Community > Politics and Government
First Trump came for Portland
SCarpelan:
--- Quote from: Vanto on July 31, 2020, 02:42:04 pm ---
--- Quote from: SCarpelan on July 31, 2020, 07:27:43 am ---
--- Quote from: Vanto on July 31, 2020, 03:20:02 am ---Ah yes, whining about "muh bothsidesism" aka "don't you dare criticize MY tribe". Sometimes, both sides are entirely deserving of criticism. I have already condemned police brutality. Are you willing to condemn the rioting? Not even rioting in general, just this rioting?
--- End quote ---
You are equating attacking and killing people to property damage. Comparatively, I don't give a fuck about the latter. Defending cops is excusing much greater harm. Without rioting there would be much less press attention, political pressure and attention on the violent response by the cops; riots are something that happens when more peaceful means have failed and as the result the frustration and justified anger boils over.
Also, rioting != murder. Killing is only acceptable as a last resort when defending oneself or another person from immediate physical danger, no matter who does it.
--- End quote ---
You say that like the rioters haven't been killing people. I pointed out that at least 22 people so far have been killed either by rioters or by people taking advantage of the riots.
And you are objectively wrong. There was universal condemnation of what happened to George Floyd before these riots, and the cops responsible for his death are facing trial. These riots have accomplished nothing except hurting innocent people and ruining what could have been a bipartisan effort towards police accountability and reform.
How many people have to die in these riots before you condemn them?
--- End quote ---
Yes, you proved that some rioters kill people. So do some cops. I already very clearly condemned those rioters who did so. One of these groups is actively protecting its members from consequences of such actions and it is not the rioters. If rioting is comparable to murder then policing is, too, as is driving a car or shooting a gun.
I'm sure you have evidence that there was an effort to reform the police that was more than empty words to keep people calm. I'm also sure you can show that these efforts were stopped, not increased as the protests and riots grew. People have no reason to trust any promises officials give until they see action and the institutional power of the police is contained.
Tolpuddle Martyr:
Very late to this discussion but, it's worth noting that some "rioters" aren't even protesters at all. This the oft cited justification that gets rehashed when police are filmed going over the top, as a foil to criminals who just want to get their crime on and looters who want to get their loot on. In a world where the function of police was primarily to prevent crime and keep citizens and property safe you'd think those guys would be the police's first priority.
It's noteworthy because this year there have been several, reported cases of police in the US ignoring criminals engaged in looting because they want to focus on whacking protesters and others of cops ignoring criminal behavior where their politics is in line with the police. In the case of Portland the criminal activity cited to justify the use of shady paramilitary stormtroopers was...wet paint on walls.
There's been 50 years of research leading to the conclusion that heavy handed police tactics leads to more aggressive protester behavior which you'd think would be exactly the outcome you don't want if your desire is to limit offending and threats to safety. Which all leads one to believe that the point of heavy handed policing of protests is not to prevent crime but to intimidate dissenters.
RavynousHunter:
--- Quote from: Tolpuddle Martyr on August 08, 2020, 09:29:54 am ---Which all leads one to believe that the point of heavy handed policing of protests is not to prevent crime but to intimidate dissenters.
--- End quote ---
Either that or giving them an excuse to use their power against other people. Gotta remember that people in and with power will invariably want to use it on someone; that just how humans are. Whether that's for good or ill, though, is up to the one using the power.
Tolpuddle Martyr:
--- Quote from: RavynousHunter on August 08, 2020, 10:20:11 am ---
--- Quote from: Tolpuddle Martyr on August 08, 2020, 09:29:54 am ---Which all leads one to believe that the point of heavy handed policing of protests is not to prevent crime but to intimidate dissenters.
--- End quote ---
Either that or giving them an excuse to use their power against other people. Gotta remember that people in and with power will invariably want to use it on someone; that just how humans are. Whether that's for good or ill, though, is up to the one using the power.
--- End quote ---
I'll grant you that, belting the bejeezus out of protesters probably gives a heck of a power rush.
Regardless, it ain't about preventing riots or looting.
RavynousHunter:
Yup. Never has been, never will be.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version