George Floyd murder / Derek Chauvin guilty of murder

[SWP's back]

Ok, let's see if this message resonates then, if Americans are happy to see their cities trashed, communes set up supported by mayors, dozens dead and thousands of businesses destroyed, and the answer is less police, fair enough.
I have a feeling they may not.

Those things are happening now because of systemic racism and police brutality as I’m sure you fucking know.

But hey, at least we’ve taught you what defunding means. Baby steps I guess.

ps, no one said “less police” other than you, you’re either being purposely obtuse or thick and I never had you down as thick.

 

[Blue Hefner]

 

[blueinsa]

Those things are happening now because of systemic racism and police brutality as I’m sure you fucking know.

But hey, at least we’ve taught you what defunding means. Baby steps I guess.

ps, no one said “less police” other than you, you’re either being purposely obtuse or thick and I never had you down as thick.

There is zero doubt that America is systematically racist.

Zero.

 

[Ban-jani]

That’s really not what Shapiro was doing at all.

He’s saying the police treated him better, ie didn’t shoot him, because he wasn’t a threat to them, whereas Blake was.

What a daft fucking Tweet.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Those things are happening now because of systemic racism and police brutality as I’m sure you fucking know.

But hey, at least we’ve taught you what defunding means. Baby steps I guess.

ps, no one said “less police” other than you, you’re either being purposely obtuse or thick and I never had you down as thick.

Is it now, I’m sure there’s a discussion somewhere in there. You taught me Jack shit, my comments simply referenced someone else, you are going to have to accept that other opposing opinions are around. If I did say less police, which I don’t remember, but will take your word for it, I would hazard that may lead to less of them if they do get defunded.
But maybe AOC’s calculations have taken this into account, and the funding analysis will reflect that, so we’ll wait and see.

 

[Blue Hefner]

That’s really not what Shapiro was doing at all.

He’s saying the police treated him better, ie didn’t shoot him, because he wasn’t a threat to them, whereas Blake was.

What a daft fucking Tweet.

Which is a position I completley disagree with - One man unarmed with his back to them, another with a machine gun with unknown intentions. I know which one I would be scared of!

Do you seriosuly think if it was the other way around the outcomes would have been the same? Really?

 

[MeatnSpudsMCFC]

Can't help but feel part of all this has occurred due to years of politicians allowing a gun industry to run rampant because of the "economic benefits" that came with it. A 17-year-old was wandering around streets armed with an AR-15 and was somehow legally within his rights to do so.

Eventually even the most ardent gun supporters have to ask themselves, is it worth it?

 

[BigOscar]

That’s really not what Shapiro was doing at all.

He’s saying the police treated him better, ie didn’t shoot him, because he wasn’t a threat to them, whereas Blake was.

What a daft fucking Tweet.

It's a pretty damning indictment of the police that a fully armed white supremacist who has just murdered a couple of people is less threatening to them than a black man who might have a weapon in his car

 

[BobKowalski]

That’s really not what Shapiro was doing at all.

He’s saying the police treated him better, ie didn’t shoot him, because he wasn’t a threat to them, whereas Blake was.

What a daft fucking Tweet.

And there you have it. Unarmed black guy shot in the back seven times ‘is an immediate threat’. White youth armed with an assault rifle, having just killed two people, not an immediate threat.

You see how the narrative and framing works and how people automatically accept it? What odds on a black guy carrying an assault rifle, having just killed two white people getting within a hundred feet of the cops without being fired upon?

 

[Ban-jani]

Which is a position I completley disagree with - One man unarmed with his back to them, another with a machine gun with unknown intentions. I know which one I would be scared of!

Do you seriosuly think if it was the other way around the outcomes would have been the same? Really?

One was resisting arrest and reaching in his car, after wrestling away from arrest but I haven’t see the other one to be honest.

The point he’s making isn’t legitimacy of the far right, the guys a Jew for god sake the far right detest him.

 

[Ban-jani]

And there you have it. Unarmed black guy shot in the back seven times ‘is an immediate threat’. White youth armed with an assault rifle, having just killed two people, not an immediate threat.

You see how the narrative and framing works and how people automatically accept it? What odds on a black guy carrying an assault rifle, having just killed two white people getting within a hundred feet of the cops without being fired upon?

You’re the only one painting a narrative.

I’ve said the Blake shooting was excessive but he was a threat to the police still.

It would depend on the cops, some are racist and wouldn’t think twice about the opportunity, some would do the same as what happened to the white ****.

 

[Ban-jani]

It's a pretty damning indictment of the police that a fully armed white supremacist who has just murdered a couple of people is less threatening to them than a black man who might have a weapon in his car

It isn’t, you’re taking two situations and painting a narrative that isn’t there.

And I think the Blake shooting was excessive.

 

[Dax777]

That’s really not what Shapiro was doing at all.

He’s saying the police treated him better, ie didn’t shoot him, because he wasn’t a threat to them, whereas Blake was.

What a daft fucking Tweet.

Being daft is a thing to be proud of on Twitter.

 

[BobKowalski]

You’re the only one painting a narrative.

I’ve said the Blake shooting was excessive but he was a threat to the police still.

It would depend on the cops, some are racist and wouldn’t think twice about the opportunity, some would do the same as what happened to the white ****.

No, when it came to Blake what was the argument used as justification? He was a threat, he reached into his car, so the shooting him in the back seven times was regrettable but justified given the potential threat to police officers.

In this case you have a white youth openly carrying an assault rifle. Cops judgement? No threat. White youth then kills two people yet he is still not seen as the same threat level as an unarmed black man, who has just been tasered (allegedly).

You have accepted the narrative and framing that an unarmed black man is a bigger threat than a white youth carrying an assault rifle who has just killed two people. The point of the narrative is to make you accept this without question.

 

[Ban-jani]

No, when it came to Blake what was the argument used as justification? He was a threat, he reached into his car, so the shooting him in the back seven times was regrettable but justified given the potential threat to police officers.

In this case you have a white youth openly carrying an assault rifle. Cops judgement? No threat. White youth then kills two people yet he is still not seen as the same threat level as an unarmed black man, who has just been tasered (allegedly).

You have accepted the narrative and framing that an unarmed black man is a bigger threat than a white youth carrying an assault rifle who has just killed two people. The point of the narrative is to make you accept this without question.

No I do not have to accept that at all.

The police were trying to arrest Blake who reached in his car, the confrontation is between Blake and the police. They are trained to act in self defence and terminate the threat and reaching for something, especially when resisting arrest, is seen as a threat. I don’t think they should have shot him, but that’s why they did.

With the nutjob shooter, I don’t even know his name, he’s not attacking the police directly and therefore they should try and arrest him.

You want them to shoot the white guy because of what happened to the black guy but it’s because the white guy wasn’t a threat to the police themselves.

That’s what you’re missing.

To be honest America needs binning off, just make it a part of Mexico, the place is fucked and it’s why I’m desperate for wankers not to bring that trouble over here and why I’m against BLM UK.

 

[BobKowalski]

No I do not have to accept that at all.

The police were trying to arrest Blake who reached in his car, the confrontation is between Blake and the police. They are trained to act in self defence and terminate the threat and reaching for something, especially when resisting arrest, is seen as a threat. I don’t think they should have shot him, but that’s why they did.

With the nutjob shooter, I don’t even know his name, he’s not attacking the police directly and therefore they should try and arrest him.

You want them to shoot the white guy because of what happened to the black guy but it’s because the white guy wasn’t a threat to the police themselves.

That’s what you’re missing.

To be honest America needs binning off, just make it a part of Mexico, the place is fucked and it’s why I’m desperate for wankers not to bring that trouble over here and why I’m against BLM UK.

No. I don’t want them to shoot either. The trouble is they are more inclined to shoot one over the other. You have accepted the narrative over the shooting of the black guy even though it contradicts the treatment of the white youth. Remember the line ‘can’t afford to take chances, how would you react etc.’ Yet in the case of the white youth none of this applies.

Is it ingrained attitudes or that the police are indifferent to the fate the shooter was going visit, and did visit, on the protestors? And if we accept this difference in treatment without thinking, or even refuse to accept it exists, how can the system be changed?

 

[SebastianBlue]

Fun Fact:

The “History” area of the Kenosha County Sheriff Department’s website ends with the “1980s to 1990s” section which reviews a substantial expansion of their jail and prison facilities, and that section ends with the following sentence...

“The department grew from 103 to 307 personnel with 178 being assigned to corrections.”

 

[Ban-jani]

No. I don’t want them to shoot either. The trouble is they are more inclined to shoot one over the other. You have accepted the narrative over the shooting of the black guy even though it contradicts the treatment of the white youth. Remember the line ‘can’t afford to take chances, how would you react etc.’ Yet in the case of the white youth none of this applies.

Is it ingrained attitudes or that the police are indifferent to the fate the shooter was going visit, and did visit, on the protestors? And if we accept this difference in treatment without thinking, or even refuse to accept it exists, how can the system be changed?

You’re essentially telling me I have to accept your view as mine and I’m telling you I don’t.

Rightly or wrongly the point Shapiro was making was that Blake was a direct threat to that officer himself whereas the nutbag wasn’t, that’s why Blake was shot for doing less.

Had the roles been reversed who knows what would have happened, maybe the cop was racist and would have shot a black man but we don’t know as they’re entirely different scenarios of arrest but I think had Blake been white in his incident, he’d have been shot anyway.

The only change that’s going to stop civilians being killed by police over there in such high numbers is taking guns off everyone, which ain’t gonna happen.

The only other option is the police change policy of only firing when someone actually fires or tries to stab at them, this will result in more dead cops which may satisfy one side of the argument but it’s unrealistic if we’re going to save as many human lives as possible.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

You'd have drawn your weapon and shot if you thought he was reaching for a gun, but not not when he had this 'knife' as others have said, nor at the point of this actual scuffle with three officers...?

You had a chance to give a comprehensive answer and so you chose your conclusion. So, before I get the inevitable "I didn't say that" or "You're putting words in my mouth" I have to reasonably assume the rest of what I said about your unspoken answer to be true.

Thanks, at least we got there.

This is why people hate “discussing” things with you.

Here is what I ACTUALLY said...

If I thought he was reaching for a gun, I’d have shot him.

Please don’t TRY to twist what I said to help your own narrative.

It is more than bad form, esp considering I think I have been quite generous in what I have been willing to share, to attempt to characterize a fairly straightforward quote as anything other than what I simply said.

 

[Ban-jani]

Fun Fact:

The “History” area of the Kenosha County Sheriff Department’s website ends with the “1980s to 1990s” section which reviews a substantial expansion of their jail and prison facilities, and that section ends with the following sentence...

“The department grew from 103 to 307 personnel with 178 being assigned to corrections.”

I mean, his views are extreme in terms of arresting people and locking them away for life for impregnating women.

He shouldn’t be a cop with views like that, they’re absolutely laughably horrific, however he does state it doesn’t matter what race so where’s the evidence of racism?