Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
MontyPython

Even The "Peaceful Protesters" Are Wrong This Time

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Joe the Pagan

Will the protest cause the authorities to charge the officer with a higher crime?  Then when the jury finds him innocent of the higher crime protest again.  When a lower charge would have returned a guilty verdict. 

  • Agree (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jax
3 minutes ago, Ladybird said:

Yes..This is not just about one incident and not exclusively about shootings and death. And I don't know if it has escaped anyone's attention, but it seems when officers are brought to accountability, it is usually after loud and sustained protests. Also video helps (though not with Rodney King). Recently Will Smith noted that it's not that racism is on the rise, it's just that now it's filmed.

And for the record,  I was appalled by what I saw so I marched with the protestors, and as I've mentioned in other thread, volunteered for the cleanup after the anarchists and criminals took advantage.

I think a lot of people were appalled by what they saw. And they don't feel it's enough to just post a comment about it on social media and move on to the next thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython
Posted (edited)
58 minutes ago, Jax said:

It's only misplaced, though, if it's narrowly defined as being solely about justice (in the legal/criminal sense) in this singular case. And if you believe the justice begins and ends at an arrest/charge. Yes. The officers have been charged. That's not a guarantee that justice will ultimately be served here (though we can certainly hope it is.) Keep in mind that many have lost faith (or have never had it) in the system itself. Pressure is being brought to bear on the system to ensure that it does work properly. And on law enforcement in general to take another look at standards, policies, and whether bad apples are getting a pass.  

Also keep in mind that many law enforcement agencies/officers are PARTICIPATING in the peaceful protests -- not just policing them. We've got police chiefs and officers marching WITH protesters, not just patrolling them. 

I didn't think you were calling all the protesters "bad people." I'm fully aware you're able to distinguish between people marching and carrying signs and people busting out windows and setting fires. ;) But you've implied that these thousands of people -- from differing demographics/backgrounds/locales -- are behaving irrationally. 

I would submit that just because you don't share their rationale(s) doesn't automatically render them irrational. 

And the admiration runs in both directions. I figure we've been civilly discussing (sometimes agreeing, sometimes not) topics for nigh on 20 years now. Always a pleasure. :)

"It's only misplaced, though, if it's narrowly defined as being solely about justice (in the legal/criminal sense) in this singular case."

But that's precisely the point: This is a singular case. It simply doesn't represent a "pattern" of cases. It's not "systemic". Therefore only the specific details that relate to this specific case are the crux of the biscuit (Kudos to anybody who can pinpoint the source of the phrase "crux of the biscuit", LOL.)

"And if you believe the justice begins and ends at an arrest/charge. Yes. The officers have been charged. That's not a guarantee that justice will ultimately be served here (though we can certainly hope it is.)"

But once again, that's exactly my point: WHEN justice HAS been proven to have failed (i.e. the rogue cop gets off scot-free) THEN by all means protest. At THAT point there's a REASON to protest. There has actually BEEN a legal travesty, a failure of justice. This time it just doesn't apply because the protesters haven't ALLOWED justice to be served. They haven't ALLOWED justice to even run its course. They are protesting BEFORE they know whether or not justice will be served. Sorry, but I just can't condone that.

"Keep in mind that many have lost faith (or have never had it) in the system itself. Pressure is being brought to bear on the system to ensure that it does work properly. And on law enforcement in general to take another look at standards, policies, and whether bad apples are getting a pass."

And again, briefly: Wait until he actually GETS a pass before protesting that he GOT a pass.

"I didn't think you were calling all the protesters "bad people." I'm fully aware you're able to distinguish between people marching and carrying signs and people busting out windows and setting fires. ;) But you've implied that these thousands of people -- from differing demographics/backgrounds/locales -- are behaving irrationally."

Sorry if this seems too abrupt or offensive:

Yup, because they ARE behaving irrationally.

"I would submit that just because you don't share their rationale(s) doesn't automatically render them irrational."

And with all due respect, I disagree.

"And the admiration runs in both directions. I figure we've been civilly discussing (sometimes agreeing, sometimes not) topics for nigh on 20 years now. Always a pleasure."

:hug:

 

Edited by MontyPython

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jax

I'll have to catch you later tonight or tomorrow, Monty. Thanks, as always. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython
8 minutes ago, Jax said:

I'll have to catch you later tonight or tomorrow, Monty. Thanks, as always. 

:2up:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MontyPython
5 minutes ago, Buckwheat Jones said:

One of the things about this that is very disturbing to me is the jump to racism.  I have seen no evidence that this cop was a racist. I have seen evidence that he is an assh*le. But the first thing that gets people up off the couch is race. That’s an assumption that lead to murders and looting. People have told me “well...you just KNOW that’s what it’s about,” and “you have to understand people are gonna pop if they’re treated badly over a long period of time.”

I dont accept the former but understand the latter. And if you feel the need to protest, I get that too. But jumping to the conclusion that it was about race, with the limited information available right now, is lazy and has been dangerous.  Not just the loss of life and property but the loss of order.  If these people can throw such violent tantrums without penalty, why should anybody else follow law?

*DING*DING*DING*

VERY well put, Buckwheat.

+1

:2up:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gravelrash

I agree with Monty's overall point about the protests. When I saw one protestor carrying a sign "Trump is murderer", well, no surprise there.

 

By the by, how many police or secret service agents were shot or stabbed by protestors in Michigan? Or had bricks thrown through their windows for shouting support? Or felt compelled to post a "Minority-owned business, please don't loot" sign? Only to be looted.  There seems to be a right and a "left" way to peaceably assemble as guaranteed by the First Amendment.

  • Agree (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gravelrash
21 minutes ago, Buckwheat Jones said:

One of the things about this that is very disturbing to me is the jump to racism.  I have seen no evidence that this cop was a racist. I have seen evidence that he is an assh*le. But the first thing that gets people up off the couch is race. That’s an assumption that lead to murders and looting. People have told me “well...you just KNOW that’s what it’s about,” and “you have to understand people are gonna pop if they’re treated badly over a long period of time.”

I dont accept the former but understand the latter. And if you feel the need to protest, I get that too. But jumping to the conclusion that it was about race, with the limited information available right now, is lazy and has been dangerous.  Not just the loss of life and property but the loss of order.  If these people can throw such violent tantrums without penalty, why should anybody else follow law?

Calling it now.  Something will be revealed either about the cop or Greg Floyd that will make the public say WTF or squirm. It's already known that they have a connection even in passing as co-workers at a restaurant/night club.

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buckwheat Jones

The other night the cops arrested a small number of people for looting in St. Louis. The prosecuting attorney is Kim Gardner who has had an adversarial relationship with the police ever since they pulled her over for a traffic violation In January . She refused to charge the looters because of a lack of “sufficient” evidence. Now the police arrested these people because they saw these people doing illegal things. But Gardner kicked them all loose because there wasn’t evidence. What kind of evidence are you going to collect in the middle of a riot other than what the cops see? 

I guess it’s good to be a rioter when no witnesses will come forward because they’re rioting too and you can’t trust the police because of “systemic racism.”

she already said she won’t accept cases from a large number of particular cops

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/st-louis-prosecutor-says-she-will-no-longer-accept-cases-from-28-city-police-officers/article_6d8def16-d08d-5e9a-80ba-f5f5446b7b6a.amp.html

 

This pretty much relegates about 30 city cops to meter maids. So I don’t know if that’s systemic racism, but it is a systemic problem.

 

  • Best Post (+1) 1
  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Confessor
4 hours ago, That_Guy said:

Any conclusions about groups of people which are based on arrest statistics are fundamentally flawed.

Any conclusions about police officers based on the actions of less than 1% of all officers are fundamentally flawed... which leads me to say:

Any statements made by some_people are fundamentally flawed, or just plain BS. 
 

 

  • Agree (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ticked@TinselTown
1 hour ago, Buckwheat Jones said:

The other night the cops arrested a small number of people for looting in St. Louis. The prosecuting attorney is Kim Gardner who has had an adversarial relationship with the police ever since they pulled her over for a traffic violation In January . She refused to charge the looters because of a lack of “sufficient” evidence. Now the police arrested these people because they saw these people doing illegal things. But Gardner kicked them all loose because there wasn’t evidence. What kind of evidence are you going to collect in the middle of a riot other than what the cops see? 

I guess it’s good to be a rioter when no witnesses will come forward because they’re rioting too and you can’t trust the police because of “systemic racism.”

she already said she won’t accept cases from a large number of particular cops

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/st-louis-prosecutor-says-she-will-no-longer-accept-cases-from-28-city-police-officers/article_6d8def16-d08d-5e9a-80ba-f5f5446b7b6a.amp.html

 

This pretty much relegates about 30 city cops to meter maids. So I don’t know if that’s systemic racism, but it is a systemic problem.

 

Reparations, one day at a time.

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ticked@TinselTown
3 hours ago, Jax said:

I think a lot of people were appalled by what they saw. And they don't feel it's enough to just post a comment about it on social media and move on to the next thing. 

Being appalled is one thing. 

Canonizing the victim to further a larger agenda is another. 

What we are seeing in the streets is an example of that.  There was a banner on the MSN homepage that took a phrase from the eulogy given at Floyd's funeral that said ' you changed the world'.

Can you tell me what Mr. Floyd did that changed the world?  What did HE do? He was a victim of an a**hole cop who went off the deep end. It was a tragedy and the guilty parties are going to be prosecuted, which is more than I can say for the majority of other violent crimes in this country.

Does that mean that every victim henceforth will also 'change the world'? 

Will the streets be filled with protestors, rioters and looters for each of them as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JerryL
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Buckwheat Jones said:

One of the things about this that is very disturbing to me is the jump to racism.  I have seen no evidence that this cop was a racist. I have seen evidence that he is an assh*le. But the first thing that gets people up off the couch is race. That’s an assumption that lead to murders and looting. People have told me “well...you just KNOW that’s what it’s about,” and “you have to understand people are gonna pop if they’re treated badly over a long period of time.”

I dont accept the former but understand the latter. And if you feel the need to protest, I get that too. But jumping to the conclusion that it was about race, with the limited information available right now, is lazy and has been dangerous.  Not just the loss of life and property but the loss of order.  If these people can throw such violent tantrums without penalty, why should anybody else follow law?

This is one of the things that I have been pointing out both here and on other forums.  Where is the link to racism?  The 4 cops present were racially diverse.  The chief of police is black.  The city and state are solidly Democrat, who we all know are oh sooooo tolerant and inclusive.  :sarcasm:  When I watched the video, I was most struck by the arrogant and uncaring face of the Asian guy.  It looked to me like another case of bad policing.  Just because a white officer was committed a heinous act does not mean that the act was racist in nature.

I watched, yesterday, a video by Candace Owens.  She pretty much agrees with Monty.  She talks about the myth of systemic racism in policing.  She also talks about Mr. Floyd.  She condemns the actions of the police...as has literally ( :) Monty!) everyone...and states clearly that he was wrong and that Mr. Floyd should not have died.  But she then investigates Mr. Floyd and questions his canonization.  He had been to prison 5 times.  Once was for an armed robbery where he held a gun to a pregnant (black) woman's belly and threatened to kill her baby if she didn't cooperate.  She states that both autopsies, including the family's, show that he was high on meth and fentanyl at the time of his arrest.  She questions raising up this person as a symbol for anything.  Link

I personally believe that we have problem with policing in the US.  Too many police seem to feel that they are above the law.  I did not say or imply all.  But, instances like this and the petty trampling of rights are getting too frequent to be ignored.   If you want to protest that, I will be right with you.  If it turns out that the cop that killed Floyd did so because he is a racist and would have treated another perp in the same situation differently, then I would protest that with them, as well.  However, I will NEVER "understand" or "accept" the actions of the looters or the rioters.  Their actions have NOTHING to do with Mr. Floyd and his tragic death.

Edited by JerryL
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Best Post (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ticked@TinselTown
5 minutes ago, JerryL said:

This is one of the things that I have been pointing out both here and on other forums.  Where is the link to racism?  The 4 cops present were racially diverse.  The chief of police is black.  The city and state are solidly Democrat, who we all know are oh sooooo tolerant and inclusive.  :sarcasm:  When I watched the video, I was most struck by the arrogant and uncaring face of the Asian guy.  It looked to me like another case of bad policing.  Just because a white officer was committed a heinous act does not mean that the act was racist in nature.

I watched, yesterday, a video by Candace Owens.  She pretty much agrees with Monty.  She talks about the myth of systemic racism in policing.  She also talks about Mr. Floyd.  She condemns the actions of the police...as has literally ( :) Monty!) everyone...and states clearly that he was wrong and that Mr. Floyd should not have died.  But she then investigates Mr. Floyd and questions his canonization.  He had been to prison 5 times.  Once was for an armed robbery where he held a gun to a pregnant (black) woman's belly and threatened to kill her baby if she didn't cooperate.  She states that both autopsies, including the family's, show that he was high on meth and fentanyl at the time of his arrest.  She questions raising up this person as a symbol for anything.  Link

I personally believe that we have problem with policing in the US.  Too many police seem to feel that they are above the law.  I did not say or imply all.  But, instances like this and the petty trampling of rights are getting too frequent to be ignored.   If you want to protest that, I will be right with you.  If it turns out that the cop that killed Floyd did so because he is a racist and would have treated another perp in the same situation differently, then I would protest that with them, as well.  However, I will NEVER "understand" or "accept" the actions of the looters or the rioters.  Their actions have NOTHING to do with Mr. Floyd and his tragic death.

BLMM = $$$

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Howsithangin
12 hours ago, That_Guy said:

Any conclusions about groups of people which are based on arrest statistics are fundamentally flawed.

Use conviction stats instead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Howsithangin
10 hours ago, Ladybird said:

 Recently Will Smith noted that it's not that racism is on the rise, it's just that now it's filmed.

Agreed.  Now if we can only convince the democrat party and their media of this fact

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Howsithangin

Correct: they weren't social distancing! :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ticked@TinselTown
2 hours ago, Howsithangin said:

Agreed.  Now if we can only convince the democrat party and their media of this fact

Aren't they the ones packaging it for maximum value?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zurg

Overall, I agree with Monty’s point and with those who’ve expanded on it (Buck, Jerry, etc.). When the incident happened, it really for once seemed to be a non-brainer that police action was cruel, callous, and maybe even murderous. It seemed like everyone in the world agreed that this was the case. It’s like we were all nodding our heads, yes indeed, 5x8=40. 
 

So. Next? March and riot??? What the ....? Who are you protesting and rioting against? Those 4 guys? The Minneapolis police department? Why are you protesting when we all know that 5x8=40? Fine, go ahead, protest. But do people really think the protesting and rioting and other deaths (including police officers who had absolutely, provably, zero to do with the neck stomping tactic employed) and destruction have been a reasonable and proportional response? No. Of course they’re not. That’s sheer lunacy. The marches are a totally misplaced response to this particular event. That cannot be argued. 
 

Which brings me to Jax’s point. I think I understand what she’s saying. Or, better stated, this is how I understand her point. You don’t get a lot of opportunity as a nation, as a crowd, to make a point. And the timing of the point you end up making, when you gather large masses, is never exactly right for the occasion. And because of the perception that people have (misplaced as it likely is, as Monty has argued), they wanted to make their point. Fine - let people speak and make their point. Was it worth it? Did the marchers realize and care that their marching enabled the Antifa and criminal elements to also do their thing? Do the protesters understand that without their marches, the bad elements had no game? Do the marchers realize that now THEY also must carry part of the burden of deaths of innocents and destruction of properties/businesses? Did they achieve a positive result? Ironically, the jury is out on that one. It is far from an obvious success. 
 

I’ll finish off more cheerfully by referring to TG’s points. As usual, he’s got only an anti-white message, that he pretzels into calling non-racist. He’s only got his very own black perspective that he thinks deserves elevation above all others. That is the only card on the table for him, and he won’t engage in dialogue as Jax would prefer, even as he piggybacks on Jax’s point in a presumptuous attempt to make it seem like she agrees with him. It’s more hilarious than it it pitiful, although it’s both. 

  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bad_Apple

I just want to know why all the BLM folks and protesters never address the other elephant in the room. You know the race that actually kills the most young Black Men. Not a peep or protest ever. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BootsieBets
16 hours ago, gravelrash said:

I agree with Monty's overall point about the protests. When I saw one protestor carrying a sign "Trump is murderer", well, no surprise there.

 

By the by, how many police or secret service agents were shot or stabbed by protestors in Michigan? Or had bricks thrown through their windows for shouting support? Or felt compelled to post a "Minority-owned business, please don't loot" sign? Only to be looted.  There seems to be a right and a "left" way to peaceably assemble as guaranteed by the First Amendment.

Yes, I just posted an answer to Lisa saying that the protests of the lock downs were peaceful and never broke down into riots.  Everyone went home, no one started fires, looted the Walgreens or the Apple store. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That_Guy
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, Ladybird said:

I was appalled by what I saw so I marched with the protestors, and as I've mentioned in other thread, volunteered for the cleanup after the anarchists and criminals took advantage.

 

17 hours ago, Jax said:

I think a lot of people were appalled by what they saw. And they don't feel it's enough to just post a comment about it on social media and move on to the next thing. 

There is most certainly a need for allies among the population majority; and it would be great to count you as one because from my experience doing this work the most important conversations happen between/among people who are in the population majority (and outside of the presence of any people of color) since they're much more likely to/be persuaded by someone who looks like them and shares their cultural experience in some way.

It's uncomfortable at times, but being an ally means calling out falsehoods like this:

17 hours ago, MontyPython said:

"It's only misplaced, though, if it's narrowly defined as being solely about justice (in the legal/criminal sense) in this singular case."

But that's precisely the point: This is a singular case. It simply doesn't represent a "pattern" of cases. It's not "systemic". Therefore only the specific details that relate to this specific case are the crux of the biscuit (Kudos to anybody who can pinpoint the source of the phrase "crux of the biscuit", LOL.)

"And if you believe the justice begins and ends at an arrest/charge. Yes. The officers have been charged. That's not a guarantee that justice will ultimately be served here (though we can certainly hope it is.)"

But once again, that's exactly my point: WHEN justice HAS been proven to have failed (i.e. the rogue cop gets off scot-free) THEN by all means protest. At THAT point there's a REASON to protest. There has actually BEEN a legal travesty, a failure of justice. This time it just doesn't apply because the protesters haven't ALLOWED justice to be served. They haven't ALLOWED justice to even run its course. They are protesting BEFORE they know whether or not justice will be served. Sorry, but I just can't condone that.

There is, in fact, a pattern of disparate enforcement of the same laws on different groups of people by police in the United States; and the fact that the actions of former-officers Derek Chauvin, Tou Thao, Alexander Kueng, and Thomas Lane were deemed sufficient for them to lose their jobs, but not their freedom, was an actual failure of justice.

This isn't one of those "agree to disagree" issues, this is literally life-and-death.

Edited by That_Guy
  • Disagree (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mjperry51
16 hours ago, Buckwheat Jones said:

So I don’t know if that’s systemic racism, but it is a systemic problem.

It's systemic stupidity -- She IS the system. . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BootsieBets
1 hour ago, Bad_Apple said:

I just want to know why all the BLM folks and protesters never address the other elephant in the room. You know the race that actually kills the most young Black Men. Not a peep or protest ever. 

George Floyd’s death should not have happened, but I wonder – does anyone here know the names of the 10 black people in Chicago who also died on Memorial weekend?  No?  Of course not, because their black lives don’t matter if the left can’t use them for a power play.   

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...