[Hindsite]

What is your racist point? You just keep doubling down on blaming the victims. Now you are saying that black leaders are incompetent because they are black.

They are incompetent because they are Democrats.

[SpecialOlympian]

Why won't black people support me and my racist party that openly hates them? The Republicans have so much to offer them. Such as:

-(Editor's note: come up with reasons to put here)
-Herman Cain? Maybe?
-

And more!

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

1. Well, according to the current system, the cop is perfectly within his rights to drop his bodycam and kill an unarmed black person. After all, the cops who did exactly that are not only walking free, but are still cops.

2. That source sucks and os so vague that it does not support your claim. Except where it talks about constables, which actually supports my claim and contradicts yours.

3. How does a cop afford $750,000 bail?

[wat0n]

@wat0n

1. Well, according to the current system, the cop is perfectly within his rights to drop his bodycam and kill an unarmed black person. After all, the cops who did exactly that are not only walking free, but are still cops.

Which is why such behavior needs to be banned. It's no different from turning them off or otherwise tampering with them. In a couple of states (Illinois and Oklahoma) it's a felony to tamper with CCTVs and similar security equipment. Tampering with police-held bodycams could be considered to be in this category, along with a form of obstruction of justice.

And if the cops are walking free is simply because the DA lacked evidence to prosecute (or so he thinks). If so then the issue is to make sure this is not something cops can argue, which is entirely possible thanks to modern technology.

But I guess that in your view lynch mobs are better and people should be jailed because "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", which is how presumption of innocence is demolished. Although of course doing away with such presumption is not fun when applied against minorities in the Southern US circa 1925 or communists in Chile circa 1975.

2. That source sucks and os so vague that it does not support your claim. Except where it talks about constables, which actually supports my claim and contradicts yours.

Cherry-picking much? Constables had a supervisory role but were not professional police.

3. How does a cop afford $750,000 bail?

What does this have to do with the topic?

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

Nice strawman.

Back to the topic:

1. You can talk as much as you like about what “should” happen. The fact is that the cops found themselves innocent, and the DA did too. That is what did happen.

2. If your only rebuttal is to accuse me of cherry picking, go ahead. It does not change the fact that it has very little detail, and does not even discuss the rattle watch of NYC, nor does it discuss when the Boston Watch did start getting paid.

3. Three of Mr. Floyd’s killers are out on bail, at the steep price of $750,000. How did they afford it? That is more than ten times their salary over ten years.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

Nice strawman.

Not a strawman.

Back to the topic:

1. You can talk as much as you like about what “should” happen. The fact is that the cops found themselves innocent, and the DA did too. That is what did happen.

Nope, the DA didn't indict. The DA considered there was not enough evidence to successfully prosecute, which is not the same as saying the DA found them not to be guilty. In fact, the DA could believe they are guilty yet still not prosecute if he believes there is no evidence to prove so beyond reasonable doubt.

Now that is an actual strawman!

2. If your only rebuttal is to accuse me of cherry picking, go ahead. It does not change the fact that it has very little detail, and does not even discuss the rattle watch of NYC, nor does it discuss when the Boston Watch did start getting paid.

What is it there to rebute? The source also mentions they were paid (just like even today you can hire security on your own), so that's a rather poor red herring.

3. Three of Mr. Floyd’s killers are out on bail, at the steep price of $750,000. How did they afford it? That is more than ten times their salary over ten years.

https://nypost.com/2020/06/11/george-fl ... 750k-bail/

[Drlee]

BLM is for getting Democrats elected while obscuring the fact that the problems affecting the black community come mostly from Democrat party politicians and the police forces and justice system they command.

Come on now. I expect far better trolling from you.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

1. You can split hairs as much as you wish, but it does not change the fact that the DA let the cops off for killing someone. And all of your ideas about what “should” happen do not change that fact either.

2. As long as we agree that policing in the northern states began in a period when slavery was legal, and therefore the roots of Us policing are racist.

3. Quote the relevant text. Specifically, how did the most recently freed murderer get it?

[wat0n]

@wat0n

1. You can split hairs as much as you wish, but it does not change the fact that the DA let the cops off for killing someone.

Understanding why that happened, and also that this isn't quite over either, is important to make improvements.

And all of your ideas about what “should” happen do not change that fact either.

It does, because it helps clarify where the problem is (lack of monitoring) and how to fix it (make it harder for government employees to prevent being monitored).

2. As long as we agree that policing in the northern states began in a period when slavery was legal, and therefore the roots of Us policing are racist.

Then no, we don't agree. But I guess cherry-picking is easier.

3. Quote the relevant text. Specifically, how did the most recently freed murderer get it?

Why don't you quote it yourself if you want to argue something? So far it says they set up a GoFundMe page, although there are no more firm details beyond that.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

1. The improvements you suggest would punish the police for dropping their cameras, but let them off the hook for the killing of Elijah McClain.

2. Well, anyone can look at the evidence.

3. I find it interesting that police who kill people can get public support for bail. This undermines the argument that popular elections will act as a method of accountability for DAs and cops, since a significant portion of the public supports cops killing unarmed black people.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

1. The improvements you suggest would punish the police for dropping their cameras, but let them off the hook for the killing of Elijah McClain.

Yet they would prevent these things from happening again.

2. Well, anyone can look at the evidence.

Sure, including the fact that policing was wholly unprofessional and a side job before modern PDs were set up.

3. I find it interesting that police who kill people can get public support for bail. This undermines the argument that popular elections will act as a method of accountability for DAs and cops, since a significant portion of the public supports cops killing unarmed black people.

Why? George Floyd's family raised a lot more money in less time through a GoFundMe.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

1. No, the use of body cams would not have prevented Elijah McClain’s murder. We know this because there were bosy cams and he is dead at the hands of murdering police officers.

2. No, Boston had full-time, paid law enforcement officers by 1712.

3. The fact that people also helped pay for a funeral does not, in any way, contradict my point. More interesting is the fact that two of Mr, Floyd’s killers got the money together without crowd funding. Can you think of any way that a cop can make that kind of money? Other than a corrupt cop, I mean.

[wat0n]

@wat0n

1. No, the use of body cams would not have prevented Elijah McClain’s murder. We know this because there were bosy cams and he is dead at the hands of murdering police officers.

Even if so, there would be much stronger evidence to prosecute if the bodycams had filmed the procedure. Furthermore, as I said, they may not prevent all unjustified use of force but they are shown to reduce its use.

2. No, Boston had full-time, paid law enforcement officers by 1712.

So far what I found is that they only worked on night shifts and were not professional (indeed, they were rather ineffective):

These early watchmen, like their counterparts in England at the time, were very lazy and inept. Minor offenders were sometimes sentenced to serve the watch as punishment. Often called leather heads, these guards were so dull that the towns had to sometimes formalize even the most simplest duties. New Haven, in 1722, had the regulation that "no watchman will have the liberty to sleep"; and a 1750 Boston rule stipulated that "watchmen will walk their rounds slowly and now and then stand and listen".

And from the same book:

The first full-time (vocational), salaried, consolidated day- and nighttime police force in the United States developed in New York City in 1844. A number of cities combined they day and night watches throughout the late 1800s. Baltimore and Newark combined their watches around 1847. Boston followed suit in 1850, as did Providence in 1864. Full-time municipal police forces took a bit longer to emerge

3. The fact that people also helped pay for a funeral does not, in any way, contradict my point. More interesting is the fact that two of Mr, Floyd’s killers got the money together without crowd funding. Can you think of any way that a cop can make that kind of money? Other than a corrupt cop, I mean.

No idea about how the other two did, corruption is a possibility indeed.

Also, $11M would be quite an expensive funeral.

[Drlee]

Also, $11M would be quite an expensive funeral.

What would you take for the life of your father? Only $10 million? How about $3.96 and a bottle of beer?

[wat0n]

What would you take for the life of your father? Only $10 million? How about $3.96 and a bottle of beer?

They fact they raised that sort of money shows the extent of public sympathy towards the Floyd family.

PS: I decided to heavily tone my response down. Maybe instead of trying to imply stupid stuff about my character, you could try to actually address the arguments.

[Drlee]

They fact they raised that sort of money shows the extent of public sympathy towards the Floyd family.

Yes it does. And it says absolutely nothing about the family and nothing about their being mostly black. So why did you mention it?

[wat0n]

Yes it does. And it says absolutely nothing about the family and nothing about their being mostly black. So why did you mention it?

You will have to ask PoD why did he mention the money was raised for the funeral. As far as I'm concerned, I think they could have presented other reasons (e.g. for paying for a lawyer, for instance) and the response would have been similar.

[Pants-of-dog]

@wat0n

1. Your speculations are irrelevant. Mr. McClain’s death shows that even the most innocent black person can be killed by police recording it on body cams, and the system still lets them off. And even if we accept that body cams reduce force, there is no acceptable level of u justified force.

2. You can split hairs as much as you want. Facts are that policing and laws were already started at least a century before abolition came to the northern states.

3. I never made a claim about a funeral. Yes, it is a distinct possibility that the cops are corrupt. What are the chances of the cops investigating where the money came from?

[Hindsite]

@Pants-of-dog

1. Your speculations are irrelevant.

2. Irrelevant.

3. All the money came from donations. But that is irrelevant too.

4. The relevant facts are that George Floyd was an ex-convict recently released from prison and was being arrested for a crime and refused to obey by resisting the police orders to get into the police squad car. Unfortunately, in an attempt to get "Big" George to comply, the controlling forces by the police officer's knee on this criminal's neck along with the pressure on the back by another police officer lasted a bit too long.

[annatar1914]

@Hindsite ;

The relevant facts are that George Floyd was an ex-convict recently released from prison

So he did his time, and should have the benefit of a doubt in treating him as a regular member of society. A man pays for what he does, and that should be the end of it.

and was being arrested for a crime

Innocent until proven guilty.

and refused to obey by resisting the police orders to get into the police squad car.

They say, right? Let's just let the facts play out in court and see what really happened. I'm interested in what can be seen from the cameras the police wear these days, the footage hasn't been released yet.

Unfortunately, in an attempt to get "Big" George to comply, the controlling forces by the police officer's knee on this criminal's neck along with the pressure on the back by another police officer lasted a bit too long.

A knee to the neck is not a good compliance measure. I understand that he might have been high, etc... Doesn't make what was done to him right. Have some compassion, and understand that just because your partisan enemies are on one side of this doesn't automatically make them wrong. Same with them, too. Follow the truth not the political bickering making hay out of a man's death that both sides are wrong about to a degree.