Portland Protests

[Guest]

Just now, fragglerock said:

her link was meant only as supporting evidence, not direct evidence

You get it...

[Guest]

High IQ going bored? 

 

Uhm, a day in a life of a police officer is incredibly diverse to another day. 

 

I'll imply higher IQ's come with more outside the box thinkers, and that's something unwanted...

[Mostly Peaceful Ryan]

@fragglerockI see you edited out the only real strong issue I have with your post, I appreciate it .

 

 

36 minutes ago, fragglerock said:

People can be offended by valid critique. That doesn't mean the critiques aren't valid.

I only have an issue with offensive if someone can't back it up. In this case it was not.

 

21 minutes ago, fragglerock said:

You are correct. I noticed this when I looked back on my post, right after posting it, and then removed that section from my response. Of course it's entirely valid for you to bring this up, especially since you saw my original response before I could edit it. Phoenix's article only showed that a police department filtered out some applicants based on high intelligence and does not directly demonstrate the hiring motivations she mentioned. Her linked article was related, in that it showed a police department was not hiring for high intelligence, but as for what they are hiring for, this is left up to interpretation. In my experience Phoenix argues in good faith and so, personally, I find it reasonable to assume her link was meant only as supporting evidence, not direct evidence.

 

Although some people consider this nit-picking I encourage people to investigate exactly which claims are being put forward and whether references support those claims.

I do not find that article to support the claim, the motives for not selecting a person with a higher IQ was that the applicant was more likely to become bored and resign after an expensive training process. They most likely had issues with previous hires that scored higher doing such things. What I am saying is Phoenix using this to support a different motive while the department has put forth their motives doesn't support the claim, it actually opposes the claim Phoenix made. 

 

25 minutes ago, Phoenix the II said:

I'll disagree with this:

Okay do you have experience going through the hiring process of a police officer? I don't know what you are basing this on.

 

17 minutes ago, Phoenix the II said:

High IQ going bored? 

 

Uhm, a day in a life of a police officer is incredibly diverse to another day. 

 

I'll imply higher IQ's come with more critical thinkers, and that's something unwanted...

It depends on the department and where they are operating out of, in this cases it is New London, CT, I am not familiar with that area of the country when it comes to policing, but I can tell you policing a smaller community with few calls can be very boring. Even if the city has many calls police get called to very similar calls over and over again. I know many officers that have complained about becoming bored with the job in less than 5 years as they see similar things day in and out. The board hiring police officers probably are putting into consideration boredom, as during exit interviews with those that scored higher they found that was an issue. They also could have seen that scoring higher had a correlation with resigning earlier, and they are looking for long-term hires as the hiring process and police training is expensive. I would recommend going on ride-alongs to see how the life of an officer would be in a particular area and talk to those already on duty.

 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Mostly Peaceful Ryan said:

I would recommend going on ride-alongs to see how the life of an officer

Like having watched most of this?

 

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmxePybUpZj8RRuWz6r8uTQ

 

( I know it's Dutch... still the "same" job)

[Mostly Peaceful Ryan]

7 minutes ago, Phoenix the II said:

Like having watched most of this?

 

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmxePybUpZj8RRuWz6r8uTQ

 

( I know it's Dutch... still the "same" job)

I don't speak dutch so please help me out, but it looks like they are following officers with cameras and showing you police work similar to the show Cops or live PD is that accurate for me to say?

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Mostly Peaceful Ryan said:

I don't speak dutch so please help me out, but it looks like they are following officers with cameras and showing you police work similar to the show Cops or live PD is that accurate for me to say?

Without it being a reality show/dramatized. It's actually vlogging by an officer...

[Mostly Peaceful Ryan]

1 minute ago, Phoenix the II said:

Without it being a reality show/dramatized.

I'm going say no, even the best documentary is going to edit down the hours where nothing happen and officers become bored. A more accurate descripter would be taking 50 of those videos, and for 5 years all you can watch are those, the first few times they get a drug bust it is entertaining but after seeing it for the 100th time it is boring, and old.

[AspieAlly613]

One detail that doesn't make sense to me:

 

Why does the federal government seem to care more about the goings-on in a city of less than a million people than that city's mayor does?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Mostly Peaceful Ryan said:

I'm going say no, even the best documentary is going to edit down the hours where nothing happen and officers become bored. A more accurate descripter would be taking 50 of those videos, and for 5 years all you can watch are those, the first few times they get a drug bust it is entertaining but after seeing it for the 100th time it is boring, and old.

Yea, just like software development. After 5 years, it becomes boring. Because the process of fixing a bug for a 500th time.

[Guest]

Oh, therefor a lot of officers tend to switch around task forces in our police departments... 

 

Just like software developers switching around projects... or companies even.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Mostly Peaceful Ryan said:

I'm going say no, even the best documentary is going to edit down the hours where nothing happen and officers become bored. A more accurate descripter would be taking 50 of those videos, and for 5 years all you can watch are those, the first few times they get a drug bust it is entertaining but after seeing it for the 100th time it is boring, and old.

Yea, infact it's been cut out so often, that the dutch vlogger, had been too busy to record stuff ( & privacy reasons). So each time he cuts back he summarizes what has happened.

[Guest]

https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-sues-feds-portland-police-attacking-medics-protests

 

 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Arodash said:

it would be a crime for me to call myself a medic because im not a medic, i'm an EMT-B. 

 

 

Quote

A medic is a person involved in medicine such as a medical doctor, medical student and sometimes a medically-trained individual participating in an emergency such as a paramedic or an emergency medical responder.

Ok, wikipedia needs a correction then, sorry

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medic

[Missing]

13 minutes ago, Arodash said:

Problem is. The video evidence that is constantly comming out shows these people are not protesting, they are riotting.

The people who were attacked in in the linked video didn’t look like they were rioting to me. 🤷‍♀️

[Guest]

Right right, so this is wrong too then...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_medic

[Guest]

Just now, Arodash said:

Doesnt mean they arent impersonating by calling themselves medics.

Right right, so this is wrong too then...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_medical_responder#Other_types_of_Emergency_Medical_Responders

[Guest]

I'm done with this... Good luck.

[Guest]

Imagine screaming for help on the streets... "Medic!!!!" because blood is pooring out of you...

 

And then someone with a EMT training comes along... 

 

"Sorry I'm not a medic"...

 

"Ok, I guess I'll wait for someone to friggin help me!"

 

"MEDIC!!"

 

[Missing]

6 minutes ago, Arodash said:

ive shown tons of evidence to show that there are riots occuring and if there are riots and you stay, you will be considered involved with the riot

I didn’t say there weren’t riots occurring. Another detail I noticed in this video is that the people who were attacked were actively leaving the scene once the agents showed up but were attacked anyway. Up until then it looked like they were staying because there was a fallen person who I presume they were either tending to or protecting from further harm. Regardless of how other situations play out, this particular situation looked like unprovoked excessive force to me. That happens sometimes, and I think government agents who use excessive force should be held accountable.

[Mostly Peaceful Ryan]

1 hour ago, Phoenix the II said:

Oh, therefor a lot of officers tend to switch around task forces in our police departments... 

Not every local department has many task forces, there are plenty of small towns that don't have these resources, I don't know New London specifically, but it is quite possible they don't. Also for the ones that do have special task force, they are usually hard to get into, I wouldn't recommend relying on them.

 

 

1 hour ago, Phoenix the II said:

Yea, infact it's been cut out so often, that the dutch vlogger, had been too busy to record stuff ( & privacy reasons). So each time he cuts back he summarizes what has happened.

So you agree, yes this is why I recommend ride-alongs, and I am talking about you physically riding the car with an officer, where they can answer questions. 

[Marrow]

20 hours ago, Elise Jennings said:

Ah. Well, a lot of protests have been going on for over a month now, but it is for a good reason. People aren't going to stop protesting until some real changes have been made.

Rioting isnt justifiable. MLK was always against rioting and violence and he made serious changes. When you get violent you destroy your message because in the end people wont think about what you are saying, they'll only think about what you're doing.

 

20 hours ago, Elise Jennings said:

What would you propose then instead of defunding the police? If the police don't get defunded, it would take a whole lot of work to change the system to make it to where it's actually...you know, the way it should be. 

Wouldnt it be easier to get legislation passed that would help to fine tune the police and put funding where it belongs (better training) and punish officers more for improper use of a firearm instead of tearing it all down and rebuilding from the start?

 

20 hours ago, Elise Jennings said:

...but the police also dismiss many sexual assault cases that come through. If I were to get r*ped and go to the police to report it (most likely), they wouldn't take me seriously. Who knows, perhaps I'd get lucky and they would take me seriously, but a lot of people who get sexually assaulted aren't taken seriously which sucks.

You know that cutting funding from the police includes all branches, which means less money towards the Special Victims Unit and others.

[Marrow]

1 hour ago, AspieAlly613 said:

One detail that doesn't make sense to me:

 

Why does the federal government seem to care more about the goings-on in a city of less than a million people than that city's mayor does?

Its politics. The Mayors are not going to own up to it because it means they'll be blamed. Good example is Chicago. The body count and violence is piling up and Mayor Lightfoot is more concerned about Trump than the death of her own civilians. People want order and safety, Mayor Lightfoot wants to look good.

[Mostly Peaceful Ryan]

53 minutes ago, Phoenix the II said:

Imagine screaming for help on the streets... "Medic!!!!" because blood is pooring out of you...

 

And then someone with a EMT training comes along... 

 

"Sorry I'm not a medic"...

 

"Ok, I guess I'll wait for someone to friggin help me!"

 

"MEDIC!!"

 

That wasn't what Arodash was saying at all, he is telling you that a Medic is legally defined in the US and you need to meet certain criteria to be called that. A "Street medic" as you are referring to do not meet these criteria, and therefore are not treated that way. You can be arrested for impersonating a Firefighter, paramedic, or EMT.  When someone is telling you something about the field they work in, I would recommend listening.

[Skycaptain]

Public perception of the police. Could people's view be tainted by the fact that most interactions with the police are because of something they don't like. Get burgled, and it's "why haven't you got the culprit in irons?" Police escorting an abnormal load, or directing traffic around an incident is making you late. Get a ticket for a driving offence and its almost never "Fair enough, I was wrong", its more "Why are you wasting your time doing this rather than arresting criminals". There's very much an "Us and them" mentality. 

 Going back to the protests. My opinion is that law and order need to reclaim the streets. Defunding the police and other law enforcement agencies will do the opposite. Put as many patrols out on the streets as is physically possible. Such a public show is the best way of reassuring the majority of the public, who only want to live peacefully, that the authorities are getting things under control 

[R_1]

16 hours ago, Phoenix the II said:

I'm done with this... Good luck.

I been pointing out that all he has provided is bad faith arguments and it is because of that, he should not be here. Other social networks are actually starting to get rid of bad faith argumenteurs.

 

Also, I noticed no one provided real evidence for the riot support. Not one of you has shown riots occured before the escalation by the federal officers, and yes federal officers that are not identified is a escalation. And then, there's the job of tying riots to protests which has failed to be linked.

 

So, if any one wants to look at this subject, a reminder that you should never take people at their words, and especially when behaviors of bad faith is shown.

[R_1]

8 minutes ago, Arodash said:

ither you havent read any of the links that have been provided or you blatently ignored them because evidence was provided of the riots. 

I have looked for links for supposed evidence of linked riots. There was absolutely zero. One was about tim scott bill which can be argued not to be enough, the last two is aboit judges response to federal officers to protests.

 

And yes, I will argue for support of stopping bad faith because it is a waste of time to engage with bad faith people, and no productivity involved.

[R_1]

Of the two, only one can be looked at. FOX has a known far right slant, and should never be taken seriously. National Review is more reliable, but has slants to the right. Given the nature of their bias, it is imperative check on details.

 

On the national review, it is said that thousands of people burned the federal courthouse. There is inconsistency within the number of arrests and the numbers of those that attempted to burn the federal courthouse. Other far right news reported that there was 52 days of burning the courthouse(it only needs one day).

 

So, given those findings, there's no reason to support claims that has been provided by right leaning website.

[R_1]

And all of them involved escalations provided by federal officers. It's funny how you have never ever once posted anything about these protests before the escalation. CNN has pointed that many protests were peaceful. Why will you not address that?

 

Let's look at the nypost: It seem to be events that occured after the escalation. Even the mayor pointed that police members were involved in starting fires.

 

Let's look at ABC: Federal officers gassing the mayor. Sounds like the actual rioters would be the federal officers.

 

Let's look at KPTV: Only believed to start a fire. Innocent unless proven guiltly here.

 

Let's look at national review: Already addressed.

 

Let's look at CNN: In the end, all has been released. Possibly because the prosecutors couldn't make a sticking claim.

 

And yes, you can try to attack these sources. However, media bias fact check supports the left leaning websites.

[Fraggle Underdark]

1 hour ago, R_1 said:

Other social networks are actually starting to get rid of bad faith argumenteurs.

This is interesting, can you share more details? It's encouraging (to my expectation of global trajectories) if people in different places are becoming less interested in and tolerant of bad faith arguments. If people were just shifting more to the left or the right then I'd see that as business as usual. It might result in some policies I like more, in the moment, but it's not a reliable method of ensuring better policies in the long term. But if people want discourse to be more honest, and move forward the standards of discourse that way, then we all can have better discussions and better find out what the best policies will be.

 

I know there are some places which have focused on honest discourse, but I'd love to hear more about general social networks moving that way.

[R_1]

3 minutes ago, Arodash said:

Federal agents only came out of the federal court house to protect it AFTER riotters attacked it. No the riotters escalated it

 

Did you know the riot wasnt declared that night until the mayor was nice and cozey inside his home? He went out for a PR stunt, half hour inside his home ans he, as the police commisioner, had them declare a riot.

 

Yeaup innocent till proven guilty, same for LE, but we have video evidence of the riotters doing this stuff.

 

Dont think you actually read the article because they havent been released they were arrested just yesterday. No where in the article does it say those 18 individuals have been released with no charges

1. Provide the evidence. The evidence we have supports escalation by the federal officers. There is zero convincing reports of protests-linked riots before they shown up.

 

2. Defecting from addressing the point. Do you think it's fine for officers to gas a mayor?

 

3. Videos aren't evidence without content. So far, you could argue that escalation ftom the officer encouraged the behavior or some cops were involved.

 

4. Read the last line.