What can Trump do about Autonomous Zone?

Trump should do nothing. The Hells Angels say they will handle it on July 4. It should be quite a show. Watch the goofy snowflakes run like the scared rats they are.

 

Very well said. Applause!!!

 

It's you who has has failed to recognize the legitimacy of protest. You do so by conflating the two with no justification other than timing.

These murders by policemen are the flash points. They are NOT the definition of what's being protested - they are only the examples of the seriousness of the problem - a problem so serious that the police feel free to murder.

Do you really think the problem would be solved if police just didn't actually commit murder?

You talk of the swift action, but those who murdered Floyd were allowed to walk. Charges came later, adjusted as officials became more aware of the political ramifications of their inaction. Had there been no demonstrations there is NO evidence that there would have been any charges at all. Normal procedures for a murder were not followed.

You state that these protesters are not good people, that they don't want safety, security and peace, that they don't vote. Who taught you that?.

The bottom line is that policing fails when the police lose the trust and cooperation of the population they are policing, when the population no longer believes that police are there to provide them safety.

Let's be at least slightly serious here. Nobody has to wait to see if a white supremacist police force is going to retain the trust and cooperation of a minority population.

 

Very good point. A couple of Abrams Tanks rolling through CHAZ would be nice. Funny, I can't see or hear CHAZ without Cher's daughter/freakshow coming to mind.

 

Rioting, burning, looting and killing are not in any way a legitimate form of protest. Why is it that when the George Floyds, the Trayvon Martins or the Michael Brown's of America die as a consequence of their criminal behavior there is a protest of any kind? Why do those protests always devolve into orgies of mayhem, destruction and murder? This is something nobody is talking about. This isn't at all about race, it's about a culture that somehow feels entitled to engage in criminal behavior without consequence. When somebody calls them on it, it always escalates to the next level, in addition to the original crime it becomes that and resisting arrest. Resisting arrest is rolling the dice even when the LEO is a highly competent, highly professional individual. When a LEO feels that the situation has become unsafe, they are going to do everything they can to protect themselves, that's natural and human but also in the interest of public safety. Anyone who commits a crime and does anything to avoid arrest forfeit's their right to safety. A LEO's job is to protect the public, even the idiots who commit crime but when the criminal changes the game the responsibility for the consequences is theirs. This culture rejects responsibility for any part of such a situation and thinks everyone else just needs to accept that and if one of them dies during an arrest there's going to be hell to pay. That is anarchy and what we are currently witnessing and have every single time there's been a similar situation. To add insult to injury there are even those in government who feel that all that these riots, the violence and destruction are justified. They need to decide whether we are going to be a civilized society with rules and laws or an anarchistic dystopia. Maybe we just need more police and to build more prisons and fill them and build more until this bullshit stops.

 

" Are you talking to ME !? "

 

I don't believe anyone is justifying destructive or violent acts. If you want to make THAT the topic, it would be best to create a separate thread.

Not even the authorities agree with you on Floyd (chosen as it is most recent).

Those policement face charges. It is considered by authorities to have been a case of murder.

It's not anarchy when the objective is having a police force and population that are cooperating toward a common goal of peace and security for all.

That's simply NOT a goal of anarchy.

Also, (and once again - sorry) these murders committed by policemen on duty are are only the flashpoints resulting from a steady state of police not respecting the lives and freedoms of US citizens of color.

Until black lives DO matter just as much as all other lives there is a very serious problem that has NOTHING to do with the legitimate actions of the state.

The constitution declares equal treatment - NOT white supremacy.

 

IF you ever listened to the other side of the issue, you might actually learn something. You apparently you see a police force as automatically being a "white supremacist police force".
I think we could call that - racist. Hostility based on color and group with no distinction between individuals and conduct.
Lots of racism around these days, mostly in the people telling us how much racism there is and how they are fighting against it. Ironic, isn't it?

Apparently you are chronologically adult. I'm not convinced a grown up, but lets assume you might have some experience with children. That, because there is a clear example and parallel.
When a child throws a tantrum and the parent caves in and appeases them, they have taught the child that you get what you want by punishing others with angry behavior. Doesn't matter if it's a piece of candy or going to bed on time or anything else- IF you fold and they win with the tactic of angry extortion, YOU have made that tactic a successful negotiating tool. Next time they don't like the rules- you are going to get another does of it. YOU discarded your responsibility, let them set the rules, are now you are playing by them because you were dumb enough to let a 5-year old dictate to you.

The would be rioters in other cities saw the authorities cower in Minneapolis- didn't take long to follow. Now we know these are not just protests, because of all the crime. It's a criminals dream actually- like taking over the town and running out the police.

Nobody has refused to re-examine the rules, or listen to complaints, or address reform- and I don't think you can find any official statement to the contrary.

At the same time, nobody like you is willing to condemn the massive level of violence and abuse that has been imposed on innocent people and the nation, and is now spreading around the world- all because the jackasses in Minneapolis threw a big tantrum and buffaloed the people in charge. What's more the concessions have only produced more an more demands, and more violence.

Nor do you consider the job facing police. Not once have you given any respect or credit to them- and the vast majority of them have served your interests faithfully all your life. I'd not be surprised if you refer to them as pigs, except when you need them. If you do, hopefully they will respond to your call with the same rules of engagement as the riots- just watch your property get carried out the door to your car they will steal, and watch you house burn too. You will no doubt be proud to have helped make that happen, because it's all in the name of supporting real issues.
But you will understand that, won't you? Black lives matter core contributor perhaps?

 

I don't see you as having listened to ANYTHING those who are protesting have been pointing out.

You constantly attempt to present something other than what the issues acutaly are.

You depend on ad hom.

MORE ad hom!

And, now you toss in the ridiculous notion that minorities just haven't explaind the problem well enough!!!!

Dude. This has been going on since slavery. How much time do you NEED?

Here, you point out that you haven't even listened to me.

And, you certainly have NOT listened to what prosters are calling for.

You should know ALL that before you start with your suggestion that you are the expert.

Until you can state THEIR position, you are NOT an expert - on ANYTHING related to this issue

 

Spoken will all the wisdom of a 16 year old who already knows everything but understands nothing . You have convinced me that 's the best you can do.
As I said before- "It unfortunate you can't tell the difference between crime and justice, protest and riot, right and wrong. Come back when you figure it out."

 

Oh look...more ad hominem

 

It is you who has claimed it is all riot and no substance, that its about anarchy, not very serious issues.

You need to become capable of presenting the argument the protesters are presenting.

You may not agree with that position, but when you don't know jack about it, it drives your poses toward being empty nonsense.

Those who have to rely on ad hom clearly have nothing of substance to say. And, that's unfortunate - we need better than that.

 

Do these "protesters" (and I use the word loosely) appear to be people who will sit down and engage in polite discussion? What fantasyland are you in, because I want to go there? And why, when people are breaking the law, should anyone sit down and have a visit with them?

Wow, sounds like a shakedown. And why, pray tell, is it my job to solve the black median wealth problem? The Equal Opportunity Commission makes sure everyone has the same rights regarding employment. So what should I do?

 

Maybe all the president can do is send in the military. It might mean losing the upcoming election, because they will shoot these folks, and the families of anyone who is killed will swear up and down that he was simply an innocent bystander, a "peace protester" and their mothers will bawl on national TV about what a good person he was (hint: EVERYONE'S family loves them, especially after they're dead). He ought to do it anyway.

If person above is correct that, by law, the governor must agree, then maybe even military force isn't possible. If that is the case, the state of Washington should cease getting ANY federal aid of any kind until they solve this problem.

 

You fail to read every time, and I tire of trying to get you to pay attention. I specifically said that I knew of nobody anywhere who had stated they were opposed to review and reform of police departments and policies. At no point did I say no such problems existed- and at no point have you seen anything else.

And you have no idea what my experiences are. I can tell yours haven't taught you to see both sides and keep your thinking in balance, or you would not be totally one-sided. I'm not, but then I object to people thinking violence is negotiation, or necessary unless they get everything they want while ignoring everything inconvenient to their argument. You seem to have no problem with that, and despite it being pointed out over and over- goes right over your head.

Why is that? I see both sides, you see only one. However I'm not going to express sympathy for the cause of people threatening the nation with violence; I require the restoration of law and order before anything is discussed . You seem to advocate the opposite, extortion being called reasonable negotiation. I call that crime and I don't tolerate it. Why do you endorse it?

IQ has been diminishing in the US for over 30 years now. From my own business experience with thousands of people, it's obvious people are at least less able to think well, and frankly- are acting a lot dumber than the generations before them. It's making communications kind of like a waste of time, many just don't can't comprehend beyond what they think they already know. Dead end.

 

Great. Maybe you can convince these people to get out there and make something positive happen.

Being not opposed to review/reform just doesn't fix anything.

I don't remember you ever pointing out something I said that made you think I'm "one sided" about something.

You can make claims like that, but they don't mean much if you have no evidence.

These protesters are NOT in favor of violent means. There are plenty of anarchist running around, but those folks aren't working for better government as those who are marching in protest are.

That is one of the differenes you have to learn about. I've been on the front lines and I've watched it happen.

I don't advocate the "opposite" of anything. That's on you. I do see peaeful protest as NOT EVEN SLIGHTLY a crime that requires police (or the military, according to Trump).

On the other hand, in Minneapolist the police chose NOT to respond when protesters wanted their help.

I can only hope you aren't part of the "dead end" on this one.

The bottom line is this: If the people are not being served and protected (according to the PEOPLE, not the police) then policing IS a failure.

Today, the people are not interested in having the police kill those who pose no threat.

Today, minority populations are not satisfied with white supremacist police forces.

Today, our police have had budgets large enough to purchase military equipment to use against civlians - something that is especially galling when the police are NOT there to protect and to serve.

Our whole direction on policing has gone in a VERY bad direction. We got that way by means of the whole system we have in place today, and assuming that that same system will somehow magically self correct is just plain ridiculous.

Let's not be that stupid.

 

No they don't. What an absurd assumption.

Besides, the "black median wealth problem" is tied with the median wealth problem that crosses all boundaries.

Those in the lower income segements, wage earners, have had income stagnation for decades while those on top get aided by specific congressional action and see their incomes grow so fast as to make it look like America is a success in terms of income - when half of all America makes so little that they don't even pay income tax!!

 

It appears some daylight is getting through, and that is good.
Now ask yourself how you can say-
The police in minneapolis chose not to respond when protestors wanted help. As the protestors and the anarchists were like arm in arm, and they couldn't move to stop looking and arson, exactly what would you have them do?

In Brunswick New Jersey there was a protest with about a thousand marchers. The police set up cones on the hiway to give them a safe lane, led the march with a patrol car, and offered support to the people injured. The injuries occurred when a deer ran into the crowd and knocked some people down, one hurt seriously. Peaceful protest is not denied, it's supported and protected, and it should be. But it is incredible to think that with a crowd throwing bricks at the police, they should respond to someone in the crowd asking for help.

I'm not in favor of the military look for police, and I've looked into it. Most of that is offered as surplus equipment by government, not actually bought out of budget. I would expect the police see it as an way to create a show of force- for the purpose of controlling riots. They chose not to use that in any of the riot videos I've seen.

You insist on saying "white supremacist forces". That's like insulting people you wish to negotiate a reasonable agreement with, sets the stage and identifies you as racist and abusive. Kind of like saying, white people aren't satisfied with ******* attitudes, and we want to fix that. Do you think it helps to do that? Do you think the cops that do their best to be fair and want to see change are impressed by that? Well- they are. It shows them that the prejudice of the worst cops may have a basis in substance. It tells them you may be someone they may have to protect themselves from, the potential threat- rather than someone they can help protect. Amazingly, treating anybody with respect usually gets you treated with respect in return. True with cops too.

In the overall size of police forces- some 400,000 of them- these incidents are extremely rare, but they happen. While such incidents are wrong and that needs correction- the attitude of the people you call protestors has been to attack all police everywhere, because they are police. Not unlike attacking all black people because they are black, or all catholics because they are catholics. Their integrity, everything about every one of them- is being attacked, and not just verbally; they are attacking their persons, now their training and salaries and even careers by demanding defunding and other actions. Those very actions would result in the hiring of lower quality people, given lower quality training- which would seem to embrace the opposite goal of police improvement. We are likely to see tens of thousands of police resign and tell the public to go to hell, and they will have cause. The level of abuse towards police in general is hardly something mature and rational adults could endorse, but these "protestors" do nothing else.
Every year, cops are killed intentionally in the line of duty- and some of them in ambush calls, and I think you know what that is. When they are, we see lots of cops at the funerals of cops, and usually many city officials. But we don't see many citizens, and we never see people marching in protest of the unjust murder, or becoming violent with rage. Not that rage isn't warranted, but that these are people with better character and control than most. It's a requirement of the job. It's also a requirement of any good citizen. Unprovoked violence toward cops is an everyday risk of their job- but it goes unnoticed.

There is no way to separate peaceful protestors from rioters except for those people to walk away. Not from the idea of protest- but from the idea of participating in riots, looting and violence.
Walk away from crime- not instigate or protect it. As far as I'm concerned, those who do not walk away have agreed to become part of the actions and message of the group they have joined. They are free to decide. I will respect or disrespect them according to the decision they make. Same way with what people support. I support police reform, I do not support blanket attacks on police, on cities or anything else. That is crime. Since these riots have erupted, all crimes have increased dramatically- for instance, homicide in Los Angeles is up 250% in the first week of June. While crimes mostly decreased with covid lockdowns, the riots opened both the streets and the attitudes that drive it.

I will endorse the movement to remove racism and injustice from the police, but them I've always been willing to do so. What I think you must do is put your self in their position of the police for a while as best you can, and try to understand who they are and what they face, so you can do the same thing with a rational point of view. Some police forces allow civilians to ride along with patrols- however they usually don't allow that in areas or times when serious trouble is expected, and that is when the caliber of the person is tested. Still, you might see some of the abuse and danger they often face, maybe come to realize that they aren't the predators that you seen to think they are. Give it a try.

 

What the heck is your point here? Nobody is claiming that all the LEOs in the USA are bad news.

Money does change hands for war materials. And, as our military operations against those in other countries vascilate, those who sell these arms need to find new marketplaces.

And, US law enforcement IS one of those marketplaces.

Being specific about white supremacists is a way of identifying a subset that is SERIOUSLY problematic. And, it's used to allow for clear identification of policy direction that fails.

This is NOT an acceptable analysis of the problem.

The issue isn't limited to those innocent minorities who end up getting murdered by policement. These are just the events that are flashpoints.

The problem is WAY deeper than that, affecting every contact between officials of any type and the general public minority population.

There are studies that show this even affects such issues as whether someone is willing to go to a hospital to see a doctor.

The issue permeates FAR beyond just the officers who end up killing some innocent kid somewhere.

The lack of trust permeates society. Think about it. If every encounter with police is a life threatening event, if you have to teach your kids how not to get shot by police, if you have NO policing that you feel safe in calling in time of need, that ends up changing the whole nature of society.

We talk about not having police as a step toward the law of the jungle - right?

Well, if you can't call the police, if you can't trust any interaction with police, then THAT is where you are - no police, law of the jungle, self preservation.

THAT is what's going on. If you're the police and noboy can trust coming anywhere near you, then there IS NO POLICE. Policing fails, in fact it really doesn't even exist when the population doesn't have trust and confidence in their police.

People wonder why cities want to be sanctuary cities. Gee, I wonder why policing and other city business would be less effective if those taling to officials of any kind could end up with themseves or their friends dropped somewhere in some foreign country!

Come on - that is not going unnoticed. It's one of the factors that leads to the "shoot first" mentality and the resort to military tools and weapons. It's what causes strengthening laws that cover police for whatever they do on the job.

I agree that we can't tolerate this, but I don't agree with the direction that is usually taken to combat this problem. Some of that direction is driven by inadequate police budgets for stuff like having two officers in each car, having greater training in deescalation, and having closer relationship with the community being policed, programs that engender trust and cooperation. If police are presented as a threat, there is greater, not less chance that they will be treated as such - even if we can all step back and decide that the police in question weren't white supremacists and had their heeads in the right place.

I don't actually believe this. Where I've seen protesters and rioters at the same time, the protesters were not in favor of the rioters.

Perhaps more importantly, this is what happens when things seriously break down. The best direction is to address the underlying problem. What happened for a few nights in Minniapolis was horrible, but the failure to figure out how to sort rioters from peaceful but highly insistent protesters is just NOT the lasting question.

Oh, sure. You've got a great education program ready for me - even though you don't know JACK about me and seem fully unaware of what the issues are.

 

You folks had just the opposite opinion when it was the Bundy's

 

I have an AutoZone near me. Their prices are excellent.

 

Exactly what are they protesting given that excessive use of force complaints occur in less than .005% of all police interactions?

Meaning 99.995% of them don’t.

 

In most cases the issue is that the population wants a police force they can trust and that will work with them.

Not having that is the same as not having a police force. And, I think we can all share a view of what it would mean to have no police force.

 

Well then your side is ready to declare war on the rest of us, right? No sane person want's that, but no honorable person is going to surrender the nation to anarchy either- and the tolerance for it is wearing awfully thin.
I didn't think you were actually going to open your view to balance, but thought I'd give you the benefit of the doubt and try anyway.

 

Please reread my post.

Never ONCE have I proposed any acceptance of anarchy. And, those demonstrating today are not interested in anarchy, either.

In fact, they WANT a police force.

And as I explained, many don't have a police force that they can trust "to protect and to serve" as we say.

They have what you and I might call a police force, but it's a force that they can not afford to call or talk to. THEIR police forces tend to be those who they need to teach their kids to avoid - how to survive contact.

That's not a police force. It's a threat from outside.

In Minneapolis, a woman called 911 a litle while back. The police came over and shot her dead. She was from Australia and may hve misjudged what calling 911 means in some places.