US Anti-Police Protests and Riots Thread III

[Neutraligon]

Sigh, the police are warning of possible use of pepper spray and the like near me on their loudspeaker due to vandalism I think.

[Greater Miami Shores]

Sigh, the police are warning of possible use of pepper spray and the like near me on their loudspeaker due to vandalism I think.

I think the Police are doing so to deter potential violent protestors from protesting violently. Protesting violently, vandalism, looting stores, businesses and burning stores and businesses are crimes.

[Neutraligon]

Sigh, the police are warning of possible use of pepper spray and the like near me on their loudspeaker due to vandalism I think.

I think the Police are doing so to deter violent protestors from protesting violently.

If you consider vandalizing the justice center violence then I guess.

[Greater Miami Shores]

I think the Police are doing so to deter potential violent protestors from protesting violently.

If you consider vandalizing the justice center violence then I guess.

I consider and we consider vandalizing any place is violence. Like always I added after you quoted me, Protesting violently, vandalism, looting stores, businesses and burning buildings, stores and businesses are crimes. I added potential, I keep telling all all of you, you have to give me at least an hour before you quote me, lol, a very bad habit I have, I have tried to break without success lol again.

[Postauthoritarian America]

Minnesota law enforcement claims goals of "Operation Safety Net" met, presence to be drawn down in near future

What the contribution of posting National Guard armored vehicles across the metro and calling in cops from Nebraska and Ohio was compared to the Chauvin jury returning a just and true verdict is still apparently undetermined...

[Kowani]

City council subpoenas NYPD for cost of robot dog

The city council wants to force NYPD to reveal the cost of its new “Digidog,” days after Mayor Bill de Blasio suggested the city “rethink” its use of the dystopian police robot dog.

Council leaders on Monday subpoenaed the NYPD for any robot-related contracts or agreements with Boston Dynamics, the company behind the four-legged robo-cop.

“The public should know how much each of these devices is costing the city,” said Councilman Ben Kallos (D-Manhattan), who issued the subpoena along with Council Speaker Corey Johnson.

Hizzoner on Wednesday said he shared concerns that the robot is “unsettling” in the wake of a viral video of the pup patrolling a Manhattan housing project while cops responded to a hostage situation. “I haven’t seen it, but I certainly share the concern that if in any way it’s unsettling to people, we should rethink the equation,” de Blasio told reporters.

Police had previously used the dog in February while responding to a home invasion and hostage situation in the Bronx — earning jeers from local politicians including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who called it a “robotic surveillance ground drone.”

Kallos said police officials had refused to share details of their agreements related to the machine, which has a reported starting price of $74,000. “Whether the mayor decides to deploy them or not, we need to know what the city has agreed to,” he said. “I would be surprised if we only paid $74,000 for them.”

The Manhattan rep has proposed legislation to ban NYPD from using any weaponized robots or drones — though NYPD’s Digidog is neither armed nor capable of flying. NYPD did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

[Fahran]

You would think a public servant who's supposedly dedicated their career to putting their life on the line to protect their community would be willing to accept a slightly higher risk of getting stabbed and use a taser instead of mowing down a 15-year-old girl but ok

I don't think we can expect any public servant to accept the severely increased chance of taking a knife to the abdomen when we have procedures to mitigate that. Not that this has any relevance to this particular case.

Mah'kia Bryant's death was tragic and stupid, but the officer was not at all in the wrong from what I've seen and heard. He could possibly have used a tazer, but use of lethal force is no less acceptable, ethically or legally, when it prevents another person from experiencing lethal force. Discharging when he did prevented another girl from being stabbed and possibly killed.

While I absolutely accept the necessity of police reform, this case had a lot more to do with violence among youths and adolescents than police killing unarmed people wrongly. Mah'kia Bryant may have been "sweet" and "a good kid", but that doesn't mean she wasn't killed in the act of employing lethal force against another child. And, really, we have to ask what the hell is wrong with our culture that leads to sweet kids hurting one another for no reason at all.

I'm really, really tired of needless hatred, needless violence, and needless killing, and, as I've expressed before, that extends beyond policing to other institutions and to the elements of our culture that make unjustified violence so palatable.

[Fahran]

Snip.

I'm not certain there's any stopping the advent of robots in policing if it doesn't contribute to a horrifying increase in unwarranted casualties. We're kinda going full steam ahead into robots at this point, and I imagine that'll be even more pronounced in a few generations given how effective they can be.

That said, I wouldn't mind a few more Luddites in the world.

[Kowani]

Snip.

I'm not certain there's any stopping the advent of robots in policing if it doesn't contribute to a horrifying increase in unwarranted casualties. We're kinda going full steam ahead into robots at this point, and I imagine that'll be even more pronounced in a few generations given how effective they can be.

That said, I wouldn't mind a few more Luddites in the world.

i mean
the ethical issue here isn't the robot itself (with the little information we have)
it's the near-total lack of oversight over police uses of funding
the city didn't even know this was happening until it went viral, and the NYPD (again) is refusing to provide relevant information to lawmakers

[Fahran]

i mean
the ethical issue here isn't the robot itself (with the little information we have)
it's the near-total lack of oversight over police uses of funding
the city didn't even know this was happening until it went viral, and the NYPD (again) is refusing to provide relevant information to lawmakers

To be honest, the NYPD needs to be definitively suboordinated by the government. It's absurd that they have next to no budgetary oversight.

[Kowani]

i mean
the ethical issue here isn't the robot itself (with the little information we have)
it's the near-total lack of oversight over police uses of funding
the city didn't even know this was happening until it went viral, and the NYPD (again) is refusing to provide relevant information to lawmakers

To be honest, the NYPD needs to be definitively suboordinated by the government. It's absurd that they have next to no budgetary oversight.

the NYPD is one of the departments which, despite multiple attempts at oversight and government control, seems to find a loophole and go right back to the old ways
i'm surprised they haven't all started conveniently forgetting to turn on their bodycams yet

[Kowani]

DHS spent $12 million, deployed 750 officers, and generally mucked about responding to Portland protests

A new report out from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General examined that agency’s response to last summer’s racial justice protests in Portland.

It found DHS was unprepared when out-of-town federal law enforcement officers first arrived in the city. But the inspector general found DHS did have the legal authority to send officers to protect the federal courthouse in downtown Portland, as well as other federal property.

The report also revealed 755 DHS officers participated in an operation to protect federal buildings in Portland, under an operation that cost more than $12 million. Few of the officers had been trained in riot and crowd control, even though that was their primary mission. Many of those officers reported hundreds of injuries.

“Specifically, not all officers completed required training; had the necessary equipment; and used consistent uniforms, devices, and operational tactics when responding to the events in Portland,” the DHS Inspector General found. The inspector general faulted DHS for not having a strategy to address the possibility for limited law enforcement assistance from state and local agencies.

On July 22, the Portland City Council voted to prevent Portland Police from cooperating with federal law enforcement officers as they tear gassed and fought with protesters on a nightly basis. While Oregon State Police also assisted in protecting the Mark Hatfield federal courthouse starting July 30, that too was only temporary, as state troopers pulled back from those duties in mid-August.

The Federal Protective Service, which is part of DHS, guards and secures federal property. In Portland, the agency is responsible for protecting 34 facilities, but has only seven full-time employees assigned to the area, according to the inspector general’s report.

On June 26, FPS created a regional plan called “Operation Diligent Valor,” to “prevent, protect, respond to, and recover from attacks on federal property” in the Pacific Northwest.

As of Aug. 31, the estimated cost of that operation was $12.3 million. Protesters caused $1.6 million in damages to the federal courthouse in Portland, the report states.

The courthouse in downtown Portland was first attacked on May 29, the report states.

On June 3, the Federal Protective Service asked for assistance. Federal officers began arriving from out of town the next day.

“Officers deployed to Portland included those from special response teams, special operations groups, rapid protection forces, and other officers from FPS, [U.S. Customs and Boarder Patrol], [U.S. Immigration and Custom Enforcement], and United States Secret Service,” the inspector general report states. During the summer, DHS officers made 62 arrests.

The report criticized DHS officers for not wearing consistent uniforms.

“Officers from FPS, CBP, and ICE all responded to Portland wearing their respective component issued uniforms,” federal officials stated. “During the operations both citizens and Congress raised concerns regarding a lack of proper identification on officers’ uniforms.”

OPB first reported on cases of federal officers in militarized uniforms arresting protesters in unmarked vehicles.Members of Oregon Congressional delegation said the report shows DHS was heavy-handed in its response to racial justice protests and unprepared to safely handle the unrest.

“This report confirms some of the worst fears I expressed along with the delegation about Donald Trump’s slapdash and knee-jerk response to last summer’s overwhelmingly peaceful protests in Portland,” Sen. Ron Wyden, a Democrat, said in a statement. “Paramilitary officers dispatched by the Trump administration into my hometown with incomplete weapons training, inconsistent tactics and a shadowy mission added up to a toxic mix that inflamed the situation instead of managing it.”

Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, also a Democrat, said she called for the investigation and was reviewing it’s findings and recommendations.

“The Trump Administration flamed tensions and sparked fear among the people of Portland for months,” she said in a statement. “I will continue to work my colleagues and with the Biden Administration to make sure Federal law enforcement have the training and tools they need to appropriately respond to conflict — in the very limited circumstances they may be needed — without resorting to militarized overreaction in violation of the Constitutional rights of Americans.”

The DHS Inspector General also found federal officers didn’t have the correct protective equipment during their deployment. From mid-June to July 30, DHS officers reported 689 injuries that included blurred vision and headaches caused by high-intensity lasers used by protesters and temporary hearing loss from fireworks, as well as wounds from projectiles.

“Other officers said there were not enough less-lethal devices and munitions to respond effectively,” the report states. Federal officers on the ground used thousands of munitions, often indiscriminately, in their efforts to control crowds at the protests. Protesters who were not engaging in property destruction often reported significant injuries, some of them critical.

“Finally, officers also reported problems with radio communications, such as the inability to communicate with DHS officers from other components,” the report states.

The report found officers were not property trained in how to respond to crowd control and riots. The IG examined the training records for a sample of the officers who deployed to Portland. Of the 63 officers examined, only seven had riot and crowd control training, the report found.

“DHS law enforcement operations in Portland were mainly focused on riot and crowd control activities,” the report stated. “Deploying officers who are not properly trained increases the risk of officers acting outside of their authority.”

[North Washington Republic]

You would think a public servant who's supposedly dedicated their career to putting their life on the line to protect their community would be willing to accept a slightly higher risk of getting stabbed and use a taser instead of mowing down a 15-year-old girl but ok

I don't think we can expect any public servant to accept the severely increased chance of taking a knife to the abdomen when we have procedures to mitigate that. Not that this has any relevance to this particular case.

Mah'kia Bryant's death was tragic and stupid, but the officer was not at all in the wrong from what I've seen and heard. He could possibly have used a tazer, but use of lethal force is no less acceptable, ethically or legally, when it prevents another person from experiencing lethal force. Discharging when he did prevented another girl from being stabbed and possibly killed.

While I absolutely accept the necessity of police reform, this case had a lot more to do with violence among youths and adolescents than police killing unarmed people wrongly. Mah'kia Bryant may have been "sweet" and "a good kid", but that doesn't mean she wasn't killed in the act of employing lethal force against another child. And, really, we have to ask what the hell is wrong with our culture that leads to sweet kids hurting one another for no reason at all.

I'm really, really tired of needless hatred, needless violence, and needless killing, and, as I've expressed before, that extends beyond policing to other institutions and to the elements of our culture that make unjustified violence so palatable.

I believe that the death of Mah'kia Bryant's has more to due with failure of our culture and how we raise children than it does with police violence. From what I seen, the officer shot Mah’kia while she was attacking another person with a deadly weapon. Her death is a tragedy, but as far as I can tell right now, this isn’t a case of police brutality.

[Page]

Sigh, the police are warning of possible use of pepper spray and the like near me on their loudspeaker due to vandalism I think.

I think the Police are doing so to deter potential violent protestors from protesting violently. Protesting violently, vandalism, looting stores, businesses and burning stores and businesses are crimes.

Using chemical weapons is violence.

[Fahran]

Using chemical weapons is violence.

Well, yes. State-controlled violence exercised with ostensibly legitimate authority, ideally with the aim of mitigating the illegitimate individualized and non-institutionalized violence that might otherwise ensue. Sometimes, this works quite well. Other times, it's an overreaction that isn't warranted.

[Austreylia]

If you consider vandalizing the justice center violence then I guess.

D'you expect them to just stand there and tell them to leave?

Vandalism definitely warrants use of non-lethal force.

[Kowani]

If you consider vandalizing the justice center violence then I guess.

D'you expect them to just stand there and tell them to leave?

Vandalism definitely warrants use of non-lethal force.

oh no, they might have to use soap and water tomorrow morning to take down the graffiti!

[Page]

Using chemical weapons is violence.

Well, yes. State-controlled violence exercised with ostensibly legitimate authority, ideally with the aim of mitigating the illegitimate individualized and non-institutionalized violence that might otherwise ensue. Sometimes, this works quite well. Other times, it's an overreaction that isn't warranted.

I don't differentiate state violence from other violence, I do not recognize the legitimacy of the state.

And while I understand that my anarchic beliefs are not very popular, I don't think one has to be an anarchist to recognize that police use of chemical weapons is problematic, especially because they cannot even be properly aimed. All it takes is a light breeze to hurt bystanders (and if firing into a crowd of protesters, that is guaranteed).

In my hometown police tried to pepper spray two high school boys who were fighting, they missed and a dozen students standing nearby were harmed. This is why it's against international conventions for weapons like these to be used in warfare.

And on the subject of warfare comparisons, while I am a police abolitionist and I only consider defending a start, if we can't even defund, the very, very least we could do is make sure police have to follow stricter rules of engagement when dealing with a child than soldiers have dealing with a grown man who is shooting at them, which is not the case now.

[Austreylia]

oh no, they might have to use soap and water tomorrow morning to take down the graffiti!

It's out of principal. Police are there to enforce the law. Vandalism is against the law. If the vandals refuse to stop doing what they're doing, then the police should enforce the law via a use of force.

[Kowani]

oh no, they might have to use soap and water tomorrow morning to take down the graffiti!

It's out of principal. Police are there to enforce the law. Vandalism is against the law. If the vandals refuse to stop doing what they're doing then the police should enforce the law via a use of force.

It's out of principle. Police are there to enforce the law. slaves escaping is against the law. If the escaping slaves refuse to stop doing what they're doing then the police should enforce the law via a use of force.

-John C. Calhoun, probably

[Austreylia]

It's out of principal. Police are there to enforce the law. Vandalism is against the law. If the vandals refuse to stop doing what they're doing then the police should enforce the law via a use of force.

It's out of principle. Police are there to enforce the law. slaves escaping is against the law. If the escaping slaves refuse to stop doing what they're doing then the police should enforce the law via a use of force.

-John C. Calhoun, probably

It's not really comparable in any way.

Laws prohibiting vandalism aren't unjust in the slightest.

[Kowani]

It's out of principle. Police are there to enforce the law. slaves escaping is against the law. If the escaping slaves refuse to stop doing what they're doing then the police should enforce the law via a use of force.

-John C. Calhoun, probably

It's not really comparable in any way.

Laws prohibiting vandalism aren't unjust in the slightest.

you have, thankfully, not missed the point being made
you have just realized how bad your original argument was and are attempting to backtrack with a qualifier (not realizing how nebulous the concept of "justice" is at the same time)
legalism, not even once

[Austreylia]

you have, thankfully, not missed the point being made
you have just realized how bad your original argument was and are attempting to backtrack with a qualifier (not realizing how nebulous the concept of "justice" is at the same time)
legalism, not even once

I haven't realized anything.

I stand by my original argument. Police should use force against people who refuse orders to stop vandalising things.

[Greater Miami Shores]

It's out of principle. Police are there to enforce the law. slaves escaping is against the law. If the escaping slaves refuse to stop doing what they're doing then the police should enforce the law via a use of force.

-John C. Calhoun, probably

It's not really comparable in any way.

Laws prohibiting vandalism aren't unjust in the slightest.

I strongly agree with you, vandalism is a crime against the law as I posted in great details, we don't live in slave days anymore. Anything can be used as a weapon, perhaps not water, but a hard soap bar might be, like a hard frozen snowball, snowballs hurt, I used to live in Chicago and many northern states as I have posted a few times.

[Neu California]

you have, thankfully, not missed the point being made
you have just realized how bad your original argument was and are attempting to backtrack with a qualifier (not realizing how nebulous the concept of "justice" is at the same time)
legalism, not even once

I haven't realized anything.

I stand by my original argument. Police should use force against people who refuse orders to stop vandalising things.

How much force do you think is justified in stopping vandals? Let's assume they're not committing any other crimes and are unarmed, for the sake of simplicity.