Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 301: Home of Antifa Leadership

(+) Yeah! (+)

You can charge both simultaneously and let the jury decide!

---

Corrik7 posted...

I am unsure why they didn't charge the Omaha business owner in the shooting death to let a jury decide as well.

I know you're dense but this is low even for you

---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

https://twitter.com/lib_crusher/status/1268229152299155462?s=21

wh

oh come on

---

Third degree is easy here, that's cut and dry. Second... I hope they've got a lot of work done. Otherwise expect more riots.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

i seriously can't grasp how anyone can believe all four of those things and still think they make logical sense combined

Because they place a very high value on keeping order.

---

If that's the case then even better, because they you get the narrative of "well geeze we don't wanna do 2nd...we'll compromise and fall back on 3rd".

I have very serious doubts. we're going to see it actually reach 2nd whether that's true or not.

I also have doubt ls whether he makes it to his court date.

Jakyl25 posted...

And why do you believe in the justice system again?

I'm not sure I agree they aided and abetted there. I think moreso that they trusted their fellow officer and were negligent to what was going on by assuming the officer kneeling was in a position to make the call if something was wrong.

Idk. I think it's not very clear cut and has a lot of way to argue they weren't really the ones who did the crime here. I would have to see Minnesota laws for what I think would fit more appropriately, but I'm not entirely sure those are the charges I would have went with. I think the charges were tossed on so placate the mob, which is fine because let a jury decide. I don't know they expect to actually extract convictions on those charges though.

---

Grimlyn posted...

I've been trying to figure out if it means the 3rd degree is replaced with the 2nd degree, or if the 2nd degree charge is just added

CNBC though saying the 2nd degree charge is "in addition to the previous charges against him"

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/03/3-more-cops-charged-in-george-floyd-death-other-officers-murder-charge-upgraded.html

I dont know exactly how criminal charges work in situations like this but surely he cant be CONVICTED of both degrees
---

Peace___Frog posted...

I know you're dense but this is low even for you

So, you agree the business owner who shot the African-American protestor should have walked! Okay! I figured you would have been on my side on that one at least!

---

If it's equality they seek, they can charge murder 1st degree as well. There's at least one appellate court in the US that said that you can form the premeditation needed for it in the time it takes to pull a trigger, so 9 minutes should be more than sufficient. No doubt a non-police officer in that situation would be facing 1st degree murder charges.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

I dont know exactly how criminal charges work in situations like this but surely he cant be CONVICTED of both degrees

If he's convicted of the greater charge, the lesser one is automatically dismissed.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

i seriously can't grasp how anyone can believe all four of those things and still think they make logical sense combined

Rioting and looting does that.
Cops look like they're in over their heads, don't have the situations under control, and while most are in agreement it's mainly not the protestors but others, they're lumped in. Ideally enforcement will prevent fires, looting, and violence but still let those who want to protest actually protest.


---

Corrik7 posted...

So, you agree the business owner who shot the African-American protestor should have walked! Okay! I figured you would have been on my side on that one at least!

Ah I misunderstood you, sorry for jumping to the conclusion. Since the conversation was regarding the officers, I thought the business owner in question was the one who called the police over the counterfeit bill. There's no world in which he should be liable for the police going way too far with their actions. Agreed?

---

Kinglicious posted...

Ideally enforcement will prevent fires, looting, and violence but still let those who want to protest actually protest.

Lol
---

Peace___Frog posted...

Ah I misunderstood you, sorry for jumping to the conclusion. Since the conversation was regarding the officers, I thought the business owner in question was the one who called the police over the counterfeit bill. There's no world in which he should be liable for the police going way too far with their actions. Agreed?

Talking about in Omaha.

And, no, the shop owner did nothing wrong. In fact, he was completely right to report counterfeit bills if he received them. Especially figuring he tried to simply just swap the merchandise back for the bill without involving the cops. And, only really called the cops because he felt Floyd was significantly under the influence of something.

Shop owner was 100% perfect to a fault. He did everything right.

---

By the way, the NYT recreation of the event helped me immensely in understanding the situation. Before that I was just getting bits and pieces regarding it.

---

Kinglicious posted...

Rioting and looting does that.
Cops look like they're in over their heads, don't have the situations under control, and while most are in agreement it's mainly not the protestors but others, they're lumped in. Ideally enforcement will prevent fires, looting, and violence but still let those who want to protest actually protest.

it's mostly their approach to trump that i don't get.

"i don't approve of trump's behavior, but if trump sends in the fucking military that's fantastic and i'm sure this can only lead to good things." ???

---

Well I use schools as an analogy. Sort of like how schools cut funding for extracurricular activities and give teachers low wages/just firing them. There's nothing stopping the police from just cutting beneficial programs and better training, so they can continue to buy riot gear and keep their current wages.

Well I don't think they should increase wages either. In terms of police pay, I think the higher ups should have their wages be directly tied to the number of deaths/instances of police brutality. Combine this with charging officers with wrongful death and readily available body cams as well as police reports. That way the higher ups have more incentive to control their officers (which is a really sad thing to type out) and the regular officers are held accountable.

Cutting pay for regular officers won't get them to quit. They spent a ton of money and time to become police officers. They're not going to go back to college or work minimum wage. So they'll likely just accept the lower pay and keep doing terrible jobs.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

it's mostly their approach to trump that i don't get.

"i don't approve of trump's behavior, but if trump sends in the fucking military that's fantastic and i'm sure this can only lead to good things." ???

It's Trump's job to preempt this kind of thing before it happens. If he was doing a good job he wouldn't need to send in the military.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

it's mostly their approach to trump that i don't get.

"i don't approve of trump's behavior, but if trump sends in the fucking military that's fantastic and i'm sure this can only lead to good things." ???

military would typically be used with the support of the state, so they'd be under the state directives.
trump can technically send them in to defend federal laws but that'd create a lot of room for error and make it way more complicated. i'm assuming people are presuming the former, not the latter.

that or, with the case of Republicans and a lot of independents, many disapprove of Trump being weak and doing photo ops in churches instead of actually getting shit under control. an actual show of strength would bring his numbers up across the board. way more than, say, being in a fucking church.

---

I don't think anyone in a vacuum wants the military in cities. However, I think many people rightfully fear and detest the violence that has gone along with the protests and want it to end. They think the military is the way to an end to it.

---

Corrik7 posted...

By the way, the NYT recreation of the event helped me immensely in understanding the situation. Before that I was just getting bits and pieces regarding it.

Is that why you switched your stance from this?

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/8-gamefaqs-contests/78729545/939892366

---

Jakyl25 posted...

https://twitter.com/skynews/status/1268192497416708096?s=21

Im IRL crying from laughter

Lmaoooooo

---

Umbreon posted...

Is that why you switched your stance from this?

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/8-gamefaqs-contests/78729545

I am not sure what you are linking me to. My stance has always been the cop was wrong. I questioned whether racism was involved and if resisting actually happened which even justified restraining him in the first place.

My stance isn't very much different, but the cop's continued actions after there was no longer any restraint is pretty indefensible.

---

Corrik7 posted...

I don't think anyone in a vacuum wants the military in cities. However, I think many people rightfully fear and detest the violence that has gone along with the protests and want it to end. They think the military is the way to an end to it.

Sending in the military to handle the police then?
---

Copied the wrong thing by mistake, the edit had the direct post.

Your stance was that the cop was wrong, but you also seemed disappointed that they were arrested if I'm not misreading that post.

You tried to suggest his actions were accidentally or due to poor training, rather than consider malice.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

Sending in the military to handle the police then?

Reminder, Jakyl. Double digits people have lost their lives so far. Businesses have been burned and looted that are in the hundreds. You can support George Lloyd getting justice with being hard against the violence coming from it. The damage to cities is devastating.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghaaO19whRA

....
seriously.
de blasio.
of all songs, you pick that one.
he's trying to piss everyone off, he has to be.

---

Umbreon posted...

Copied the wrong thing by mistake, the edit had the direct post.

Your stance was that the cop was wrong, but you also seemed disappointed that they were arrested if I'm not misreading that post.

You tried to suggest his actions were accidentally or due to poor training, rather than consider malice.

Can you link my post? I don't believe he intended to kill the person, no. If that's what you are asking.

Okay. I see it now. I am not really referring to charging them as pandering in the way you mean.

---

Corrik7 posted...

George Lloyd

Corrik doesn't even know this fucking name, lol.

Damn, the typo police are out! lol

---

Corrik7 posted...

Okay. I see it now. I am not really referring to charging them as pandering in the way you mean.

What did you mean then?

---

Corrik7 posted...

Reminder, Jakyl. Double digits people have lost their lives so far. Businesses have been burned and looted that are in the hundreds. You can support George Lloyd getting justice with being hard against the violence coming from it. The damage to cities is devastating.

The damage being done by the .1% of bad cops as you say is far more devastating
---

Umbreon posted...

What did you mean then?

I believe the law should work the same regardless. If no one protested and they felt a crime happened, he should have been charged. If they didn't feel a crime happened and protests happened, he shouldn't have been charged.

I don't think the law should ever pander or be determined based on public opinion. That said, I believe from memory that someone said charges for something in cases like these usually take a bit of time before they came out. And, it was a question if the charges came so quick to try and quell the protests.

If that is solely the reasoning, the reasoning is bad to pander to the protests. The law should always work the same. Otherwise you give incentive to protest if it gets you preferable results to do so.

---

Corrik, when you were drunk driving they probably charged you the next day. It's not equal if police get a lengthy internal investigation before being charged while everyone else gets charged immediately and told to come up with bail money or rot in jail while waiting for trial.

---

Corrik7 posted...

The law should always work the same.

The law has never worked the same and was not designed to work the same, which is the part you tend to disagree with when you put your ideals of justice on a pedestal
---

red sox 777 posted...

Corrik, when you were drunk driving they probably charged you the next day. It's not equal if police get a lengthy internal investigation before being charged while everyone else gets charged immediately and told to come up with bail money or rot in jail while waiting for trial.

Usually you receive a charge after the blood results come back. (Though I believe that have something like up to a year or something to charge you... forget the statute. For example: A friend of mine got a dui last year for having weed in his system. He was charged 3 months later or something.)

I was never put in jail for any of my offenses and RoRed by the magistrate each time.

I think you are incorrect in your premise, surely in your example at least.

---

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1268185637921964032

Good for Esper for saying this. Apparently Trump is furious; wouldn't be surprised if he's gone by next week.

---

The law should work the same.

But they don't.

That's why people are protesting.

---

https://twitter.com/ariehkovler/status/1268268724693467136?s=21

More designed disinformation from the White House to smear us
---

If it interests you all, someone posted a video making fun of George Floyd and his death (with a re-enactment) in the I believe Southland Mall area in PA. There was rumors Antifa lol was coming to our area and my specific towns walmart to protest this re-enactment. So many people were scared and saying they were taking their guns to go and defend our local walmart from antifa that police had to come to make sure the gun toting defenders of our walmart would not do it lol.

---

Corrik7 posted...

If it interests you all, someone posted a video making fun of George Floyd and his death (with a re-enactment) in the I believe Southland Mall area in PA. There was rumors Antifa lol was coming to our area and my specific towns walmart to protest this re-enactment. So many people were scared and saying they were taking their guns to go and defend our local walmart from antifa that police had to come to make sure the gun toting defenders of our walmart would not do it lol.

What were the gun toting defenders of Wal-Mart doing wrong? What exactly did the police do when they got there?
---

The continued emergence of "Antifa" as an organised boogieman showing up wherever someone is committing racist acts is honestly hilarious.

---

I mean, aside from being willing to put their lives on the line for fucking Wal-Mart
---

Jakyl25 posted...

What were the gun toting defenders of Wal-Mart doing wrong? What exactly did the police do when they got there?

Police were there prior... the protest was supposed to start at 3pm. The entire thing was a facebook joke I think because Food Stamps or some other type of social assistance comes out today and swamps our walmart then. But, people literally took it serious here.

Police just showed up and were basically re-assuring people it wasn't true.

---

https://twitter.com/geoffrbennett/status/1268214491801694211?s=21

This seems like a really stupid and self-serving idea unless he distinctly ties it to Biden
---

Jakyl25 posted...

https://twitter.com/geoffrbennett/status/1268214491801694211?s=21

This seems like a really stupid and self-serving idea unless he distinctly ties it to Biden

Well, wouldn't your stance have to be that Obama's ideas were dumb because ACAB and you can never trust them?

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Lol this is almost certainly the same list of things Joe Biden would propose.

Im sure Inviso will find a way to attack Bernie supporters for this.

Yes, and I certainly wouldn't be praising Biden for such a list, either, but you expect it from Biden. I defended Biden's quote because it wasn't actually a list of "I need these things or I won't support it." Seeing an actual list of demands be... Basically keeping the status quo is disappointing.

You expect Biden to play politics because he's running for President. It's certainly nothing at all to praise but I'm pretty sure most of us have agreed our praise basically ends at "Better than the other guy."

I was hoping Bernie'd not play politics and not feel the need to compromise.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Well, wouldn't your stance have to be that Obama's ideas were dumb because ACAB and you can never trust them?

I dont think Ive ever said ACAB though I am sympathetic to those who use it.

But regardless, I was speaking more from a practical standpoint
---

Honestly I just want somebody to propose "Let's unilaterally take away guns."

They'd become my favorite politician.

---