Pretty cool that people can put cops/agents in choke holds, attack them, and get away with it. These dismissals started under Trump so this isn’t a partisan issue. https://www.foxnews.com/us/most-portland-riot-suspects-wont-be-prosecuted-us-attorney-reveals Charges have been dismissed against 58 of the 97 people arrested during the unrest last year David Bouchard admitted he put a Customs and Border Protection officer in a chokehold. Charles Comfort was indicted by a grand jury of civil disorder for twice charging at Portland Police Bureau officers and hitting them with a makeshift shield then kicking a third officer while being arrested. Both men faced federal charges stemming from their actions during a summer of more than 100 straight nights of often violent protests in Portland. But Bouchard and Comfort are among dozens of Portland federal arrestees whose cases were dismissed or are being deferred without so much as a day behind bars.
These people have a constitutional right to protest. The police do not have the right interfere with that. They don't have the right to harass innocent people. Correct. It's not partisan. Everybody has these rights.
Protest, yes. Riot, no. I’m not claiming that the police, particularly the feds, didn’t overstep their bounds at times, but it’s also pretty clear that protests at times became riots.
And if the police can prove any of those people deliberately caused harm to another person or another person's property (ie. "rioting") those people will be charged. If they can't prove that then they wasted time and resources arresting them. This is a problem with police not doing their jobs correctly because they have an opposing agenda.
No doubt there’s some truth in that. Not knowing the details, I can’t comment. I do know that there was abundant evidence of destruction of property that indicates it wasn’t all innocent protest. That said, if the cops can’t provide direct evidence sufficient to prove appropriate charges, there’s no point in proceeding with court cases.
For sure, there were/are criminals down there making everybody look bad. But police are spinning it like the protests are the problem, not their lack of police work. Portland police don't even wear body cameras even though they have approval for them in the budget. Why no HD cameras on top of targeted buildings? If you had enough cameras (cheap) on the protest and police followed and arrested everybody who committed a crime there would be evidence. The only reason not to do that is you don't actually want to have evidence. No excuse.
Does anybody think these people would have gotten off if there were video evidence of this behavior? Not a chance.
I do. They aren't identifiable. They all wear hoods and masks and dress in black and look alike. The only way to prosecute with evidence is to capture and demask to identify. This camera push is a joke of an excuse. so are the drones. It takes far less time to smash a window and run away than a drone has time to turn focus and try to chase someone running away downtown in between tall buildings. lets see someone operate a drone down town streets chasing a masked man who just smashed a window. some criminals simply have to be physically taken down and the cops need access to them. Really is common sense.
Yes. If the whole area is covered, and the whole thing is on video when you capture and denask them you'll have all the evidence you need to charge and convict them. You'll be able to trace the video from the act all the way to the arrest. There is no excuse not to do that. Other than not actually wanting evidence...
https://www.flgov.com/2021/05/05/go...pandemic-bonus-for-floridas-first-responders/ Governor Ron DeSantis Announces $1,000 Pandemic Bonus for Florida’s First Responders ALSO.........
But that isnt the issue. The issue is breaking through the crowds to get to the criminals to demask them and identify them. You are shifting the goal posts. First you said the cameras should be able to follow them with drone technology. Now you think a large wide lense camera of the whole field is going to identify people with trees and stuff in the way and the cops still need to go get them? let me ask. How far away do you think the camera would need to be to capture the whole crowd and avoid having trees or anything else in the way? i just don't think you are seeing the whole picture with your stance that cameras will solve everything. Eventually the cops still have to push through the wall of protestors to get to and detain the ones breaking the law. No one has yet to answer my question of what they think the response would be if the police push through the front lines of the protestors to get at the criminals. we have to be realistic about this. I just dont think you are with your hard stance... Drones and cameras wil not work alone. Stop protecting those who are protecting criminals. Its as simple as saying any cop who protects a bad cop is also a bad cop.
The mayor has recently said the anarchist need to be identified and he would appreciate the publics help so they can address. For him to finally come to that conclusion tells me that they simply have been spinning wheels in addressing the vandals and and arsonist and he now identifies them as anarchist. One way to deal with Anarchist is publicly expose them for who they are.
When did I say cameras alone would solve it? When did I say 1 camera? It's been a year. Plenty of time to blanket that area with cameras. It's not difficult to get a camera to a 3rd story window. I have also said plain clothes officers should follow and arrest the person. This is not expensive. https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/eye-sky This can be done. It has been done. Do we want surveillance drones over head all the time? No. Should we use them to root out Anarchists from peaceful protests? Yes, absolutely. Police are professionals. Paid to do a job. Paid to carry a weapon and authorized to remove people's freedom and even use lethal force. They have to meet a far higher standard of responsibility than a mob of largely uneducated and untrained citizens. They should be held to a much higher standard and they should be compensated as such. Allowing 1 small group committing a crime to change a crowd of 1000 people from peaceful protestors into antifa rioters is not acceptable. The police need to do better at gathering evidence. Or at least try to before I'll even consider feeling sorry for them.
you have pushed a narrative that cameras can identify criminals in a crowd without requiring a physical police presence. id like to know where you think the funds would have come from and got set up last year when many companies were closed or behind, police were paying heavy ot hours, understaffed and overbudgeted to begin with? Have they made mistakes? Of course but this” all they had to do last year was toss cameras in the air” claim is almost comical. If it were that easy, it would have been done last year. And all cities everywhere would be doing it. I still do not believe you are taking all of the realities of the situation into account.
No, I have not pushed that narrative or made that claim. The funding has been there for body cameras for years. There is only one reason not to use cameras. You don't want video evidence.
The mayor has been the acting Police Commissioner in Portland so maybe he also had a hand in if the should wear cameras or not? he certainly could push now.
yes, you have pushed that narrative. We addressed body cams. How do they video tape people four people deep? Your response was to use drones. Now your back to body cams. Sigh.... You don't want a rational conversation. ill just let you think you are right and move on....
No, you're not reading. Body cams, AS WELL as overhead cameras, AS WELL as plain clothes officers in the crowd, ALSO with cameras. You're being deliberately obtuse to support your boot licking fetish. It doesn't fly.
