zlacker

> I cannot condone violence nor encourage it, but you have to admit that the first few protests and property damage drastically influenced the quick arrest of an officer that may not have been arrested or even fired if it didn't happen.

I don't think this is a good thing. The office involved should be charged or arrested based on the circumstances and evidence, not to appease angry protesters and to attempt to quell riots.

In this case, it appears overwhelmingly clear that the office should be charged; but arresting people because their actions have inspired protests or riots is very dangerous.

>>toast0+(OP)
It's the last way the people have for their voice to be heard. All laws come from the people governed; legislatures serve at their behest and for their interests. If you have SO MANY people decrying an action -- it's direct democracy in real time.

>>toast0+(OP)
> The office involved should be charged or arrested based on the circumstances and evidence

Obviously. But they weren't, and given precedent, probably never would have been. That's why this is happening.

>>toast0+(OP)
This reply elides the fact that there are quite a few American police officers who have killed American citizens in similar circumstances to this one who are free and have never been convicted.

Yes, it would be great if the law worked as we intended it to. Yet it does not, and to suggest that we continue to sit here while these police officers continue to murder people undermines the ability of the people who are being murdered to stop it.

>>wbroni+U2
They usually don't even get charged.

>>simond+L2
The officer in question has been charged with murder. The Minnesota Governor and AG were both advocating for charges basically since day 1 and well before the protests so it's not at all clear the turmoil influenced his arrest.

>>simond+L2
There's lots of precedent of officers being charged and arrested. Not often enough, and they are especially acquitted too often, but the public perception that they aren't charged is a function of media narrative, not fact.

>>freeon+W1
Voting? Anyway, there's pretty broad agreement that the riots are opportunistic violence, not connected to or motivated by a concern for justice.

>>devalg+15
To the contrary, the prosecutor had this to say about why he had not pressed charges:

'But my job in the end is to prove he violated a criminal statute - but there is other evidence that does not support a criminal charge.'[0]

This quotation is from a tabloid, but the quote--and the DA's failure to say unequivocally that he would prosecute Floyd's killer, Chauvin--contributed to the riots.

And then Chauvin was arrested the day after riots started.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8367221/Prosecutors...

>>devalg+15
There was more than one murderer. There were 4 murderers. The police chief said as such, which is unprecedented for a police chief to say.

>>throwa+Sc
Voting hasn't worked. Oakland PD still has half of its budget to brutality complaints. It's been 7 years since the movement started and 66 years since voting was allowed for Black people. Voting isn't going to change anything.

"Broad agreement" by who, exactly? I keep seeing videos of cops smashing windows then blaming it on protestors, cops attacking crowds with tear gas and less-lethal rounds, and now a shooting of a small business owner at a barbecue. It's not connected to a concern for justice because you're looking at the wrong side to blame.

>>teachr+0d
Attorney General != District Attorney last time I checked.

>>freeon+aC
> Voting hasn't worked

What? If 10% of the people who turned out to protest actually voted in their local elections, they would have whatever they wanted. Voting has hardly been attempted, and there are voting data to prove it.

> "Broad agreement" by who, exactly?

Basically everyone who isn't an outside agitator, but if you don't already believe me I doubt I'm going to change your mind.

> I keep seeing videos of cops smashing windows then blaming it on protestors, cops attacking crowds with tear gas and less-lethal rounds, and now a shooting of a small business owner at a barbecue. It's not connected to a concern for justice because you're looking at the wrong side to blame.

I don't know what to tell you. Cops aren't using kid gloves any more for sure, but cities are descending into chaos and no one in good faith thinks its the cops that are out there doing the looting and burning.

>>throwa+6J
> Basically everyone who isn't an outside agitator, but if you don't already believe me I doubt I'm going to change your mind.

Trotting out a nebulous, totally unsourced claim and then implying that anyone who questions you is wrong beyond help is… not exactly a convincing tactic.

>>freeon+aC
> Voting hasn't worked. Oakland PD still has half of its budget to brutality complaints. It's been 7 years since the movement started and 66 years since voting was allowed for Black people. Voting isn't going to change anything.

Really, honestly, think about this rationale and think about what it would look like if people with different views than you applied this line of reasoning. Would you be okay with anti-abortion activists employed direct action and did to clinics what these protestors did to police stations?

>>manfre+k81
Are you saying they haven't? The DOJ considers anti-abortion activists domestic terrorists and treats them as such.

>>manfre+k81
No, for two reasons:

First, no one is forcing you to have an abortion you don't want. Anti-abortion activity is for the sake of others, and never yourself. This makes it no less noble of an endeavor for your personal beliefs, but since other people having abortions don't actually affect you one wit, it's hard to see abortion as having the same urgency as police brutality, where people at random are dying daily, and anybody could be the next target.

Second, because their voices are being heard. Between the banning of funding for Planned Parenthood domestically as well as internationally, and continued restrictions to constructively ban abortion in several states, it's clear that progress is being made, so voting is working. This is not clear at all for victims of police violence, where claims have been increasing over time, not decreasing.

>>freeon+4w1
Tell that to the people who genuinely believe that termination of pregnancies is murder. I don't deny that you see abortion in a different light (and so do I). That's the point. It's clear that the comment above is written without consideration for the fact that people have different worldviews.

Your comment is just as empowering for said activists to say "voting hasn't worked, murdering the unborn remains legal nationwide. We need to use direct action against abortion providers".

The idea that force is justified because democracy has not produced the desired outcome directly leads to a world where might makes right.

>>select+7u1
And rightly so. That's my point: using force to override democracy is bad, and leads to a world where might makes right. The same scrutiny should be applied to the groups torching police departments.

>>devalg+15
If I, as a citizen, went along with three cronies to murder a man, those three cronies would all catch murder charges as well.

>>throwa+Ic
The cop in question had 18 prior complaints against him.

I don't know about you, but if I had 18 complaints against me at work, I would probably have got in trouble by now, and I'm not talking about two "letters of reprimand".

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/01/us/derek-chauvin-what-we-...

>>broken+oL1
Yeah, I’d be in big trouble. My industry has yet to unionize.

>>devalg+JC
DAs decide whether to file murder charges. AGs are not relevant to the process.