George Floyd murder / Derek Chauvin guilty of murder

[SWP's back]

Well you should have carried on.

The questions are in order of what happened in the video.

Ok I’ll read again.

 

[Ban-jani]

You mentioned what MLK would say of an armed Black militia.

Note there was no mention of your opinion of a Black militia.

I mentioned him within context of a group of black men forming the militia to improve the situation, and how it contrasts the great man’s approach.

 

[kaz7]

The other question is if he was there to break up a fight between two women, what made them draw weapons against him in the first place?

Was is it 'shoot first, ask question later' policy?

He was black in amongst women,must have been up to no good

 

[SWP's back]

I mentioned him within context of a group of black men forming the militia to improve the situation, and how it contrasts the great man’s approach.

To be fair, after a further 60 years of no fucking changes, her probably be inclined to agree with them.

 

[Bigga]

I mentioned him within context of a group of black men forming the militia to improve the situation, and how it contrasts the great man’s approach.

See, now you provide greater insight to your thinking in particular (and across the wider spectrum) and thus rounds out my original question of why people think in this manner.

You should pair your point to what I asked originally and not take offence to it being an individual attack.

It was a question asked of general thinking about a demographic.

 

[Ban-jani]

To be fair, after a further 60 years of no fucking changes, her probably be inclined to agree with them.

Well I’ve never been to America but I would say looking in from the outside the situation is greatly better than it was in 1960.

There’s still a big issue and it seems to have flared up again over the last few years but black Americans are far better off than they were under the Jim Crow Laws.

The biggest change during the Civil Rights movement was under MLK’s approach.

He not only unified the black community but he got public opinion from apathetic whites onto their side too, by being peaceful and making the movement totally inclusive and not aggressive.

I appreciate people are angry it’s still happening, turning to armed militias isn’t the answer though.

 

[Ban-jani]

See, now you provide greater insight to your thinking in particular (and across the wider spectrum) and thus rounds out my original question of why people think in this manner.

You should pair your point to what I asked originally and not take offence to it being an individual attack.

It was a question asked of general thinking about a demographic.

Well you did seem annoyed in your initial response to me.

We all want the same thing here, the discussion is do they go down the MLK or the Black Panthers route.

Im arguing for the former.

 

[bobmcfc]

I think he's still alive. If it's the same man as on the BBC News story.

Don't think it was a traffic stop, actually.

According to his lawyer, he was trying to intervene in a fight between two women, and he had his three kids in the car when he was shot.

Story

That makes me so sad.

 

[Bigga]

Well I’ve never been to America but I would say looking in from the outside the situation is greatly better than it was in 1960.

There’s still a big issue and it seems to have flared up again over the last few years but black Americans are far better off than they were under the Jim Crow Laws.

The biggest change during the Civil Rights movement was under MLK’s approach.

He not only unified the black community but he got public opinion from apathetic whites onto their side too, by being peaceful and making the movement totally inclusive and not aggressive.

I appreciate people are angry it’s still happening, turning to armed militias isn’t the answer though.

Firstly, look into 'The New Jim Crow'.

And secondly, if the US constitution allows for 'all men being equal', 'the right to bear arms' and 'blah blah blah militias', then that applies to everyone having that particular country's rights.

If White men can march as militias, so can the Indigenous people, the Chinese, the Mexicans, women etc and on to its stupid conclusion.

Perhaps when all this has come to pass, the constitution can be re-written as it's supposed to be a living document, not selective in who can do or have what.

 

[Bigga]

Well you did seem annoyed in your initial response to me.

We all want the same thing here, the discussion is do they go down the MLK or the Black Panthers route.

Im arguing for the former.

And I'm arguing that 'turning the other cheek' is not conducive in modern society. Why should any demographic be afraid of another?

 

[Ban-jani]

Firstly, look into 'The New Jim Crow'.

And secondly, if the US constitution allows for 'all men being equal', 'the right to bear arms' and 'blah blah blah militias', then that applies to everyone having that particular country's rights.

If White men can march as militias, so can the Indigenous people, the Chinese, the Mexicans, women etc and on to its stupid conclusion.

Perhaps when all this has come to pass, the constitution can be re-written as it's supposed to be a living document, not selective in who can do or have what.

Yeah I did make a point of stating it’s perfectly legal for militias to form as self defence, it was a duty in fact in the early years of the country’s founding.

My point is merely I don’t like seeing it, whether it’s white, black, Mexican or otherwise.

My view is that response should be peaceful as the government (police, army etc.) will win if it comes to a firefight and there will be many needless causalities.

 

[Bigga]

Yeah I did make a point of stating it’s perfectly legal for militias to form as self defence, it was a duty in fact in the early years of the country’s founding.

My point is merely I don’t like seeing it, whether it’s white, black, Mexican or otherwise.

My view is that response should be peaceful as the government (police, army etc.) will win if it comes to a firefight and there will be many needless causalities.

This I will agree with.

I prefer to see equality of position for all or for none.

 

[Ban-jani]

And I'm arguing that 'turning the other cheek' is not conducive in modern society. Why should any demographic be afraid of another?

I love that phrase but I agree you shouldn’t do it in certain circumstances.

I certainly wouldn’t if I awoke to a burglary taking place in my house.

I’m not for a minute saying black people should put up and shut up with police brutality and murder in the US, I think they should take strong action, just not violent.

The peaceful movement in the 60s that eventually led to change wasn’t just “turning the other cheek”, it was in some regard but it was proactive and slightly radical but ultimately peaceful ...and that’s what won over apathetic whites at the time and forced the government to make changes.

You may say that’s pointless with Trump but changes can be made at State level and Biden might be in by Xmas.

 

[Bigga]

I love that phrase but I agree you shouldn’t do it in certain circumstances.

I certainly wouldn’t if I awoke to a burglary taking place in my house.

I’m not for a minute saying black people should put up and shut up with police brutality and murder in the US, I think they should take strong action, just not violent.

The peaceful movement in the 60s that eventually led to change wasn’t just “turning the other cheek”, it was in some regard but it was proactive and slightly radical but ultimately peaceful ...and that’s what won over apathetic whites at the time and forced the government to make changes.

You may say that’s pointless with Trump but changes can be made at State level and Biden might be in by Xmas.

My point is that there is often a parade of White male men that march openly on the streets from time to time with the display that the Gov will not take their guns. Of late, I recall an event of such in the face of BLM protests.

In the main, if at all, no police stop these activities as it is deemed a 'right'. The most I've seen is that some, in the media, look at these people as idiots.

The narrative changes when Black people decide if it's good enough for them, it's good enough for us, but the same type of march is looked upon with a cloud of 'threat'. I, simply, wonder why this happens.

I think it was late 60s/ early 70s when the Black Panthers decided to do such a thing and certain weapons were banned as a reaction to the very same marches that White people/ KKK held at the time.

That mental fear has never disappeared and I think the mentality is, from certain sections of society, that the Black demographic will finally 'rise up' against what is known as 'unfair treatment' over centuries.

I think those that expose the US constitution should make up their minds on whether it serves all or scrap it and start again.

 

[blueinsa]

Now you're being dumb.

I qualified what I said about the background of what he says without it meaning his DIRECTLY saying it!

It's in all his 'if you don't comply' messaging!

Like I said, READ HIS TEXT!

Fool, dumb.....what next?

I will leave you to making up things posters have said only to then have to climb down and admit they didn't.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

Police officers watch videos like this in training.

Policing peaceful protestors is a different task than a traffic stop with non-compliance.

I am casting no premature judgement on the Kenosha shooting.

Would some of you feel differently if you discovered he was reaching inside his car for a gun? I don’t know if was or wasn’t. I don’t know if there was a gun in the car or not. I do know that if the officers had waited until they saw a gun, they could be dead now.

As I have said, when guns are ubiquitous, EVERY cop in EVERY situation has to assume the use of deadly force AGAINST HIM is a possibility.

There is admitted non-compliance and we ALL know enough to know that non-compliance and actions in complete contradiction of the compliance orders elevate the fear and danger of the situation.

Non-compliance coupled with bending down into a car, with the door partially open, backs to the officers do they have zero visibility of what the non-compliant person is doing is, in my opinion, the height of stupidity and daring the officers to use they already drawn weapons.

Ask yourself a question:

If you were confronted by two armed officers, guns drawn, barking orders at you, would YOU comply?

If not, why not?

Would you walk around a car away from them, where they can’t see your hands?

Would you then open your drivers side car door (the location where most people with weapons keep that weapon, within reach while driving, which is illegal unless legally permitted for concealed carry), with your back to officers, where they have zero vision of your hands?

You don’t even live in the US, but I would imagine most everyone in the UK would comply immediately, would not ignore lawful compliance orders from armed officers, and would definitely not ignore them to the point of just walking around the car to get to the drivers side door to reach in.

Like I said, I’ll withhold judgment until I know more, but I simply ask what would YOU have done? What do you think the “normal” person would have done? Why do YOU think the person was so completely non-compliant? Does non-compliance in the face of armed officers suggest fear or did he act quite nonchalantly? We’re there other people in the immediate vicinity, any one of whom could have been armed, escalate the situation?

Again, no judgement, just asking the questions that reasonable people ask about these incidents.





These were essentially “nothing” incidents until, in a split second, they became potentially deadly encounters...for police officers.

If YOU were a police officer, would YOU wait until fired upon to return fire? In those last two videos, did those guys look like they were afraid of the police? Had any intention to comply? Did they look like they ANY FEAR, OR CONCERN FOR HUMAN LIFE WHATSOEVER, when they immediately opened fire, and even got out of their own cars to run to the police cars to have a gun battle in the street?

Again, no judgement if you or your answers, just asking questions of (I assume) normal, every day, run of the mill, law abiding citizens from a country where gun crime is almost non-existent.

 

[Ban-jani]

My point is that there is often a parade of White male men that march openly on the streets from time to time with the display that the Gov will not take their guns. Of late, I recall an event of such in the face of BLM protests.

In the main, if at all, no police stop these activities as it is deemed a 'right'. The most I've seen is that some, in the media, look at these people as idiots.

The narrative changes when Black people decide if it's good enough for them, it's good enough for us, but the same type of march is looked upon with a cloud of 'threat'. I, simply, wonder why this happens.

I think it was late 60s/ early 70s when the Black Panthers decided to do such a thing and certain weapons were banned as a reaction to the very same marches that White people/ KKK held at the time.

That mental fear has never disappeared and I think the mentality is, from certain sections of society, that the Black demographic will finally 'rise up' against what is known as 'unfair treatment' over centuries.

I think those that expose the US constitution should make up their minds on whether it serves all or scrap it and start again.

Well I’m not saying they’re not allowed to do that nor am I saying the police should engage the militia, in fact it’d be a woeful idea to do so, a negotiation should take place.

I think most people are just concentrating on getting by during a pandemic to compare black militias to the KKK and your average American isn’t do that.

If course there’s more justification for a Black Panther-type organisation than the KKK but I just think that’s the wrong way to go about pushing change.

I understand why they’re doing it and appreciate those reasons though.

I would have to be a supporter of gun marches or the KKK for them to matter to my point and I can tell you I’m really not.

 

[Ban-jani]

Police officers watch videos like this in training.

Policing peaceful protestors is a different task than a traffic stop with non-compliance.

I am casting no premature judgement on the Kenosha shooting.

Would some of you feel differently if you discovered he was reaching inside his car for a gun? I don’t know if was or wasn’t. I don’t know if there was a gun in the car or not. I do know that if the officers had waited until they saw a gun, they could be dead now.

As I have said, when guns are ubiquitous, EVERY cop in EVERY situation has to assume the use of deadly force AGAINST HIM is a possibility.

There is admitted non-compliance and we ALL know enough to know that non-compliance and actions in complete contradiction of the compliance orders elevate the fear and danger of the situation.

Non-compliance coupled with bending down into a car, with the door partially open, backs to the officers do they have zero visibility of what the non-compliant person is doing is, in my opinion, the height of stupidity and daring the officers to use they already drawn weapons.

Ask yourself a question:

If you were confronted by two armed officers, guns drawn, barking orders at you, would YOU comply?

If not, why not?

Would you walk around a car away from them, where they can’t see your hands?

Would you then open your drivers side car door (the location where most people with weapons keep that weapon, within reach while driving, which is illegal unless legally permitted for concealed carry), with your back to officers, where they have zero vision of your hands?

You don’t even live in the US, but I would imagine most everyone in the UK would comply immediately, would not ignore lawful compliance orders from armed officers, and would definitely not ignore them to the point of just walking around the car to get to the drivers side door to reach in.

Like I said, I’ll withhold judgment until I know more, but I simply ask what would YOU have done? What do you think the “normal” person would have done? Why do YOU think the person was so completely non-compliant? Does non-compliance in the face of armed officers suggest fear or did he act quite nonchalantly? We’re there other people in the immediate vicinity, any one of whom could have been armed, escalate the situation?

Again, no judgement, just asking the questions that reasonable people ask about these incidents.

I think this is a good post. It’s so alien to us because a police officer with a gun is so rarely seen in England and had that same situation happened here, they’d have just dragged him out the car or tasered him.

I still think unless there is a gun spotted, firing seven shots into his back is well beyond a reasoned response.

 

[BobKowalski]

Police officers watch videos like this in training.

Policing peaceful protestors is a different task than a traffic stop with non-compliance.

I am casting no premature judgement on the Kenosha shooting.

Would some of you feel differently if you discovered he was reaching inside his car for a gun? I don’t know if was or wasn’t. I don’t know if there was a gun in the car or not. I do know that if the officers had waited until they saw a gun, they could be dead now.

As I have said, when guns are ubiquitous, EVERY cop in EVERY situation has to assume the use of deadly force AGAINST HIM is a possibility.

There is admitted non-compliance and we ALL know enough to know that non-compliance and actions in complete contradiction of the compliance orders elevate the fear and danger of the situation.

Non-compliance coupled with bending down into a car, with the door partially open, backs to the officers do they have zero visibility of what the non-compliant person is doing is, in my opinion, the height of stupidity and daring the officers to use they already drawn weapons.

Ask yourself a question:

If you were confronted by two armed officers, guns drawn, barking orders at you, would YOU comply?

If not, why not?

Would you walk around a car away from them, where they can’t see your hands?

Would you then open your drivers side car door (the location where most people with weapons keep that weapon, within reach while driving, which is illegal unless legally permitted for concealed carry), with your back to officers, where they have zero vision of your hands?

You don’t even live in the US, but I would imagine most everyone in the UK would comply immediately, would not ignore lawful compliance orders from armed officers, and would definitely not ignore them to the point of just walking around the car to get to the drivers side door to reach in.

Like I said, I’ll withhold judgment until I know more, but I simply ask what would YOU have done? What do you think the “normal” person would have done? Why do YOU think the person was so completely non-compliant? Does non-compliance in the face of armed officers suggest fear or did he act quite nonchalantly? We’re there other people in the immediate vicinity, any one of whom could have been armed, escalate the situation?

Again, no judgement, just asking the questions that reasonable people ask about these incidents.

Dude, they shot him seven times. In the back.

Is not the issue that LEO’s are trained to automatically suspect all black people no matter the circumstances? Black youth with a toy gun? Shoot him. Black man with a recently, and legally purchased, firearm. Shoot him.

Is the law now that if you are black you must, immediately and without question, obey all LEO instructions or risk being shot? Is the penalty for non compliance a hail of bullets in the back?

The answer must lie in tackling the culture in which these reflex reactions are cultivated. Not just in the police but society as a whole. There is centuries old racial fear of the black man rising up. Keep them down for fear of them rising up. Keep them uneducated for fear of them rising up. Suppress the vote for fear of them rising up. Shoot them first and often for fear of them rising up.

I‘m not American so I won’t pretend to know the answers and maybe I’m wrong, but I can’t help feeling you guys have to break the cycle before it breaks you.

My two cents for what it’s worth.

 

[hilts]

What a fucked up world we live in.