Protests following the killing of George Floyd

Do you actually have some documented examples of all this AntiFa escalation we keep hearing about? Because I hear a lot of right wingers talking about it, but not much actual evidence of it.
It was a general statement about white "allies" but
 
I’m not entirely clued up on politics - especially in foreign countries (the lord knows we have enough problems of our own), but it seems that the police are literally just acting on the mandate the government (Trump) provides them: the media is the enemy & the public - especially the black civilians, don’t really matter and the police are not held accountable - the same way no one in the government is. Everything can be twisted, lied about and turned in your favor. Absolute shambles of a country atm.

Scenes you'd expect to see from a 3rd world country. Arresting news speakers for no reason infront of live camera, police driving into crowds with their SUVs, police standing on a man's neck for 9 minutes until he's dead.

Easily a third world country, just with the ability to print infinite money and hold the rest of the world ransom with military power.
Yeah I must say, being from a third world country, I never knew America was this divided until Trumps election if I’m honest. There was always a hint of racism (show me somewhere in the world where there isn’t!), but I genuinely bought into the American hype - freedom, bravery, land of opportunity etc.

Turns out it was all a scam and the country/system is broken and possibly the most divided society in the world, which is scary. And I’m from South Africa where we had apartheid until the 1990’s.
 
Dude you’re trying to play down police officers driving through a crowd of people.

Even if we accept your entirely hypothetical scenario that they were responding to a call, that’s 100% unacceptable. Not even the American police training manuals will tell officers to run people over if they need to get where they’re going ffs.

I was simply giving another angle on the one that was being put forward that they've simply got in their cars and thought "feck it, let's run down some people".

I don't know where they were going, I assume a 911 call as they had their sirens on. In any sense what would you do in that situation if you were surrounded by a crowd attacking your vehicle. You can't just sit there as it's likely you'll get seriously injured or killed. That's not to say you should speed though people (as I've said repeatedly now).
 
If I were in that situation I certainly wouldn't run people over. I have more respect for human life than that.

I could speculate that I would:
1. Turn off the engine (if they couldn't hear me over it) and communicate that I need to get going if there is a emergency, inform them that the people who could be calling could be their family or their friends and that I support the protest while hoping that as few lives would be negatively affected as possible and that was the reason I was on the job that night. Not because I wanted to hurt people.

2. If they refused to listen then I would keep the engine shut down and not drive over them. I'd continue to try to talk to them. I would also report in to my seniors that I wouldn't be able to move and to send someone else.

Not sure if you have been watching, but I am not convinced that the protesters blocking the car were in any mood for sitting down for a nice cup of tea and a civil discussion. In a country where there are currently widespread riots and police cars being destroyed, its not unreasonable to think that if the engine was turned off, they would proceed to start trashing the car.

The police could definitely have done better. At least a slow, deliberate acceleration to allow people to get out of the way, rather than the sudden and quite forceful start. But honestly your suggested actions would simply not be appropriate for that situation.
 
I counted 9 times they said "get inside" before they paintballed them.

I reckon if armed police were shouting at me to do something, I'd listen to them after (at most) 4 or 5 times.

Im not an expert, but my understanding of the curfew law is that being on ones own porch out-of-hours is still meant to be allowed.

I do agree though that in that situation, if the police are telling you to get inside then just do it.
 
I counted 9 times they said "get inside" before they paintballed them.

I reckon if armed police were shouting at me to do something, I'd listen to them after (at most) 4 or 5 times.

Aren't they just standing in their own garden?
 
If I were in that situation I certainly wouldn't run people over. I have more respect for human life than that.

I could speculate that I would:
1. Turn off the engine (if they couldn't hear me over it) and communicate that I need to get going if there is a emergency, inform them that the people who could be calling could be their family or their friends and that I support the protest while hoping that as few lives would be negatively affected as possible and that was the reason I was on the job that night. Not because I wanted to hurt people.

2. If they refused to listen then I would keep the engine shut down and not drive over them. I'd continue to try to talk to them. I would also report in to my seniors that I wouldn't be able to move and to send someone else.

Whilst I appreciate the sentiment you've clearly never been in a riot. Sadly amongst the genuine peaceful reasonable protesters there's a high number of criminals who simply won't listen or respond to any of that.

With regards to point 2 within seconds you could find your car on fire or on its roof if you remain stationary for too long. Or yourself and your colleagues being dragged out and beaten to a pulp. In any sense it's not just as straightforward as having a quiet word, the crowd parting and you going on your way.
 
Not sure if you have been watching, but I am not convinced that the protesters blocking the car were in any mood for sitting down for a nice cup of tea and a civil discussion. In a country where there are currently widespread riots and police cars being destroyed, its not unreasonable to think that if the engine was turned off, they would proceed to start trashing the car.

The police could definitely have done better. At least a slow, deliberate acceleration to allow people to get out of the way, rather than the sudden and quite forceful start. But honestly your suggested actions would simply not be appropriate for that situation.
I'll accept your premise that I absolutely have to get out of there for my own safety and because there is absolutely no common ground to be found.
I would start the car, yell to them as loud as I can that I would be driving as slowly as I can straight forward. Then I would do that.

I do however think the actions I would have taken would have been a hell of a lot more reasonable than driving through people.
 
Not sure if you have been watching, but I am not convinced that the protesters blocking the car were in any mood for sitting down for a nice cup of tea and a civil discussion. In a country where there are currently widespread riots and police cars being destroyed, its not unreasonable to think that if the engine was turned off, they would proceed to start trashing the car.

The police could definitely have done better. At least a slow, deliberate acceleration to allow people to get out of the way, rather than the sudden and quite forceful start. But honestly your suggested actions would simply not be appropriate for that situation.

Yeah that's my point.
 
There's a load of armed police shouting at them to "get indoors". They can't possibly have thought the cops meant "get indoors unless you're in your garden".

My point is that it is a sorry state of affairs when people are being shot for standing in their own garden beside their house door.
 
I counted 9 times they said "get inside" before they paintballed them.

I reckon if armed police were shouting at me to do something, I'd listen to them after (at most) 4 or 5 times.

Why should they have to get inside though when they are stood on their own property? Granted I don't know the law in the US but I'm not sure how you can justify shooting people stood on their own porches in an empty street.
 
I'll accept your premise that I absolutely have to get out of there for my own safety and because there is absolutely no common ground to be found.
I would start the car, yell to them as loud as I can that I would be driving as slowly as I can straight forward. Then I would do that.

I do however think the actions I would have taken would have been a hell of a lot more reasonable than driving through people.

So we can agree on that then.
 
Scenes you'd expect to see from a 3rd world country. Arresting news speakers for no reason infront of live camera, police driving into crowds with their SUVs, police standing on a man's neck for 9 minutes until he's dead.

Easily a third world country, just with the ability to print infinite money and hold the rest of the world ransom with military power.
You forgot firing rubber bullets into news reporters whilst the camera being used is literally pointing at you.
But yep, third world policing in a country that prides itself on being number one in the world. Delusions of grandeur.
 
Beyond a reasonable doubt is defined as “that no other logical explanation can be derived from the facts except that the defendant committed the crime, thereby overcoming the presumption that a person is innocent until proven guilty”.

The video evidence shows murder .That is unquestionable. But what it doesn’t explicitly prove is whether it was either premeditated or deliberate.

I can look at that horrible video and with 100% Certainty say that it was a deliberate murder. But I can’t prove it and neither can the prosecution.

I sat on a jury for a horrific case where a man was accused of anally and vaginally raping and beating his 7 year old daughter and his wife on multiple occasions.

The hardest thing to do in those circumstances is separate emotion from evidence.

We found that scumbag guilty of 5 of the 7 charges against him. There isn’t a doubt in my mind that he was guilty of the other two either, but there just wasn’t the evidence to convict.

The fact that juries convict on evidence rather emotion is what makes the system work in my opinion.



I think that they will make an example of him. He’ll get the full 25 year sentence imo. Not what he deserves, but better than having him walk free due to lack of murder one evidence.

Look, I get it. Justice and due course.

But at least detain the man first?

And I doubt any "not deliberately planted" jury would find these videos insufficient to proof that they are indeed killed him. Come on if that's not murder then what is? Half of US inmates probably got into jail with less evidence than he says she says.

This is my irks with ex polices and so called professionals, call it as it is, a murder. Stop hidding behind the "it could have been caused by pre-existing conditions" etc, it's a cop out. That's what hurts people the most, the fact that such an incident caught on multiple camera angle and still people trying to defend it, and not only trying to defend it they'll actually use it as some serious justifications.

3rd degree murder and manslaughter?

Plus since when are police only charged people when they have a "beyond reasonable doubt" cause, even the due process of justice is already discriminating.

For what its worth, my guess is that he'll get 10 with no parole at best.
 
Whilst I appreciate the sentiment you've clearly never been in a riot. Sadly amongst the genuine peaceful reasonable protesters there's a high number of criminals who simply won't listen or respond to any of that.

With regards to point 2 within seconds you could find your car on fire or on its roof if you remain stationary for too long. Or yourself and your colleagues being dragged out and beaten to a pulp. In any sense it's not just as straightforward as having a quiet word, the crowd parting and you going on your way.
You are 100% correct. I have no idea how to be a cop, whether it is during riots or in other situations. I wouldn't be in that situation to begin with.
I do however know that driving through people at any sort of speed is very dangerous.
As I mentioned to Walrus, if I absolutely had to get out of there I would have informed them that I would be driving and as slowly as possible move out.
The point however is that driving through people at any speed is dangerous, and that's obvious. No matter the emergency, there is absolutely nothing defending what they did.
 
I was simply giving another angle on the one that was being put forward that they've simply got in their cars and thought "feck it, let's run down some people".

I don't know where they were going, I assume a 911 call as they had their sirens on. In any sense what would you do in that situation if you were surrounded by a crowd attacking your vehicle. You can't just sit there as it's likely you'll get seriously injured or killed. That's not to say you should speed though people (as I've said repeatedly now).

I know Trump keeps saying Obama stripped the police of funds but I think even their cars have reverse gear.
 
You are 100% correct. I have no idea how to be a cop, whether it is during riots or in other situations. I wouldn't be in that situation to begin with.
I do however know that driving through people at any sort of speed is very dangerous.
As I mentioned to Walrus, if I absolutely had to get out of there I would have informed them that I would be driving and as slowly as possible move out.
The point however is that driving through people at any speed is dangerous, and that's obvious. No matter the emergency, there is absolutely nothing defending what they did.

Of course it's dangerous and totally avoidable if people don't block the road of and stand in front of the vehicles. That said it might be the only thing you can do under the circumstances and as such you should do it at a slow speed. That's exactly what I suggested at the start. Only for you to tell me to feck off and someone else to call me a racist.
 
Why should they have to get inside though when they are stood on their own property? Granted I don't know the law in the US but I'm not sure how you can justify shooting people stood on their own porches in an empty street.

From what I have read, the curfew law does indeed say that you are allowed on your own property (porch, garden, balcony etc) after-hours. And the police were probably either ignorant of this, or tonedeaf to the situation, or just another of the bad cops that seem to be so common.

That said, I dont really see the need for people to contest every instruction given to them by the police. Just do everyone a favour and go inside - you can probably come back out 5 minutes later after they have passed anyway. Still didnt deserve to be shot though, of course.
 
Don’t really know much about US politics but surely Barrack Obama can come out to give a speech to ease tensions or wouldn’t he make a difference?

Because there’s no way Trump can bring an end to this with his recent comments.
 
It's certainly a sorry state of affairs but they got tons of warning and then paintballed. They were not protesting, just rubbernecking.

If you're allowed to be on your own property during curfew (which I think you are from what I have read about it) then they've done nothing wrong for being outside on their porch. If the police (authority or whatever) ask me to do something and I am not breaking the law then I do not have to comply with them and should most definitely not be shot.
 
So we can agree on that then.
Absolutely, if what you meant as too fast for your liking was that it was absurd how fast they went through people.
But the way you were "playing devils advocate" and at the speed they drove comes across as if they were just a bit too fast, not unreasonably fast with putting extreme danger of injuring and killing the protestors which squarely put them in the wrong regardless of their reasons for moving so fast.
 
From what I have read, the curfew law does indeed say that you are allowed on your own property (porch, garden, balcony etc) after-hours. And the police were probably either ignorant of this, or tonedeaf to the situation, or just another of the bad cops that seem to be so common.

That said, I dont really see the need for people to contest every instruction given to them by the police.
Just do everyone a favour and go inside - you can probably come back out 5 minutes later after they have passed anyway. Still didnt deserve to be shot though, of course.

I understand this but you simply can't shoot at people who don't listen. It's not reasonable to the circumstances in my opinion and an officer could have walked over and explained the situation and the request to go inside. Especially in that scenario when the street was empty.
 
Feckin' 'ell. There was that dude with a bow and arrow shooting at a crowd too wasn't there?
:lol: I did crack up at that. I mean the guys a racist cnut but he at least gave me some mild amusement. Who the feck comes out to this sort of thing with a bow and arrow.
 
Sorry guys, but racism and police brutality are initial problem here and it needs to be resolved but when protests turn into riots and vandalism where innocent people are being attacked, beat and robbed then as a citizen i would want drastic measures from police and national guard.
Unfortunately idiots ruined something which could have been huge in fighting against racism and police brutality.
 
I counted 9 times they said "get inside" before they paintballed them.

I reckon if armed police were shouting at me to do something, I'd listen to them after (at most) 4 or 5 times.

The idea that you should allow someone to break the law and infringe upon your human rights, simply because the law breaker is a police officer, is precisely the reason they feel so empowered to continue breaking the law and infringing upon human rights.

Policing is broken as a system in the US. For how long should people continue to respect a broken system?
 
Absolutely, if what you meant as too fast for your liking was that it was absurd how fast they went through people.
But the way you were "playing devils advocate" and at the speed they drove comes across as if they were just a bit too fast, not unreasonably fast with putting extreme danger of injuring and killing the protestors which squarely put them in the wrong regardless of their reasons for moving so fast.

I thought it was pretty obvious what I meant however clearly not. The devil's advocate was there are certain circumstances when you simply have to get through that crowd. It may be due to the risk to yourself or the nature of the incident you are responding to. If there's no other option then you may have to go through the crowd but not at that speed and in such a reckless, careless fashion.

Not sure how that opinion makes me a racist or all of the other insults that were thrown.
 
:lol: I did crack up at that. I mean the guys a racist cnut but he at least gave me some mild amusement. Who the feck comes out to this sort of thing with a bow and arrow.
He wasnt even very good with it. He didnt even get a shot of i dont think