Discussion in 'Off Topic But Still Civil' started by Ryan, Apr 23, 2020.
Please I've seen enough dumpster fires where I live this week.
It seems to be now, especially with the latest that's tearing the country apart
As someone else said in a previous post, COVID-19 is just something we'll eventually learn to live and deal with because it won't ever completely go away.
Some people will see this as right or wrong, but the resulting aftermath isn't helping anything, and certainly "social distancing" doesn't matter in rioting and looting
Please note the American flag in the above pic is flying upside down, which pretty much explains the current state of affairs in the US, we're in distress
My 2 cents: the George Floyd video unleashed a wide variety of bottled up tensions; some of it is racial, some of it is social, some of it is economic, some of it is cultural, some of it is political extremism, some of it is healthcare related.
The number of Americans with little to lose has multiplied exponentially over the last couple months. The worst part is, we are only starting to feel the economic impact from the pandemic.
And some may just look at it as an opportune moment to do some rioting and looting to get something for free
Yup. Or as an opportune moment to drive in from out of state and foment revolution. “Free Minneapolis,” y'know.
Those armed guys with gas masks in black Suburbans with out of state plates don’t just show up to visit family and incidentally burn down the library, post office, and car-parts store... the post office and library, at least, being key to getting out of the “bad part” of the state.
Indeed. It’s everyone for himself.
It is as if George Floyd has tweeted “Liberate America!”
Of course to liberate always means different things to different people, depending where you sit.
I find the —peaceful— protests now gathering in front of the White House the more interesting. They show a level of restrained energy we haven’t seen in a long time.
See what happens when a cop takes a knee?
These moments are for Millennials like the 1960s were for Baby Boomers.
Yep, "taking a knee" now has a whole new meaning
I saw a segment on China’s reopening: economists estimate that China’s economy has returned to 90% of pre-COVID levels. While that sounds very good, it still represents a 10% contraction in economic activity. Normally that would be seen as a huge contraction. Worse, the recovery has been very uneven: some sectors have recovered to predict-COVID levels, while others haven’t.
This gives us a hint of what to expect from our own reopening.
From the UK
Having sex in your own home with someone from a different household is illegal from today, after the government altered its coronavirus legislation.
At 11.30am on Monday, a change to the law was introduced that bans two people from different households in England gathering in an indoor, private place during the coronavirus lockdown.
The amendment to the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) Bill states: “No person may participate in a gathering which takes place in a public or private place indoors, and consists of two or more persons.”
Previously, going to another person’s home to have sex would have been a breach of coronavirus lockdown restrictions, but now both parties could be prosecuted under the law. Having sex in public is already illegal.
Only those with a “reasonable excuse” are permitted to meet in a private place.
The amended bill reads: “No person may, without reasonable excuse, stay overnight at any place other than the place where they are living.”
This differs from the previous legislation, which prohibited people from leaving their home at all without a reasonable excuse.
Anyone breaking the law can be fined £100, halved to £50 if paid within 14 days.
Human rights barrister Adam Wagner tweeted on Sunday: “I can’t believe I’m about to tweet this.
“From tomorrow sex between two (or more) people in a private place who do not live in the same household is a ‘gathering’ between 2 or more people and is therefore illegal.”
Coronavirus: Sex during lockdown with someone outside your household is illegal from today (at https://www.yahoo.com/news/coronavirus-sex-lockdown-illegal-093127804.html )
No National Guard, no recurrence of the Vitnam protests. It will lead to a police state. Watch the Grant story on cable.
It could lead to a Vietnam war-like situation on our own soil, because our President doesn't know what to do, except try get his way by force or being a bully. He's going to do things his way and nobody can tell or advise him differently. This is not going to end well and there will be blood-shed on our own streets.
I haven't heard of Trump making any public remarks on the situation, the only thing the news reported was that he went to a bunker overnight for protection, and Trump tweeted about that. IMO, he should have been on live tv making some remarks.
I have a nephew that is in the Customs and Border Protection and he normally works out of Arizonia. He was deployed to New York City earlier this morning to help there. I just hope he stays safe, because right now, nobody in law enforcement is very popular.
There's already been bloodshed on our own streets.
Much of the violence, arson, and vandalism so far has been either from the police (mostly violence) and outsiders, mainly anarchists (currently a far-right designation based on their affiliations with right-wing hate groups, e.g. Nazis, former-4Chan, and Klan). It's a good way to discredit the protesters and sew fear, uncertainty, and doubt, and by the way give Trump and governors an excuse to clal in the Guard and tell the police to shoot first.
NYC was interesting, with one cop filmed driving into a crowd (when he had plenty of room to turn around if he was scared) and others joining the nonviolent protesters. NYC has had its issues and strengths. It's a huge police force, plenty of room for good and bad cops.
Trump has been making public remarks about shooting demonstrators, setting the dogs on them (as in the 1960s), and such. He just hasn't been on live TV. Given the things he's said in the past, he's best off not being on TV, talking about how there are plenty of good police murdering unresisting black guys. (I sincerely do believe that there ARE mostly good police. That's not the point here. I also do not believe there was “good on both side” in Charlottesville. Klanners who drive into an area to bring violence are not “good people.”)
One thing that's new is the police in many areas targeting reporters. Not just the black CNN crew. This popped up in my Apple News feed: Journalists get caught in the crosshairs as protests unfold (at https://www.axios.com/journalists-covering-protests-targeted-20166e8e-36e0-4d1b-93e6-5074c188c030.html )
I've seen video of the Rutgers University police, back around 1989, starting their _own_ riot when there was a completely nonviolent and dull student protest which involved “taking over” a building that was left unlocked over the weekend. They sent a reporter to the hospital, thinking him a student, and when they saw they were on film, stormed a dormitory to grab the camera. (The student filming swapped cassettes, so the news footage was on CNN. An editorial in Advertising Age, of all places, savaged the campus police.) In this case it was more accurate to say that the police rioted while the protesters were merely sent to the hospital.
The daughter of an old friend was in Boston; she reported that at the end of the protest, the Boston PD swarmed the protesters. They shut down the subways and blocked the streets so nobody could escaped, then fired tear gas at point blank range and started clubbing. That was a police riot.
We were making great progress until recently on de-militarizing the police and creating better relationships between cops and communities. Some cities and towns are still doing so. But as a nation, in 2017, all those programs were dropped. Now we're going to have increasing violence for a while — and COVID-19 will spread further.
I hope your nephew stays safe. I wonder if NYC woudl do better without outside support, though.
I meant bloodshed of innocent people.
The military are not police, they aren't trained in police tactics. The military fight wars, if the military are called in, this will be a war that nobody wants to fight, especially when it's a war against our own people, it may a little hard for them to tell exactly who the enemy are, they won't be wearing a different uniform.
Trump should be on tv trying to make statement to defuse the situation, not to incite more violence.
My nephew has now been diverted to DC.
No, the general military is not trained in police tactics. That's not necessary to merely defend life and property, especially essential property and government facilities. The line units in the Army National Guard (ARNG) are required to do annual riot control drills, and being community-based, in theory should be less likely to overreact like an active duty Infantry unit might. The senior leadership at company and up have already been through years of training to work under "rules of engagement" - with a key being "use the minimum force necessary" - from two decades of counter-insurgency warfare; transitioning to "rules of use of force" in a civil disturbance environment is just one step down. The Military Police (MPs) could have more utility, mostly in controlling traffic and providing mounted security capabilities the police either don't have or have little of. Plus, they have at least minimal law enforcement training, unless they're in an actual LE Det/Provost Martial Office type billet where they would have actual full LE training. When I was fresh out of college, a "shave-tail" Lieutenant, I was in a gun store in Lafayette, Indiana. Police Gear Co. back then was a local gun shop owned by a cop. I think he's retired now, from Purdue PD. There was an ARNG Sgt in the store, out of uniform, but he was talking about the ARNG needing less combat arms and more MPs. The Iraq experience - for good or bad - proved to be a forcing function, and now Indiana has more MP units, including Combat Support (typical MP), detainee/prison guard units, and LE Dets.
For our European members, a US Army MP unit is similar to an Italian Carbinieri or French Gendarmerie unit, but unlike the Carbineri/Gendarmerie has no arrest powers of civilians off the military installation, so they're not a Carbinieri/Gendarmerie unit. More like a German Feldjaeger unit. The closest thing to that is an Army National Guard unit under State Active Duty, and even then, absent a martial law order, they only work under the authority of the chief law enforcement officer of the jurisdiction. They would only normally have arrest powers if they're deputized, which is subject to state and local law. Combat Support (CS) MPs - the most typical MP specialty - keep order and defend "rear" areas and supply lines (Lines of Communication). The actual Law Enforcement specialties are usually on a fixed base of some size and importance. In some ways, the CS MPs are like Cavalry in that they're mobile and well armed. In fact, I think US Army MP lineage comes from dragoon units that were essentially light horse cavalry being used to assist and maintain order in the Revolutionary War.
When was the last time that the military were used as any kind of riot control on US soil?
My bet is that nobody on current active duty, or in a reserve status subject to recall, have been exposed to any actual, under fire, riot control during real-world conditions. No amount of training and practice can prepare anyone for what they may encounter under real-world conditions.
From today's news:
Louisville, Ky., resident David McAtee was shot and killed during a police response to a curfew violation early Monday. Both police and National Guard members were on the scene and fired shots. The incident has led to the firing of the police chief.
State and local leaders called for the release of police body-camera footage, but Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer announced Monday that officers on the scene had not activated their body cameras. Fischer also said that Louisville Police Chief Steve Conrad was relieved of command in the wake of the shooting. Conrad was already due to retire amid criticism related to the controversy surrounding the death of Breonna Taylor in March.
According to member station WFPL, the incident that resulted in McAtee's death took place at a gas station in Louisville's predominantly black West End. McAtee, who was black, operated a barbecue business nearby. No protests were taking place there, but the National Guard and Louisville police were called in to respond to a large gathering and enforce the city's 9 p.m. curfew. Before being relieved of his post, Conrad said that the police and National Guard were shot at first and that the shots that killed McAtee were fired in response.
Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear tweeted in a statement that "[the Louisville Metro Police Department] and the Kentucky National Guard returned fire resulting in a death."
The incident is now under investigation by local and state authorities, according to a report from Louisville's Courier-Journal. According to the mayor, the two Louisville police officers who fired their weapons in the altercation have been put on administrative leave pending the investigation.
When someone signs up for the military, you kind of accept the fact that at some point in time you may be deployed to fight in a war, against a foreign combatant. But nobody in the military ever expects to possibly die on US soil and at the hands of US citizens. More could die during these riots and it could be members of the military.
Agreed. And we were (and still are) trained to kill, not maim. Unless you are in a National Guard unit (MP) and undergo riot training the natural extinct from training is to aim at center mass (best percentage shot). The M16A2 I trained on had a killing range of 460 meters (that's 4 12/ football fields folks) and overall range of 2,600 meters. At any range under 100 meters I was in a medical hospital unit and my unit never underwent riot training.
Consider this, the National Guard units do have "arrest" powers. Active military do not. At best active military can be used for support, but not policing. The US has laws prohibiting the military being used as police units.