Kansas Crimson

Not Nice.

“How come there was no curfew for white people carrying AR-15 protesting public health?”

A sign seen at a protest in Oakland.

JADE HELM. Um yeah. Obama and his dangerous use of exercise names.

zsn wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 1:38 am “How come there was no curfew for white people carrying AR-15 protesting public health?”

A sign seen at a protest in Oakland.

Honest question.

Did any of those protests happen at or go into the night?

those protests were pretty much done by 8pm so they could be home in time for WWE Smackdown.

did any of those protests involve any police violence toward the protestors?

(It’s pretty crazy that the vibe is such “if you keep protesting us cops beating and killing you then we will literally beat and kill you.”)

bear in mind, the no-mask maga protestors were as right up in the cop’s faces as anyone.

And with assault weapons too!

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 9:02 am bear in mind, the no-mask maga protestors were as right up in the cop’s faces as anyone.

And with assault weapons too!

The fact that someone was ignorant and entitled enough to post that says volumes about why our country is in its current state.

them's some strong words.

If you'd care to have a civil discussion about it, let's do it.

if I may ask, how is that ignorant and entitled?

between a cop and a retail worker, who has received more training to de-escalate these sorts of situations?

do you not perceive some double standard with these protests?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 8:53 am did any of those protests involve any police violence toward the protestors?

(It’s pretty crazy that the vibe is such “if you keep protesting us cops beating and killing you then we will literally beat and kill you.”)

Yes- this. The fact that nothing happened when white people brought assault weapons into government buildings didn’t elicit the same response as when black people are kneeling in the streets is telling.

Besides, as someone else posted, where are those cowardly people who said they are carrying these weapons to defend against police/government overreach when there’s actually overreach?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 9:02 am bear in mind, the no-mask maga protestors were as right up in the cop’s faces as anyone.

And with assault weapons too!

Sorry to interrupt your and HD's "discussion" but I felt adding the rest of what Froyo tweeted might be beneficial to understand his/her "message".

Froyo
@froyoverse
May 31
literally a 20 something who gets called an idiot over and over at starbucks has a better handle on their emotions than an armed police officer who is TRAINED for these situations. if a cop cant handle it they shouldnt be A FUCKING COP.

Froyo
@froyoverse
May 31
weapons and power shouldnt be given to people who cant handle pressure and this statement should not be controversial.

yeah, it's sad that some seem OK with giving cops carte blanche to use whatever force they want - and giving them some blanket benefit of the doubt after the fact.

sure, cops have a tough job. but so do retail workers.

and again, I think we can have a lot of respect for cops, and still hold them to a high standard.

(and how sad is it that the "high standard" may be as simple as, "please try not to kill anyone at work today.")

Chauvin charges elevated to Murder 2. 3 other officers charged w/ aiding and abetting.


The elevated charges make me a little nervous. But, Ellison has the independent autopsy now, so he feels like he's got it in the bag.

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 1:18 pm Chauvin charges elevated to Murder 2. 3 other officers charged w/ aiding and abetting.


The elevated charges make me a little nervous. But, Ellison has the independent autopsy now, so he feels like he's got it in the bag.

When he was originally charged with 3rd degree, he was also charged with 2nd degree manslaughter. I assume that charge also stays, and that the conviction for that is also easier to get.

Yes, that would be true, but I don't know if that is the case. I only read tweet headlines.


I do know that only a manslaughter conviction would not sit well with many. Probably me included.

Also, is an aiding and abetting conviction contingent on a conviction for murder?

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 1:27 pm Also, is an aiding and abetting conviction contingent on a conviction for murder?

Depends on state, but there are definitely exceptions where an aiding and abetting conviction can stand without a principle conviction.

The best defense for those 3 will be if they can be heard on video saying "shouldn't you let him up?" etc.

so without double checking my notes, murder 3 is a reckless indifference, and 2 is intent to kill?

So it’s up to Chauvin to answer why he didn’t relent when Floyd pleaded, when Chauvin asked if he lets him up would he cooperate and Floyd says “I will,” when another found no pulse, and so on.

I still think murder one is at least a question for a jury.

Can’t it be a question for a jury, between one and two?

In a general sense, how often does a murder trial feature video evidence of the act being committed?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 1:43 pm so without double checking my notes, murder 3 is a reckless indifference, and 2 is intent to kill?

So it’s up to Chauvin to answer why he didn’t relent when Floyd pleaded, when Chauvin asked if he lets him up would he cooperate and Floyd says “I will,” when another found no pulse, and so on.

I still think murder one is at least a question for a jury.

Can’t it be a question for a jury, between one and two?

What was it Dowdy asked after she got those people killed? “What difference, at this point, does it make?”