Minneapolis is Burning

[seven 1366]

I wonder how things would work out if the good citizen would have put his hand on his gun "for his protection" 

[NWBuck 8547]

8 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

Wasn't it incredible? He's open-carrying in a public place where such thing is completely legal and he gets approached by 8 cops who want to know what he's up to.  Guarantee you that if he looked like me that would not have happened.

 

[GRHorn 105]

I’m against facial recognition technology being utilized by the surveillance state, but I do enjoy this kind of calling out of hypocrisy. 
 

It’s kind of reminiscent of LeBron etc calling out racial injustice here (rightfully) but shushing any support of HK protests because it makes him big money. 

[elfenix 34171]

the old, "you're not addressing all problems so you can't address this problem," argument. 

[F250 28689]

I'm watching the protests in Atlanta on CNN. Protesters were starting to climb up a hill and move on to the highway. As people were starting to gather at the top of the hill and climb onto the highway something happened and everyone started running downhill fleeing the area.

I thought shots were fired the way people took off running but no it just started to rain. lulz

 

[F250 28689]

35 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I’m against facial recognition technology being utilized by the surveillance state, but I do enjoy this kind of calling out of hypocrisy. 
 

It’s kind of reminiscent of LeBron etc calling out racial injustice here (rightfully) but shushing any support of HK protests because it makes him big money. 

I don't understand the call out, does Microsoft sell homosexual detection technology?

[staboner 4959]

1 hour ago, Degenerate Gardner said:

Good luck beating a cult in a chanting contest.

nomination for a new surly byline prease

[pyrohornIII 4809]

On 6/13/2020 at 5:13 PM, HenryJames said:

 

You know that force has to be in chaos.  She was so on point last week with Killer Mike, and now this.   The lunatics have taken over the asylum.

1 hour ago, Jive Turkey said:

 

So now people who have no exposure to aggy via athletics are getting a taste.    That's wonderful.  

[Captainant 27463]

2 hours ago, GRHorn said:

I’m against facial recognition technology being utilized by the surveillance state, but I do enjoy this kind of calling out of hypocrisy. 
 

It’s kind of reminiscent of LeBron etc calling out racial injustice here (rightfully) but shushing any support of HK protests because it makes him big money. 

Comrade GRUhorn with the whataboutism. Classic move

[GRHorn 105]

1 hour ago, elfenix said:

the old, "you're not addressing all problems so you can't address this problem," argument. 

It’s calling out hypocrisy. Corporate at that. 

[StassneyHorn 6540]

Red herring is a kind of fallacy that is an irrelevant topic introduced in an argument to divert the attention of listeners or readers from the original issue. In literature, this fallacy is often used in detective or suspense novels to mislead readers or characters, or to induce them to make false conclusions.

[Hornius Emeritus 12420]

SIAP but HOLY CRAP this is disturbing. Cops get called on a homeless guy at a bus stop.  This is a straight up execution. The police don't even bother to turn off their cameras.  NSFW!
 

 

[NameAlreadyInUse 5106]

Jesus Christ

[Fastbreak 3959]

Why are cops wearing camo?

[bad_teammate 13132]

22 minutes ago, Fastbreak said:

Why are cops wearing camo?

Tactical Forward Urban Operators

[softlynow 1783]

53 minutes ago, Fastbreak said:

Why are cops wearing camo?

To hide their tiny dicks.

[honolulu horn 6157]

What in the living fuck? Drunk guy, possibly mentally ill, sleeping at a bus stop. That's plain murder, no two ways about it. And 100% avoidable. 

I mean, I do some mental health training with police. This situation is so fucking elementary to deal with. Approach gently, without weapons drawn, and clearly describe options for helping the guy. Crisis Intervention Training 101. Instead they gear up like they're in fucking Abbottabad hunting down Bin Laden. Jesus. 

This is what "defund the police" is about. That guy needed a case manager, a social worker, or a substance abuse expert to get him off the street, not the police. 

Edited June 15, 2020 by honolulu horn

[cam4mav 770]

jesus christ. straight up firing squad execution...... what the fuck

[bad_teammate 13132]

Call was about a homeless man with a gun. The cops set themselves up for an execution by saying if he reached near his waistband they'd kill him.

[elfenix 34171]

4 hours ago, GRHorn said:

It’s calling out hypocrisy. Corporate at that. 

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Ad-Hominem-Tu-quoque

[NameAlreadyInUse 5106]

2 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Call was about a homeless man with a gun. The cops set themselves up for an execution by saying if he reached near his waistband they'd kill him.

Yup they should all spend the rest of their miserable lives in jail.

[DigDug 1649]

Jesus fucking shit fuck man

[Anastasis 23395]

Disarm the police. 

[hookemATL 11611]

FAC

[Bevo14 8274]

Those dipshits were looking for an excuse to murder that guy. Disturbing

[Bevo14 8274]

26 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Disarm the police. 

Arrest the police

[Chad Fuck 17566]

That video is horrifying and highlights for me a real Achilles heel of US law enforcement. As long as we have essentially unfettered access to guns, cops here are prepared to kill immediately, because they are trained to suspect anyone may be carrying and kill them. We wind up with “shoot first, ask questions later” mentality. That great for western novels, but it’s no way to protect the citizenry.

[kevwun 15651]

The Albuquerque PD has a terrible reputation with use of force.  They are one of the worst police departments in the country.

[TwiceHorn 31280]

52 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

That video is horrifying and highlights for me a real Achilles heel of US law enforcement. As long as we have essentially unfettered access to guns, cops here are prepared to kill immediately, because they are trained to suspect anyone may be carrying and kill them. We wind up with “shoot first, ask questions later” mentality. That great for western novels, but it’s no way to protect the citizenry.

While I concede that the availability of firearms in the US presents police with potentially a different set of challenges, I still think we can disarm them successfully.

Learning to approach a situation cautiously, not with gun drawn and an itchy trigger finger, would save a lot of lives, cops included, I think.

 

[jimmyjazz 45558]

No way am I watching that.

[Brisketexan 104624]

30 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

While I concede that the availability of firearms in the US presents police with potentially a different set of challenges, I still think we can disarm them successfully.

Learning to approach a situation cautiously, not with gun drawn and an itchy trigger finger, would save a lot of lives, cops included, I think.

 

Well, yeah.  But you can't overcome police training that is based on the following Unholy Trinity:

1) if you want to search anyone or anything, just say "based on my years of training and experience, I smelled the distinct odor of marijuana."  You can search the whole world after that.

2) All you have to say is "it appeared that he was reaching for his waistband/pocket/shoulder holster/that place up your ass where you could stash a small gun, and I reasonably feared for my life," and you can shoot the hell out of whoever you want.

3) If you want to beat the shit out of anyone, just start beating the fuck out of them while yelling "STOP RESISTING! STOP RESISTING!"

There, I've typed out the entire American Manual of Modern Policing.  They aren't going to just give that up.  Ever.

[BradInATX 9208]

4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

No way am I watching that.

I can never watch them. But we all know what happens.

Burn some more shit down. 

[GW Hayduke 1952]

32 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

While I concede that the availability of firearms in the US presents police with potentially a different set of challenges, I still think we can disarm them successfully.

Learning to approach a situation cautiously, not with gun drawn and an itchy trigger finger, would save a lot of lives, cops included, I think.

 

I’ll add the lack of adequately funded mental health services with the saturation of firearms in our society as another contributing factor. Disarming would have been preferred for sure. Sending in an unarmed counselor would have furthered that goal, but what level of risk would that person be taking. 

[honolulu horn 6157]

8 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

I’ll add the lack of adequately funded mental health services with the saturation of firearms in our society as another contributing factor. Disarming would have been preferred for sure. Sending in an unarmed counselor would have furthered that goal, but what level of risk would that person be taking. 

A lot of risk, but no on e is suggesting that. Progressive policing involves co-responders or emergency back up mental health / substance abuse assistance (not to mention CIT training that puts officers through 40 hours of dedicated training on dealing with mental health and substance abuse calls). It's very unlikely any department would just send out an unarmed counselor, but one possibility includes sending out a counselor along with with armed police, so that all bases are covered. The biggest difference, though, is the attitude and approach of the police. They must be armed and ready to protect themselves and others as necessary, but they shouldn't go in battalion-style looking for a firefight. They should go in (on a call like this) to see what assistance is possible for the guy. You know, help him. 

[Brisketexan 104624]

3 minutes ago, honolulu horn said:

A lot of risk, but no on e is suggesting that. Progressive policing involves co-responders or emergency back up mental health / substance abuse assistance (not to mention CIT training that puts officers through 40 hours of dedicated training on dealing with mental health and substance abuse calls). It's very unlikely any department would just send out an unarmed counselor, but one possibility includes sending out a counselor along with with armed police, so that all bases are covered. The biggest difference, though, is the attitude and approach of the police. They must be armed and ready to protect themselves and others as necessary, but they shouldn't go in battalion-style looking for a firefight. They should go in (on a call like this) to see what assistance is possible for the guy. You know, help him. 

This.  Imagine the homeless dude was instead a bomb.  What would they do to protect the public?  They'd clear the immediate area.  They would approach it cautiously, and see if the bomb could be defused.

If every matter is "potentially life and death," then they should work REALLY hard to protect LIFE.  That should be the metric of success for these interactions: nobody got hurt, including the suspect.  Yes, there will be some situations where it can't be avoided.  People will still die and be hurt.  But hopefully a lot fewer than today.

[Grade of D as in David 13253]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This.  Imagine the homeless dude was instead a bomb.  What would they do to protect the public?  They'd clear the immediate area.  They would approach it cautiously, and see if the bomb could be defused.

If every matter is "potentially life and death," then they should work REALLY hard to protect LIFE.  That should be the metric of success for these interactions: nobody got hurt, including the suspect.  Yes, there will be some situations where it can't be avoided.  People will still die and be hurt.  But hopefully a lot fewer than today.

They would shoot the bomb.

Stuck pickle jar, shoot it.

Squeaky hinge, shoot it.

They're a murderous group of one trick ponies that need to be disarmed.

[GW Hayduke 1952]

30 minutes ago, honolulu horn said:

A lot of risk, but no on e is suggesting that. Progressive policing involves co-responders or emergency back up mental health / substance abuse assistance (not to mention CIT training that puts officers through 40 hours of dedicated training on dealing with mental health and substance abuse calls). It's very unlikely any department would just send out an unarmed counselor, but one possibility includes sending out a counselor along with with armed police, so that all bases are covered. The biggest difference, though, is the attitude and approach of the police. They must be armed and ready to protect themselves and others as necessary, but they shouldn't go in battalion-style looking for a firefight. They should go in (on a call like this) to see what assistance is possible for the guy. You know, help him. 

Sure. The mental health professional could have been covered by a sniper in a situation like this. But it goes back to my point about adequately funded mental health services and managing the risk of those type of unarmed staff. If there are no mental health professionals staffed, then it’s up to armed police. If this guy had received adequate services earlier in his life, things might have been different.

This is a great example of the call for reprioritizing local funding when it comes to police, mental health, homelessness, etc. plus the added dynamic when readily available firearms are thrown in the mix

[Brisketexan 104624]

31 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Sure. The mental health professional could have been covered by a sniper in a situation like this. But it goes back to my point about adequately funded mental health services and managing the risk of those type of unarmed staff. If there are no mental health professionals staffed, then it’s up to armed police. If this guy had received adequate services earlier in his life, things might have been different.

This is a great example of the call for reprioritizing local funding when it comes to police, mental health, homelessness, etc. plus the added dynamic when readily available firearms are thrown in the mix

Yep.

How about we back up, and look at this from 30,000 feet.  What percentage of police interactions are with the following populations/purposes?

1) mentally ill people

2) addicts

3) the homeless (BIG overlay with categories 1 and 2, by the way)

4) drug enforcement/interdiction

Seriously, I don't know.  BUT, from perusing the APD booking threads over the years.....man, it looks like it's a metric shitton.  If you take out ordinary traffic enforcement (speeding etc.), you'd chop off most interactions between law enforcement and the public.

We can reduce police encounters (which create a risk to all) if we address these issues better on the front end.  Treat addiction like a medical issue, not a criminal one.  Provide more rehab infrastructure instead of more prison cells.  Build a real mental health apparatus again.  End the war on drugs (and re-direct those resources to prevention and treatment of addiction).  Have most traffic enforcement be via specialized traffic units, focused on that task and not as a revenue-generating sideline for primary police.

We have a pool of dollars.  Instead of continuing to spend the biggest chunk of them on tactical armed response units.....how about we re-direct large chunks of those funds to addressing the very issues that the tactical armed response units keep responding to?  That's it.  That's the gist of the "defund the police" movement and similar thinking.

Edited June 15, 2020 by Brisketexan

[Mdhorn 5911]

Brisket,

those prisons won't pay for themselves and this is from a 2013 article.  Can't imagine what it must be like under the current admin.  https://www.salon.com/2013/09/23/6_shocking_revelations_about_how_private_prisons_make_money_partner/: 

1. 65 percent of the private prison contracts ITPI received and analyzed included occupancy guarantees in the form of quotas or required payments for empty prison cells (a “low-crime tax”). These quotas and low-crime taxes put taxpayers on the hook for guaranteeing profits for private prison corporations.
2. Occupancy guarantee clauses in private prison contracts range between 80% and 100%, with 90% as the most frequent occupancy guarantee requirement.
3. Arizona, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Virginia are locked in contracts with the highest occupancy guarantee requirements, with all quotas requiring between 95% and 100% occupancy.
4. Though crime has dropped by a third in the past decade, an occupancy requirement covering three for-profit prisons has forced taxpayers in Colorado to pay an additional $2 million.
5. Three Arizona for-profit prison contracts have a staggering 100% quota, even though a 2012 analysis from Tucson Citizen shows that the company’s per-day charge for each prisoner has increased an average of 13.9% over the life of the contracts.
6. A 20-year deal to privately operate the Lake Erie Correctional Institution in Ohio includes a 90% quota, and has contributed to cutting corners on safety, including overcrowding, areas without secure doors and an increase in crime both inside the prison and in the surrounding community.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Disgusting.

Systematic racism perpetuated by men like this.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Damn. That was quick!

[UpperWestside 6136]

Consider his social construct, both outdated and racist, to now be canceled. 

[BrazilHorn 6576]

Good, fuck that 61 yo racist POS.

There are 41M people out of work and I am willing to bet that the city of Philadelphia can find 1 person from that group that is not a racist piece of trash.

[freyguy 4245]

Can we also fire the dude filming the encounter?  His camera skills are offensive.

[gmr548 16513]

That video is horrifying and highlights for me a real Achilles heel of US law enforcement. As long as we have essentially unfettered access to guns, cops here are prepared to kill immediately, because they are trained to suspect anyone may be carrying and kill them. We wind up with “shoot first, ask questions later” mentality. That great for western novels, but it’s no way to protect the citizenry.

While I concede that the availability of firearms in the US presents police with potentially a different set of challenges, I still think we can disarm them successfully.
Learning to approach a situation cautiously, not with gun drawn and an itchy trigger finger, would save a lot of lives, cops included, I think.
 

The "cops need guns because bad guys have them too" bit is really hollow for me.

1.) Most police interactions aren't with dangerous armed criminals, they're traffic stops. They're responding to Karen complaints. In most situations, the simple presence of a gun escalates the situation.

2.) People don't not shoot cops because they're armed. People don't shoot cops because a.) People just don't shoot random people that often, and b.) It's capital murder.

[Brisketexan 104624]

9 minutes ago, BrazilHorn said:

Good, fuck that 61 yo racist POS.

There are 41M people out of work and I am willing to bet that the city of Philadelphia can find 1 person from that group that is not a racist piece of trash.

Here's the thing....there are folks who lament this as "cancel culture."  Fuck that shit.  I'm done.  I'm done accommodating shit that's incompatible with a functioning society.  For fuck's sake, these assholes spent centuries "cancelling" the ability of black people to vote, work certain jobs, etc.  For no fucking reason other than that they are black.  Now, when they face consequences for their ACTIONS, they bitch?  Fuck that shit.  Being a fucking racist asshole has consequences.  Deal with it.  And note, if that's just the way you FEEL, and you just sit at home watching OAN seething quietly to yourself, but you don't do or say something racist in public, you'll be fine.

Kind of like how it doesn't matter if rape fantasies get you hot.  As long as you don't go out and actually rape someone, you can have all the twisted feelings you want.

No sympathy for this fuckstick or anyone like him.

[BrazilHorn 6576]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

Here's the thing....there are folks who lament this as "cancel culture."  Fuck that shit.  I'm done.  I'm done accommodating shit that's incompatible with a functioning society.  For fuck's sake, these assholes spent centuries "cancelling" the ability of black people to vote, work certain jobs, etc.  For no fucking reason other than that they are black.  Now, when they face consequences for their ACTIONS, they bitch?  Fuck that shit.  Being a fucking racist asshole has consequences.  Deal with it.  And note, if that's just the way you FEEL, and you just sit at home watching OAN seething quietly to yourself, but you don't do or say something racist in public, you'll be fine.

Kind of like how it doesn't matter if rape fantasies get you hot.  As long as you don't go out and actually rape someone, you can have all the twisted feelings you want.

No sympathy for this fuckstick or anyone like him.

Exactly this. He could have just sat at home venting his spleen to his television set or he could have complained to the center where the signs were posted if he genuinely believed that ANY sign on that fence was inappropriate. I am willing to bet that a "Back the blue" sign wouldn't have been a problem for this man.

The lady in central park who tried to SWAT the black birdwatcher, the douchebag in Maryland who attacked the teens handing out fliers with his bike and this fucktard all 100% deserve what is coming to them in terms of job loss, public shaming etc.

It would be one thing if 10 years ago he posted something he has since grown from and completely distanced himself from, that would be leaning into "cancel" culture. This is in the midst of a massive social awakening choosing to be a complete POS. There is a big difference.

[Hookah Horns 3081]

In this podcast on race and police use of force, Sam Harris says a lot of things I've been thinking lately. It looks at the statistics on police violence by race and argues that while we clearly have a police use of force problem, it's not clear that we have an epidemic of racist white cop on black man violence. 

I'm sharing because I think it's a compelling viewpoint that should be debated. 

I'd be interested in reading any thoughtful counterarguments from those of you who contend the opposite. 

[jimmyjazz 45558]

An increasing number of Americans are learning that there are consequences associated with freedom, and specifically freedom of speech.  I for one am fucking overjoyed that shitbag 61 YO man now has to go scramble for employment as what will likely be "Walmart greeter" or "Uber driver". 

It's the very definition of white privilege.  Dude thinks he can do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, and his experience has been 61 long years in the making.  Guess what, asshole.  You were wrong.  It just took awhile for things to catch up.

[Brisketexan 104624]

2 minutes ago, Hookah Horns said:

In this podcast on race and police use of force, Sam Harris says a lot of things I've been thinking lately. It looks at the statistics on police violence by race and argues that while we clearly have a police use of force problem, it's not clear that we have an epidemic of racist white cop on black man violence. 

I'm sharing because I think it's a compelling viewpoint that should be debated. 

I'd be interested in reading any thoughtful counterarguments from those of you who contend the opposite. 

I am curious to listen to this, and will try to do so.  I have my doubts about how the numbers are being used, because I've seen the same numbers most of y'all have, and the same problems with how they are argued.  Still, I'll check it out.

But I will suggest that the problem is not just police VIOLENCE.  It's police treatment across the board.  It's the fact that a black guy, of any socioeconomic class, is more likely to be detained (and cuffed) than a white man in similar circumstances.  That guy is more likely to be questioned by cops while he's waiting to meet a friend in a nice hotel lobby, etc.  To have a cop come to the car door with his hand on his gun.  Look at the videos of how cops confront a white man open carrying vs. a black man.  It's a load of biases and prejudices, some intentional, some unconscious.  Facing and confronting that reality, instead of steadfastly denying it as we have been, is THE most essential step.  We really can't accomplish much unless/until we do that.