I’m perplexed by the replies defending police actions because of some “other side” doing something.
If someone commits a crime, that doesn’t mean it’s okay for the police to start punching random peaceful people on the street. They don’t get to be “annoyed”, that’s their job.
If someone commits a crime, that doesn’t mean it’s okay for the police to start punching random peaceful people on the street. They don’t get to be “annoyed”, that’s their job.
In fact they don’t get to hurt even people who *did* commit a crime, unless there is no way to apprehend them otherwise or someone is in immediate danger. They’re the police, not vigilantes. Their job is to detain people who commit crimes, not beat or hurt them.
Even if all police departments burned down in the same day, that wouldn’t give police the license to go out on the street and assault random people. I can’t believe this isn’t obvious to yall.
If you and your friend have a fight, you both get to spill your emotions. It’s a personal conflict.
Police is different because its use of force is state-sanctioned. There is w power imbalance. Therefore, unlike you and your friend, they don’t get to express “emotions”.
Police is different because its use of force is state-sanctioned. There is w power imbalance. Therefore, unlike you and your friend, they don’t get to express “emotions”.
Listen to this with sound. These men are drunk with their power and military toys. Disgusting.
The obsession with military toys and all the “they were PUSHED to be like this” excuses in my mentions make it sound almost like we’re treating grown-ass men like little boys. I wonder why that might be
