Death of George Floyd

If the violence continues the state will start locking things down. Most people will turn against the protesters because they will associate the looting and destruction of property with their cause. It isn't logical and it doesn't make sense but that's what will happen. People are stupid. That plays into the hands of the racists and that is why racists are joining ranks with the protestors and attempting to incite more violence.

The protests and demonstrations are not bad but the looting is counter productive and dangerous. Giving the government the excuse in the minds of enough people to create a police state, temporary or permanent, is not a good thing.

Protests need to have a definition or goal. They can't go on forever because people become disinterested. No one is paying attention to the protests in Hong Kong right now. They are losing their autonomy as we speak. The WTO protests petered out after 9/11. In both those examples the protests were unsuccessful. They did not achieve their goals. They did bring attention to their plights but that is all.

In the case of police brutality against black people these protests have brought attention to the issue. Anyone who didn't already know there was an issue must have their head in the sand. The officers involved are beginning the legal process. That is a win. If they don't get found guilty, like the police involved in the Rodney King beating, then we have a problem.

One thing not addressed is the prosecutor and the police chief involved. They should be relieved of their offices and possibly prosecuted for dereliction of duty. No one seems to be paying much attention to them for some strange reason.

Maybe with enough eruptions like this, the police will start policing themselves as not wanting to be the next spark.

Yes, technology and surveillance is a double-edged sword.
The best part about it is, it is also in the hands of the people, not just the gov't. And as we have seen, police and politicians are being watched.

There's always the old saying, if you're not doing something wrong what are you worried about.

Ugh. I have to walk away from the conversation a bit.

4d4m, you are frustrating me. In each post you almost get “it” but circle back and double down on refusing to see “it”.

I don’t have the respectful words right now to try and explain “it”.

I’m just so f***ing tired and hurt right now.

Good point. That's exactly what they are supposed to be doing; policing themselves. When they don't do that the DOJ steps in and takes over a municipal law enforcement operation, usually under the order of a federal judge. They appoint an administrator and staff until they feel the operation can be handed back to the local government.

When they don't police themselves someone needs to be held accountable. In this instance the Cheif and prosecutor. I'm not sure why this hasn't been addressed. If you think about it that's the real reason for the protests. If they would have arrested the offending officer like they should have none of this would be happening. People want justice and they believe in our system. When the system takes a s@#t like this someone needs to be held accountable.

Can you provide an example of this and a link to your source?

If not, perhaps you could provide a link to the DOJ's (or FBI's) policies that say the can, will or have done something like this.

Cleveland OH

From 2015

The announcement comes on the heels of a weekend of mostly mild-mannered protests in Cleveland stemming from the acquittal of Officer Michael Brelo, who took part in the killing of two unarmed African Americans, Timothy Russell and Malissa Williams, in 2012.

That was the 157 shots fired, prompted by the backfire of a car and ensuing police chase.

Surveillance cameras caught what looked like a scene out of Blues Brothers with dozens of cop cars racing down the street.
But the ending was no laughing matter

Oh... you are talking about consent decrees. That isn't the DOJ actually coming in and takes over a municipal law enforcement operation.

In a consent decrees the police Department continues to run its operations, they just consent to following agreed upon rules and being monitored.

That is not the same thing as the DOJ taking over operations.

>>> words have meanings <<<

The Albuquerque Police Dept after a number of incidences of officers using undo deadly force was investigated by the DOJ. As part of the agreement a Consent Decree was utilized as oversight. The Dept Chief was required to report on his judgement of any deadly force incident to the oversight committee set up by the DOJ. Here is another link to documents related to the settlement on the CIty of Albuquerque website.

Another example is the City of Newark NJ. This is the agreement reached between them and the Federal Government in District Court

Oversight

Not taking over operations.

This LA Times article is about a federal monitor ordered for Newark. sorry subscription site.

This article from nj.com describes the monitors. They are legal and law enforcement professionals with no ties to the department and appointed by the DOJ

This article discusses what should happen when a police department fails while still under a decree. From the Huffington Post

Note the decrees are an agreement between the DOJ and the offending municipality, kind of like a plea bargain.

Again, the operative words being "consent decree" not "taking over".

The police departments in question retain their control of operation.

I feel like a state took over operations once (governor or attorney general...?)... but I can't remember which one..?

Maybe it was a movie of a book...

Not really like a plea bargain.

Possibly a bit like "probation" but neither "plea bargain" nor "probation" really does the trick... probably closer to a chapter 11 bankruptcy.