Playing devil's advocate, didn't they call in the national guard though? That's what the national guard is. I guess I am not surprised at seeing military grade machines.
Last night they attempted to burn a church directly across from the White House. These are domestic acts of terror. The military's highest responsibility is to protect the nation.
Arson is a crime, but a crime worthy of the US military? That feels insane.
The choppers were by all accounts being used against groups of peaceful protesters who were nowhere near the church in question. They were not the ones involved in the arson.
I know from another thread about how the police use indiscriminate violence instead of de-escalation that this is totally ok with about half the people here. That half can go fuck themselves
"Shadowbanned" means banning someone without telling them. I told you in the comment you're replying to.
It's impossible to answer every email right away. You'll certainly get an answer, but I can't promise when. If you saw the catastrophic mess that is the HN inbox, you'd understand why.
We've banned this account for repeatedly violating HN's guidelines. You simply can't do this on this site, no matter how right you are or feel you are, and you've done it repeatedly already.
> I'm curious if you truly think the people that I listed want to see their home towns on fire
When given a choice to protect murderous cops or prevent a fire, they chose to protect the murderous cops. All the cops have to do is go to jail, get a court date, post bail and sit at home. Why can't a cop that murdered someone be that inconvenienced?
Probably because it was boilerplate. When people show up in threads with a pre-existing list of links, that's not conversation, that's talking-points. HN threads are supposed to be conversations.
Baseless accusation. The protests are mostly in the blue-voting cities, and the GP's list is representative.
[edit]
Here is how it works:
Minneapolis, Chief of Police: nominated (...) by the Mayor of Minneapolis (Betsy Hodges) [1]
Seattle, Chief of Police: [n]ominated by Mayor Jenny Durkan [2]
St Louis, Comissioner of Police: appointed as the 35th Commissioners of the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department on December 28, 2017 by Mayor Lyda Krewson [3]
Atlanta Chief of Police: Mayor of Atlanta Kasim Reed announced on December 1, 2016, that he had chosen Shields [4]
Chicago Superintended of the Chicago Police Department: The City Council on Wednesday voted 50-0 to appoint former Dallas Police Chief David Brown to lead the Chicago Police Department [5]
Oakland Chief of Police: Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf announced Monday that she has appointed former San Mateo Police Chief Susan Manheimer as Oakland’s interim police chief [6]
It's the cops on each force they cherry-picked. The fact that they are chief of police means nothing, but that you don't understand the institutions involved and how they work. This stuff is in front of SCOTUS and congress right now. It's not simple and it is very broken.
> The list of police chiefs & other officials is solid.
The list is solid ignorance of the institutions involved. It focuses on race of one part of police leadership and not police violence and the racist actions of many cops. Highlighting police chief race is a racial argument in the least and may be even a racist argument.
This is a pretty cynical post, but I'm not going to downvote/report it.
I actually really like the guidelines of this site. @dang and the other administrators do a good job at keeping the conversation mostly civil and the guidelines are great principles and rules to aim for that end.
Maybe if you assume bad faith of a post (anywhere on social media), it might be time to skip over it or take a break.
I'm listening to the RabbitHole podcast[1] right now which is a pretty interesting analysis by the NYTimes of how social media / online content fuels impactful psycho/social impact on participants. I hope you find it interesting.
> I don’t think that typical “pro-police forces” want to own the narrative of their cause being racist and violent
I think they do. Many cops seem to be very racist and very violent. It doesn't seem like they care who knows it. Even when they do care, they might not turn on body-cams which should be a fireable offense and now it finally is in at least one case in Kentucky.
You say “most” which implies that you agree that some police are racist and violent “bad apples.” Why, then, do the “good cops” not speak out against the bad cops? Surely they could use their overwhelming numbers to get rid of the racist and violent bad apples?
Why don't the "good protesters" speak out against the looters? Why do you demand the cops do what you wont do? (maybe you personally do but most protesters are not speaking against the looters). Often times it's dangerous to speak up or separate groups entirely. I'm sure the oakland police department is less racist than some random cop Jackson, Mississippi.
Bad analogy. You might as well ask why firefighters don’t pull teeth. It’s not their job.
Police swear an oath to uphold the law and it’s ostensibly their job to, when observing illegality, say “hey knock it off.”
Protesters do not swear an oath as a prerequisite to protesting. Protesters frequently do speak out against- and even forcibly prevent- looting and vandalism within their ranks, but if they don’t, it’s not a dereliction of duty in the same way as when cops ignore abuses in their ranks.
In a large enough group, you can find "many" people who are whatever you want to generalize the whole group as. Using your logic, saying "many" of the protesters are looting and attacking police and innocent bystanders is completely true. You're picking words that you know are deliberately misleading to push an agenda.
That's a video of George Floyd being murdered by cops. Do you even know what we are talking about? The cops are violent. They could de-escalate instead of use violence. The agenda is talking about this article https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/de-escalation-keeps-pro...
