault victims were told by police to move outside of the barricaded area in order to receive aid.[77] Police and residents near the square said that stolen vehicles were abandoned near the square and people fleeing police used the barricaded area to evade the pursuit of law enforcement.[100] Tow truck companies refused to haul away vehicles that had been stowed there.[93] Fearing violence, some food delivery service drivers refused to venture into the square area.[99]

It's fucked up if they aren't even letting ambulances it. The ambulance isn't the police like wtf?

It would be better if they kept an eye on the police than straight up banning them from the area. At least let them do their actual assigned job while making sure that's what they're doing and not other stuff they shouldn't be.

[Galloism]

I mean, it's not like a legally legitimate autonomous zone. But none of them have been.

Here's from wiki:

It's fucked up if they aren't even letting ambulances it. The ambulance isn't the police like wtf?

It would be better if they kept an eye on the police than straight up banning them from the area. At least let them do their actual assigned job while making sure that's what they're doing and not other stuff they shouldn't be.

So... here's the thing.

Ambulances are full of drugs, some of them with a substantial street value. It's probably not that the people there won't let ambulances in per se, but that the ambulances refuse to go into a place with a very high crime rate and risk without a police escort. So if you don't let the police in, the ambulances won't come.

In areas of high crime (even absent this particular social context), ambulances are often accompanied by police to ensure the ambulances aren't robbed for their drugs.

[Boomhaueristan]

There is a firm line between protesting and looting. If you want to spread your message, destruction of private property is just not the way. If I was a thin blue line kind of dude and you spray painted my store, stole some merchandise, or even burnt it to the ground, I would probably not come to your side after that would I?

I understand people are heated, and that they're tired of being treated like shit by the people that are suppose to defend us from the true villians of the world, but riots are just not the way. MLK did not advocate for civil rights by throwing molotovs into buildings or robbing his fellow man. I get that people are angry, I really do. If a police officer treated my wife (black) differently then he treated me (white) I would be outraged, it's a pathetic injustice that in the '20s we have this racism.

And it doesn't just apply to the black community, not that I'm trying to diminish what they've been through. Let us not forget Philip Mitchell Brailsford shot and killed an unarmed, scared to death white man, who was of absolutely zero threat to himself or his partner.

Racism, or incompetence, the police need a better system of checks on their authority. No unarmed person should be afraid for their life when confronted by a uniformed police officer.

[Ifreann]

There is a firm line between protesting and looting. If you want to spread your message, destruction of private property is just not the way. If I was a thin blue line kind of dude and you spray painted my store, stole some merchandise, or even burnt it to the ground, I would probably not come to your side after that would I?

I understand people are heated, and that they're tired of being treated like shit by the people that are suppose to defend us from the true villians of the world, but riots are just not the way. MLK did not advocate for civil rights by throwing molotovs into buildings or robbing his fellow man. I get that people are angry, I really do. If a police officer treated my wife (black) differently then he treated me (white) I would be outraged, it's a pathetic injustice that in the '20s we have this racism.

And it doesn't just apply to the black community, not that I'm trying to diminish what they've been through. Let us not forget Philip Mitchell Brailsford shot and killed an unarmed, scared to death white man, who was of absolutely zero threat to himself or his partner.

Racism, or incompetence, the police need a better system of checks on their authority. No unarmed person should be afraid for their life when confronted by a uniformed police officer.

Hey look, it's the exact same opinion as the white moderate of the 1960s, travelled to the future to say the same "I support your cause, but not your methods" shit people were saying to MLK back then.

[Boomhaueristan]

There is a firm line between protesting and looting. If you want to spread your message, destruction of private property is just not the way. If I was a thin blue line kind of dude and you spray painted my store, stole some merchandise, or even burnt it to the ground, I would probably not come to your side after that would I?

I understand people are heated, and that they're tired of being treated like shit by the people that are suppose to defend us from the true villians of the world, but riots are just not the way. MLK did not advocate for civil rights by throwing molotovs into buildings or robbing his fellow man. I get that people are angry, I really do. If a police officer treated my wife (black) differently then he treated me (white) I would be outraged, it's a pathetic injustice that in the '20s we have this racism.

And it doesn't just apply to the black community, not that I'm trying to diminish what they've been through. Let us not forget Philip Mitchell Brailsford shot and killed an unarmed, scared to death white man, who was of absolutely zero threat to himself or his partner.

Racism, or incompetence, the police need a better system of checks on their authority. No unarmed person should be afraid for their life when confronted by a uniformed police officer.

Hey look, it's the exact same opinion as the white moderate of the 1960s, travelled to the future to say the same "I support your cause, but not your methods" shit people were saying to MLK back then.

Do you want me to support rioting and violence?

What a petty reply that warrants zero discussion.

[Ifreann]

Hey look, it's the exact same opinion as the white moderate of the 1960s, travelled to the future to say the same "I support your cause, but not your methods" shit people were saying to MLK back then.

Do you want me to support rioting and violence?

Yes. Rioting is most often defensive violence in response to police aggression. You should support people defending themselves from attack by agents of the state.

[Salus Maior]

Do you want me to support rioting and violence?

Yes. Rioting is most often defensive violence in response to police aggression. You should support people defending themselves from attack by agents of the state.

That’d be more true if said violence was actually directed at the police, rather than gas stations and local businesses, and bystanders.

[Ifreann]

Yes. Rioting is most often defensive violence in response to police aggression. You should support people defending themselves from attack by agents of the state.

That’d be more true if said violence was actually directed at the police, rather than gas stations and local businesses, and bystanders.

That is what happens. Did you not see any of the riots last year? It wasn't the rioters attacking members of the press or legal observers, it was the cops.

[Sengoku Americas]

That’d be more true if said violence was actually directed at the police, rather than gas stations and local businesses, and bystanders.

That is what happens. Did you not see any of the riots last year? It wasn't the rioters attacking members of the press or legal observers, it was the cops.

There's an excellent video of an Australian reporter being charged at by police in riot gear despite doing nothing but filming. So much for the 'freedom of press', indeed!

[Salus Maior]

That’d be more true if said violence was actually directed at the police, rather than gas stations and local businesses, and bystanders.

That is what happens. Did you not see any of the riots last year? It wasn't the rioters attacking members of the press or legal observers, it was the cops.

Alongside the destruction of completely unrelated businesses, homes, looting, etc.

[Ifreann]

That is what happens. Did you not see any of the riots last year? It wasn't the rioters attacking members of the press or legal observers, it was the cops.

Alongside the destruction of completely unrelated businesses, homes, looting, etc.

Yes, the cops also did that in addition to attacking bystanders.

[Vassenor]

That is what happens. Did you not see any of the riots last year? It wasn't the rioters attacking members of the press or legal observers, it was the cops.

Alongside the destruction of completely unrelated businesses, homes, looting, etc.

It was later estimated that between May 26 and August 22, 93% of individual protests were "peaceful and nondestructive"[36] and The Washington Post estimated that by the end of June, 96.3% of 7,305 demonstrations involved no injuries and no property damage.

[Salus Maior]

Alongside the destruction of completely unrelated businesses, homes, looting, etc.

Yes, the cops also did that in addition to attacking bystanders.

Whataboutism isn’t helping you. We know the cops are in the wrong, aren’t the protesters supposed to be in the right?