# Are your views consistent on the HK and BLM protests?



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Sep 4, 2020)

So I admit the last thread was problematic because the scope of comparison was limited.

However, the two movements have sometimes been treated very differently in media, e.g. FOX news. So what is your view? Why?

[I personally view both protest movements as riots.]


----------



## notimp (Sep 4, 2020)

Here is a fun one for you. 


> Legal and historical experts say that the word _riot_ is a loaded one: While it aptly describes some events that have unfolded during the past two weeks, using it risks eclipsing the full picture by zooming in on a small, sensational slice of the action.
> 
> “Riot suggests pandemonium,” says john a. powell, a professor of law and African American studies at the University of California, Berkeley (who does not capitalize his name in recognition of its being a slave name). “What’s happening across the country and across the world is a call for justice, a call for police accountability, for the recognition that black lives matter too,” powell says. “_Rioting_ detracts from all of that.”





> “For those who wish this would all go away,” says University of Michigan’s Thompson, _riot_ might seem like just the word they’re looking for. “They would rather focus on the minority incidents where things have gotten particularly chaotic,” she says, “as a way to dismiss it.” People have looted stores and broken windows and set fires. But the vast majority of protests have been peaceful.
> 
> Compared to _riot_, a word like _uprising_ or _rebellion_ does more to suggest a struggle for justice, a warranted response to oppression, an attempt to demand change outside a system that has failed to yield it. Labeling the George Floyd protests as riots capitalizes on the fact that “people have an easier time digesting frames of black criminality than black freedom,” says Nikki Jones, a professor of African American Studies at Berkeley. It helps push away the notion that a passive observer might be complicit in anything by being passive. It also gives cover to those who might use harsh tactics to bring the unrest to an end.



src: https://time.com/5849163/why-describing-george-floyd-protests-as-riots-is-loaded/


----------



## Seliph (Sep 4, 2020)

Lol another one of these.

I think a better term than riot would be *uprising*.

Anyways, the two movements are totally different. The Hong Kong protests are about Hong Kong's sovereignty and the BLM protests are about the US prison-industrial complex. The only correlation is state-sanctioned police violence against protestors.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 4, 2020)

I don't know what's going on over in Hong Kong, other than that it's to separate them from China.


----------



## Taleweaver (Sep 4, 2020)

Erm... If they aren't riots, then what are they? Is a peaceful protester routing or not? 

I'm not trying to be sarcastic here : I feel this is a linguistic situation that requires a more thorough knowledge of English than I have. So the following might be a bit pedantic, for which I'm sorry...

Both Hong Kong residents and black people in the US feel as if they're being oppressed. In Hong Kong's case, it is harder to deny, as it pretty much openly changes the city state's laws in favor of 'neigboring' state China,against the will of the citizens. Black people in the US have at least in theory the exact same laws to avoid by as others (white people, basically). But they feel impressed because in practice the laws are bent depending on skin color.

Either way... Because of their (at least perceived) oppression, both groups enact civil protests in an effort to stop it. In both cases, the ruling class doesn't want to give in to demands. And as always happens in large protests : there is a subgroup that does not believe in peaceful protests and resorts to violence.
Also in both cases, the ruling class tries to dismiss the large group that just wants to enable a fair treatment for them by pretending that everyone in this group is violent, so they can play the 'we don't negotiate with terrorists' card(1).

TL;DR: they're both in a similar situation. But depending on the definition of 'riots' I'd say they both are our they both aren't. 

Oh, and : fox News isn't really media... It's a conservative propaganda machine for the US. The fact they report a situation drastically different (apparently... I have no idea on their stance on Hong Kong) is something you can throw on the pile of evidence of that statement. 


(1): this also gives the ruling class a direct motivation to enact violence on its citizens : you can create an excuse to not listen to tens of thousands of your citizens if you just send a couple dozen people in the field to treat the place, and then pretend that these vandals represent tens of thousands. Whether or not this actually happens is debatable, though


----------



## omgcat (Sep 4, 2020)

ITT: Chinese fighting for basic human rights is a protest, black people fighting for basic human rights are rioters. change my mind. It's plainly obvious that both are protests suffering from agents provocateurs.


----------



## Sicklyboy (Sep 4, 2020)

I think it's incredibly disingenuous to frame either as a black-and-white "riot or protest". Both have been protests spattered with incidents that have turned into riots at certain times and places.


----------



## Rail Fighter (Sep 4, 2020)

Is BLM the same as Antifa? If so, it's just an pretext as everything the left do.


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Sep 5, 2020)

The "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville was mostly peaceful as well, yet most people did not call them that. The media referred to them as "deadly". I have never seen the description "deadly BLM protests/riots".
A Jew who also grew up in Germany once said on television: If the air conditioning at 40° in a train wagon does not work, how would you feel if the employer told you "but in most wagons they do work!".
Most German National Socialists in World War 2 also did not kill Jews. It is not comforting at all.

However, the rioters in HK, in America and the Nazis did not condemn their problematic minority.
There is a video by the BBC where a female leader in HK explicitily refused to condem violence.


----------



## omgcat (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> The "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville was mostly peaceful as well, yet most people did not call them that. The media referred to them as "deadly". I have never seen the description "deadly BLM protests/riots".
> A Jew who also grew up in Germany once said on television: If the air conditioning at 40° in a train wagon does not work, how would you feel if the employer told you "but in most wagons they do work!".
> Most German National Socialists in World War 2 also did not kill Jews. It is not comforting at all.
> 
> ...



you mean the rally that lead to counter protesters getting run over by a car driven by James Alex Fields Jr.?

yeah man, totally not a deadly rally when a white nationalist supporter runs over people with a car.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlottesville_car_attack#Ideology

An ex-schoolmate of Fields said that Fields would draw swastikas and talk about "loving Hitler" as early as middle school Fields's high school history teacher said that Fields was "deeply into Adolf Hitler and white supremacy."

sounds to me that the common link to these protests getting deadly is alt-right fascists getting violent.


----------



## FAST6191 (Sep 5, 2020)

From where I sit the Hong Kong peeps have something to protest about -- China very much throwing its weight around; it was never particularly easy and people playing the thorn in the PRC's side had a nasty habit of vanishing but from what I have seen the initial extradition law that kicked it off, the meddling in elections, and things since have been anything but in either the letter or spirit of Hong Kong's autonomy for the next however many years they are guaranteed it by the handover agreement (not that I would have expected it to be adhered to had Hong Kong not been inordinately richer than anywhere else in the PRC at the time).

If the US branch (there is a UK one as well which is even sillier, though illuminating on other aspects) of BLM/antifa have anything to protest about I am not seeing a clear set of anything like reasonable demands or coherent logic, or maybe there are multiple factions nominally grouped together. If I take the basic surface reading of "it's about racism" then I don't see the US as a whole, much less the police of it, as having a racism problem and certainly not a widespread, endemic and actively seeking to keep those with greater or lesser, or specific, amounts of melanin down. The problem, if there is one at all, is a poverty problem and few seem to be in a hurry to address that one, though I suppose a nice financial crash might possibly have some measure of reset value.
Whether I write it off as the usual bored studenty types having a little shout like we see I don't entirely know.


----------



## osaka35 (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> So I admit the last thread was problematic because the scope of comparison was limited.
> 
> However, the two movements have sometimes been treated very differently in media, e.g. FOX news. So what is your view? Why?
> 
> [I personally view both protest movements as riots.]


it's called revolution. But they are very similar. Second-class citizens trying to achieve basic human rights. Revolt, uprising, revolution, protest, riots, whatever word works for you. What matters is what gets it done.



FAST6191 said:


> I am not seeing a clear set of anything like reasonable demands or coherent logic, or maybe there are multiple factions nominally grouped together.


There are lists of coherent, straight-forward demands that are linked to addressing the issues of systematic oppression. it's like "do these very obvious things and start to fix the problem". I can try and find some resources for you if you'd like.


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Sep 5, 2020)

omgcat said:


> yeah man, totally not a deadly rally when a white nationalist supporter runs over people with a car.


That´s my point. Deaths (and destruction) caused by BLM and HK rioters are downplayed (let´s remember the amazing video of a reporter and his Naked Gun: "Nothing to see here" moment).

The truth is, it is not about objectivity but whether sb supports a movement or not.


----------



## morvoran (Sep 5, 2020)

The HK protests are people fighting for their basic human/civil rights and not be forced under communist rule.
The BLM fiasco is about burning impoverished communities to take away basic human/civil rights and force everyone under communist rule.

The HK protests are mostly peaceful except when the Chinese government became violent.
The Black Lies Matter tantrum is mostly just attacking the government and destroying property.

The HK protest were about pushing for positive change that benefited all citizens of HK.
The BLM just want to destroy.

If someone really can't see how the HK protest were for good and the BLM destruction are for whining little participation trophy winners looking to destroy, then you may need to seek professional help.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 5, 2020)

morvoran said:


> The HK protests are people fighting for their basic human/civil rights and not be forced under communist rule.
> The BLM fiasco is about burning impoverished communities to take away basic human/civil rights and force everyone under communist rule.
> 
> The HK protests are mostly peaceful except when the Chinese government became violent.
> ...


was going to type something out but this x2


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Sep 5, 2020)

morvoran said:


> The HK protests are mostly peaceful except when the Chinese government became violent.


The government in Beijing did nothing for a very long time. Probably to sway opinions about the riots (see Trump today). The HK police (which is known for its professionalism) also behaved very reserved.


----------



## Soulsilve2010 (Sep 5, 2020)

Neither one are riots, the rioters are people who came to take advantage of things so they could burn and loot and some of them are probably paid to make either movement look bad.


----------



## morvoran (Sep 5, 2020)

UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> The government in Beijing did nothing for a very long time. Probably to sway opinions about the riots (see Trump today). The HK police (which is known for its professionalism) also behaved very reserved.


I'm not sure how things work in China, but in the US, the federal government has no jurisdiction in the individual states unless the governor of that state asks for federal involvement (except in extreme situations).  Trump wasn't watching and waiting to see how the riots turned out.  He was waiting for the liberal panty waste governors/mayors to ask for assistance. 

From what I could tell, it seems that the protest in HK went on too long and the government decided to take violent action to stop the peaceful protesting. 

The pedocrats here are just sitting back and watching their citizens' being killed and property destroyed by violent rioters (unless the rioting comes to their personal homes).


----------



## WiiHomebrew+Snes (Sep 5, 2020)

both are riots, but one's a quiet riot. the other one you can feel the noize.


----------



## FAST6191 (Sep 5, 2020)

osaka35 said:


> There are lists of coherent, straight-forward demands that are linked to addressing the issues of systematic oppression. it's like "do these very obvious things and start to fix the problem". I can try and find some resources for you if you'd like.



Please do.

For a start I am not sure the US has anything like systematic (or would that be systemic?) oppression with race as an underpinning in the modern world, nor for basically a whole lifetime at this point (civil rights era still within living memory but at the same time many many many years ago right now).

As far as demands
I saw some seek to apparently completely abolish the police (they used the word defund but most police won't work for free so... yeah).
Some said abolish the police and let the communities themselves police things. Because that always works so well, not to mention aren't the police already usually based somewhere there (give or take rich parts of New York).
Others say no just cut a budget. Not sure what good that does but hey.
Others say cut budget and give the cash over to social services of some flavour.
Others say leave the budget alone (possibly even unarse some more money) and do better training. What that training consists of varies as well (crowd control, mental health stuff, whatever "bias training" might be).
Some seemed to want to go further still and seek a block on immigration and customs enforcement from operating within given city limits. Others elsewhere demanded all federal law enforcement leave the city.
Some wanted to break the police unions.
Some seemed to want various flavours of prison reform, varying from simple reform to release all people of a given skin colour, to more nuanced things varying with crime levels.
Some of the people wandering around yelling at night appeared to want to have people give up their houses because gentrification and historical ownership demographics in a given area.
Some sought the whole reparations thing for the however many times it has been now, and if the civil rights era is a distant memory then nobody alive today was ever a slave (and actually it would be surprising if anybody alive today had ever met one -- you are already talking extreme human life lengths for two people and a chance meeting even then).
Some sought their particular school curriculum be taught, assuming the leaked materials were accurate they were hardly without contentious aspects.
Some seemed to want various politicians or police heads to step down.
Some seem to want to push that prejudice+power narrative/definition, others stick with the generally accepted definitions.
Others apparently just wanted to protest statistics; seems black people are more likely to catch a police bullet if you look simply at population breakdown, adjust for crime rates and things change rather, go in for bad shoots and things look even different again.

https://en.as.com/en/2020/06/12/other_sports/1591985502_814148.html
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/06/protest-dc-george-floyd-police-reform/612748/
https://nypost.com/2020/08/14/seattle-blm-protesters-demand-white-people-give-up-their-homes/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53466718

Even if I assumed such things had some merit then several of those are mutually conflicting (defunding police and giving them extra funding being rather at odds with each other, as is extra training and instead kicking things to "community" policing). There are some commonalities in theme, though "do these very obvious things" is a bit harder to qualify.
About as close as it gets is "police reform is a good thing" but as again there are mutually incompatible interpretations of what that might mean and then we are immediately bogged down.


----------



## Hanafuda (Sep 5, 2020)

I would need more information before deciding. Are the rioters in Hong Kong receiving an average $970 a week in unemployment benefits while they riot?? LINK


----------



## osaka35 (Sep 5, 2020)

FAST6191 said:


> Please do.
> 
> For a start I am not sure the US has anything like systematic (or would that be systemic?) oppression with race as an underpinning in the modern world, nor for basically a whole lifetime at this point (civil rights era still within living memory but at the same time many many many years ago right now).
> 
> ...


defund the police basically means taking a hard look at allll the different jobs expected of the police, and finding different people to handle those jobs instead. In the states, we expect the police to handle so many more different kinds of things that aren't really in their wheelhouse. Social workers, in particular, can take a lot off their hands. That's an obvious one. There may be some conversations about which jobs should best be taken over, which is where you'll see differences in different groups wanting different things. Could also come down to area and region. Important thing is these conversations are had with an eye towards removing anything from the police responsibilities that other folks are actually trained in doing, leaving only what only the cops can do. And in some places, that may mean no cops at all. that may mean few changes, though cops should still maybe not be given tanks and military grade equipment. That with only the core aspects of their jobs left, be given intense and continual training. Far more than the laughable 6 months they get now. Basically, efficiently fund them, but only for what only they can do, so they can do their jobs properly.

And that's just the funding cops aspect. Everything else has also been being talked about for literally generations. It is complex and has loads of facets. The prison pipeline is definitely one of the bigger ones. Things have been getting progressively worse since Reagan for PoC (people of colour). The 1994 Crime Bill really did a lot of harm, for instance.

I'll find some articles or whatnot for you to read tomorrow. I've got to do some homework at the moment. This is basically just my understanding, which seems congruent with everything i've heard and read.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 6, 2020)

osaka35 said:


> defund the police basically means taking a hard look at allll the different jobs expected of the police, and finding different people to handle those jobs instead. In the states, we expect the police to handle so many more different kinds of things that aren't really in their wheelhouse. Social workers, in particular, can take a lot off their hands. That's an obvious one.


Murderers just need a hug~


----------



## omgcat (Sep 6, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Murderers just need a hug~



more like, if hospital workers get charged with murder for killing someone while trying to restrain them, then why shouldn't police? hospital workers have to deal with just as many cracked out crazy people as police do, but severely punished or expelled from the industry for doing anything close to what police can do. maybe we don't need to send lethally armed police to every little incident. social services, youth services, housing, education, healthcare and other community resources should be getting the lions share of funding that police get. as it is right now, we get scenarios like sending armed police to handle a fistfight at a school. also police should not have military gear, full stop.


----------



## osaka35 (Sep 6, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Murderers just need a hug~


Do you need a hug?


----------



## JaapDaniels (Sep 6, 2020)

for my visio:
first Hong kong: they know and it's proven to be so not just by media, but also by VN and a lot of studies, if china gets it's way it's gonna be a direct reverse on freedom of movement, freedom of speech and freedom of religion. yes i know hong kong has been part of china in the past and should work with china, i agree. just the agreement is to wait 40 more years, and no restriction on said freedoms.
for Black lives Matter:
maybe there's something wrong with USA, i say maybe cause i doubt it really is as bad as BLM is trying to make it look like.
that there are racistic cops among cops doesn't tell me much, there are rasistic people all over the world, and so there will no matter what we do be incidents of violence.
an incident doesn't represent a system.
keep telling someone to be a sinner over years and most likely he'll proof you right just to get it over with, this applies to racism aswell.
if you don't give a person the chance to get to know you how can such a person ever proof to be a friend?
pushing me further, and i'm saying right now is a point of no return, in here we had peace and an inclusive society.. but ever since we started listen to BLM that gets thinner, it's walking on eggshells right now. i've gotta read minds before i talk to anyone. before i know there's a bomb going of just because i see the world different.


----------



## UltraSUPRA (Sep 6, 2020)

omgcat said:


> more like, if hospital workers get charged with murder for killing someone while trying to restrain them, then why shouldn't police? hospital workers have to deal with just as many cracked out crazy people as police do, but severely punished or expelled from the industry for doing anything close to what police can do.


The doctors who kill aren't trained enough.


omgcat said:


> maybe we don't need to send lethally armed police to every little incident. social services, youth services, housing, education, healthcare and other community resources should be getting the lions share of funding that police get. as it is right now, we get scenarios like sending armed police to handle a fistfight at a school. also police should not have military gear, full stop.


Police are highly-trained professionals. They need that money for their training. If you really think that therapists can stop a murderer, you are sorely mistaken.
What _should_ happen to stop unnecessary police brutality is that they pay for their damages out of their own pockets.


----------



## notimp (Sep 6, 2020)

US police are a bunch of low intelligence goons, that follow idiots, but it all works out because, they like to do what a leader tells them. And within an institutional framework, following a leader that follows a rulebook, more or less strictly, usually is enough. Or so many local sheriff departments seem to believe.

If you think this is hyperbole, watch Democracy Now for two weeks, and tell me how you faired.
edit: Link: https://www.democracynow.org/topics/police_brutality

In the US police training apparently consists of inviting Steven Segal and Shouty Mc Shout Moron

, to hold a training camp, and watching videos like these:


That rulebook has leniencies for police getting out of line, because it is expected to happen in practice, and you dont want a legal case on you, after every action you took. But this obviously has lead to police cultures, that are just immensely out of whack, where covering each others behavior is really most of what it consists of.

Police officers are highly trained in exactly nothing apart from some martial art mambo jumbo, that usually doesnt pass the sniff test for BS. For every action that requires thinking, or extensive anything, they call in specialists, and it is good that they do.

While none of this is true in any sense of generalizable reality, it should be closer to the truth than, police are highly trained professionals.


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Sep 7, 2020)

So the police academy movies were not a comedy after all.


----------



## notimp (Sep 7, 2020)

UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> So the police academy movies were not a comedy after all.


Some truth lies somewhere in the middle.


----------



## mikefor20 (Nov 10, 2020)

They were protests that evolved in to riots.  Intentionally. Protesters don't break,steal and set on fire.  Get a grip. Stop giving thugs a pass because they are pissed off. It doesn't matter what happens, you are responsible for your actions.  "I was so mad I bunt down a town and stole a new living room set"  Bullshit. Thieves and looters. Stupid and selfish.   Hiding behind the guise of protest and a stupid acronym. All them looting turds deserve the tear gas and batons. From BLM to ACAB I say STFU is the only acronym I stand behind. Especially in America. YOU ARE NOT OPPRESSED, JUST STUPID.


----------



## notimp (Nov 10, 2020)

UltraDolphinRevolution said:


> So I admit the last thread was problematic because the scope of comparison was limited.
> 
> However, the two movements have sometimes been treated very differently in media, e.g. FOX news. So what is your view? Why?
> 
> [I personally view both protest movements as riots.]


You classify everything as riots, thats anti government.

Then you tuck tight and sleep well. Because society finally is great. 

Might it be more complicated than that? 

Have you looked into the issues behind both protest that go beyond 'people want to riot?'.
-

Because:

1. If people 'just want to riot', they could do that after a football game.
2. Riots breaking out (small scale) is actually a rather expected (dare I say natural) result of big mass protests. (Clashing with forces that try to constrain them (i.e. police). Because the natural reaction of masses in that case is not 'well, then I think we should do down that street anymore - oh well... Next time then...' Thats already the high level 'socially accepted behavior' reaction.)
3. Riots are used by governments to delegitimize mass protests.
(See f.e.

*Retraction of the "riot" characterisation*: The government originally characterised the 12 June protest as "riots", it later amended the description to say there were "some" rioters, an assertion protesters still contest. The crime of "rioting" carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.
src: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019–20_Hong_Kong_protests )
4. Riots are actively provoked by governments to be able to do so.


At the same time, there might be some psychological tactics in play to calm down masses - f.e. when you see locked away bricks turning up in the middle of the street as ammunition depots. (Reminding people, that not rioting is necessary for sustained social acceptance.)



Second ones are _not_ locked away... Make of that what you will.

So - the idea, that protests are either 'legitimate protests' or 'riots' is false. The riot issue, in general, is overplayed in both of the protests named.

Which makes what you do - adding to an extremist position of 'hate all protests' as soon as there is an element of violence to be seen. Which is an excellent way to squander legitimate protests.

The 'corrective' (whats ok, and whats not) is actually pubic opinion. And you are working on a 'as soon as they get violent, 'beat them into submission'' position in public opinion. Which doesnt work in reality.

Also, you ideally have to differentiate between violence against f.e. storefronts/cars, and violence against people. Which you dont do.

But to your point 'symbols' of rioting, can be used to draw out more people in the beginning of a mass protest, the 'in the beginning' part is important. Once you reached a certain mass, the mass itself becomes the draw for people (it feels good to experience that), and 'burning cars' arent needed anymore. Roughly.

Havent read those theory books (some of them scientific literature from the 1960 btw. (social sciences)), but picked up parts over the years.


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Nov 10, 2020)

There are good and bad protests (personal perspective). But riots are always wrong. The irony in HK was that the rioters demanded not to be called rioters (while damaging stores etc) a la "don´t call me a terrorist, or I´ll kill you"

I don´t distinguish between violence against property and people because the former leads to the latter.


----------



## mikefor20 (Nov 10, 2020)

notimp said:


> You classify everything as riots, thats anti government.
> 
> Then you tuck tight and sleep well. Because society finally is great.
> 
> ...




What? No dude.. You legitimize this bullshit.  Come on Son! You are 100% responsible for your own actions. 100%.. No matter what happens, Protest are not vandalism, assault and theft! Those are not simply bi products of real protest. Those are crimes. And it's a bi-product of idiots. 100%. Morons. Lighting a structure on fire, breaking someone else's property, assault, Theft. All piece of shit moves. Any decent mind knows this. You never have an excuse. Unless it's for survival.You cant eat a burnt down grocery store. WTF? They do this shit for any reason they can mobilize enough retards. The Raiders lose the Superbowl they set Oakland on fire. OAKLAND. Not Tampa... OAKLAND!  You beat my team so I set MY OWN HOUSE ON FIRE. George Floyd Vandal BLM terrorist moron assholes burnt down many important businesses for their own community. Go to the rich neighborhood and burn THAT down, dummies. WTF. And you are not a protester when you break in to Walmart and steal a TV. You are a fucking thief. So fucking stupid and selfish.


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Nov 10, 2020)

mikefor20 said:


> You are 100% responsible for your own actions.


The left is made up of entitled brats.

To think you cannot destory public property: normal / humble.
To think you can destroy public property because you are part of the public: privileged / entitled.
To think you can destroy other people´s private property: super privileged / entitled.

Put people who think otherwise in power and it only takes a few generations to turn a country into a failed state.


----------



## notimp (Nov 10, 2020)

UltraSUPRA said:


> Police are highly-trained professionals.


For the second time, they are morons in uniforms, with a license to beat up people, or bully them around (if needed), that if in doubt shoot at anything that moves in a 10 feet radius in front of them, because they are trained, that an attacker with a knife could kill them faster, than they can draw a gun from that distance. Probably. 

They arent very well educated at all. They refer to the 'collective' for anything that requires brain cells. They follow protocol, and the book. And a code. And none of those are attributes of 'well educated people'.Highly trained and 'professional' they might be. But if I'd risk my life for not that much pay - and had power in numbers, I'd probably shoot and ask questions later as well. Might not be part of the training - but hey. Cut me a break.

We love them regardless though, for the service they are providing and that they put their lives on the line, for not that much pay (also not an indication of a highly qualified person).

Doctors arent qualified enough, but policemen are - is just another way of saying 'I'm with stupid'.  Sorry - I'm with 'not that well educated'. But I like weapons, because to me they represent all the power I'll ever get in my life.


Btw - if this is a discussion about 'defunding police' thats over and not happening.

In case you havent heard, Trump gained a higher votes percentage in all demographics except white less educated voters - over the last election results against Hillary.

This is not 'black live matters' reigned supreme. This is 'they did their thing - and nobody cared'.

src: https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-support-demographics-white-men-exit-poll-1545144


----------

