If Minneapolis gets rid of their police...
- Thread starter TUMe
- Start date
A lot of this conversation reminds me of this old Daily Show clip
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/9fgyc6/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-marines-in-berkeley
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/9fgyc6/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-marines-in-berkeley
Did he not have an ID ? I would find it odd the police didn't run his info at the very first of his detainment. That in itself sounds like a training issue.
So some of the speculation (and I haven't seen it in this thread, maybe I
Not all...but definitely some.
There's still a heavy dose of systemic racism in the UK against Africans, Indians, Pakistanis, etc.
Possibly, and that might come into play for things like traffic stops. But they were responding to a call from a guy about someone who tried to pass off a fake 20. So how would they have known a priori?
Maybe, but in that scenario he has already been successfully detained.
Also, I really don't know how it works... Would running his ID show all his previous offences? Or only any outstanding warrants? I thought the point of running an ID was to see if there were any outstanding warrants or such, I don't know why it would need to show his priors.
EDIT:
I could see priors shown in relation to any current parole status or some such, but that's about it.
i assumed the first thing the police would do when they detain someone is run their name for outstanding warrants and priors. Not a cop so that could be completely off base. However, if I'm a cop I would want to know as fast as possible if I'm dealing with someone with a history of violent offenses.
You are correct. In fact, the data is hidden in your DL number in most states. cops can tell if you have a felony conviction just by looking at your drivers license before you even start answering questions, dispatch gives more information or you pull it up on your laptop. Your DL numbers is actually a combination of digits. Birth year, so they can tell if you forged the actual birth year to avoid a warrant coming back if it’s called in or so you can buy beer. The number of felony convictions. The region where the license was issued in large states. Other types of info.
Last edited:
There was definitely some training and staffing issues. Two of the four had less than a week on the job.
They banned slavery there because they knew they would have access to it here and the Caribbean for economic purposes.
Italy is ridiculous...and I only know from the number of incidents reported during Serie A games. The way they treat Balotelli, a guy who plays for the national team, is absolutely deplorable. I can only imagine how they treat individuals who aren't well-known international stars.
Britain is a different culture that has had 100 years of culture and adjustment to have have the law enforcement.fireams ban work for them. Just like we can't adopt the single payer system found in the nordic countries and have it work the same way for us, we can't just adopt the fireams regulations like Britain did and have it function the same way.
The problem is it doesn't ever look like the cops calmed down enough to do any such check...they went immediately to kneeling on his neck and snuffing him out. I've still yet to see any video that shows Floyd being combative, seriously resistant to where he needed to be subdued in that manner. In the initial clip that came out, it appeared he was already in handcuffs...he wasn't going to go anywhere. Do cops realize at some point your hands won't go any further behind your back and the resistance they feel are actual tendons and ligaments holding the body together...sort of like a rubberband?
We can....we just won't. We're like a stubborn 4 year old who is convinced there is only one way to do something.
Thanks for the clarification, it is appreciated to have someone who knows more about these things around.
Question for you, Huffy: If you have looked at any of it, what do you think of the bill that the House Dems have put together on police reform? As far as I can tell, it doesn't disarm or defund police, but does make changes to the way qualified immunity can be used and such. It seemed very reasonable to me, but I would appreciate your perspective.
I question that statement, but I only have indirect(word of mouth) experience with Bitain. The only direct experience I have is with France. They definitely have racial problems in France, but I would not go so far as to say they are more racist than us. In fact the racism in France is a notch or two below us.
Yeah, I still have questions about all of that as well. When cops are chasing someone down, I doubt they ask them to shout back their name and DOB so they can run a check. Once they are stopped and cops can get to a wallet to get ID, sure. But to lawpoke's argument, I don't see what relevance that has in the use of force to apprehend, because at that point they have already apprehended. I am sure there are cases where they know exactly who they are going after and it may bias them, but it is not clear at all that happened here.
I don't agree with the statement of it simply being we just won't. The only way to know is to try. But I think there would be at least 10 or 20 years of strife we would have to go through, if they were willing to give it that long. I tend to disagree that, that would prove we just won't.
Last edited:
Well, it's time to start moving in that direction on multiple fronts. Just like it was time to start moving towards abolition decades after Britain had done so.
Fair enough. There are a lot of different stakeholders and the actual public is lowest on the totem pole when it comes to who and why and when the decision would be made. ACA hasn't been the abject disaster that the GOP wants you to believe. They just don't like it was a black man that got it passed. Even William Jefferson Clinton couldn't get to that point and remember HRC made it part of her agenda as First Lady to aggressively pursue health care reform to make it available to all. There's way too much money with the insurance companies (which are really catastrophic insurance companies vs actual health care) and the big pharmaceuticals being thrown at politicians to get them to change. I've always said once you eliminate lobbying money and PACs, you'll see politicians with consciences and actual change for the better occur.
Yeah....good luck making the argument against gun ownership now that we've seen police completely overwhelmed and incapable of protecting people against rioters, while at the same time making the argument to get rid of police
If anything I'm more in favor of less gun ownership because I want the police to be allowed to be disarmed (out of a lack of necessity). If the police were disarmed then it would mean we wouldn't have to combat a well equipped paramilitary organization on our own soil just to have change.
The police shouldn't need to protect people against rioters, because there shouldn't need to be riots to facilitate change.
Last edited:
All I'm saying is it's a much tougher argument to make now. The riots and inadequate response had people buying guns who have never owned a gun before. It has effectively wiped it out as any kind of campaign issue for this year
https://www.zerohedge.com/political...george-floyd-struggling-cops-inside-squad-car
You can’t see what is happening inside the squad car from this video, but you can tell by the cops’ reactions that something is going on in there.
FYI, even if he was resisting arrest initially (which is not definitive one way or the other from this video), I still think the cops used excessive force in pinning him down that long and in that way once he was outside the car and incapacitated on the ground. But the original comment was about having justification for using force to subdue him initially, and this video at the very least shows it was possible that they had a reasonable cause to forcefully subdue him initially.
Last edited:
I don't agree. Not that I think there will be change this year; because it's more of a fringe issue with the other problems we have going on.
The articles out there interviewing first time gun buyers in California and them complaining about the restrictions and red tape is lol. “Why is it so hard to buy a gun?!”
I feel like she would before some of the guys above her in this thread (like the guys in the shootouts)I don't think she's going to give up her rifle either
If he's in cuffs already, couldn't they just tase him? I din't know. I've never been a cop, never wanted to be a cop. I know it's a tough job for a variety of different reasons. At some point though when do other cops say enough is enough to one another? Or do they ever? Is there some kind of code? Why do videos seem to show cops having more patience if the alleged perpetrator is white?
Nope. But why do I feel like she couldn't show up at some of the reopen protests without being seriously harassed by police?I don't think she's going to give up her rifle either
That’s part of the unfortunate circumstances here. The senior officer had decades of experience. He did the neck stepping. Two of the three others only had a few days on the job. The other officer was the long time associate of the senior. For obvious reasons, you try to avoid those situations because when a mistake is made you don’t have an environment to speak up.
My understanding is that the APT shows that they were out with the guy for nearly 20 minutes before the video we’ve seen began.
They are very aware. You learn the first day that handcuffing can cause shoulder separation, rotator cuff damage, loss of fingers, cuts and scarring.
I don’t know either. For all I know, it could be that they’re told not to taze people who are already cuffed. Plus, my assumption is that they taze people to get them to the ground, not to keep them on the ground. So even if he did taze him initially, the cop might have still ended up kneeling on his neck to restrain him (again, I’m not excusing the kneeling and think it was excessive force).
Hard to even try to answer this question. A lot probably depends on which particular videos you are choosing to watch. Also, drawing broad conclusions from anecdotal evidence is generally not the best way to approach any sort of issue or problem.
Side Note: I wasn't changing my position about single payer. I was just stating we can't expect it to go as smoothly and as similarly as it works in Nordic countries, as an example. We are not Sweden, etc. But I am still for it, unlike defunding and/or disarming the police. There are other better routes to go than defunding police.
the movement just lost credibility.. They let Al Sharpton speak at the funeral. He's been a so called black leader for the last 50 years. What has he done to fix the problem?
