The Shooting Gallery: Police Violence MEGATHREAD

[Tamas]

After posting a picture of his dad on civil rights marches, here's Mitt Romney joining the 1,000 Christians for BLM today:
[img width=12
This is a sign of the success of these protests. If you'd said on 1 January that by the end of the year Mitt Romney would have joined a BLM protest I think you would have been laughed out the room.

So, Romney....actually a decent guy or just wants to stick it to Trump?

What's the yardstick for that? Compared to Trump, Dubya Bush is a standup guy I'd happily vote for.

[Tamas]

OMG the Labour leader being measured and reasonable? How refreshing:

It shouldn't be done in that way. Completely wrong to pull a statue down like that.

But, stepping back, that statue should have been taken down a long, long time ago. You can't, in 21st-century Britain, have a slaver on a statue.

A statue is there to honour people. And you can't have that in 21st-century Britain. That statue should have been brought down properly with consent and put, I would say, in a museum.

This was a man who was responsible for 100,000 people being moved from Africa to the Caribbean as slaves, including women and children who were branded on their chests with the name of the company that he ran. Of the 100,000, 20,000 died en route and they were chucked in the sea.

[Maladict]

OMG the Labour leader being measured and reasonable? How refreshing:

...
You can't, in 21st-century Britain, have a slaver on a statue.
...

I imagine there are quite a lot of them. I don't see Drake coming down any time soon.

[Josquius]

What's the yardstick for that? Compared to Trump, Dubya Bush is a standup guy I'd happily vote for.

Well, being better than Trump is a given.
But you don't see many politicians even from the progressive side of things so actively supporting the protests.

OMG the Labour leader being measured and reasonable? How refreshing:

...
You can't, in 21st-century Britain, have a slaver on a statue.
...

I imagine there are quite a lot of them. I don't see Drake coming down any time soon.

I've not seen a Drake statue about actually. Maybe in his home town?

Drake is nowhere near as bad as this guy though. His slave trading being very small scale, reselling slaves that he had stolen, and far further back in history.

[Eddie Teach]

There wasn't really much of an abolitionist movement in the late 17th century either.

[Sheilbh]

Well, being better than Trump is a given.
But you don't see many politicians even from the progressive side of things so actively supporting the protests.

Lots of Dems have been attending and posting themselves on social media. Elizabeth Warren has been on at least three days, normally with her dog but I don't think she's been doing the selfies so much.

I've not seen a Drake statue about actually. Maybe in his home town?

Drake is nowhere near as bad as this guy though. His slave trading being very small scale, reselling slaves that he had stolen, and far further back in history.

Yeah I think there's a load in Devon, as you'd expect - hometown boy done good. I can't think of any in London off the top of my head, which is surprising given that I can think of statues of at least 4 US Presidents (Washington, Lincoln, FDR and Ike) and of course there's even a statue of George IV giving his horse severe back pain.

But it's right there will be loads of statues of slavers around - especially in the City with statues of various grandees from the 17th-18th century. As I say I'd like us to have this debate and consider how we confront and deal with our history, which hopefully this will provoke. In general my preference is to add context and remember the victims in the same sort of space as we remember the slave traders. I also think that would work, for example, with the statue of Clive outside the Foreign Office or the statue of Napier in Trafalgar Square.

But as I say putting up a statue is a cultural expression and taking one down is exactly the same. What may have been the culture that the UK wanted to celebrate/memorialise in the 1890s is different than what we want now. You know, we're a country that's torn down Catholic statues and white-washed walls and destroyed stained glass, we've torn down royallist and parliamentarian monuments etc. I'd like a lot of it preserved in a museum but I sort of think it's okay to re-fresh the public space in our streets and squares fairly regularly - what does it express about us now.

[Tamas]

But as I say putting up a statue is a cultural expression and taking one down is exactly the same. What may have been the culture that the UK wanted to celebrate/memorialise in the 1890s is different than what we want now. You know, we're a country that's torn down Catholic statues and white-washed walls and destroyed stained glass, we've torn down royallist and parliamentarian monuments etc. I'd like a lot of it preserved in a museum but I sort of think it's okay to re-fresh the public space in our streets and squares fairly regularly - what does it express about us now.

I agree with this completely, but if you take yesterday's event, remove the particulars and look just at the act in general, then what happened was that a group of people assembled and tore down a public structure by force, because they wanted to.

It is very important, especially in a multi-cultural society, but really in any society that wants rule of law, that such acts do not become accepted, even conditionally. Otherwise streets will become a battleground of damaging symbols.


In regards to slavery, a proper facing of its history with it would be apt for Britain because I don't think they have anything to be particularly ashamed about. Yes, they did partake and just like that guy on the statue, those who got filthy rich over the suffering of untold thousands, should not be celebrated or having statues of them. But Britain also led the fight on abolishing slavery around the world,  quite literally, with the Royal Navy hunting slaveships IIRC. This and the people playing a key role in it is should be remembered and statues raised about.

[Josquius]

On the statue removal thing... I'm wondering if it was thrown in the water,  treating it like a shopping trolley and not worthy of much, or as a bit of commentary on his victims.

[Tonitrus]

To me, the sadder reflection on modern society is that pretty much everyone there is pointing a camera/mobile phone camera at the event for their later self-aggrandizement on Instragram/Facebook.

[Sheilbh]

I agree with this completely, but if you take yesterday's event, remove the particulars and look just at the act in general, then what happened was that a group of people assembled and tore down a public structure by force, because they wanted to.

It is very important, especially in a multi-cultural society, but really in any society that wants rule of law, that such acts do not become accepted, even conditionally. Otherwise streets will become a battleground of damaging symbols.

Yeah - I think the added point is just that I know Bristol quite well and I know there have been attempts to change that statue for a long time it was agreed in the last few years to add an additional plaque that explicitly referred to him as a slave trader but it has not been possible to agree a text (and in fairness there are still at least four streets, one tower, one pub, two schools and a local baked good named after him). I think that is part of the reason this happened in Bristol with that statue is how to difficult it has been to even add something acknowledging his part in the slave trade in a democratic way. In part it's a BLM issue, in part it's probably frustration at how difficult it has been to do this in the "right" way.

On the statue removal thing... I'm wondering if it was thrown in the water,  treating it like a shopping trolley and not worthy of much, or as a bit of commentary on his victims.

I don't know but it is definitely the latter. As the Mayor of Bristol put it, "we have a statue of someone who made their money by throwing our people into water...and now he's on the bottom of the water."

Edit: And this image from the end of the protest is striking - Bristol council has been collecting the placards for permanent display, which I think is appropriate:


Edit: Also, incidentally, when the debate was around a second plaque referring to his role in the slave trade, one local Tory councillor said it would be justified to steal the second plaque. So defacing the statue/attacking public property is okay in certain circumstances

[Maladict]

It seems these events tend to happen roughly the same way in every time and place. When the momentum is there for permanent change, the first couple of statues come down by (spontaneous) force, then the other ones are removed quietly by the authorities.

I've not seen a Drake statue about actually. Maybe in his home town?

There is a rather prominent one in Plymouth

[Fate]

After posting a picture of his dad on civil rights marches, here's Mitt Romney joining the 1,000 Christians for BLM today:
[img width=12
This is a sign of the success of these protests. If you'd said on 1 January that by the end of the year Mitt Romney would have joined a BLM protest I think you would have been laughed out the room.

So, Romney....actually a decent guy or just wants to stick it to Trump?

Maybe he's a decent man, but I wouldn't trust his virtue signaling on BLM as genuine until we see legislative action. He's a politician who will bend with the wind and discards principles. Remember he has both represented an extremely liberal state in the past (Gov. of Massachussetts) and now an extremely conservative state (Sen. of Utah) so we know he has no qualms about pretending to believe whatever is necesssary to win election. I think he mostly wants to stick it to Trump and sees an opening for 2024 to gain power.

[The Larch]

John Oliver's Last Week Tonight's has been, unsurprisingly, about the police in the US. It covers many of the topics we've been mentioning in the last few days: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wf4cea5oObY

[The Larch]

Apparently the Buffalo cops who resigned from the Emergency Response unit didn't do so out of solidarity with the officers who had been suspended for pushing the 75 yo man to the ground, but because they'd no longer be legally covered by the city or their union during their actions.

EXCLUSIVE: Two Buffalo Police ERT members say resignation was not in solidarity with suspended officers

BUFFALO, N.Y. (WKBW) — "It went bad. It went bad."

Two officers of the Buffalo Police Department's Emergency Response Team spoke with 7 Eyewitness News under the condition their names not be used.

The officers are part of the 57-person volunteer assignment team that resigned Friday, following an incident involving two of their members Thursday night in Niagara Square. They did not resign from the police department, only from their roles on the team.

The officers we spoke with said the Buffalo Police Benevolent Association's statement asserting all 57 officers resigned from ERT in a "show of support" with the two officers that were suspended without pay is not true.

"I don't understand why the union said it's a thing of solidarity. I think it sends the wrong message that 'we're backing our own' and that's not the case," said one officer with whom we spoke.

"We quit because our union said [they] aren't legally backing us anymore. So why would we stand on a line for the City with no legal backing if something [were to] happen? Has nothing to do with us supporting," said another.

A representative from the Buffalo Police Benevolent Association told 7 Eyewitness News Reporter Hannah Buehler the officers resigned in "disgust" with how the two officers were treated.

"Some of them probably resigned because they support the officer," said another officer with whom we spoke. "But, for many of us, that's not true."

"The City, DA Flynn, they're not representing those guys at all. They have to find their own lawyers, they have to come out of pocket."

7 Eyewitness News was not able to reach PBA president John Evans to confirm this information or get a response to several officers shooting down his assertions, but we did obtain an email sent to PBA members by Evans.

It states, in part:

"In light of this, in order to maintain the sound financial structure of the PBA it will be my opinion the PBA NOT to pay for any ERT or SWAT members legal defense related to these protests going forward. This Admin in conjunction with DA John Flynn and or JP Kennedy could put a serious dent in the PBA's funds."

"You can't ask people to do something and then when they do it and it goes bad then you just say they're on their own," an officer told 7 Eyewitness News.

[merithyn]

But respect to you Merry for a dialogue. Thanks.

You clearly had ideas - and more experience than the rest of us - and I wanted to hear them. Thank you for taking the time to do so.

WHAT DO YOU (PROTESTERS) REALISTICALLY AND LOGICALLY WANT IN POLICING. It's all just knee-jerk reaction right now. Sure defund the PDs, that will change when some jack ass is shooting up a school, mall, or concert and you don't have the cops or hardware to take him out. How do you think we got to the current state of police militarization, well your elected politicians and citizenry. The politicians will lie to your face so the protesters won't destroy their cities.

If you're asking what *I* want, the answer is pretty close to what you suggested with a few minor tweaks that probably aren't worth mentioning. But one thing that I think *has* to happen that you didn't bring up is alternatives to police response - or addendums to police response.

As was mentioned by Toni, some portion of PD funding should go toward mental health experts who are available and able to attend to calls that are "mental health crises". Obviously, those can still be dangerous, but specially trained mental health experts on the scene has been shown to de-escalate situations far more often than police alone.

Additionally, something you didn't bring up, is racial profiling/racial treatment. This is a societal problem, but the police have *got* to step up and take charge on this. The only way that's going to happen is to get rid of their safety nets (Union, allowed to quit, no national database of employment record). Those things are dangerous in that I'm not a big believer in preventing someone from doing their job for the rest of their lives over a single mistake, nor not giving them room to learn and grow. But I think that can be handled well with a lot of thought and planning. (Unlike the sex-offender's registry, which is only now becoming truly useful/fair, and that depends on the state.)

*As was mentioned by Toni, some portion of PD funding should go toward mental health experts who are available and able to attend to calls that are "mental health crises". Obviously, those can still be dangerous, but specially trained mental health experts on the scene has been shown to de-escalate situations far more often than police alone.

In Washington state it's called CIT (Crisis Intervention Training) certification that police officers can and do get. I have sent 20 or so of my officers to that certification. This certification has been in wa state for maybe a decade IIRC. And the police officers do just what you describe. It is and has been incredibly effective. Maybe wa state is ahead of the curve in this area? Don't know about the rest of the country


*Additionally, something you didn't bring up, is racial profiling/racial treatment. This is a societal problem, but the police have *got* to step up and take charge on this. The only way that's going to happen is to get rid of their safety nets (Union, allowed to quit, no national database of employment record). Those things are dangerous in that I'm not a big believer in preventing someone from doing their job for the rest of their lives over a single mistake, nor not giving them room to learn and grow. But I think that can be handled well with a lot of thought and planning. (Unlike the sex-offender's registry, which is only now becoming truly useful/fair, and that depends on the state.)

Yes it is and it needs to be a multi pronged approach to stamp it out. Departmentally, Politically, and Society itself etc.

However those nets you describe are a part of the systemic problem for the police in general. But they need to go away. How many use of force issues did that turd have in his record who killed Floyd? Too many and that goes to the heart of it IMO. He should have never been a cop let alone an FTO training new officers.

So despite the snarky back-and-forth, we seem to agree on nearly all points.

My guess is that most people agree on these points. The problem is in gaining the trust that those who can and will make the decisions will do so in good faith. Trust has been seriously eroded and what's being seen today builds on that mistrust.

The very first thing that has to happen is that the police HAVE to be seen as being on the side of the people, and right now, they are anything but. And again, that falls on them. The "bad apples" came from them, stayed with them, and continue to be protected by them. I see the protests as forcing the police to see that and deal with it.

How they handle the next couple of weeks and months will show if they - the police - really do want change and to be part of the solution instead of staying a militarized thug squad.