Is this just the beginning of rioting or will it subside?

[jamil]

...
The other day Seattle surrendered one of their police precincts to the mob in deference. Just in getting some local governments even to consider dismantling their police departments is shocking progress towards ending the founding principles.
...

Just to keep the context.

I want to hear what you mean by this.

Police departments weren't really a widespread thing at the founding of the U.S., so I don't think they are necessary for the country to pursue our defined principles. Why do you think they are?


Oh, and the best way to minimize bad interactions that citizens have with the police is to drastically reduce the number of laws (and the complexity of laws) being enforced. I think that's a position that most of INGO from across the spectrum can get behind.

The part about the police, other than that the mob was able to get a valid government body, to capitulate to its whims, doesn't have much to do with the point. The point is the proof of concept, that they could get as far as they did by using violence and mob shaming tactics.

Oh, and I'm completely agreed on how to minimize interactions with police. Reduce the number of laws where it makes sense would certainly help. But also, another one especially impactful in black communities, would be to ban pretextual stops as a tactic of law enforcement. Stop-and-frisk is a cost too high in a free society.

 

[Alpo]

But it is.

 

[jamil]

.You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to jamil again.

Some of your very best writing...

Thanks. I really appreciate that.

 

[CampingJosh]

Just to keep the context.


The part about the police, other than that the mob was able to get a valid government body, to capitulate to its whims, doesn't have much to do with the point. The point is the proof of concept, that they could get as far as they did by using violence and mob shaming tactics.

Oh, and I'm completely agreed on how to minimize interactions with police. Reduce the number of laws where it makes sense would certainly help. But also, another one especially impactful in black communities, would be to ban pretextual stops as a tactic of law enforcement. Stop-and-frisk is a cost too high in a free society.

Gotcha. Agreed.

Thanks for taking the time to explain it.

 

[CPT Nervous]

1st and 2nd degree murder require intent. 3rd degree murder doesn't.
2nd degree gets a bit iffy and cloudy on where it's applicable.

I think the officer will walk if they only prosecute for 2nd degree. He's somewhere between 2nd and 3rd degree.

I can see 3rd degree. Definitely not 1st or 2nd.

 

[CPT Nervous]

But it is.

Let's wait for the court to decide.

 

[Tombs]

I can see 3rd degree. Definitely not 1st or 2nd.

In my opinion, the act was criminally negligent homicide. Which is effectively what 3rd degree murder means.

 

[jamil]

My neighbor has three cats. Are we just saying things that have no relevance to the fact that agents of the government killed a citizen outside of the justice system?

Nobody wants to talk about it because those are two fundamentally different issues. George Floyd wasn't killed by the police because they thought he was going to kill other black people. Trying to tie the two issues together only serves to provide cover for tyrannical actions by government.

No it doesn't. Two things can be true at the same time. No one of any noteworthiness is trying to cover for tyrannical actions by the government. I think almost everyone in this and the other related threads INCLUDING COPS have agreed that it was unjust what happened to Floyd.

The thing that ties the two things together, albeit not all that tightly, is a name that implies that Black Lives Matter universally, not just when it's a white cop that kills a black person. I don't think that's a winning argument however, because advocacy groups get to have however narrow focus they want. They might pick a name that more accurately reflects that focus though but that's just an opinion.

 

[CampingJosh]

Who's to say Floyd wouldn't have died sitting in the back of a police car? Floyd died in police custody. That isn't the same as being killed by police, and I believe you used the word "murdered" earlier in this thread. I am confident that the officer did not intend for Floyd to die, nor did he even realize that holding him in a prone position for so long could kill him. Murder requires intent.

Doesn't a ton of the funding for police departments go to training? Does none of that talk about positional asphyxia? I knew that holding people like that for several minutes can cause breathing issues, and that's just from wrestling in high school.

In my opinion, there is plenty of evidence from the video that the officers knew or should have known that the victim's breathing was inhibited. I personally would need to be disqualified as a juror in this case.

And the crime of murder in Minnesota doesn't always require intent to kill.

 

[CPT Nervous]

Doesn't a ton of the funding for police departments go to training? Does none of that talk about positional asphyxia? I knew that holding people like that for several minutes can cause breathing issues, and that's just from wrestling in high school.

In my opinion, there is plenty of evidence from the video that the officers knew or should have known that the victim's breathing was inhibited. I personally would need to be disqualified as a juror in this case.

And the crime of murder in Minnesota doesn't always require intent to kill.

I do not work for Minneapolis PD, so I cannot speak to the level of their training. I also cannot speak to this officer's individual training. It is possible it was discussed in some training he attended, but I don't know.

You are correct that MN doesn't require intent for 3rd degree murder. I think it's going to be tough proving 2nd degree, though.

 

[jamil]

Which should get more attention: one high school student beating up another, or one high school teacher beating up a student?

With the pay and authority comes extra responsibility and a higher level of scrutiny.

Agreed. But also there's an economy of scale to that. One cop killing one person during a stop. That's very bad. That's intolerable. That's an incident.

52% of all homicide victims are black. That's astonishing since the 12% of the population is black. 96% of the people killing them are black. That's very bad. That's intolerable. That's data.

We're burning cities all over America. And I'm not so naive that I think it's just because of one black man. It's not. There are a lot of people exercising their constitutional right to protest injustice, and that incident was merely representative of an overall problem that's real, but also that's perceived. Once the rioting begins, and the chants of no justice no peace start, it's no longer about that. It's more about a revolution of more than just getting justice for Floyd.

It's about a fundamental change that other people get a say about too. I'm with them about getting justice for George Floyd. I want to see his family see that justice was done. When they start talking about rearranging society into some leftist utopian wet dream, I'm gonna say no to that. Eliminate laws. Fine. Eliminate police tactics like pretextual stops, yeah. I'm there. We're not gonna rearange society to solve this problem. It's not the cause.

 

[jamil]

Two separate issues, but only one of them can be controlled by government. That's why it is the issue getting political attention.

That may be why it has your attention. I'm pretty sure that's not why it is getting all the political attention.

 

[jamil]

Hmmm....I sort of agree with Josh. We have 18,000 law enforcement establishments in the USA (according to INGO). We have a national drug enforcement system deployed in the US.

I've never been Terry-stopped. In New York City...just NYC....there were almost 700,000 Terry Stops in 2012. Wanna guess how many were minorities?

There are real issues here. But riots and arson aren't solutions, they even **** me off to the point I won't begin to listen to their arguments and proposed solutions until the violence stops.

That IS a real issue. That's not why people are looting and burning businesses in cities indiscriminately though. It was a catalyst. And so is the constant egging on by the media. I've seen some examples where there are signs in the windows saying, "black owned business". Well, if it's about police brutality why is there even a need to distinguish? It's not any of the businesses doing this. But anyway, sometimes those signs are effective, and sometimes they just loot and burn the place anyway. Makes me suspect it's about WAY more than just getting justice for Floyd or generally about ending injustice at the hands of some police.

But as far as real solutions, as you've seen me say, reducing encounters reduces bad encounters. Using minor traffic violations to fish for bigger crimes is nonsense and only increases the chances that the stop will go bad. The less people encounter the police the less likely they are to end up like Floyd.

 

[Alpo]

 

[jamil]

It's 100% relevant to national riots, national mourning, 3 funerals, and a golden casket.

As I've said elsewhere, it's relevant only to the extent that it helps fuel rage. I don't think the veneration is because people really believed he lived a pristine life. It's because he's a symbol representing the fight for justice.

But that violence if it's close to 100% the cause of anything, that cause is the desire to deconstruct America's institutions. And like I've said, other people have a say in that too. We should not leave that decision to a relatively few radicals.

 

[jamil]

My chosen solution to the possibility of an unpleasant encounter with law enforcement is to not commit any crimes. As I've said before, Mr Floyd should not have expected to die in police custody, but he forged the first link in that chain of events of his own free will. Who will call out his culpability in how events unfolded

That's not possible. Our laws are so many and so intricate that at a given time you could be pulled over for a ridiculous infraction. My wife was pulled over while we were traveling through Colorado for failing to signal a lane change. There was exactly 3 cars on the road for miles. Us, the truck my wife passed, and the cop that pulled her over for it. She usually signals. It was a very boring trip through the plains. She just didn't think of it. Honest mistake. That ********** was fishing. Point is, it was a pretextual stop. That ********** was fishing. We were just uninteresting throwaways. He lectured us about the importance of signaling lane changes, made her promise to signal next time, and then let her off with a warning. ****ing *******.

 

[jamil]

Have you ever been walking down the street in a known high crime/drug/prostitution area late at night? I'll bet most of those Terry stops occurred in areas like that. It doesn't have to be about race.

That doesn't justify its use.

 

[jamil]

But it is.

I'm unsure of the context. But it is ... what?

 

[jamil]

I can see 3rd degree. Definitely not 1st or 2nd.

Well. Maybe this is what I get for watching lawyers on Youtube. One of the lawyers I watch said that in Minnesota it's reasonably easy to get a conviction for 2nd or 3rd degree. He explained it and frankly I don't remember the details. I kinda thought that it was overcharged as well. But some Youtuber who is a defense attorney and claims to know Minnesota law, said he doesn't think it's overcharged given the evidence he's seen. Take that for what it's worth.

 

[CPT Nervous]

Well. Maybe this is what I get for watching lawyers on Youtube. One of the lawyers I watch said that in Minnesota it's reasonably easy to get a conviction for 2nd or 3rd degree. He explained it and frankly I don't remember the details. I kinda thought that it was overcharged as well. But some Youtuber who is a defense attorney and claims to know Minnesota law, said he doesn't think it's overcharged given the evidence he's seen. Take that for what it's worth.

There very well be evidence that I'm not aware of. I do feel it's overcharged, but I do not claim to understand MN law. So we will just have to wait and see.