The Shooting Gallery: Police Violence MEGATHREAD

[Admiral Yi]

If they robbed the nation blind after 08, how is it the federal government made money on TARP?

[jimmy olsen]

If they robbed the nation blind after 08, how is it the federal government made money on TARP?

Talking about the people. Millions of people lost their homes due to predatory lending practices.

[jimmy olsen]

Anyway, the White House is under siege by rioters and the Secret Service is out there in riot gear trying to prevent the White House from being overrun.

[Admiral Yi]

Talking about the people. Millions of people lost their homes due to predatory lending practices.

So the socioeconomic elite robbed The People blind by lending them money and not getting paid back.  Got it.

[jimmy olsen]

Talking about the people. Millions of people lost their homes due to predatory lending practices.

So the socioeconomic elite robbed The People blind by lending them money and not getting paid back.  Got it.

The predatory was key there. They broke tons of laws there.

You think those lost homes just disappeared into the ether? The banks ended up with them. Whether they end up being paid back or getting the property via default the banks always end up ahead.

[Admiral Yi]

The predatory was key there. They broke tons of laws there.

You think those lost homes just disappeared into the ether? The banks ended up with them. Whether they end up being paid back or getting the property via default the banks always end up ahead.

So the banks made tone of money predatory lending and repossessing houses, so none of them got taken over for pennies like Washington Mutual and Bear Stearns, and none of them needed bailout money from the government.  Got it.

[Zoupa]

No, none of them needed a bailout. They took it though.

[Admiral Yi]

No, none of them needed a bailout. They took it though.

Why did they take it if they didn't need it?

And why does Lehman Brothers no longer exist, or Bear Stearns, or Washington Mutual?

[Richard Hakluyt]

I blame Camper for the demise of WaMu 

[Solmyr]

First, there is not much evidence it is effective in actually making positive change. There have been numerous violent protests over police violence, as far as I'm aware not much evidence this has changed the problem.

The Stonewall Riots were massive and got us LGBT rights.

[garbon]

Ah, so your cryptic comment was referring just to trying to effectively drive change on police brutality directed at people of color.

First off, the attitude? Don't need it and won't have it. After all, it shouldn't be a surprise that I might be talking about police brutality towards people of color in a thread called: The Shooting Gallery: Police Violence MEGATHREAD and the forum is discussing the reactions to the police murdering a black person.

Well, I'd say that violent methods have failed, and there are far more nonviolent methods that haven't even been attempted than violent ones.  You may believe that the principles of non-violence advocated by MLK are no longer viable, but I am unconvinced by a mere assertion.

Where, exactly, do you expect the violent methods you espouse to lead?  tactical defeat of the police?  Inflicting so many injustices on innocent people that the public cries "uncle' and surrenders to.... whatever you think the alternative to modern society is?

The practitioners of nonviolence had an endgame.  What's the endgame for you supporters of violence?

Excuse me, I'm not a supporter of violence. I'm sad for my country that it has come to this, something that will just lead to more brutality / no underlying fundamental change.

Noting that I can see how people might feel it is there only course of action does not mean that I condone the violence.

As to why they feel that's their only recourse? Well Tim actually noted it quite well, we've had many large peaceful protests in my lifetime and they don't seem to accomplish much. More like an emotional bonding session for the protesters than a driver of any real change. I can see how that can lead some to question the utility of yet another ineffectual march.

It has been nearly 6 years since the death of Eric Garner, so nearly 6 years from when I felt fear, sadness and anger as I tried to commute home through a crowd of protesters monitored by the police. 6 years and what has changed? Well if anything, it has gotten worse as leadership of the country only repeatedly adds fuel to the flames. 

Looking back at MLK, in his day, his non-violent approach was labeled as extremist. That's not the case today and that's why it is an insufficient outlet for releasing 'repressed emotions'.

Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever. The yearning for freedom eventually manifests itself, and that is what has happened to the American Negro. Something within has reminded him of his birthright of freedom, and something without has reminded him that it can be gained. Consciously or unconsciously, he has been caught up by the Zeitgeist, and with his black brothers of Africa and his brown and yellow brothers of Asia, South America and the Caribbean, the United States Negro is moving with a sense of great urgency toward the promised land of racial justice. If one recognizes this vital urge that has engulfed the Negro community, one should readily understand why public demonstrations are taking place. The Negro has many pent up resentments and latent frustrations, and he must release them. So let him march; let him make prayer pilgrimages to the city hall; let him go on freedom rides -and try to understand why he must do so. If his repressed emotions are not released in nonviolent ways, they will seek expression through violence; this is not a threat but a fact of history. So I have not said to my people: "Get rid of your discontent." Rather, I have tried to say that this normal and healthy discontent can be channeled into the creative outlet of nonviolent direct action. And now this approach is being termed extremist.

[garbon]

First, there is not much evidence it is effective in actually making positive change. There have been numerous violent protests over police violence, as far as I'm aware not much evidence this has changed the problem.

The Stonewall Riots were massive and got us LGBT rights.

That seems like quite the paraphrase. Gays were still continually arrested after Stonewall and just looking it up, the Stonewall Inn actually went out of business shortly after the Stonewall Riots.

I think the best that can be said is that they sparked a new sense of gay consciousness/militancy that led to more coherent activism which led to increase rights for gays.

[Syt]

I think another difference these days might be that in the 60s, there were still discriminatory laws on the books that were struck down due to the success of the Civil Rights Movement.

Today, at least on paper, minorities enjoy the same rights, freedoms, and protections as white people, but in practice they're often treated very differently. The change required now is structural and in the minds of people, and that is much more difficult to accomplish than changing the laws on the books.

[Syt]

Meanwhile at the US embassy in Vienna. Guy wants to write with chalk "That's why we kneel", with a police guard intentionally getting in the way, ignoring the Corona distancing rules, and asking him repeatedly if he's even properly registered in Austria.





The Twitter accound of the Vienna police has posted that they understand people are angry and that the photos have been forwarded to internal review.

[The Larch]

So much for Rotes Wien.