8 ms·

I feel like some upfront setting of expectations would really, really be helpful here. If you're planning to arrest people after curfew, explain that in clear t

I feel like some upfront setting of expectations would really, really be helpful here. If you're planning to arrest people after curfew, explain that in clear terms: "Our curfew is at 8pm, so we will start asking groups to disperse at 7:30. At 8pm, no large assemblies will be permitted, and police will begin arresting people in large groups at that time. We understand some people will engage in civil disobedience, and if they are cooperative with the police, they will be arrested peacefully. If any protesters start taking action that endangers police (e.g. throwing bricks or running at police unexpectedly), they will be met with force and arrested. Because it can be difficult for police to determine the perpetrator of violence, additional crowd control tactics such as tear gas may be used, so we strongly encourage you to self-police and prevent any violence towards police. After 8pm there will be a 30 minute grace period for those who are not gathered in groups but are in the process of heading home. At 8:30pm, anyone who remains on the street will be detained." I think it would really help both in terms of outcomes as well as the perception of police if they gave this kind of clear description of what's going to happen. As it stands now, the curfews aren't enforced with any kind of regularity, so they just cause confusion.

jdavis703 6y ago
A much simpler policy would be to have no curfew at all. As someone who has participated in protests for 5 out of the last 6 days and was tear gassed, I can tell you that protestors are much more peaceful when the cops keep a distance. Once the armor shows up and the tear gassing starts protestors get angry.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago
  I haven't been protesting but there should be an exception for when police escalate. I've watched videos of peaceful protestors getting shield bashed by police which causes them to get really angry and then they get a beat down for being angry about it. It's a pretty human response to get angry when someone gets physically aggressive towards you.
- awillen 6y ago
  I also agree with this. It seems like in the majority of cases at this point, the curfew does nothing but create unnecessary conflict. It almost creates an objective for protesters - to be serious about what they're protesting, they need to stay out after the curfew. I think curfews do have a place when there's massive looting happening and the police need the streets clear so they can prevent it, but there hasn't been enough looting in several days to justify curfews.
  - fennecfoxen 6y ago
    The case that will be made is that the curfew has caused the reduction in looting, by sending the most nonviolent protestors home and making it easier to distinguish those looting.
    - awillen 6y ago
      Except there are still extremely large protests in DC/NY/LA after curfew but the looting appears to have stopped.
      - fennecfoxen 6y ago
        While I decline to specifically endorse that logic at this time, I don't think it is necessarily is in conflict with your observation. The crowd dynamics of protestors protesting after curfew and of that of looters may be quite different: one crowd, versus many smaller groups dispersed in the city, spreading out, with a mix of protesting and opportunistic looting (sometimes in the same group and sometimes not).
- rb808 6y ago
  Maybe in areas where there have been no looting. In NYC its pretty frustrating to see midtown being looted and police having to babysit protesters that should be at home.
  - mindslight 6y ago
    The police don't "have to" be occupied with protestors. The police are prioritizing punishing peaceful protestors for speaking out against them, while deprioritizing going after looting as its presence actually helps the police narrative.
- stunt 6y ago
  Look at their gears and equipment. The whole riot-police industry only focuses on anti-riot training and strategies. They don't practice for peaceful protests. They aren't designed for that and you can see it just by looking at what they are wearing and holding. An armed protest without riot-police presence is normally more quiet than a peaceful protest with their presence. It was a wrong call to send them to a peaceful protest in the first place. They should have published a proper schedule and location for the protest and let people to share their voices. Police shouldn't guard the protesters. That's a recipe for chaos. They should guard the city, businesses, and take care of safety of protesters. And it gets worst when the government focus is pushing police harder and harder to end the protest instead of helping them by telling people that their voice has been heard. Police under pressure starts overreacting to protesters instead of taking care of looters which has nothing to do with protesters. No matter how much they try to control. Often they just get tired, things get messy and overwhelming and they start to beat people. Now sadly there are also a small number of police force that are just waiting for a day to have an opportunity to enjoy and exercise all the anti-riot trainings they had with their fancy equipment. And that's where you see stupid unnecessary violence from police and no sign that they regret doing that.
aspenmayer 6y ago
Are curfews compatible with otherwise law-abiding constitutionally-protected protests? What’s the caselaw on protests? I remember during OccupySF, curfews were ineffective at ending the protest, but I don’t know if any legal ruling was ever made as to if the curfew was applicable or binding to the protests.
- mc32 6y ago
  I think the police can disperse when they think violence will escalate. Say you have opposing factions protesting each other (let’s say people seeking independence versus those who want to remain a colony somewhere). Should police just allow them to beat each other or instill some order?
  - viklove 6y ago
    Should doesn't matter, are curfews legal?
    - mc32 6y ago
      Well curfews are enforced at the municipal level. Some places have teen curfews and such and I’m not sure they have been struck down everywhere, so I think the lagality varies by jurisdiction. It is an interesting question with intersectionality with remain in place orders as well. Can the gov keep you from going places? Seems most states have had some shelter in place orders.
    - freeone3000 6y ago
      NY state has suspended Habeas Corpus and federal forces in DC have violated the ENTIRE bill of rights (including the third!) so I think legal/illegal is a bit of a moot point to make.
      - ceejayoz 6y ago
        Wait, where has the Third Amendment been violated? I think you're getting wires severely crossed there. The National Guard is staying at hotels, but the government'll certainly be paying for that lodging. https://dcist.com/story/20/06/03/federal-troop-lodging-at-marriott-marquis-and-other-local-hotels-shuttled-to-d-c-protests-on-tour-buses/ https://dcist.com/story/20/06/03/federal-troop-lodging-at-ma... There's a dispute over who pays (Feds vs DC): https://twitter.com/maustermuhle/status/1268921612595875846 https://twitter.com/maustermuhle/status/1268921612595875846
xxpor 6y ago
Here's what's actually happening: the cops say there's a curfew and they're arresting everyone at 8. Except then they kettle everyone at 7:30 so you can't leave. They then arrest you at 8 for breaking curfew.
- awillen 6y ago
  Yep, I've been seeing that in NY, and it baffles me. The cynical part of me thinks they want to arrest people, but that just seems too stupid at this point. The city leadership has to know that doing this is only causing the protests to continue. Maybe cynicism is the right approach, but people usually act in their own self interest, and it's very much in the self interest of the politicians running the city to not have police out there beating people and to get crowds to disperse peacefully. Just baffling and terrible.
  - ceejayoz 6y ago
    > The city leadership has to know that doing this is only causing the protests to continue. City leadership doesn't have control. Fired cops get reinstated. When criticized or acted against, they retaliate against civilian leadership. https://twitter.com/MplsWard3/status/1267891878801915904 https://twitter.com/MplsWard3/status/1267891878801915904 > Politicians who cross the MPD find slowdowns in their wards. After the first time I cut money from the proposed police budget, I had an uptick in calls taking forever to get a response, and MPD officers telling business owners to call their councilman about why it took so long. https://gizmodo.com/nypd-union-doxes-mayors-daughter-on-twitter-1843813751 https://gizmodo.com/nypd-union-doxes-mayors-daughter-on-twit... > A New York City Police Department union known for its controversial attacks against Mayor Bill de Blasio tweeted out the personally identifying information of his daughter on Sunday night, including a residential address and her New York State ID number. https://www.cityandstateny.com/articles/politics/new-york-city/meet-men-who-scared-de-blasio-away-police-reform.html https://www.cityandstateny.com/articles/politics/new-york-ci... > Lynch’s most infamous comment, the one that many believe set New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio running scared from the cause of police reform, came after a man shot two NYPD officers in Brooklyn in 2014. The slain officers’ “blood on the hands starts at City Hall in the Office of the Mayor,” Lynch said. The PBA president blamed de Blasio because the mayor acknowledged, in the wake of Garner’s death, that racially disparate policing exists in New York City. Cops subsequently turned their back on de Blasio at the slain officers’ funeral, and the mayor has sided with the cops ever since. > But to understand why the mayor does what he does, one must understand what he’s up against. On Monday, The City reported that since 2015 the PBA has spent upwards of $1.4 million on lobbying and campaign contributions. In addition to conventional political advocacy for their interests, as City & State noted in a 2019 cover story, “the cops also have the power to undermine a mayor by refusing to do their job.” In December 2014, when Lynch blamed the two officers’ murders on de Blasio, NYPD officers made two-thirds fewer arrests and wrote 94% fewer tickets than they had during the same period the year before. The PBA has also moved to block new policies intended to increase transparency and accountability, for example by suing to prevent the release of body camera footage.
zbrozek 6y ago
That sounds like a good approach to reduce tragic outcomes _right now_, but I can't help but feel that it's also oppressive. I don't want there to be curfews at all, because that's not freedom. I'm just glad that my municipality doesn't have them, though I have to be careful these days about where I bike because some nearby ones do.
the_gastropod 6y ago
Curfews cannot be enforced as you're suggesting. There are people who need to be out past curfews (e.g., hospital workers, delivery drivers, doormen, etc.) So police already cannot indiscriminately arrest anyone on the streets past curfew. So the whole notion of curfew is inherently unclear and hard to enforce. Additionally, the essential workers who work overnight hours also tend to be disproportionately minorities—the same people police disproportionately arrest and brutalize. Curfews are another really misguided attempt to quell otherwise peaceful protests, and only serve to escalate tensions.
- mc32 6y ago
  Do people on their way to work not avoid protests? I know I would. I know protests can turn on a dime at any moment. Police can get you, protesters can misidentify you, etc.
  - ceejayoz 6y ago
    Some don't have the option. https://www.pix11.com/news/local-news/manhattan/mayor-blasts-arrest-of-delivery-worker-caught-on-video-on-upper-west-side https://www.pix11.com/news/local-news/manhattan/mayor-blasts... > Mayor Bill de Blasio spoke out overnight after videos went viral on social media Thursday appearing to show a delivery worker being arrested by police in Manhattan while making a delivery past the city's 8 p.m. curfew.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - gentryb 6y ago
    Living in the center of a mid-sized city - this isn't always possible. When doing volunteer health assessments at the local homeless shelter, I came across several situations where there isn't a clear path to get to my destination that doesn't involve people protesting (literally surrounded at times).
  - pizzazzaro 6y ago
mimikatz 6y ago
I completely agree. Two other big causes of problems that I never see brought up are. Clear rules about what is allowed/causes a response. You routinely hear protesters complain we did nothing and the police started firing tear gas or moving in on the crowd. What they don't know is if the fence between the two sides gets pushed or moved police consider that aggression and respond. That's just an example, but when both sides understand the rules it makes things safer another thing common language to communicate through the two sides. Police are abusive when clearing the streets, they push and club people, they spray them when they turn around and stop moving. A protester isn't going to know what is happening and it is human nature to turn around and ask, which police respond to by hitting them. It is a bit of insanity.
katbyte 6y ago
When you announce curfew, at curfew you’re doing a lot wrong.
jdc 6y ago
[...] if they are cooperative with the police, they will be arrested peacefully. If only..
adamsea 6y ago
There's actually very little confusion; police are unaccountable and behave as such. You realize that the heart of the issue has nothing to do with rules, conventions, or regulations, right? You could create all those rules you listed, and then so many police would just ignore them, abuse or harm people (especially people of color), and their colleagues would not intervene.
0xB31B1B 6y ago
A better way to set expectations would be to not equip the cops with riot and war gear face shields, batons, tear gas etc. Equip them with cargo shorts, dad style new balance shoes, and polo shirts. The police should be there to deescalate, not escalate. There are a lot of studies that show that "the uniform makes the man" and by outfitting someone in war gear, they are primed to "go to war". It sounds insane, but in the 70s, menlo park changed their police uniforms from the standard issue to suit and tie, and not only did incidents of officer involved violence go down by like 50%, but citizen on citizen violence also went down by like 30%. The reality is, the people have a right to peacefully assemble, so setting expectations that the cops are going to beat the shit out of people in a peaceful assembly is morally wrong and unconstitutional.
- mindslight 6y ago
  Another thing to point out about gear specifically that doesn't seem to be getting talked about: All of those full face respirators the cops are wearing would also work great for healthcare workers, who are still dealing with COVID-19. Specifically anything with pink cartridges has a P100 particulate filter, the highest level of filtration (99.97% vs N95 95%). When you see a picture of cops wearing or holding respirators, you should think of the nurses, EMTs, and vulnerable people that have been deprived of that PPE, just so the cops don't have to think about which direction the wind is blowing before they open fire on peaceful protestors.
gwd 6y ago
That all sounds perfectly reasonable, but there's still a problem: police using force against people not doing anything obviously wrong. That loses the police their legitimacy, and makes protesters more angry and less likely to obey; leading to more force, leading to more anger. Imagine this scenario: Maybe 80% of the protesters are totally planning on going home at 8pm. You have 15% who are stubborn and don't like to be told what to do; they'll go home at 9pm if they're asked to insistently, just to show that you're not their boss. And 5% who are downright looking for a confrontation and won't go home until it's clear they won't get one. What happens when you apply your rubric? Well, when you apply your force at 8:30, those 15% move from the "stubborn" camp to the "confrontational" camp. In the 80%, there will be people who see the unnecessary violence, and move to the "stubborn" camp; in addition to people who tried to get home by 8:30 but couldn't for whatever reason. Now you've got 30% of your protesters in the "confrontational" camp. The police get more defensive, and start doing stupid things like shooting people before 7:30. Congrats, now 40% of the people are in the confrontational camp. Malcolm Gladwell recently posted a chapter from a book he wrote, concerning The Troubles in Northern Ireland, as a podcast recently; it addresses one of the core assumptions in your suggestion, that people are simple cost-benefit calculators, and so that with enough force, you can make impose your will on people. It never really turns out the way people think it will. https://podbay.fm/podcast/1119389968/e/1591088400 https://podbay.fm/podcast/1119389968/e/1591088400
dragontamer 6y ago
The main issue is that the Police have lost legitimacy. Mostly due to our confusing structure in the USA. https://twitter.com/sunriseon7/status/1267587976986427393 https://twitter.com/sunriseon7/status/1267587976986427393 Same incident, different camera angle: https://twitter.com/benyc/status/1267587033783992322 https://twitter.com/benyc/status/1267587033783992322 . We can see the first officer shield-bashing the crew unprovoked, and a 2nd officer come in to baton-smack the reporter. As members of the press, they are morally obligated to be there, recording what is going on. And it is pretty clear that the Police charge and attack the cameracrew in this instance. ---------- This was the stupid decision of two officers. However, we can bet that this "stupid decision" will go unpunished. Which is the entire point of the protests. The Police do not seem to have any mechanism for feedback in these circumstances, and can do whatever they want. The protesters now want this officer to be punished. But once again, we have no mechanism to punish police officers in the USA. ------ A few more aggravating factors: * DC has a ton of different police departments due to the confusing structure of the city / not a state / seat of the federal government. Case in point: were these officers Secret Service? DC Park police? Metropolitan Police Department ? Unclear who to blame right now. * Its unclear because these officers in this instance taped over their badges and identification. We don't know the names of the cops in riot gear, we don't know who they were working for. We don't know the chain of command. * This happened roughly 45-minutes BEFORE curfew. The President (or really: Attorney General Barr) seemed to want the area cleared for a Press Briefing on Monday, but this fact was not clearly communicated to the protesters, nor to members of the press. * Given all the advantages Police officers have in the justice system, it is unlikely that if we press charges (even if we managed to get the names of the officers in this incident) that the courts would ever be on our side. The courts overwhelmingly take the side of officers. I will note: there's clearly one officer who is holding back his colleague in this instance, who provides room for the cameraman and the reporter to escape. There are "good guys" in the police department, but it is increasingly looking like a minority. ------ The "Go home before curfew" argument doesn't work in these circumstances. With protesters (and reporters) getting bashed long before the curfew, its only natural for the protesters to not respect the curfew anymore.
klyrs 6y ago
> If you're planning to arrest people after curfew, explain that in clear terms... Who writes that notice? A coalition of the foot soldiers who are doing the actual arrests, or some high-minded politician sitting behind a desk? Because that politician can't actually make promises about the behavior of the police. De Blasio has been denying that well-documented cases of abuse have happened, and saying that if such a thing were to happen, it'd surely be punished. We've yet to see any accountability for NYPD. Statements are nice. Actions matter.
gremlinsinc 6y ago
According to the FBI, there's been a move by white supremacists to essentially take over the police of this country: https://www.justsecurity.org/70507/white-supremacist-infiltration-of-us-police-forces-fact-checking-national-security-advisor-obrien/ https://www.justsecurity.org/70507/white-supremacist-infiltr... Cops seem to enjoy beating up protesters, and I think that's the real problem.
drewbug01 6y ago
I agree, in general, that clear expectations lead to better outcomes. But what you've described is dystopian: - curfew: a curfew is an extreme tactic that deprives many people of their civil liberties without due process. There are legitimate reasons for curfews to exist at times, but dispersing peaceful protest is not one of them. - use of tear gas: this is (quite literally) prohibited under the Geneva protocol even in times of war. - "difficult for police to determine": this suggests that because the job is difficult, the police have leeway to indiscriminately punish whomever is nearby. Again - I understand why you'd make the argument you made, but the fatal flaw is that it is founded on an utterly dystopian premise. The response from police across the country is unjustified, and a rank violation of everything that Americans supposedly hold dear.
- awillen 6y ago
  Sure, I don't disagree with any of this - especially with the almost entirely peaceful protests the last couple of days, curfews are entirely inappropriate. My point is only to say that if they're going to use them, communicating expectations would lead to better outcomes. But yeah, 100% same page, especially with regard to tear gas.

jdavis703 6y ago

A much simpler policy would be to have no curfew at all. As someone who has participated in protests for 5 out of the last 6 days and was tear gassed, I can tell you that protestors are much more peaceful when the cops keep a distance. Once the armor shows up and the tear gassing starts protestors get angry.

2OEH8eoCRo0 6y ago
I haven't been protesting but there should be an exception for when police escalate. I've watched videos of peaceful protestors getting shield bashed by police which causes them to get really angry and then they get a beat down for being angry about it. It's a pretty human response to get angry when someone gets physically aggressive towards you.
awillen 6y ago
I also agree with this. It seems like in the majority of cases at this point, the curfew does nothing but create unnecessary conflict. It almost creates an objective for protesters - to be serious about what they're protesting, they need to stay out after the curfew. I think curfews do have a place when there's massive looting happening and the police need the streets clear so they can prevent it, but there hasn't been enough looting in several days to justify curfews.
- fennecfoxen 6y ago
  The case that will be made is that the curfew has caused the reduction in looting, by sending the most nonviolent protestors home and making it easier to distinguish those looting.
  - awillen 6y ago
    Except there are still extremely large protests in DC/NY/LA after curfew but the looting appears to have stopped.
    - fennecfoxen 6y ago
      While I decline to specifically endorse that logic at this time, I don't think it is necessarily is in conflict with your observation. The crowd dynamics of protestors protesting after curfew and of that of looters may be quite different: one crowd, versus many smaller groups dispersed in the city, spreading out, with a mix of protesting and opportunistic looting (sometimes in the same group and sometimes not).
rb808 6y ago
Maybe in areas where there have been no looting. In NYC its pretty frustrating to see midtown being looted and police having to babysit protesters that should be at home.
- mindslight 6y ago
  The police don't "have to" be occupied with protestors. The police are prioritizing punishing peaceful protestors for speaking out against them, while deprioritizing going after looting as its presence actually helps the police narrative.
stunt 6y ago
Look at their gears and equipment. The whole riot-police industry only focuses on anti-riot training and strategies. They don't practice for peaceful protests. They aren't designed for that and you can see it just by looking at what they are wearing and holding. An armed protest without riot-police presence is normally more quiet than a peaceful protest with their presence. It was a wrong call to send them to a peaceful protest in the first place. They should have published a proper schedule and location for the protest and let people to share their voices. Police shouldn't guard the protesters. That's a recipe for chaos. They should guard the city, businesses, and take care of safety of protesters. And it gets worst when the government focus is pushing police harder and harder to end the protest instead of helping them by telling people that their voice has been heard. Police under pressure starts overreacting to protesters instead of taking care of looters which has nothing to do with protesters. No matter how much they try to control. Often they just get tired, things get messy and overwhelming and they start to beat people. Now sadly there are also a small number of police force that are just waiting for a day to have an opportunity to enjoy and exercise all the anti-riot trainings they had with their fancy equipment. And that's where you see stupid unnecessary violence from police and no sign that they regret doing that.

aspenmayer 6y ago

Are curfews compatible with otherwise law-abiding constitutionally-protected protests? What’s the caselaw on protests? I remember during OccupySF, curfews were ineffective at ending the protest, but I don’t know if any legal ruling was ever made as to if the curfew was applicable or binding to the protests.

mc32 6y ago
I think the police can disperse when they think violence will escalate. Say you have opposing factions protesting each other (let’s say people seeking independence versus those who want to remain a colony somewhere). Should police just allow them to beat each other or instill some order?
- viklove 6y ago
  Should doesn't matter, are curfews legal?
  - mc32 6y ago
    Well curfews are enforced at the municipal level. Some places have teen curfews and such and I’m not sure they have been struck down everywhere, so I think the lagality varies by jurisdiction. It is an interesting question with intersectionality with remain in place orders as well. Can the gov keep you from going places? Seems most states have had some shelter in place orders.
  - freeone3000 6y ago
    NY state has suspended Habeas Corpus and federal forces in DC have violated the ENTIRE bill of rights (including the third!) so I think legal/illegal is a bit of a moot point to make.
    - ceejayoz 6y ago
      Wait, where has the Third Amendment been violated? I think you're getting wires severely crossed there. The National Guard is staying at hotels, but the government'll certainly be paying for that lodging. https://dcist.com/story/20/06/03/federal-troop-lodging-at-marriott-marquis-and-other-local-hotels-shuttled-to-d-c-protests-on-tour-buses/ https://dcist.com/story/20/06/03/federal-troop-lodging-at-ma... There's a dispute over who pays (Feds vs DC): https://twitter.com/maustermuhle/status/1268921612595875846 https://twitter.com/maustermuhle/status/1268921612595875846

xxpor 6y ago

Here's what's actually happening: the cops say there's a curfew and they're arresting everyone at 8. Except then they kettle everyone at 7:30 so you can't leave. They then arrest you at 8 for breaking curfew.

awillen 6y ago
Yep, I've been seeing that in NY, and it baffles me. The cynical part of me thinks they want to arrest people, but that just seems too stupid at this point. The city leadership has to know that doing this is only causing the protests to continue. Maybe cynicism is the right approach, but people usually act in their own self interest, and it's very much in the self interest of the politicians running the city to not have police out there beating people and to get crowds to disperse peacefully. Just baffling and terrible.
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  > The city leadership has to know that doing this is only causing the protests to continue. City leadership doesn't have control. Fired cops get reinstated. When criticized or acted against, they retaliate against civilian leadership. https://twitter.com/MplsWard3/status/1267891878801915904 https://twitter.com/MplsWard3/status/1267891878801915904 > Politicians who cross the MPD find slowdowns in their wards. After the first time I cut money from the proposed police budget, I had an uptick in calls taking forever to get a response, and MPD officers telling business owners to call their councilman about why it took so long. https://gizmodo.com/nypd-union-doxes-mayors-daughter-on-twitter-1843813751 https://gizmodo.com/nypd-union-doxes-mayors-daughter-on-twit... > A New York City Police Department union known for its controversial attacks against Mayor Bill de Blasio tweeted out the personally identifying information of his daughter on Sunday night, including a residential address and her New York State ID number. https://www.cityandstateny.com/articles/politics/new-york-city/meet-men-who-scared-de-blasio-away-police-reform.html https://www.cityandstateny.com/articles/politics/new-york-ci... > Lynch’s most infamous comment, the one that many believe set New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio running scared from the cause of police reform, came after a man shot two NYPD officers in Brooklyn in 2014. The slain officers’ “blood on the hands starts at City Hall in the Office of the Mayor,” Lynch said. The PBA president blamed de Blasio because the mayor acknowledged, in the wake of Garner’s death, that racially disparate policing exists in New York City. Cops subsequently turned their back on de Blasio at the slain officers’ funeral, and the mayor has sided with the cops ever since. > But to understand why the mayor does what he does, one must understand what he’s up against. On Monday, The City reported that since 2015 the PBA has spent upwards of $1.4 million on lobbying and campaign contributions. In addition to conventional political advocacy for their interests, as City & State noted in a 2019 cover story, “the cops also have the power to undermine a mayor by refusing to do their job.” In December 2014, when Lynch blamed the two officers’ murders on de Blasio, NYPD officers made two-thirds fewer arrests and wrote 94% fewer tickets than they had during the same period the year before. The PBA has also moved to block new policies intended to increase transparency and accountability, for example by suing to prevent the release of body camera footage.

zbrozek 6y ago

That sounds like a good approach to reduce tragic outcomes _right now_, but I can't help but feel that it's also oppressive. I don't want there to be curfews at all, because that's not freedom. I'm just glad that my municipality doesn't have them, though I have to be careful these days about where I bike because some nearby ones do.

the_gastropod 6y ago

Curfews cannot be enforced as you're suggesting. There are people who need to be out past curfews (e.g., hospital workers, delivery drivers, doormen, etc.) So police already cannot indiscriminately arrest anyone on the streets past curfew. So the whole notion of curfew is inherently unclear and hard to enforce. Additionally, the essential workers who work overnight hours also tend to be disproportionately minorities—the same people police disproportionately arrest and brutalize. Curfews are another really misguided attempt to quell otherwise peaceful protests, and only serve to escalate tensions.

mc32 6y ago
Do people on their way to work not avoid protests? I know I would. I know protests can turn on a dime at any moment. Police can get you, protesters can misidentify you, etc.
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  Some don't have the option. https://www.pix11.com/news/local-news/manhattan/mayor-blasts-arrest-of-delivery-worker-caught-on-video-on-upper-west-side https://www.pix11.com/news/local-news/manhattan/mayor-blasts... > Mayor Bill de Blasio spoke out overnight after videos went viral on social media Thursday appearing to show a delivery worker being arrested by police in Manhattan while making a delivery past the city's 8 p.m. curfew.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- gentryb 6y ago
  Living in the center of a mid-sized city - this isn't always possible. When doing volunteer health assessments at the local homeless shelter, I came across several situations where there isn't a clear path to get to my destination that doesn't involve people protesting (literally surrounded at times).
- pizzazzaro 6y ago

mimikatz 6y ago

I completely agree. Two other big causes of problems that I never see brought up are. Clear rules about what is allowed/causes a response. You routinely hear protesters complain we did nothing and the police started firing tear gas or moving in on the crowd. What they don't know is if the fence between the two sides gets pushed or moved police consider that aggression and respond. That's just an example, but when both sides understand the rules it makes things safer another thing common language to communicate through the two sides. Police are abusive when clearing the streets, they push and club people, they spray them when they turn around and stop moving. A protester isn't going to know what is happening and it is human nature to turn around and ask, which police respond to by hitting them. It is a bit of insanity.

katbyte 6y ago

When you announce curfew, at curfew you’re doing a lot wrong.

jdc 6y ago

[...] if they are cooperative with the police, they will be arrested peacefully. If only..

adamsea 6y ago

There's actually very little confusion; police are unaccountable and behave as such. You realize that the heart of the issue has nothing to do with rules, conventions, or regulations, right? You could create all those rules you listed, and then so many police would just ignore them, abuse or harm people (especially people of color), and their colleagues would not intervene.

0xB31B1B 6y ago

A better way to set expectations would be to not equip the cops with riot and war gear face shields, batons, tear gas etc. Equip them with cargo shorts, dad style new balance shoes, and polo shirts. The police should be there to deescalate, not escalate. There are a lot of studies that show that "the uniform makes the man" and by outfitting someone in war gear, they are primed to "go to war". It sounds insane, but in the 70s, menlo park changed their police uniforms from the standard issue to suit and tie, and not only did incidents of officer involved violence go down by like 50%, but citizen on citizen violence also went down by like 30%. The reality is, the people have a right to peacefully assemble, so setting expectations that the cops are going to beat the shit out of people in a peaceful assembly is morally wrong and unconstitutional.

mindslight 6y ago
Another thing to point out about gear specifically that doesn't seem to be getting talked about: All of those full face respirators the cops are wearing would also work great for healthcare workers, who are still dealing with COVID-19. Specifically anything with pink cartridges has a P100 particulate filter, the highest level of filtration (99.97% vs N95 95%). When you see a picture of cops wearing or holding respirators, you should think of the nurses, EMTs, and vulnerable people that have been deprived of that PPE, just so the cops don't have to think about which direction the wind is blowing before they open fire on peaceful protestors.

gwd 6y ago

That all sounds perfectly reasonable, but there's still a problem: police using force against people not doing anything obviously wrong. That loses the police their legitimacy, and makes protesters more angry and less likely to obey; leading to more force, leading to more anger. Imagine this scenario: Maybe 80% of the protesters are totally planning on going home at 8pm. You have 15% who are stubborn and don't like to be told what to do; they'll go home at 9pm if they're asked to insistently, just to show that you're not their boss. And 5% who are downright looking for a confrontation and won't go home until it's clear they won't get one. What happens when you apply your rubric? Well, when you apply your force at 8:30, those 15% move from the "stubborn" camp to the "confrontational" camp. In the 80%, there will be people who see the unnecessary violence, and move to the "stubborn" camp; in addition to people who tried to get home by 8:30 but couldn't for whatever reason. Now you've got 30% of your protesters in the "confrontational" camp. The police get more defensive, and start doing stupid things like shooting people before 7:30. Congrats, now 40% of the people are in the confrontational camp. Malcolm Gladwell recently posted a chapter from a book he wrote, concerning The Troubles in Northern Ireland, as a podcast recently; it addresses one of the core assumptions in your suggestion, that people are simple cost-benefit calculators, and so that with enough force, you can make impose your will on people. It never really turns out the way people think it will. https://podbay.fm/podcast/1119389968/e/1591088400 https://podbay.fm/podcast/1119389968/e/1591088400

dragontamer 6y ago

The main issue is that the Police have lost legitimacy. Mostly due to our confusing structure in the USA. https://twitter.com/sunriseon7/status/1267587976986427393 https://twitter.com/sunriseon7/status/1267587976986427393 Same incident, different camera angle: https://twitter.com/benyc/status/1267587033783992322 https://twitter.com/benyc/status/1267587033783992322 . We can see the first officer shield-bashing the crew unprovoked, and a 2nd officer come in to baton-smack the reporter. As members of the press, they are morally obligated to be there, recording what is going on. And it is pretty clear that the Police charge and attack the cameracrew in this instance. ---------- This was the stupid decision of two officers. However, we can bet that this "stupid decision" will go unpunished. Which is the entire point of the protests. The Police do not seem to have any mechanism for feedback in these circumstances, and can do whatever they want. The protesters now want this officer to be punished. But once again, we have no mechanism to punish police officers in the USA. ------ A few more aggravating factors: * DC has a ton of different police departments due to the confusing structure of the city / not a state / seat of the federal government. Case in point: were these officers Secret Service? DC Park police? Metropolitan Police Department ? Unclear who to blame right now. * Its unclear because these officers in this instance taped over their badges and identification. We don't know the names of the cops in riot gear, we don't know who they were working for. We don't know the chain of command. * This happened roughly 45-minutes BEFORE curfew. The President (or really: Attorney General Barr) seemed to want the area cleared for a Press Briefing on Monday, but this fact was not clearly communicated to the protesters, nor to members of the press. * Given all the advantages Police officers have in the justice system, it is unlikely that if we press charges (even if we managed to get the names of the officers in this incident) that the courts would ever be on our side. The courts overwhelmingly take the side of officers. I will note: there's clearly one officer who is holding back his colleague in this instance, who provides room for the cameraman and the reporter to escape. There are "good guys" in the police department, but it is increasingly looking like a minority. ------ The "Go home before curfew" argument doesn't work in these circumstances. With protesters (and reporters) getting bashed long before the curfew, its only natural for the protesters to not respect the curfew anymore.

klyrs 6y ago

> If you're planning to arrest people after curfew, explain that in clear terms... Who writes that notice? A coalition of the foot soldiers who are doing the actual arrests, or some high-minded politician sitting behind a desk? Because that politician can't actually make promises about the behavior of the police. De Blasio has been denying that well-documented cases of abuse have happened, and saying that if such a thing were to happen, it'd surely be punished. We've yet to see any accountability for NYPD. Statements are nice. Actions matter.

gremlinsinc 6y ago

According to the FBI, there's been a move by white supremacists to essentially take over the police of this country: https://www.justsecurity.org/70507/white-supremacist-infiltration-of-us-police-forces-fact-checking-national-security-advisor-obrien/ https://www.justsecurity.org/70507/white-supremacist-infiltr... Cops seem to enjoy beating up protesters, and I think that's the real problem.

drewbug01 6y ago

I agree, in general, that clear expectations lead to better outcomes. But what you've described is dystopian: - curfew: a curfew is an extreme tactic that deprives many people of their civil liberties without due process. There are legitimate reasons for curfews to exist at times, but dispersing peaceful protest is not one of them. - use of tear gas: this is (quite literally) prohibited under the Geneva protocol even in times of war. - "difficult for police to determine": this suggests that because the job is difficult, the police have leeway to indiscriminately punish whomever is nearby. Again - I understand why you'd make the argument you made, but the fatal flaw is that it is founded on an utterly dystopian premise. The response from police across the country is unjustified, and a rank violation of everything that Americans supposedly hold dear.

awillen 6y ago
Sure, I don't disagree with any of this - especially with the almost entirely peaceful protests the last couple of days, curfews are entirely inappropriate. My point is only to say that if they're going to use them, communicating expectations would lead to better outcomes. But yeah, 100% same page, especially with regard to tear gas.