Well, those protests were nice and all but, on the most predictable thing ever, in the second that they messed with the suburbs where rich white people live, welp, time to remove them:
Due to ongoing violence and public safety issues in the East Precinct/Cal Anderson Park area. Mayor Jenny Durkan has issued an executive order to vacate the area. Seattle police will be in the area this morning enforcing the Mayor’s order.
Official Twitter of the Seattle Police Department.
The end of the Commune of Paris was known as the Bloody Week. Hopefully it won't get to such extremes, but "The Mayor only did something when those thugs came to her house!" is pretty much a free win given to Trump.
Missouri assault rifle guy was just on CNN being really smug about how the only reason he's still alive after that gun wielding mob of raiders attempted to burn down his house was because he went and got his gun. He's pretty outraged at how unfair it is that he's being victimized for threatening protesters that were walking by his house.
Apparently he had just previously been on Fox News and it was a real scaremongering session about how the violent masses are coming to kill all the white people.
As a law abiding Missouri gun owner (Winchester 70 in .308 and Benelli 12 gauge properly locked away from their ammo), I so want him and his wife to get sued for assault/unlawful use of a weapon and lose their 2nd amendment rights. And if the Missouri Bar Association wants to look at their credentials after that, I wouldn't object.
I know given their income level it's a bit of a pipe dream, but once upon a time I was an optimist.
Did they fire their guns or wield them?
I believe that assault is only usable if the weapon is discharged.
The unlawful firearm exception might apply. It’s going to depend if the street was public or private. Going into a gated community might make them trespassers (Regardless of breaking the gate or opening it, doesn’t matter). And in Missouri it is a stand your ground state. So if the HOA owns the street they likely won’t get a conviction, and the prosecutor will likely avoid charging.
It’s going to be interesting, but I doubt much will come of it. Jury selection will be hell. How do you avoid the issue that half or more of the jury pool voted for Trump.
I mean they acted ridiculous and racist, but this is going to be really hard to win.
Nah, assault is the threat iirc, so brandishing almost certainly covers it. And the status of the street is irrelevant because the homeowners are not the HOA and so trespass can't apply with respect to the homeowners. I'm not aware of any state where a stand your ground law would let me shoot someone on my neighbor's property.
Texas. Although that's castle doctrine, not stand your ground, I'd call it close enough.
Missouri assault rifle guy was just on CNN being really smug about how the only reason he's still alive after that gun wielding mob of raiders attempted to burn down his house was because he went and got his gun. He's pretty outraged at how unfair it is that he's being victimized for threatening protesters that were walking by his house.
Apparently he had just previously been on Fox News and it was a real scaremongering session about how the violent masses are coming to kill all the white people.
As a law abiding Missouri gun owner (Winchester 70 in .308 and Benelli 12 gauge properly locked away from their ammo), I so want him and his wife to get sued for assault/unlawful use of a weapon and lose their 2nd amendment rights. And if the Missouri Bar Association wants to look at their credentials after that, I wouldn't object.
I know given their income level it's a bit of a pipe dream, but once upon a time I was an optimist.
Did they fire their guns or wield them?
I believe that assault is only usable if the weapon is discharged.
The unlawful firearm exception might apply. It’s going to depend if the street was public or private. Going into a gated community might make them trespassers (Regardless of breaking the gate or opening it, doesn’t matter). And in Missouri it is a stand your ground state. So if the HOA owns the street they likely won’t get a conviction, and the prosecutor will likely avoid charging.
It’s going to be interesting, but I doubt much will come of it. Jury selection will be hell. How do you avoid the issue that half or more of the jury pool voted for Trump.
I mean they acted ridiculous and racist, but this is going to be really hard to win.
Nah, assault is the threat iirc, so brandishing almost certainly covers it. And the status of the street is irrelevant because the homeowners are not the HOA and so trespass can't apply with respect to the homeowners. I'm not aware of any state where a stand your ground law would let me shoot someone on my neighbor's property.
Texas. Although that's castle doctrine, not stand your ground, I'd call it close enough.
No, that was defense of property after a burglary. Not castle doctrine. Texas has limited carve-outs, or at least had at the time, for defense of property including the property of others. Castle doctrine, generally, refers to the use of self defense in your home.
To my knowledge, Texas does not allow use of deadly force for mere trespass on land (not within the home), especially if we're talking about a road with an easement used to access other properties.
I feel like the fact that the NYPD has a billion dollars to cut from it is kind of an issue...
I mean NYC is larger than many states. It's not "just a city." That's only something like $100 per resident, right?
Still a little crazy, since yeah that's the amount they can cut, meaning the actual budget is much, much larger. But the scope of NYC's budget is always going to seem crazy, I think.
The CHAZ/CHOP security shot two teens, one 14 and one 16. The 16 year old was killed. That's why police are moving in now.
I'm sorry, could you provide a citation for that?
Also, the 14 year-old was taken to the hospital by people who lived in CHOP. The 16 year-old was put in an ambulance, which was held up by police for several minutes. That was the difference between life and death.
The CHAZ/CHOP security shot two teens, one 14 and one 16. The 16 year old was killed. That's why police are moving in now.
I'm sorry, could you provide a citation for that?
Also, the 14 year-old was taken to the hospital by people who lived in CHOP. The 16 year-old was put in an ambulance, which was held up by police for several minutes. That was the difference between life and death.
Somebody who may or may not have been CHOP security shot two teens. That we cannot say one way or the other whether it was CHOP security (and if so, name the individuals), if that's the part you're questioning, is a huge part of the problem.
The CHAZ/CHOP security shot two teens, one 14 and one 16. The 16 year old was killed. That's why police are moving in now.
I'm sorry, could you provide a citation for that?
Also, the 14 year-old was taken to the hospital by people who lived in CHOP. The 16 year-old was put in an ambulance, which was held up by police for several minutes. That was the difference between life and death.
Somebody who may or may not have been CHOP security shot two teens. That we cannot say one way or the other whether it was CHOP security (and if so, who they were), if that's the part you're questioning, is a huge part of the problem.
How many shootings have occurred in the rest of the Seattle area during this period of time?
Is every crime that occurs in CHOP the fault of CHOP existing?
Or is it because the government is looking for any excuse to dismantle CHOP that every single instance of criminality (whether real or invented) is quickly reported by the police to the media?
I'm not saying shootings are good. I am questioning that allowing the SPD back into the area is going to lead to any improvements.
The CHAZ/CHOP security shot two teens, one 14 and one 16. The 16 year old was killed. That's why police are moving in now.
I'm sorry, could you provide a citation for that?
Also, the 14 year-old was taken to the hospital by people who lived in CHOP. The 16 year-old was put in an ambulance, which was held up by police for several minutes. That was the difference between life and death.
The original poster there has since deleted her tweets and protected her account, because falsely identifying two teens as murderous fascists and praising the badassery of the guys who shot them, as the kids say, ain't it chief. People on the ground were absolutely claiming it was CHAZ/CHOP security until they realized maybe two kids joyriding in the area were not the same people who got into fights earlier.
The CHAZ/CHOP security shot two teens, one 14 and one 16. The 16 year old was killed. That's why police are moving in now.
I'm sorry, could you provide a citation for that?
Also, the 14 year-old was taken to the hospital by people who lived in CHOP. The 16 year-old was put in an ambulance, which was held up by police for several minutes. That was the difference between life and death.
Somebody who may or may not have been CHOP security shot two teens. That we cannot say one way or the other whether it was CHOP security (and if so, who they were), if that's the part you're questioning, is a huge part of the problem.
How many shootings have occurred in the rest of the Seattle area during this period of time?
Is every crime that occurs in CHOP the fault of CHOP existing?
Or is it because the government is looking for any excuse to dismantle CHOP that every single instance of criminality (whether real or invented) is quickly reported by the police to the media?
I'm not saying shootings are good. I am questioning that allowing the SPD back into the area is going to lead to any improvements.
No. I don't blame the two previous shootings on CHOP - they were personal disputes that took advantage of the environment.
In this case, *CHOP security* lit up a car without a good reason to do so. So yeah, it is the fault of CHOP having a poorly trained set of armed idiots running "security."
The CHAZ/CHOP security shot two teens, one 14 and one 16. The 16 year old was killed. That's why police are moving in now.
I'm sorry, could you provide a citation for that?
Also, the 14 year-old was taken to the hospital by people who lived in CHOP. The 16 year-old was put in an ambulance, which was held up by police for several minutes. That was the difference between life and death.
Somebody who may or may not have been CHOP security shot two teens. That we cannot say one way or the other whether it was CHOP security (and if so, who they were), if that's the part you're questioning, is a huge part of the problem.
How many shootings have occurred in the rest of the Seattle area during this period of time?
Is every crime that occurs in CHOP the fault of CHOP existing?
Or is it because the government is looking for any excuse to dismantle CHOP that every single instance of criminality (whether real or invented) is quickly reported by the police to the media?
I'm not saying shootings are good. I am questioning that allowing the SPD back into the area is going to lead to any improvements.
To the bolded, this was discussed in the Washington Politics thread. There are (per the AP) ~80 injury shootings in 2019 in all of Seattle, or about five every three weeks. There were 18 fatal shootings. That's right about 1 fatal shooting every three weeks, across all of Seattle (a city of 750K).
There were two fatal shootings in three weeks in the CHOP, and what four more injury shootings? In a stretch of a few blocks, over a period of about three weeks. Makes Rainier Beach look like Mayberry, honestly.
Seattle's police and mayor have been anti-citizen through this whole thing and are just taking advantage of the media focus.
It is very possible that this is true, but at the same time it is also still a very serious problem if CHAZ "security", or whatever guys convincingly LARPing as such (if there is a meaningful difference), got jumpy and shot up some kids and a bunch of people started praising that killing.
Like, it's not something that can really be swept under the rug or dismissed as just normal crime, since, y'know, the crime was being openly praised because it was committed by people trusted to use force
Also, the 14 year-old was taken to the hospital by people who lived in CHOP. The 16 year-old was put in an ambulance, which was held up by police for several minutes. That was the difference between life and death.
I feel like the bullets fired into the 16 year old were likely the major factor in his death.
Seattle's police and mayor have been anti-citizen through this whole thing and are just taking advantage of the media focus.
It is very possible that this is true, but at the same time it is also still a very serious problem if CHAZ "security", or whatever guys convincingly LARPing as such (if there is a meaningful difference), got jumpy and shot up some kids and a bunch of people started praising that killing.
Like, it's not something that can really be swept under the rug or dismissed as just normal crime, since, y'know, the crime was being openly praised because it was committed by people trusted to use force
That's a conversation, but has nothing to do with why the people who brutalize and terrorize the population while being paid our tax money are taking apart signs of resistance to their reign.
The CHAZ/CHOP security shot two teens, one 14 and one 16. The 16 year old was killed. That's why police are moving in now.
I'm sorry, could you provide a citation for that?
Also, the 14 year-old was taken to the hospital by people who lived in CHOP. The 16 year-old was put in an ambulance, which was held up by police for several minutes. That was the difference between life and death.
Somebody who may or may not have been CHOP security shot two teens. That we cannot say one way or the other whether it was CHOP security (and if so, who they were), if that's the part you're questioning, is a huge part of the problem.
How many shootings have occurred in the rest of the Seattle area during this period of time?
Is every crime that occurs in CHOP the fault of CHOP existing?
Or is it because the government is looking for any excuse to dismantle CHOP that every single instance of criminality (whether real or invented) is quickly reported by the police to the media?
I'm not saying shootings are good. I am questioning that allowing the SPD back into the area is going to lead to any improvements.
To the bolded, this was discussed in the Washington Politics thread. There are (per the AP) ~80 injury shootings in 2019 in all of Seattle, or about five every three weeks. There were 18 fatal shootings. That's right about 1 fatal shooting every three weeks, across all of Seattle (a city of 750K).
There were two fatal shootings in three weeks in the CHOP, and what four more injury shootings? In a stretch of a few blocks, over a period of about three weeks. Makes Rainier Beach look like Mayberry, honestly.
We're working with a small enough sample size that I'd be disinclined to read much into it when it comes to gangs or personal beefs coming out there.
+3
Options
zepherinRussian warship, go fuck yourselfRegistered Userregular
Seattle's police and mayor have been anti-citizen through this whole thing and are just taking advantage of the media focus.
It is very possible that this is true, but at the same time it is also still a very serious problem if CHAZ "security", or whatever guys convincingly LARPing as such (if there is a meaningful difference), got jumpy and shot up some kids and a bunch of people started praising that killing.
Like, it's not something that can really be swept under the rug or dismissed as just normal crime, since, y'know, the crime was being openly praised because it was committed by people trusted to use force
It also provides cover to bust the area for the city, or for the president to enact the insurrection act and give CHAZ 72 hours to clear out.
For the reals though. If that last action happens, and our racist president actually bothers to give a deadline, serious to our Seattle folks, leave, stay out of the area till everything is settled, because things are going to get real bad real quick. I love you all and don't want you injured.
Shooters are still unidentified in that shooting as well. No one has come forward to explain themselves.
And while Hacks made a great point that coming forward would mean involving SPD, an organization that they were there in protest of and do not trust, we're still left with the same problem. Somebody shot up a car like it was fucking al-Hawija and everything around it is just a big ol' question mark. The residents of the city, on the whole, aren't going to just let that fly. Only the extreme fringes are going to be able to shrug that off.
And thats beside the whole "surprised pikachu face" at the fact that an organized protest around the lack of accountability in use-of-force incidents took all of three weeks to have a use-of-force whose level of violence and lack of accountability would make LAPD blush.
EDIT: I mean I don't think anybody should change their mind about SPD over this incident, and protests should continue. But this was a hella bad look, even acknowledging the whole "small sample size" thing.
I think that the shooting definitely a strong and easy to pull reason for busting CHAZ, and think that the police doing so is shitty in a number of ways. I also doubt the mayor particularly has any sympathy for the group.
I think that "provides cover" or "is an excuse" for taking down CHAZ is a bit much, though. Based on just what we know, two kids got shot, maybe by security, but definitely by people CHAZ on the ground praised. One of them died. There is likely to be zero cooperation in figuring out who did it (for good reason), and similar situations will likely have similar outcomes. "CHAZ is too unsafe to continue" is, at this point, a reasonable opinion, and it's fair to believe that the ideological reasons to support CHAZ do not outweigh that.
Eh. While I grant that much of the city is composed of fools based on the lack of masks, you have to be pretty ignorant to not understand that there was going to eventually be a trigger happy idiot event.
It wasn't terribly long ago that we had a cop's brother try to run over a bunch of protesters and shoot a guy and then walk over to get protected by the police.
We also had a guy try to run over protesters last night because they dared get between him and a food delivery.
There were already people trying to kill people here.
I think that the shooting definitely a strong and easy to pull reason for busting CHAZ, and think that the police doing so is shitty in a number of ways. I also doubt the mayor particularly has any sympathy for the group.
I think that "provides cover" or "is an excuse" for taking down CHAZ is a bit much, though. Based on just what we know, two kids got shot, maybe by security, but definitely by people CHAZ on the ground praised. One of them died. There is likely to be zero cooperation in figuring out who did it (for good reason), and similar situations will likely have similar outcomes. "CHAZ is too unsafe to continue" is, at this point, a reasonable opinion, and it's fair to believe that the ideological reasons to support CHAZ do not outweigh that.
They were already taking the CHOP down earlier, with a bunch of nebulous information, because the protests were getting weaker.
They are not doing this to protect anyone, just taking the power back now that they have media cover.
Eh. While I grant that much of the city is composed of fools based on the lack of masks, you have to be pretty ignorant to not understand that there was going to eventually be a trigger happy idiot event.
It wasn't terribly long ago that we had a cop's brother try to run over a bunch of protesters and shoot a guy and then walk over to get protected by the police.
We also had a guy try to run over protesters last night because they dared get between him and a food delivery.
There were already people trying to kill people here.
You're not wrong, but I don't think either of those incidents is necessarily on the "pump twenty rounds with a rifle into a vehicle" level of violence. Especially when one of those individuals you mention was immediately identified and detained, the other likely will be, and the shooter here (who actually ended another human life) will likely just disappear into the crowd forever.
It's indefensible. I honestly supported the occupation continuing, but it was no longer a position I could defend. I don't think there's any way to do so without looking like a complete extremist. It's unfortunate, but it is what it is.
EDIT: And yes, I agree that from the mayor and PD this is just a pretext...they give precisely zero shits about the public safety angle. Doesn't change the fact that the pretext works, this is politics whether the protesters want it to be or not. They lost this one.
I think that the shooting definitely a strong and easy to pull reason for busting CHAZ, and think that the police doing so is shitty in a number of ways. I also doubt the mayor particularly has any sympathy for the group.
I think that "provides cover" or "is an excuse" for taking down CHAZ is a bit much, though. Based on just what we know, two kids got shot, maybe by security, but definitely by people CHAZ on the ground praised. One of them died. There is likely to be zero cooperation in figuring out who did it (for good reason), and similar situations will likely have similar outcomes. "CHAZ is too unsafe to continue" is, at this point, a reasonable opinion, and it's fair to believe that the ideological reasons to support CHAZ do not outweigh that.
They were already taking the CHOP down earlier, with a bunch of nebulous information, because the protests were getting weaker.
They are not doing this to protect anyone, just taking the power back now that they have media cover.
Yeah, but realistically this seems like the eventual end result. CHOP was never going to be allowed to persist indefinitely.
I think that the shooting definitely a strong and easy to pull reason for busting CHAZ, and think that the police doing so is shitty in a number of ways. I also doubt the mayor particularly has any sympathy for the group.
I think that "provides cover" or "is an excuse" for taking down CHAZ is a bit much, though. Based on just what we know, two kids got shot, maybe by security, but definitely by people CHAZ on the ground praised. One of them died. There is likely to be zero cooperation in figuring out who did it (for good reason), and similar situations will likely have similar outcomes. "CHAZ is too unsafe to continue" is, at this point, a reasonable opinion, and it's fair to believe that the ideological reasons to support CHAZ do not outweigh that.
They were already taking the CHOP down earlier, with a bunch of nebulous information, because the protests were getting weaker.
They are not doing this to protect anyone, just taking the power back now that they have media cover.
Yeah, but realistically this seems like the eventual end result. CHOP was never going to be allowed to persist indefinitely.
CHOP was just kind of an accident of the cops trying to kettle everyone in the same spot over and over and then abandoning the kettle location entirely. It really doesn't matter. The ongoing protests matter. NIMBY folks just love to focus on it.
Missouri assault rifle guy was just on CNN being really smug about how the only reason he's still alive after that gun wielding mob of raiders attempted to burn down his house was because he went and got his gun. He's pretty outraged at how unfair it is that he's being victimized for threatening protesters that were walking by his house.
Apparently he had just previously been on Fox News and it was a real scaremongering session about how the violent masses are coming to kill all the white people.
As a law abiding Missouri gun owner (Winchester 70 in .308 and Benelli 12 gauge properly locked away from their ammo), I so want him and his wife to get sued for assault/unlawful use of a weapon and lose their 2nd amendment rights. And if the Missouri Bar Association wants to look at their credentials after that, I wouldn't object.
I know given their income level it's a bit of a pipe dream, but once upon a time I was an optimist.
Did they fire their guns or wield them?
I believe that assault is only usable if the weapon is discharged.
The unlawful firearm exception might apply. It’s going to depend if the street was public or private. Going into a gated community might make them trespassers (Regardless of breaking the gate or opening it, doesn’t matter). And in Missouri it is a stand your ground state. So if the HOA owns the street they likely won’t get a conviction, and the prosecutor will likely avoid charging.
It’s going to be interesting, but I doubt much will come of it. Jury selection will be hell. How do you avoid the issue that half or more of the jury pool voted for Trump.
I mean they acted ridiculous and racist, but this is going to be really hard to win.
You win by threatening the case, draining their cash with legal fees, and letting them plead down to brandishing, which I feel like is the actual crime here.
Except assholes like this have self defense insurance which pays for legal fees in cases like this.
Then let 'em I guess, the victims get a payout and their insurance monthly goes through the roof. Either way, they get a misdemeanor and the state bar gets to put their licenses in jeopardy.
There's no reason to associate that with the CHOP itself except that it's convenient for those in power to do so. We don't even know who DID it yet.
This is not a particularly strong defense IMO. People on the ground at CHAZ taking pictures of the scene reported on it as security that did the shooting and praised it. Inasmuch as anything can be attributed to the will of an anarchist zone with limited central structure, it seems that the shooting was, in fact, something CHAZ wanted until they realized they fucked up and shot some teenagers.
Even if those people on the ground were wrong about who the shooter is and were praising a random guy who shot up a car for no reason by mistake, the desire for bloodshed and immediate false reporting of strong justification for the shooting should be horrifying. If any shooting will be immediately praised as justified for as long as possible and, when it's found to be unjustified, deflected to an unknown other because of the amorphous nature of anarchist security, that's still an untenable situation because you're gonna have people getting shot and nobody stopping the people doing it.
I think that the shooting definitely a strong and easy to pull reason for busting CHAZ, and think that the police doing so is shitty in a number of ways. I also doubt the mayor particularly has any sympathy for the group.
I think that "provides cover" or "is an excuse" for taking down CHAZ is a bit much, though. Based on just what we know, two kids got shot, maybe by security, but definitely by people CHAZ on the ground praised. One of them died. There is likely to be zero cooperation in figuring out who did it (for good reason), and similar situations will likely have similar outcomes. "CHAZ is too unsafe to continue" is, at this point, a reasonable opinion, and it's fair to believe that the ideological reasons to support CHAZ do not outweigh that.
They were already taking the CHOP down earlier, with a bunch of nebulous information, because the protests were getting weaker.
They are not doing this to protect anyone, just taking the power back now that they have media cover.
Yeah, but realistically this seems like the eventual end result. CHOP was never going to be allowed to persist indefinitely.
CHOP was just kind of an accident of the cops trying to kettle everyone in the same spot over and over and then abandoning the kettle location entirely. It really doesn't matter. The ongoing protests matter. NIMBY folks just love to focus on it.
I'm honestly glad to see the CHAZ go. Easy, obvious distraction that sucked air out of the BLM protests on the national stage. They failed to retain focus, and became first a caricature of the left, then a caricature of the police.
Leaving aside all judgment as to the value of their broader economic message, good riddance imo. They were noise in the BLM signal.
Posts
The end of the Commune of Paris was known as the Bloody Week. Hopefully it won't get to such extremes, but "The Mayor only did something when those thugs came to her house!" is pretty much a free win given to Trump.
Texas. Although that's castle doctrine, not stand your ground, I'd call it close enough.
That BLM chant is basically shit that did not happen (small group of protesters said it years ago in Missouri).
Trump complaining about the denigration of "this luxury Avenue" because of a freaking message on the road is some peak out of touch white guy stuff.
He is now just plain claiming "Black Lives Matter" is a hate symbol because he got high on the Fox News supply
No, that was defense of property after a burglary. Not castle doctrine. Texas has limited carve-outs, or at least had at the time, for defense of property including the property of others. Castle doctrine, generally, refers to the use of self defense in your home.
To my knowledge, Texas does not allow use of deadly force for mere trespass on land (not within the home), especially if we're talking about a road with an easement used to access other properties.
And hey: I thought conservatives liked reducing government spending :snap:
I mean NYC is larger than many states. It's not "just a city." That's only something like $100 per resident, right?
Still a little crazy, since yeah that's the amount they can cut, meaning the actual budget is much, much larger. But the scope of NYC's budget is always going to seem crazy, I think.
I'm sorry, could you provide a citation for that?
Also, the 14 year-old was taken to the hospital by people who lived in CHOP. The 16 year-old was put in an ambulance, which was held up by police for several minutes. That was the difference between life and death.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
funds are being reallocated without real changes - ie, funds that would go to the nypd for sros are now going to the dept of ed to fund the same role
it's bullshit and another stain on the embarassment that is deblasio
Somebody who may or may not have been CHOP security shot two teens. That we cannot say one way or the other whether it was CHOP security (and if so, name the individuals), if that's the part you're questioning, is a huge part of the problem.
He is Mr “Radical Islamic Terrorism” afterall
How many shootings have occurred in the rest of the Seattle area during this period of time?
Is every crime that occurs in CHOP the fault of CHOP existing?
Or is it because the government is looking for any excuse to dismantle CHOP that every single instance of criminality (whether real or invented) is quickly reported by the police to the media?
I'm not saying shootings are good. I am questioning that allowing the SPD back into the area is going to lead to any improvements.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
The original poster there has since deleted her tweets and protected her account, because falsely identifying two teens as murderous fascists and praising the badassery of the guys who shot them, as the kids say, ain't it chief. People on the ground were absolutely claiming it was CHAZ/CHOP security until they realized maybe two kids joyriding in the area were not the same people who got into fights earlier.
No. I don't blame the two previous shootings on CHOP - they were personal disputes that took advantage of the environment.
In this case, *CHOP security* lit up a car without a good reason to do so. So yeah, it is the fault of CHOP having a poorly trained set of armed idiots running "security."
To the bolded, this was discussed in the Washington Politics thread. There are (per the AP) ~80 injury shootings in 2019 in all of Seattle, or about five every three weeks. There were 18 fatal shootings. That's right about 1 fatal shooting every three weeks, across all of Seattle (a city of 750K).
There were two fatal shootings in three weeks in the CHOP, and what four more injury shootings? In a stretch of a few blocks, over a period of about three weeks. Makes Rainier Beach look like Mayberry, honestly.
It is very possible that this is true, but at the same time it is also still a very serious problem if CHAZ "security", or whatever guys convincingly LARPing as such (if there is a meaningful difference), got jumpy and shot up some kids and a bunch of people started praising that killing.
Like, it's not something that can really be swept under the rug or dismissed as just normal crime, since, y'know, the crime was being openly praised because it was committed by people trusted to use force
pleasepaypreacher.net
I feel like the bullets fired into the 16 year old were likely the major factor in his death.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
That's a conversation, but has nothing to do with why the people who brutalize and terrorize the population while being paid our tax money are taking apart signs of resistance to their reign.
We're working with a small enough sample size that I'd be disinclined to read much into it when it comes to gangs or personal beefs coming out there.
For the reals though. If that last action happens, and our racist president actually bothers to give a deadline, serious to our Seattle folks, leave, stay out of the area till everything is settled, because things are going to get real bad real quick. I love you all and don't want you injured.
And while Hacks made a great point that coming forward would mean involving SPD, an organization that they were there in protest of and do not trust, we're still left with the same problem. Somebody shot up a car like it was fucking al-Hawija and everything around it is just a big ol' question mark. The residents of the city, on the whole, aren't going to just let that fly. Only the extreme fringes are going to be able to shrug that off.
And thats beside the whole "surprised pikachu face" at the fact that an organized protest around the lack of accountability in use-of-force incidents took all of three weeks to have a use-of-force whose level of violence and lack of accountability would make LAPD blush.
EDIT: I mean I don't think anybody should change their mind about SPD over this incident, and protests should continue. But this was a hella bad look, even acknowledging the whole "small sample size" thing.
I think that "provides cover" or "is an excuse" for taking down CHAZ is a bit much, though. Based on just what we know, two kids got shot, maybe by security, but definitely by people CHAZ on the ground praised. One of them died. There is likely to be zero cooperation in figuring out who did it (for good reason), and similar situations will likely have similar outcomes. "CHAZ is too unsafe to continue" is, at this point, a reasonable opinion, and it's fair to believe that the ideological reasons to support CHAZ do not outweigh that.
It wasn't terribly long ago that we had a cop's brother try to run over a bunch of protesters and shoot a guy and then walk over to get protected by the police.
We also had a guy try to run over protesters last night because they dared get between him and a food delivery.
There were already people trying to kill people here.
Christ. Even worse than I thought.
They were already taking the CHOP down earlier, with a bunch of nebulous information, because the protests were getting weaker.
They are not doing this to protect anyone, just taking the power back now that they have media cover.
You're not wrong, but I don't think either of those incidents is necessarily on the "pump twenty rounds with a rifle into a vehicle" level of violence. Especially when one of those individuals you mention was immediately identified and detained, the other likely will be, and the shooter here (who actually ended another human life) will likely just disappear into the crowd forever.
It's indefensible. I honestly supported the occupation continuing, but it was no longer a position I could defend. I don't think there's any way to do so without looking like a complete extremist. It's unfortunate, but it is what it is.
EDIT: And yes, I agree that from the mayor and PD this is just a pretext...they give precisely zero shits about the public safety angle. Doesn't change the fact that the pretext works, this is politics whether the protesters want it to be or not. They lost this one.
Yeah, but realistically this seems like the eventual end result. CHOP was never going to be allowed to persist indefinitely.
There's no reason to associate that with the CHOP itself except that it's convenient for those in power to do so. We don't even know who DID it yet.
CHOP was just kind of an accident of the cops trying to kettle everyone in the same spot over and over and then abandoning the kettle location entirely. It really doesn't matter. The ongoing protests matter. NIMBY folks just love to focus on it.
Then let 'em I guess, the victims get a payout and their insurance monthly goes through the roof. Either way, they get a misdemeanor and the state bar gets to put their licenses in jeopardy.
This is not a particularly strong defense IMO. People on the ground at CHAZ taking pictures of the scene reported on it as security that did the shooting and praised it. Inasmuch as anything can be attributed to the will of an anarchist zone with limited central structure, it seems that the shooting was, in fact, something CHAZ wanted until they realized they fucked up and shot some teenagers.
Even if those people on the ground were wrong about who the shooter is and were praising a random guy who shot up a car for no reason by mistake, the desire for bloodshed and immediate false reporting of strong justification for the shooting should be horrifying. If any shooting will be immediately praised as justified for as long as possible and, when it's found to be unjustified, deflected to an unknown other because of the amorphous nature of anarchist security, that's still an untenable situation because you're gonna have people getting shot and nobody stopping the people doing it.
I'm honestly glad to see the CHAZ go. Easy, obvious distraction that sucked air out of the BLM protests on the national stage. They failed to retain focus, and became first a caricature of the left, then a caricature of the police.
Leaving aside all judgment as to the value of their broader economic message, good riddance imo. They were noise in the BLM signal.
The Venn diagrams in play are not just a circle.