Harsh Your Mellow Monday: Fire, Fury, and Frustration Edition
I’ve never struggled with putting what my eyes see and read to what my fingers write as I have the last few days. I even debated if it was appropriate to do a purposefully snarky thing like HYMM is, as I did not do when the Coronavirus first hit for a few weeks. But the frustration is real and the anger is real, so if we don’t channel it productively ourselves, who are we to tell others to do so?
Thus here we go, with this weeks Harsh Your Mellow Monday. But do take care of yourselves and each other out there.
[HM1] No, This Time Won’t Be Different…Unless
Every time we do this, folks will insist “This is the moment…” that everything is going to be different.
God, I hope it is. I pray it is. I doubt it is.
Not because folks don’t want change, or aren’t demanding it, or really don’t mean it when they protest, because everything that brought us up to this point is untouched by all that outrage and will remain, dooming us to repeat this cycle again.
If protests, riots, and outrage changed things they would have after we Americans did this before:
The protests and riots in Los Angeles and elsewhere in 1992:
Hudson nodded at the memory. “Yeah, I looted. Car parts, liquor, cigarettes. What else we get? We got some tyres. I saw it being done all over the place. It was amazing.”
The explosion of rage and anarchy that became known as the Rodney King riots found its locus at this drab corner of south central Los Angeles. Television news helicopters captured scenes that mesmerised and horrified: buildings aflame, crowds looting, mobs beating.
It erupted on 29 April 1992 after a nearly all-white jury acquitted four LAPD officers of savagely assaulting King a year earlier, an atrocity caught on camera. “It was scary because there was no justice,” recalled Hudson, 50. “You saw the man getting whupped. The whole world knew they were guilty.”
And so, for this and other injustices, African Americans here and in other parts of the city lashed back, six days of fury which consumed 53 lives and a billion dollars worth of property and made LA, once a symbol of American optimism, appear apocalyptic.
The dark year that was 1968 in America:
“I don’t like to predict violence,” Martin Luther King Jr. told an audience at Washington National Cathedral on March 31, 1968. The mostly white crowd of 4,000 packed the cathedral and spilled onto the lawn. “But if nothing is done between now and June to raise ghetto hope,” King continued, “I feel this summer will not only be as bad but worse than last year.”
Angered by poor living conditions, unemployment, and discrimination, African-Americans in 1967 rioted in cities across the country. Twenty-seven people died in Newark, 43 in Detroit.
Four days after his sermon at the cathedral—on Thursday, April 4—King was assassinated in Memphis.
At the busy intersection of 14th and U streets in Northwest DC—the heart of the District’s black community—the news arrived on teenagers’ transistor radios. People began to gather at the intersection, which was near the Washington office of King’s Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Stokely Carmichael—a Howard University graduate who would later become a nationally known Black Panther—led a group of young men into nearby businesses, demanding they shut down as they had when President Kennedy was killed in 1963. Carmichael urged people to remain calm, but the crowd grew. Rioters, many of them teenagers, smashed windows, looted stores, and started fires. They tossed Molotov cocktails into buildings and threw bottles, bricks, and rocks at firefighters who tried to put out the blazes. The mood was part anger, part exhilaration.
You can even go back to a time where we had protests, rioting, and a pandemic all at the same time, 1918/1919, that has already drawn comparisons to now because of the Covid-19/Spanish Flu similarities:
A rash of racist violence against African Americans has hit the United States. Across the land, African Americans and left organizations attempt to organize, or even fight back. Meanwhile, a pandemic ravages the country and the world. International crises further threaten to tear the nation apart.
This was the state of things in the summer of 1919.
The United States reeled from the “Red Summer” riots, where hundreds of African Americans were slain in cities and small towns alike. Many of the “riots” were little more than anti-black pogroms, waged in response to growing demands for civil rights, labor rights, and adequate housing. This all came as the nation struggled to return to a peacetime economy amid international uncertainty, and the influenza pandemic — popularly known as the “Spanish Flu” — pummeled the country. Ultimately, 675,000 Americans would die from influenza, part of over 50 million deaths worldwide.
Historians tend to say that history doesn’t repeat itself. But, in this case, it does feel like it rhymes.
It rhymes because we are remixing the same old song and wondering why it sounds the same just with different lyrics and an updated beat.
It starts with the basic lack of respecting, enforcing, and recognizing rights. Endowed rights. Inalienable rights. Fancy words that just mean the human beings around you have every bit the value you have, and thus you should treat them as you yourself should be treated. This isn’t complicated. Some form of that exact concept is scattered throughout recorded human history from Code of Hammurabi to the “Golden Rule” to Beatles songs. It’s as simple a concept as there is beyond subconscious breathing.
And yet we, the nation with the most freedoms in the history of civilization, screw it up at every opportunity.
The Minneapolis police officers denied at least four and probably more specifically enumerated things from the Bill of Rights that George Floyd was entitled to as Derek Chauvin’s knee killed him over the course of nearly 9 minutes, face down in the street. Protesters have a right to assemble peaceably whether the police like it or not, and shouldn’t be dispersed without sufficient cause. They sure as hell shouldn’t be assaulted for the filming police officers — the act that seems to enrage them with a fury second only to attacking them physically. Journalists have a right to record what is happening on the street corners of America for the same reasons, and under the same amendments to the Constitution, as the protesters. Rioters and professional anarchists do not have the right to destroy anything for any reason, ever. Property owners have a right to expect their tax dollars that fund the police and government mean their businesses will be protected by the same and not ceded to the mob because of optics. And regardless of the anger toward the bad apples among them, the police have rights to not be broad-brushed and assaulted because of the actions of some bad actors in the same profession.
Yes, all that is really hard, maybe impossible to balance. But this is America. This is the greatest experiment in human history of a free people trying to self-govern. This is grown folk citizenship, where you have the right to both take to the street to air your grievances and also to sit at your keyboard and gripe about those who do. It isn’t easy. It isn’t supposed to be easy. It’s hard. People are hard. Some of those folks’ hearts are even harder. We will always have conflict between the decent and the abusive, the givers and the takers.
Which is why the three things that hard wire our society to repeat this cycle of doom need to be addressed, and if they aren’t we as a people and nation will be doing this all over again.
First off, qualified immunity has gone from a needed shield to an all too real flaming sword in America. Qualified immunity shields an administrative officer from civil liability if they were within the scope of their office, acting in good faith, and so on. The history of the doctrine in case law is long, but for us laity the TL:DR version is the Supreme Court and others have narrowed down what type of civil liability (read lawsuits) can be brought. In fact the Supreme Court just declined to hear three cases dealing with QI, and has another before them right now. QI reform is not going to be easy, and should not be. There are many reasons why law enforcement should have some protections because of the nature of their duties. But the narrowing of rights has been corrected by the courts before, and needs to be again here both by the Supremes and also congress. Do they have the will do to that heavy lifting? We will see.
Second, something has to be done about the public sector unions, specifically police unions. Again, of course law enforcement should be entitled to representation if they so chose. The have rights. But like QI, the police unions have metastasized from protecting those who protect us to shielding the worst at the expense of the good. The problem here is police unions are overlapping ideological ground; the left is leery of criticizing, let alone reforming, organized labor, and some on the right get migraines anytime you have to put down the “Back the blue!” stickers and actually hold them to account like everyone else. Crossing the streams of political power, political influence, and ideological sacred cows is not going to be easy, clean, or quick.
Third, and this is going to be far harder than the first two herculean tasks, is demilitarizing the police. It’s harder to define than a runway law statute like QI, or a union that has become too invested in protecting their own at all cost. But something has definitely changed in police in the last half century in America. I’m old enough to remember when there was still a debate whether it was appropriate for the West Virginia State Police to have a short-sleeved uniform, as some felt it would look unprofessional. Now police in full tactical gear which would be appropriate for trying to retake the streets of Fallujah are common in the streets of Fayetteville. The massive influx of military surplus, not to mention the ever-present overlap between former military and law enforcement from two decades at war, to local police departments doesn’t help that impression. “Use or lose”-type funding and a grant writing system that encourages such purchases, whether you need them or not, isn’t helping either. Sure, it can be justified in some causes, sometimes even needed. You can use an MREP in a natural disaster, and when things go sideways you definitely need the good guys to out-gun the bad guys. But far too many LE branches are somewhere on the spectrum between looking cool with all that gear to ingraining a mindset that they really are at war with the community. Reforming hearts and minds of law enforcement who “protect and serve” means just that — even when pissed off and dressed for Call of Duty LARPing when Class B Galls against your fellow citizens would do just fine — is not going to be quick, or clean, or easy.
My fear is that all three of those problems not only will not be addressed, but be reinforced by officials pointing to the very unrest they have created — and the worst actors taking advantage of the situation to wreck havoc — and going “see there, it’s us versus them” while filing another dozen grant requests for equipment meant for warfare.
Racial issues, ranging from the ignorance of prejudice to the soul problem of racism, are not going to be fixed with policies, ideologies, or politicians. Hearts and minds are the most difficult things to change. But we can do something about the triggers in our government, specifically in our law enforcement, that would at least slow down the escalation. Otherwise the symbiotic relationship of police brutality and cities burning is going to just keep being lather, rinse, repeat until we do.
[HM2] Eight Great Minutes in American Rhetoric
This is superb. Even in not agreeing with all of it (review boards are well and good but unless you do the three things I outlined in [HM1] they are powerless) this is some Patrick Henry-level stuff on citizenship, freedom, rights, and the responsibilities of all three. I don’t care if there is some language and it’s raw. You don’t think a 2020 version of P-Henny wouldn’t drop some F-bombs and slurs on King George in today’s vernacular? Watch this.
The whole country needs to stop right now and listen to Killer Mike. He’s verbalizing what a lot of us don’t know how to express pic.twitter.com/yiBEaicRGT
— ment (@mentnelson) May 30, 2020
[HM3] Know When to Shut Up, Charlie Kirk Edition
There is a lack of self awareness and then there is 501Charlie3. Let us come together as a people to mock the ridiculousness of Charlie Kirk.
White privilege is a racist myth that has no basis in facts or data.
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) May 31, 2020
A white kid who went straight from high school to running a multi-million dollar grifting 501c3 enterprise because he was really good at selling a caricature of what “millennial college students” would want politically to rich, white, right wing millionaires and billionaires, who then flooded him with money to go and do so, has thoughts on privilege.
Shut all the way the hell up Charlie Kirk. Come back when you’ve held down a job that doesn’t primarily involve being “Charlie Kirk: Money Conduit”, being introduced to rich benefactors, and then selling to college kids that you have some kind of brilliant insight from your pitifully uncreative platitudinal Pez dispenser that functions as thinking ability.
You, sir, are the walking manifestation of not only privilege, but the apex of modern socio-political jackassery.
I suppose on a very foundational level one of the big problems is that there is no universal definition of what is and what is not freedom and liberty. One of my bugbears against right-wing organizations is that they constantly claim monopoly on the words freedom and liberty. You had the far right-wing House Freedom Caucus, there is also the homophobic and anti-LBGT “Alliance defending Freedom” group that is constantly trying to enforce homophobia via court order. To be fair, I also loathe that a lot of left-leaning groups let the right-wing get away with this for so long.
I think for a lot of people, freedom and liberty is a lot more closely related to “law and order” than it probably should be. There are just huge parts of our culture that venerate the cops and law enforcement and for a lot of white people, cops are generally benign to helpful.
The whole culture of policing seems hard to change even in very liberal areas. De Blasio was elected with huge amounts of support among the African-American community and ran on a police reform platform and he hit a huge wall. Part of this is his own dithering (though he has done a lot for the African-American community generally) but the police seem to form a force unto themselves. Mayors come and go in terms of 4-8 years as do city council members. The police are here to stay and seem to create a cult/barricaded mentality.
This is true in police forces all across the land. The current chief of the Minneapolis police department is African-American but he sued his own police department for racial discrimination. The head of the Minneapolis police union is a white supremacist. A lot of police forces seem insulated and nepotistic. If you are a cop, chances are that you had a brother, uncle, dad who was a cop. A lot of people don’t seem to mind cops passing down the line even if they hate the kid of doctors who becomes a doctor too.
Even those who don’t get it through nepotism seem to have authoritarian streaks which is what makes them become cops. One potential reform I have seen here is that some smaller communities make people rotate through being cops, firefighters, and paramedics. This requires more money and training but it seems to take out an aggression factor.
But we still live in a culture that does not know how to do anything but idolize cops as heroes or helpers. A lot of white liberal parents are also a problem here because said parents do not want to do anything that destroys childhood innocence and lots of kid culture shows cops as helpers/good guys including the visits to elementary schools or Into the Spiderverse which gave Milo Morales a cop dad because it codes reliably as blue-collar but righteous blue-collar job in the United States.
This needs to change.Report
A message from the legitimate leader of the free world:
How to Make this Moment the Turning Point for Real Change
Barack Obama
https://medium.com/@BarackObama/how-to-make-this-moment-the-turning-point-for-real-change-9fa209806067
Moreover, it’s important for us to understand which levels of government have the biggest impact on our criminal justice system and police practices. When we think about politics, a lot of us focus only on the presidency and the federal government. And yes, we should be fighting to make sure that we have a president, a Congress, a U.S. Justice Department, and a federal judiciary that actually recognize the ongoing, corrosive role that racism plays in our society and want to do something about it. But the elected officials who matter most in reforming police departments and the criminal justice system work at the state and local levels.
…
So the bottom line is this: if we want to bring about real change, then the choice isn’t between protest and politics. We have to do both. We have to mobilize to raise awareness, and we have to organize and cast our ballots to make sure that we elect candidates who will act on reform.Report
I liked the essay and generally agree with the points but police culture seems highly insular and walled in. De Blasio was elected on a police reform platform and has done some great stuff but he also met stiff resistance from the NYPD that no amount of will or power can seemingly surmount. Reformist District Attorneys also seem actively underminded by the cops.Report
Damn. I was right there with you… Until HM3. Why? I don’t care if you disagree with him, that’s healthy. But calling him a Grifter, or Jackass, or any other dip shittery like that will just reinforce his point of view on the right. And further alienates you from that perspective, unable to make any sort of change or have influence you might think is appropriate and needed.
Fully half of the country is more conservative than the other half. And while that is a tautology, in this period of deep, deep animosity between the various factions in the country, taking away the idea that any opinion they might have is simply to steal money or con people, to delegitimize them and brand them as simple liars is not just uninformed, it hurts the very thing that you are trying to achieve, unless what you are trying to achieve is further destruction of the body politic. When conservatives call a black leader a “race hustler” they are delegitimizing them in exactly the same manner that you just did.
If OT has one major fault over the years, it is this practice. To make this place worthy of thoughtful discussion and reasoned debate, effectively ejecting half of the possible viewpoints of the country does it no good service. Indeed, it makes us worse than a place like RedState or TPM, as we are lying to ourselves that we are better than that, when at least they admit to being tools of a viewpoint.
Argue against ideas, not the man.Report
Argue against ideas, not the man.
Yet…here you are, saying that Kirk’s supporters will only cling to him tighter because the accusation is from the other tribe.
Can you make a case that, objectively speaking, Kirk is not a grifter and jackass?Report
Let me answer that:
I was speaking directly, by name, of one person in that harshness. I didn’t say conservatives, I didn’t say republicans, I didn’t say Trump supporters, or anyone else. I said Charlie Kirk. Note I made no mention of his politics at all.
You’ve got three years and nearly 500 articles of mine just here on OT as a reference point. I rarely go to name calling. With Charlie Kirk it is fully, justifiably earned, and the fact I reserve it for him and people like him should tell you something.
I spent an inordinate amount of my time daily helping all sorts of folks, many I disagree with if not most, get their voices heard and platformed here and elsewhere. If you want to post something I’ll not only help you do so, I’ll promote it on my own social media to get more folks to see it.
The Kirks of the world are not about convincing anyone. The great lie of Kirk, TPUSA, and that you just repeated here, is that they are trying to change minds, or do anything at all productive. They are not. They are laundering money from donors into their own bank accounts while they live off billable expenses to the organization. They tell their gullible donors that is what they are doing to keep the cash flowing. All they have to do is spout off enough of the proper buzzwords to keep the money train going. It has nothing to do with conservatism, the right, America, or anything else.
You can’t delegitimize a con man. They’ve already done that to themselves. So let me reiterate: Charlie Kirk, for a list of reasons you can easily find if you so desire, is a grifter and a jackass. Not because I seek to delegitimize him, because he is, in fact, a grifter and a jackass.
If someone is incapable of looking at a grifter and a jackass and go “Hark, there goes a grifter and a jackass” because they like the flowery buzzwords the grifting jackass speaks, or they lack the integrity to attack the grifting jackass just because the jackass has co-opted the ideological team of said observer, that is their problem.
The man and the ideas are already separate. I attacked, justifiably, only the man here.
I didn’t lump anyone else into Charlie Kirk. Don’t defend him by lumping him in with people I wasn’t referring to.Report
Thank you for answering me Andrew, in my eyes that is important.
But, after all is said and done, I agree with that piece quoted above. Not necessarily anything else by him, but that part about privledge. I feel the concept is as BS as any collective guilt, which that is what it essentially boils down to. I don’t ascribe black folk as being uniformly bad, not do I ascribe white people as always being handed a break.
Was James Boyd, a homeless man shot three times by police, possesing white privledge? What about Kelly Thomas? Beaten to death by six policemen. Zachery Hammond, shot in his car during a sting gone bad? Daniel Shaver? Shot by a policeman in a no-knock raid. If they didn’t have “white privledge” no one has white privlegde.
Or we could talk about Bou Bou Phonesavanh, a half-white half-thai baby who had the missfortune of a a flash-bang granade landing in his crib one morning. That present must have been from the white privledge fairy.
No, fully two third of people killed by police are white. But, saying things like Privledge, or micro agression, or any other halfbaked racial theory, makes people feel superior. And that, at the end of the day, is what is stopping the us from making actual progres in the area of police reform.
All that is a roundabout way of saying that if he is right about this thing, than maybe he is right about other things. Maybe TPUSA isn’t fleecing people money, but is in fact providing something other than a monorail or 1000 trombones. Or my great grandfathers “gold mines.”
And at the very least, if they are indeed con-men, so is every. single. other. person. pushing a political set of ideas. From Josh Marshal to Eric Erikson, Rush Limbaugh to Barak Obama. Every single one of them has a opinion they can hang thier hat on and make a few buck with. And if people subsribe to those thoughts, think they are worth something, then by definition they are not conmen, or grifters or flimflam artists.Report
And if people subsribe to those thoughts, think they are worth something, then by definition they are not conmen, or grifters or flimflam artists.
“Those taken in on the con confirm that it was not a con” is not much of defense.Report
So, then Obama was a con man. Regan was a con man. Jerry Brown was a con man. Kamala Harris was a con man. I mean, people like what they had to offer, right?
See, it really comes down to what we believe in, what we think is foolish. Nothing else. If my guy, or your guy, or any other guy, is a con man simply because we think they are wrong, then we truly get nowhere in this world.
You aren’t putting up anything to show that what they are selling is known to them to be bunkum, just showing that what is outside your circle of beliefs must be a con, because you don’t believe in it.
That doesn’t show anything, except how small your circle is.Report
HM1 – yes, to all
HM3 -Who the hell is Charlie Kirk?Report
I’m not sure either. He gets a lot of negative attention on Twitter, but should we be paying attention to this guy at all?
I assume he’s the same breed of nitwit as Milo or Loomer, and I assume he’ll tread the same path to irrelevance as they did. In the meanwhile, he makes a lot of noise, none of it worth hearing.Report
I made the decision long ago to pay as little attention as I possibly can to the Twitterati, and I have since acquired a sense of good cheer that I would hate to lose. “Who the hell is X, and why should I care?” is my default response.Report
I do think it’s worth being passably aware of these people, along with other various nitwits, such as the -chan trolls. Individually they aren’t important, but collectively they can cause harm. In other words, we should be aware of the narrative they’re selling, who is buying it, and why it sells.
As an analogy, I think that str8 women are wise to be passingly aware of “PUA” tactics, and other bullshit that (some) men use to manipulate women into sex. The reason is obvious: they will encounter guys who try that shit. Recognizing it early can help avoid an unpleasant situation. Likewise, as an LGBT person, I feel I kinda of need to be aware of what the right wing is up to. For example, in the west they’ve switched from an anti-gay stance to an anti-trans stance. This isn’t really a shift in their attitudes. They remain anti-gay. However, they know that doesn’t sell the way it used to, but they hope an anti-trans message will. It remains the same bigotry with the same motives, just a different package.
It’s important for me to be aware of this, because it helps me to make others aware of it. Anti-LGBT groups are very motivated to change public perception. The more the general public is aware of how these narratives spread, and why, the better for LGBT people.
For example, a while back there was an organized effort to flood Reddit’s r/amitheasshole subreddit with fake anti-trans stories. The writer would pose as an average person telling a story about how the responded to a totally unreasonable trans person. These stories were bogus, but they were made to seem real.
I think it is important that people know about this, so that when they hear some friend-of-a-friend story about a terrible trans person, they can ask themselves, “Wait, why do I believe this?”
Another example: have you read an incel forum? On the one hand, don’t. It gets really depressing really fast. On the other hand, there seems to be an active effort to spread antisemitism on those forums. There is an entire complex narrative about Jews and porn and estrogen and all kinds of nonsense.
Who is selling this narrative? Who is buying it? Why?
Why is there a semi-organized effort to convince a group of lonely and mentally unstable men that Jews are at fault for their problems? Why would anyone do that?
Well, what results might it have?Report
Quillette exists primarily to act as a laundering operation to pass these sorts of outrage stories from the swamps of Reddit to a respectable audience.Report
Charlie K? Conjure in your imagination an over the top stereotype of a smug, shit talking, dumb but sure he is brilliant, hyper partisan young trumpy republican and you got him.Report
Trump sounds like is most weak and most fascist self in this clip: https://twitter.com/oliverdarcy/status/1267491105727295490?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1267491105727295490&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fdisqus.com%2Fembed%2Fcomments%2F%3Fbase%3Ddefault%26f%3Dlawyersgunsmoneyblog-com%26t_i%3D110608%2520https%253A%252F%252Fwww.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com%252F%253Fp%253D110608%26t_u%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com%252F2020%252F06%252Ftom-cotton-fascist%26t_e%3DTom%2520Cotton%253A%2520Fascist%26t_d%3DTom%2520Cotton%253A%2520Fascist%2520-%2520Lawyers%252C%2520Guns%2520%2526%2520Money%26t_t%3DTom%2520Cotton%253A%2520Fascist%26s_o%3Ddefault%23version%3Defcc2026181de0642e7600ef9b3537b7Report
[HM2] I really like Killer Mike’s speech. I can’t say anything that’s better. Just listen to it.Report
There have been police officers who have defended or even participated in the protests along with fighting against them. The entire situation is weird. At the very least, nearly all police forces have been intelligent enough to realize that defending the murder that started this in anyway would be really brain dead. I’m not sure what I exactly think about the cops joining the protest. Part of me thinks that they are just defending their asses but that might be enough. They could even be sincere.Report
Two hits:
1. Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer just announced every single officers’ body camera was NOT ACTIVATED during the shooting last night that resulted in DavidMcAtee’s death. Not one.
2. Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer announced Louisville Metro Police Chief Steve Conrad has been relieved of duty after it was revealed that the officers involved in a shooting that killed a local business owner early Monday did not activate their body cameras.Report
My assumption at this point is that if there is a camera, then not having it turned on is an admission of guilt.
They can not be selective about this shit.Report
Agreed. 100%.Report
I hear ya, but it wasn’t the officers who were fired over the bodycam snafu, but the Chief of Police. !!!Report
Good God how is the Onion even going go satire this.Report
This goes back to the system, I imagine. Lawyer types, please correct me if I am wrong.
The Chief is there at the pleasure of the Mayor. The Mayor can fire the Chief if s/he wishes. Now, this is an unpopular move under most circumstances, but we find ourselves in circumstances where it is most likely going to be a popular move. (99% sure on this one.)
The Mayor can’t fire individual members of the force. (51% sure of this one.)Report
That’ was my thought as well. Mayor fired Police Chief for running a shoddy force. It’s good politics *and* good policy.
I’d imagine that the Mayor isn’t done though, and that the cops who killed that guy will get legally roughed up a bit as well.Report
To kinda open up the circle a little bit, a good union would be working with the mayor to make sure that the officers are not doing this kind of crap. That they are professional to a T.
We don’t have good unions.Report
Wait, the officers are still there?
Well, as long as the union says its ok… /sarcReport
If you prefer your police to not turn on cameras but to have an explanation:
Report
I hate the idea of a survailance state also, but the police are employees of me in that capacity. They should be free from survailance when on their own time, but not on the job.
By the way, I was part of a team working on installing cameras in a major metro police forces cars. They uploaded to a server, I beleive and were always on. It was great for when someone was pulled over and later said something that didn’t match the police report. Mostly, it was favorable to the officers.
Mostly.Report
I can’t believe how stupid and audacious this particular statement is.
It’s…
I can’t believe how stupid and audacious it is.Report
“Elect more and better Democrats.”
I watched to see how well she sold that argument, if her heart was in it. Seemed like her heart was in it.Report
Likewise, Trump couldn’t name a single Bible verse because he didn’t want to get into specifics.Report
Another hit:
Report
This is a good development. Not that there probably aren’t 1000 other cops who could also be charged but 6 is a good start.Report
Of note from friends in Louisville, the Chief was already planning to retire next month over the Breanna Taylor shooting. So his control of the force was probably not what it would ave otherwise have been.Report
The hits keep coming
Minnesota AFL-CIO Calls for Minneapolis Police Union President Bob Kroll’s Immediate ResignationReport
Zing. Good. Kroll seems like an exceptionally toxic dude. He spoke at a trump rally about how great it was trump was not handcuffing the cops like obama was.
I think there is something of a sea change going on about cops and i don’t think most cops are psychologically capable of grasping it. It’s still uncertain how many of the deep systematic changes we need that we are going to get, but something is changing.Report
Thread from Minnesota state rep on the state of play re: Kroll and the union:
I want to be clear: I am about as pro-union as a person can be. The Police Federation should not be thought of as a union. They do not affiliate with the AFL-CIO. They don’t walk picket lines in solidarity. How do I know? Because I do and I’ve never seen them on a line. Not once.
…
Politicians who cross the MPD find slowdowns in their wards. After the first time I cut money from the proposed police budget, I had an uptick in calls taking forever to get a response, and MPD officers telling business owners to call their councilman about why it took so long.Report
The AFL-CIO headquarters in DC was burned. A lot of the violence obviously comes from scabs instead of unionized protesters.Report
Another hit:
A Denver police officer has been fired for writing “Let’s start a riot” as a caption to a photo he posted on social media showing himself and two other officers in riot gear.Report
A couple of days ago I posted a comment quoting a writer’s thoughts about how police unions might serve a useful function, helping individual officers to maintain their authority in the face of a hierarchy that would sell them out for not toeing the line or kissing ass.
The flip side of that, which has long been forgotten, is responsibility. The idea was that if a cop screwed up, made a bad call and hurt someone, then their first impulse would not be “how can I make this not be my fault”, “how can I keep my job”. The union would help them not go to jail, would help the department not be ruined, but that person wouldn’t keep on being a cop afterwards, they wouldn’t fight to get back on the street and back in the same position they screwed up before. The union protects you, but the union also strongly suggests you leave the police-officer career to seek opportunities elsewhere.
But now that’s not what happens. The motte is “anyone who’s a cop should be a cop for as long as they care to be no matter what and the union should make sure that happens”, and when people ask “is that good” the cops run back to the bailey of “well UNIONS HAVE DONE SO MUCH FOR THIS COUNTRY, WHY DO YOU HATE UNIONS”.Report
I remembered reading something, somewhere, about a police union chief expressing frustration that the local teacher’s union wasn’t showing solidarity after a particularly egregious incident. The police chief said something to the effect of “we supported them when such-and-such happened! They can’t support us? We won’t support them next time!”
When I was looking for that particular story, I found This link to Lawyers, Guns, and Money (it’s from 2014):
Report
In that vein…
The cops have been screwing up for a long time. The cop cops have been screwing up for a long time. And the cop cop cops have been covering for them.Report
RE: [HM2] Eight Great Minutes in American Rhetoric
Wow! Really worth listening to.Report
I enjoy a good psyop as much as anyone.
This one took my breath away:
Report