I think it's a bit disingenuous to say that cops abandoned chaz and that chaz has no options left.
I mean I agree that "lol fuck 'em" is probably the internal police policy, but it doesn't seem like the people in chaz want any cops around.
I dunno, has there been anything from chaz like "we want the police to operate with us in this specific way"?
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
I'm saying a situation where self-appointed "security" is shooting at people is no better than the police doing it.
Its better than being unguarded sheep while the wolves are prowling.
I mean that’s literally a David Grossman training line.
Were the guys that opened fire CHOP security or not? Regardless of the stated answer, how do we know? How do we verify? Was anybody filming them to ensure they were acting appropriately? Is there video of the “attempted drive by?” If no shots were fired from the vehicle when the CHOP security (or not CHOP security) opened fire, how did they know it was an attempted drive by? Was this a proper use of force? Who the hell was even involved, on both sides of it?
These are all questions we would be asking of a police shooting, and we damn well need to ask the same here. Otherwise we’ve potentially replaced the police with something even less accountable. Or more violent. Or both.
I hope I don’t need to bend over backwards to establish myself as an ally here. I’m coming from a place of support. But man, if this doesn’t look like a serious problem then I don’t know what to tell you.
Edit: And I fully understand that the answers to all these questions may come throughout the day. But we better hope that they’re good answers.
Yes Id like to know those things too but it doesnt change at the end of the day what the options are. The police have abandoned a community firmly in the sights of a national white supremacist movement. Their options are then to either take measures to protect themselves from violent men or to not so so.
I think it's an important point that the people in CHOP, especially now, aren't the community that actually lives in the area. That area has been extremely heavily gentrified over the last 20 years and is now a super-high-rent part of town full of tech workers.
Yeah, I think the community is likely supportive...based on my experience living a couple blocks away just a few years back, and still having friends in that area...but yeah its definitely a different demo nowadays than what people assume based on decade-plus old knowledge. Our one-bedroom apartment there back in 2015 cost an embarrassing amount.
I’d also say there’s an argument to be had whether the cops abandoned them, or were pushed out. Pushed out for good reason, if so, but still.
I’m mostly just curious how much effort, if any, is being put into ensuring that the armed men placed on the boundaries of the CHOP are acting reasonably. What accountability is being demanded? Is anybody actually tracking who is working this effort? Is there a roster? Is anybody filming to ensure you can document the need for any use of force? In a way that cannot be easily destroyed by those involved?
I'm saying a situation where self-appointed "security" is shooting at people is no better than the police doing it.
Its better than being unguarded sheep while the wolves are prowling.
I mean that’s literally a David Grossman training line.
Were the guys that opened fire CHOP security or not? Regardless of the stated answer, how do we know? How do we verify? Was anybody filming them to ensure they were acting appropriately? Is there video of the “attempted drive by?” If no shots were fired from the vehicle when the CHOP security (or not CHOP security) opened fire, how did they know it was an attempted drive by? Was this a proper use of force? Who the hell was even involved, on both sides of it?
These are all questions we would be asking of a police shooting, and we damn well need to ask the same here. Otherwise we’ve potentially replaced the police with something even less accountable. Or more violent. Or both.
I hope I don’t need to bend over backwards to establish myself as an ally here. I’m coming from a place of support. But man, if this doesn’t look like a serious problem then I don’t know what to tell you.
Edit: And I fully understand that the answers to all these questions may come throughout the day. But we better hope that they’re good answers.
Yes Id like to know those things too but it doesnt change at the end of the day what the options are. The police have abandoned a community firmly in the sights of a national white supremacist movement. Their options are then to either take measures to protect themselves from violent men or to not so so.
A lot of what you are saying is the exact reasoning right wingers use in brandishing weapons in their communities as well. And I thought CHOP kicked out the police wasn't that the whole point? They weren't wanted there any longer and its now under community control?
I think the difference between brandishing guns in service of white supremacy is somewhat different than branding them in defense against it man
I'm saying a situation where self-appointed "security" is shooting at people is no better than the police doing it.
Its better than being unguarded sheep while the wolves are prowling.
I mean that’s literally a David Grossman training line.
Were the guys that opened fire CHOP security or not? Regardless of the stated answer, how do we know? How do we verify? Was anybody filming them to ensure they were acting appropriately? Is there video of the “attempted drive by?” If no shots were fired from the vehicle when the CHOP security (or not CHOP security) opened fire, how did they know it was an attempted drive by? Was this a proper use of force? Who the hell was even involved, on both sides of it?
These are all questions we would be asking of a police shooting, and we damn well need to ask the same here. Otherwise we’ve potentially replaced the police with something even less accountable. Or more violent. Or both.
I hope I don’t need to bend over backwards to establish myself as an ally here. I’m coming from a place of support. But man, if this doesn’t look like a serious problem then I don’t know what to tell you.
Edit: And I fully understand that the answers to all these questions may come throughout the day. But we better hope that they’re good answers.
Yes Id like to know those things too but it doesnt change at the end of the day what the options are. The police have abandoned a community firmly in the sights of a national white supremacist movement. Their options are then to either take measures to protect themselves from violent men or to not so so.
A lot of what you are saying is the exact reasoning right wingers use in brandishing weapons in their communities as well. And I thought CHOP kicked out the police wasn't that the whole point? They weren't wanted there any longer and its now under community control?
I think the difference between brandishing guns in service of white supremacy is somewhat different than branding them in defense against it man
And yet those guns apparently killed a black teenager in this case. Assuming it was CHOP security. Assuming we’ll ever really know.
And what reason do we have to buy their story that it was an attempted drive-by? Has anybody stated that weapons were even recovered from the vehicle yet? Did those that shot the occupants have a chance to plant weapons? Was there any control of the scene or documentation?
Is it possible that a car containing two teenagers just “fit the description“ of a vehicle involved in an earlier incident? Will we ever know?
I'm saying a situation where self-appointed "security" is shooting at people is no better than the police doing it.
Its better than being unguarded sheep while the wolves are prowling.
I mean that’s literally a David Grossman training line.
Were the guys that opened fire CHOP security or not? Regardless of the stated answer, how do we know? How do we verify? Was anybody filming them to ensure they were acting appropriately? Is there video of the “attempted drive by?” If no shots were fired from the vehicle when the CHOP security (or not CHOP security) opened fire, how did they know it was an attempted drive by? Was this a proper use of force? Who the hell was even involved, on both sides of it?
These are all questions we would be asking of a police shooting, and we damn well need to ask the same here. Otherwise we’ve potentially replaced the police with something even less accountable. Or more violent. Or both.
I hope I don’t need to bend over backwards to establish myself as an ally here. I’m coming from a place of support. But man, if this doesn’t look like a serious problem then I don’t know what to tell you.
Edit: And I fully understand that the answers to all these questions may come throughout the day. But we better hope that they’re good answers.
Yes Id like to know those things too but it doesnt change at the end of the day what the options are. The police have abandoned a community firmly in the sights of a national white supremacist movement. Their options are then to either take measures to protect themselves from violent men or to not so so.
A lot of what you are saying is the exact reasoning right wingers use in brandishing weapons in their communities as well. And I thought CHOP kicked out the police wasn't that the whole point? They weren't wanted there any longer and its now under community control?
I think the difference between brandishing guns in service of white supremacy is somewhat different than branding them in defense against it man
The problem here is your assumption of who was shooting and why. Which again is the same thing that right wingers and even the police use to justify bad actions themselves.
The facts have to come out here, but I'm not happy a private security force opened fire on a car, and I want some accountability for that, one person is dead the other in critical condition, and we don't know why, that's bad.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
I'm saying a situation where self-appointed "security" is shooting at people is no better than the police doing it.
Its better than being unguarded sheep while the wolves are prowling.
I mean that’s literally a David Grossman training line.
Were the guys that opened fire CHOP security or not? Regardless of the stated answer, how do we know? How do we verify? Was anybody filming them to ensure they were acting appropriately? Is there video of the “attempted drive by?” If no shots were fired from the vehicle when the CHOP security (or not CHOP security) opened fire, how did they know it was an attempted drive by? Was this a proper use of force? Who the hell was even involved, on both sides of it?
These are all questions we would be asking of a police shooting, and we damn well need to ask the same here. Otherwise we’ve potentially replaced the police with something even less accountable. Or more violent. Or both.
I hope I don’t need to bend over backwards to establish myself as an ally here. I’m coming from a place of support. But man, if this doesn’t look like a serious problem then I don’t know what to tell you.
Edit: And I fully understand that the answers to all these questions may come throughout the day. But we better hope that they’re good answers.
Yes Id like to know those things too but it doesnt change at the end of the day what the options are. The police have abandoned a community firmly in the sights of a national white supremacist movement. Their options are then to either take measures to protect themselves from violent men or to not so so.
A lot of what you are saying is the exact reasoning right wingers use in brandishing weapons in their communities as well. And I thought CHOP kicked out the police wasn't that the whole point? They weren't wanted there any longer and its now under community control?
I think the difference between brandishing guns in service of white supremacy is somewhat different than branding them in defense against it man
The problem here is your assumption of who was shooting and why. Which again is the same thing that right wingers and even the police use to justify bad actions themselves.
The facts have to come out here, but I'm not happy a private security force opened fire on a car, and I want some accountability for that, one person is dead the other in critical condition, and we don't know why, that's bad.
There are two points being discussed that shouldnt be conflated like this, the specific shooting, and the presence of armed protest-aligned groups to act as defense. Im wholly in favor of the latter and while Id like to see more information on the former it seems so far to have been self defense.
You betray some historical ignorance though when you say my rhetoric is right wing. The necessity of community based self defense due to complacency or complicity on the part of the police has been a thread through minority struggles for far longer than either of us have been around, and at least in the modern era a core difference between liberals and leftists.
I'm saying a situation where self-appointed "security" is shooting at people is no better than the police doing it.
Its better than being unguarded sheep while the wolves are prowling.
I mean that’s literally a David Grossman training line.
Were the guys that opened fire CHOP security or not? Regardless of the stated answer, how do we know? How do we verify? Was anybody filming them to ensure they were acting appropriately? Is there video of the “attempted drive by?” If no shots were fired from the vehicle when the CHOP security (or not CHOP security) opened fire, how did they know it was an attempted drive by? Was this a proper use of force? Who the hell was even involved, on both sides of it?
These are all questions we would be asking of a police shooting, and we damn well need to ask the same here. Otherwise we’ve potentially replaced the police with something even less accountable. Or more violent. Or both.
I hope I don’t need to bend over backwards to establish myself as an ally here. I’m coming from a place of support. But man, if this doesn’t look like a serious problem then I don’t know what to tell you.
Edit: And I fully understand that the answers to all these questions may come throughout the day. But we better hope that they’re good answers.
Yes Id like to know those things too but it doesnt change at the end of the day what the options are. The police have abandoned a community firmly in the sights of a national white supremacist movement. Their options are then to either take measures to protect themselves from violent men or to not so so.
A lot of what you are saying is the exact reasoning right wingers use in brandishing weapons in their communities as well. And I thought CHOP kicked out the police wasn't that the whole point? They weren't wanted there any longer and its now under community control?
I think the difference between brandishing guns in service of white supremacy is somewhat different than branding them in defense against it man
The problem here is your assumption of who was shooting and why. Which again is the same thing that right wingers and even the police use to justify bad actions themselves.
The facts have to come out here, but I'm not happy a private security force opened fire on a car, and I want some accountability for that, one person is dead the other in critical condition, and we don't know why, that's bad.
There are two points being discussed that shouldnt be conflated like this, the specific shooting, and the presence of armed protest-aligned groups to act as defense. Im wholly in favor of the latter and while Id like to see more information on the former it seems so far to have been self defense.
You betray some historical ignorance though when you say my rhetoric is right wing. The necessity of community based self defense due to complacency or complicity on the part of the police has been a thread through minority struggles for far longer than either of us have been around, and at least in the modern era a core difference between liberals and leftists.
I think just about the only indisputable fact at this point is the person killed in that jeep was 16 years old and african american. That doesn't sound like a proud boy or white supremacist.
Attacked by tweeeeeeees!
+7
Options
BrodyThe WatchThe First ShoreRegistered Userregular
I'm saying a situation where self-appointed "security" is shooting at people is no better than the police doing it.
Its better than being unguarded sheep while the wolves are prowling.
I mean that’s literally a David Grossman training line.
Were the guys that opened fire CHOP security or not? Regardless of the stated answer, how do we know? How do we verify? Was anybody filming them to ensure they were acting appropriately? Is there video of the “attempted drive by?” If no shots were fired from the vehicle when the CHOP security (or not CHOP security) opened fire, how did they know it was an attempted drive by? Was this a proper use of force? Who the hell was even involved, on both sides of it?
These are all questions we would be asking of a police shooting, and we damn well need to ask the same here. Otherwise we’ve potentially replaced the police with something even less accountable. Or more violent. Or both.
I hope I don’t need to bend over backwards to establish myself as an ally here. I’m coming from a place of support. But man, if this doesn’t look like a serious problem then I don’t know what to tell you.
Edit: And I fully understand that the answers to all these questions may come throughout the day. But we better hope that they’re good answers.
Yes Id like to know those things too but it doesnt change at the end of the day what the options are. The police have abandoned a community firmly in the sights of a national white supremacist movement. Their options are then to either take measures to protect themselves from violent men or to not so so.
A lot of what you are saying is the exact reasoning right wingers use in brandishing weapons in their communities as well. And I thought CHOP kicked out the police wasn't that the whole point? They weren't wanted there any longer and its now under community control?
I think the difference between brandishing guns in service of white supremacy is somewhat different than branding them in defense against it man
The problem here is your assumption of who was shooting and why. Which again is the same thing that right wingers and even the police use to justify bad actions themselves.
The facts have to come out here, but I'm not happy a private security force opened fire on a car, and I want some accountability for that, one person is dead the other in critical condition, and we don't know why, that's bad.
There are two points being discussed that shouldnt be conflated like this, the specific shooting, and the presence of armed protest-aligned groups to act as defense. Im wholly in favor of the latter and while Id like to see more information on the former it seems so far to have been self defense.
You betray some historical ignorance though when you say my rhetoric is right wing. The necessity of community based self defense due to complacency or complicity on the part of the police has been a thread through minority struggles for far longer than either of us have been around, and at least in the modern era a core difference between liberals and leftists.
I think just about the only indisputable fact at this point is the person killed in that jeep was 16 years old and african american. That doesn't sound like a proud boy or white supremacist.
Which doesn't mean that that person hadn't previously executed a drive by of the CHOP.
It sucks that someone died, and we shouldn't ignore or downplay the fact that a life was lost. But also we should wait to get some actual facts (obviously, the age and race of the person whose life was lost is an actual fact, but I meant more about the circumstances) before we go all CNN on this shit and spend 24 hours reporting hearsay only to learn everything was different later.
Do we know for a fact that it was CHOP security that fired on the jeep/Bronco?
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
I'm saying a situation where self-appointed "security" is shooting at people is no better than the police doing it.
Its better than being unguarded sheep while the wolves are prowling.
I mean that’s literally a David Grossman training line.
Were the guys that opened fire CHOP security or not? Regardless of the stated answer, how do we know? How do we verify? Was anybody filming them to ensure they were acting appropriately? Is there video of the “attempted drive by?” If no shots were fired from the vehicle when the CHOP security (or not CHOP security) opened fire, how did they know it was an attempted drive by? Was this a proper use of force? Who the hell was even involved, on both sides of it?
These are all questions we would be asking of a police shooting, and we damn well need to ask the same here. Otherwise we’ve potentially replaced the police with something even less accountable. Or more violent. Or both.
I hope I don’t need to bend over backwards to establish myself as an ally here. I’m coming from a place of support. But man, if this doesn’t look like a serious problem then I don’t know what to tell you.
Edit: And I fully understand that the answers to all these questions may come throughout the day. But we better hope that they’re good answers.
Yes Id like to know those things too but it doesnt change at the end of the day what the options are. The police have abandoned a community firmly in the sights of a national white supremacist movement. Their options are then to either take measures to protect themselves from violent men or to not so so.
A lot of what you are saying is the exact reasoning right wingers use in brandishing weapons in their communities as well. And I thought CHOP kicked out the police wasn't that the whole point? They weren't wanted there any longer and its now under community control?
I think the difference between brandishing guns in service of white supremacy is somewhat different than branding them in defense against it man
The problem here is your assumption of who was shooting and why. Which again is the same thing that right wingers and even the police use to justify bad actions themselves.
The facts have to come out here, but I'm not happy a private security force opened fire on a car, and I want some accountability for that, one person is dead the other in critical condition, and we don't know why, that's bad.
There are two points being discussed that shouldnt be conflated like this, the specific shooting, and the presence of armed protest-aligned groups to act as defense. Im wholly in favor of the latter and while Id like to see more information on the former it seems so far to have been self defense.
You betray some historical ignorance though when you say my rhetoric is right wing. The necessity of community based self defense due to complacency or complicity on the part of the police has been a thread through minority struggles for far longer than either of us have been around, and at least in the modern era a core difference between liberals and leftists.
I think just about the only indisputable fact at this point is the person killed in that jeep was 16 years old and african american. That doesn't sound like a proud boy or white supremacist.
There'd been in days/weeks prior some violent incidents that didnt seem to have much of anything to do with the protests or what have you that got caught up with community security efforts for obvious reasons. I wouldnt be surprised if this is the case.
+1
Options
BrodyThe WatchThe First ShoreRegistered Userregular
I've got a couple of thoughts here.
First of all, this was always going to end up being a problem. We didn't have to worry about this when the 3% or whoever did their shitty armed protests about dumb shit, because for all the Antifa is the scariest terrorist organization born from Satan, they don't exactly show up armed with assault rifles everywhere they go, so you don't have to worry as much about counter protests starting a shooting war. But now that you have the CHOP group (it's my understanding that its a largely anarchist movement that's trying to support BLM because in this instance ACAB lines up well with their ideology, and also Seattle anarchists love to fuck shit up), which is armed for once, and your counter protesters are the group that have already shown they aren't afraid to show up armed. It just makes everything more fraught.
Should the CHOP be armed? Hell yeah. Its the only reason its lasted this long, its a large part of the reason no one did shit when the facists marched into the capitol building in Olympia. Police aren't trained to face a similarly armed force. Its (to my understanding) the impetus of the original push towards gun control, with Black Panther groups arming themselves to A) police their own neighborhoods, and protect their neighborhoods from the police. This is basically the same thing.
Lastly, with the number of anarchists in CHOP, there is going to always be some level of no one is responsible for anyone elses actions, and internally they likely don't see much of an issue with that. You fuck up, the rest of the community lets you know in subtle and overt ways, and when that happens often enough the group becomes self regulating w/o having to actually regulate. Person A did something abhorent, now no one will barter/trade/interact with them, don't do abhorent shit if you want to be able to work within the system. Unfortunately, thats not how outsiders are going to view it. Everyone wants to know "who is leading the anarchist movement", because they are so trapped in power structures that they can't come to terms with the fact that there is no power structure. No one is in charge, the only person you can blame for an action is the person who took the action.
This may all be way off base, I need more sleep and less coffee right now, and I am definitely an outsider to pretty much all of these groups.
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
I'm saying a situation where self-appointed "security" is shooting at people is no better than the police doing it.
Its better than being unguarded sheep while the wolves are prowling.
I mean that’s literally a David Grossman training line.
Were the guys that opened fire CHOP security or not? Regardless of the stated answer, how do we know? How do we verify? Was anybody filming them to ensure they were acting appropriately? Is there video of the “attempted drive by?” If no shots were fired from the vehicle when the CHOP security (or not CHOP security) opened fire, how did they know it was an attempted drive by? Was this a proper use of force? Who the hell was even involved, on both sides of it?
These are all questions we would be asking of a police shooting, and we damn well need to ask the same here. Otherwise we’ve potentially replaced the police with something even less accountable. Or more violent. Or both.
I hope I don’t need to bend over backwards to establish myself as an ally here. I’m coming from a place of support. But man, if this doesn’t look like a serious problem then I don’t know what to tell you.
Edit: And I fully understand that the answers to all these questions may come throughout the day. But we better hope that they’re good answers.
Yes Id like to know those things too but it doesnt change at the end of the day what the options are. The police have abandoned a community firmly in the sights of a national white supremacist movement. Their options are then to either take measures to protect themselves from violent men or to not so so.
A lot of what you are saying is the exact reasoning right wingers use in brandishing weapons in their communities as well. And I thought CHOP kicked out the police wasn't that the whole point? They weren't wanted there any longer and its now under community control?
I think the difference between brandishing guns in service of white supremacy is somewhat different than branding them in defense against it man
The problem here is your assumption of who was shooting and why. Which again is the same thing that right wingers and even the police use to justify bad actions themselves.
The facts have to come out here, but I'm not happy a private security force opened fire on a car, and I want some accountability for that, one person is dead the other in critical condition, and we don't know why, that's bad.
There are two points being discussed that shouldnt be conflated like this, the specific shooting, and the presence of armed protest-aligned groups to act as defense. Im wholly in favor of the latter and while Id like to see more information on the former it seems so far to have been self defense.
You betray some historical ignorance though when you say my rhetoric is right wing. The necessity of community based self defense due to complacency or complicity on the part of the police has been a thread through minority struggles for far longer than either of us have been around, and at least in the modern era a core difference between liberals and leftists.
While I agree in general, the bolded is quite literally the identical excuse used to band up, get Cletus and Skeeter together, and take care of that feller down the end of the road. After all, the police wouldn't do anything, so the community had to step in. One can, of course, say "but our motivations are good!", and they may well be, but again this would be a sentiment echoed by your counterparts.
I'm saying a situation where self-appointed "security" is shooting at people is no better than the police doing it.
Its better than being unguarded sheep while the wolves are prowling.
I mean that’s literally a David Grossman training line.
Were the guys that opened fire CHOP security or not? Regardless of the stated answer, how do we know? How do we verify? Was anybody filming them to ensure they were acting appropriately? Is there video of the “attempted drive by?” If no shots were fired from the vehicle when the CHOP security (or not CHOP security) opened fire, how did they know it was an attempted drive by? Was this a proper use of force? Who the hell was even involved, on both sides of it?
These are all questions we would be asking of a police shooting, and we damn well need to ask the same here. Otherwise we’ve potentially replaced the police with something even less accountable. Or more violent. Or both.
I hope I don’t need to bend over backwards to establish myself as an ally here. I’m coming from a place of support. But man, if this doesn’t look like a serious problem then I don’t know what to tell you.
Edit: And I fully understand that the answers to all these questions may come throughout the day. But we better hope that they’re good answers.
Yes Id like to know those things too but it doesnt change at the end of the day what the options are. The police have abandoned a community firmly in the sights of a national white supremacist movement. Their options are then to either take measures to protect themselves from violent men or to not so so.
A lot of what you are saying is the exact reasoning right wingers use in brandishing weapons in their communities as well. And I thought CHOP kicked out the police wasn't that the whole point? They weren't wanted there any longer and its now under community control?
I think the difference between brandishing guns in service of white supremacy is somewhat different than branding them in defense against it man
The problem here is your assumption of who was shooting and why. Which again is the same thing that right wingers and even the police use to justify bad actions themselves.
The facts have to come out here, but I'm not happy a private security force opened fire on a car, and I want some accountability for that, one person is dead the other in critical condition, and we don't know why, that's bad.
There are two points being discussed that shouldnt be conflated like this, the specific shooting, and the presence of armed protest-aligned groups to act as defense. Im wholly in favor of the latter and while Id like to see more information on the former it seems so far to have been self defense.
You betray some historical ignorance though when you say my rhetoric is right wing. The necessity of community based self defense due to complacency or complicity on the part of the police has been a thread through minority struggles for far longer than either of us have been around, and at least in the modern era a core difference between liberals and leftists.
While I agree in general, the bolded is quite literally the identical excuse used to band up, get Cletus and Skeeter together, and take care of that feller down the end of the road. After all, the police wouldn't do anything, so the community had to step in. One can, of course, say "but our motivations are good!", and they may well be, but again this would be a sentiment echoed by your counterparts.
I think its fairly grotesque that people keep comparing minority and civil rights protest communities defending themselves to their charicatures of white supremacist mobs
+4
Options
BrodyThe WatchThe First ShoreRegistered Userregular
I'm saying a situation where self-appointed "security" is shooting at people is no better than the police doing it.
Its better than being unguarded sheep while the wolves are prowling.
I mean that’s literally a David Grossman training line.
Were the guys that opened fire CHOP security or not? Regardless of the stated answer, how do we know? How do we verify? Was anybody filming them to ensure they were acting appropriately? Is there video of the “attempted drive by?” If no shots were fired from the vehicle when the CHOP security (or not CHOP security) opened fire, how did they know it was an attempted drive by? Was this a proper use of force? Who the hell was even involved, on both sides of it?
These are all questions we would be asking of a police shooting, and we damn well need to ask the same here. Otherwise we’ve potentially replaced the police with something even less accountable. Or more violent. Or both.
I hope I don’t need to bend over backwards to establish myself as an ally here. I’m coming from a place of support. But man, if this doesn’t look like a serious problem then I don’t know what to tell you.
Edit: And I fully understand that the answers to all these questions may come throughout the day. But we better hope that they’re good answers.
Yes Id like to know those things too but it doesnt change at the end of the day what the options are. The police have abandoned a community firmly in the sights of a national white supremacist movement. Their options are then to either take measures to protect themselves from violent men or to not so so.
A lot of what you are saying is the exact reasoning right wingers use in brandishing weapons in their communities as well. And I thought CHOP kicked out the police wasn't that the whole point? They weren't wanted there any longer and its now under community control?
I think the difference between brandishing guns in service of white supremacy is somewhat different than branding them in defense against it man
The problem here is your assumption of who was shooting and why. Which again is the same thing that right wingers and even the police use to justify bad actions themselves.
The facts have to come out here, but I'm not happy a private security force opened fire on a car, and I want some accountability for that, one person is dead the other in critical condition, and we don't know why, that's bad.
There are two points being discussed that shouldnt be conflated like this, the specific shooting, and the presence of armed protest-aligned groups to act as defense. Im wholly in favor of the latter and while Id like to see more information on the former it seems so far to have been self defense.
You betray some historical ignorance though when you say my rhetoric is right wing. The necessity of community based self defense due to complacency or complicity on the part of the police has been a thread through minority struggles for far longer than either of us have been around, and at least in the modern era a core difference between liberals and leftists.
While I agree in general, the bolded is quite literally the identical excuse used to band up, get Cletus and Skeeter together, and take care of that feller down the end of the road. After all, the police wouldn't do anything, so the community had to step in. One can, of course, say "but our motivations are good!", and they may well be, but again this would be a sentiment echoed by your counterparts.
I think the difference here is one of "take care of that feller down the end of the road" and "defend against threats approaching us". Its also basically the exact same problem we have with the police, just Cletus and Skeeter don't have the benefit of Qualified Immunity (although if the jury is rigged, they might as well have).
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
I'm saying a situation where self-appointed "security" is shooting at people is no better than the police doing it.
Not when they're actively being shot at. I'm perfectly fine with armed security firing back when fired upon, assuming they take precautions to prevent collateral damage and innocent lives. So far it looks like that's what's happened: armed security disabled the shooters in their vehicle with sharpshooting and then medics immediately treated them and got them to a hospital. If were police instead of armed security, they would have sprayed the car down with dozens of bullets, potentially harming people nearby, then left them to rot in the car for a while before even attempting any sort of medical aid.
Is there a claim anywhere that they found a weapon in the vehicle?
+2
Options
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
edited June 2020
The appalling thing about this to me is the police whining about how they "need to get back in there", when nobody forced them out in the first place. They ran away unprompted and left the area without protection which is 100% on the police, not the people currently trying to replace them.
If the cops want to go back, then they should fucking go back. Move the barriers, go to the precinct, cut through the fence, and walk inside. People might physically stand in their way, but the armed showdown the cops keep wanting just isn't going to happen. The only thing actually keeping police from the precinct is their dumbass selves.
Police are saying when they got there the scene was disturbed. 16 year old was killed 14 year old wounded. Doesn't seem like we have any information on who shot them.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
I'm saying a situation where self-appointed "security" is shooting at people is no better than the police doing it.
Not when they're actively being shot at. I'm perfectly fine with armed security firing back when fired upon, assuming they take precautions to prevent collateral damage and innocent lives. So far it looks like that's what's happened: armed security disabled the shooters in their vehicle with sharpshooting and then medics immediately treated them and got them to a hospital. If were police instead of armed security, they would have sprayed the car down with dozens of bullets, potentially harming people nearby, then left them to rot in the car for a while before even attempting any sort of medical aid.
Is there a claim anywhere that they found a weapon in the vehicle?
King5 article I was reading said police chief Best said the signs the vehicle was tampered with were "abundantly clear." She doesn't go into detail on whether that means they found or didn't find weapons, and, regardless, depending on whether you believe her is going to be entirely up to whether you think the police are being unbiased in their assessment.
Erlkönig on
| Origin/R*SC: Ein7919 | Battle.net: Erlkonig#1448 | XBL: Lexicanum | Steam: Der Erlkönig (the umlaut is important) |
0
Options
RingoHe/Hima distinct lack of substanceRegistered Userregular
I think one thing that's being glossed over is that the CHOP security who fired weapons are at least potentially going to be held liable for their actions
I think one thing that's being glossed over is that the CHOP security who fired weapons are at least potentially going to be held liable for their actions
That's not something you can say about police
Are they? Like the times article lists them as unidentified shooters, so if CHOP closes ranks on these guys they might also avoid any scrutiny.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
The appalling thing about this to me is the police whining about how they "need to get back in there", when nobody forced them out in the first place. They ran away unprompted and left the area without protection which is 100% on the police, not the people currently trying to replace them.
If the cops want to go back, then they should fucking go back. Move the barriers, go to the precinct, cut through the fence, and walk inside. People might physically stand in their way, but the armed showdown the cops keep wanting just isn't going to happen. The only thing actually keeping police from the precinct is their dumbass selves.
At the very least Durkan and Best (though probably not the trigger happy rank and file) are well aware that the only way there will be further momentum on cutting police budgets or more restrictions on their use of force beyond what is already underway is if the police instigate further violence. All they have to do in order to get the majority on their side is keep doing what they've been doing: hold back and let all the difficulties of actually running a society be blamed on CHOP. Playing the martyr is part of that. They'll get their precinct back eventually. They just have to wait for things to continue along their current course.
I think one thing that's being glossed over is that the CHOP security who fired weapons are at least potentially going to be held liable for their actions
That's not something you can say about police
Are they? Like the times article lists them as unidentified shooters, so if CHOP closes ranks on these guys they might also avoid any scrutiny.
If they were even CHOP security. To the extent that this even exists as a real “thing.”
I won’t compare this to white supremacist mob justice. But I will compare it to the police. If two officers shoot up a car and kill a black teenager, at least we generally get to know who they are. In 2020, we may get bodycam footage. There will be reports filed, and investigations. And as much as we may not trust those mechanisms and as toothless as they may be, they are something. And you can’t even begin to have a process of any kind if you don’t even know who did the shooting, and who they were “working for” so to speak.
We need to see a lot of answers, and they need to be the right answers, before you convince me that this is any better than what we had before.
Councilmember Kshama Sawant said during a council briefing the shooting “highlights the urgency to address the endemic violence in our society under capitalism.”
I just can't even when one child is dead and another in critical care. That's not accountability, that's dodging the question.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
I'm saying a situation where self-appointed "security" is shooting at people is no better than the police doing it.
Not when they're actively being shot at. I'm perfectly fine with armed security firing back when fired upon, assuming they take precautions to prevent collateral damage and innocent lives. So far it looks like that's what's happened: armed security disabled the shooters in their vehicle with sharpshooting and then medics immediately treated them and got them to a hospital. If were police instead of armed security, they would have sprayed the car down with dozens of bullets, potentially harming people nearby, then left them to rot in the car for a while before even attempting any sort of medical aid.
Is there a claim anywhere that they found a weapon in the vehicle?
King5 article I was reading said police chief Best said the signs the vehicle was tampered with were "abundantly clear." She doesn't go into detail on whether that means they found or didn't find weapons, and, regardless, depending on whether you believe her is going to be entirely up to whether you think the police are being unbiased in their assessment.
I'm not even talking about by the police. Have any of the CHAZ/CHOP people made a specific claim that a weapon was retrieved from the vehicle?
I ask because there are a ton of photos floating around of the shot up car, but none of a weapon, which you'd think is like the first thing you'd want to document.
Doc on
+5
Options
BrodyThe WatchThe First ShoreRegistered Userregular
Councilmember Kshama Sawant said during a council briefing the shooting “highlights the urgency to address the endemic violence in our society under capitalism.”
I just can't even when one child is dead and another in critical care. That's not accountability, that's dodging the question.
I think she is probably referencing the fact that these shootings are not a new thing under CHOP. In 2019 there were 332 shootings in Seattle, which is just about one a day.
Edit: typo'd the number of shootings, sorry
Brody on
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
I'm saying a situation where self-appointed "security" is shooting at people is no better than the police doing it.
Not when they're actively being shot at. I'm perfectly fine with armed security firing back when fired upon, assuming they take precautions to prevent collateral damage and innocent lives. So far it looks like that's what's happened: armed security disabled the shooters in their vehicle with sharpshooting and then medics immediately treated them and got them to a hospital. If were police instead of armed security, they would have sprayed the car down with dozens of bullets, potentially harming people nearby, then left them to rot in the car for a while before even attempting any sort of medical aid.
Is there a claim anywhere that they found a weapon in the vehicle?
King5 article I was reading said police chief Best said the signs the vehicle was tampered with were "abundantly clear." She doesn't go into detail on whether that means they found or didn't find weapons, and, regardless, depending on whether you believe her is going to be entirely up to whether you think the police are being unbiased in their assessment.
Ofc there are signs someone else was in the car, people tried to treat the occupants, removed them, and drove them to the Hospital.
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
Councilmember Kshama Sawant said during a council briefing the shooting “highlights the urgency to address the endemic violence in our society under capitalism.”
I just can't even when one child is dead and another in critical care. That's not accountability, that's dodging the question.
I think she is probably referencing the fact that these shootings are not a new thing under CHOP. In 2019 there were 2019 shootings in Seattle, which is just about one a day.
But she was asked about the shooting this morning that's my problem. Pointing to the overall societal trend of violence when a 16 year old is dead and a 14 year old wounded is not leadership I want. I don't want it from the police, I don't want it from council people or a mayor. Tell me what the fuck you're doing about the dead and wounded not how much you think capitalism sucks.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Councilmember Kshama Sawant said during a council briefing the shooting “highlights the urgency to address the endemic violence in our society under capitalism.”
I just can't even when one child is dead and another in critical care. That's not accountability, that's dodging the question.
I think she is probably referencing the fact that these shootings are not a new thing under CHOP. In 2019 there were 332 shootings in Seattle, which is just about one a day.
But she was asked about the shooting this morning that's my problem. Pointing to the overall societal trend of violence when a 16 year old is dead and a 14 year old wounded is not leadership I want. I don't want it from the police, I don't want it from council people or a mayor. Tell me what the fuck you're doing about the dead and wounded not how much you think capitalism sucks.
Well, if she thinks capitalism is a primary motivating factor in the death of a 16 year old, then maybe its what she thinks she's doing regarding the death of a 16 year old.
Brody on
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
Councilmember Kshama Sawant said during a council briefing the shooting “highlights the urgency to address the endemic violence in our society under capitalism.”
I just can't even when one child is dead and another in critical care. That's not accountability, that's dodging the question.
I think she is probably referencing the fact that these shootings are not a new thing under CHOP. In 2019 there were 2019 shootings in Seattle, which is just about one a day.
Per the AP there were 332 “shooting incidents” in 2019, but only 79 injury shootings and 18 fatal, or one every three weeks or so, in Seattle.
It’s been three weeks so far? And we have *two* dead, in CHOP (versus all of Seattle), and four more injured? That’s...not great.
That we now have a black teenager shot dead in his car for allegedly “attempting” a drive-by, and we’re well into the day without any video or names of shooters or anything, and I’m starting to think we have a problem here.
And I’m the guy who’s been telling people to shut their stupid mouths about Capitol Hill since before the police even pulled back. I’m strongly supportive of the protests in general. But man, this is eventually going to get tough to defend.
Councilmember Kshama Sawant said during a council briefing the shooting “highlights the urgency to address the endemic violence in our society under capitalism.”
I just can't even when one child is dead and another in critical care. That's not accountability, that's dodging the question.
I think she is probably referencing the fact that these shootings are not a new thing under CHOP. In 2019 there were 2019 shootings in Seattle, which is just about one a day.
But she was asked about the shooting this morning that's my problem. Pointing to the overall societal trend of violence when a 16 year old is dead and a 14 year old wounded is not leadership I want. I don't want it from the police, I don't want it from council people or a mayor. Tell me what the fuck you're doing about the dead and wounded not how much you think capitalism sucks.
I mean she's a socialist and you're not. You guys dont share a world view so obviously you wont agree with her on what constitutes doing something.
seeing as we apparently have no idea what actually happened going "capitalism shot this boy" is stupid.
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Councilmember Kshama Sawant said during a council briefing the shooting “highlights the urgency to address the endemic violence in our society under capitalism.”
I just can't even when one child is dead and another in critical care. That's not accountability, that's dodging the question.
I think she is probably referencing the fact that these shootings are not a new thing under CHOP. In 2019 there were 2019 shootings in Seattle, which is just about one a day.
But she was asked about the shooting this morning that's my problem. Pointing to the overall societal trend of violence when a 16 year old is dead and a 14 year old wounded is not leadership I want. I don't want it from the police, I don't want it from council people or a mayor. Tell me what the fuck you're doing about the dead and wounded not how much you think capitalism sucks.
I mean she's a socialist and you're not. You guys dont share a world view so obviously you wont agree with her on what constitutes doing something.
I'm not going to agree with anyone when asked about a specific shooting that mentions an overall problem no. Like that's unacceptable for any political persuasion. Especially a shooting that is highly fucking suspect on what happened.
Like I don't accept it when a right winger tells me that the problem with shootings in america is mental health, so no I won't accept a city councilwoman saying capitalism killed a 16 year old this morning, I wish you wouldn't either.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Councilmember Kshama Sawant said during a council briefing the shooting “highlights the urgency to address the endemic violence in our society under capitalism.”
I just can't even when one child is dead and another in critical care. That's not accountability, that's dodging the question.
I think she is probably referencing the fact that these shootings are not a new thing under CHOP. In 2019 there were 2019 shootings in Seattle, which is just about one a day.
But she was asked about the shooting this morning that's my problem. Pointing to the overall societal trend of violence when a 16 year old is dead and a 14 year old wounded is not leadership I want. I don't want it from the police, I don't want it from council people or a mayor. Tell me what the fuck you're doing about the dead and wounded not how much you think capitalism sucks.
I mean she's a socialist and you're not. You guys dont share a world view so obviously you wont agree with her on what constitutes doing something.
I'm not going to agree with anyone when asked about a specific shooting that mentions an overall problem no. Like that's unacceptable for any political persuasion. Especially a shooting that is highly fucking suspect on what happened.
Like I don't accept it when a right winger tells me that the problem with shootings in america is mental health, so no I won't accept a city councilwoman saying capitalism killed a 16 year old this morning, I wish you wouldn't either.
Ok, well, what sort of answers would you accept? Because I think both of them are probably fairly accurate.
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
Councilmember Kshama Sawant said during a council briefing the shooting “highlights the urgency to address the endemic violence in our society under capitalism.”
I just can't even when one child is dead and another in critical care. That's not accountability, that's dodging the question.
I think she is probably referencing the fact that these shootings are not a new thing under CHOP. In 2019 there were 2019 shootings in Seattle, which is just about one a day.
But she was asked about the shooting this morning that's my problem. Pointing to the overall societal trend of violence when a 16 year old is dead and a 14 year old wounded is not leadership I want. I don't want it from the police, I don't want it from council people or a mayor. Tell me what the fuck you're doing about the dead and wounded not how much you think capitalism sucks.
I mean she's a socialist and you're not. You guys dont share a world view so obviously you wont agree with her on what constitutes doing something.
I'm not going to agree with anyone when asked about a specific shooting that mentions an overall problem no. Like that's unacceptable for any political persuasion. Especially a shooting that is highly fucking suspect on what happened.
Like I don't accept it when a right winger tells me that the problem with shootings in america is mental health, so no I won't accept a city councilwoman saying capitalism killed a 16 year old this morning, I wish you wouldn't either.
No Im perfectly fine with the idea that a capitalist society like we have builds an environment in which violent crime can foster and grow leading to things liks 16 year olds dying in a gun fight. But then Sawant and I share an ideology.
right it's all capitalism's fault, that's the thing we should be focusing on in this particular death
that's why the slogan is "socialist lives matter"
Aioua on
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Councilmember Kshama Sawant said during a council briefing the shooting “highlights the urgency to address the endemic violence in our society under capitalism.”
I just can't even when one child is dead and another in critical care. That's not accountability, that's dodging the question.
I think she is probably referencing the fact that these shootings are not a new thing under CHOP. In 2019 there were 2019 shootings in Seattle, which is just about one a day.
But she was asked about the shooting this morning that's my problem. Pointing to the overall societal trend of violence when a 16 year old is dead and a 14 year old wounded is not leadership I want. I don't want it from the police, I don't want it from council people or a mayor. Tell me what the fuck you're doing about the dead and wounded not how much you think capitalism sucks.
I mean she's a socialist and you're not. You guys dont share a world view so obviously you wont agree with her on what constitutes doing something.
I'm not going to agree with anyone when asked about a specific shooting that mentions an overall problem no. Like that's unacceptable for any political persuasion. Especially a shooting that is highly fucking suspect on what happened.
Like I don't accept it when a right winger tells me that the problem with shootings in america is mental health, so no I won't accept a city councilwoman saying capitalism killed a 16 year old this morning, I wish you wouldn't either.
Ok, well, what sort of answers would you accept? Because I think both of them are probably fairly accurate.
That the security force if that's who shot this young man be held accountable, that if there wasn't video they need to have video, and those responsible for the shooting will be identified and turned over to an authority to face criminal liability for opening fire on a car with two young men in it. And that people who are in charge of this security force be identified and explain what orders if any they gave to their security force that lead to this shooting. And then following that up what further steps might be taken at CHOP to prevent further shootings or loss of life.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Councilmember Kshama Sawant said during a council briefing the shooting “highlights the urgency to address the endemic violence in our society under capitalism.”
I just can't even when one child is dead and another in critical care. That's not accountability, that's dodging the question.
I think she is probably referencing the fact that these shootings are not a new thing under CHOP. In 2019 there were 2019 shootings in Seattle, which is just about one a day.
But she was asked about the shooting this morning that's my problem. Pointing to the overall societal trend of violence when a 16 year old is dead and a 14 year old wounded is not leadership I want. I don't want it from the police, I don't want it from council people or a mayor. Tell me what the fuck you're doing about the dead and wounded not how much you think capitalism sucks.
I mean she's a socialist and you're not. You guys dont share a world view so obviously you wont agree with her on what constitutes doing something.
I'm not going to agree with anyone when asked about a specific shooting that mentions an overall problem no. Like that's unacceptable for any political persuasion. Especially a shooting that is highly fucking suspect on what happened.
Like I don't accept it when a right winger tells me that the problem with shootings in america is mental health, so no I won't accept a city councilwoman saying capitalism killed a 16 year old this morning, I wish you wouldn't either.
No Im perfectly fine with the idea that a capitalist society like we have builds an environment in which violent crime can foster and grow leading to things liks 16 year olds dying in a gun fight. But then Sawant and I share an ideology.
And I’m still legitimately curious why we’re accepting the story that this was “a gun fight,” rather than just a shooting. You know, until we have any reliable evidence that the victims were armed.
I do kinda understand the impulse to trust the CHOP security...again assuming that’s who even fired...more than cops. But I don’t necessarily share it. Anybody who just shot another person is probably going to be doing damage control, because prison sucks.
+7
Options
knitdanIn ur baseKillin ur guysRegistered Userregular
Basically every form of accountability we ask of the police, but not made toothless by a corrupt union.
“I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Basically every form of accountability we ask of the police, but not made toothless by a corrupt union.
I mean I don't want to replace the police with the police again. Isn't that what these protests are about? Young black men being summarily executed by the authority? Because from where I'm sitting that's exactly what just happened this morning.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Posts
I mean I agree that "lol fuck 'em" is probably the internal police policy, but it doesn't seem like the people in chaz want any cops around.
I dunno, has there been anything from chaz like "we want the police to operate with us in this specific way"?
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Yeah, I think the community is likely supportive...based on my experience living a couple blocks away just a few years back, and still having friends in that area...but yeah its definitely a different demo nowadays than what people assume based on decade-plus old knowledge. Our one-bedroom apartment there back in 2015 cost an embarrassing amount.
I’d also say there’s an argument to be had whether the cops abandoned them, or were pushed out. Pushed out for good reason, if so, but still.
I’m mostly just curious how much effort, if any, is being put into ensuring that the armed men placed on the boundaries of the CHOP are acting reasonably. What accountability is being demanded? Is anybody actually tracking who is working this effort? Is there a roster? Is anybody filming to ensure you can document the need for any use of force? In a way that cannot be easily destroyed by those involved?
We can’t pretend we don’t know to do these things and why they’re important. It’s literally the reason this area exists to begin with. If we aren’t bothering then, even if through route naïveté, we’ve created something arguably worse than what we drove out.
I think the difference between brandishing guns in service of white supremacy is somewhat different than branding them in defense against it man
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
And yet those guns apparently killed a black teenager in this case. Assuming it was CHOP security. Assuming we’ll ever really know.
And what reason do we have to buy their story that it was an attempted drive-by? Has anybody stated that weapons were even recovered from the vehicle yet? Did those that shot the occupants have a chance to plant weapons? Was there any control of the scene or documentation?
Is it possible that a car containing two teenagers just “fit the description“ of a vehicle involved in an earlier incident? Will we ever know?
The problem here is your assumption of who was shooting and why. Which again is the same thing that right wingers and even the police use to justify bad actions themselves.
The facts have to come out here, but I'm not happy a private security force opened fire on a car, and I want some accountability for that, one person is dead the other in critical condition, and we don't know why, that's bad.
pleasepaypreacher.net
There are two points being discussed that shouldnt be conflated like this, the specific shooting, and the presence of armed protest-aligned groups to act as defense. Im wholly in favor of the latter and while Id like to see more information on the former it seems so far to have been self defense.
You betray some historical ignorance though when you say my rhetoric is right wing. The necessity of community based self defense due to complacency or complicity on the part of the police has been a thread through minority struggles for far longer than either of us have been around, and at least in the modern era a core difference between liberals and leftists.
I think just about the only indisputable fact at this point is the person killed in that jeep was 16 years old and african american. That doesn't sound like a proud boy or white supremacist.
Which doesn't mean that that person hadn't previously executed a drive by of the CHOP.
It sucks that someone died, and we shouldn't ignore or downplay the fact that a life was lost. But also we should wait to get some actual facts (obviously, the age and race of the person whose life was lost is an actual fact, but I meant more about the circumstances) before we go all CNN on this shit and spend 24 hours reporting hearsay only to learn everything was different later.
Do we know for a fact that it was CHOP security that fired on the jeep/Bronco?
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
There'd been in days/weeks prior some violent incidents that didnt seem to have much of anything to do with the protests or what have you that got caught up with community security efforts for obvious reasons. I wouldnt be surprised if this is the case.
First of all, this was always going to end up being a problem. We didn't have to worry about this when the 3% or whoever did their shitty armed protests about dumb shit, because for all the Antifa is the scariest terrorist organization born from Satan, they don't exactly show up armed with assault rifles everywhere they go, so you don't have to worry as much about counter protests starting a shooting war. But now that you have the CHOP group (it's my understanding that its a largely anarchist movement that's trying to support BLM because in this instance ACAB lines up well with their ideology, and also Seattle anarchists love to fuck shit up), which is armed for once, and your counter protesters are the group that have already shown they aren't afraid to show up armed. It just makes everything more fraught.
Should the CHOP be armed? Hell yeah. Its the only reason its lasted this long, its a large part of the reason no one did shit when the facists marched into the capitol building in Olympia. Police aren't trained to face a similarly armed force. Its (to my understanding) the impetus of the original push towards gun control, with Black Panther groups arming themselves to A) police their own neighborhoods, and
Lastly, with the number of anarchists in CHOP, there is going to always be some level of no one is responsible for anyone elses actions, and internally they likely don't see much of an issue with that. You fuck up, the rest of the community lets you know in subtle and overt ways, and when that happens often enough the group becomes self regulating w/o having to actually regulate. Person A did something abhorent, now no one will barter/trade/interact with them, don't do abhorent shit if you want to be able to work within the system. Unfortunately, thats not how outsiders are going to view it. Everyone wants to know "who is leading the anarchist movement", because they are so trapped in power structures that they can't come to terms with the fact that there is no power structure. No one is in charge, the only person you can blame for an action is the person who took the action.
This may all be way off base, I need more sleep and less coffee right now, and I am definitely an outsider to pretty much all of these groups.
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
While I agree in general, the bolded is quite literally the identical excuse used to band up, get Cletus and Skeeter together, and take care of that feller down the end of the road. After all, the police wouldn't do anything, so the community had to step in. One can, of course, say "but our motivations are good!", and they may well be, but again this would be a sentiment echoed by your counterparts.
I think its fairly grotesque that people keep comparing minority and civil rights protest communities defending themselves to their charicatures of white supremacist mobs
I think the difference here is one of "take care of that feller down the end of the road" and "defend against threats approaching us". Its also basically the exact same problem we have with the police, just Cletus and Skeeter don't have the benefit of Qualified Immunity (although if the jury is rigged, they might as well have).
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
Is there a claim anywhere that they found a weapon in the vehicle?
If the cops want to go back, then they should fucking go back. Move the barriers, go to the precinct, cut through the fence, and walk inside. People might physically stand in their way, but the armed showdown the cops keep wanting just isn't going to happen. The only thing actually keeping police from the precinct is their dumbass selves.
Police are saying when they got there the scene was disturbed. 16 year old was killed 14 year old wounded. Doesn't seem like we have any information on who shot them.
pleasepaypreacher.net
King5 article I was reading said police chief Best said the signs the vehicle was tampered with were "abundantly clear." She doesn't go into detail on whether that means they found or didn't find weapons, and, regardless, depending on whether you believe her is going to be entirely up to whether you think the police are being unbiased in their assessment.
That's not something you can say about police
Are they? Like the times article lists them as unidentified shooters, so if CHOP closes ranks on these guys they might also avoid any scrutiny.
pleasepaypreacher.net
At the very least Durkan and Best (though probably not the trigger happy rank and file) are well aware that the only way there will be further momentum on cutting police budgets or more restrictions on their use of force beyond what is already underway is if the police instigate further violence. All they have to do in order to get the majority on their side is keep doing what they've been doing: hold back and let all the difficulties of actually running a society be blamed on CHOP. Playing the martyr is part of that. They'll get their precinct back eventually. They just have to wait for things to continue along their current course.
If they were even CHOP security. To the extent that this even exists as a real “thing.”
I won’t compare this to white supremacist mob justice. But I will compare it to the police. If two officers shoot up a car and kill a black teenager, at least we generally get to know who they are. In 2020, we may get bodycam footage. There will be reports filed, and investigations. And as much as we may not trust those mechanisms and as toothless as they may be, they are something. And you can’t even begin to have a process of any kind if you don’t even know who did the shooting, and who they were “working for” so to speak.
We need to see a lot of answers, and they need to be the right answers, before you convince me that this is any better than what we had before.
I just can't even when one child is dead and another in critical care. That's not accountability, that's dodging the question.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I'm not even talking about by the police. Have any of the CHAZ/CHOP people made a specific claim that a weapon was retrieved from the vehicle?
I ask because there are a ton of photos floating around of the shot up car, but none of a weapon, which you'd think is like the first thing you'd want to document.
I think she is probably referencing the fact that these shootings are not a new thing under CHOP. In 2019 there were 332 shootings in Seattle, which is just about one a day.
Edit: typo'd the number of shootings, sorry
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
Ofc there are signs someone else was in the car, people tried to treat the occupants, removed them, and drove them to the Hospital.
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
But she was asked about the shooting this morning that's my problem. Pointing to the overall societal trend of violence when a 16 year old is dead and a 14 year old wounded is not leadership I want. I don't want it from the police, I don't want it from council people or a mayor. Tell me what the fuck you're doing about the dead and wounded not how much you think capitalism sucks.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Well, if she thinks capitalism is a primary motivating factor in the death of a 16 year old, then maybe its what she thinks she's doing regarding the death of a 16 year old.
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
Per the AP there were 332 “shooting incidents” in 2019, but only 79 injury shootings and 18 fatal, or one every three weeks or so, in Seattle.
It’s been three weeks so far? And we have *two* dead, in CHOP (versus all of Seattle), and four more injured? That’s...not great.
That we now have a black teenager shot dead in his car for allegedly “attempting” a drive-by, and we’re well into the day without any video or names of shooters or anything, and I’m starting to think we have a problem here.
And I’m the guy who’s been telling people to shut their stupid mouths about Capitol Hill since before the police even pulled back. I’m strongly supportive of the protests in general. But man, this is eventually going to get tough to defend.
I mean she's a socialist and you're not. You guys dont share a world view so obviously you wont agree with her on what constitutes doing something.
I certainly know i don't care for that kind of rhetoric in response
seeing as we apparently have no idea what actually happened going "capitalism shot this boy" is stupid.
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
I'm not going to agree with anyone when asked about a specific shooting that mentions an overall problem no. Like that's unacceptable for any political persuasion. Especially a shooting that is highly fucking suspect on what happened.
Like I don't accept it when a right winger tells me that the problem with shootings in america is mental health, so no I won't accept a city councilwoman saying capitalism killed a 16 year old this morning, I wish you wouldn't either.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Ok, well, what sort of answers would you accept? Because I think both of them are probably fairly accurate.
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
No Im perfectly fine with the idea that a capitalist society like we have builds an environment in which violent crime can foster and grow leading to things liks 16 year olds dying in a gun fight. But then Sawant and I share an ideology.
that's why the slogan is "socialist lives matter"
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
That the security force if that's who shot this young man be held accountable, that if there wasn't video they need to have video, and those responsible for the shooting will be identified and turned over to an authority to face criminal liability for opening fire on a car with two young men in it. And that people who are in charge of this security force be identified and explain what orders if any they gave to their security force that lead to this shooting. And then following that up what further steps might be taken at CHOP to prevent further shootings or loss of life.
pleasepaypreacher.net
And I’m still legitimately curious why we’re accepting the story that this was “a gun fight,” rather than just a shooting. You know, until we have any reliable evidence that the victims were armed.
I do kinda understand the impulse to trust the CHOP security...again assuming that’s who even fired...more than cops. But I don’t necessarily share it. Anybody who just shot another person is probably going to be doing damage control, because prison sucks.
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
I mean I don't want to replace the police with the police again. Isn't that what these protests are about? Young black men being summarily executed by the authority? Because from where I'm sitting that's exactly what just happened this morning.
pleasepaypreacher.net