2 shot, 1 dead in Chaz

My fundamental objection is that the one editorial is not an outline for a solution.

It IS a statement of the several problems with attempts to "reform" what we have today.

Suggesting she's is off the mark based on a question that she did NOT answer makes no sense.

Her article points to sound reasons to believe that adequately reforming the police departments we have today (such as that in Minneapolis) is beyond possibility.

There have been attempts at reform in the past. We CAN look at what change was accomplished by these incremental approaches.

As she points out, there are sound rasons and evident signs supporting the notion that reform really isn't possible.

THAT is what she wrote about.

 

Not when that assembly affects other people negatively. They also have their constitutional rights. The barriers are there as a direct result of the "protesters".

 

Yes - public assembly affects other people negatively - even regardless of hte topic. That's pretty much a fact of life.

But, the idea of using the poilce to attack those who are protesting the police is espically dangerous in terms of our fundamental rights.

 

When they interfere with access to a business or a home it has gone beyond that.

Sarcasm. Be peaceful, but enter their home or business, block access. No problem as long as it is peaceful.

I doubt you would be so accommodating if it was your home or business.

 

Citation needed.

 

The blockade aspect was for cars. It didn't stop access by foot, and there is little parking in that area. I don't believe anyone was complaining about blocking cars.

There were businesses that stayed open at least through most of it.

There were businesses that were offering bathroom access to protesters. There were business owners who were working out solutions of various kinds with protest organizers.

Protest organizers stood to lose due to violence or property damage, not to gain by that.

Nobody who is rioting is going to be in a position to discuss policy and law with representatives of the city or state.

 

That was a purely factual event, well reported by all news covering CHOP - in the US or outside the US.

I'm willing to cite stuff that is opinion or in some way debatable.

 

So it's merely your opinion that the shooter was "right wing"?

Okay, I'll grant you that.

You're entitled to your unsubstantiated opinion.

 

Or, if you actually care about recent protests and CHOP in particular, you can become aware of the situation.

 

I am not suggesting anything.

You claimed that no one wanted to abolish the police.

I provided and op-ed entitled

"Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police"

Be a mensch and acknowledge that you were mistaken.

 

Apprise me of the situation please.

What proof do you have that confirms your opinion that the shooter (last name Fernández) was "right wing".

 

It's one of those instances of-

"Just because we say very dumb things, very loudly, and with great passion, that doesn't mean we really mean those things."

 

Which means there were businesses who lost business.

How would you fell if Trump had done this? Sent in a bunch of Trump supporters and took over a half dozen city blocks with restricted access and blocking the streets? You OK with that?

 

And, there are people losing their lives to policemen.

CHOP was not driven by partisan politics.

There were specific issues involved.

 

So you are selective who could have another CHOP? CHOP is partisan, whether you like it or not.

And the vast majority are after resisting arrest.

 

Our government here is pretty uniformly Democratic party and those at CHOP are most definietly not Republicans.

So, your partisan claim makes no sense.

And, if you take one more step and look at the issues, you also find that the issue is most definitly NOT partisan.

I would suggest you actually listen to the protesters if you want to know what the issues are. Trying to guess is totally ridiculous.

Do you see people being successful at guessing YOUR issues and concerns? Do you just think you're a better guesser?

 

Democrats in a democratic controlled state and you claim it is not partisan.

The issue is also partisan. You will find that republicans generally favor law enforcement, democrats not so much.

But that has little to do with my issue. A small group of people have taken control of an area. It was neither done legally nor with the consent of all those involved. There are those in that area who do not like it.

Those responsible should be arrested and charged.

 

LOL - threre really aren't any Republicans here to speak of.

So, if you want to claim something going on here is partisan, you have to do WAY WAY better than that.

And, the issue isn't about "favoring" law enforcement. Everybody in the USA wants law enforcement - including policing.

The issue IS about the fact that the current police force is not trusted by a large segment of the community.

If you were a member of a minority, would you trust the several officers that killed Floyd, those from the same city the killed the Australian tourist who called 911? Etc.?

And, this issue goes WAY beyond outright murder, as it affects every single interaction with police. It even affects whether police are called. You call for help from those you trust - not those who just might kill you. Without being trusted, called, given information, etc., police are not going to succeed.

It's going to be like there IS no police.

 

It is democratic across the board. However, it affects people who do not want it to happen and most likely those arerepublicans. When one party in congress votes for a bill and the other does not, it is partisan. This is no different.

 

Well, so much for the silly claims that the residents and businesses trapped inside CHAZ actually supported the autonomous dumpster fire experiment.

 

I have been saying that some of those responsible should be arrested and charged. That should include some of the Seattle government. I am fairly sure that they violated their oath of office when they allowed this to take place.

 

No, if you want to claim it was a partisan issue here you need to show evidence that it was a partisan issue here.

And, the protests here are NOT over a bill in any congress.

You haven't even STARTED to support your claim that CHOP was partisan - a claim that I see as preposterous.

 

I hope they all win millions and millions of dollars. And the mayor should go to jail for derelict of duty. Absolutely disgusting.

 

It is partisan. Mostly only democrats support it and it is ran by democrats. But it really does not make any difference whether it is partisan or not. For all practical purposes, a bunch of thugs moved in and took over the area. Residents be damned.

 

Nobody is going to make money off this protest.

And, the police ARE going to face some serious changes toward accountability and how they go about their jobs.

Everybody wants policing. But, nobody is going to put up with policing that can't be trusted or accepted by those being policed.