Police Driver Acquitted RE: Freddie Gray

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Relapse**

What the hell?

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2015/04/27/baltimore-mayor-we-gave-those-who-wished-to-destroy-space-to-do-that/

**Grey Templar**

I know.

He basically said that rioting and looting is acceptable behavior.

**Relapse**

Bet the people whose businesses were looted and burned as well as people beaten and robbed by the rioters would disagree..

**Eadartri**

"we also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well" -as reported in the article.

I guess if those peaceably assembling brought their own property to destroy and clean up, fine. Otherwise: law enforcement.

**Nostromodamus**

I suggest they are given a place to break rocks for 10 hours a day.

**Dreadclaw69**

Not acceptable. This is not a group exercising their right to peaceably assemble, nor are they being prohibited from petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

**Medium of Death**

One thing that perplexes me is why the curfew isn't being imposed this evening but tomorrow?

These rioters need shooting.

**Verviedi**

.

**Ouze**

Is the area they were given to destroy Hamsterdam? Because that's where BPD usually does that sort of thing, as I understand it.

**Hordini**

Medium of Death wrote:
One thing that perplexes me is why the curfew isn't being imposed this evening but tomorrow?

These rioters need shooting.

They said on CNN that it's probably because they need to give reasonable notice.

They didn't say this, but I'm guessing that they also need that time to get police and National Guard units in place first, in order to actual enforce the curfew effectively.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Verviedi wrote:
Medium of Death wrote:
One thing that perplexes me is why the curfew isn't being imposed this evening but tomorrow?

These rioters need shooting.

Bullets are extremely inefficient against such a mob. A flamethrower has more shock value and is more effective at clearing large amounts of hostiles at short range.

Okay.

**Medium of Death**

I just imagine this will absolutely suck for the business and home owners in the area.

Expect the former to fall.

I'm watching footage of a street with lots of stolen cars facing towards the police line. Very brave officers considering these people have likely been drinking all day.

**Grey Templar**

Medium of Death wrote:
I just imagine this will absolutely suck for the business and home owners in the area.

Expect the former to fall.

I'm watching footage of a street with lots of stolen cars facing towards the police line. Very brave officers considering these people have likely been drinking all day.

Absolutely. Something like this will be absolutely devastating for a small business, even if they're insured.

**KalashnikovMarine**

Well we'll see what kind of space the Guard gives them.

**dogma**

Never waste an opportunity.

**Howard A Treesong**

Businesses pay rates and other taxes that support law enforcement. If the local authority decide to withdraw from actually policing the streets and allowing looter to run riot then they should pick up the tab for the damage, not the businesses or their insurers. If they don't then people won't want to open businesses there and insurers will have to charge a colossal premium.

**Inquisitor Lord Bane**

There's a video floating around the internet of one mom standing for whats right. She finds her kid masked among the rioters and proceeds to beat the crap out of him in front of other rioters, police, and CNN. At least the situation isn't completely fethed

I'll try to put it up when I get home, on my phone now.

**nels1031**

Inquisitor Lord Bane wrote:
There's a video floating around the internet of one mom standing for whats right. She finds her kid masked among the rioters and proceeds to beat the crap out of him in front of other rioters, police, and CNN. At least the situation isn't completely fethed

I'll try to put it up when I get home, on my phone now.

I got you covered, brah,

http://theroottv.theroot.com/video/A-Mother-Beating-Her-Son-On-Liv

**TheDraconicLord**

nels1031 wrote:
Inquisitor Lord Bane wrote:
There's a video floating around the internet of one mom standing for whats right. She finds her kid masked among the rioters and proceeds to beat the crap out of him in front of other rioters, police, and CNN. At least the situation isn't completely fethed

I'll try to put it up when I get home, on my phone now.

I got you covered, brah,

http://theroottv.theroot.com/video/A-Mother-Beating-Her-Son-On-Liv

Frak sake, finally some good parenting on live TV! A mother who actually cares!

**nels1031**

I've seen nothing that confirms that narrative though. Could just as easily be a woman fighting back after her property was damaged or some such.

**Jihadin**

Curfew to go into effect tonight. Reason why it didn't go into effect last night was they couldn't enforce it.

**Inquisitor Lord Bane**

nels1031 wrote:
I've seen nothing that confirms that narrative though. Could just as easily be a woman fighting back after her property was damaged or some such.

Disclaimer: Harsh language at link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXFLTXD2Bko

It's his mom, you can tell by the way shes chasing him and you can barely make out her threats to him if you listen closely.

**Jihadin**

Inquisitor Lord Bane wrote:
nels1031 wrote:
I've seen nothing that confirms that narrative though. Could just as easily be a woman fighting back after her property was damaged or some such.

Disclaimer: Harsh language at link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXFLTXD2Bko

It's his mom, you can tell by the way shes chasing him and you can barely make out her threats to him if you listen closely.

Also he did not raise a hand at her. Took the beating like a son from a PO mom

**Inquisitor Lord Bane**

Also, Rev. Sharpton is planning to go to the city, and the national guard is going to be ~~handing out Darwin Awards to lucky rioters~~ armed.

Also, slighty more up to date news link http://www.wnd.com/2015/04/baltimore-riots-at-least-7-police-injured/

**Jihadin**

Is the DoJ going to investigate BPD?

**CptJake**

Relapse wrote:
Bet the people whose businesses were looted and burned as well as people beaten and robbed by the rioters would disagree..

That is what you get for opening a business in or having the gumption to walk through a designated Destruction Allowed Zone.

Of course, it would seem the municipal authorities were a bit lax in their marking of the Zone, as the folks exercising their right to destroy and steal property they don't own seem to have spilled out of the designated Zone, assumedly unintentionally due to the poor boundary markings.

**OgreChubbs**

my guess is the next city allowed to be destroyed will be parts of Chicago. I give it 6 months max

**Frazzled**

I don't know, Chicago PD has historically been a tough group. With a lot of the inner city violence there, would anyone notice?

**CptJake**

Mayor Rawlings-Blake wrote:

“I was asked a question about the property damage that was done, and in answering that question I made it very clear that we balance a very line between giving protesters — peaceful protesters — space to protest. What I said is, in doing so, people can hijack that and use that space for bad. I did not say that we were accepting of it, I did not say that we were passive to it, I was just explaining how property damage can happen during a peaceful protest. It is very unfortunate that members of your industry decided to mischaracterize my words and try to use it in a way to say we were inciting violence. There’s no such thing,”

“What we did was manage a peaceful protest in the best way possible and when it got violent and destructive we responded to that. We have an obligation to protect people’s First Amendment rights. We also understand through the best training and best practices that we have to do everything we can to de-escalate, and those were the tactics that were deployed yesterday. Did people exploit those tactics or that space that we gave, that we facilitated to have people protest for bad? Yes, they did. But we didn’t endorse it.”

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/04/27/we-didnt-endorse-it-baltimore-mayor-defends-destroy-space-comment-as-riots-rage/

So giving the looters space to destroy was an unintended consequence of giving the peaceful protestors space to peacefully protest,and the 'space to destroy' was in that context.

**cincydooley**

She's a moron that should be forced out of office on grounds of that comment alone.

She will not be. We're she, it would probably incite even more.

**CptJake**

The 'comment alone' was taken out of context.

I think the real issue is did she have decent indicators the protests would remain peaceful, and that therefore it made sense to 'give them space', or were there indicators it could turn violent, in which case perhaps how much space is given and how that space should be enforced/contained differs. And assuming for argument's sake they really did believe it would all remain peaceful, when the first indicators of that not holding true started coming in, how quickly did they adjust their plan to compensate for the change.

I submit, they did a gakky job of adjusting.

Having said that, she and the police probably also remembered the videos of the MRAPs and riot cops beating the feth out of Ferguson protestors which led to a massive escalation of the violence,and did not want to repeat those mistakes.

I don't think they made the right call here, I do think their decision cycle suffered from paralysis and fear of how police 'brutality' would be perceived by the protestors and by the media and the media's audience.