Minneapolis PD Suspect Dies On Video While Handcuffed. FBI Investigating.

[BehindBlueI's]

You just wear people down, don't you? LOL

Posited: As a result of union pressure police agencies sometimes retain officers who, by demonstrated action have demonstrated unsuitability to continue as LEO's? Yes or No

I'm best used in small doses, but I am non-addictive and non-habit forming.

I really don't like boiling complex questions down to yes or no responses and I can't speak for unions or departments nationwide. I can only say that with how merit boards work locally if someone is legitimately unsuitable for police work and the department can't document that and figure out a way to solve the problem, the union probably isn't the major factor. My personal experience is the command staff is the major hurdle for someone who's simply unsuitable but not for politically sensitive reasons such as simple incompetence.

[BehindBlueI's]

In the eyes of the government confronting it, it would still be treated as a criminal or lawless act, and depending on scale, opposed with force...police or military.

This would be true whether colonists opposed King George or their own subsequently erected government.

Definitions can become matters of nuance and minutiae in numerous circumstances. That becomes more of an issue if the matter is tried as opposed to resolved in the street.

I know it's not your point, but I don't find analogies to the American Revolution compelling in these conversations. The Revolutionaries certainly tried a lot of means short of revolt prior to finding it necessary. Modern Americans can't even be arsed to go to the polls much of the time.

[blues]

I know it's not your point, but I don't find analogies to the American Revolution compelling in these conversations. The Revolutionaries certainly tried a lot of means short of revolt prior to finding it necessary. Modern Americans can't even be arsed to go to the polls much of the time.

Well, since you quoted me...you're correct, it wasn't meant to encompass the history of the birth of this nation. It was simply juxtaposing two forms of government with their reaction to civil / social / criminal disobedience. Either one would take measures to preserve its survival and supremacy.

No more, no less. Nuance is played out in the courtroom.

[Guerrero]

Third night of protest right by my house. Luckily, again, no shenanigans.

The Milwaukee police department seems to have no idea how to do crowd control. They either do nothing or totally overdo it, usually when the main protest body has passed, then they make a "show of force" on the stragglers.

[UNM1136]

I don't feel personally called out but professionally I am getting tired of being both too little and too much simultaneously. I'm also tired of people complaining "they" are organized and "they" are ruining this country but "we" can't get organized, etc. I note armed protesters showing up to rally against COVID related measures but am not seeing many of those guys showing up to protect infrastructure and businesses. Now the narrative from that group seems to be "I won't protect those who won't protect themselves" and "but if they come for me..."

Air support is frequently reporting large vans disorging and loading up groups of 8-12 guys in nylon vests and long guns in the areas of these protests. Strangely they are always in the area, but fade away so they have to be tracked by helos. Who also have to watch the groups of rioters.

There were guys using scanners a couple nights ago to follow PD and FD units around to "assist" on calls for service in the area of the riots, but not at the riots... Don't worry dude, we got yer back.

And a local gunshop had people on the roof with long guns to help the poor cops out.

And the protesters cried loudly when SWAT dudes were observed taking high ground to observe...

A couple of reports of shots fired in the area, but no reports of gunshot wounds or arrests.

I dunno where I am going with this; I am up past my bed time.

pat

[RevolverRob]

What then, would be determined as a revolutionary act or movement?

A fine question, I think.

The simple answer is - organization. When we review successful (and unsuccessful) rebellions of the last ~300 years, the most critical thing separating riots and revolution is organization. In particular, critical, loud, and dedicated leadership. This is the thing that is lacking in current "movements" such as BLM or Antifa - they have no broader representative leaders that are dedicated to their causes, beyond organizing marches or inciting riots. They are anarchists in kind of a pure form.

When we review the American Revolution - dedicated leaders worked diligently both within the system they were a part of (i.e., many founding fathers spent considerable time in England appealing to parliament and the crown) AND organizing a new system when it became apparent their efforts were not going to be sufficient. A similar set of leaders appeared among the Confederacy during the Civil War. And similar factions and efforts occurred during the various French revolutions.

One can even argue (and I would) that the Civil Rights Movement (Revolution) was driven by the dedicated efforts of MLK, Edgar Nixon, Malcom X, among others. Those leaders, organizers, and devotees stand in stark contrast to the lack of leadership in current 'efforts' for equality*.

So, I think the distinction between riots/rebellions has as much to do with their broad, goal-oriented, leadership, as it does with the fact that they are rebelling. As it is, I see nothing from the groups rioting that suggests their riots are about true change, there appear to be largely opportunistic. Protesters are a little more cohesive in their message, though in my opinion, rarely do marches and protests accomplish more than politicking does.

*'Efforts' because these efforts are half-assed at best. Things like #blackouttuesday where people put black screens on their social media accounts - are emblematic of today's 'efforts'. They are slacktivism in the image of doing 'something' and I consider it a distasteful and disgraceful form of protest, because it is merely imagery and means nothing. Either you're dedicated to "the cause", or you're a bystander to it. I for one, am not particularly dedicated to "the cause", because I have no fucking clue what it is, because there is no cohesive leadership or message surrounding "the cause".

[RevolverRob]

@RevolverRob

As I said a couple days ago. At this point, if you're organizing a "protest," you're basically providing an engraved invitation and cover to bad actors, and that makes you part of the problem.

What message is your protest going to deliver that everyone in the country isn't well aware of by now? What more needs to be demonstrated about that's worth inviting the destroyers and thieves into anybody's neighborhood?

I think I probably answered your question with my last post, indirectly at least.

No, I'm kind of with you. Organizing a protest is an open invitation for people to cause problems, that said people have a right to protest, even if their message is dumb. But I think the reason for why this "movement" attracts a number of lawless individuals is because it lacks structured leadership and clear goals. And is built primarily on emotional outbursts, as opposed to rational thought.

I know I'm not the only person who has been randomly assigned to an ad-hoc committee with poorly defined (no) goals to do "something" about a "problem". And every single time I have been, I sit quietly and observe the committee yammer on for an extended period of time doing nothing. When I've gotten the jist of the problems, I restart the whole committee by saying something to the effect of, "This is all great. Especially your scree about nothing, Karen. So what are the goals for this committee? Because right now, I see a bunch of people pissing away time doing nothing and talking about nothing."

___

FWIW - I'm going to go find the legal defense fund for the people who are going to sue the mayor of Birmingham. With all due respect to a mayor attempting to keep the peace, you cannot blanket ban marches, protests, or even vigils. That is unconstitutional and I hope he gets sued into fucking oblivion for it.

No one has yet given that great piece of libertarian gold: You guys realize that bad actors showing up at protests are the result of having the freedom to assemble and protest in the first place...right? Right. It's the cost of freedom...or something.

[Wondering Beard]

He's helping.

Twitter bio:
Mark D. Levine
@MarkLevineNYC
Chair of New York City Council health committee.
Representing District 7, Uptown Manhattan (Washington Heights, West Harlem, UWS).
En español y בעברית.


https://twitter.com/@twitter/status/1268159721468559360

[5pins]

All protesters are not rioters and all rioters are not protesters but it sure seems like all riots start with a protest.

[Caballoflaco]

@RevolverRob

While the Mayor’s speech was a bit overtop (in a Trumpish way) protests have still been allowed pre-curfew. But, when it’s curfew time you leave or go to jail. At least yesterday and Monday a few folks decided to be arrested as a form of civil disobedience, but I thnk only one was charged with resisting arrest downtown.