The Shooting Gallery: Police Violence MEGATHREAD

[Admiral Yi]

Do you think militarized police forces disappearing people in unmarked vehicles is a proportionate response to spray paint on federal buildings?

Most of those things are emotional triggers that I guess just don't get to me too much.  Law enforcement in riot gear with bullet proof vests are going to appear "militarized."  I'm not going to demand that cops respond to large crowds that often use violence in tshirts and bike shorts.  "Disappearing people in unmarked vehicles" is supposed to evoke South American dictatorship's dirty war against communism.  If the people arrested in Portland are truly being held incommunicado, that's when I'll start to worry.  If the question is whether arresting a spray painter is proportionate, I'd say yes.

[Valmy]

If the question is whether arresting a spray painter is proportionate, I'd say yes.

Depends on how it is done and if it is following the proper legal procedures. It is almost like we have rules about what is proportionate.

[Oexmelin]

There is not crowd using violence. There is no arrest of people committing the horrible crime of spray painting a federal office.  These are people seized walking in the streets by men mobilized through an extraordinary process to give a hard on to authoritarians.

If you are waiting for the magic day when the American government turns on full turbo fascist to get worried, you'll never see it. It's not how it happens.

[Admiral Yi]

Depends on how it is done and if it is following the proper legal procedures. It is almost like we have rules about what is proportionate.

We have rules about things like excessive use of force, which AFAIK is not at issue in Portland.  I 'm not aware of any rules about marking law enforcement vehicles.  And of course we have rules about appearing before a judge, bail hearings, contacting lawyers, etc., etc.  If any of those are broken then it's a big fucking deal.

[Sheilbh]

As to the second, what difference does it make if it's just an excuse or not? Or rather I should say that's the narrative we'd prefer to focus on.  But the actual principle at stake is whether protesters in a virtuous cause should be able to damage federal property without repercussion.  The damage to federal property creates the legal and moral justification for action.  It's what starts to turn centrists like myself away from the virtuous protesters in a virtuous cause/evil Trump and his jack booted thugs narrative toward something more morally gray.

For a  start I don't really think in terms of virtue - I think it's a weird route to go down and you're conflating two points: protesters in a virtuous cause and protesters behaving virtuously. They're different. Do I particularly care about spray-painting?

Even if there is damage to federal property. And that becomes a "moral justification" for action, not all actions are equal. For me the more important issue to an extent on both sides is around proportionality.To me unbadged, unidentified federal law enforcement plucking people off the streets despite not being invited by the states is not proportionate to spray-painting. In addition I think it is, in itself, potentially corrosive and dangerous to normal principles of law enforcement in a democracy - it's not normal behaviour that you don't know who is arresting people on the streets or even what they're being arrested for. And I say this is assuming those arrests are for damage to federal property, I've not seen any evidence of that yet. To me it looks like an excuse to deploy those forces who are then just roaming the streets.

[Admiral Yi]

For a  start I don't really think in terms of virtue - I think it's a weird route to go down and you're conflating two points: protesters in a virtuous cause and protesters behaving virtuously. They're different. Do I particularly care about spray-painting?

Even if there is damage to federal property. And that becomes a "moral justification" for action, not all actions are equal. For me the more important issue to an extent on both sides is around proportionality.To me unbadged, unidentified federal law enforcement plucking people off the streets despite not being invited by the states is not proportionate to spray-painting. In addition I think it is, in itself, potentially corrosive and dangerous to normal principles of law enforcement in a democracy - it's not normal behaviour that you don't know who is arresting people on the streets or even what they're being arrested for. And I say this is assuming those arrests are for damage to federal property, I've not seen any evidence of that yet. To me it looks like an excuse to deploy those forces who are then just roaming the streets.

When I go to the trouble of typing out "virtuous protesters in a virtuous cause" it's the exact opposite of conflating the two.

You don't particularly care about spray painting.  Others don't particularly care about burning cop cars or police stations, some don't particularly care about throwing rocks or frozen water at cops, some don't particularly care about shooting cops.  Who's right?

I addressed the unmarked car stuff in my response to Syt.

I don't have any direct evidence of damage to federal property either.  Shall we make it a simple empirical question of damage/no damage?  My stance would change significantly if there were no damage (or the imminent threat of damage).  Would your stance change?

[fromtia]

Seems to me if protesters stay away from federal buildings this issue goes away.

I think you are deliberately masquerading as a kind of pantomime Yi at this point. "Unidentified military types bundling people into unmarked cars? - Seems to me this is all normal and above board" .No doubt if things get Pinochet-Helicopter you will still be "seems to me..."

[fromtia]

I'm currently re-reading Judge Dredd: The Complete Case Files.

[Sheilbh]

I don't have any direct evidence of damage to federal property either.  Shall we make it a simple empirical question of damage/no damage?  My stance would change significantly if there were no damage (or the imminent threat of damage).  Would your stance change?

And my point is I've not seen any indication that these federal forces are identifying the people responsible for criminal damage. That's why I think it's just an excuse - because from what I've seen it looks like they are just "policing the streets" (which isn't their job) and the people arrested seem pretty random.

But even if they were identifying the spray painters, no - none of the three videos of policing in Portland seem remotely proportionate to criminal damage, I also don't think criminal damage is anywhere near sufficient to send in federal police if you weren't requested by the state.

When I go to the trouble of typing out "virtuous protesters in a virtuous cause" it's the exact opposite of conflating the two.

So why do the lack of virtuous people make the cause morally grey? Surely it's virtuous or it's not (though I hate that language).

You don't particularly care about spray painting.  Others don't particularly care about burning cop cars or police stations, some don't particularly care about throwing rocks or frozen water at cops, some don't particularly care about shooting cops.  Who's right?

Yeah. But we can set pretty objective reasons why spray painting is different than arson is different than trying to kill someone. Whereas your point seems to be if there is a moral and legal justification for action by law enforcement then anything goes and actually arresting a terrorist and a spray painter is basically the same thing.

[Admiral Yi]

.No doubt if things get Pinochet-Helicopter you will still be "seems to me..."

I specifically said the exact opposite just a while ago, so I guess you're calling me a liar.

[Admiral Yi]

So why do the lack of virtuous people make the cause morally grey? Surely it's virtuous or it's not (though I hate that language).

Did I say it renders the cause morally gray?  That's not what I meant.  I meant it renders this situation (jack booted Trumpist thugs bundling Portland hipsters into minivans) morally gray.

The cause, defined as law enforcement should not unduly kill black people, remains exactly the same.

[Tamas]

Seems to me if protesters stay away from federal buildings this issue goes away.

But as I say this type of protest seems classic Gandhi/MLK approach - the purpose is to provoke a response.

TBF that "follow us and you get shot" incident was following the arrested lady trying to hit an officer on a motorbike with her protest sign, allegedly. That doesn't make the whole episode ok, but if true that's not exactly a Gandhi approach either.

[Sheilbh]

TBF that "follow us and you get shot" incident was following the arrested lady trying to hit an officer on a motorbike with her protest sign, allegedly. That doesn't make the whole episode ok, but if true that's not exactly a Gandhi approach either.

My point on that is if the state are saying don't come near Federal buildings, the response isn't to stay away from Federal buildings. You protest at Federal buildings exactly to provoke a response.

[merithyn]

Seems to me if protesters stay away from federal buildings this issue goes away.

Except that a number of the "kidnappings" were miles away from Federal buildings. (Across the river and north, if you'd like exactness.)

[merithyn]

But as I say this type of protest seems classic Gandhi/MLK approach - the purpose is to provoke a response.

I don't know the particulars, but I've read about "damage to federal property."  I'm guessing some spray painting, but that's just a guess.  That's not just provoking a response, that's breaking a law, a law that most people in this country probably think is a good and just law that needs no changing.  That's not what Gandhi and MLK did.

The particulars of damage to federal property in Portland - I've gone down and seen it myself and several friends have also done so and posted pictures - were spray painting on two (city) statues and one federal building. The building is now completely surrounded by 10'-high fencing and inaccessible to the public. (The fencing was up a month before the feds showed up in the city.)