Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: UoF Post George Floyd Riots in Minneapolis

  1. #1

    UoF Post George Floyd Riots in Minneapolis

    There was some little street discussion after an anti-car jacking team shot a fellow in the MSP. The situation was notable because (1) the MSP has had a ballooning car jacking issue and (2) it is the first fatal law enforcement shooting locally since George Floyd departed this mortal coil.

    This Star Tribune snippet illustrates the consent agreement on crowd control use of force and the exigencies:

    After Wednesday night's shooting, a crowd of about 100 protesters congregated near the scene and at times grew tense, shouting expletives and throwing snowballs at police. Later in the evening, protesters remained relatively peaceful as they gathered at a bonfire built in the street.

    According to dispatch audio, an officer asked at one point for permission to use a 40 mm launcher because "they are starting to throw ice balls at us." Launchers are authorized only "to stop imminent physical harm to officers," dispatch said.

    "Can you clarify what is authorized at this point?" one officer asked. They were told handheld aerosol, such as pepper spray, could be used to stop "assaultive conduct."


    Note that some of the language in the scene video is strong, opining that the police officers should participate in sexual activity.
    https://www.startribune.com/minneapo...top/600005259/

    Evidently a wayward rubbish container and commentary about a “spirited” crowd seemed most apropos for Public Radio.

    Name:  22FE180F-5264-48EB-9D3F-2DBBE648E117.jpg
Views: 368
Size:  42.8 KB
    https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/1...in-minneapolis

    In related news, three fellows were charged with attempting to burn down Target Stores HQ in nearby downtown MSP - https://www.justice.gov/usao-mn/pr/t...n-headquarters

  2. #2
    Modding this sack of shit BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by DrkBlue View Post
    There was some little street discussion after an anti-car jacking team shot a fellow in the MSP.
    Is your intent to discuss the use of force issues or the general current event? I ask because if it's in this forum it's going to be limited to the first. If you're looking for a more general discussion, I can move it to General Discussion.
    Sorta around sometimes for some of your shitty mod needs.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by BehindBlueI's View Post
    Is your intent to discuss the use of force issues or the general current event? I ask because if it's in this forum it's going to be limited to the first. If you're looking for a more general discussion, I can move it to General Discussion.
    Use of Force was my salient, if wandering, point. There was some added commentary there, but the Minneapolis consent agreement is similar to overall trend nationally. Since MSP was the genesis of some of the national trend, believe it a datapoint. There was more discussion in the Star Tribune story on the UoF agreement, but wanted to highlight that officers on scene still don’t have the clarity to determine.

    Great deference to where you think it belongs. Please edit out the other stuff as desired to get it focused as desired.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Ca
    Clarity can be lacking with new policies that may be interpreted differently by the administration. My old agency is under oversight and the administrator didn't believe being hit by a rock/concrete rose to the level of serious bodily injury. Where as the frontline folks feel a lot differently. There were many occasions where we believeed we acted within policy or law but found out of compliance, which creates the lack of clarity. The use of munitions may be restricted to only at the direction of a supervisor or incident commander even if an exigency is present to remove all discretion, so you may hear radio traffic asking for permission. Reformers place a blanket peaceful protest label on everything even if it's a mob rioting so you end up with a lot of inaction.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    SF Bay Ahea
    Quote Originally Posted by JF1 View Post
    Clarity can be lacking with new policies that may be interpreted differently by the administration. My old agency is under oversight and the administrator didn't believe being hit by a rock/concrete rose to the level of serious bodily injury. Where as the frontline folks feel a lot differently. There were many occasions where we believeed we acted within policy or law but found out of compliance, which creates the lack of clarity. The use of munitions may be restricted to only at the direction of a supervisor or incident commander even if an exigency is present to remove all discretion, so you may hear radio traffic asking for permission. Reformers place a blanket peaceful protest label on everything even if it's a mob rioting so you end up with a lot of inaction.

    You need supervisors willing to pull the troops out and let the city burn. I'll probably never run a squad in a riot situation again, but I'm not going to let my folks be rock-absorbers for no good reason. I'm betting a decent OSHA complaint about workplace safety that referenced the ridiculous "standards" that have been forced upon many of us in this current unpleasantness might change some of the ridiculous decisions by our "leaders" and force them to stand up and be counted.

  6. #6
    Site Supporter Erick Gelhaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Wasatch Front
    I'm essentially retired so I'm not experiencing these issues first hand; however, I'm still involved in discussions and seeing the fallout with those on the street, road.

    If I had to guess about last night's OIS and the subsequent protest, it would be this: the suspect made his decision and put it into motion, the officers from whatever agency responded to the threat. Then we have the effect of narratives going back seven months, more like seven or eight years - that any use of deadly force by the police is murder and was unlawful from the get-go. Agency administrators, in many cases, have abandoned their cops; the SJWs have gone from questioning an event to rioting & demanding the termination/prosecution/conviction of the cops involved immediately; all while the media has chucked any pretense of impartial reporting (but we knew this).

    During the foreseeable future, any time an officer has to use any force, never mind deadly force, that community is very likely to see this reaction, response.

    Hopefully, the agency will release the BWC footage sooner rather than later with context & explanation - to let the viewer know what they are seeing - rather than just dumping it out there.

    The behavior of the crowd from last night in Minneapolis will probably be the norm for a very long time.

  7. #7
    Modding this sack of shit BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Quote Originally Posted by DrkBlue View Post
    Use of Force was my salient, if wandering, point. There was some added commentary there, but the Minneapolis consent agreement is similar to overall trend nationally. Since MSP was the genesis of some of the national trend, believe it a datapoint. There was more discussion in the Star Tribune story on the UoF agreement, but wanted to highlight that officers on scene still don’t have the clarity to determine.

    Great deference to where you think it belongs. Please edit out the other stuff as desired to get it focused as desired.
    It's fine to stay here as long as that's the conversation you wanted to have. We had similar threads after Ferguson and it's an important topic. I just wanted to clarify your intent.

    We have made some changes on riot response, but the vast majority are on paper only. They are writing down things that were already our practices, clarifying things, etc. "Chemical munitions will not be used against peaceful protests" sort of thing. Well, no shit, we never did.

    I spent over a decade on our version of a riot squad (it was more then that, also including NBC response, missing person searches, a third string version of SWAT, and basically anything that required coordinated squads to do) mostly as a patrolman and then for awhile as a sergeant. I had some nagging injuries and did not feel physically capable of continuing in my role at least temporarily. I felt I was likely to be a liability at some point and when on inactive status before the George Floyd stuff. I was a squad leader for mobile field force when things kicked off, but wasn't in the heat of anything, my old unit was. I saw officers getting charged for doing thing within policy and rioters not getting charged. I saw another squad sergeant put on admin leave for no good reason and investigated for criminal charges. I turned in my riot gear shortly thereafter and left permanently. Well, 'in good standing' means I can go back any time by asking, but it's permanent. I no longer recommend it to my younger officers.

    Frankly, I'm more willing to risk my life then I am a prison sentence. If I get killed, at least my family is taken care of. I think the pendulum will swing eventually, but for now that risk has to be calculated by each officer and supervisor on the line when "mostly peaceful" isn't.
    Sorta around sometimes for some of your shitty mod needs.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •