Daily thread for news/updates/discussion of George Floyd protests - June 6

Progress in New York. We now know the shape of the reform package that will likely pass before the end of next week when the legislature is back in session.

You can read the summary and find links to the text of every bill right here.

I'm surprised and pleased to see legalization of cannabis is included. This will deprive police of one of their most effective excuses for harassing people. It's a much larger issue in the NYC area than in the rest of the state, it's been my experience upstate cops give zero fucks about cannabis. I know cops who smoke it, and know I grow it. They only get worked up over large scale grow operations, not personal use.

The NYPD, on the other hand, uses cannabis like a club to beat their way through every door and into every car trunk. 'I smell something' will no longer serve that function for them.

More updates on Buffalo. The two officers involved in that video were arrested and charged with felony 2nd degree assault.

So much for resignations helping. Even better, the officers lied in their police report saying the man tripped and fell. Not just the two charged - many others who were at that incident. We haven't heard the last of this yet.

Two hours and nine minutes of police brutality videos. This compilation popped up on /r/publicfreakout yesterday.

I must say I'm amazed at the idiocy of these cops. They know people are filming them and they are still under the impression these acts won't cost them their careers in law enforcement and land them with felony convictions. It's wonderful to get so many of these thugs out in the open where they can be held accountable and stripped of their public trust.

If you're too foolish/thuggish to behave when fifty cameras are pointed at you, then you're clearly lacking the required integrity to remain in the police force.

This is a hyper-local report, but I just wanted to say that I attended a BLM protest and memorial for George Floyd in my wee tiny (pop. 15,000) very white northwestern Michigan town, and 1,500 people turned out for a passionate, but orderly event. [It doesn't sound like much of a thing, until you imagine 10% of the population of a major city showing up.]

The Chief of Police spoke, acknowledging that the actions of the Minneapolis officers in George Floyd's death were wrong and unconscionable. He quoted Robert Woodson on just policing - interesting quotes, even if the figure behind them has some problematic history.

Local-resident Black speakers described incidents of profiling, unnecessary use of force, and racist social media posts from police officers. The local BLM leadership presented demands for an end to racial profiling, annual implicit bias training, civilian review, and incidentally brought up the fact that 40% of the county budget is dedicated to police services [national average for similar forces is 25%]. They recommended public release of the detailed budget, and reallocation of those funds for non-police community services.

Video is published here.

Aside from the mere presence of a single dude in a very questionable yellow Hawaiian shirt, I didn't see any evidence of Boogaloo, white nationalist, or other potentially violent infiltrators. Lots of kids, people of all ages, genders, colors, significant call-outs for native, Latinx, LGBT+, and other minorities in the community. Lots of supportive honking from passing cars.

One of the rally organizers is a leader in the local Indivisible group, a major Democratic Party activist, and also sits on the city Board of Commissioners.

The Mayor's office was able to persuade organizers of an Open Carry firearms rally (with some really awful white nationalist backing) to choose another day.

Bill de Blasio (mayor of New York City) gave a jaw dropping interview on WNYC yesterday. An amazing display of gaslighting about the well documented nightly brutality by NYPD during the protests. (Link goes to audio and full transcript.)

Here's a short summary.

Democrats to Propose Broad Bill to Target Police Misconduct and Racial Bias

Democrats in Congress plan to unveil expansive legislation on Monday that would make it easier to prosecute police misconduct and recover damages from officers found to have violated the constitutional rights of civilians, and step up pressure on the Justice Department to address systemic racial discrimination by law enforcement.

The bill, which House and Senate Democrats have named the Justice in Policing Act of 2020, is a direct response to the recent killings of three black Americans by white civilians and officers that have prompted protests across the country, but it includes policies that civil rights activists have been pushing for decades to combat racial bias and excessive use of force by law enforcement. The New York Times obtained a copy of a section-by-section summary of its contents, circulated privately on Capitol Hill late Friday.

Lots of incredibly positive changes in the Bill:

As currently proposed, it would significantly change federal law and require states and localities to make modifications of their own, such as instituting mandatory bias training, to receive federal funds. It would create a national registry to track police misconduct and require that law enforcement agencies report data on the use of force, as well as ban certain chokeholds and other practices that were used in confrontations with the police that left black Americans dead.

If adopted, the bill would rewrite key elements of the federal criminal code related to police misconduct to make it easier to prosecute law enforcement officers and for individuals who are victims of such practices to recover damages.

The federal police misconduct statute currently makes it a crime for an officer to “willfully” violate an individuals’s constitutional rights, meaning prosecutors must prove an officer acted with the intention of depriving the person of their rights. Democrats plan to propose lowering that standard of criminal intent to “knowingly or with reckless disregard.” The change is likely to face opposition from police unions and their allies.

The legislation would also alter the legal doctrine known as qualified immunity that shields police officers from being held legally liable for damages sought by citizens whose constitutional rights were violated.

In addition, Democrats are proposing to change the federal standard for the use of force by officers from “reasonableness” to only when it is “necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury.” The bill would require that federal officers use de-escalation tactics and use deadly force only as a last resort. Grants to state and local agencies would require them to do the same.

In federal drug cases, lawmakers intend to propose banning “no knock” warrants, which allow police to enter a residence without warning or identifying themselves, and incentivize states to do the same. Ms. Taylor was shot and killed in her home during such a raid.

The legislation would also ban chokeholds or other carotid holds, and condition law enforcement funds on states and other agencies doing the same. The technique led to Mr. Floyd’s death, prosecutors have said, and the high-profile death in 2014 of Eric Garner in New York.

It would also limit the transfer of military weaponry to state and local departments.

It would give new power to Justice Department investigators conducting inquiries into patterns or practices of behavior by police departments that violate the Constitution and incentivize state attorneys general to conduct such investigations on their own.

Lawmakers would require all uniformed federal officers to wear body cameras and use dashboard cameras, which have been crucial tools to holding officers accountable in many cases, and they would mandate that state and local agencies use federal funds to “ensure” their use.

Democrats would also try to prod state and local law enforcement agencies to undertake a new effort to end discrimination in their practices, by conditioning federal funding on the adoption of policies and training to combat racial and other discriminatory profiling.

The bill would also impose new requirements on the Justice Department to assemble and promulgate new policing standards for state and local agencies and collect reams of data on police actions all over the country that could inform more changes in the future, particularly when a Democratic administration controls the department.

The bill would also include a provision, held up in the Senate, that would make lynching a new federal hate crime for the first time in American history.

Hopefully they can actually get it passed without being watered down too much. If not, hopefully they will try again in 6 months.

p.s. Does anyone else think this may deserve its own post, given its importance?

From a few days ago but interesting nonetheless:
UPDATED: Suspended Fargo deputy police chief resigns

Osmundson was first put on suspension earlier on Thursday after Fargo Police Chief David Todd and Mayor Tim Mahoney met with him to discuss his actions, which they say he chose to "undertake on his own without approval."

The former deputy chief initially came under scrutiny after co-workers complained in an email that during the protest, Osmundson held up a sign at the law enforcement center, held a beer can during the downtown riot, and said the words “f--- the police."

“I took actions on Saturday to protect all officers and the protesters and citizens of Fargo during Saturday’s events," the former deputy chief said. "Those actions led to distrust of this community and those among law enforcement and no amount of suspension will regain that trust.”

Doing that to "protect all officers and the protesters and citizens of Fargo", was he? I'm sure being a provocateur never once crossed his mind while he was out there pretending to be a protestor either. /s

I just wanted to post a few article of note about the National Guard. Sorry a couple of them are a bit of old news.

• A National Guardsman in MA was removed from active duty after posting "I can't wait to shoot you".

• An Ohio guardsman who was removed because of his white supremacist posts

• National Guard flying aggressive "persistent presence" mission with helicopters earlier this week over protesters. Apparently that was ordered by the Pentagon

Edit: Fixed link to Ohio National guard.

From tear gas to rubber bullets, here’s what ‘nonlethal’ weapons can do to the body

When misused, nonlethal weapons break bones, burn skin, and cause internal injuries. Here’s why those serious injuries may occur, and how to protect against them.

Kind of a surprising article coming from National Geographic, especially given they are owned by Disney now.

@spit-evil-olive-tips, figured you might want to read this given your post on chemical weapons the other day.

Manhattan D.A. Cy Vance will not prosecute protesters arrested for unlawful assembly or disorderly conduct.

(note: Vance is still a corrupt goon, despite doing the right thing here.)

Protests about police brutality are met with wave of police brutality across US

From Minnesota to New York, Texas, California, Washington DC and many places beyond, from small towns to big cities, police officers have demonstrated just how problematic law enforcement is in the US, drawing condemnation from international groups as well as domestic civil rights organizations.

Police Board President: Officers Struck Me 5 Times With Their Batons During Protest

Foreman’s complaint, which identifies the officer Foreman said struck him, is one of 344 complaints of police misconduct filed with COPA between midnight May 29 and 7 a.m. Friday, Eaddy said

Seattle PD, unable to use tear gas, are now trying to redefine what words mean.

"we're asking the crowd to back away from the fencing in order to keep this a peaceful demonstration"

So...if they don't back up, the police will make it not peaceful by firing the first shot? Or if they don't back up, they'll consider "standing too close to the fence" to be violence and use that as an excuse to start firing anyway?

edit: their justification is that the crowd got violent and threw a candle at them

Separately, yesterday here in Seattle, police reportedly pepper-sprayed a woman with her child in their car. This video shows the aftermath but not the event itself, which I haven't been able to find any video of.

Their official statement today confirms they used pepper spray, but claims that the child was not in the car at the time.

Which...I hope is wrong, or I'm misunderstanding it, because it would mean they first dragged the child out of the car, then pepper-sprayed the mother, with the child watching from the sidewalk?

Unidentified police in plain clothes do not identify themselves and arrest woman on the street and throw her into an unmarked car (turns out to be San Diego police department). People filming are told they will be shot if they follow

George Floyd's brother to testify in House hearing on police brutality

George Floyd shouldn't have been killed. It doesn't take a genius to figure that one out. Now people are taking to the streets and rioting, let's talk about that.

(Out of Protest)

Because this situation is so strange, I wanted to condense my thoughts into a post. I've donated $10 to the ACLU and encourage you to do so if possible. I'm not making any money from this post either as I don't monetise my blog in any way.

How Americans Feel About George Floyd’s Death And The Protests

First, the public pretty clearly thinks the police were in the wrong. A Yahoo News/YouGov survey, for instance, found that 84 percent of Americans strongly or somewhat approved of the firing of the officers involved in Floyd’s death, and 68 percent said they approved of charging former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin, who knelt on Floyd’s neck for nearly 9 minutes, with murder. Similarly, 65 percent of respondents in a Data for Progress poll said that Chauvin murdered Floyd; 25 percent of respondents said his death was partly a product of excessive force “but not murder,” and just 10 percent said it was a “tragic accident.”

Additionally, most Americans said that policing is biased against African Americans. In a new survey from Monmouth University, 57 percent said police were more likely to use excessive force in difficult situations if the suspect is black, while just 33 percent said police were equally likely to use excessive force against white people and black people. Similarly, 57 percent of respondents in a new CBS News/YouGov survey said police in most communities treat white people better than black people.

More broadly, the public appears receptive to why people are protesting. Fifty-seven percent of respondents in the Monmouth poll felt that, regardless of their actions, protesters’ anger was “fully justified,” while 21 percent said it was “partially justified” and 18 percent said it was “not at all justified.” And 64 percent told Reuters/Ipsos that they were sympathetic to those participating in the protests, while a Morning Consult poll found that 54 percent of adults supported “the protest in general” while 22 percent opposed it.

However, Americans had mixed views on what has happened during the protests, and many have expressed disapproval of protests that have been violent or destructive. Forty-five percent of respondents told Morning Consult that, on the whole, most of the protesters are peaceful and desire meaningful social reform, while 42 percent said most protesters are trying to incite violence or destroy property. In Monmouth’s poll, only 17 percent felt the actions of the protesters were fully justified, 37 percent said they were partially justified and 38 percent said they weren’t justified at all. And the Reuters/Ipsos survey found that most Americans (72 percent) didn’t think violent protests were an appropriate response to Floyd’s killing, and that property damage caused by protesters undermined their goals (79 percent). Morning Consult’s survey also found that Americans were less supportive of the protests when they were specifically asked about black people protesting.

As for President Trump’s handling of the protests, Americans largely gave him a thumbs down. The CBS News/YouGov poll found that 32 percent approved of Trump’s response while 49 percent disapproved, and Reuters/Ipsos found that 33 percent approved while 56 percent disapproved. Although Trump usually has overwhelming backing from Republicans on most job approval questions, there were some signs that at least a few GOP voters were breaking with him on this issue. The CBS News/YouGov survey found that 65 percent approved of how he’s handling the situation — far lower than the 84 percent who approve of how he’s handling the coronavirus pandemic, for example — while 14 percent disapproved. Similarly, in the Reuters/Ipsos poll, 20 percent disapproved while 67 percent approved.

There could be electoral repercussions to the protests and the president’s response to them. Monmouth’s survey found that 74 percent of Americans felt the country was on the wrong track, the largest share since Monmouth first asked the question nationally in 2013. And as a result of Floyd’s death and the protests, 45 percent of registered voters told Morning Consult they were more likely to now vote for former Vice President Joe Biden. However, another 31 percent said they’d be more likely to vote for Trump. And at this point, it’s hard to imagine that George Floyd’s death won’t be an important factor in the election.

On one hand, cool.

On the other hand, this is what happened with the coronavirus where it went from partisan to not partisan to partisan.

Salt Lake City, Utah

At Friday’s peaceful demonstration, a lone marine stood for 3 hours in full uniform with protesters in support of Black Lives Matters.

Todd, a Marine with two decorated purple hearts stood at the Utah’s State Capitol with black tape over his mouth reading “I Can’t Breathe” and holding a sign that said “justice for George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Tamir Rice, and countless others…”

BTS and Big Hit Entertainment Donate $1 Million to Black Lives Matter

In liberal Austin, protests unleash violence — then an identity crisis