[News] The USA Police State will never satisfy its lust for beating, gassing, and imprisoning minorities

[Bubble181]

ITT: someone who has forgotten how obstinate and stubborn Americans are about the Second Amendment.

No matter what, it's all interpretation. "The right to bear arms" doesn't specifically limit what kind of arms, given the will to do so you could define it as "give everybody a broadsword, but nothing that can fire a bullet" all the way to "selling nuclear missiles to the mentally disabled is a-okay". Everything is an interpretation, and even moderate/otherwise normal Americans behave oddly around it.

I've stopped trying to have this discussion. Arguably we have less of an oligarchy than the USA, despite having fewer arms. "Democracy" in the USA is frankly a farce (well, in most of the West), yet I don't see the Militia protecting their Rights. Those who do are lone wolf suicide-by-cops, or domestic terrorists, or whatever, and anyone should be able to see that an actual movement to "take back" the States for democracy won't be by "Patriots" "liberating" federal facilities with guns (remember those idiots a while back?) - it'd have to be more akin to an Occupy movement or a Bernie Sanders campaign... for which you don't need guns.

Democracy is broken, Americans cling to their 2nd Amendment as "proof" that they could technically rise up. They can't, and won't, it's make-belief, but in that sense it's just as useful as our unions as "'protectors" of the lower and middle class and people here seem to believe they still fulfill that role, too.

 

[Null]

The thing about a "sniper rifle" is that even the same service branch can't agree on a consistent set of requirements to be classified as one. Hell, it can't even agree necessarily on the type of action: semi-automatic, bolt action, and single shot rifles are all used as sniper weapons. One thing that is generally agreed upon is that the rifle should have between 0.5 and 1.25 MOA - Minute of Angle. 1 MOA is roughly defined as spacing of 1 inch at 100 yards, meaning that the weapon is capable of firing a grouping of 5 shots within 1 inch at 100 yards. It is worth mentioning that competition and sporting rifles like those used in biathlon are capable of around 0.3 MOA, though they are generally of small caliber used at much shorter range. When I earned my rifle shooting merit badge in scouts, I had to produce 3 groupings of 5 shots at 25 yards that would fit under a dime using a Marlin .22LR rimfire bolt action rifle. Range is also an issue: a military sniper rifle might be required to shoot at distances of over a kilometer, while police sniper rifles are rarely used at more than 200 meters, as is ruggedness - the PSG-1 is useful for urban police departments but is rather fragile for military use.

 

[Hailey Knight]

My siblings are confirming my position as the most articulate and intelligent of our generation in the family. My brother's Facebook posts have become an incoherent mess of "american flag MY FLAG AMERICAN FLAG american Flag come at me if you wanna fight about America flag" only with much worse spelling and grammar. Like, I think he's trying to tell us something, but it's such a mess that I'm not sure even he knows what he's trying to convey at this point.

 

[evilmike]

As has been mentioned, one of the tragic aspects of the Dallas shooting is that the Dallas police force was actually working on institutional change to improve the quality of its police work. This article from the Dallas Morning News provides some insight into how they did this:

Police Chief David Brown says this shift toward de-escalation is driving a sharp drop in excessive-force complaints against officers.

Training instructors say they preach tactics that sometimes seem counter-intuitive to veteran officers: Slow down instead of rushing into a situation; don’t approach a suspect immediately. Try to build a rapport; don’t have multiple officers shout at once.

When you are granted the power by the state to deprive Americans of their liberty and their lives, your job is not to panic. You must de-escalate the situation. And if you don’t, then you need to be held accountable for your actions.
​

Okay, you fire everybody. You know how long it takes to hire someone to become a cop? It ain't overnight.

So how do you patrol the city while you're "properly training" your potential replacement LEO's? Have the mayor and the common council go out in police cruisers? Throw up the Bat signal and hope some winged vigilante shows up?

And even if you decide, "oh, we'll do an investigation, and we'll fire the appropriate people," what happens to those who are left? 100 officers to do the job of 150? 200? 300?How safe do you think your city will be then? Think you'll be able to handle all the retribuitions, the #BlackLivesMatter protests, the gang warfare as the bad guys realize there ain't no one patrolling their street anymore?

Oh, and when it comes out how awful and horrible these police officers are in your city, who do you rightfully think is gonna WANT to be a police officer in your little hamlet? Andy Taylor and Barney Fife are both pushing up daisies, kids.

Sorry - sore spot. The exact same damn thing is happening to my workplace. I don't know if it'll ever recover from all the crap we've had to go through over the last eight months.

The problem with this thinking is that it presents a false binary -- either the police get to do it "their way" or there will be chaos. As the Dallas department has shown, this isn't a situation to be fixed with a witch hunt. This is a situation that can be improved by stepping back, taking a breath, and figuring out how to improve the situation for everyone.

next up - why do the dallas police have robot bombs
follow up question - why are they using them to blow up suspects

My real concern is not the use of a robot with a bomb in this specific situation. I am more worried that other, less restrained police forces will consider this precedent to add this tactic to their daily SOP.

Nevada City, CA Councilwoman: The Dallas Police Got What They Deserved

Even Californians are starting to sit up and take notice and say "Ok yeah, maybe that was a bit over the line, and maybe she should go."

She's despicable to be sure and really shouldn't be in government at all, but, given that she's a minor politician in a small community that may be completely nuts (Nevada City Becomes First In The World To Enforce Chemtrail Free Zone), I am more concerned about the incendiary statements of people like the Lt. Governor of Texas ("Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick calls Dallas protesters 'hypocrites' for running from sniper's bullets ").

 

[Officer_Charon]

I used to live in Nevada City... it was sorta the place that hippies went to retire... several school buses turned into RVs there.

Gorgeous countryside, though. I lived at the head of a logging trail that went back onto the Sierra Nevadas. Great hiking, biking, and sledding in the winter.

 

[Bubble181]

Warning: Pokemon GO is a Death Sentence if you are a Black Man.

 

[Ravenpoe]

Warning: Pokemon GO is a Death Sentence if you are a Black Man.

That is the click baitiest of click bait stories of things that haven't happened

 

[PatrThom]

That is the click baitiest of click bait stories of things that haven't happened

He has a legitimate concern, but on a scale of 0 to Fire Marshal Bill, he's probably somewhere north of 7.

--Patrick

 

[Officer_Charon]

The precursor to Pokemon GO was Ingress. I used to catch folks in all sorts of odd locations playing it.

Then I'd sap their sites, because Enlightened are scrubs.

The one guy I kept encountering was nervous at first, but ultimately got used to seeing us encountering him. Mostly because so many of us played, as well.

 

[strawman]

While I believe some of the information presented is done so in an inordinately biased manner, if you take into account the bias you'll still find a decent perspective on the black lives matter movement within this video:

 

[evilmike]

While I believe some of the information presented is done so in an inordinately biased manner

I'm curious, what did you find inordinately biased about it?

 

[strawman]

I'm curious, what did you find inordinately biased about it?

I think that the overall point is good, and that we shouldn't let minor aspects of it become the focus of discussion. So I don't feel there's any value in discussing them, which is why I didn't specify and choose not to now.

 

[DarkAudit]

I think that the overall point is good, and that we shouldn't let minor aspects of it become the focus of discussion. So I don't feel there's any value in discussing them, which is why I didn't specify and choose not to now.

Then why did you bring it up in the first place? That's a Charlie way of thinking.

 

[strawman]

Then why did you bring it up in the first place? That's a Charlie way of thinking.

It may seem odd, but I find that if I acknowledge a problem without addressing it, and make it explicit that it's minor, then usually it heads off discussion about the minor problem.

Of course this sometimes backfires and the discussion becomes about discussing the fact that there's a thing I'm not interested in discussing.

 

[PatrThom]

Personally, I'm offended by the whole #BlackLivesMatter label, and I don't mean because I think it should be "#AfricanAmericanLivesMatter" or anything like that. I find it much easier to deal with if I treat #BLM as a label applied to an idea/ideal, rather than as an insinuation that #AllTheNonBlackLivesArePerfectlyFine, which is how it feels to me when that label/hashtag is rammed into my eyeballs by some angry person on the Internet.
So to review, #BLM is perfectly fine as the symbol/tag/graffito for the need for social change. I get that. I'm fine with it. As an individual being crushed by so many problems of my own I feel annoyed by my inability to make any real social progress but my foundation must be strong before I take on anyone else's cause(s). But so many people seem to be using it in the context of #LookSeeHowTheBlackManHasBeenShatUponYetAgainWillItEverEndWeNeverGotTheRetributionWeDesired and I'm really getting tired of the people who use it in that manner.

--Patrick

 

[Hailey Knight]

Personally, I'm offended by the whole #BlackLivesMatter label, and I don't mean because I think it should be "#AfricanAmericanLivesMatter" or anything like that. I find it much easier to deal with if I treat #BLM as a label applied to an idea/ideal, rather than as an insinuation that #AllTheNonBlackLivesArePerfectlyFine, which is how it feels to me when that label/hashtag is rammed into my eyeballs by some angry person on the Internet.
So to review, #BLM is perfectly fine as the symbol/tag/graffito for the need for social change. I get that. I'm fine with it. As an individual being crushed by so many problems of my own I feel annoyed by my inability to make any real social progress but my foundation must be strong before I take on anyone else's cause(s). But so many people seem to be using it in the context of #LookSeeHowTheBlackManHasBeenShatUponYetAgainWillItEverEndWeNeverGotTheRetributionWeDesired and I'm really getting tired of the people who use it in that manner.

--Patrick

That's because you're taking a thing that is not about you and making it about you.

 

[Sparhawk]

I still read the BLM thing as Bureau of Land Management.

 

[PatrThom]

That's because you're taking a thing that is not about you and making it about you.

Oh, but it is.
It's about society.
I am a member of society.
Ergo...
The rest is a rant about my lack of influence over this issue, which I suppose is about me. So be it.

--Patrick

 

[MindDetective]

Oh, but it is.
It's about society.
I am a member of society.
Ergo...

--Patrick

That is pretty terrible reasoning. Also, the premise is flawed.

 

[PatrThom]

That is pretty terrible reasoning. Also, the premise is flawed.

Enlighten me.
No, really.

--Patrick

 

[MindDetective]

Premise: it is about society.

It is not about society. It is about one aspect of society.

Flawed reasoning corrected:

It is about societies (P1)
I am a society (P2)
It is about me (C)

 

[PatrThom]

Hmm. I still see the premise of the #BLM movement as being one which wishes to effect a change in society's programming (i.e., "A person's a person, no matter how brown"). Is this an incorrect assumption? Or have I just been missing whatever the real point was all this time?

--Patrick

 

[MindDetective]

Hmm. I still see the premise of the #BLM movement as being one which wishes to effect a change in society's programming (i.e., "A person's a person, no matter how brown"). Is this an incorrect assumption? Or have I just been missing whatever the real point was all this time?

--Patrick

That's not the entirety of a society, though.

 

[Hailey Knight]

The real point is that it's been noticed that black people seem to be killed by police in situations where white people would not be killed by police, and it'd be good if that stopped. But stopping that involves acknowledging that racism is still a thing. Unfortunately, the mass perception is that racism = KKK, and not the subtle prejudices that are more passive until situations like these occur. The issue hasn't been about anything besides ebbing unnecessary killing of black people by police. It focused very sharply on this one issue.

There's really no way to address the issues without it being hijacked. #BlackLivesMatter gets countered with #AllLivesMatter. If it was #StopKillingBlackPeople it'd be #StopKillingAllPeople, and so on. Because people like to pretend racism is a thing that other people do or used to do, but not themselves, never themselves.

 

[strawman]

"The real point is that it's been noticed that black people seem to be killed by police in situations where white people would not be killed by police, and it'd be good if that stopped."

Has this shown to be true, or are we missing/ignoring the hundreds of white people killed by police under suspicious circumstances?

 

[ThatGrinningIdiot!]

BLM stopped the pride parade in Toronto and would not allow it to continue unless the leadership acquiesced to a list of demands. One of such was police be removed from the event entirely. How can a movement expect tolerance and respect when they hypocritically demand the exclusion of another group? Did they not think to consider that there are gay police officers who volunteer their time for Pride? That little stunt had me facepalming.

 

[AshburnerX]

"The real point is that it's been noticed that black people seem to be killed by police in situations where white people would not be killed by police, and it'd be good if that stopped."

Has this shown to be true, or are we missing/ignoring the hundreds of white people killed by police under suspicious circumstances?

You really only need to look at the actual statistics and then adjust for population size.

In 2015, The Washington Post launched a real-time database to track fatal police shootings, and the project continues this year. As of Sunday, 1,502 people have been shot and killed by on-duty police officers since Jan. 1, 2015. Of them, 732 were white, and 381 were black (and 382 were of another or unknown race).

But as data scientists and policing experts often note, comparing how many or how often white people are killed by police to how many or how often black people are killed by the police is statistically dubious unless you first adjust for population.

According to the most recent census data, there are nearly 160 million more white people in America than there are black people. White people make up roughly 62 percent of the U.S. population but only about 49 percent of those who are killed by police officers. African Americans, however, account for 24 percent of those fatally shot and killed by the police despite being just 13 percent of the U.S. population. As The Post noted in a new analysis published last week, that means black Americans are 2.5 times as likely as white Americans to be shot and killed by police officers.

U.S. police officers have shot and killed the exact same number of unarmed white people as they have unarmed black people: 50 each. But because the white population is approximately five times larger than the black population, that means unarmed black Americans were five times as likely as unarmed white Americans to be shot and killed by a police officer.

Police have shot and killed a young black man (ages 18 to 29) — such as Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo. —175 times since January 2015; 24 of them were unarmed. Over that same period, police have shot and killed 172 young white men, 18 of whom were unarmed. Once again, while in raw numbers there were similar totals of white and black victims, blacks were killed at rates disproportionate to their percentage of the U.S. population. Of all of the unarmed people shot and killed by police in 2015, 40 percent of them were black men, even though black men make up just 6 percent of the nation’s population.

The article breaks down a lot more of the statistics as well, including showing that police killings did not correlate with violent crime statistics. A city with a lot of police killing civilians may or may not have a high rate of violent crime. It apparently doesn't even matter where: unarmed people are just as likely to get shot by the police in areas of violent crime as in areas without.

The only correlation they can find that significantly affected the odds of an unarmed person being shot by the police was whether or not they were black. An unarmed black man is twice as likely to be shot by the police as a white one.

 

[PatrThom]

The real point is that it's been noticed that black people seem to be killed by police in situations where white people would not be killed by police, and it'd be good if that stopped. But stopping that involves acknowledging that racism is still a thing.

Yeah it is. Black people get denied for loans, housing, jobs, all kinds of stuff. It's no secret, but it'd be great if those things get addressed, too. I agree that "killing" is worse than "denying," though.

"The real point is that it's been noticed that black people seem to be killed by police in situations where white people would not be killed by police, and it'd be good if that stopped."
Has this shown to be true, or are we missing/ignoring the hundreds of white people killed by police under suspicious circumstances?

Semi-translation (which I hope will be corrected if wrong since I seem to misinterpret things easily): "Is this actually as bad as it sounds or is this something which just seems that way because of the selective boost/cut The Media gives it?" -- i.e., a request for facts, nothing more.
EDIT: Thank you for some facts.

--Patrick

 

[Hailey Knight]

"The real point is that it's been noticed that black people seem to be killed by police in situations where white people would not be killed by police, and it'd be good if that stopped."

Has this shown to be true, or are we missing/ignoring the hundreds of white people killed by police under suspicious circumstances?

There's really no way to address the issues without it being hijacked. #BlackLivesMatter gets countered with #AllLivesMatter. If it was #StopKillingBlackPeople it'd be #StopKillingAllPeople, and so on. Because people like to pretend racism is a thing that other people do or used to do, but not themselves, never themselves.

[DOUBLEPOST=1468466097,1468466018][/DOUBLEPOST]

You really only need to look at the actual statistics and then adjust for population size.

The article breaks down a lot more of the statistics as well, including showing that police killings did not correlate with violent crime statistics. A city with a lot of police killing civilians may or may not have a high rate of violent crime. It apparently doesn't even matter where: unarmed people are just as likely to get shot by the police in areas of violent crime as in areas without.

The only correlation they can find that significantly affected the odds of an unarmed person being shot by the police was whether or not they were black. An unarmed black man is twice as likely to be shot by the police as a white one.

But can we really be certain this reflects the truth of events or is this just another example of the media's sensationalized mathematics?[/steinman]

 

[PatrThom]

This really is why it needs serious study instead of swarms of people yelling for justice.
I mean yes, one way to restore parity would simply be to kill more white people, but let's try the other option, 'k?

--Patrick

 

[bhamv3]

This really is why it needs serious study instead of swarms of people yelling for justice.
I mean yes, one way to restore parity would simply be to kill more white people, but let's try the other option, 'k?

--Patrick

Black people all get killed, white people all get killed, Asians take over America! Woo hoo!

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

holy shit the white-whining in this thread is TREMENDOUS.

 

[DarkAudit]

holy shit the white-whining in this thread is TREMENDOUS.

You're as white as any of us, troll-boy. Probably more so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hailey Knight]

This really is why it needs serious study instead of swarms of people yelling for justice.

Black people all get killed, white people all get killed, Asians take over America! Woo hoo!

This is not Jurassic Park!

You're as white as any of us, troll-boy. Probably more so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You don't have to go after him on reflex. I mean, he's right. I'm seeing a whole new side of PatrThom I didn't know existed.

 

[Bubble181]

What? I don't see PatrThom saying "oh those poor black folks boohooh", and that's what it seems he's being interpreted as. Just because he voices an opinion that asks attention to something else doesn't immediately invalidate his feeling or opinion.

Some movements, that focus on very real and important issues, sadly focus on specific - big and easy - problems and this causes some other problems to get ignored, swept under the rug, or even become worse. There is sexism against men, there are men who get raped, there are white people getting killed by police for things they shouldn't get killed over (for example, I'm not sure a skinhead covered in big tattoos fares all that much better vis-a-vis cops than a black guy in a suit), and so on. This doesn't mean there aren't bigger problems with sexism towards women or transgenders, female victims, and black people facing undue violence. But some people fighting a good fight lose sight of those, and focus all anger/energy on only the "big" part, thus causing injustice of their own. It's good to acknowledge that, even if it's perhaps not exactly the same fight.