So we're just going to pretend that cities aren't going up in flames, businesses aren't being destroyed and innocent protestors, rioters and police aren't being killed?
There is an extremely blurry line between peaceful and violent protests. Unfortunately all of the chaos of recent days that the WaPo and others (Obama, etc.) seem all too eager to sweep under the rug has ruined things for everyone.
I believe that various examples of this and numerous people being killed invalidates the claim that the national guard shouldn't be on the street with clear curfews to protect life.
I agree that it is a dangerous situation and also want to protect lives and the rights of citizens.
Are safety and the right to peacefully assemble so at odds?
The national guard protecting the lives and rights of its citizens is a far cry from being dominated as a part of a battle space.
If we consider that there may be substance to other viewpoints as opposed to only opposition to our own we could work at addressing some of the root or common goals instead of focusing on division.
Why don’t states and or citizens feel comfortable utilizing the national guard?
Is it reasonable to fear an escalation which may place the American people and their constitutional rights in jeopardy?
Are there approaches that would deescalate the situation that should be favored over those which risk even greater division (in particular between the citizens and the military )?
So do you advocate for the means by which peaceful protestors (and press) have been dealt with after curfew? Is assault a reasonable response to curfew breaking?
Looters should be assaulted instead of arrested? Where is the due process?
People have been assaulted on their own porches, is any of this resolving the situation or escalating it at the cost of the rights and well being of the citizenry?
I hope there is as at least as much of that pretending and sweeping under the rug as there us when phrases like "most cops are good" ,"it's only a few bad apples" are used and when cops are not charged with a crime after being filmed in broad daylight commiting heinous crimes that would cause any civilian to rot in prison, or after being charged they don't even make it to trial because a grand jury preemptively aquitted them. I think all that counts as sweeping under the rug. But it seems you care more about property than human life being swept under the rug?
As someone said, maybe the right perspective is "it's too bad all this property is needlessly destroyed, but how can we let so many innocent people die, protestors get assaulted for no reason, journalists losing their eyes and being beaten and detained on american soil for doing their job?" Priorities my friend, says a lot about you. I am sure a country that can afford multi trillion dollar wars and bailouts can handle a few insured propertied burning down. Heck, some people might even profit with the right insurance.
Democratic mechanisms to address these issues already exist, and they are in the hands of each State's legislature.
If you hold the Federal Government responsible, then you want to put this power in the hands of Federal Legislature. Are you ready to forsake the federal structure of US Government?
That is exactly what these protests are - part of the democratic process. To show the majority, who are not affected by police criminality through a combination of race and chance, the severity of the grievances by the minority who are.
As for the decentralization argument - I really don't want to be on this side of the states' rights debate, but that ship sailed a long time ago with regards to civil rights. It's not terribly unreasonable that individual rights are protected by state governments ior the federal government when an individual state is unwilling. Although we are currently witnessing a direct failure mode of this centralization, with the federal government having gone AWOL with regards to enforcing the law and even inciting lawlessness.
Do we live in separate universes? It is the media on the Left that is inciting violence by justifying and even glorifying violent riots. The federal government has done the opposite of invite lawlessness both now and in the past.
As we are now beginning to realize, the entire narrative of "rampant police brutality and killing of minorities" is simply a lie. Not backed up by the data.
Black communities need the police now more than ever. In Chicago over memorial day weekend over 50 people were shot. 11 killed. A 5 year old girl was shot! Where are the protests? Where is the rioting and the sanctimonious yapping from celebrities and companies?
There is none, because it's not politically advantageous for certain factions to address the real problems in the black community. Shameful and sickening.
Yeah, see, when black people call cops they themselves get beat up by cops who show up after a few hours and arrest anyone they see for bothering them. So, more cops would hardly help. But if you can have civil cops that live in the community they protect,maybe that might help.
Regardless, I doubt you will ever get it. I think the rioters are holding back too much if you ask me. If I was in fear of my life from cops and I have exhaused the political process for decades like this people, I would be more strategic about the destruction, target gas stations, 18 wheelers, transformers,etc... Cripple the city's critical infrastructure. When they try to demonstrate peacefully ypu complain, when they democractically elect someone you fight undemocractically and in bad faith to prevent their success. People armed with automatic weapons stormed city halls just a few weeks ago with no consequence. Did you not see cops doing a drive by shooting? Cops marching and breakint car windows for no reason? Cops tear gasing a peacefup protest? Getting caught framing protesters so they can beat them up?
My friend, the rioting is for people like you so you can hear their screaming, I think they need to scream louder since you're still dismissing their plight as if they haven't been peacefully protesting and voting since the 1950's and the current president vowed to unleash vicious dogs on them, something JFK fought against in the late 50's and early 60's. So I think they need to scream louder this way so you can hear them.
You may have some valid points in isolation, but as long as you keep rejecting others' substantive points that don't fit your narrative, it will continue to seem that you are living in a different universe.
The democratic system is founded on the fundamnetal rights of the people (live,liberty and pursuit of happiness), the police are attacking these fundamental rights and the people are excercising their right to freely assemble and air their grievances to the government, and again they are being physically assaulted for it. Proteating is a democractic process as is journalism.
If it helps protect innocent people's rights, I am willing to forsake the federal structure of the us government. I would actually be in favor of rewriting the condtitution. I think you forget the american war of independence and civil war were fought over much less.
It is concerning. It's also an incomplete narrative.
The protests are grounded in legitimate grievances, and engaging in public protest is a core right of the citizenry.
The violence effectively delegitimizes these protests in the eyes of millions of fellow citizens. I'm guessing that you may be one of them.
There are serious systemic issues with policing in America and if one only focuses on the bad actors on the "opposing side" then there is no dialog, only opposing monologues.
Peaceful protest is peaceful protest. It's a democratic right and always legitimate.
Failing to properly report the scale of violence and looting whilst simultaneously questioning the legitimacy of the response to it though exposes the media narrative for what it is, not objective.
I'm sorry but I don't believe that you are engaging in good faith. If you are serious about discussing this I can answer your question, but from your comment history and your new account I don't see any value in even trying.
The proportion of looters vs protestors is much lower than bad cops to good cops. If you are going to let a few bad apples spoil the bunch, why are you not saying the same thing about cops? If it’s about the cost, then why aren’t you complaining about the $5 trillion in looting that Congress just passed to redistribute wealth upwards? Or did you just watch a Fox News clip and get mad about what they want you to?
How do you know this? I'm not saying this is not the case. But how do you know this? I suspect that there are a lot of good police men, just like there are a lot of good protesters. How do you come to the conclusion that there are more of one than the other?
When a video of a cop murdering someone comes to a department's attention, they're not immediately arrested on suspicion of murder. When one cop from a group smashes a car window, the others don't arrest the perp for vandalism. When a cop shoots peaceful protestors engaging in constitutionally protected speech with flashbangs, tear gas, or rubber bullets, they're not immediately arrested for assault and battery. All of these incidents indicate that these departments are at least half full of corrupt cops, whether by individual morals or institutional policy.
And when these bad cops are protected from prosecution across the entire country, it's no longer about a single bad cop in a barrel of apples from an isolated tree. It becomes an institution encouraging bad policing, a systemic issue. And when you look at who funds the police...
Rather than paint the entire country with one brush, we need to focus on individual jurisdictions. There are many police departments that are facilitating the protestors exercising their rights, speaking with protestors about their concerns, even showing support, etc. These are likely departments where if an individual cop makes some off the cuff racist remark, they're called out by their peers. We need to give credit where credit is due.
I was not lauding those jurisdictions, for sure. Although if the knee-takers were individual officers being allowed to show their political opinion before being ordered to open fire on protesting Americans, then we should show some praise to those individuals. Although obviously much less praise than if they had simply refused the unlawful orders.
There is an extremely blurry line between peaceful and violent protests. Unfortunately all of the chaos of recent days that the WaPo and others (Obama, etc.) seem all too eager to sweep under the rug has ruined things for everyone.