this post was submitted on 26 May 2024
217 points (97.0% liked)

politics

19072 readers
4465 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DABDA@lemm.ee 26 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I don't care about the particular person being targeted, the police aren't supposed to murder someone just because they feel like it. If they're a first time offender or a "career criminal" they shouldn't be killed unless there's no feasible alternatives.

Do you honestly think there would have been meaningful lasting change if people propped up Breonna as a martyr instead? Why hasn't that happened for any of the other well-publicized deaths of upstanding citizens? Why haven't things like consent decrees and civilian oversight boards been enough to curb police violence and rights abuse, especially against minority groups?

The police didn't even bother pretending they were sorry and would pinkie-swear to reform, they flat out demanded that they be allowed to act with impunity and then just decided they didn't want to enforce the law at all anymore if the public was going to be angry with them. Are there instances of the police stating they want to improve their perception and relationship with the public and "the reactionaries" just deciding to riot instead? It should never have come to the point that a large amount of people (across the country) felt rioting was the most appropriate move, but since it did I think the failing was just that it didn't go far enough. There's plenty of evidence to conclude that the police and their enablers will not voluntarily reform and will need be forced against their will.

And as far as providing conservatives with talking points, there's literally no situation where they won't just use whatever narrative they want; even if it involves space lasers or child trafficking in a pizzeria basement.