commenter-thread

Just found out this was not an "ordinary" day for Derek (the killer).

Derek's wife (who is a POC btw) separated from him the day before the murder.

Seems like they were being educated in exactly the wrong way when this was going down.

Culture is the hardest thing to change.

My expectation is the most useful thing we could do is impose the death penalty on the department; i.e. fire everyone and start over from scratch.

If you don't do that then the killer is just taking one for the team. It'd be the cop equiv of the CEO stepping down when something goes wrong (meet the new boss, same as the old boss).

This hits the radar as an organization/culture problem.

2 are 4 day old rookies. Mr Knee was their training officer and had more than twice as much experience as everyone else put together. There is a little more mitigating stuff in that link but it's from their lawyer so I'd expect heavy spin.

The 3rd guy had something like 9 years worth of experience, I don't recall off hand.

I'm not sure what the law says (which is how we end up with jail time being an option), but it seems a little unrealistic to expect the two rookies to override both of their training officers.

https://www.snopes.com/ap/2020/06/04/attorneys-2-ex-cops-charged-in-floyds-death-were-rookies/

Two of the four were 4-day-old rookies.

If we have to choose between Medicare For All/free college/ confiscatory tax on billionaires, and large number of buildings burning down, then that’s an easy choice.

If you're trying to claim the first part of your statement is LESS economically destructive than the second, then I suggest you get another back of the napkin to write on.

The devil is in the details but the phrase "confiscatory tax" strongly implies bad things.

My general policy on intense events where the media is reporting everything "now" is that I need to wait multiple weeks before finding out what the truth was.

At this point in the news cycle rumors are being reported as fact and self interested people are pushing narratives for their self interest.

By all appearances, none of the police officers involved seemed to think that what was done to Floyd was an out of the ordinary or even extreme measure.

I have some heinous relatives who have done some heinous things. It's REALLY hard to get into their heads because I run into contradictions.

My conclusion has been that it's very fraught to even try it, and it's very risky to make conclusions.

The contradiction here is kneeling on a guy's neck to the point where he's unconscious and then continuing for 3 minutes afterwards seems like a deliberate effort to kill him with the expected outcome that he dies. That seems an "extreme measure".

But if I’m black, or my kids are, I’m looking at all those other times

Are those other times "I personally have seen the police kneel on someone's neck to the point of killing him" or is it more "I heard about a lottery winner's life story so that's the expected outcome if I play"?

if I paid for something with a $20 that a storekeeper suspected wasn’t a real $20, and I acted in a similar fashion to Floyd, I am very, very certain I would not have been handcuffed, held in a prone position with an officer’s knee pushing down on my neck or head.

The way to bet when you buy a lottery ticket is that you don't win.

If the claim is this type of event is actually very common, then we need more than the plural of anecdote.

...the protesters are not giving it cover or agreeing to it or enabling it...

And yet buildings tend to catch on fire as part of these things, windows are smashed, looters do their thing and so forth.

If the "protesters" have lost control over their emotions and are doing this themselves then that's a problem and it's reasonable for the cops to be violent and it's absolutely on the protesters' ticket.

If the protesters are joined by people who just want stuff to burn or to rob stuff, then while it's not them losing control over their emotions, it's going to look like that and it's still giving license for the cops to treat all of them badly.

If the cops get violent when things are peaceful and things spiral out of control then there's a very strong argument it's not on the protesters' ticket but there's still a link there.

Protesters are NOT disrupting the system.

The whole point is to disrupt the system.

They ARE obeying the law, even if it means standing in a street or shouting loudly.

The entire point to this is to disobey an unjust set of laws and create change by putting a spot light on them. Being arrested is great, swamp the system.

From the Protesters point of view they SHOULD be beaten up on camera by the cops while making it clear that they're not resisting and are peaceful. That proves their point.

Close to the worst case outcome is video with Protesters burning buildings, looting, and causing other destruction. Do that and you're creating the "they are violent and need violent cops to contain them" narrative. That path leads to a few meaningless paper changes to stop the current violence and making it worse in the long run. Not just brutal cops but job creators refusing to locate in "those" communities. Detroit still hasn't recovered from the 60's riots.

Those are just the incidents I can think of where cops, under color of law, didn’t do a much better job of handling protesters. Not even close.

The one that surprises me is DC, supposedly they have to deal with protests on a regular basis. NY does too but they also have the rep for having issues.

As for Minneapolis, the only thing I know about them is 4 of them were cool with killing a guy in public. That's so damning on the face of it that I expect they have other problems. I also expect they have among the worst protests.

Having said that, we have something like 400+ cities with serious protests and I expect the news is showing us the bottom of the barrel. If that city doesn't have specific training on how to handle this kind of protest, well they do have a lot of training telling the cops to think their lives are in danger at all times.

even those who commit crimes, are still citizens endowed with all the rights of a free people.

Burning down buildings is not a "right".

Where is the error in my thinking?

There's a short story in the "Bolo" series where you have a small extra-world colony defended against raiders by one guy.

The guy is more than a little fried by his job (which is violence). He gets drunk, tries to rape one of the local girls, some guys stop him and he kills them.

The colonists decide enough is enough. After a short trial they try to take his weapons, he objects and is put down.

And a month later the raiders come in and kill or enslave everyone.

---------------

If we have to choose between the brutal cop beating the protestors and large numbers of buildings burning down, then that's an easy choice.

I don't think we have to choose but I'm not 100% convinced of that.

This is an astonishing statement.

One can reasonably look at burning stores and think that's a serious problem.

So... are the protestors giving (political or actual) cover to that? Are they enabling that? Are they one move away from doing that? Is that a menu option or is it even the plan?

"I'm upset over something, so I'm going to go start fires" is not a very defensible statement nor course of action.

IMHO "peaceful protest" is not a mindset that leads to arson, but the number of burned buildings suggests either I'm wrong or protests attract arsonists.

Ferguson wasn't much of a thing in my state.

Right now we have 400+ cities with serious protests and the National Guard being called out in 28 states.

A "protest" where the cops outnumber the protestors is probably a different thing than one where they're outnumbered by a lot.

I assume I ninja'ed you. If you want it black letter, then no, imho the police shouldn't be shooting or tear gassing peaceful protestors.

However there's a big black line between peaceful protest and a riot, and "mostly peaceful" implies that line has been crossed.

I think the cops should do a MUCH better job at handling protest, and apparently that's something we need to re-learn every few decades.

However the words "peaceful protestors" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. We hear in the news "mostly peaceful protestors" a fair amount which means the peaceful protestors have lost control.

When was the last time we had these kinds of protests? Rodney King was in... 1992? Police vets with 28+ years of experience are either behind desks or retired.

This generation of cops has close to zero experience with this. The bulk of their training and experience is WOD "warrior" style.

Their world has three types of people; fellow cops (and other maintainers/supporters of the system), civilians/victims (who obey the law), and criminals. The protesters aren't fellow cops and they're disrupting the system so they're not civilians.

Criminals don't obey society's rules, it's the cop's job to make them, ideally non-violently but violently if need be.

disobeying a cop is not essentially violent.

The cops have orders. Their job is to make the crowd go away.

We're in "when you have a hammer everything looks like a nail" territory.

Perhaps I should endeavor to change.

Parts of Detroit have not recovered from the riots of 22 years ago. Parts haven't recovered from the riots of 50+ years ago.

From the point of view of the police, they need to choose the lesser evil and it's the protestors opening the door to buildings burning down who need to adjust their actions.

And if you drill down into any of those lists they claim to be lists of people reported killed, which is in theory what we're talking about.

"Not the actual number" is a mis-phrase, what they mean is there are other lists that may be better.

Wapo is behind a paywall (I have NO access to it). I have no clue how good or bad their numbers are or what they are using as their definitions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_the_United_States

Who is saying “George Floyd had rights, but…”?

The video of a white cop openly killing an unarmed already restrained black man is extremely powerful. We get videos like this (although less extreme) every now and then.

The implication of that video is this is how the system works, this is common.

Number of people killed (all races) by law enforcement in 2019: 139
Number of people killed (all races) by law enforcement in 2020 thus far: 19

Now if you go back to 2015 it was 849, but the numbers dropped after Trump took office (I assume that's a coincidence).

Law enforcement interactions being captured on camera has become common.
Being killed by law enforcement is an extreme outlier.
Being killed unjustly is even more extreme.
However the entire system is being judged by its most heinous, and illegal, outlier action.