Options

Minneapolis is on fire.

19596979899101»

Posts

  • Options
    Speed RacerSpeed Racer Scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratchRegistered User regular
    rhylith wrote: »
    Fishman wrote: »
    -Tal wrote: »
    The eight rules do not create any additional mechanisms for accountability. Cities have everything they need to hold cops accountable now and they are simply choosing not to.

    1. These two sentances are contradictory. If cities already have everything they need to hold cops accountable, why would they need additional mechanisms?
    2.
    Fishman wrote: »

    I mean, I think the proposal deserves a bit of peer review, and is worth debating, but it feels a bit like a few too many people are looking at a catchy graphic and dismissing without digging any deeper.

    That whole initiative is part of campaign zero, an organization started by several of the most prominent voices to come out of the Ferguson protests.

    Those 8 steps are definitely not the only thing they’re advocating for.

    I'm not really arguing one way or the other about it, but fwiw this thread makes some counter arguments against it

    Also, it's worth remembering that many of the most prominent voices to come out of the ferguson protests were found dead under suspicious circumstances in the following years.

  • Options
    MagellMagell Detroit Machine Guns Fort MyersRegistered User regular
    Fishman wrote: »
    -Tal wrote: »
    The eight rules do not create any additional mechanisms for accountability. Cities have everything they need to hold cops accountable now and they are simply choosing not to.

    1. These two sentances are contradictory. If cities already have everything they need to hold cops accountable, why would they need additional mechanisms?
    2.
    Fishman wrote: »

    I mean, I think the proposal deserves a bit of peer review, and is worth debating, but it feels a bit like a few too many people are looking at a catchy graphic and dismissing without digging any deeper.

    All of those 8 steps are already illegal for cops.

    If we conced to keeping police around the problem is that they are the ones that police themselves and they never get punished for their transgressions.

  • Options
    Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Registered User regular
    Solar wrote: »
    I think if I was American I'd advise you not to really think about salvaging your international reputation

    Fix your internal problems and that will come with it. Slowly. Maybe also bomb less people as a general idea.

    (I'd say the same thing to my own country, incidentally)

    Yeah after ww2 we just kinda grabbed the Mideast adventuring stick from you all

    I make sure to refer to BP by their previous name to remind folks (Anglo-Iranian Oil Company)

  • Options
    PhillisherePhillishere Registered User regular
    Magell wrote: »
    Fishman wrote: »
    -Tal wrote: »
    The eight rules do not create any additional mechanisms for accountability. Cities have everything they need to hold cops accountable now and they are simply choosing not to.

    1. These two sentances are contradictory. If cities already have everything they need to hold cops accountable, why would they need additional mechanisms?
    2.
    Fishman wrote: »

    I mean, I think the proposal deserves a bit of peer review, and is worth debating, but it feels a bit like a few too many people are looking at a catchy graphic and dismissing without digging any deeper.

    All of those 8 steps are already illegal for cops.

    If we conced to keeping police around the problem is that they are the ones that police themselves and they never get punished for their transgressions.

    With the even larger problem that the “roaming asshole with a badge and a gun” model primarily appeals to high school bullies.

    The key to effective police reform is to replace the police with social workers backed up by highly trained armed response units who spend their time training more instead of wandering around harassing people and becoming sociopaths in response to everyone in the community hating and fearing them.

    Just in general, letting police just wander around and start shit is a lot of the problem.

  • Options
    Typhoid MannyTyphoid Manny Registered User regular
    Oghulk wrote: »
    Oghulk wrote: »
    I get that the LAPD budget cuts don't seem like much, but that's a really significant step given the police department union's political power, their collective bargaining agreements, and the fact that it's supposedly from salaries. Local governments right now are in full retrenchment season because of COVID, so the fact that they might actually consider police department budget cuts to make up for those shortfalls is really important.

    this is sort of a good illustration of why incrementalism is dangerous. you're 100% right in everything you say, it's a big deal the LAPD got their budget cut even though the amount barely signifies against their total budget, but that shouldn't be a big deal. it doesn't come anywhere near actually addressing the problems, and the fact that we consider it a major concession shows just how far on one end of the spectrum we are. if the best they're offering is reform at a rate where (for example) maybe american cops will look like UK cops in twenty or thirty years, that just isn't good enough. that means many thousands more people unjustly killed or locked up and millions or billions of dollars stolen from people who didn't do anything wrong. that kind of progress is indistinguishable from just treading water. plus a long string of minor incremental changes are much, much easier to roll back when the politician who instituted them is voted out and replaced by a fascist or a fascist sympathizer

    I think the most significant part of it isn't that it's a small amount, but they're actually willing to do it despite the political pressure to not do so. I'm not saying "ah yes enough we're good now" but that pressure should be maintained because they now see the protest movement as a viable political threat that counteracts the political power of the police unions. That is significant

    no i get what you're saying and i agree with you, it surely is significant in a relative sense. but in an absolute sense it's basically worthless, which i think both the people protesting and the politicians suddenly scared enough to start trying to compromise understand

    this i think is one of the major differences between these protests and ones in the past, our current thing was started by radicals and hasn't been taken over yet by liberals, and it doesn't seem likely that's gonna happen at all. i'm not shit-talking liberals here either, just saying that they would be satisfied with relatively minor institutional changes that radicals believe aren't anywhere near enough

    from each according to his ability, to each according to his need
    hitting hot metal with hammers
  • Options
    rhylithrhylith Death Rabbits HoustonRegistered User regular
    rhylith wrote: »
    Fishman wrote: »
    -Tal wrote: »
    The eight rules do not create any additional mechanisms for accountability. Cities have everything they need to hold cops accountable now and they are simply choosing not to.

    1. These two sentances are contradictory. If cities already have everything they need to hold cops accountable, why would they need additional mechanisms?
    2.
    Fishman wrote: »

    I mean, I think the proposal deserves a bit of peer review, and is worth debating, but it feels a bit like a few too many people are looking at a catchy graphic and dismissing without digging any deeper.

    That whole initiative is part of campaign zero, an organization started by several of the most prominent voices to come out of the Ferguson protests.

    Those 8 steps are definitely not the only thing they’re advocating for.

    I'm not really arguing one way or the other about it, but fwiw this thread makes some counter arguments against it

    Also, it's worth remembering that many of the most prominent voices to come out of the ferguson protests were found dead under suspicious circumstances in the following years.

    I’m not arguing for its effectiveness, I’m saying it’s not all they’re advocating. This is just one initiative.

    https://www.joincampaignzero.org/solutions

  • Options
    HobnailHobnail Registered User regular
    Hobnail wrote: »
    Solar wrote: »
    Why the US military allows troops to just paint whatever fucking design they like on their equipment, armour, vehicles they like is beyond me

    You'd have thought that they'd be like, you get your allocated decals and unit markings and that's fucking it. This isn't the 11th confederate cavalry punisher brigade combat team. Put the unit symbol on there, and anything else is prohibited.

    Oh well not anything the NO GODS NO MASTERS decal on your tank is gonna get you in hot water

    WARZONE PUNISHER CUCK SMASHER not so much

    Since the repeal of DADT, I feel it is only right and equitable for us to reintroduce pin-up girls and boys for all sexual orientations; alongside The Memphis Belle you could have Big Dick McGillicutty, and Betty Paige's BDSM counterpart could be Biker Leather Daddy.

    Just countless military war machines covered in hentai, furry art, Ernie suckin' Bert's dick and Miss Piggy pegging Kermit.

    You'd save billions on the cost of ammo, no one would ever go into combat against such depravity.

    I dont like it

    But I dont hate it either

    Broke as fuck and the bills past due, all amounts assist and are kindly received.

    https://www.paypal.me/hobnailtaylor
  • Options
    HobnailHobnail Registered User regular
    Broke as fuck and the bills past due, all amounts assist and are kindly received.

    https://www.paypal.me/hobnailtaylor
  • Options
    YaYaYaYa Decent. Registered User regular
    good lord he has to lean down to get in the pig's faces, we stan a huge king

  • Options
    SolarSolar Registered User regular
    He looks like a fucking video game character

  • Options
    Mortal SkyMortal Sky queer punk hedge witchRegistered User regular
    height slider alllll the way up

  • Options
    PhillisherePhillishere Registered User regular
    Oghulk wrote: »
    Oghulk wrote: »
    I get that the LAPD budget cuts don't seem like much, but that's a really significant step given the police department union's political power, their collective bargaining agreements, and the fact that it's supposedly from salaries. Local governments right now are in full retrenchment season because of COVID, so the fact that they might actually consider police department budget cuts to make up for those shortfalls is really important.

    this is sort of a good illustration of why incrementalism is dangerous. you're 100% right in everything you say, it's a big deal the LAPD got their budget cut even though the amount barely signifies against their total budget, but that shouldn't be a big deal. it doesn't come anywhere near actually addressing the problems, and the fact that we consider it a major concession shows just how far on one end of the spectrum we are. if the best they're offering is reform at a rate where (for example) maybe american cops will look like UK cops in twenty or thirty years, that just isn't good enough. that means many thousands more people unjustly killed or locked up and millions or billions of dollars stolen from people who didn't do anything wrong. that kind of progress is indistinguishable from just treading water. plus a long string of minor incremental changes are much, much easier to roll back when the politician who instituted them is voted out and replaced by a fascist or a fascist sympathizer

    I think the most significant part of it isn't that it's a small amount, but they're actually willing to do it despite the political pressure to not do so. I'm not saying "ah yes enough we're good now" but that pressure should be maintained because they now see the protest movement as a viable political threat that counteracts the political power of the police unions. That is significant

    no i get what you're saying and i agree with you, it surely is significant in a relative sense. but in an absolute sense it's basically worthless, which i think both the people protesting and the politicians suddenly scared enough to start trying to compromise understand

    this i think is one of the major differences between these protests and ones in the past, our current thing was started by radicals and hasn't been taken over yet by liberals, and it doesn't seem likely that's gonna happen at all. i'm not shit-talking liberals here either, just saying that they would be satisfied with relatively minor institutional changes that radicals believe aren't anywhere near enough

    I would hesitate to point to this as a radical protest. It is a necessary action by the black community, who realized that their lives have no value to the state even in areas where ostensible allies dominate the political system.

    There are radicals out there, but the reason this movement seems radical is that it is led by a group of people who are literally fighting for their lives.

  • Options
    turtleantturtleant Gunpla Dad is the best.Registered User regular
  • Options
    Typhoid MannyTyphoid Manny Registered User regular
    Oghulk wrote: »
    Oghulk wrote: »
    I get that the LAPD budget cuts don't seem like much, but that's a really significant step given the police department union's political power, their collective bargaining agreements, and the fact that it's supposedly from salaries. Local governments right now are in full retrenchment season because of COVID, so the fact that they might actually consider police department budget cuts to make up for those shortfalls is really important.

    this is sort of a good illustration of why incrementalism is dangerous. you're 100% right in everything you say, it's a big deal the LAPD got their budget cut even though the amount barely signifies against their total budget, but that shouldn't be a big deal. it doesn't come anywhere near actually addressing the problems, and the fact that we consider it a major concession shows just how far on one end of the spectrum we are. if the best they're offering is reform at a rate where (for example) maybe american cops will look like UK cops in twenty or thirty years, that just isn't good enough. that means many thousands more people unjustly killed or locked up and millions or billions of dollars stolen from people who didn't do anything wrong. that kind of progress is indistinguishable from just treading water. plus a long string of minor incremental changes are much, much easier to roll back when the politician who instituted them is voted out and replaced by a fascist or a fascist sympathizer

    I think the most significant part of it isn't that it's a small amount, but they're actually willing to do it despite the political pressure to not do so. I'm not saying "ah yes enough we're good now" but that pressure should be maintained because they now see the protest movement as a viable political threat that counteracts the political power of the police unions. That is significant

    no i get what you're saying and i agree with you, it surely is significant in a relative sense. but in an absolute sense it's basically worthless, which i think both the people protesting and the politicians suddenly scared enough to start trying to compromise understand

    this i think is one of the major differences between these protests and ones in the past, our current thing was started by radicals and hasn't been taken over yet by liberals, and it doesn't seem likely that's gonna happen at all. i'm not shit-talking liberals here either, just saying that they would be satisfied with relatively minor institutional changes that radicals believe aren't anywhere near enough

    I would hesitate to point to this as a radical protest. It is a necessary action by the black community, who realized that their lives have no value to the state even in areas where ostensible allies dominate the political system.

    There are radicals out there, but the reason this movement seems radical is that it is led by a group of people who are literally fighting for their lives.

    that's fair, i think i was imprecise in what i was trying to get at. the main point was that it hasn't been co-opted yet like occupy was

    from each according to his ability, to each according to his need
    hitting hot metal with hammers
  • Options
    HobnailHobnail Registered User regular
    edited June 2020
    Yes if you're wearing hearing protection around firearm discharges or flashbangs or LRADs and etc. please be certaib you are wearing them correctly

    The idea is to keep pressure waves from fucking your eardrums apart so the main idea is to create a total seal in front of them, if you are wearing the disposable foam jobs make sure to twist them tight so they will fit into your ear canal, when they untwist they will expand to fill the space

    Ear muff style hearing protection is more convenient to take on and off, again make sure there is a firm seal all the way around your ears. Do not cheap out on the ear muffs, shitty ones are shitty and will not protect you adequately.

    I honestly recommend the cheap orange foam disposables, they are very effective

    Hobnail on
    Broke as fuck and the bills past due, all amounts assist and are kindly received.

    https://www.paypal.me/hobnailtaylor
  • Options
    Mortal SkyMortal Sky queer punk hedge witchRegistered User regular
    yeah foamies are the way to go wrt cheap, easy hearing protection, especially because they're light and replaceable, but also because they can't be knocked out

  • Options
    WybornWyborn GET EQUIPPED Registered User regular
    The tweet thread suggests that hearing protection doesn't really work against LRADs because of the way they work. Is there research on this stuff?

    dN0T6ur.png
  • Options
    WeedLordVegetaWeedLordVegeta Registered User regular
    Choosing to believe that's joel embiid until proven otherwise

  • Options
    HobnailHobnail Registered User regular
    Yes come to think of it I would only recommend the ear muffs if you are in a position to be constantly taking your hearing protection on and off, they get quite sweaty and irritating

    Broke as fuck and the bills past due, all amounts assist and are kindly received.

    https://www.paypal.me/hobnailtaylor
  • Options
    HobnailHobnail Registered User regular
    Wyborn wrote: »
    The tweet thread suggests that hearing protection doesn't really work against LRADs because of the way they work. Is there research on this stuff?

    I am not wise on the subject but I do not see how it could be so, it is easy to fuck up wearing hearing protection so I wonder if that is the explanation

    If anyone has good stuff on LRADs I would be very much interested

    Broke as fuck and the bills past due, all amounts assist and are kindly received.

    https://www.paypal.me/hobnailtaylor
  • Options
    Mortal SkyMortal Sky queer punk hedge witchRegistered User regular
    Wyborn wrote: »
    The tweet thread suggests that hearing protection doesn't really work against LRADs because of the way they work. Is there research on this stuff?

    Basically, the LRADs can get up into the 140-150 range easily (actual levels classified, may be higher) and some cheap foamies only mitigate ~10-15 dB, where hearing damage gets nasty above about 120dB. So you want as much hearing protection as you can afford - Good news is, nicer foamies ($0.20 a pop instead of $0.05, so still affordable) like ones meant for shooting or construction use can get into higher mitigation ranges of 20-30 dB. Bad news is, that's still not gonna fully mitigate the LRAD's physiological effects on everything else because it's getting awful close to the point where sound becomes a shock wave

  • Options
    HobnailHobnail Registered User regular
    I have been around some loud shit but nothing designed to weaponise loudness I suppose

    Broke as fuck and the bills past due, all amounts assist and are kindly received.

    https://www.paypal.me/hobnailtaylor
  • Options
    BroloBrolo Broseidon Lord of the BroceanRegistered User regular
    Mortal Sky wrote: »
    Wyborn wrote: »
    The tweet thread suggests that hearing protection doesn't really work against LRADs because of the way they work. Is there research on this stuff?

    Basically, the LRADs can get up into the 140-150 range easily (actual levels classified, may be higher) and some cheap foamies only mitigate ~10-15 dB, where hearing damage gets nasty above about 120dB. So you want as much hearing protection as you can afford - Good news is, nicer foamies ($0.20 a pop instead of $0.05, so still affordable) like ones meant for shooting or construction use can get into higher mitigation ranges of 20-30 dB. Bad news is, that's still not gonna fully mitigate the LRAD's physiological effects on everything else because it's getting awful close to the point where sound becomes a shock wave

    man it seems like use of those should be really illegal, given the potential to cause permanent disability on everyone in a general area

    which I guess is why police are flocking to them

  • Options
    DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited June 2020
    Donnicton wrote: »

    It should be noted that police officers in Lincoln have not been out on the streets in riot gear kettling protestors to pepper spray and teargas them. They haven't been escalating for several nights, apparently.

    DarkPrimus on
  • Options
    Romanian My EscutcheonRomanian My Escutcheon Two of Forks Registered User regular
  • Options
    DonnictonDonnicton Registered User regular
    Brolo wrote: »
    Mortal Sky wrote: »
    Wyborn wrote: »
    The tweet thread suggests that hearing protection doesn't really work against LRADs because of the way they work. Is there research on this stuff?

    Basically, the LRADs can get up into the 140-150 range easily (actual levels classified, may be higher) and some cheap foamies only mitigate ~10-15 dB, where hearing damage gets nasty above about 120dB. So you want as much hearing protection as you can afford - Good news is, nicer foamies ($0.20 a pop instead of $0.05, so still affordable) like ones meant for shooting or construction use can get into higher mitigation ranges of 20-30 dB. Bad news is, that's still not gonna fully mitigate the LRAD's physiological effects on everything else because it's getting awful close to the point where sound becomes a shock wave

    man it seems like use of those should be really illegal, given the potential to cause permanent disability on everyone in a general area

    which I guess is why police are flocking to them

    "less lethal"

  • Options
    A Dabble Of TheloniusA Dabble Of Thelonius It has been a doozy of a dayRegistered User regular
    vm8gvf5p7gqi.jpg
    Steam - Talon Valdez :Blizz - Talonious#1860 : Xbox Live & LoL - Talonious Monk @TaloniousMonk Hail Satan
  • Options
    BrainleechBrainleech 機知に富んだコメントはここにあります Registered User regular
    Solar wrote: »
    Why the US military allows troops to just paint whatever fucking design they like on their equipment, armour, vehicles they like is beyond me

    You'd have thought that they'd be like, you get your allocated decals and unit markings and that's fucking it. This isn't the 11th confederate cavalry punisher brigade combat team. Put the unit symbol on there, and anything else is prohibited.

    It was frowned upon as I did a cat on my m249 and was told to wipe it off a lot by my LT other people did things he and others would really get uppity about

This discussion has been closed.