3 ms·
What you're advocating for is essentially that the police are justified to inflict violence on anyone as long as they either give you an order or if there was a
by fzeroracer 6y ago
What you're advocating for is essentially that the police are justified to inflict violence on anyone as long as they either give you an order or if there was a riot or protest somewhere within a five mile radius.
All of the clips have all of the context you need. Claiming that you're trying to not polarize the situation by making the most disingenuous take you can make is nonsense. Considering your prior posts on this matter, I have all the context I need.
Edit: Since I'm rate limited, let's try a test [1]. In this video, can you tell me what this man did to deserve being arrested? Specifically why it was only him that was arrested despite protesting peacefully and not a single looter or riot to be found.
[1] https://twitter.com/sweeeetdee_/status/1267319103167107072?s=19 https://twitter.com/sweeeetdee_/status/1267319103167107072?s...
- lostmsu 6y agoYes, I am advocating exactly that (except you extended the bounds quite a bit). How else are you going to prevent looting without dispersing the crowd first? The instruments police uses to do that are already as harmless as possible in most cases. Additional: the whole thing spins as police officers personally being brutal. But the problem of instruments to disperse crowd is not decided by them personally, so I see no reason to blame them.