|
|
|
|
|
by ben_w
2191 days ago
|
|
People disagree that the American police are routinely armed? That’s the first I’ve heard. Does anyone actually disagree that the police have a presumption of justification for lethal force? Because literally every time I’ve seen this conversation, for longer than I’ve been online, the argument from those opposed to the protesters of the moment and in favour of the police response has been that they should have that presumption not if they have that presumption. Does anyone disagree that the protestors face the prospect of injury or loss of life? Despite, to use one of far too many salient examples from this year alone, the video of a pensioner being knocked to the ground by one cop and bleeding from the head as the rest just walked around him without even attempting to offer first aid? As for what ought to be acceptable grounds for firing… how many states are “at-will” or whatever the correct term is? In those places, anything goes. |
|
You should probably live here before you pass judgement.
Listening to the echo chamber here and the mainstream news that comes out of America is not the full picture.