Minneapolis cops slowly murder handcuffed man in front of crowd

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Lmao he even capitalised "THUGS". Real subtle there donny.

[Pyro]

To give some perspective of the area:

https://twitter.com/PartyPrat/status/1266249061071327232

[T'Chenka]

Force needs to be applied to curb the actions of the criminals that are looting and destroying businesses, how much economic damage is being inflicted upon normal business owners as a result of these riots. As for the issue of Floyd, it's clear the police attracts some sadists and when you have hundreds of thousands of police officers, you will get a few sadists who enjoy causing pain and killing people, its unfortunate but inevitable, the only solution is a trial for the police officer who was involved with killing Floyd.

ok sauron

So... the angry anarchy mob can just do whatever they want and they can't be met with force? Defending your home, business and family members from pitchforks and torches makes you Sauron now?

To be clear, I am VERY MUCH with these protestors on this unjustified killing. A destructive violent mob and protestors are two different things though. One understands right/wrong and processes logic and reason, the other does not.

This isn't Canada, fam.

"Peaceful" protests have failed time and time again. Is this the right answer? Almost certainly not but it isn't unreasonable for desperate times to call for desperate measures. People are already on their last legs due to the pandemic, it's the perfect storm.

When a mob evolves into a violent mob and then eventually into anarchy, there is literally no organization where the rioters can come together and accomplish anything constructive in the way that protestors could. The only thing anarchy can try and succeed to accomplish is... anarchy. Nothing that helps race relations or brings justice for this travesty can be accomplished by anarchy.

I understand that. Decrying certain behaviors doesn't create a solution, though. What is the fix, and when? This issue isn't going to go away without action.

I wish I had the answers.

I do know though - and this is PURELY hypoethetical - that if that angry mob had gone from precinct to precinct and destroyed every police behicle they saw (including parked helicopters) and burned down every police station in the entire city, that might have been a violent and destructive response that I could get maybe behind and it might have led to something good in the long run. What's happening right now is NOT that. It's literal anarchy with no rhyme or reason. Innocent people's homes, businesses, vehicles are being stolen / destroyed and apparently some innocent people are being harmed. I'm not sure you understand how DEEPLY f___ed up anarchy can become. I hope that the number of rapes and murders end up being minimal or zero by the end of this.

Starting a war with cops isn't a viable solution for anyone.

Okay, so hear me out here.

You're saying that there's a simmering rage slowly bubbling under the surface due to all of this injustice, and when injustuces like this happen, there is an unavoidable violent backlash of rage that will be expressed. Are we in agreement so far? Makes sense? Now let me ask you this. That violent rage backlash IS happening no matter what right? And nobody can stop it and it's unavoidable. SO, what's "better" / closer to justice / more moral and righteous? Direct that rage at the perpetrators of the injustice, OR let the destruction and violence eminate as chaos in every direction to the surrounding geography which includes innocent civilian property, homes and persons? Which is closer to justice / less immoral / more constructive?

[fhtagn]

For anyone who can and will read.

The entire framing is a lie. There are not Riots in Minneapolis, there were no riots in Baltimore or Ferguson, and I would venture to say that Black people have probably never rioted in the history of the United States.

yeah, no. the article is garbage is so is your opinion if you agree with this.

[SevenEleven]

Force needs to be applied to curb the actions of the criminals that are looting and destroying businesses, how much economic damage is being inflicted upon normal business owners as a result of these riots. As for the issue of Floyd, it's clear the police attracts some sadists and when you have hundreds of thousands of police officers, you will get a few sadists who enjoy causing pain and killing people, its unfortunate but inevitable, the only solution is a trial for the police officer who was involved with killing Floyd.

ok sauron

So... the angry anarchy mob can just do whatever they want and they can't be met with force? Defending your home, business and family members from pitchforks and torches makes you Sauron now?

To be clear, I am VERY MUCH with these protestors on this unjustified killing. A destructive violent mob and protestors are two different things though. One understands right/wrong and processes logic and reason, the other does not.

This isn't Canada, fam.

"Peaceful" protests have failed time and time again. Is this the right answer? Almost certainly not but it isn't unreasonable for desperate times to call for desperate measures. People are already on their last legs due to the pandemic, it's the perfect storm.

When a mob evolves into a violent mob and then eventually into anarchy, there is literally no organization where the rioters can come together and accomplish anything constructive in the way that protestors could. The only thing anarchy can try and succeed to accomplish is... anarchy. Nothing that helps race relations or brings justice for this travesty can be accomplished by anarchy.

I understand that. Decrying certain behaviors doesn't create a solution, though. What is the fix, and when? This issue isn't going to go away without action.

I wish I had the answers.

I do know though - and this is PURELY hypoethetical - that if that angry mob had gone from precinct to precinct and destroyed every police behicle they saw (including parked helicopters) and burned down every police station in the entire city, that might have been a violent and destructive response that I could get maybe behind and it might have led to something good in the long run. What's happening right now is NOT that. It's literal anarchy with no rhyme or reason. Innocent people's homes, businesses, vehicles are being stolen / destroyed and apparently some innocent people are being harmed. I'm not sure you understand how DEEPLY f___ed up anarchy can become. I hope that the number of rapes and murders end up being minimal or zero by the end of this.

Starting a war with cops isn't a viable solution for anyone.

Okay, so hear me out here.

You're saying that there's a simmering rage slowly bubbling under the surface due to all of this injustice, and when injustuces like this happen, there is an unavoidable violent backlash of rage that will be expressed. Are we in agreement so far? Makes sense? Now let me ask you this. That violent rage backlash IS happening no matter what right? And nobody can stop it and it's unavoidable. SO, what's "better" / closer to justice / more moral and righteous? Direct that rage at the perpetrators of the injustice, and let the destruction and violence eminate as chaos in every direction to the surrounding geography which includes innocent civilian property, homes and persons? Which is closer to justice / less immoral / more constructive?

Destroying police buildings and vehicles has a social cost as well and provides opportunity for hundreds of thousands of people to be even less safe. It's an all around terrible situation and next time it's going to be even worse than this.

[SevenEleven]

For anyone who can and will read.

The entire framing is a lie. There are not Riots in Minneapolis, there were no riots in Baltimore or Ferguson, and I would venture to say that Black people have probably never rioted in the history of the United States.

yeah, no. the article is garbage is so is your opinion if you agree with this.

"All of which brings us to the first part of our definition. That’s the part that sticks. A riot requires “a disturbance of the peace.” When has there EVER been peace in this country for Black people?"

[fhtagn]

For anyone who can and will read.

The entire framing is a lie. There are not Riots in Minneapolis, there were no riots in Baltimore or Ferguson, and I would venture to say that Black people have probably never rioted in the history of the United States.

yeah, no. the article is garbage is so is your opinion if you agree with this.

"All of which brings us to the first part of our definition. That’s the part that sticks. A riot requires “a disturbance of the peace.” When has there EVER been peace in this country for Black people?"

imagine being so delusional that you seriously think that

[T'Chenka]

Starting a war with cops isn't a viable solution for anyone.

Okay, so hear me out here.

You're saying that there's a simmering rage slowly bubbling under the surface due to all of this injustice, and when injustuces like this happen, there is an unavoidable violent backlash of rage that will be expressed. Are we in agreement so far? Makes sense? Now let me ask you this. That violent rage backlash IS happening no matter what right? And nobody can stop it and it's unavoidable. SO, what's "better" / closer to justice / more moral and righteous? Direct that rage at the perpetrators of the injustice, OR let the destruction and violence eminate as chaos in every direction to the surrounding geography which includes innocent civilian property, homes and persons? Which is closer to justice / less immoral / more constructive?

Destroying police buildings and vehicles has a social cost as well and provides opportunity for hundreds of thousands of people to be even less safe. It's an all around terrible situation and next time it's going to be even worse than this.

*Police murder innocent black guy*

*Angry mob shows up on your street, torches your car, break your elderly white neighbour lady''s jaw, smash the front window of the nice couple that live across their street, steal their big screen TV and attempt to gang rape their 15 year olddaughter. Three or four other houses are burnt to the ground.*

You Some - "Welp, good thing they came here instead of taking their anger out on the immoral police department that wronged them and p___ed them off!"

[SevenEleven]

Starting a war with cops isn't a viable solution for anyone.

Okay, so hear me out here.

You're saying that there's a simmering rage slowly bubbling under the surface due to all of this injustice, and when injustuces like this happen, there is an unavoidable violent backlash of rage that will be expressed. Are we in agreement so far? Makes sense? Now let me ask you this. That violent rage backlash IS happening no matter what right? And nobody can stop it and it's unavoidable. SO, what's "better" / closer to justice / more moral and righteous? Direct that rage at the perpetrators of the injustice, OR let the destruction and violence eminate as chaos in every direction to the surrounding geography which includes innocent civilian property, homes and persons? Which is closer to justice / less immoral / more constructive?

Destroying police buildings and vehicles has a social cost as well and provides opportunity for hundreds of thousands of people to be even less safe. It's an all around terrible situation and next time it's going to be even worse than this.

*Police murder innocent black guy*

*Angry mob shows up on your street, torches your car, break your elderly white neighbour lady''s jaw, smash the front window of the nice couple that live across their street, steal their big screen TV and attempt to gang rape their 15 year olddaughter. Three or four other houses are burnt to the ground.*

You - "Welp, good thing they came here instead of taking their anger out on the immoral police department that wronged them and p___ed them off!"

That's not me, wtf.

*insert letter from Birmingham here*

[Koharu]

Rumors again, this time about Columbus, OH's statehouse having been taken by protestors.

[YPestis25]

Rumors again, this time about Columbus, OH's statehouse having been taken by protestors.

It's confirmed.

https://twitter.com/nbc4i/status/1266216805879644160

[T'Chenka]

Starting a war with cops isn't a viable solution for anyone.

Okay, so hear me out here.

You're saying that there's a simmering rage slowly bubbling under the surface due to all of this injustice, and when injustuces like this happen, there is an unavoidable violent backlash of rage that will be expressed. Are we in agreement so far? Makes sense? Now let me ask you this. That violent rage backlash IS happening no matter what right? And nobody can stop it and it's unavoidable. SO, what's "better" / closer to justice / more moral and righteous? Direct that rage at the perpetrators of the injustice, OR let the destruction and violence eminate as chaos in every direction to the surrounding geography which includes innocent civilian property, homes and persons? Which is closer to justice / less immoral / more constructive?

Destroying police buildings and vehicles has a social cost as well and provides opportunity for hundreds of thousands of people to be even less safe. It's an all around terrible situation and next time it's going to be even worse than this.

*Police murder innocent black guy*

*Angry mob shows up on your street, torches your car, break your elderly white neighbour lady''s jaw, smash the front window of the nice couple that live across their street, steal their big screen TV and attempt to gang rape their 15 year olddaughter. Three or four other houses are burnt to the ground.*

You - "Welp, good thing they came here instead of taking their anger out on the immoral police department that wronged them and p___ed them off!"

That's not me, wtf.

*insert letter from Birmingham here*

This post is going to sound snarky, but let me assure you that I'm just genuinely just trying to understand your position here.

So I went back and read all your posts and you are correct. You didn't actually say that what's happening now is the preferable outcome to the rioters focusing their energies on the policy instead of civilians, private property, businesses. Obviously, either outcome is really really bad. I'm sorry that I jumped the gun a bit there.

What is your position on this, if you don't mind me asking? If this horrible situation is/was truly unavoidable, what is the "less bad" version? Should the mob have devolved into anarchy (what actually happened) and caused violence and destruction all over the place, or should the mob have picked a target (police) that they had legitimate bones to pick with and targetted the guilty parties in an organized fashion, leaving totally innocent civilians out of it? Whi h scenario is "better", which is more morally justified and which is more contructive long term? Perhaps that's three different questions.

[Dr. Arch]

Rumors again, this time about Columbus, OH's statehouse having been taken by protestors.

It's confirmed.

https://twitter.com/nbc4i/status/1266216805879644160

Welp... Flip another one of those infamous Lichtman keys against Trump's re-election prospects (civil unrest).

This has been one of the most discouraging, sobering, and distasteful presidential terms in the history of this country, to be rivaled by those already recognized as the absolute worst.

[Koharu]

It sounds like things in Minneapolis have now moved to the 4th precinct building. Protestors gathering there, and police had already been there. There were some murmurings about the national guard being there as well.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

For anyone who can and will read.

The entire framing is a lie. There are not Riots in Minneapolis, there were no riots in Baltimore or Ferguson, and I would venture to say that Black people have probably never rioted in the history of the United States.

yeah, no. the article is garbage is so is your opinion if you agree with this.

"All of which brings us to the first part of our definition. That’s the part that sticks. A riot requires “a disturbance of the peace.” When has there EVER been peace in this country for Black people?"

imagine being so delusional that you seriously think that

If you think there are peaceful periods in the history of black American life that the author of the article is glossing over, feel free to provide us with some examples.

[Horus]

For anyone who can and will read.

The entire framing is a lie. There are not Riots in Minneapolis, there were no riots in Baltimore or Ferguson, and I would venture to say that Black people have probably never rioted in the history of the United States.

yeah, no. the article is garbage is so is your opinion if you agree with this.

"All of which brings us to the first part of our definition. That’s the part that sticks. A riot requires “a disturbance of the peace.” When has there EVER been peace in this country for Black people?"

imagine being so delusional that you seriously think that

And a conservative white woman from the South is an authority on race relations why, exactly?

I believe she is a "person of color" though I am not sure what color.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

For anyone who can and will read.

The entire framing is a lie. There are not Riots in Minneapolis, there were no riots in Baltimore or Ferguson, and I would venture to say that Black people have probably never rioted in the history of the United States.

yeah, no. the article is garbage is so is your opinion if you agree with this.

"All of which brings us to the first part of our definition. That’s the part that sticks. A riot requires “a disturbance of the peace.” When has there EVER been peace in this country for Black people?"

imagine being so delusional that you seriously think that

And a conservative white woman from the South is an authority on race relations why, exactly?

I believe she is a "person of color" though I am not sure what color.

Yeah, edited my post because I remembered that.

[SevenEleven]

Starting a war with cops isn't a viable solution for anyone.

Okay, so hear me out here.

You're saying that there's a simmering rage slowly bubbling under the surface due to all of this injustice, and when injustuces like this happen, there is an unavoidable violent backlash of rage that will be expressed. Are we in agreement so far? Makes sense? Now let me ask you this. That violent rage backlash IS happening no matter what right? And nobody can stop it and it's unavoidable. SO, what's "better" / closer to justice / more moral and righteous? Direct that rage at the perpetrators of the injustice, OR let the destruction and violence eminate as chaos in every direction to the surrounding geography which includes innocent civilian property, homes and persons? Which is closer to justice / less immoral / more constructive?

Destroying police buildings and vehicles has a social cost as well and provides opportunity for hundreds of thousands of people to be even less safe. It's an all around terrible situation and next time it's going to be even worse than this.

*Police murder innocent black guy*

*Angry mob shows up on your street, torches your car, break your elderly white neighbour lady''s jaw, smash the front window of the nice couple that live across their street, steal their big screen TV and attempt to gang rape their 15 year olddaughter. Three or four other houses are burnt to the ground.*

You - "Welp, good thing they came here instead of taking their anger out on the immoral police department that wronged them and p___ed them off!"

That's not me, wtf.

*insert letter from Birmingham here*

This post is going to sound snarky, but let me assure you that I'm just genuinely just trying to understand your position here.

So I went back and read all your posts and you are correct. You didn't actually say that what's happening now is the preferable outcome to the rioters focusing their energies on the policy instead of civilians, private property, businesses. Obviously, either outcome is really really bad. I'm sorry that I jumped the gun a bit there.

What is your position on this, if you don't mind me asking? If this horrible situation is/was truly unavoidable, what is the "less bad" version? Should the mob have devolved into anarchy (what actually happened) and caused violence and destruction all over the place, or should the mob have picked a target (police) that they had legitimate bones to pick with and targetted the guilty parties in an organized fashion, leaving totally innocent civilians out of it? Whi h scenario is "better", which is more morally justified and which is more contructive long term? Perhaps that's three different questions.

I legitimately don't know. I don't feel comfortable condoning any sort of violence. This whole situation is terrible and disturbs me at a core, basic level.

My position is that the Rodney King officers should have gone to prison. The Korean shop owner who murder the teenager by shooting her in the back of the head should have gone to prison. George Zimmerman should have gone to prison. Eric Gardner never should have happened. And on and on we can go. I'm Latino, so I've seen a lot of unnecessary sh**t happen to people I know and love. I've had unnecessary sh**t happen to me. I see what goes on in my very mixed and not so we'll off neighborhood.

I don't have the answers and I won't pretend to. I've made speaking up on race related policies and events my main priority posting here, because I don't think even some of our most well intentioned understand just what it's like in these communities. Life is never black and white (no pun intended), sometimes there is a win-win and sometimes there is a lose-lose. People are only willing to lose so much. I feel for the business owners; I feel for the business owners who lost their livelihood to this pandemic as well. But while perfect is never an option, progress can be, and more importantly, could have been. That we are still in the same place we are ten years later is sickening.

[fhtagn]

For anyone who can and will read.

The entire framing is a lie. There are not Riots in Minneapolis, there were no riots in Baltimore or Ferguson, and I would venture to say that Black people have probably never rioted in the history of the United States.

yeah, no. the article is garbage is so is your opinion if you agree with this.

"All of which brings us to the first part of our definition. That’s the part that sticks. A riot requires “a disturbance of the peace.” When has there EVER been peace in this country for Black people?"

imagine being so delusional that you seriously think that

If you think there are peaceful periods in the history of black American life that the author of the article is glossing over, feel free to provide us with some examples.

I'm not white, but your failed attempt here is hilarious.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

For anyone who can and will read.

The entire framing is a lie. There are not Riots in Minneapolis, there were no riots in Baltimore or Ferguson, and I would venture to say that Black people have probably never rioted in the history of the United States.

yeah, no. the article is garbage is so is your opinion if you agree with this.

"All of which brings us to the first part of our definition. That’s the part that sticks. A riot requires “a disturbance of the peace.” When has there EVER been peace in this country for Black people?"

imagine being so delusional that you seriously think that

If you think there are peaceful periods in the history of black American life that the author of the article is glossing over, feel free to provide us with some examples.

I'm not white, but your failed attempt here is hilarious.

Failed attempt at what, exactly?

[fhtagn]

For anyone who can and will read.

The entire framing is a lie. There are not Riots in Minneapolis, there were no riots in Baltimore or Ferguson, and I would venture to say that Black people have probably never rioted in the history of the United States.

yeah, no. the article is garbage is so is your opinion if you agree with this.

"All of which brings us to the first part of our definition. That’s the part that sticks. A riot requires “a disturbance of the peace.” When has there EVER been peace in this country for Black people?"

imagine being so delusional that you seriously think that

If you think there are peaceful periods in the history of black American life that the author of the article is glossing over, feel free to provide us with some examples.

I'm not white, but your failed attempt here is hilarious.

Failed attempt at what, exactly?

Well it was edited as I was quoting it, but it was in reference to you referring to me as white.

But this notion that non-white Americans face constant oppression and their lives are always at risk is simply exaggerated. Sure, it might make for fun talking points to certain groups, but it has little basis in truth in this day and age.

[SevenEleven]

I guess a lot of you might not know what it's like to have cops pull a gun on you for no reason. You might not know what it's like to have been pulled over by officers eight times, seven of which involved carrying black passengers. You might not have looked out your window after hearing screams at 3 am and jumping out of bed to help someone you thought was maybe getting raped, killed, or abducted, only to see cop cars with their lights off beating two white tweakers senseless. You haven't been able to see sexual predators let off the hook, even teachers, with no jail time, while your neighbors get hauled to jail for bogus complaints. For that, I will remain envious.

[T'Chenka]

I'm not a mod, but can we PLEASE postpone the "people of color do/don't face daily discrimination" debate for another day? Please?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

For anyone who can and will read.

The entire framing is a lie. There are not Riots in Minneapolis, there were no riots in Baltimore or Ferguson, and I would venture to say that Black people have probably never rioted in the history of the United States.

yeah, no. the article is garbage is so is your opinion if you agree with this.

"All of which brings us to the first part of our definition. That’s the part that sticks. A riot requires “a disturbance of the peace.” When has there EVER been peace in this country for Black people?"

imagine being so delusional that you seriously think that

If you think there are peaceful periods in the history of black American life that the author of the article is glossing over, feel free to provide us with some examples.

I'm not white, but your failed attempt here is hilarious.

Failed attempt at what, exactly?

Well it was edited as I was quoting it, but it was in reference to you referring to me as white.

It was a serious question. Since I remembered that it was based on a false premise, I retracted it and replaced it with another question. I guess you could consider that a failed attempt at something, yeah, but why be snide like that?

[AtorBoltox]

I'm not a mod, but can we PLEASE postpone the "people of color do/don't face daily discrimination" debate for another day? Please?

When is the right time to talk about it, then?