Also breaking car windows. I actually saw the live broadcast for this as it was happening, but didn’t notice the vandalism until after it was posted on reddit. This was just after curfew, when the police were starting to clear the streets in Riverside, CA.
2 Likes
Most tow trucks I’ve seen use little carts that go under the wheels that are on the ground, especially since nowadays with hybrids and EVs you’re not supposed to to spin the wheels if the car isn’t on and properly managing its electrical systems.
5 Likes
Naturally. Especially if not defending their power will lead to prison time. And yet, is that a good reason for letting them continue to run rampant?
But then they would have to wait around for each tire to drain.
Or they could have used a tool that used to be available on the ends of some valve stem caps to unscrew/remove the valve stem. I did that when I was a bored asshole teenager.
The thing is, they wanted to cause damage. Not prevent it. So, slash away. The cruelty is the point. Teach those stinking protestors a lesson about property damage, eh coppers? Sure.
Certainly. And that was part of the reason.
If you drive into a group of cops, the way they have driven into protestors, and they get their hands on you, they will kill you and get away with it.
Same reason you can’t shoot cops the way they shoot citizens. The cops are protected in ways a citizen will never be protected.
10 Likes
OANN reporters don’t drive. They swoop in on a column of black smoke.
12 Likes
which other “organization” looks at the bad things their peers are doing and finds excuses for them or protects them? or just join them in committing various crimes and then lie about it, while touting a “brotherhood” to which they belong? i feel like we are financing a gang and not police nowadays.
2 Likes
I was talking about slashing tires so they don’t drive into protestors. Not driving into cops.
2 Likes
No us military forces did this. It was all police.
1 Like
Yes, you can sue both the employee(cop) and employer(city), but the question is who pays. Even if you argue the cop was not acting in “course and scope” you still have direct liability against the municipality for negligent hiring, training, supervision, etc. Much as I would like to believe it, plaintiffs don’t sue to prove a point - they go after the deep pockets.
Apparently the current legislation is more nuanced than I assumed, and gets into Section 1983 issues that are over my head, but at the end of the day it comes down to whether a municipal corporation will be responsive and accountable as a result of civil litigation. I just don’t see that happening. Joe Arpaio cost Maricopa County $90 million in settlements, verdicts and legal fees over his tenure, and the only thing that stopped him was getting voted out.
Just my .02 - I’d be happy to be proven wrong.
1 Like
Right, but the idea then becomes that this puts taxpayer pressure on the municipalities to, y’know, stop hiring white-power thugs.
… Case in point. The voters who were responsible for paying his settlements finally got tired of it.
4 Likes
Ah, gotcha. I’m all for slashing cop’s tires at protests, if they are incapable of not running people over. That said, again, the citizen will get in real trouble for doing what the cop’s do with impunity.
1 Like
Yeah I think it might make sense to just start forming a parallel police organisation. Try to get the focus right up front. Don’t hire anybody from the old organisation. Run the two in parallel for as long as needed then run the old organisation down, giving them less work and less money until they are gone.
3 Likes
9 Likes
knives knives knives
2 Likes
I think these troopers have misread the nature of the people they “serve”. Minnesotans are very supportive of police – especially in places like Anoka County, Michelle Bachman territory – but most of them, even many Republicans, don’t respect this kind of petty meanness.
3 Likes
Yes. In the US, if multiple parties are at fault, you can collect from whichever one has the deepest pockets even if they are only partially responsible. They could actually try to then sue the other parties to collect from them. So in principle the city could sue the police officers to try to get back some of the money they paid out. In practice they won’t do that because they don’t have enough money to make a material difference, and also because the city would be worried about pissing off the police.
It would probably be better in the particular instance if the court forced the individual most directly responsible to pay whatever they could and relied on the employer to pick up the rest, but the civil court system is based on the intent of compensating the victim, not punishing the perpetrators.
Getting voted out is how elected officials get fired. And costing the department/city a bunch of money in lawsuits for being a shithead does actually get cops fired. The problem is it doesn’t happen enough, doesn’t happen to enough people (i.e. the leadership responsible for the culture), and doesn’t keep them from working in the next town over and doing it again.
1 Like
lawnmower lawnmower lawnmower
2 Likes
After De Blasio defended the police driving a deadly weapon through a crowd, I started scanning for videos of police driving through crowds. I had never heard of such a thing but I found several videos of cops driving into crowds. I’m bad at twitter so can’t seem to post the links but they are out there.
I do appreciate De Blasio walking back his comments but he has blood on his hands.
3 Likes
Those are tear gas grenade launchers, not silenced rifles (they still shouldn’t be using tear gas either).
2 Likes
“Nice town you got here. It would be a damn shame if something bad was to happen to it, yeah?” Openly mobstering is not a good look for them.
7 Likes
I would hope so. But that’s a rather broad generalization to say that enough voters got tired of the financial strain Arpaio was placing on the County to turn the tide. (Correlation does not equal causation.) And the counter point is that for years Arpaio was costing the county millions, yet enough of the Trumpy types liked his tough talk and racial profiling to keep him in office despite the financial penalties.
