NewCharlesInCharge
No bio...
User ID: 89
NewCharlesInCharge
2d ago
Bad shoots are inevitable, they’re never going to be driven to zero. Even if we had Star Trek phasers eventually some guy will screw up and unintentionally use the kill setting.
ICE resistors are creating conditions that increase the probability of a bad shoot. According to them we’ve now had two, I would say we might have had one.
People who create these conditions don’t necessarily get what they “deserve” if one of them is a victim of a bad shoot, but their actions are necessary for the bad shoot. They do share in the blame, but they’ll never acknowledge as such or adjust their behavior.
NewCharlesInCharge
3d ago
These can both be true, even though I think we don't have enough to conclude that the first is true or false:
- Pretti never moved in a way that a reasonable officer could construe as a threat.
- He was repeatedly playing a very dangerous game where his death was a likely outcome: picking fights with police while armed.
The second video supports the second point.
NewCharlesInCharge
5d ago
I listened to part of one episode long ago, I forget the topic, but it was bog-standard Western media narratives, nothing insightful.
NewCharlesInCharge
6d ago
The last time the government attempted to measure the proportion of illegals working W-2 with forged / stolen documents versus those working under the table was around 2013. Back then it was about half: https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/RL32004
If you ratchet up the pressure on the under the table arrangements, you'll certainly get more W-2 fraud. And the most popular form of this fraud is to use some citizen's real identity, potentially causing them all kinds of trouble, not the least of which involves the IRS.
NewCharlesInCharge
7d ago
Your employer submitted your I-9 twice or they did their own research to confirm the authenticity of your documents?
The latter exposes them to legal risk.
NewCharlesInCharge
7d ago
Most likely the shooter saw the deceased move in a way that appeared like he was going for a gun.
“Guy reaches for gun that was removed five seconds earlier” is almost certainly not a scenario they train for. “Guy reaches for gun” almost certainly is.
When situations turn chaotic people generally fall back to the level of their training.
NewCharlesInCharge
8d ago
But for his reflexes and marksmanship Rittenhouse would’ve almost certainly been killed by Gaige Grosskreutz.
NewCharlesInCharge
19d ago
In the wake of George Floyd my most consumed YouTube genre was police shooting videos. I couldn’t get enough of them. I watched nearly every Donut Operator video.
There were some instances when even I, almost always on the side of police, would raise an eyebrow in a car vs cop shooting. But I can’t recall a single instance where the cop was found to be unjustified in shooting the driver of a car on a collision course with them.
It’s so consistent it should be part of the anti-ICE training manuals. Never drive in a way where it could even unreasonably be interpreted that you’re going to collide with police.
I asked an LLM if there were cases of cop vs car shootings where the shooting was found to be unjustified. It gave me one where the car was driving away, Jordan Edwards in Balch Springs, Texas. And then Barnes v. Felix, but that revised the standard and remanded the case back down, it still hasn’t been found unjustified.
NewCharlesInCharge
19d ago
Instead of having a bicameral legislature that gives you representation at two different resolutions of geographic boundaries, let’s make one of the houses based on something else.
One by geography, preferably the higher resolution geography to give backwaters a fighting chance against legislation that impacts the backwaters.
And another by proportional representation. So that when the population is polarized slightly in one direction, the minorities still have a voice and tools like the filibuster to force majorities to make concessions.
NewCharlesInCharge
24d ago
There's no single definition of terrorism, but she was part of a direct action campaign that used violent confrontations with ICE to further their political goal to not enforce immigration laws.
Most terorrism definitions don't require killing, just violence.
This paper contains a wide range of definitions, I'll quote a few:
1998/2017 Bruce Hoffman: Terrorism is “ineluctably political in aims and motives; violent – or, equally important, threatening violence; designed to have far-reaching psychological repercussions beyond the immediate victim or target; conducted either by an organisation with an identifiable chain of command or conspiratorial cell structure (whose members wear no uniform, or identifying insignia) or by individuals or a small collection of individuals influenced, motivated, or inspired by the ideological aims or example of some existent terrorist movement or its leaders, or both; and perpetrated by a subnational group or nonstate entity.”
1987 Walter Laqueur: “Most authors agree that terrorism is the use or the threat of use of violence, a method of combat, or a strategy to achieve certain targets, that it aims to induce a state of fear in the victim, that it is ruthless and does not conform with humanitarian policy, and/or to destabilise and even overthrow government.”
1988 New Academic Consensus Definition (A.P. Schmid): Terrorism is an anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent action, employed by (semi-) clandestine individual, group, or state actors, for idiosyncratic, criminal, or political reasons, whereby – in contrast to assassination - the direct targets of violence are not the main targets. The immediate human victims of violence are generally chosen randomly (targets of opportunity) or selectively (representative or symbolic targets) from a target population and serve as message generators. Threat- and violence-based communication processes between terrorist (organisation), (imperiled) victims, and main targets are used to manipulate the main target audience(s), turning it into a target of terror, a target of demands, or a target of attention, depending on whether intimidation, coercion, or propaganda is primarily sought.
I suppose a major point of contention is whether the direct action of anti-ICE is committed only for its first order effects of frustrating the specific enforcement actions happening at that time, or if they think that their acts taken together will have second-order effects that advance their political goals.
NewCharlesInCharge
24d ago
My first reaction was to scoff at the hyperbole.
But on second thought, she was abrogating the state's monopoly on violence in furtherance of political goals.
NewCharlesInCharge
25d ago
Not that extreme. The precedent is Tennessee vs Garner. Prior to that police could use deadly force against any fleeing felon. The decision made it such that the officer must have probable cause that the fleeing individual poses a significant risk of seriously injuring or killing others.
If a person has shot at someone then they can be shot while fleeing.
NewCharlesInCharge
27d ago
About 1 in 3 children will be the subject of a CPS investigation at some point: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0283534
NewCharlesInCharge
27d ago
He justifies it under the 2001 AUMF, no?
I sometimes work with people near the top of a trillion dollar company and they’re clearly bright but just make the minimal effort to communicate, like it’s better for me to burn time decrypting their ambiguity than for them to write clearly from the start.
I don’t know if it’s some kind of a power move, they really are too busy to communicate any better, or maybe they’re just operating on too little sleep.
More options
Context Copy link