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

[Ronin]

I saw "I can't breath" written on the back of someone's car here at my apartment complex. I guess that's the protest saying?

It's one of the mottos, yes.

Expresses the utter - anxiety, grief, pain, hopelessness, fear for life of yourself and everyone you know, and more -

At hearing someone of your(race) people was (again) murdered.

Also solidarity...
As they literally couldn't breathe, dying...
And can't breathe, now, or ever again.

 

[Freida]

I honestly don't see how repetitions of what is required of police in high stress situations adds anything other than paltry excuses to a discussion about what happened to George Floyd.

I think I was going more for why the rookie would be unwilling/unable to correct a senior officer - not if what happened was acceptable. There is no universe where it's an acceptable thing to happen.

Honestly I'm guessing he just froze. Happens to the new kids all the time. People think they get much, much more training than they really do. Usually they get the basics in the academy but they learn the skills on-the-job with a senior officer. So when things start to go south they are kind of deer in the headlights. That's the moment some of them realize this isn't the job for them. Happens in dispatch too -- they get that first really bad call and just freeze. All the scenarios in the world can't prepare you for the real thing and I've had my share of them quit on the spot at their first dead baby call, or CPR on grandpa at thanksgiving dinner, or shot and bleeding out on the phone, blah blah blah. Some people just aren't cut out for the job - but they don't know that till they are tested. That's what the sr person is supposed to be doing -- making sure nothing goes wrong if the newbee freezes.

That's going to be one bad thing about this defunding campaign. The first thing they will cut is formal training because it's considered expendable - since you can learn on the job. So it will end with cops with even less training.

But it can be beneficial too:
Many states no longer allow officers to respond to people who are suicidal unless they are endangering someone else because it's not illegal to be suicidal and it was ending with suicide by cop way too often. Instead, now the caller is referred to the crisis line, who will do an intake and then decide if they will send a team out to see the suicidal person. The crisis team is funded by part of the police budget.

Ok. -- makes sense. And it's really effective, because it's trained mental health providers dealing with it, plus it frees officers up to go to other calls. Overall people are all sorts of happy with it.

Unless you are this person:

Her -- My brother is holding a gun to his head
Me -- where are you?
Her -- I'm outside the house
Me - is anyone inside with him?
Her - no
Me - Ok, stay outside and I'll transfer you to crisis
Her - WHAT?!!! He has a gun to his head!!!!
Me - yep. Gotta send you to crisis because officers no longer respond unless the person is a threat to someone else. Crisis will do an intake with you about his mental health history and then decide if they will send a team out.
her - How long with that take?
Me -- well once they talk to you and decide to send a team it will take about 30 minutes for them to get there
her : YOU f*ckING BITCH WHAT PART OF HE'S HOLDING A GUN TO HIS f*ckING HEAD DID YOU NOT HEAR!!!!! SEND ME A GODDAMN COP!!!!
me - Sorry - cops aren't allowed to do that anymore. So I'm transferring you to crisis.......

I had that conversation a lot - because there are a lot of armed suicidal people out there in merica.

Funny how people's opinions will change once they understand how it's really going to work.

 

[Sideways]

I had that conversation a lot - because there are a lot of armed suicidal people out there in merica.

You're right. It was never my job to deal with people when they were in the middle of dealing with the worst day of their life. I don't get it.

Still don't see how that relates to what happened to George Floyd. Because that wasn't what was going on for him. Not even remotely. And this is not a police state.

Funny how people's opinions will change once they understand how it's really going to work.

Or, like in my case, how people's opinions change when their job is to deal with the fallout of excessive and unjustified police brutality. Abuses of basic human rights. The legacy that leaves on them personally, on on their family and loved ones. And especially the legacy it leaves on their children.

There's a line we have to try and preserve. Where we say, "This is unacceptable", if we want to preserve the freedoms that we hold so dearly.

 

[Freida]

There's a line we have to try and preserve. Where we say, "This is unacceptable", if we want to preserve the freedoms that we hold so dearly.

Yep. I totally agree with that. We just need to be smart about it instead of rushing into the political answer with the most sound bites instead of an answer that might actually work

 

[Ronin]

Right.

But you don't uphold human rights by ordering policies that, in effect, mean freedom for abusers of human rights, mass scale.

Disbanding multiple PDs? Does give power to thugs, only.

The particularly spineless kind, too - those that wouldn't try to get business going in the presence of cops / other security around, but feel 'safe' to come out with no cops at sight.

And? People in these discussions seem to forget there are quite a few Black people in law enforcement TOO.

Imagine the fuun that is, hated for your race as usual day, now even more for being a cop, and then even left out of discussions on your very own communities. Hello, depression strenghtening. What things do with suicide rates in that population I didn't yet have the balls to ask nor research.

 

[blackemerald1]

Death was a reasonably likely outcome.

^You are now pre-empting evidence & investigations sideways. You don't know that!^^

Not my personal opinion there, either - the charges against Chauvin have been upgraded to Murder 2. The accusation against him is if he didn't realise he was killing Mr Floyd, he should have. And the remaining cops did nothing to stop him, when they should hav

^@Sideways since when and what Universe did a charge become the evidence?

Just because the police officer, defendant - has been charged does not make him guilty.

A court of law decides that remember? And also good luck ever finding him a fair trial too - what with all of these coffee cup lawyers observing from the sides? If you're going to quote Human rights remember Article 10? That applies to him too.

Hence my disappointment that due to what is apparently political pressure he's had his charges upgraded. You should know that the higher the charge the more onerous the burden of proof is - it's harder to land a conviction when you're stretching like that. Let's hope they kept or are still able to downgrade to manslaughter because there's going to be a big uphill battle proving that he knew & intended to kill. Good luck with proving that the police officer formed sufficient malicious aforethought to kill George Floyd. And just to be clear, again - charges do not equal evidence!

The assumption isn't that the enemy are everywhere and ready to kill you - you're surrounded by your own citizens, and your job is to protect them, treat with dignity when they don't pose any kind of threat to police or anyone else, and keep them sa

^How can you assume that? Police enter apparently safe & civilised situations everyday that turn into a fight for their lives.

Floyd had been arrested and was being taken into custody. At that point, the police become responsible for ensuring Floyd's safety. That's why repeatedly referencing what the police and military have to be ready for is unhelpful.

^Absolutely that was their obligation. Nobody has said otherwise. The reference to the police and military is about the chain of command and the necessity for having it. It's essential that one have a understanding of why & how they work like they do before passing judgement.

Because the job of the police is to contribute to keeping their own citizens safe, and free. Keeping the streets of a free and civilised society free and civilised - not turning them into a place where any police interaction might result in death.

^Of course their core job is to protect life. Nobody said otherwise did they? But must disagree with you about the risk of every interaction going wrong. Frequently it does & police must be prepared & know who is in charge, who can do what & when and who calls the shots. That's how rookies learn. They are equipped with basic skills when tipped out of the academy and learn on the job.

Still don't see how that relates to what happened to George Floyd. Because that wasn't what was going on for him. Not even remotely. And this is not a police state.

^You and I, don't yet know what happened prior to G.F's arrest. I've heard unverified reports that he was a career criminal. What that criminality extended to, I don't know. Neither do you. So ruling things in or out right now is premature. We don't know enough.

Or, like in my case, how people's opinions change when their job is to deal with the fallout of excessive and unjustified police brutality. Abuses of basic human rights. The legacy that leaves on them personally, on on their family and loved ones. And especially the legacy it leaves on their children.

If you lose perspective you've lost an important tool for doing your job. The law decides what actually happened and when we, you and I, everyone, depart from the truth, jump to emotional conclusions, knee jerk social media fuelled responses we fail our own communities and ultimately ourselves.

 

[whiteraven]

I've heard unverified reports that he was a career criminal. What that criminality extended to, I don't know. Neither do you.

I don't think that what he did in the past justifies what happened, but there are a number of reports talking about his background - several arrests and time spend in jail for violent offenses - and folks upset because there's not a lot of reporting on it and everyone seems to be elevating him to the level of a hero.

The only comprehensive link I can find is pretty controversial, so I'm not going to post.

 

[Freida]

So I just watched three different activist panels about defunding and abolishing police departments. They had some good points about getting people connected with better resources as a way to lower crime

And I would like to think they can take that method and teach people life skills to stop them from calling the police over stupid shit like putting their kids to bed.

Getting better use of force policies and getting bad cops fired?
Yep...needs to be done
So far I'm on board.

Then one of them said.....we can abolish the police because we don't need them even for things like murders because all cops do is investigate them they don't stop them

And that's where they lost me because it shows they have very little knowledge of what a good police department does.

The host of one show kept trying to ask if defunding police meant solving your own crime - and no one on the panel would answer him. They just kept repeating that police departments needed to be abolished

So when they shut down the police departments do they think crime will stop? Redirecting resources may lower it but it will still be there. Or do they expect you to handle it on your own because now you have community resources that will teach you how?

Ok that works. I'm sure you will be just fine when your neighbors are armed and physically fighting, your child is attacked, someone is breaking into your house, your car is being stolen, there's a bank robbery, there's a drunk driver running cars off the road, blah blah stuff cops do every day.

I'm sure they are right - getting rid of cops is the best option.
We don't need them.
We just need hopes and prayers
:rolleyes:

 

[whiteraven]

Then one of them said.....we can abolish the police because we don't need them

I thought about this argument on the way home tonight after the power had gone out and they needed 4 police officers to manage the traffic at the major intersections that were without a traffic light.

Some people are just stupid.

 

[blackemerald1]

and folks upset because there's not a lot of reporting on it and everyone seems to be elevating him to the level of a hero

^Well there's respect for the dead and his family too. That's a fair consideration since they lost a loved one. So due sensitivity should be given. :cautious:

^I've seen various family members that were never really that well liked when they were alive but omg... when they're dead let's give em a halo because they're going straight to heaven. So too is it ridiculous escalating the character of this man beyond what is real but apparently that's happening too.

what he did in the past justifies what happened, but there are a number of

^His death is unjustified I agree with you. I know probably there are a few radicals out there in na na land who can rationalise or justify it but I'm going to ignore them bc I'm here on this forum.

Police are not entitled to kill people they arrest and safety of the offender, the general public and the police conducting that arrest must always be paramount.

So his past doesn't entitle him to being killed BUT it does inform the police who were attending that the offender may be violent, may habitually carry weapons and that extreme caution should be used & the employment of various deescalation & restraints are or should be used. That doesn't mean kill him btw just so we're clear.

 

[Sideways]

You are now pre-empting evidence & investigations sideways.

It's almost like you've watched a different video to the one that sparked protests all around world.

Making assumptions about the political motivations of the prosecution etc. I'm not going down that rabbit hole. George Floyd should not have been killed by those officers that day - not lying face down on the ground being slowly suffocated, as he pleaded for his life, in the middle of the street, not at all. His daughter should still have a father.

Beyond that? I think this thread has become unhelpful for me. The issues here are being so overshadowed by what some military-type police force faces every day that the complete brutality of what happened to George Floyd, and how wrong that is, has been lost.

Police (different from the military, in a whole lot of really relevant ways) are required to not kill people unless there is some overwhelming necessity to do so. Unless other, less forceful tactics are available. That's the job. Not an easy job. But that's the job.

If training isn't adequately providing police with the ability to do that? The answer isn't to start accepting unnecessary brutality, and shift the line the of what is and isn't acceptable. The answer is to train them better, and get the ones who can't differentiate between life-threatening v's "we're killing this man both brutally and unnecessarily" the hell off the police force.

There's no amount of "but they were rookies", or "do you know what these guys face every day" that changes what happened to George Floyd. There is no amount of chain-of-command passing the buck mentality that change the fact that his daughter will spend the rest of her life without a father. Unnecessarily.

 

[whiteraven]

Police are not entitled to kill people they arrest and safety of the offender, the general public and the police conducting that arrest must always be paramount.

Oh yeah. Agree!

Well there's respect for the dead and his family too. That's a fair consideration since they lost a loved one. So due sensitivity should be given.

Agreed. And I don't think it's appropriate immediately after. I do think, though, it would not be inappropriate to cover the *whole* story, now that some have elevated him as they have.