Racism in America (with data)

[malchior]

I didn't see this but yesterday apparently saw a nasty counter-protest out on Long Island. It's pretty ugly. Unlike the jamokes in that one video where they stood around holding guns these guys tried to unleash the police on the protesters. Quality humaning here.

[malchior]

BTW - prepare to hear about Project Veritas. They are a right-wing disinformation group who is now claiming that they infiltrated antifa's secret training program...in Portland. Derp derp derp high alert. My canaries are tweeting like mad. There is so much disinformation propaganda flying that it is hard to think this isn't a conspiracy. Just kidding. The right has schmucks like James O'Keefe making shit up every day. Whatever sticks, sticks. The best part is this...

[morlac]

Stuff

Just a suggestion, but if you want to have a serious discussion, maybe stop misrepresenting people's positions.

I wont bother to point to the multiple times that same has happened to me in this thread, nor will I bother to cite again where I tried to have a discussion on why violence isn't the answer and how it would fail; even quoting and linking to a great article supporting this from the last time our country had race riots. Pretty much the most applicable comparison. I got zero response except rolley eyes, told I lived in fantasy land, and then insinuations I'm racist because I had the audacity to say no violence.

Yes, almost every post since then has been full of hyperbole and slippery ass slope arguments to prove a point.

It's all good, no hard feelings. Thank you all for participating.

Carry on, You gentleman enjoy yourselves.

[Zaxxon]

Let me know when you're done with the team phone from calling all the African-Americans who have experienced injustice due to systemic racism. Then I'll start in on those impacted by looting.

[malchior]

BTW - the blue number you are can see at the top left is them trying to keep track of the incidents so they can de-conflict them if they get multiple angles. Those are the number of police violence incidents they're captured. that doesn't mean they are all bad but you can page through and many of them aren't good to say the least. Again we have massive, massive problem and pretending the police haven't antagonized the population into massive unrest is missing the picture. It doesn't mean looting is ok but people are fed up and the police are escalating the violence further. That is maybe why this isn't going away.

[ImLawBoy]

Stuff

Just a suggestion, but if you want to have a serious discussion, maybe stop misrepresenting people's positions.

I wont bother to point to the multiple times that same has happened to me in this thread, nor will I bother to cite again where I tried to have a discussion on why violence isn't the answer and how it would fail; even quoting and linking to a great article supporting this from the last time our country had race riots. Pretty much the most applicable comparison. I got zero response except rolley eyes, told I lived in fantasy land, and then insinuations I'm racist because I had the audacity to say no violence.

Yes, almost every post since then has been full of hyperbole and slippery ass slope arguments to prove a point.

It's all good, no hard feelings. Thank you all for participating.

Carry on, You gentleman enjoy yourselves.

Look, if you are going to say that anyone who is trying to understand why some people are turning to violence is condoning violence, you're not going to get anyone all that interested in responding to any of the well reasoned arguments you might make. If you're going to ignore everyone who responded to your question about whether they've faced violence, why should they bother responding to your other points?

[LawBeefaroni]

Trump has put people who aren't trained for this task in a terrible position.

To be fair, I'm kinda glad we're not training NG troops to move against American citizens.

[Alefroth]

I got zero response except rolley eyes, told I lived in fantasy land, and then insinuations I'm racist because I had the audacity to say no violence.

I only rolly eyed the part of your post where you descended into absurdity and you know it.

[morlac]

Let me know when you're done with the team phone from calling all the African-Americans who have experienced injustice due to systemic racism. Then I'll start in on those impacted by looting.

Haha love it, now we are talking hyperbole.

Dammit, I was going to stop but this one is too easy.

So not all lives created equal? What's the blood equation for this? 10 lost lives due to injustice = 1 lost to looting? I gotta now when it's not racist to complain so I need to be over that delta.

[LawBeefaroni]

[morlac]

I got zero response except rolley eyes, told I lived in fantasy land, and then insinuations I'm racist because I had the audacity to say no violence.

I only rolly eyed the part of your post where you descended into absurdity and you know it.

Oh absolutely. Sorry, I wasn't referencing that one as it was warranted but one way earlier in the thread when I was actually trying to have a serious conversation, albeit a little agitated one after Friday night.

[Zaxxon]

Let me know when you're done with the team phone from calling all the African-Americans who have experienced injustice due to systemic racism. Then I'll start in on those impacted by looting.

Haha love it, now we are talking hyperbole.

Dammit, I was going to stop but this one is too easy.

So not all lives created equal? What's the blood equation for this? 10 lost lives due to injustice = 1 lost to looting? I gotta now when it's not racist to complain so I need to be over that delta.

[LordMortis]

No idea who Beau of the Fifth, but he's inspirational. I hope he's every sergeant out there.

[Smoove_B]

then insinuations I'm racist because I had the audacity to say no violence.

I just want to reiterate (in case that was directed at me), that in no way was the article I shared intended to be a passive/aggressive swipe at anyone here discussing current events. Again, it was only shared as something I could (unfortunately) relate to - communicating with older relatives that are seemingly unaware it's no longer 1965.

[Anonymous Bosch]

Let me know when you're done with the team phone from calling all the African-Americans who have experienced injustice due to systemic racism. Then I'll start in on those impacted by looting.

Yeah, until then fuck all the African-American small business owners whose livelihoods have been utterly devastated by rampant looters and violent opportunists. Not to mention the 77-yr-old African-American that was murdered by looters and streamed live on Facebook bleeding to death on a sidewalk in front of a looted shop.

Retired Police Captain David Dorn Was Shot During Protests in St Louis. His Death Was Streamed Live on Facebook

A retired police chief was checking on his friend’s store in St. Louis in the early hours of Tuesday morning when he was shot, and as he lay bleeding to death on the sidewalk, his final moments were broadcast live on Facebook.

David Dorn, 77, was shot in the torso about 2:30 a.m. on Tuesday while responding to an alarm at Lee’s Pawn & Jewelry at 4123 Martin Luther King Drive, to the north of St. Louis city center. St. Louis Police Chief John Hayden told a press conference Tuesday that the store was being looted, and that Dorn was shot “during the looting process,” but no arrests have been made.

The shooting occurred during another night of protests against the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, and elsewhere in St. Louis on Monday night, four police officers were shot. Dorn, who retired from the St. Louis Metro Police force over a decade ago, was not wearing a law enforcement uniform when he was shot.

The live video on Facebook has now been taken down, but copies of it continue to be shared on Twitter.

The disturbing video, reviewed by VICE News, shows someone pulling up to the scene in a car just after the shooting happened. The person gets out of the car, saying “stay with me, stay with me.”

Dorn, who is sprawled on the sidewalk holding his phone, is still alive when the video is being taken and can be seen moving his head — but the person taking the video does not appear to call 911.

State Rep. Rasheen Aldridge said he saw the broadcast and was horrified by it. “I just seen a man die on live man! Smh,” he wrote in a Facebook post. Another Facebook user pointed out that no one appeared to help Dorn.

[Zaxxon]

Clearly communication is not happening here. Carry on; I'm out.

[Enough]

Let me know when you're done with the team phone from calling all the African-Americans who have experienced injustice due to systemic racism. Then I'll start in on those impacted by looting.

Yeah, until then fuck all the African-American small business owners whose livelihoods have been utterly devastated by rampant looters and violent opportunists. Not to mention the 77-yr-old African-American that was murdered by looters and streamed live on Facebook bleeding to death on a sidewalk in front of a looted shop.

Retired Police Captain David Dorn Was Shot During Protests in St Louis. His Death Was Streamed Live on Facebook

A retired police chief was checking on his friend’s store in St. Louis in the early hours of Tuesday morning when he was shot, and as he lay bleeding to death on the sidewalk, his final moments were broadcast live on Facebook.

David Dorn, 77, was shot in the torso about 2:30 a.m. on Tuesday while responding to an alarm at Lee’s Pawn & Jewelry at 4123 Martin Luther King Drive, to the north of St. Louis city center. St. Louis Police Chief John Hayden told a press conference Tuesday that the store was being looted, and that Dorn was shot “during the looting process,” but no arrests have been made.

The shooting occurred during another night of protests against the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, and elsewhere in St. Louis on Monday night, four police officers were shot. Dorn, who retired from the St. Louis Metro Police force over a decade ago, was not wearing a law enforcement uniform when he was shot.

The live video on Facebook has now been taken down, but copies of it continue to be shared on Twitter.

The disturbing video, reviewed by VICE News, shows someone pulling up to the scene in a car just after the shooting happened. The person gets out of the car, saying “stay with me, stay with me.”

Dorn, who is sprawled on the sidewalk holding his phone, is still alive when the video is being taken and can be seen moving his head — but the person taking the video does not appear to call 911.

State Rep. Rasheen Aldridge said he saw the broadcast and was horrified by it. “I just seen a man die on live man! Smh,” he wrote in a Facebook post. Another Facebook user pointed out that no one appeared to help Dorn.

I don't think anyone is disputing your point AB. It seems though you are contorting yourself to not look through the lens that we've presented that when shit gets really bad this is the unavoidable locus of change (I gave a few examples in the post I replied to yours earlier if you need some). I don't see one damn person on this thread celebrating violence worthy of your fuck you small black business owner missive. I see people trying to keep the focus on why the fires are lit and how do we get where we don't have this happen every generation in this country. It will burn again if we don't get there and yet another generation of small businesses will yet again burn. But let me be clear, I fucking hate violence and hate to see any business get gutted. How many small businesses were gutted in the 1968 riots after MLK's death in the week leading up to the landmark 1968 civil rights bill getting passed? Was that part of why that law was passed? Do we have that on the books today sans riots? I think we're saying this is a really damn serious situation and we can understand that a reaction is rioting and that is about all the truly oppressed feel they have to fight with.

[Anonymous Bosch]

Perhaps I misinterpreted, but Zaxxon's post struck me as snarky. So I replied in kind with my own snarkastic response. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

[morlac]

Enough, here is an article along these lines and explaining pretty well why violence won't work and will infact potentially helps Trump win again.
(second time If posted it but here it is again)
https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/ ... e-politics

Choice quotes:


What we observe in the nineteen-sixties is that there was a nontrivial number of white moderates who were open to policies that advanced racial equality, and were also very concerned about order. The needle that civil-rights activists were trying to thread was: How do you advance racial equality, and capture the attention of often indifferent or hostile white moderates outside of the South, and at the same time grow a coalition of allies? And over time the strategy that evolved was one of nonviolent protest, which actively sought to trigger police chiefs like Bull Connor [in Birmingham, Alabama,] to engage in spectacles of violence that attracted national media and would, in the language of the nineteen-sixties, “shock the conscience of the nation.” So it isn’t just nonviolence that is effective, but nonviolence met with state and vigilante brutality that is effective.

The interesting thing to me that came out of this research was that civil-rights leaders were picking Birmingham and Selma specifically because they had police chiefs with hair-trigger tendencies toward violence. So there was this strategic use of violence by the civil-rights movement, but it was to be the object of violence, not the instigators of violence. At the same time, what was very hard about, with that strategy, is that you had images of people observing their kinfolk being brutalized on television, and that helped fire up a more militant wing of the civil-rights movement, which endorsed violence in self-defense and was much less committed to tactics of nonviolence. When we observed a wave of violent protests in the mid- to late sixties, those white moderates who supported the Democratic Party after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 defected to the Republican Party in 1968. So, when the state was employing violence and protesters were the targets of that violence, the strategy worked well, and when protesters engaged in violence—whether or not the state was—those voters moved to the law-and-order coalition.

And


Trump has run as a law-and-order candidate, and today repeated the looting-and-shooting comment that was made by the Miami police chief Walter Headley, in 1967. At the same time, it seems like Nixon was fundamentally selling stability, and Trump often tries to destabilize situations. How do you think this will or won’t have political ramifications?

On the first part, I have looked at polling data from the sixties, and the numbers are really surprising. It was something like eighty per cent of Americans said that law and order had broken down. We had King’s assassination, and two Kennedys assassinated, and these waves of violent protests. So it was more than just urban unrest. There was a sense that the social fabric was tearing, and I think Nixon was clearly appealing to voters for whom that was an anxiety. And I also found that, in the 1966 gubernatorial election in California, Democrats who thought Pat Brown, who was the Democratic governor at the time, had handled the Watts riots poorly were hugely less likely to support him. [Ronald Reagan defeated Brown by fifteen percentage points.] So it really was pivotal in the nineteen-sixties.

What’s often hard for people to see is that there are these white moderates who are part of the Democratic coalition as long as they perceive there to be order, but when they perceive there to be too much disorder they shift to the party that has owned the issue of order, which is the Republican Party. For some people, the idea that there are these swing Democratic-minded voters is hard to grasp, but there is pretty strong evidence that in 2016, and in 1968, that was an important and influential niche of voters.

You are absolutely right that Trump, to a lot of people, is an instigator of chaos rather than a restorer of order, so I think that potentially works against him. But if you are this white moderate, and perceive the disorder to be coming from African-Americans in cities, then turning to Trump, even if you see him as a rough character, is appealing: He’s a street fighter, but he is our street fighter. So the real danger for advocates of reform in Minneapolis trying to get better policing, and for those trying to pursue racial justice nationally, is that there are people who are turned off by Trump but who have a strong taste for order, and so if they are more concerned about racial disorder, then Trump is their racial order.

[Enough]

Perhaps I misinterpreted, but Zaxxon's post struck me as snarky. So I replied in kind with my own snarkastic response. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

And in such you can understand the mechanism behind the current riots. Tit for tat and on and on...

[Enough]

Enough, here is an article along these lines and explaining pretty well why violence won't work and will infact potentially helps Trump win again.
(second time If posted it but here it is again)
https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/ ... e-politics

Choice quotes:


What we observe in the nineteen-sixties is that there was a nontrivial number of white moderates who were open to policies that advanced racial equality, and were also very concerned about order. The needle that civil-rights activists were trying to thread was: How do you advance racial equality, and capture the attention of often indifferent or hostile white moderates outside of the South, and at the same time grow a coalition of allies? And over time the strategy that evolved was one of nonviolent protest, which actively sought to trigger police chiefs like Bull Connor [in Birmingham, Alabama,] to engage in spectacles of violence that attracted national media and would, in the language of the nineteen-sixties, “shock the conscience of the nation.” So it isn’t just nonviolence that is effective, but nonviolence met with state and vigilante brutality that is effective.

The interesting thing to me that came out of this research was that civil-rights leaders were picking Birmingham and Selma specifically because they had police chiefs with hair-trigger tendencies toward violence. So there was this strategic use of violence by the civil-rights movement, but it was to be the object of violence, not the instigators of violence. At the same time, what was very hard about, with that strategy, is that you had images of people observing their kinfolk being brutalized on television, and that helped fire up a more militant wing of the civil-rights movement, which endorsed violence in self-defense and was much less committed to tactics of nonviolence. When we observed a wave of violent protests in the mid- to late sixties, those white moderates who supported the Democratic Party after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 defected to the Republican Party in 1968. So, when the state was employing violence and protesters were the targets of that violence, the strategy worked well, and when protesters engaged in violence—whether or not the state was—those voters moved to the law-and-order coalition.

And


Trump has run as a law-and-order candidate, and today repeated the looting-and-shooting comment that was made by the Miami police chief Walter Headley, in 1967. At the same time, it seems like Nixon was fundamentally selling stability, and Trump often tries to destabilize situations. How do you think this will or won’t have political ramifications?

On the first part, I have looked at polling data from the sixties, and the numbers are really surprising. It was something like eighty per cent of Americans said that law and order had broken down. We had King’s assassination, and two Kennedys assassinated, and these waves of violent protests. So it was more than just urban unrest. There was a sense that the social fabric was tearing, and I think Nixon was clearly appealing to voters for whom that was an anxiety. And I also found that, in the 1966 gubernatorial election in California, Democrats who thought Pat Brown, who was the Democratic governor at the time, had handled the Watts riots poorly were hugely less likely to support him. [Ronald Reagan defeated Brown by fifteen percentage points.] So it really was pivotal in the nineteen-sixties.

What’s often hard for people to see is that there are these white moderates who are part of the Democratic coalition as long as they perceive there to be order, but when they perceive there to be too much disorder they shift to the party that has owned the issue of order, which is the Republican Party. For some people, the idea that there are these swing Democratic-minded voters is hard to grasp, but there is pretty strong evidence that in 2016, and in 1968, that was an important and influential niche of voters.

You are absolutely right that Trump, to a lot of people, is an instigator of chaos rather than a restorer of order, so I think that potentially works against him. But if you are this white moderate, and perceive the disorder to be coming from African-Americans in cities, then turning to Trump, even if you see him as a rough character, is appealing: He’s a street fighter, but he is our street fighter. So the real danger for advocates of reform in Minneapolis trying to get better policing, and for those trying to pursue racial justice nationally, is that there are people who are turned off by Trump but who have a strong taste for order, and so if they are more concerned about racial disorder, then Trump is their racial order.

Here's the theorist in the interview from your article on Twitter:



I think you might misunderstand Omar Wasow. His point seems to be more than nonviolence can work to help bring about real change. And thank god for that, cause we need to get to that point for the deep structural changes needed. The riots provide the saliency and exigency, such that this RP forum and so many other convos around the country have been thinking about these issues non-stop. It's a Venn diagram and the circles are not mutually exclusive. And thinking about it more now, I guess if we all went Gandhi here and lined up to take the police brutality over and over again, that might be an alternative, but it's pretty damned hard to fault those that don't have the training in non-violence to do so. As your expert says on his twitter,

To be clear, this is not an argument against violent resistance. Most moral codes allow for violence in self defense. Malcolm X said, “I don't even call it violence when it’s self-defense, I call it intelligence.” The evidence above, however, does suggest nonviolence can work

In short, strategic black activists effectively used a variety of nonviolent tactics like boycotts & what I call “agenda seeding” of media to break Jim Crow and win in Congress & national elections. Violent resistance to state repression may be just but not always strategic.

[morlac]

Interesting thanks fort sharing, you did read the entire twitter thread though, right? and the article I linked? Not just the one twitt one you linked? The entire feed just recaps the article. He did good research, check it all out.



this quote"Still, I’m struck by folks saying “nonviolence doesn’t work.”




From the article.

"What protest tactics would you recommend for people concerned about police brutality today? On the one hand, these current protests were already sparked by state violence, so they don’t need to incite more of it. On the other hand, we have had these viral videos of police brutality for years, and it is not clear all that much is changing.

If you are an activist and there is this outrageous incident (like a knee on a neck) and you say, “How can we advance our interests?,” it might be that both violent and nonviolent protests are legitimate—but it still might be more effective to employ nonviolence, if we get everything we would from a violent protest, plus we don’t splinter a coalition that favors change. One puzzle is, if you are an activist, are nonviolent tactics going to get you more of what you want, or are violent tactics? And what I found from the sixties is that nonviolent protest achieved many of the same sorts of outcomes that the more militant activists were fighting for without splintering the Democratic coalition. There was a pro-segregation media at the time, and there were all kinds of state and federal repression—and, despite all of that, the nonviolent wing of the civil-rights movement was really able to move the country from tolerating Jim Crow to breaking Jim Crow."
"o I think there is a lot of evidence that nonviolent tactics can be effective. You saw this on the first day in Minneapolis, where the police showed up with an excess of force, and you had these images of children running away and police dressed like stormtroopers. There are a set of narrative scripts in the public mind, and I think we interpret the news through those preëxisting narratives. And so a nonviolent protest where we see state excesses is a very powerful and sympathetic narrative for the cause of fighting police violence. And as soon as the tactics shift to more aggressive violent resistance—and, to be clear, as best I can tell, police were shooting rubber bullets and there was tear gas. It seemed like an excessive police response, and so in reaction protesters escalated as well. That has an unfortunate side effect of muddying the story. Instead of talking about the history of police killings in Minneapolis, we are talking about a store going up in flames, and the focus in reporting tends to shift from a justice frame to a crime frame. And that is an unfortunate thing for a protest movement. It ends up undermining the interests of the advocates."


This is what I said:"Enough, here is an article along these lines and explaining pretty well why violence won't work and will infact potentially helps Trump win again. "
--Not sure How I'm misunderstanding him as the article and his twitter feed back this up.

Edit to add: His whole shtick is around winning over Moderates and the effect that violence vs non violence has on the media and swaying those votes to effect change. His conclusion was that violence was not effective. He felt the need to caveat that with the twitt you linked for some reason even though he did not in the article. Odd.

[Alefroth]

Why do you keep insisting anyone here has said non-violence doesn't work?

[malchior]

In other fun news, NY has suspended habeus corpus and aren't processing arrests. They are holding people indefinitely in Manhattan, Brooklyn, and the Bronx at the moment. The judge cites the Covid-19 crisis as a reason since all arraignments are being done virtually. Somehow this is slower.

[Grifman]

Let me know when you're done with the team phone from calling all the African-Americans who have experienced injustice due to systemic racism. Then I'll start in on those impacted by looting.

You know, one can be opposed to racism and police brutality, and at the same time be concerned about the violence and looting going on too. These are not opposing positions. In fact, I've seen black protestors trying to stop and restrain looters, oftentimes white looters. They certainly seem able to hold both positions at the same time.

I've read any number of reports about minority businesses that most likely will go under due to damage and destruction. Corporate entities will survive, and either rebuild, or very likely, move out. it's minority small businesses that will die and not reopen, costing jobs in the very communities that so desperately need them.

[Zaxxon]

Let me know when you're done with the team phone from calling all the African-Americans who have experienced injustice due to systemic racism. Then I'll start in on those impacted by looting.

You know, one can be opposed to racism and police brutality, and at the same time be concerned about the violence and looting going on too .

Indeed, I do know that *as that is my position!*

No one in this thread (unless I've missed it) is 'unconcerned' with the violence and looting.

[Alefroth]

You know, one can be opposed to racism and police brutality, and at the same time be concerned about the violence and looting going on too. These are not opposing positions.

Of course you can, and I challenge you to find anyone here who has claimed otherwise. It's just that a few people seem to be focusing more on the latter, and that seems a bit out of touch currently since looting isn't exactly systemic.

[malchior]

This one is rough. Really rough. They push the man, he stumbles backwards, and hits his head with an ear bleed. A serious cranial injury potentially. They move on without rendering aid and it looks like some guardsmen step up to look at him. BTW the Buffalo PD official line is "tripped and fell". The police were barely there at all. The little shove? Not material. FFS.

[Anonymous Bosch]

Let me know when you're done with the team phone from calling all the African-Americans who have experienced injustice due to systemic racism. Then I'll start in on those impacted by looting.

You know, one can be opposed to racism and police brutality, and at the same time be concerned about the violence and looting going on too .

Indeed, I do know that *as that is my position!*

No one in this thread (unless I've missed it) is 'unconcerned' with the violence and looting.

Except your snarky response to morlac unambiguously implied your empathy towards those impacted by looting was contingent upon him first "calling all the African-Americans who have experienced injustice due to systemic racism" (hence my snarkastic response in kind):

Let me know when you're done with the team phone from calling all the African-Americans who have experienced injustice due to systemic racism. Then I'll start in on those impacted by looting.

[Zaxxon]

Indeed, as it was called for after his prior post ridiculously caricatured and/or demonstrated misunderstanding of what he thought he was arguing against.

It's really not that complicated. Go back a few days and read through what I, BH, etc have been saying.

[malchior]

They wear that bright green hat so the cops know they are there to make sure that protesters rights are being protected. Arresting them is pure thuggery. Especially in light of the suspension of the writ of habeus corpus in NY. DeBlasio needs to get control of this department.

[Isgrimnur]

Spoiler:

[Smoove_B]

Am I misunderstanding that the general policy in NYC seems to be anyone out after curfew is getting arrested, right? If only there was some way to de-escalate that and make sure people that are peacefully assembling didn't get arrested. I'd need to think about that tonight.

[malchior]

Yep. Apparently they got the message that property was more important than not warring with the population. They are enforcing the curfew that is *far too early* by immediately starting a melee. 8 o'clock rings and the purge begins except it is thug cops cracking skulls. And they trapped them so that they were surrounded for the fight to begin.

The NYPD was put in a crappy spot but they've essentially squeezed out any empathy they deserved. They are completely out of control. Worse they also are claiming that they can't process everyone in a timely manner so they convinced a judge to just let them sit and rot. We sure look like a shit hole nation. We are going to need a truth and reconciliation committee after this is done.

[Enough]

Yep. Apparently they got the message that property was more important than not warring with the population. They are enforcing the curfew that is *far too early* by immediately starting a melee. 8 o'clock rings and the purge begins except it is thug cops cracking skulls. And they trapped them so that they were surrounded for the fight to begin.

The NYPD was put in a crappy spot but they've essentially squeezed out any empathy they deserved. They are completely out of control. Worse they also are claiming that they can't process everyone in a timely manner so they convinced a judge to just let them sit and rot. We sure look like a shit hole nation. We are going to need a truth and reconciliation committee after this is done.

There's one heck of a violent video on Reddit of a prisoner getting seriously beaten while restrained, pure torture. And back to what is being seen at protests, another video shows a guy with his hands up being interviewed get rushed by a gazillion cops complete with barking attack dog and they beat the crap out of him.

[malchior]

Here is the police pushing a reporter around - notice when he leaves what is on his shirt...might as well be a gang shirt at this point. Fascist thugs. Guess we're supposed to be happy they only intimidated and pushed around a reporter instead of arresting her.

[Alefroth]

I don't think there is really much difference at this point.

[malchior]

This was the Buffalo PD last night. A man is giving an interview and the police charge him from behind and just tackle him violently.

[Enough]

This was the Buffalo PD last night. A man is giving an interview and the police charge him from behind and just tackle him violently.

Yep, that's the one I saw earlier.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[Smoove_B]

Philadelphia - w in the actual f is happening?

This is Philly around 5:30 today. There is just no defense for this behavior. At all.

I guess I am largely ignorant of what the NYPD climate has been. I knew they were bad at one point but then I thought they were evaluated and reformed. What I've been seeing over the last 24 hours suggests they have big, big problems. I don't know anything about Philadelphia cops (or their history) but that video above is inexcusable.