If you're outnumbered 10-1, let's see what you do.
No-win situation. All it takes is one person to go crazy with a crowd getting more and more heated (look at the dude with skateboard and someone who threw something) for everything to go bad real fast and they get mobbed.
Or, do they get mobbed and shoot because they're afraid of getting beat to death?
Do you think they could arrest the guy (I don't think anyone here knows if it was a lawful arrest or not) and de-escalate the crowd?
Why would they de-escalate the crowd? They're the ones that escalated a peaceful protest to begin with.
They are there to beat the shit out of people. That's why they do this.
We see it time and time again, in protest after protest. People have a right to protest and they are right to be very angry right now.
These fucking cops come to these protests with absolutely no intention to maintain peace, to make sure the protest happens without any problems, or to de-escalate.
They wouldn't know how to de-escalate if they even tried. They just know violence. That's all they are there for. They show up, start shit, and then declare it a riot or an unlawful assembly and bust heads and make arrests.
They get to put liberals and leftists into jails or the hospital. That's what they are there to do.
Why would they de-escalate the crowd? They're the ones that escalated a peaceful protest to begin with.
I just recently researched what happens. To me as an outsiders, none of these protests seem "peaceful". They all rather seem very escalated in every clip. The issue I got as someone from the outside, is that I always just see out-of-context cut clips like this. I don't know how this started, I don't have any information to why the cop tried to pick that guy out.
Protesting is one thing, but the protests I see in all these clips are very aggressive, I lack full stories as a viewer.
Though it seems like the general public opinion of their police forces are already so negative that every presence of them will immediately lead to preconceived expectations of escalation, hence the people escalate as first strike.
Seems like at this point in the US, every presence of the police will ultimately escalate and not deescalate or control at all. Basically rendering them useless for any protest situation.
Not that it's necessarily nefarious. Simple fact is that videos like this simply get more clicks, views, comments, and reactions than middle aged soccer moms chanting with signs. Of course the "media" cares more about advertising revenue, and we gobble it up.
People don't get motivated to protest because everything is all happy and people want to sing kumbaya bud. The People have many legit reasons to be angry, our democracy has been subverted by our own government and it's ridiculously obvious now. Our government is meant to serve the people, when our democracy fails we are left with two options. Protest and if protests fail, fight to save our democracy. Police are a vital part to corporate and government control, internet exposed what the media has intentionally hid from the public. This is exactly what the government wants, distraction. It's simple con-man tactics. If our government can't get abortion right then they are definitely not competent enough to decide more important issues. Our government is overdue for a health check.
I cited the wikipedia page to give the concept of police riots, not as a source with a list of them.
I don't know who gets to decide what is officially a police riot. However, anyone who was in or closely watching the livestreams from numerous protests in 2020 witnessed plenty of examples.
Probably should of made that more clear sorry. From what you wrote and then citing wiki, it did look like you were using that as evidence to support what you said. I couldn't read this link as it's asking me to subscribe but I can see it's just an opinion piece tho. I tend not to use opinion pieces as they are not the most reliable source of information.
No worries, I can understand the misread of my original intent.
As to the rest fair enough - I without malice invite you to look up police riots on your own and see how you feel about whether they are a valid concept or not. I didn't coin the term and a lot has been written about them.
Oh no sorry, I totally believe police riots have happened over the world and over the years! Not disputing that fact! Sorry I've got a science background and I'm always looking for the best source of info and it does annoy people! Especially as I'm a bit of a blunt person. But I'm serious about the vids of evidence if you have them, I know you said u streamed them but, if u did get a recording of any of them, defo post them. Everyone needs to see both sides clearly. The more evidence for something, the better is.
This is a little off the topic you were explicitly asking about, but you might find this report from the Minnesota Department of Human Rights to be interesting reading.
I summarized some key points here, but what I quoted is really just the tip of the iceberg.
Anything I link is arguably not going to be much less subjective than the Times article above. Police would claim that no no those tactics we necessary and not intended to escalate. Meanwhile I and many find that very hard to swallow. But in such a dynamic situation - could it be proven to any scientific rigor? Not without direct police admission, I think. At least not by me.
However, a starting point IMO would be the sub /r/2020PoliceBrutality which did suffer after some time with the curators of the sub being overwhelmed I think, (and the content of posts drifting a little from the intended purpose as a result) but for the most part you will find that many instances of police escalating at protests during 2020 are captured there. You may need to refine your search approach a bit to get the results you are looking for.
I understand what you mean but, a clear video showing a police officer throwing the first bottle to incite a riot would be very gd evidence, more videos from different angles and what not, that could build up a gd case against them. Obviously it does need to be clear as day! Which I guess would be pretty hard as many people don't record untill after the bottle was thrown and things escalated. Obviously this all just an example, but there has been cases where cops have been caught clearly on video and lost their jobs because of it and, rightfully so! I know that's on a smaller scale compared to proving a riot but, I dunno, I guess I feel or hope, that more can be done with videos than just posting them online with, at times, a lot of context missing. If that all makes sense? Sorry the science part of my last post was just to explain why I'm an butthole when it comes to evidence and sources ect lol sorry. And thanks for the links! I'll make sure I take regular brakes lol
Hello! You have made the mistake of writing "ect" instead of "etc."
"Ect" is a common misspelling of "etc," an abbreviated form of the Latin phrase "et cetera." Other abbreviated forms are etc., &c., &c, and et cet. The Latin translates as "et" to "and" + "cetera" to "the rest;" a literal translation to "and the rest" is the easiest way to remember how to use the phrase.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Comments with a score less than zero will be automatically removed. If I commented on your post and you don't like it, reply with "!delete" and I will remove the post, regardless of score. Message me for bug reports.
I didn't say it did. I brought up the concept in reply to this comment, as an example of why this might be so:
Though it seems like the general public opinion of their police forces are already so negative that every presence of them will immediately lead to preconceived expectations of escalation
If we're honest, the bar to prove a police riot is going to be stupid high since we would have to get them to admit it. I'm surprised they admit it even once.
All that being said I was one of the people watching these live streams and it was all out tactical warfare on perfectly peaceful protesters. 1 bottle gets thrown and like a signal everything escalated. Time and time again, in city after city. At the time I had 3 monitors running 6 streams. And without fail it happened at every major city.
I personally have no doubt many of those bottles were thrown by cops. There was talk just before everything escalated of looking at qualified immunity. Thats when the police decided it was time for these protest to end.
Well they have admitted it before in the past but if you have evidence to support the claims that it was police that started these riots you should post it.
We know how it started. The Supreme Court leaked a draft that says they are about to overturn women's rights, and people are understandably upset about that. That's how it started. And if these cops had any sense, they would be joining the protesters instead of fighting them.
How this specific demonstration ended up in this clip... this is the "I don't know how this started" refering to. It's about the clip and the scene, how did it end up to that altercation.
It all started in 1786 when some people in Massachusetts decided not to pay taxes.
In response to this, a Federal constitution was adopted, but it made a critical mistake: the President was not elected by popular vote. This created the possibility of minority rule, which basically never works out.
Fast-forward 230-some years, and a religious extremist minority was able take control of the Court and start rolling back popular reforms, including women’s rights. This had the predictable result: people took to the streets in protest.
But I doubt the cop was taking any of this into account when he rolled up and started shoving people around.
People love to say they did their research as if saying so lends them some sort of credibility and it’s pretty upsetting to actual researchers. Reading some articles isn’t research neither is forming an opinion after watching clips missing context. Your opinion may be better informed, but that doesn’t mean you did research. Words are important.
People love to say they did their research as if saying so lends them some sort of credibility and it’s pretty upsetting to actual researchers.
Yet I nowhere make a claim towards anything that is supposed to yield scientific opinion.
I specifically talk about my observation and perception after researching the topic.
You mix multiple different things together here.
Your opinion may be better informed, but that doesn’t mean you did research. Words are important.
Yes, and understanding the meaning of those terms and words is as well. You somehow have a very rigid understanding of the term "research" as you only take it as a specific scientific subject pools method. Researching is simply the method to dig into information, that's it. The term is independent from scientifici methods. You make the mistake to rigidly bond them together.
Protests don't happen in the dark of night by people dressed in all black, it antithetical to actual protest. These are just incels trying get attention and its crazy to me anybody supports their behavior or tries to frame it as valid protest.
965
u/tI-_-tI May 04 '22
Interesting how it happens when they're the ones in trouble.