Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n
If you were holding police unions to the same standard, you would condemn the MPD police union and others. You have not.
Well, what I've posted there is something I've been pointing out ITT and others too. I hadn't thought about nurse unions though. I also don't think I said nurse or other public sector unions are racist, ageist or discriminatory towards any protected category either, so I don't see why is it that I'm holding both to a double standard.
Their attitude is of course nefarious for society, but does
moral grandstanding in this matter (and many others) solve anything? Abolishing public sector unions isn't a good idea (in the same way abolishing the police, or abolishing nursing, isn't either), just like some of their behaviors can be damaging for society, they
do play a positive role in other instances. But as usual, giving them too much power will simply make them do what everyone else does if in the same position: Advance their own interests at the expense of everyone else's if necessary.
Private sector unions do the same, and so do their employers, if they are in a position that allows them to. The only difference is that public sector unions do so at the taxpayer's expense, and that it may be damaging to services that are particularly sensitive for the population which can often be government-run natural monopolies (or services where leaving them to the private sector can be problematic, e.g. administering justice and law enforcement), as such, it particularly rubs me and many people in the wrong way when this happens. But police unions are simply one example among others, whose behavior takes the form it takes as a result of the nature of their activity (i.e. using force to enforce the law).
Pants-of-dog wrote:Have they released the bodycam footage yet?
No as far as I'm aware.
. 
- By QatzelOk
- By ingliz
- By Ronaldo_