> He didn't do anything. He was basically just standing there.
If you actually watch the video, you can see that he was approaching the officers as they are trying to enforce a perimeter, trying to get in their way. The additional video of him confronting other protesters as well as the detail of when this happens tells us two things:
1. He was there to cause trouble
2. The curfew had begun and the officers were merely enforcing it
Of course, whether or not the force they used was justified, or if this is part of some grand conspiracy is an entirely different story; the answer to both of these are no, I think. But it's important to look at this situation fairly.
🇳🇱
@realcaseyrollins The real question shouldnt be if they had the legal right.. the question is.. are they deescalating the situation or making it worse with these actions.
@freemo Well, they clearly deescalated it 😜 Again, the question is whether or not the actions they took to do so were warranted. I think not, but only in consideration to the person's age. They overestimated his strength, thus committing a potentially lethal flaw in dishing out the gentle shove.
Carrying him away or arresting him calmly and peacefully would've been a better move IMHO. Sort of glad they resigned. While it is one mistake, it was a potentially lethal one, and the tolerance for such mistakes should be low.
@l0wk3y sorry IDK how my reply got orphaned from the original thread smh
Clearly? Did the people who witness the situation say to themselves "fuck the police im more pissed".
Just because people didnt rush the cop in anger doesnt mean that the impression they left on the community lead the bigger picture in the right direction.
By the way not saying your wrong.. just asking the question.. I may even agree with you.. People are easily triggered right now is all.
> Did the people who witness the situation say to themselves "fuck the police im more pissed".
I don't care.
> Just because people didnt rush the cop in anger doesnt mean that the impression they left on the community lead the bigger picture in the right direction.
Again, don't care. Doing their job and ensuring the safety of the community is probably more important than PR.
We're seeing this now actually, police making PR moves that is forcing them to commit more harm to citizens, such as using rubber bullets instead of tear gas because people are saying "look, they're gassing the people! The barbarians." Tear gas rarely leaves permanent injuries like rubber bullets can. People say "oh they're just rubber bullets" but they can actually be extremely dangerous!
> People are easily triggered right now is all.
While many conservatives, including the ones I watch and listen to, are opposed to officers kneeling, and frankly while I'm not a huge fan of it from a small picture viewpoint (for imagery reasons I don't think having a bunch of white cops kneeling like Chauvin did is necessarily a good look but that's just me) I think it's important and at time necessary to join the protesters and show that you support them to build mutual goodwill between the officers and the citizens, for this very reason. Remember, cops can get triggered too, and that leads to even worse results since they're armed and stuff, so it's important to keep the citizens happy when possible.
Well thing is, whether you think their right or not you should care. Because ultimately if they perceived it as something that made them more angry about the cops the end result is larger and bigger riots tomorrow than we have today.
Presumably you do care if your house gets burned down.
Then youa re concerned with PR, you just dont think that PR should effect how they uphold the law... unfortunately thats kinda where all the protests come from. All they really care about is how the police treat them..
Thats the tricky part its gotten so excitable out there even somewhat reasonable responses to a gang of rioters is going to create more riots not less.
Things are going to get worse and worse until there are some pretty major laws in place that curtail the police in some way.
While I do think the police need curtailing I dont see anyone doing it in the right way. I dont have high hopes anyone will solve the problem just because americans arent very good at solving problems anymore, even ones as simple to solve as this.
Diversity has failed so hard
It's entertaining
Now we have the LA Riots, nationwide!
No, we've realized on some level that we want totally different things.
The Right wants Mayberry, the Left wants Haight-Ashbury.
"Diverstity" that now obsolete leftwing codeword
now we know it really means marginalize white males
the worst kind of racism, the equal of the nazi's
It was also a Soviet program, until it failed there as it always does.
Genghis Khan was big into it too.
A good point: diversity will exterminate every racial group.
The Left are egalitarians, and that means taking from the successful, healthy, sane, and good to give to the failing, sick, insane, sad, and/or bad.
@amerika @l0wk3y @freemo @EMPEROR Yeah I mean they didn't let black shopping stores open during the #Coronavirus lockdowns did they? lol
The Left will be happy to keep Black America dependent on handouts.
That way, they control them.
Affirmative action is also a handout.
the left started as egalitarian, now they are anti-white-male closet fascists
@amerika I just watched a video on that very topic, it was quite excellent.
Democrats Use Blacks For Votes by Mr. Reagan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gKN-YcNXl8
That's consistent with egalitarianism.
Take from the successful, give to the unsuccessful.
White males were always going to be a target.
Diversity is how Leftists (tyrants, Communists, not really fascists) take over:
http://www.amerika.org/politics/aristotle-and-plato-on-why-diversity-is-tyranny/
The right started as anti-slavery party too.. now they are home to everyone bearing a swastika (though many on the right are not racist mind you)... times change.
Many opposed slavery because it was diversity.
The Right came about long before that, however.
Here's a good definition:
https://www.reddit.com/r/askaconservative/wiki/conservative
@amerika @l0wk3y @freemo @EMPEROR
> many on the right are not racist
Many? More like most.
@TomKawczynski was a white supremacist running against #Trump and he got nowhere. Mind you, this was AFTER the #KKK said they were disappointed with him, after previously supporting him.
At this point it seems that the anti-white racists on the left far outnumber the anti-black racists on the right.
Being anti-Black is kind of dumb, in my view.
The problem is not Blacks or whites, but diversity.
@amerika @l0wk3y @TomKawczynski @freemo @EMPEROR Ah yes...we just need a segregated state...because the Africans get along with each other just fine...
we have a different take on this
the left's ideology has mutated so that
it is now about marginalizing white people and the white male especially
but any racism against or for any race or gender should be opposed
the left can no longer understand this
In a diverse society, one group will always be on top.
The Left will consume them, and then move on to the next group on top.
I don't favor racism, but I equally oppose diversity. They are one and the same.
End diversity, end racism.
::tosses an old sandwhich at casey for being black:: poor fellow, here, have a bite to eat. I'd give you money but you'd spend it on drugs
@freemo @l0wk3y #Minneapolis just started curtailing their police, let's see how that turns out
😎
🍿