News Events around the George Floyd protests and riots, US and beyond

[joeylittle]

Found this piece in Buzzfeed on Racial Gaslighting - I thought it was a really interesting read, for anyone interested.

 

[grit]

At the end it is about empathy.
Pure and simple.

Can a person deeply feel the difference and yet the sameness of humanity and act accordingly?

I think few people showed the kind of depth of empathy in which also one can make a significant and seismic change: I can think of Mandela and Lincoln.

If trump had empathy as much grandiose etc, he could have surpassed both of them. The most glaring underestimated word in English.... IF!

And only if.

I just saw joelittle's racial gaslighting post and it reminded me a great little paper I saw a while a go.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21565503.2017.1403934

 

[siniang]

Just a piece worth reading.

I fit the description.... — steve locke

 

[Freida]

America - you will get your wish. You won't have to defund the police because they will already be gone
America we are leaving
I remember wanting to be a cop
Police officers targeted

Many departments are already incredibly short staffed because people don't want to do the job.

would you?

 

[Freida]

here is no way he could have known the man would die, he might have thought he may die but a superior with lots of experience obviously didn't think so. Again, wrong, but there wasn't a clear path for him to follow without knowing the death was imminent.

My guess is that it was the first time rookie had seen some one restrained - that's why they are rookies. This is all new to them. Sure, they may have seen demos in class, but most of what they learn is on the job and in the moment.

The rookies rely completely on their senior officers to know what to do. So if senior guy said "this is how we do it all the time and it's fine, no one has ever been harmed" then ya, there would be no reason to think he was lying - until it was too late.

Its a culture thing that LE and the military share - obey and don't ask questions until after the situation is over because if someone is shooting at us I don't have time to answer .

It's drilled into them ---- because they have to completely trust that this person is going to teach them to stay alive when shit goes south. So if senior guy says "don't worry" they have no reason to think what they are seeing isn't a restraint technique...it's actually a murder

Should he have jumped in to help?
That's a question he will be asking himself for the rest of his life.
Along with "Why was I stupid enough to believe him when he told me this was how it is done and the guy would be fine?"

Not excusing his behavior - just explaining how it works

 

[Sideways]

So if senior guy says "don't worry" they have no reason to think what they are seeing isn't a restraint technique...it's actually a murder

There's something seriously wrong with the policing system then. Like, seriously, fundamentally wrong.

Average Joe could tell you that putting the body weight of a grown man on someone's neck could kill them, never mind keeping it there for nearly 10 minutes. Necks break. People suffocate. Those things are fatal. Most kids have some clue about how fragile necks are by the time they're through with Disney cartoons.

I appreciate that I'm not a cop, and so I don't really "get it." But we're talking about cops, not the military. We're talking about Minneapolis, not Syria. We're talking about an unarmed, handcuffed man lying face down on the road with 4 officers on top of him, not some crazed gun-weilding loose cannon.

If the consequences of "Get off him, boss" are so grievous that it's worth letting a civilian die? Then they've made the right call shutting that police force down.

Police are given special powers, and serious weaponry, to protect the community. That's their number one priority.

When any police force starts using those powers with complete disregard for the safety of individual citizens, because the internal power dynamics of the police force have become so toxic? That's no longer a police force that has any place in a free society. Preserving human life should be at the very core of what individual police are concerned with, and if their training has them prioritising "do what boss says at any cost, including human life"? That's not training, that's tyranny.

ETA Being given a police badge means you carry more responsibility to do the right thing, and keep people safe, not less. Rookie or not.

 

[siniang]

In addition to what Sideways wrote, but this vvv

Its a culture thing that LE and the military share - obey and don't ask questions until after the situation is over because if someone is shooting at us I don't have time to answer .

Is also important and as you point out, a cultural thing. One I’ll just never understand. Ever.

I’ve already seen people advocate for your 2nd amendment here in this very thread ... but if a police officer has to ALWAYS assume the other person is more likely than not armed? Then of course you get a culture of “shoot first, ask later”.

Hence why police force through guns? Just not as prevalent in other countries. Hence why other deescalation tactics play a much larger role, both in training and in every day service.

This is not to say that there isn’t police brutality in other countries. But in many at least Western countries? It’s at least not immediately deadly as a too often first line of action.

 

[Ronin]

Nope.

To that part of 'other countries do far more deescalation / don't use guns'. Both factually incorrect.

For the same scenarios, like responding to a riot call and going to both a developing (not enough intel, rapid changing information) and volatile situation? You can bet the officers would go with the same kit & gear anywhere... if their dept isn't a total f*ckup that doesn't keep their employees safe, that is.

It's not a 'too much guns in Murrca' thing.
It's tactical & security needs that are universal *responding to that type of call* that, frankly, if you aren't dealing with those risks you can't even begin to see the *need* for.

Because to get why is which gear a need on site you have to have a training that civilians outside of those jobs just don't.

And? There absolutely *is* police brutality in other countries. Deadly one, too. But how it's handled and publicized differs. Ditto to reactions it sparks. Communities of color elsewhere? Just don't *get to* make a big protest for their dead, for one.

If for nothing else because say, the responsible killer cop is an active NeoNazi with friends, and very few would actually care if, I dunno, those buddies would torch down that Gypsy neighborhood.

Where Americans air their grievances and immediately.

 

[blackemerald1]

If the consequences of "Get off him, boss" are so grievous that it's worth letting a civilian die? Then they've made the right call shutting that police force down.

^That's not what happened though. Back up for a moment. They didn't know he, George Floyd was going to die so there was no calculation or process where they stopped and considered their career vs a civilians life.

Pointing out that I very much doubt the rookies and subordinates there thought death would result from this particular action, on this particular day.

Nobody here and certainly not @Freida has said that they thought not acting was worth letting him die.

When any police force starts using those powers with complete disregard for the safety of individual citizens, because the internal power dynamics of the police force have become so toxic?

^Big statement but not true. What powers do you mean? What toxicity do you refer to?

Nobody condones the actions that happened here. Nobody condones violence - surely?

The 'police force' as an organisation has not given 'complete disregard' for the safety of individual citizens. Far from it.

If one constantly extrapolates the facts out to 'any police force' you're not addressing the issue.

Obviously there is a problem with this police member. Obviously there is an issue with that particular tactic (knee to the neck)

Does this mean that ALL police and ALL police forces using their legislative powers are wrong? No. It doesn't.

There will always be a need for police forces to be armed, to be able to respond to violent resistance to the stuff that most people don't even worry about.

And police are entitled to protect themselves whilst they are doing their duties too.

There are pockets of bad cops sure. And they should be disbanded and appropriately dealt with.

I've seen Police units, groups etc disbanded because the hierarchy had lost confidence in that particular unit to maintain the standards that the community expected. That's a fair call. Did it make the news? No.

Internal power dynamics are always at play... they're at play in every organisation. Pressure usually flows downwards onto the troopers on the ground... the one's that are under-resourced, over-worked.

and if their training has them prioritising "do what boss says at any cost, including human life"? That's not training, that's tyranny.

^That's not what @Freida said. Almost every profession where there is training of recruits & the acquisition of experience you begin as a junior or rookie. You gain on the job experience. The most experienced police officers are expected to train the inexperienced recruits. All recruits, rookies etc have to account for their own actions and be answerable to what they have and have not done.

But in a high stress situation, just as in the military, you do what you're told or you will quite possibly die. Or someone that you're supposed to be helping, saving, protecting will die.

The hierarchy of police forces and military organisations has been around for ever. It's what works and it works well.

but if a police officer has to ALWAYS assume the other person is more likely than not armed? Then of course you get a culture of “shoot first, ask later”.

^Police officers are trained to expect the unexpected and that means protecting themselves too. Expecting that offenders may be armed is one of many considerations that police officers should and are trained to consider when arresting and otherwise interacting with the public.

There were no guns involved in the killing of George Floyd. Why do we always get the injection of weapons in this thread? If a discussion about what weaponary police have is necessary then ok. But it didn't happen in this particular circumstance.

Hence why other deescalation tactics play a much larger role, both in training and in every day service.

Deescalation tactics are used. There are literally millions of arrests and situations all around the Western world every year where police officers do employ deescalation tactics. But for the protection of the public and themselves weapons are unfortunately, necessary.

 

[Ronin]

Let alone...

Even the technique, knee to the kneck? Isn't problematic. That's basic boot camp stuff.

That it some times has tragic outcomes, both in training and situations outside of it, is another question.

That what happened is profoundly tragic on every level and ties into several systemic issues doesn't mean the *system itself* is wrong.

Nor that the system wrong is fixed by disbanding it altogether.

If doing that, you get *more* lawlessness and acts of depravity. Not *less.*

 

[Movingforward10]

I think it's utterly exciting to come up with a new system. Perhaps one that is outside the patriarchal colonial systems and something new? Something that reflects the very citizens it is there to protect? Quotas for example if the population is X% Hispanic etc then the new protective officers are X% Hispanic etc etc

Why keep trying to make the current system better when we've all been trying that for years?
This is an opportunity for change .
So let's change.

 

[blackemerald1]

Quotas for example if the population is X% Hispanic etc then the new protective officers are X% Hispanic etc etc

^This is not new. This has been around for a really long time & is still being done. Police forces, military & other agencies actively and enthusiastically recruit but I don't know of quotas. Same goes for female percentages.