GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Surely part of the problem is that when police officers who have killed are put in front of a jury, they never get convicted. Logically you would expect some to be found guilty and others not guilty according to the balance of the evidence for and against them. That's the pattern you observe with any other kind of crime. But not police killings. No matter how blatant the crime, the American juries always acquit.
Result: people no longer believe that peaceful protest gets them anywhere.
Result: people no longer believe that peaceful protest gets them anywhere.
Yes, a police officer has to shoot someone in the back while they are running away to get convicted. Like happened a while back. Or get caught beating the snot out of someone for 5 minutes with clubs, after they are already down on the pavement.(You will obey me)
Or get caught choking someone who is a little too fat to start with until they have a heart attack and die, over selling cigarettes illegally.(You will obey me)
Or abuse someone so badly that you break their backbone, and then get caught on camera dragging them to a van and throwing them it.(You will obey me)
Or attacking a bunch of religious people in their compound, using pyrotechnic devices, harass them with all kinds of psych warfare techniques, until the compound burns down and about 70 kids burn to death.(YOU WILL OBEY US). And yes, the religious nuts were disobeying the law. Like sleeping with 13 year old girls.
Resulting in some people getting so mad at them they retaliated against them blowing up a building in Ok City.
Or before that, burning an entire city block in New York down killing people.
And then after saying all of that. Our darling media has a hand in this.
I suspect that for every 1000 good deeds that the police perform in a days time like helping old ladies across the street, rescuing kitties out of trees, stopping the perverts from doing sex stuff to kids, rescuing beaten women, catching bank robbers, etc... the media darlings focus on the worst of the worst, to cause riots to happen...
You see, it's not the medias job to fairly and accurately report the news. No No No, it's the medias job to sway public thinking and to affect social change, like the president of NBC news was caught saying back in 1980.
I assume the videos were recorded by bystanders.. I didn't watch the videos and don't know when it was recorded etc but the Austin Texas protests were infiltrated by violent extremists and looters were ransacking stores. Its been reported that extremists and of course opportunists were taking advantage of the protests as reported by the FBI. From what I have read the violence had already escalated by the time the riot patrol arrived. I don't condone violence and don't have a clue what was appropriate at the time.
As posted in another thread those "armed right-wing militias (you may call them extreme, I call them patriots)" i.e. the boogaloo movement that have shown up at protests are anti-government, anti-law enforcement groups and are trying to start a civil war.
Surely part of the problem is that when police officers who have killed are put in front of a jury, they never get convicted. Logically you would expect some to be found guilty and others not guilty according to the balance of the evidence for and against them. That's the pattern you observe with any other kind of crime. But not police killings. No matter how blatant the crime, the American juries always acquit.
Result: people no longer believe that peaceful protest gets them anywhere.
And we have yet another "expert" from another country who thinks they know all about the SSA. What you just stated is true only some of the time; not even a majority of the time.
Yes, a police officer has to shoot someone in the back while they are running away to get convicted. Like happened a while back. Or get caught beating the snot out of someone for 5 minutes with clubs, after they are already down on the pavement.(You will obey me)
Or get caught choking someone who is a little too fat to start with until they have a heart attack and die, over selling cigarettes illegally.(You will obey me)
Or abuse someone so badly that you break their backbone, and then get caught on camera dragging them to a van and throwing them it.(You will obey me)
Or attacking a bunch of religious people in their compound, using pyrotechnic devices, harass them with all kinds of psych warfare techniques, until the compound burns down and about 70 kids burn to death.(YOU WILL OBEY US). And yes, the religious nuts were disobeying the law. Like sleeping with 13 year old girls.
Resulting in some people getting so mad at them they retaliated against them blowing up a building in Ok City.
Or before that, burning an entire city block in New York down killing people.
uh...ya
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckk
And then after saying all of that. Our darling media has a hand in this.
I suspect that for every 1000 good deeds that the police perform in a days time like helping old ladies across the street, rescuing kitties out of trees, stopping the perverts from doing sex stuff to kids, rescuing beaten women, catching bank robbers, etc... the media darlings focus on the worst of the worst, to cause riots to happen...
You see, it's not the medias job to fairly and accurately report the news. No No No, it's the medias job to sway public thinking and to affect social change, like the president of NBC news was caught saying back in 1980.
So all police are bad because of a few isolated incidents? You don't know jack about what is really going on or why.
So all police are bad because of a few isolated incidents? You don't know jack about what is really going on or why.
I don't think you've followed and identified teckk's position accurately, Lady Fitzgerald. While I don't agree with every detail he has posted, I have found a lot of what he has said and even more of what he has linked to be quite objective and not at all one-sided. Nowhere has he stated that all police are bad and in fact posted numerous links of good and proper police individuals and organizations.
The link of a CBS interview with a black NYC police vet of 20 years is particularly illuminating and he emphasizes how enforcement "has been hijacked" by violent, abusive misfits in many precincts, and lays the fault higher up in administration... right where it belongs.
The police vet also notes this has been evolving over many decades. I personally witnessed National Guard being appalled by the actions of some policemen during the Washington DC riots after Martin Luther King, Jr. was murdered in 1968. Some bragged about the blood and hair on their nightsticks and laughed in supposed camaraderie of "We showed them who is boss in this town".
It was not isolated to DC. It was apparently happening all over.
If you don't mind a little protest Rock, check this old Zappa tune out, it's incisive and prophetic... and balanced
There's more to what's going on today than just one issue. Can there be some racist cops? Yes. Can there be some cops who should simply never have been let out from behind a desk? Absolutely. And those police should be dealt with swiftly and harshly.
But I really don't think the activist class is right to lay blame on some sort of systemic-intersectional-racist-dictatorial-<insert your favorite social justice buzzword here> plot and this is why.
Two of the cops who murdered Freddie Gray were black. The cop who shot Philando Castile was Hispanic. One of the cops involved in George Floyd's death was black and another was Asian. Just a few days ago we had an incident near where I live where six cops dragged a college-age couple from their car and began tasering them. Five of those cops were black, one white. The mayor of Buffalo who wouldn't fire those cops for pushing a 75-year old man and cracking his head open? Black.
And I'm sure the cops who killed Breonna Taylor weren't all white either.
As a society we need to STOP looking for the easiest answer, the media needs to STOP looking for the sexiest angle on the news to bring in the high ratings, and we all need to chill.
Last edited by RickDeckard; 06-07-2020 at 06:40 PM.
U.S. Supreme Court re-examines Qualified Immunity. Needed for not only Law Enforcement, but for the Judicial System (I.E. Prosecutin Attorneys), as well!
Just a sidenote:
On the various 'bad boy' websites disgruntled young men might go to, there's already a lot of anti woman discord being sown in the wake of this whole business.
Sure, the talking points are nothing new.
According to the people who get airdropped into those circles, "women have been destroying the west" for, probably 7 internet years now (and that notion is even older, but the past decade or so, whew, can't go a few online meters, if you walk along the lanes of that kind) but this riot and blacklives matter thing is once again being exploited to stir discontent between the sexes.
Women shaving their heads for support, women being so much in support for 'race treason' and all that. You can probably extrapolate the gamut, etc.
Now, these websites don't reflect reality very well, but, as a personal fan of extremism of any kind (because having a CRYSTAL clear yes and no available, and not just mushy gradients is a valuable thing to have in many things), but especially in 'hypothetical discourse'.
I think these aberrations are still useful to explore middle grounds, too.
In this case, I lowkey predict a new wave of engineered anti woman mindset from 'angry white boys' with the core resentment being
"Hey, you idiots made cops be scaredy cats now, if even the cops are being whipped like this. Don't expect ME, a civilian to save your ass when something happens, especially when race stuff is part of it."
Which, of course, is fertile ground for FURTHER pushes against the population.
Now that the police is squashed, regular folk now have to watch their asses (even harder!) too.
Does this kind of pressure train have brakes? I don't think so.
After all, there's always a new 'social injustice' and 'microaggression' and 'bigotry' to be had.
What am I trying to express here?
Simply don't tunnel vision on the police. What is police at the end of the day? They're still sourced from civilians. They don't fall from the sky or get grown in a lab.
Police squashed?
Oh, my dear (white) bigots, who TOTALLY WOULD HAVE JOINED THEM, are now conducting your vile evils from the homesteads?
Can't have that.
And women will be utilized for this. (Even though I don't at all buy into the narrative of that kind, women ARE still more susceptible to social pressures (which the media and co DO influence) than zee boys.
Women who oppose this? Get henpecked. We already have it. Internalized misogyny, etc. Which can be used to socially pressure 'less extreme' women even further.
(Don't be like this hateful bitch!)
Etc.
Vigilance, prudence and high scrutiny is what I would suggest.
Especially in the US, where, again, anyone who looks even a bit bleached, can be white, and talk for them.
When in reality, again, call an Irishman British, or something. Or a Dutch a German. Granted, in that case they are, but...y'know.
Frenemies(even though the relationship is quite closer than that) still.
P.S.:
Just to hopefully give my post a bit more gravitas, so to speak.
Just in case it's not obvious anymore 'due to these trying times' but ...the human species does benefit from healthy and harmonious breeding pairs.
Controversial statement, perhaps...
But, I do believe there's some truth to it, still. Even in 2020.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
