Can’t say everything in 600 words but

Solving the Floyd problem:

The agreements that have built up over the years, such things as qualified immunity for the police and other inequalities before the law, are specifically there in order to release the police from those same responsibilities in the exercise of those powers. That’s what unions are for, of course, to privilege union members — which is why we must not have them in the police force.

Getting rid of these special arrangements means getting rid of the unions that negotiate them. That might only be a start, but it’s a necessary precondition. Abolishing police unions would be the first step in moving police forces away from their position as legally privileged occupying powers back to what they ought to be — just the citizenry in uniform serving the society they are a part of.

73 thoughts on “Can’t say everything in 600 words but”

  1. Fair do’s. But I think you’d have to do it in concert with abolishing a lot of law. If you want policing by consent, you do have to have consent. There’s a subtle difference between law & order. Preserving order is regulating the behaviour of citizens with the each other. There’s a presumed general consent to that. But a lot of law is the gub’ment telling the citizens what & what not to do. With no assumed consent whatsoever. Which is why you have the laws. And police with more powers than a citizen in uniform to enforce them.

  2. Yes. But what’s perhaps the most interesting part of this. When discussing with the editor what I should write about for this week this was their suggestion. Not “write about this, this way” but more “what about police unions then?”

    That an editor suggests a topic in this manner means that it’s already something being thought about, talked of. That they ask an obvious outsider to write about it shows that it’s not mainstream as yet, but it’s out there, already being considered.

  3. “By consent” is all fine and dandy in normal circumstances but when there is XR/Antifa/riots/looting et al., you need sjamboks and rubber bullets.

  4. A problem very prevalent in the USA and UK, and probably everywhere else, is that the quality of policemen is so shit. They are not on your side, they protect their own, they are almost universally thick, they have become unbearably woke to the point it destroys their effectiveness, they mostly run away from the unfolding crime rather than towards it, I could go on. The police deserve little respect for the most part. I’m a middle aged white person. I don’t feel they will support me – I feel they will take delight in harassing me. They have lost my trust and respect. I am not alone in this regard. IN the UK and the USA the police need fundamental reform and much higher standards of recruitment and training and the ability to get fired for being shit. Introducing an officer class as per the armed services might be a sensible start.

  5. Yes Jussi. But consent’s not all one side of the street. I’d imagine your average citizen’s response to the rioting, looting & destruction of private property we’ve seen on TV the last few days would be to hose the vermin down with with heavy machine guns. It’s gub’ment law prevents citizens doing that themselves. ANTIFA only exists because it can hide behind police protection

  6. “Introducing an officer class as per the armed services might be a sensible start.”

    It might, but I fear you’d simply get a cadre of criminology graduates at the top engaging in the competitive pieties of wokeness. Oh wait…

  7. hmm. I agree in theory with police are just joe public in uniform. In practice if Joe public happens across a crim doing crim things there’s a chance Joe’d do diddely squat. He has his safety to consider, he may be injured, may face reprisals, he may also be uncertain about the law. A policeman has a duty to intervene, they don’t get the no i’d rather not option. So there’s a difference for one. And another practical difference is, however much it can be mitigated with training, if you fight people daily for a living, doesn’t the law of averages mean that it’s going to go wrong sometimes? So what do you do with that knowledge?

  8. Hallowed Be said:
    “A policeman has a duty to intervene, they don’t get the no i’d rather not option.”

    Golly, where have you been living? Or when?

  9. The Meissen Bison

    I concur with Patrick – the police used to be able to count on the support of the generally law-abiding whereas now the generally law-abiding are the soft target of police activity into ill-advised tweets and goodness knows what all else.

    They pounce with considerable swagger on the most modest individual infringements but scuttle off behind risk-assessments when there’s real policing to be done.

  10. Henry Crun,

    Just for you, they should rename New Scotland Yard, John Vorster Square, make sure the upper windows can be opened and ensure a plentiful supply of bars of soap at the top of staircases.

    I’m reminded of the observation, only partly in jest, that the Brixton Murder and Robbery Squad was not a title but a job description.

  11. Why stop at police unions? Scrap all public sector unions.

    Realpolitik question: is easier to pick off the public-sector unions one-by-one, or take them all out in a single shot?

  12. Brixton Murder and Robbery Squad

    DocBud, weren’t they the guys in the radio show Squad Cars? Or was that before your time in SA?

  13. @Andrew M

    All at once. In November. Cold and dark means that they’re less likely to go outside and make trouble while on strike. Would need to organise calling up TA to cover fire services just in case strikers got arson-y but that’s about it.

  14. Hallowed Be: “A policeman has a duty to intervene, they don’t get the no i’d rather not option.”

    A rather naïve view these days.

    As Crimebodge points out Plod investigates complaints against Plod and produces only acres of whitewash. Nor are the “Crime Commissioners” and that hierarchy use or ornament (were they creatures of Bliar or his heir Camoron? It blurs). They just consume money.

    Police in Scotland were formed into a national force so Scottish National socialist Party could better control and force CM on them.

    And Common Purpose shot through all forces.

    Farting about with “Unions” –which have probably the least to do with the present mess–is daft in the face of all the above. Unions aren’t responsible for a cunt like Cressida Dick not just keeping her job but floating like a turd.

    It sounds like some half-baked old- time Tory knee-jerk than a credible plan to reign in and reform Plod.

    Jail time for Treason May would be a better move and would put the shits up legions of cop suckers everywhere.

    Oh and BTW –no point in buckling the coppers and leaving shite like the CPS unmolested.

  15. Where you have a monopsonist purchaser of labour (in this case the state) there is a strong argument in favour of unions to protect the workforce.
    We should not *abolish* public sector unions but we *should* ban closed shops, full-time union representatives paid by the employer, special privileges, deduction of union subscriptions from pay packets, voting on union matters by union-sponsored MPs …

  16. Connected:
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/02/first-person-watching-trump-stand-outside-church-tear-gassed/

    The headline “First person: ‘Watching Trump stand outside the church as he tear-gassed protesters reminded me of the Middle East’ “is of course a straight lie. Trump was not standing outside a church tear gassing protesters.
    Protestors?
    “Dozens of shops down Fifth Avenue were ransacked as demonstrators smashed their way through stores boarded up because of the coronavirus lockdown.

    The 8,000 officers were no match for the organised hordes, who had come with duffel bags and getaway cars.”

    No those are not demonstrators. Unless they’re demonstrating how to loot shops & businesses and get away with it.

    A policeman who was just a citizen in uniform would shoot looters, wouldn’t he? He wouldn’t just stand by & watch them loot. A policeman who was a citizen in uniform would preserve public order & the safety of private property whatever it took.

  17. I agree with Mr Ecks’ observation about common purpose being shot through all forces.

    Before tackling the unions why not start with removing Cressida D, Commander Coward and the next two levels of seniority across all forces. You never know, there may be many in the unions with unfashionably sensible attitudes to policing in the 21st century. Something along the lines of preventing and solving actual crimes as opposed to pursuing micro-aggressions and wearing rainbow nail polish.

    I will willingly accept a few bad apples at local level if the overall direction is positive (that wouldn’t be difficult considering the present clusterfeck which passes for policy).

  18. 8000 coppers couldn’t manage to do shite against a largely unarmed mob. Hell if they shot a load of scum the copses can hardly turn out for more looting over their own killings can they?

    Police were ordered to do nothing by leftist Mayors etc.

    Can Trump not order the arrest of at least the local Democrat leftist hierarchy on Federal charges? I think aiding and abetting Marxist mobs to loot and murder could be quite reasonably classed as treason or sedition.

  19. John77,
    What’s the evidence that, absent a union, the state would ride roughshod over public-sector workers’ rights?

  20. So Much For Subtlety

    It is a tragedy that the police are losing the support of the law abiding middle class. I agree that they have only brought it on themselves. They want to avoid bullying by the arseholes in the press and BBC so they have become politically correct. That might impress the Essex Uni student union but most of us would prefer they fought crime.

    The problem is that it is a difficult and dangerous job dealing with difficult and dangerous people. Who lie. Juries do not understand. The press does not understand. It is hard for police men to go to Court and explain to the utterly ignorant what their job entails. But we need them to do it.

    I would rather that they had our support. I do not even mind a little bit of legal immunity given the possibility for vexatious legal suits – look at the Squaddies in Iraq or NI. But to do that they have to be on our side. The side of law and order, not the side of policing tweets.

  21. So Much For Subtlety

    Someone in America said the problem with US policing was the civil service reforms that made police more professional but also more centralised. His solution was to return policing to the local ward bosses. They could appoint any policeman they liked. That would make them much more local.

    I don’t think we need to go that far. But we could change the training to a quasi-degree; a qualification, not a job. And copy Jersey where the policemen are elected. Locally. Then if people of an African persuasion want corrupt incompetent policemen who sell drugs on the side, and given Detroit they seem to, then they can have them. If Islington wants to police Facebook they can have that too.

    I would just say that compensation for criminal damage ought to be local too. So there is an annual levy raised to pay for the police and crime, locally.

  22. SMFS 9.27–You are once again heading back to your idea that alibis and innocence are a scam to stop justified accusations –no smoke without fire etc and you would not have been accused unless you were guilty. And your reliance on the belief that the likes of you will never be messed over by Plod or the system so we can drop those inconvenient safeguards etc. Old territory for you. And still just as dangerous for everybody–inc you.

    Wouldn’t it be supreme irony if your frequent absences from the blog were caused by you being inside.

  23. Perhaps the way to abolish unions for government employees is to start with those who are most recently and obviously mucking about.

    That means the teachers now. When people are commuting into London again it means the railway unions.

    But eventually, or perhaps simultaneously but more subtly, the police must have their turn. And the BMA too: we can’t exempt the middle classes, can we?

    There is one problem however. Though unions are a huge burden for the workers to bear, they do one task that’s surely wise to preserve. I refer to the “personal cases” where, for example, some jack-in-office bullies his underlings. Maybe the industrial tribunals system means that that union function is obsolete: I’m too out of touch with that world to have an opinion.

    Of course the best protection from bullies is to resign and work for someone else. But the employing company/bureaucracy would probably be better off if it had a cheap, effective way of handling such problems rather than bearing the costs of employees pissing off, and taking them to a tribunal on the way out.

    In the case of private and public companies that’s a job for the management: in the case of government employees it’s a job for the government. It should combine it with reforms that make it easier to sack the incompetent and lazy.

  24. Golly, where have you been living? Or when?
    Rather naive.

    so what’s the answer to the point i raised? Surely you’re not saying Police=public in uniform and consequently intervene with the same ratio as joe public. If that’s the case or should be the case in your view – not much need for a police force- just leave it to Joe.

    I’d grant a tendency in a target rich environment to triage things easy to accomplish, but it’s not obvious what that has to do with police duties versus privileges.

  25. So Much For Subtlety

    Mr Ecks June 3, 2020 at 9:52 am

    “You are once again heading back to your idea that alibis and innocence are a scam to stop justified accusations –no smoke without fire etc and you would not have been accused unless you were guilty.”

    It is clear that a lot of accusations are a scam. We have seen that repeatedly. Poor Lee Clegg went to prison. Again – look at the British soldiers from Iraq. The government’s independent panel just recommended 1,000 cases be dropped for lack of evidence. They are happy for one, ONE, to go ahead.

    Shysters have been struck off for vexatious claims. You simply cannot deny it happens.

    “And your reliance on the belief that the likes of you will never be messed over by Plod or the system so we can drop those inconvenient safeguards etc. Old territory for you. And still just as dangerous for everybody–inc you.”

    Actually you know nothing about me so you have no idea what relationship I have or have not had with the police. But by all means, I agree I could be screwed over by the police – especially these days because they hate people like me. So what? I am far more likely to be robbed or mugged by people other people like you keep out of prison. No solution is perfect.

    “Wouldn’t it be supreme irony if your frequent absences from the blog were caused by you being inside.”

    Oh go on. I would have to commit murder to be in that long.

  26. The accusations I meant were those against ordinary people not the police. I agree a load of crims put in crap accusations to harass Plod–but loads of innocents fucked over by Plod put in genuine complaints. As the Crimebodge site demonstrates. They ALL get the whitewash treatment.

    We have had this argument before. I don’t know about your relations with the cops. But it is a reasonable assumption that HAD you been messed over without reason you would hardly be on the side of your tormentors.

    In passing tho’ Dreyfus–victim of French conspirators–was once playing cards with some friends. This was in his old age long after his return from Devil’s Island. A friend remarked on the shocking nature of some espionage accusations in the newspaper. Then realising who he was talking to he added “but there is likely nothing in the charges” a bit shamefacedly. To which Dreyfus replied “Oh I don’t know–there is no smoke without fire”

    No accounting for people.

  27. So Much For Subtlety

    Mr Ecks June 3, 2020 at 10:16 am – “The accusations I meant were those against ordinary people not the police. I agree a load of crims put in crap accusations to harass Plod–but loads of innocents fucked over by Plod put in genuine complaints.”

    Well perhaps so. It is hard to tell though isn’t it? That really has nothing to do with what I said, but let’s agree it is true. What can be done? We need a police force. They have to arrest people. I would prefer they arrested guilty people. Now how can we improve the quality of the police? By smearing them all as criminals, exiling them from polite company and calling them pigs? You know, I think that might drive good candidates away and you will only recruit wrong ‘uns. But that is me. Perhaps you think that sneering at policemen will work. Solzhenitsyn did not think so. He said that Tsarism was doomed a generation before 1919 when “good” Russians would no longer shake the hand of a policemen. How did that work out?

    “To which Dreyfus replied “Oh I don’t know–there is no smoke without fire” No accounting for people.”

    Maybe there’s the voice of experience. Prisons are full of people who claim to be innocent. Maybe Dreyfus was simply aware of the reality having been inside himself.

  28. I never caught the show, Henry.

    The Brixton Murder and Robbery Squad was quite notorious for its alleged use of torture.

  29. The problem with a return to the Peelian principle of police being merely “Citizens in Uniform” is that while that worked at a time where there was a more active and less litigious citizenry, enabled by magistrates who knew the local villains and scofflaws, we no longer have that.

    You’d have to repeal a vast amount of laws which unjustly criminalise the public (which should be done anyway), abolish anti-gun legislation to restore an armed citizenry and then institute limited liability for any citizen, uniformed or not making an arrest to protect them from vexatious claims.

    Might be easier to catch a ride with Elon and start from scratch on Mars.

  30. “By smearing them all as criminals, exiling them from polite company and calling them pigs?”

    They are doing that to themselves by their antics. If there are a majority of “good” cops the fuckers aren’t putting up much of a fightback.

  31. Police have a duty to apprehend. Other citizens do not. In fact, the phony Floyd issue involved an apprehension.

    I was a supervisor in a union shop. I was amazed by some of the stupid things MANAGEMENT did. Which justified the union’s existence to me. I agree with John77, allow unions, but drastically cut their realm.

  32. Dennis, Who Is Somewhat Amused

    The same people who argued for two days over two threads that my raising of the issue of competence among police officers was at best a red herring and at worst an attack on civilization as we know it are now offering their opinions on how to raise the level of competence among police officers.

    Evidently there is room for improvement after all. Interesting.

  33. @Dennis – If competence was the only, or even main problem then I would agree, but it’s not. What has brutality got to do with competence?

  34. Dennis, He Who Is Not Easily Amused

    What has brutality got to do with competence?

    Thank you, John, I doubt I’ll have a harder laugh the rest of the week.

  35. That herring is still flopping on the deck.

    Had Chauvin restrained most any other man as he did Floyd, they would not have died from the restraint.

    Floyd was not medically competent to try the sh|t he did.

  36. It’s true, BIB, in the U.S., the cops have no LEGAL obligation. But it is in their job description.

  37. Dennis, Pointing Out The Obvious

    Had Chauvin restrained most any other man as he did Floyd, they would not have died from the restraint.

    Floyd was not medically competent to try the sh|t he did.

    Yep. And to sum the thread up…

    When a policeman kills a black man via the incorrect application of non-lethal force, it is the inevitable and entirely blameless consequence of the untermenschen simply being unable to behave correctly in polite society. Could it be brutality via incompetence? Nah. Nothing to see here.

    But when a policeman inconveniences, or worse yet annoys, a middle class white man or woman, well, the time for fundamental reform of the U.S. and British systems of policing is NOW! Can’t have those particular untermenschen making Biff and Karen, or Nigel and Felicity, nervous, now can we?

  38. The Meissen Bison

    Do you really have people called Biff? What’s it short for?

    (We have plenty of Karens too – too many, arguably)

  39. Dennis, Not Biff

    I have never met a Biff personally, but back in the ’80s a lot of yuppies went by the name of Biff… The blond hair, blue eyes, VP of Marketing, 3 series BMW, country club types.

  40. “simply being unable to behave correctly in polite society.’

    Simply unable to keep his heart beating.

    “When a policeman kills a black man via the incorrect application of non-lethal force”

    You don’t know that. Like I said, quite possible any other man would have survived.

    I investigated industrial accidents for many years. Virtually always in accidents, there were two or more factors. In this case, assuming Chauvin made a mistake, we have the second factor of Floyd’s health/medical status.

    Why do you inject race into this, Dennis? “When a policeman kills a man” works just fine.

    “Untermenschen” is another fabrication by you.

  41. “That means the teachers now.”

    Dearieme, indeed. My sprog’s school has managed to give her up to an hour’s worth of work each day, via google, since lockdown began. All of an hour.

    OTOH, the teachers have put together some lovely minute-long videos explaining how much they miss the children.

  42. Dennis, Yet Again

    You don’t know that. Like I said, quite possible any other man would have survived.

    And you don’t know that. What we do know is Chauvin incorrectly applied non-lethal force. We know that because Floyd is dead. My statement was one of fact. Yours is conjecture.

    In this case, assuming Chauvin made a mistake, we have the second factor of Floyd’s health/medical status.

    I’ve never denied there were contributing factors to Floyd’s death. It seems obvious from the autopsies that both his general health and his use of drugs are contributing factors. The fact that they are contributing factors does not change the essential fact that the primary factor in Floyd’s death was the incorrect use of non-lethal force by Chauvin.

    Why do you inject race into this, Dennis? “When a policeman kills a man” works just fine.

    I am not injecting race. I am stating a relevant – and important – fact about the case. Had Chauvin caused the death of a white man by incorrect use of non-lethal force, at most it would have been mentioned a time or two in that day’s news cycle. It would not have set off riots. It strikes me that in using the phrase “When a policeman kills a man”, you are attempting obfuscate.

    I’d also note that I very much doubt that I doubt Tim would have posted about it had it been white cop/white individual (he can correct me if I wrong in this). I’d also note that I very much doubt I’d have experienced the level of vehement denial about Chauvin’s incompetence and his responsibility for cause Floyd’s death at this site if it had been a white on white matter. In fact, I’d wager money that if it had been white on white, there would be general agreement here that the (white) indvidual’s death was due to the incompetence of the (white) police officer. I have no way of knowing if I’m correct in this, but I think I am.

  43. Why do you inject race into this, Dennis? “When a policeman kills a man” works just fine.

    I bet few of you have ever heard the name Daniel Shaver.

    You can find his execution on YouTube.

    Still no one gives a flying fuck.

    I also like the epilogue to this thread about police competence.

    At 4pm cops in London were kneeling to the mob, by 6pm they were getting an ass kciking.

  44. The Meissen Bison

    At 4pm cops in London were kneeling to the mob, by 6pm they were getting an ass kciking.

    What? Where? Is there video of this? Too wonderful! I hope they were wearing non-run mascara.

    Joy!

  45. “And you don’t know that. What we do know is Chauvin incorrectly applied non-lethal force. We know that because Floyd is dead.”

    You didn’t used to be this stupid, Dennis.

    “My statement was one of fact. Yours is conjecture.”

    You are not entitled to your own facts.

  46. Surreptitious Evil

    I’d imagine your average citizen’s response to the rioting, looting & destruction of private property we’ve seen on TV the last few days would be to hose the vermin down with with heavy machine guns

    The correct response to an enemy personnel problem in friendly or contested territory is judicious application of _light_ machine gun fire (or organised squad-level fire from mil-grade automatic weapons.) HMGs cause too much material damage.

  47. What we do know is Chauvin incorrectly applied non-lethal force. We know that because Floyd is dead. My statement was one of fact.

    You’re a desperately proud man, Dennis, to be clinging to this stupid “competence” bullshit so much that you imagine your puerile conjecture is fact.

    Medical examiner:
    Cause of death: Cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression
    Manner of death: Homicide
    How injury occurred: Decedent experienced a cardiopulmonary arrest while being restrained by law enforcement officer(s)
    Other significant conditions: Arteriosclerotic and hypertensive heart disease; fentanyl intoxication; recent methamphetamine use

    Those are the known facts.

    You’ve no fucking idea whether it was Chauvin’s actions, incompetent or otherwise, that caused the cardiopulmonary arrest. Maybe it was being in the prone position too long. Maybe it was the pressure from the officer kneeling on his back. Maybe it was the stress of the arrest attenuating his heart diseases. Maybe it was the chronic drug use. Maybe it was acute drug effects. Maybe it was some combination of these. And maybe it actually was Chauvin, but he took advantage of a random arrest to murder someone he knew.

    But no, because in a distantly previous thread, Dennis, little nowhere man, mused that it wos police incompetence wot killed that bloke (init), so it must forever be – because pride.

    Take a knee, or something. Get over yourself.

  48. The correct response to an enemy personnel problem in friendly or contested territory is judicious application of _light_ machine gun fire (or organised squad-level fire from mil-grade automatic weapons.) HMGs cause too much material damage.

    Ah. Yes. The General Dyer problem.

  49. Out of interest, we are aware this particular pillar of the black community served 5 years for armed robbery & violent assault on a woman?
    No?
    Wonder why?

  50. Out of interest, we are aware this particular pillar of the black community served 5 years for armed robbery & violent assault on a woman?
    No?
    Wonder why?

    In fairness, that has been mentioned in the press. Since it didn’t have anything to do with his arrest or his death, what difference does that make other than to distract from the issue of how and why he was murdered.

    He was also an amateur porn star, but apart from adding an element of titillation to the story, does that actually help us understand how or why he is dead?

  51. Sky News – “Who was George Floyd? The ‘gentle giant’ who was trying to turn his life around ”
    Yeah right. By getting dosed up on speed. ‘Course he was. Wouldn’t anybody?

  52. Yeah right, Mr Galt. So he was standing in the street, reciting poetry, when the cop for no reason threw him to the ground & knelt on him. ‘Çourse he did.

  53. Yeah right, Mr Galt. So he was standing in the street, reciting poetry, when the cop for no reason threw him to the ground & knelt on him. ‘Çourse he did.

    Which completely ignores my point that it is reasonable to address how and why the circumstances immediately surrounding his death arose (including his potentially having drugs at the scene which he dropped – albeit that is no confirmed).

    Everything unrelated to the events surrounding his death is just a distraction.

  54. So Much For Subtlety

    John Galt June 3, 2020 at 9:51 pm – “Since it didn’t have anything to do with his arrest or his death, what difference does that make other than to distract from the issue of how and why he was murdered.”

    You know, I think that a suspect’s propensity for violence is highly relevant to how he is treated on arrest – not murdered. Do not assume facts not in evidence or pre-judge the situation. The police are obviously not going to treat a 6’2″ 200 pound violent felon on drugs the same way they are going to treat a little old white grandmothers.

    Nor should they.

  55. So Much For Subtlety

    Dennis, Yet Again June 3, 2020 at 4:42 pm – “What we do know is Chauvin incorrectly applied non-lethal force.”

    We do not know that. There is no such thing as non-lethal force, just less lethal. And there is no evidence so far that Chauvin applied it incorrectly. In fact the medical report would seem to suggest he did not apply it incorrectly.

    Why you are siding with antifa I do not know but stop making stuff up.

    “Had Chauvin caused the death of a white man by incorrect use of non-lethal force, at most it would have been mentioned a time or two in that day’s news cycle. It would not have set off riots.”

    That is true. It is an election year and the Democrats are determined to burn America down to save it. So they needed some riots. It is BLM all over again – a cynical use of lies to make Blacks angry enough to vote.

    No idea why you are furthering this nonsense. A bit old to have become a Trot, no?

  56. So Much For Subtlety

    John Galt June 3, 2020 at 9:32 pm – “Ah. Yes. The General Dyer problem.”

    Exactly so. But perhaps not in the way you mean. The Establishment turned on Dyer too. And perhaps he did go a little too far. But once the police and military knew that the government would not back them in using force against protests, they stopped using force against protests.

    Partition soon followed. And mobs hacked millions of South Asians of the wrong persuasion to death. If the Army had shot a few early on it is likely this would not have happened.

    Attacking the police, even when they do deserve it, comes with a body count. Even Harvard has admitted in a recent study that criticing the police in this case and in others has killed low thousands of young Black men.

  57. @Tim W

    That they ask an obvious outsider to write about it shows that it’s not mainstream as yet, but it’s out there, already being considered

    BMA, RCN etc too one hopes

    Police: back to Peelian origins please. Oh for the days plod said “Sir, May I borrow your gun?”

    @Patrick June 3, 2020 at 7:26am
    +100 Spot on

  58. Dennis, Mental Health Amateur

    You didn’t used to be this stupid, Dennis.

    I most certainly was. I’ve always been this stupid. The only difference is now you disagree with my stupidity.

    But no, because in a distantly previous thread, Dennis, little nowhere man, mused that it wos police incompetence wot killed that bloke (init), so it must forever be – because pride.

    Ah, amateur psychology and abuse. You need to step up your game, Gamecock.

    And since we’re indulging in amateur psychology now, let me add my bit…

    It’s been interesting to watch the frustration of a number of you escalate to the point of anger, abuse and outright hatred. You seem quite desperate – and that is the correct word – to get me to admit that the position I’ve taken from the beginning, and defended since, is wrong. It’s as though it’s a reaction to cognitive dissonance. We’re now to the point where you guys lash out at anyone (Galt, for example) who remains open-minded to my argument (as opposed to being on “my side”, which he certainly is not). You’re really, really, really way too emotionally invested in getting me to admit I’m wrong and/or shut the fuck up. That’s interesting to me… Why you haven’t you disengaged and moved on. Why my opinion is so important to you on this single matter? It’s not like there’s a large audience out there (or even here) looking for direction from me on matters of import.

  59. So Much For Subtlety

    You seem quite desperate – and that is the correct word – to get me to admit that the position I’ve taken from the beginning, and defended since, is wrong.

    It is wrong. You have been consistently wrong. You have repeatedly said things that are not true and refuse to back away from them.

    It doesn’t make me angry. It makes me sad.

  60. Ah, amateur psychology and abuse. You need to step up your game, Gamecock.

    Can’t keep track of the basics. No wonder Dennis is so ill-informed.

  61. You know, I think that a suspect’s propensity for violence is highly relevant to how he is treated on arrest – not murdered. Do not assume facts not in evidence or pre-judge the situation. The police are obviously not going to treat a 6’2″ 200 pound violent felon on drugs the same way they are going to treat a little old white grandmothers.

    Which is further evidence of prejudice, albeit of character rather than race. Unless Floyd showed violence during his arrest (entirely possible, but I’ve not seen it), then how else is that “propensity for violence” to be measured?

    Perhaps our erstwhile Officer Chauvin was aware of such “propensity” from working with Floyd at the dive bar they both worked at? Maybe they had unresolved issues from that time working together (a cop and a felon in close work proximity certainly doesn’t bode well). Until the evidence is judged in a court of law, with both sides presenting the best case they can we won’t know.

    It is clear though that those on Floyd’s side are keen to see Chauvin tried and convicted on media presentation alone, which would make them no better than the lynch mobs of old that they rightly abhor.

    For all the “Clarity” that some appear to see in this case, I only see overlapping layers of complication and complexity, even IF you discard all of Floyd’s prior criminal history.

    I am deeply suspicious of those saying this matter is cut and dried. There are certainly questions to be answered and on the face of it the police handling seems excessively brutal, but that is only part of the picture.

  62. Dennis, Yet Again

    It doesn’t make me angry. It makes me sad.

    Strangely, not once when reading any of your posts directed towards me on any of the three threads devoted to this matter did I detect a note of sadness, let alone an expression of one. Forgive me if I take your switch from anger to pity as purely tactical… You’re still trying to win.

    Can’t keep track of the basics. No wonder Dennis is so ill-informed.

    I was well aware you’d written that line. I was mocking Gamecock, who I’d quoted above you in that post. And, of course, I was mocking you.

    Go look at yourself in a mirror and say that again.

    Anyone who has spent about a week at this site has no doubt noticed that I am argumentative, usually relentlessly so. It is one of my least endearing, but most consistent, personality traits. My conduct in all three threads has been entirely in character and completely consistent with my prior behavior at this site. What has been out of character is your conduct.

  63. @Galt

    I think the reason Floyd’s death is so powerful is partly the visuals of it that are available, partly that it just seems wrong – frankly, it stinks – for him to have had a knee to his neck for that length of time, partly a lot of pent-up frustration exacerbated by the lockdown. The actual complexities of the case are, despite several fascinating details you picked out, in many ways secondary or even irrelevant – though I note his death would have been less impactful if he had died while being arrested for holding a gun to someone in that robbery than the relatively minor and nonviolent issue of using a fake $20 note.

    Regardless of his medical history, the way he was dealt with was always going to be extremely risky and I think the general public largely follow the “eggshell-skull” principle – do something that dumb to someone and you can’t complain afterwards how surprised you are that the consequences were bad due to some unforeseen vulnerability of the victim.

    Police brutality, and deaths in particular, if you take a cold analytical look at the figures, is one of the least of African-Americans’ problems. It’s a relatively small number of people per year and though dispiritingly disproportionate against African-Americans there are a lot of more serious social ills that are even more seriously biased against them.

    Every year hundreds of thousands of black Americans die at a substantially younger age than they would have done if they were white, but that’s the kind of figure that doesn’t crystallise into a peculiarly shocking exemplar image. Just some guy dying slowly in a hospital bed in his fifties or sixties, often of some preventable ill, repeated up and down the country many times a day. Median household being 40% lower than for whites, well they see that every time they get paid.

    The idea of Floyd as some kind of redeemed New American Hero or as a “gentle giant” is clearly a mythologising stretch, but every cause needs its martyrs and sometimes you’ve got to make the best of the ones you’re given. His death was brutal, unnecessary, undesirable and bloody hard to defend without getting tied up in knots. Whether it will be judged criminal in the eyes of the legal system we shall have to see and I wouldn’t want to place any bets. But it’s a death that has indisputable symbolic power at a time when any such trigger event was going to have enormous consequences. And it was frankly a matter of time before one came along – it just so happened to be Floyd and as a result a lot of the complexities and shades of grey in his death were bound to be brushed aside, at least until this comes to court.

  64. But no, because in a distantly previous thread, Dennis, little nowhere man, mused that it wos police incompetence wot killed that bloke (init), so it must forever be – because pride.

    Ah, amateur psychology and abuse. You need to step up your game, Gamecock.

    ==========================

    He can’t even keep track of who said what.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *