Four Minneapolis officers fired after death of black man

[nipprdog]

[video=youtube;qv-O4rnUToU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=100&v=qv-O4rnUToU&feature=emb_title[/video]

 

[smokingman]

There's not a mechanism for that really. Maybe there should be. But think about that practically. How would a police department enlist the help of citizens to stand with them shoulder to shoulder to restore peace? There's so many practical things not considered in the belief that this would happen. There's liability, proper training, weeding out troublemakers/racists/*******s/instigators. It's just not practical. But, like I said, I don't see anything wrong with a group of people banding together to defend specific lives and property with a good plan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_comitatus

 

[jbombelli]

That does answer the question. Some rando dumbass with a bow and arrow isn't handling it. So what does citizens handling it look like?

Kut? Is that you? The police aren't handling it, so... Does that mean nobody should handle it?

Either nobody handles it, or other people handle it. Which do you prefer? One anomaly aside.

 

[jamil]

**** it isn't that hard. Make a call for honorably discharged vets with DD214s, deputize them. Problem solved.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

How do you vet them? Just with a DD214? That doesn't automatically qualify them as honorable and competent. I wouldn't be surprised if the asshat with the bow and arrow qualifies as you've described. And how do you handle liability? Not just liability for the volunteers, but the liability for the police department when rambo does stupid ****. I'm just trying to think practically about how that would even work. It's something that can't just be put together in a day. Hey, boyz. Bring your DD214s and your AR 15s and help us out here. I guess I could see a situation desperate enough to do something like that. This ain't that apocalyptic.

 

[jsharmon7]

I think that's true. They have a lose/lose situation going on here. But I don't think the cops are just sitting on their hands in a lot of these places. There are more people flooding these cities than can be handled safely. If there were a police presence everywhere there are protesters they'd be spread so thin I think it would be very dangerous for them. So I think in a lot of these circumstances it's unfair to claim the cops aren't doing their jobs. It's a very difficult job to do where the outcome actually turns out well.

My post wasn’t specifically about the recent riots. Look at what’s happening in San Francisco and some other liberal, west coast cities. People are literally ****ting in the streets and stealing anything not tied down but the police can’t do anything because of politicians. More decisions about law enforcement are going to be made from a standpoint of not wanting to look bad than from the standpoint of enforcing the law.

 

[jamil]

Kut? Is that you? The police aren't handling it? Does that mean nobody should handle it!

Jesus christ man. I've answered that ****ing question six ways from Sunday! So fine. Let's go for seven. NOT LIKE THAT GUY "HANDLED" IT!

Vigilantism no! People don't have a right to impose right and wrong on other people in a civil society, notwithstanding the uncivilized actions of a few. However you have a right to defend yourself, while having a responsibility not to intentionally put yourself in a position where you have to.

Maybe if you can get a group together to defend what's yours or, or friends', or family's, in a way that could be successful, fine. You have a right to protect yourself. One guy with a sword? foolish. No way to win that. Better just to stay home and watch it burn. One guy with a bow and arrow in a crowded mob? foolish dumbassery. No way to win that. Should have kept his car in the garage, stayed home, and watched the angry mobs on TV.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I don't think that's what the #noonescoming hashtag means. There seems to be a belief among a few people on the right that democrat mayors are telling police to stand down. And in the bat-**** craziest cities that may be at least a little true. It happened in Portland with many of their protests in the recent past. But it doesn't look to me like most of these cities in the past few days are telling cops to stand down. Whatever inaction we see I think is more due to being overwhelmed by what seems to be a coordinated effort to turn these protests into as much violence as possible.

I wasn't addressing the hashtag whatever. Just answering Frank, as I figured he was referring to some of the comments that have been seen here on INGO.

 

[jamil]

My post wasn’t specifically about the recent riots. Look at what’s happening in San Francisco and some other liberal, west coast cities. People are literally ****ting in the streets and stealing anything not tied down but the police can’t do anything because of politicians. More decisions about law enforcement are going to be made from a standpoint of not wanting to look bad than from the standpoint of enforcing the law.

Well that's true too. It does look like a lot of those uber-progressive cities are telling cops to just let things go. There is a sentiment that these people are owed their looting. And that's just nonsense. But the immediate context is the rioting going on now. I don't think most of these mayors are telling cops to stand down because these people are owed their looting.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Jesus christ man. I've answered that ****ing question six ways from Sunday! So fine. Let's go for seven. NOT LIKE THAT GUY "HANDLED" IT!

Vigilantism no! People don't have a right to impose right and wrong on other people in a civil society, notwithstanding the uncivilized actions of a few. However you have a right to defend yourself, while having a responsibility not to intentionally put yourself in a position where you have to.

Maybe if you can get a group together to defend what's yours or, or friends', or family's, in a way that could be successful, fine. You have a right to protect yourself. One guy with a sword? foolish. No way to win that. Better just to stay home and watch it burn. One guy with a bow and arrow in a crowded mob? foolish dumbassery. No way to win that. Should have kept his car in the garage, stayed home, and watched the angry mobs on TV.

I'm not sure why you keep focusing on Errol Flynn and Robin Hood. I don't think anyone has suggested taking swords or bows to assist the police or to defend themselves or their property.

 

[Dutchisaurus]

Jesus christ man. I've answered that ****ing question six ways from Sunday! So fine. Let's go for seven. NOT LIKE THAT GUY "HANDLED" IT!

Vigilantism no! People don't have a right to impose right and wrong on other people in a civil society, notwithstanding the uncivilized actions of a few. However you have a right to defend yourself, while having a responsibility not to intentionally put yourself in a position where you have to.

Maybe if you can get a group together to defend what's yours or, or friends', or family's, in a way that could be successful, fine. You have a right to protect yourself. One guy with a sword? foolish. No way to win that. Better just to stay home and watch it burn. One guy with a bow and arrow in a crowded mob? foolish dumbassery. No way to win that. Should have kept his car in the garage, stayed home, and watched the angry mobs on TV.

Actually the citizenry have a right to impose right and wrong. It's called citizens arrest and it does exist for a reason.

We long drifted away from the fact that we are of the people, for the people and BY the people.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[jamil]

I'm not sure why you keep focusing on Errol Flynn and Robin Hood. I don't think anyone has suggested taking swords or bows to assist the police or to defend themselves or their property.

To the extent that I have, it's because that's the context. I've made specific statements about Errol Flynn and Robin Hood (rep for that BTW). And that's what people have pushed back about. But I've also broadened the focus to talk about vigilantism in general, and when I think people are within their rights to defend property. I've talked about the impracticality of helping the police out in an armed and active role. There are ways we can help them out. Someone mentioned bringing them water. And certainly if you see the angry mob beating police officers, and you're there, and you're capable of stepping in to help, I see nothing wrong with that. But they're not asking you to come downtown with your battle gear and police the crowd. If you take that on for yourself, that's vigilantism. You have no authority to do that.

 

[jamil]

Actually the citizenry have a right to impose right and wrong. It's called citizens arrest and it does exist for a reason.

We long drifted away from the fact that we are of the people, for the people and BY the people.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

That's for very specific situations. Policing the crowd is not that.

 

[Dutchisaurus]

How do you vet them? Just with a DD214? That doesn't automatically qualify them as honorable and competent. I wouldn't be surprised if the asshat with the bow and arrow qualifies as you've described. And how do you handle liability? Not just liability for the volunteers, but the liability for the police department when rambo does stupid ****. I'm just trying to think practically about how that would even work. It's something that can't just be put together in a day. Hey, boyz. Bring your DD214s and your AR 15s and help us out here. I guess I could see a situation desperate enough to do something like that. This ain't that apocalyptic.

Didn't say anything about armed.

But yeah come on down, here's a idacs check or whatever y'all run.

Pair each with an officer and stand the line. Have them run fire hose lines, fire extinguishers, goof off and a sponge, have them help evacuate the wounded and run 9 lines, run water and supplies.

It's really that simple. It doesn't even have to be about hey stand this line and shoot that dude if he does something. Plenty of ways to be a civil servant without a gun.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[Flash-hider]

…..

 

[Dutchisaurus]

That's for very specific situations. Policing the crowd is not that.

Insurrection is a felony. Arson is a felony, looting is a felony.
Lots of citizen arrest quality felonies in all the live videos.



Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

 

[jbombelli]

Jesus christ man. I've answered that ****ing question six ways from Sunday! So fine. Let's go for seven. NOT LIKE THAT GUY "HANDLED" IT!

Vigilantism no! People don't have a right to impose right and wrong on other people in a civil society, notwithstanding the uncivilized actions of a few. However you have a right to defend yourself, while having a responsibility not to intentionally put yourself in a position where you have to.

Maybe if you can get a group together to defend what's yours or, or friends', or family's, in a way that could be successful, fine. You have a right to protect yourself. One guy with a sword? foolish. No way to win that. Better just to stay home and watch it burn. One guy with a bow and arrow in a crowded mob? foolish dumbassery. No way to win that. Should have kept his car in the garage, stayed home, and watched the angry mobs on TV.

You seem to have a very hard time saying either yes or no. Either nobody handles it or other people handle it. you keep pointing to one effing guy like that's an answer. Thats equivalent to saying nobody should protect their **** because one guy was an idiot, or nobody should own guns because some guy shot up a church.


Let me try a different tack. if the police can't or don't handle it, who should? Don't say not that one guy, because that just evades the question.

 

[Dutchisaurus]

You seem to have a very hard time saying either yes or no. Either nobody handles it or other people handle it. you keep pointing to one effing guy like that's an answer. Thats equivalent to saying nobody should protect their **** because one guy was an idiot, or nobody should own guns because some guy shot up a church.


Let me try a different tack. if the police can't or don't handle it, who should? Don't say not that one guy, because that just evades the question.

Is Chuck Norris the answer? He was a Texas ranger

 

[churchmouse]

…..

Yeah that is a solid addition to the thread right there.....

 

[DoggyDaddy]

To the extent that I have, it's because that's the context. I've made specific statements about Errol Flynn and Robin Hood (rep for that BTW). And that's what people have pushed back about. But I've also broadened the focus to talk about vigilantism in general, and when I think people are within their rights to defend property. I've talked about the impracticality of helping the police out in an armed and active role. There are ways we can help them out. Someone mentioned bringing them water. And certainly if you see the angry mob beating police officers, and you're there, and you're capable of stepping in to help, I see nothing wrong with that. But they're not asking you to come downtown with your battle gear and police the crowd. If you take that on for yourself, that's vigilantism. You have no authority to do that.

Fair enough on the vigilantism, and I do agree that unless specifically asked to do otherwise, there are other ways to assist besides armed assistance. And thanks for the rep!

 

[Dutchisaurus]

That's for very specific situations. Policing the crowd is not that.

We are 3 days into this and it seems IMPD is incapable of turning the tide. They are under manned, out numbered and their hands are tied.

At what point does it become too much and the citizens right to defend their city?

Let them burn 50% of downtown? All of downtown? Carmel? The suburbs?

I love the fact that IMPD is playing Superman but sometimes it's ok to ask for help.

I mentioned water. I dropped it off. For all I know it got put in a trunk and no one got any. I'm dropping off 10 more cases. I don't know again that anyone will get it.

I think IMPD would be surprised at the amount of honest decent citizenry that are willing to stand up and help. This is our city after all. Even if there are **** heads and agitators they are going to be obvious and easy to weed out.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk