Current rioting

[Doug1029]

20 minutes ago, quillius said:

thats not my point, read his post....you asked another to be specific about what posts/points make no sense....

when he talks about laser rather than taser, doesnt even know he fought police and took the taser etc etc and then decides to say the part about counterfeit note being added later to story.....  says it all.

Sounds like you've got a good imagination.

Doug

[Doug1029]

26 minutes ago, WVK said:

Neo-Crusades, great.  As discussed here your movement is a form of religion start at 12:15

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-FOCZVLTaw

 

Right wing propaganda.

Doug

[Doug1029]

24 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

So... You have no real evidence. Just your opinion that much of the people killed are actually being murdered...

If a officer is obviously guilty, usually the evidence will show it. If the officer gets off on a technicality, that's not uncommon for many criminal trials. Sounds like a legislative issue to me, not an enforcement issue.

The US does not keep records on what proportion of police killings are murder.

FYI:  "Murder" is the taking of life without due process of law.  How many of those people killed by police had a trial?

On the other hand, nobody is making a credible case for the other side.

Doug

[WVK]

Just now, Doug1029 said:

Right wing propaganda.

Doug

How so?

[Doug1029]

19 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Peaceful protest is allowed under the Constitution.

So it is.  Then why did Trump's minions use pepper spray and violently clear protesters so he could have a photo-op.  I'd say he went out there to pick a fight.

How about the Border Patrol (?) thugs attacking a line of moms?  Linking arms to form a barrier between police and demonstrators so as to prevent violence is a long-held tradition, dating at least back to the 60s.

What you are trying to defend is police violence.

If the police can't/won't enforce the law (against bad cops as well as others), then the citizens will have to do it themselves.  I'm talking vigilance committees here.  We have found them necessary in the past and we may find them necessary again.  In some states they are still legal.  If a few cops turn up lining county road ditches, maybe they'll get the message.  In the meantime, campaigns such as those by BLM represent a middle ground.  We should all be working for justice.

Doug

 

[+DieChecker]

15 minutes ago, Doug1029 said:

The US does not keep records on what proportion of police killings are murder.

FYI:  "Murder" is the taking of life without due process of law.  How many of those people killed by police had a trial?

On the other hand, nobody is making a credible case for the other side.

Doug

Nope, there is also various levels of Manslaughter, as well a Homicide. Justifiable homicide being usually what a cop gets investigated for.

Murder (at least in the case of 1st degree and 2nd degree) require forethought, if not premeditation. 

Not 100% sure about nationwide, but everywhere ive lived, after a shooting, much less a death, an officer gets investigated. 

Often the family of the person killed goes to civil court.

So, AFAIK, every person killed by police has due process. Youre suggesting that "bigfoot is real"...

... I mean... that there's a coordinated understanding nation wide to cover up murders by the police. Whether in New York City, or Houston, or Chicago, or Seattle... The secret cabal keeps everything under wraps?

[Doug1029]

2 hours ago, WVK said:

It would destroy America.  You OK with that

It MIGHT Make America Great Again.  But right now, I think Americans would settle for making America normal again.

Doug

[Doug1029]

2 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Nope, there is also various levels of Manslaughter, as well a Homicide. Justifiable homicide being usually what a cop gets investigated for.

Murder (at least in the case of 1st degree and 2nd degree) require forethought, if not premeditation. 

Not 100% sure about nationwide, but everywhere ive lived, after a shooting, much less a death, an officer gets investigated. 

Often the family of the person killed goes to civil court.

So, AFAIK, every person killed by police has due process. Youre suggesting that "bigfoot is real"...

... I mean... that there's a coordinated understanding nation wide to cover up murders by the police. Whether in New York City, or Houston, or Chicago, or Seattle... The secret cabal keeps everything under wraps?

An investigation after-the-fact is not due process for the individual who was killed.  It IS due process for the killer.

Is there a secret cabal that does this?  I don't think so, unless police unions could be considered a cabal.  The whole problem  comes from the fact that some police can't be trusted to act in a professional manner, so we must be suspicious of all police.

 

That's OK.  Bigfoot doesn't believe in you, either.

Doug

[+DieChecker]

6 minutes ago, Doug1029 said:

So it is.  Then why did Trump's minions use pepper spray and violently clear protesters so he could have a photo-op.  I'd say he went out there to pick a fight.

That was a bit over the top. I think most people agree. But, from what i remember watching, it was less violent then parents rushing a Toys-R-Us the day after Thanksgiving.

Quote

How about the Border Patrol (?) thugs attacking a line of moms?  Linking arms to form a barrier between police and demonstrators so as to prevent violence is a long-held tradition, dating at least back to the 60s.

The moms were pushed back, not clubbed.

They were NOT told to go away, but to move back, which they did not follow the lawful order. Later, after the gathering was declared a riot, they were told to leave.

Quote

What you are trying to defend is police violence.

And you are defending violent rioters intent on destruction.

Quote

If the police can't/won't enforce the law (against bad cops as well as others), then the citizens will have to do it themselves.  I'm talking vigilance committees here.  We have found them necessary in the past and we may find them necessary again.  In some states they are still legal.  If a few cops turn up lining county road ditches, maybe they'll get the message.  In the meantime, campaigns such as those by BLM represent a middle ground.  We should all be working for justice.

Doug

So.... Condoning of vigilante murder??? Thats a new one for you Doug... 

There is LAW, and there is JUSTICE, and it is the job of elected officials to balance those. It is not the job of a guy in a bank robbers mask to make that decision.

[+DieChecker]

3 minutes ago, Doug1029 said:

An investigation after-the-fact is not due process for the individual who was killed.  It IS due process for the killer.

Is there a secret cabal that does this?  I don't think so, unless police unions could be considered a cabal.  The whole problem  comes from the fact that some police can't be trusted to act in a professional manner, so we must be suspicious of all police.

 

That's OK.  Bigfoot doesn't believe in you, either.

Doug

Sounds like youd like one step to be desolving police unions. 

I generally dont like unions, so id not be terribly against that.

Not a problem to be suspicious of the police. Be suspicious of everyone, IMHO. However, we cant just see a dead person, and a cop, and assume murder.

[Doug1029]

15 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

That was a bit over the top. I think most people agree. But, from what i remember watching, it was less violent then parents rushing a Toys-R-Us the day after Thanksgiving.

Did the parents use pepper-spray?

17 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

The moms were pushed back, not clubbed.

They were NOT told to go away, but to move back, which they did not follow the lawful order. Later, after the gathering was declared a riot, they were told to leave.

So what followed then?  Did the police go on to attack the demonstrators?  If not, they didn't need to move the moms away.  You're only telling part of the story here.

19 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

And you are defending violent rioters intent on destruction.

You are defending the use of excessive force by police.  That does not produce justice.

I am defending those who peaceably assemble.  That MIGHT produce justice.

If someone damages something, steals something, assaults someone, then arrest that person.  Do not shoot pepper spray or rubber bullets at someone who had nothing to do with it.

Remember that rubber bullets are supposed to be aimed low from a distance so they cannot kill someone.  Firing them at a range of 25 feet is assault with a deadly weapon.  Remember that tear gas grenades explode.  Remember that a taser can kill when left on the wrong setting.  Police "tools" are altogether too subject to abuse.

I am a graduate of Kent State University, Class of 1971.  I have seen police power at its worst.  I have seen state-sanctioned murder.  I have seen innocent people arrested, charged and prosecuted for somebody else's crime.  I have seen people arrested and fined for only speaking out against the injustice (Charles Brill was fined for disobeying a politically-motivated gag order.).  I have seen WEWS stage a "riot" for the TV cameras.  I know from experience that what happened on the ground has little resemblance to what the newspapers say.  For that reason, I am skeptical of claims from both sides, but especially skeptical of police because they represent the government I pay for; they represent me and I do NOT condone that government's actions.

33 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

So.... Condoning of vigilante murder??? Thats a new one for you Doug... 

Indeed it is.  When there is no effective police authority, then there is no alternative to vigilance committees.  That's what we have in some of our cities right now.  When the victim of a crime is afraid to call police for fear of being further victimized, then it's time to consider other measures.  One does not have to kill people.  You've heard it said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth."  That means ONLY an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.  Police who do not kill people have nothing to fear from a good vigilance committee.

I used to live in a small rural community.  We had a foreign student living there, the son of a diplomat.  He got caught stealing firewood.  The victim complained to the sheriff who could do nothing because legally, someone with diplomatic immunity doesn't exist.  So the guy continued his depredations on the neighbors' woodpiles.  Then he got caught again.  This time they took him into the woods, tied his arms around a tree and broke his hands with the wood he had stolen.  They turned him lose.  He complained to the sheriff who told him that since he didn't exist, no crime had been committed.  That's when the Ambassador heard about it and revoked his diplomatic immunity.  The guy returned to Saudi Arabia to escape prosecution.  But he never stole wood again.

 

49 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

There is LAW, and there is JUSTICE, and it is the job of elected officials to balance those. It is not the job of a guy in a bank robbers mask to make that decision.

"When policemen break the law, there is no law - just a struggle for survival."  --Billy Jack

Doug

[Doug1029]

48 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Sounds like youd like one step to be desolving police unions. 

I generally dont like unions, so id not be terribly against that.

Not a problem to be suspicious of the police. Be suspicious of everyone, IMHO. However, we cant just see a dead person, and a cop, and assume murder.

Police unions are fine as long as they do not advocate for police having immunity from accountability and prosecution.  That's what has happened and it needs to be undone.  If the unions want to argue about better pay, better hours, better benefits, that's fine with me.  The good cops deserve better than most of them get.

Unions are just another check to balance the power of unrestrained employers.

If one is going to investigate a death, then one needs to assume murder until investigation reveals otherwise.  The reason for trying all police shootings is to keep everything out in the open so that people know that no backroom deals are letting the guilty party off.

Doug

[Tatetopa]

5 hours ago, docyabut2 said:

to add, the Antifa Communists are trying to take over our cities:(

Docy, what do you mean?  They will never be elected to public office or control the police.  

[Doug1029]

43 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Docy, what do you mean?  They will never be elected to public office or control the police.  

As I recall, Antifa was opposed to the communists.  What is he talking about?

Doug

[docyabut2]

1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

Docy, what do you mean?  They will never be elected to public office or control the police.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Communist_Party,_USA

 What I am saying that party is behind the Antifa  Craz  movement .

Antifa planned anti-government insurgency for months, law enforcement official says

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/jun/3/antifa-planned-anti-government-insurgency-george-f/

 

https://nypost.com/2020/07/28/ag-barr-thinks-antifa-will-spread-if-states-dont-squash-violence/

WASHINGTON — Attorney General William Barr is concerned that Antifa-led violence will grow and spread across the country if state officials allow riots to continue rocking their cities.

 

Revolutionary Communist Party leader backs Biden

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/aug/3/revolutionary-communist-party-leader-backs-biden/

Edited August 4, 2020 by docyabut2

[docyabut2]

Revolutionary Communist Party leader backs Biden?

They know they can get away with their riots, by voting for Biden.

[docyabut2]

49 minutes ago, Doug1029 said:

As I recall, Antifa was opposed to the communists.  What is he talking about?

Doug

, Antifa  are communists. Where they came from.

 Antifa arose from para-military factions and has been likened to a militia. Marxist Antifa-progenitors first arose in the Russian Revolution starting in 1917.

 

[Doug1029]

23 minutes ago, docyabut2 said:

, Antifa  are communists. Where they came from.

 Antifa arose from para-military factions and has been likened to a militia. Marxist Antifa-progenitors first arose in the Russian Revolution starting in 1917.

 

I stand corrected.  Thanks.

Doug

[docyabut2]

Sen. Ted Cruz chairs hearing on Antifa role in riots, 'stopping anarchist violence': live updateshttps://www.foxnews.com/politics/cruz-hearing-antifa-riots-anarchist-violence

 

 

[+Desertrat56]

4 minutes ago, docyabut2 said:

Sen. Ted Cruz chairs hearing on Antifa role in riots, 'stopping anarchist violence': live updateshttps://www.foxnews.com/politics/cruz-hearing-antifa-riots-anarchist-violence

 

 

Anarchists, socialists and anti-facists are not the same thing.  3 different ideologies.

[docyabut2]

1 minute ago, Desertrat56 said:

Anarchists, socialists and anti-facists are not the same thing.  3 different ideologies.

Cruz, ahead of Antifa hearing, describes riots in US cities as ‘organized terror attacks’

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/cruz-ahead-of-antifa-hearing-describes-riots-in-us-cities-as-organized-terror-attacks/ar-BB17xnFk?ocid=bingoverlay

[+Desertrat56]

9 minutes ago, docyabut2 said:

Cruz, ahead of Antifa hearing, describes riots in US cities as ‘organized terror attacks’

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/cruz-ahead-of-antifa-hearing-describes-riots-in-us-cities-as-organized-terror-attacks/ar-BB17xnFk?ocid=bingoverlay

I understand and I agree, they were organized because they happened or were attempted in a lot of cities on the same day.  Some were successful in creating chaos and some were not.

I am just pointing out that you cannot lump them all together.  There are several groups who want to cause fear and chaos. 

As for my pointing out that the three words you use to describe who is trying to create the chaos as being 3 different groups or ideologies, I think it is a relevant point. 

[docyabut2]

8 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

I understand and I agree, they were organized because they happened or were attempted in a lot of cities on the same day.  Some were successful in creating chaos and some were not.

I am just pointing out that you cannot lump them all together.  There are several groups who want to cause fear and chaos. 

As for my pointing out that the three words you use to describe who is trying to create the chaos as being 3 different groups or ideologies, I think it is a relevant point. 

 The Revolutionary Communist Party, USA (also known as RCP and Revcom) is a communist party in the United States founded in 1975 and led by its chairman Bob Avakian. The party organizes for a revolution in the United States, to overthrow the system of capitalism and replace it with a new socialist republic,^[1] with the final aim of world communism.^[2]

[Tatetopa]

I think the FBI has also said Boogaloo and the Proud Botz are also domestic terrorist threats.

I really wonder if a group that "organizes" a violent riot in one city is  communicating with groups in other cities to organize or if it is independent individuals who take advantage of opportunities in different cities.   It looks a lot more dangerous and threatening if it is one large organized group, than just a bunch of violent but disorganized kids.

[+Desertrat56]

12 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

I think the FBI has also said Boogaloo and the Proud Botz are also domestic terrorist threats.

I really wonder if a group that "organizes" a violent riot in one city is  communicating with groups in other cities to organize or if it is independent individuals who take advantage of opportunities in different cities.   It looks a lot more dangerous and threatening if it is one large organized group, than just a bunch of violent but disorganized kids.

It could be a mixture of both.  Local groups that want to destroy mixed in with organized groups from elsewhere planted for maximum effect.