Maybe enough conservatives will do the right thing and see the bill fail
What's this about GPs and face to face? WTF. A month or so ago Hancock was telling the very same newspaper that the default position would be telephone/video consultations and only go in if necessary after that. This was for after the virus had completely finished.
Did I dream this?
I have no idea but the telephone triage system is working very well in our practice
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
There was no intention to kill the woman, so it wouldn't be murder. Furthermore, the officers were under fire, and therefore are rightly given lattitude in how their actions are judged.
But ultimately, the fault is with US policing, which emphasises the idea the the police are at war.
No, I think the ultimate fault is America's revolutionary history, and the 2nd Amendment.
America is an armed state with a populace which is uniquely happy to own, carry and use guns, and let their fellow citizens do the same.
As a result, American police are acutely aware that they might be shot dead in any random moment, unlike almost any other police force worldwide, so they resort to violence much sooner. Of course there are issues with terrible training and embedded racism, but these are somewhat ancillary to the central issue.
Guns.
I'm sorry, but that's insufficient.
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
They didn't "fire [at her] in self defence", she wasn't shooting at them.
If someone goes into a shop armed to rob it and takes people hostage, then are the Police entitled to fire blind into the shop and kill everyone inside, innocent unarmed people, as a result trying to get the criminal? Even without getting into the fact that they were the intruders, she was not shooting at them.
Setting aside the rights and wrongs (not belittling them) I just do not understand the liberal European obsession with the details of American policing. It's a foreign country, with various problems, and many virtues.
Is it because America dominates social media, so these things get amplified worldwide? is it because it makes a certain type of European person feel virtuous in comparison?
Would Lewis Hamilton wear a shirt for the thousands of Uighurs tortured or killed in China? I doubt it. Yet that is surely a far greater crime.
Same reason why I'm more concerned with what happens to my brother than to a stranger.
America is family, we share a language, a culture, TV shows, movie, music, literature . . . and yes news.
Well, try informing yourself about the laws and practices of the place, then. RCS sounds as if he has some first hand understanding of the issues involved. You do not. You may say Well, he lives there and I don't, but in that case don't claim to know the country like your own brother.
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
Walker fired once. Taylor was shot 5 times. One police officer fired 10 round blind into the apartment - he was fired by the police department. Walker, incidentally was charged with attempted murder until the outrage generated by the publicity made them drop the charges.
Breonna Taylor did not receive any medical attention until 20 minutes after being shot.
So are we going to undermine our FTA with the Japan now it doesn't do what we want?
Who says it doesn't?
Truss has done a fantastic job yet again. She is one of our best Cabinet Ministers in a long time.
iirc some in No. 10 have discovered it undermines their ability to use State Aid in some way or other (as all good Thatcherites love to do).
Any reports of criticism from No. 10?
Or are you referring to the misleading headline from the FT earlier conflating a negotiating position with the EU and an actual agreed treaty deal that is very close but different to our negotiating position?
See Horse's posting.
I've replied to Horse, he's just quoted the [very misleading] new headline, not reports from No. 10.
Not correct. I provided more detail in another post.
?
All I see is more of the same, that the UK/JPN agreed deal is different to the UK/EU negotiating position.
There's a difference between a deal and a negotiating position. Always has been.
So the Tories would be 4 short of a majority and the DUP would hold the balance of power again as they did after 2017.
Therefore holding this vote to remove the border in the Irish Sea is clearly an attempt by Boris to win over the DUP if he needs them after the next election, if Parliament votes down amending the WA he can tell them he tried but MPs decided otherwise
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
There was no intention to kill the woman, so it wouldn't be murder. Furthermore, the officers were under fire, and therefore are rightly given lattitude in how their actions are judged.
But ultimately, the fault is with US policing, which emphasises the idea the the police are at war.
No, I think the ultimate fault is America's revolutionary history, and the 2nd Amendment.
America is an armed state with a populace which is uniquely happy to own, carry and use guns, and let their fellow citizens do the same.
As a result, American police are acutely aware that they might be shot dead in any random moment, unlike almost any other police force worldwide, so they resort to violence much sooner. Of course there are issues with terrible training and embedded racism, but these are somewhat ancillary to the central issue.
Guns.
I'm sorry, but that's insufficient.
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
But it all stems from America's love affair with Revolution and guns, the armed militia ready to take on the overmighty state.
It's in America's DNA (as, tragically, is racism, via the slave trade and Deep South culture)
Countries are like personae, forever influenced by early events. France is a fascinating example: because of its own Revolutionary history, it has a tradition of vibrant and sometimes volatile rebellion (strikes, 1968, Gilets Jaunes) which makes it a a hard country to reform, except by massive rupture.
Germany cannot escape Hitler. Britain - or England - cannot stop marvelling at itself in the mirror that is the Blitz, and a long history of peace and non-conquest-by-others, which leads to exceptionalism.And Brexit.
So the Tories would be 4 short of a majority and the DUP would hold the balance of power again as they did after 2017.
Therefore holding this vote to remove the border in the Irish Sea is clearly an attempt by Boris to win over the DUP if he needs them after the next election, if Parliament votes down amending the WA he can tell them he tried but MPs decided otherwise
Don't be a numpty. What's the point of trying to bribe minor parties now on the off-chance that a poll taken 3.5 years out correctly predicts the size of the majority?
The Tories have shown they are perfectly capable of bribing minor parties over the wekkend after the GE.
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
Walker fired once. Taylor was shot 5 times. One police officer fired 10 round blind into the apartment - he was fired by the police department. Walker, incidentally was charged with attempted murder until the outrage generated by the publicity made them drop the charges.
Breonna Taylor did not receive any medical attention until 20 minutes after being shot.
I disagree with people like Geoffrey Cox on just about everything. But I also know they are patriots in the truest sense of the word. They put their country first. I can only admire that.
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
Walker fired once. Taylor was shot 5 times. One police officer fired 10 round blind into the apartment - he was fired by the police department. Walker, incidentally was charged with attempted murder until the outrage generated by the publicity made them drop the charges.
Breonna Taylor did not receive any medical attention until 20 minutes after being shot.
Again, who cares? With all due respect. This is one murder/justifiable killing in a foreign country. It is deeply sad, but there is much sadness in the world, and there are FAR greater crimes going on elsewhere.
Yet we focus on this American crap like it is happening in our back gardens. It is quite odd, and it warps our politics and media in a bad and weird way.
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
Walker fired once. Taylor was shot 5 times. One police officer fired 10 round blind into the apartment - he was fired by the police department. Walker, incidentally was charged with attempted murder until the outrage generated by the publicity made them drop the charges.
Breonna Taylor did not receive any medical attention until 20 minutes after being shot.
Indeed this has been a common trait all year with these stories. I shared a video here the other day about a BLM medic being forced away by the Police from a white supremacist protester who'd been shot that she was trying to save. He died after bleeding out with no medical attention given until it was too late.
If someone has been shot then getting medical attention should be a priority, but putting them in handcuffs and ignoring the fact someone is dying seems to be routine instead.
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
There was no intention to kill the woman, so it wouldn't be murder. Furthermore, the officers were under fire, and therefore are rightly given lattitude in how their actions are judged.
But ultimately, the fault is with US policing, which emphasises the idea the the police are at war.
No, I think the ultimate fault is America's revolutionary history, and the 2nd Amendment.
America is an armed state with a populace which is uniquely happy to own, carry and use guns, and let their fellow citizens do the same.
As a result, American police are acutely aware that they might be shot dead in any random moment, unlike almost any other police force worldwide, so they resort to violence much sooner. Of course there are issues with terrible training and embedded racism, but these are somewhat ancillary to the central issue.
Guns.
I'm sorry, but that's insufficient.
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
But it all stems from America's love affair with Revolution and guns, the armed militia ready to take on the overmighty state.
It's in America's DNA (as, tragically, is racism, via the slave trade and Deep South culture)
Countries are like personae, forever influenced by early events. France is a fascinating example: because of its own Revolutionary history, it has a tradition of vibrant and sometimes volatile rebellion (strikes, 1968, Gilets Jaunes) which makes it a a hard country to reform, except by massive rupture.
Germany cannot escape Hitler. Britain - or England - cannot stop marvelling at itself in the mirror that is the Blitz, and a long history of peace and non-conquest-by-others, which leads to exceptionalism.And Brexit.
I give American police a lot of slack, because they are faced with people with guns. And they are under enormous stresses, and they're scared. And people make mistakes when they're scared.
It's also worth remembering that, while the US murder rate peaked in the mid-1980s, the number of people killed by the police has just kept on rising and rising and rising.
So the Tories would be 4 short of a majority and the DUP would hold the balance of power again as they did after 2017.
Therefore holding this vote to remove the border in the Irish Sea is clearly an attempt by Boris to win over the DUP if he needs them after the next election, if Parliament votes down amending the WA he can tell them he tried but MPs decided otherwise
Don't be a numpty. What's the point of trying to bribe minor parties now on the off-chance that a poll taken 3.5 years out correctly predicts the size of the majority?
The Tories have shown they are perfectly capable of bribing minor parties over the wekkend after the GE.
Bribery for the DUP is not enough as May and Boris found out, they also want clear evidence of effort not to have any distinction between NI and GB in terms of customs arrangements
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
There was no intention to kill the woman, so it wouldn't be murder. Furthermore, the officers were under fire, and therefore are rightly given lattitude in how their actions are judged.
But ultimately, the fault is with US policing, which emphasises the idea the the police are at war.
No, I think the ultimate fault is America's revolutionary history, and the 2nd Amendment.
America is an armed state with a populace which is uniquely happy to own, carry and use guns, and let their fellow citizens do the same.
As a result, American police are acutely aware that they might be shot dead in any random moment, unlike almost any other police force worldwide, so they resort to violence much sooner. Of course there are issues with terrible training and embedded racism, but these are somewhat ancillary to the central issue.
Guns.
I'm sorry, but that's insufficient.
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
But it all stems from America's love affair with Revolution and guns, the armed militia ready to take on the overmighty state.
It's in America's DNA (as, tragically, is racism, via the slave trade and Deep South culture)
Countries are like personae, forever influenced by early events. France is a fascinating example: because of its own Revolutionary history, it has a tradition of vibrant and sometimes volatile rebellion (strikes, 1968, Gilets Jaunes) which makes it a a hard country to reform, except by massive rupture.
Germany cannot escape Hitler. Britain - or England - cannot stop marvelling at itself in the mirror that is the Blitz, and a long history of peace and non-conquest-by-others, which leads to exceptionalism.And Brexit.
I give American police a lot of slack, because they are faced with people with guns. And they are under enormous stresses, and they're scared. And people make mistakes when they're scared.
It's also worth remembering that, while the US murder rate peaked in the mid-1980s, the number of people killed by the police has just kept on rising and rising and rising.
Yes, that's fair. There are sad problems. I do not deny it. I am just bewildered as to why Europeans seem to obsess over the minutiae of policing in America whereas China is actually going full on genocide, and no one really speaks of it.
Moreover, you could once - just about - have justified this unbalanced perspective by saying America is a much more important country, the global hegemon, the dominant superpower.
That is simply no longer the case. China is far bigger in population, is roughly the same or bigger in economic size (by PPP), is more important in trade for most nations, in many ways it is more potent than the USA, and global trends will only increase this shift to Asia.
Yet we STILL wank on about America. I think it's because journalists are a bit lazy, they can go to America and speak English, and it's easy to report, and make it colourful, and criticizing America makes European liberals feel good, and so on.
Criticizing China is harder, practically, for so many reasons, and reporting is more difficult, so better and easier to just ignore it. This is a grave failure.
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
There was no intention to kill the woman, so it wouldn't be murder. Furthermore, the officers were under fire, and therefore are rightly given lattitude in how their actions are judged.
But ultimately, the fault is with US policing, which emphasises the idea the the police are at war.
No, I think the ultimate fault is America's revolutionary history, and the 2nd Amendment.
America is an armed state with a populace which is uniquely happy to own, carry and use guns, and let their fellow citizens do the same.
As a result, American police are acutely aware that they might be shot dead in any random moment, unlike almost any other police force worldwide, so they resort to violence much sooner. Of course there are issues with terrible training and embedded racism, but these are somewhat ancillary to the central issue.
Guns.
I'm sorry, but that's insufficient.
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
But it all stems from America's love affair with Revolution and guns, the armed militia ready to take on the overmighty state.
It's in America's DNA (as, tragically, is racism, via the slave trade and Deep South culture)
Countries are like personae, forever influenced by early events. France is a fascinating example: because of its own Revolutionary history, it has a tradition of vibrant and sometimes volatile rebellion (strikes, 1968, Gilets Jaunes) which makes it a a hard country to reform, except by massive rupture.
Germany cannot escape Hitler. Britain - or England - cannot stop marvelling at itself in the mirror that is the Blitz, and a long history of peace and non-conquest-by-others, which leads to exceptionalism.And Brexit.
I give American police a lot of slack, because they are faced with people with guns. And they are under enormous stresses, and they're scared. And people make mistakes when they're scared.
It's also worth remembering that, while the US murder rate peaked in the mid-1980s, the number of people killed by the police has just kept on rising and rising and rising.
Yes, that's fair. There are sad problems. I do not deny it. I am just bewildered as to why Europeans seem to obsess over the minutiae of policing in America whereas China is actually going full on genocide, and no one really speaks of it.
How many American TV shows do you want? American movies? How many American books do you read? How many American songs do you listen to?
Same questions for China.
How many people in the UK watch on a regular basis a show like Law & Order or an equivalent American drama? How many watch a Chinese equivalent?
We are far more interested and involved in what happens in America. For good or bad.
So the Tories would be 4 short of a majority and the DUP would hold the balance of power again as they did after 2017.
Therefore holding this vote to remove the border in the Irish Sea is clearly an attempt by Boris to win over the DUP if he needs them after the next election, if Parliament votes down amending the WA he can tell them he tried but MPs decided otherwise
Don't be a numpty. What's the point of trying to bribe minor parties now on the off-chance that a poll taken 3.5 years out correctly predicts the size of the majority?
The Tories have shown they are perfectly capable of bribing minor parties over the wekkend after the GE.
Bribery for the DUP is not enough as May and Boris found out, they also want clear evidence of effort not to have any distinction between NI and GB in terms of customs arrangements
Hmmm. I am sure they'll have Boris's word - what more could they want?
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
There was no intention to kill the woman, so it wouldn't be murder. Furthermore, the officers were under fire, and therefore are rightly given lattitude in how their actions are judged.
But ultimately, the fault is with US policing, which emphasises the idea the the police are at war.
No, I think the ultimate fault is America's revolutionary history, and the 2nd Amendment.
America is an armed state with a populace which is uniquely happy to own, carry and use guns, and let their fellow citizens do the same.
As a result, American police are acutely aware that they might be shot dead in any random moment, unlike almost any other police force worldwide, so they resort to violence much sooner. Of course there are issues with terrible training and embedded racism, but these are somewhat ancillary to the central issue.
Guns.
I'm sorry, but that's insufficient.
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
But it all stems from America's love affair with Revolution and guns, the armed militia ready to take on the overmighty state.
It's in America's DNA (as, tragically, is racism, via the slave trade and Deep South culture)
Countries are like personae, forever influenced by early events. France is a fascinating example: because of its own Revolutionary history, it has a tradition of vibrant and sometimes volatile rebellion (strikes, 1968, Gilets Jaunes) which makes it a a hard country to reform, except by massive rupture.
Germany cannot escape Hitler. Britain - or England - cannot stop marvelling at itself in the mirror that is the Blitz, and a long history of peace and non-conquest-by-others, which leads to exceptionalism.And Brexit.
I give American police a lot of slack, because they are faced with people with guns. And they are under enormous stresses, and they're scared. And people make mistakes when they're scared.
It's also worth remembering that, while the US murder rate peaked in the mid-1980s, the number of people killed by the police has just kept on rising and rising and rising.
Yes, that's fair. There are sad problems. I do not deny it. I am just bewildered as to why Europeans seem to obsess over the minutiae of policing in America whereas China is actually going full on genocide, and no one really speaks of it.
How many American TV shows do you want? American movies? How many American books do you read? How many American songs do you listen to?
Same questions for China.
How many people in the UK watch on a regular basis a show like Law & Order or an equivalent American drama? How many watch a Chinese equivalent?
We are far more interested and involved in what happens in America. For good or bad.
"Hopes flicker that Britain's 'second wave' will see a lower death rate than the first Early indications suggest the UK may avoid a major spike in deaths as young people drive new infections
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
There was no intention to kill the woman, so it wouldn't be murder. Furthermore, the officers were under fire, and therefore are rightly given lattitude in how their actions are judged.
But ultimately, the fault is with US policing, which emphasises the idea the the police are at war.
No, I think the ultimate fault is America's revolutionary history, and the 2nd Amendment.
America is an armed state with a populace which is uniquely happy to own, carry and use guns, and let their fellow citizens do the same.
As a result, American police are acutely aware that they might be shot dead in any random moment, unlike almost any other police force worldwide, so they resort to violence much sooner. Of course there are issues with terrible training and embedded racism, but these are somewhat ancillary to the central issue.
Guns.
I'm sorry, but that's insufficient.
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
But it all stems from America's love affair with Revolution and guns, the armed militia ready to take on the overmighty state.
It's in America's DNA (as, tragically, is racism, via the slave trade and Deep South culture)
Countries are like personae, forever influenced by early events. France is a fascinating example: because of its own Revolutionary history, it has a tradition of vibrant and sometimes volatile rebellion (strikes, 1968, Gilets Jaunes) which makes it a a hard country to reform, except by massive rupture.
Germany cannot escape Hitler. Britain - or England - cannot stop marvelling at itself in the mirror that is the Blitz, and a long history of peace and non-conquest-by-others, which leads to exceptionalism.And Brexit.
I give American police a lot of slack, because they are faced with people with guns. And they are under enormous stresses, and they're scared. And people make mistakes when they're scared.
It's also worth remembering that, while the US murder rate peaked in the mid-1980s, the number of people killed by the police has just kept on rising and rising and rising.
Yes, that's fair. There are sad problems. I do not deny it. I am just bewildered as to why Europeans seem to obsess over the minutiae of policing in America whereas China is actually going full on genocide, and no one really speaks of it.
How many American TV shows do you want? American movies? How many American books do you read? How many American songs do you listen to?
Same questions for China.
How many people in the UK watch on a regular basis a show like Law & Order or an equivalent American drama? How many watch a Chinese equivalent?
We are far more interested and involved in what happens in America. For good or bad.
Also, the US is, or should be, or we would like it to be, the leader of the free world, the leading democracy, an example to inspire oppressed people.
We know that China is an evil totalitarian dictatorship. Oppression of its own people is what we expect. The police in a free Republic do not long kill their own citizens in such numbers as the police in the US. It's not a stable state of affairs. The people will either cease being free, or they will restrain the police.
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
There was no intention to kill the woman, so it wouldn't be murder. Furthermore, the officers were under fire, and therefore are rightly given lattitude in how their actions are judged.
But ultimately, the fault is with US policing, which emphasises the idea the the police are at war.
No, I think the ultimate fault is America's revolutionary history, and the 2nd Amendment.
America is an armed state with a populace which is uniquely happy to own, carry and use guns, and let their fellow citizens do the same.
As a result, American police are acutely aware that they might be shot dead in any random moment, unlike almost any other police force worldwide, so they resort to violence much sooner. Of course there are issues with terrible training and embedded racism, but these are somewhat ancillary to the central issue.
Guns.
I'm sorry, but that's insufficient.
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
But it all stems from America's love affair with Revolution and guns, the armed militia ready to take on the overmighty state.
It's in America's DNA (as, tragically, is racism, via the slave trade and Deep South culture)
Countries are like personae, forever influenced by early events. France is a fascinating example: because of its own Revolutionary history, it has a tradition of vibrant and sometimes volatile rebellion (strikes, 1968, Gilets Jaunes) which makes it a a hard country to reform, except by massive rupture.
Germany cannot escape Hitler. Britain - or England - cannot stop marvelling at itself in the mirror that is the Blitz, and a long history of peace and non-conquest-by-others, which leads to exceptionalism.And Brexit.
I give American police a lot of slack, because they are faced with people with guns. And they are under enormous stresses, and they're scared. And people make mistakes when they're scared.
It's also worth remembering that, while the US murder rate peaked in the mid-1980s, the number of people killed by the police has just kept on rising and rising and rising.
Yes, that's fair. There are sad problems. I do not deny it. I am just bewildered as to why Europeans seem to obsess over the minutiae of policing in America whereas China is actually going full on genocide, and no one really speaks of it.
How many American TV shows do you want? American movies? How many American books do you read? How many American songs do you listen to?
Same questions for China.
How many people in the UK watch on a regular basis a show like Law & Order or an equivalent American drama? How many watch a Chinese equivalent?
We are far more interested and involved in what happens in America. For good or bad.
Also, the US is, or should be, or we would like it to be, the leader of the free world, the leading democracy, an example to inspire oppressed people.
We know that China is an evil totalitarian dictatorship. Oppression of its own people is what we expect. The police in a free Republic do not long kill their own citizens in such numbers as the police in the US. It's not a stable state of affairs. The people will either cease being free, or they will restrain the police.
That's all waffle.
"We know that Nazi Germany is a racist totalitarian dictatorship. Extermination of the Jews is what we expect. So it's boring and let's look at police SWAT teams in LA instead and blah blah"
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
There was no intention to kill the woman, so it wouldn't be murder. Furthermore, the officers were under fire, and therefore are rightly given lattitude in how their actions are judged.
But ultimately, the fault is with US policing, which emphasises the idea the the police are at war.
No, I think the ultimate fault is America's revolutionary history, and the 2nd Amendment.
America is an armed state with a populace which is uniquely happy to own, carry and use guns, and let their fellow citizens do the same.
As a result, American police are acutely aware that they might be shot dead in any random moment, unlike almost any other police force worldwide, so they resort to violence much sooner. Of course there are issues with terrible training and embedded racism, but these are somewhat ancillary to the central issue.
Guns.
I'm sorry, but that's insufficient.
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
But it all stems from America's love affair with Revolution and guns, the armed militia ready to take on the overmighty state.
It's in America's DNA (as, tragically, is racism, via the slave trade and Deep South culture)
Countries are like personae, forever influenced by early events. France is a fascinating example: because of its own Revolutionary history, it has a tradition of vibrant and sometimes volatile rebellion (strikes, 1968, Gilets Jaunes) which makes it a a hard country to reform, except by massive rupture.
Germany cannot escape Hitler. Britain - or England - cannot stop marvelling at itself in the mirror that is the Blitz, and a long history of peace and non-conquest-by-others, which leads to exceptionalism.And Brexit.
I give American police a lot of slack, because they are faced with people with guns. And they are under enormous stresses, and they're scared. And people make mistakes when they're scared.
It's also worth remembering that, while the US murder rate peaked in the mid-1980s, the number of people killed by the police has just kept on rising and rising and rising.
Yes, that's fair. There are sad problems. I do not deny it. I am just bewildered as to why Europeans seem to obsess over the minutiae of policing in America whereas China is actually going full on genocide, and no one really speaks of it.
Moreover, you could once - just about - have justified this unbalanced perspective by saying America is a much more important country, the global hegemon, the dominant superpower.
That is simply no longer the case. China is far bigger in population, is roughly the same or bigger in economic size (by PPP), is more important in trade for most nations, in many ways it is more potent than the USA, and global trends will only increase this shift to Asia.
Yet we STILL wank on about America. I think it's because journalists are a bit lazy, they can go to America and speak English, and it's easy to report, and make it colourful, and criticizing America makes European liberals feel good, and so on.
Criticizing China is harder, practically, for so many reasons, and reporting is more difficult, so better and easier to just ignore it. This is a grave failure.
Criticising China also risks (1) accusations of racism / Sinophobia (2) screwing up any chance in the future of access to China and (3) possibly p1ssing off your owners if they do business in China
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
There was no intention to kill the woman, so it wouldn't be murder. Furthermore, the officers were under fire, and therefore are rightly given lattitude in how their actions are judged.
But ultimately, the fault is with US policing, which emphasises the idea the the police are at war.
No, I think the ultimate fault is America's revolutionary history, and the 2nd Amendment.
America is an armed state with a populace which is uniquely happy to own, carry and use guns, and let their fellow citizens do the same.
As a result, American police are acutely aware that they might be shot dead in any random moment, unlike almost any other police force worldwide, so they resort to violence much sooner. Of course there are issues with terrible training and embedded racism, but these are somewhat ancillary to the central issue.
Guns.
I'm sorry, but that's insufficient.
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
But it all stems from America's love affair with Revolution and guns, the armed militia ready to take on the overmighty state.
It's in America's DNA (as, tragically, is racism, via the slave trade and Deep South culture)
Countries are like personae, forever influenced by early events. France is a fascinating example: because of its own Revolutionary history, it has a tradition of vibrant and sometimes volatile rebellion (strikes, 1968, Gilets Jaunes) which makes it a a hard country to reform, except by massive rupture.
Germany cannot escape Hitler. Britain - or England - cannot stop marvelling at itself in the mirror that is the Blitz, and a long history of peace and non-conquest-by-others, which leads to exceptionalism.And Brexit.
I give American police a lot of slack, because they are faced with people with guns. And they are under enormous stresses, and they're scared. And people make mistakes when they're scared.
It's also worth remembering that, while the US murder rate peaked in the mid-1980s, the number of people killed by the police has just kept on rising and rising and rising.
Yes, that's fair. There are sad problems. I do not deny it. I am just bewildered as to why Europeans seem to obsess over the minutiae of policing in America whereas China is actually going full on genocide, and no one really speaks of it.
Moreover, you could once - just about - have justified this unbalanced perspective by saying America is a much more important country, the global hegemon, the dominant superpower.
That is simply no longer the case. China is far bigger in population, is roughly the same or bigger in economic size (by PPP), is more important in trade for most nations, in many ways it is more potent than the USA, and global trends will only increase this shift to Asia.
Yet we STILL wank on about America. I think it's because journalists are a bit lazy, they can go to America and speak English, and it's easy to report, and make it colourful, and criticizing America makes European liberals feel good, and so on.
Criticizing China is harder, practically, for so many reasons, and reporting is more difficult, so better and easier to just ignore it. This is a grave failure.
Criticising China also risks (1) accusations of racism / Sinophobia (2) screwing up any chance in the future of access to China and (3) possibly p1ssing off your owners if they do business in China
Yes. It is basic cowardice, avarice, and self-preservation which prevents proper journalism.
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
There was no intention to kill the woman, so it wouldn't be murder. Furthermore, the officers were under fire, and therefore are rightly given lattitude in how their actions are judged.
But ultimately, the fault is with US policing, which emphasises the idea the the police are at war.
No, I think the ultimate fault is America's revolutionary history, and the 2nd Amendment.
America is an armed state with a populace which is uniquely happy to own, carry and use guns, and let their fellow citizens do the same.
As a result, American police are acutely aware that they might be shot dead in any random moment, unlike almost any other police force worldwide, so they resort to violence much sooner. Of course there are issues with terrible training and embedded racism, but these are somewhat ancillary to the central issue.
Guns.
I'm sorry, but that's insufficient.
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
But it all stems from America's love affair with Revolution and guns, the armed militia ready to take on the overmighty state.
It's in America's DNA (as, tragically, is racism, via the slave trade and Deep South culture)
Countries are like personae, forever influenced by early events. France is a fascinating example: because of its own Revolutionary history, it has a tradition of vibrant and sometimes volatile rebellion (strikes, 1968, Gilets Jaunes) which makes it a a hard country to reform, except by massive rupture.
Germany cannot escape Hitler. Britain - or England - cannot stop marvelling at itself in the mirror that is the Blitz, and a long history of peace and non-conquest-by-others, which leads to exceptionalism.And Brexit.
I give American police a lot of slack, because they are faced with people with guns. And they are under enormous stresses, and they're scared. And people make mistakes when they're scared.
It's also worth remembering that, while the US murder rate peaked in the mid-1980s, the number of people killed by the police has just kept on rising and rising and rising.
Yes, that's fair. There are sad problems. I do not deny it. I am just bewildered as to why Europeans seem to obsess over the minutiae of policing in America whereas China is actually going full on genocide, and no one really speaks of it.
Moreover, you could once - just about - have justified this unbalanced perspective by saying America is a much more important country, the global hegemon, the dominant superpower.
That is simply no longer the case. China is far bigger in population, is roughly the same or bigger in economic size (by PPP), is more important in trade for most nations, in many ways it is more potent than the USA, and global trends will only increase this shift to Asia.
Yet we STILL wank on about America. I think it's because journalists are a bit lazy, they can go to America and speak English, and it's easy to report, and make it colourful, and criticizing America makes European liberals feel good, and so on.
Criticizing China is harder, practically, for so many reasons, and reporting is more difficult, so better and easier to just ignore it. This is a grave failure.
Criticising China also risks (1) accusations of racism / Sinophobia (2) screwing up any chance in the future of access to China and (3) possibly p1ssing off your owners if they do business in China
Yes. It is basic cowardice, avarice, and self-preservation which prevents proper journalism.
Ironically Trump has been prepared to take on China over the 'China virus' and imposing tariffs on their exports to the USA.
Obama-Biden did very little to stand up to China.
India too has recently been in conflict with China at their border
So the Tories would be 4 short of a majority and the DUP would hold the balance of power again as they did after 2017.
Therefore holding this vote to remove the border in the Irish Sea is clearly an attempt by Boris to win over the DUP if he needs them after the next election, if Parliament votes down amending the WA he can tell them he tried but MPs decided otherwise
Don't be a numpty. What's the point of trying to bribe minor parties now on the off-chance that a poll taken 3.5 years out correctly predicts the size of the majority?
The Tories have shown they are perfectly capable of bribing minor parties over the wekkend after the GE.
Bribery for the DUP is not enough as May and Boris found out, they also want clear evidence of effort not to have any distinction between NI and GB in terms of customs arrangements
Hmmm. I am sure they'll have Boris's word - what more could they want?
Wouldn't it be amusing though if 50 Tory MPs rebelled but the internal market bill still passed, yet only thanks to the votes of the DUP
How many American TV shows do you want? American movies? How many American books do you read? How many American songs do you listen to?
Same questions for China.
How many people in the UK watch on a regular basis a show like Law & Order or an equivalent American drama? How many watch a Chinese equivalent?
We are far more interested and involved in what happens in America. For good or bad.
It is for bad.
It's obviously easier to watch American movies than Chinese ones because of the language (and presumably cultural overlap too, though if Netflix offered a few subtitlted Chinese movies it'd be interesting to test that). I'm not sure that most Brits read many American books. But that's not the point.
The things is that our very familiarity with the US makes its problems instantly comprehensible, and it seems to many of us that Trump is the worst leader of any major country in the modern world, so his struggle to hold on is fascinating theatre and therefore the basis for good journalism. Always remember that journalism is at heart an entertainment industry - the supply of news, sadly, has long been only a secondary objective.
Is Xi struggling to hold on? Few of us know,, as we don't follow it in detail and it's largely secretive anyway. If his position was being undermined by someone we've not heard of, that would be important and it would interest us politics nerds, but you can't expect journalists to write just for us.
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
There was no intention to kill the woman, so it wouldn't be murder. Furthermore, the officers were under fire, and therefore are rightly given lattitude in how their actions are judged.
But ultimately, the fault is with US policing, which emphasises the idea the the police are at war.
No, I think the ultimate fault is America's revolutionary history, and the 2nd Amendment.
America is an armed state with a populace which is uniquely happy to own, carry and use guns, and let their fellow citizens do the same.
As a result, American police are acutely aware that they might be shot dead in any random moment, unlike almost any other police force worldwide, so they resort to violence much sooner. Of course there are issues with terrible training and embedded racism, but these are somewhat ancillary to the central issue.
Guns.
I'm sorry, but that's insufficient.
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
But it all stems from America's love affair with Revolution and guns, the armed militia ready to take on the overmighty state.
It's in America's DNA (as, tragically, is racism, via the slave trade and Deep South culture)
Countries are like personae, forever influenced by early events. France is a fascinating example: because of its own Revolutionary history, it has a tradition of vibrant and sometimes volatile rebellion (strikes, 1968, Gilets Jaunes) which makes it a a hard country to reform, except by massive rupture.
Germany cannot escape Hitler. Britain - or England - cannot stop marvelling at itself in the mirror that is the Blitz, and a long history of peace and non-conquest-by-others, which leads to exceptionalism.And Brexit.
I give American police a lot of slack, because they are faced with people with guns. And they are under enormous stresses, and they're scared. And people make mistakes when they're scared.
It's also worth remembering that, while the US murder rate peaked in the mid-1980s, the number of people killed by the police has just kept on rising and rising and rising.
Yes, that's fair. There are sad problems. I do not deny it. I am just bewildered as to why Europeans seem to obsess over the minutiae of policing in America whereas China is actually going full on genocide, and no one really speaks of it.
How many American TV shows do you want? American movies? How many American books do you read? How many American songs do you listen to?
Same questions for China.
How many people in the UK watch on a regular basis a show like Law & Order or an equivalent American drama? How many watch a Chinese equivalent?
We are far more interested and involved in what happens in America. For good or bad.
It is for bad.
For the record, I read The Three Body Problem trilogy this year. It was good, but not amazing.
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
There was no intention to kill the woman, so it wouldn't be murder. Furthermore, the officers were under fire, and therefore are rightly given lattitude in how their actions are judged.
But ultimately, the fault is with US policing, which emphasises the idea the the police are at war.
No, I think the ultimate fault is America's revolutionary history, and the 2nd Amendment.
America is an armed state with a populace which is uniquely happy to own, carry and use guns, and let their fellow citizens do the same.
As a result, American police are acutely aware that they might be shot dead in any random moment, unlike almost any other police force worldwide, so they resort to violence much sooner. Of course there are issues with terrible training and embedded racism, but these are somewhat ancillary to the central issue.
Guns.
I'm sorry, but that's insufficient.
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
But it all stems from America's love affair with Revolution and guns, the armed militia ready to take on the overmighty state.
It's in America's DNA (as, tragically, is racism, via the slave trade and Deep South culture)
Countries are like personae, forever influenced by early events. France is a fascinating example: because of its own Revolutionary history, it has a tradition of vibrant and sometimes volatile rebellion (strikes, 1968, Gilets Jaunes) which makes it a a hard country to reform, except by massive rupture.
Germany cannot escape Hitler. Britain - or England - cannot stop marvelling at itself in the mirror that is the Blitz, and a long history of peace and non-conquest-by-others, which leads to exceptionalism.And Brexit.
I give American police a lot of slack, because they are faced with people with guns. And they are under enormous stresses, and they're scared. And people make mistakes when they're scared.
It's also worth remembering that, while the US murder rate peaked in the mid-1980s, the number of people killed by the police has just kept on rising and rising and rising.
Yes, that's fair. There are sad problems. I do not deny it. I am just bewildered as to why Europeans seem to obsess over the minutiae of policing in America whereas China is actually going full on genocide, and no one really speaks of it.
Moreover, you could once - just about - have justified this unbalanced perspective by saying America is a much more important country, the global hegemon, the dominant superpower.
That is simply no longer the case. China is far bigger in population, is roughly the same or bigger in economic size (by PPP), is more important in trade for most nations, in many ways it is more potent than the USA, and global trends will only increase this shift to Asia.
Yet we STILL wank on about America. I think it's because journalists are a bit lazy, they can go to America and speak English, and it's easy to report, and make it colourful, and criticizing America makes European liberals feel good, and so on.
Criticizing China is harder, practically, for so many reasons, and reporting is more difficult, so better and easier to just ignore it. This is a grave failure.
Criticising China also risks (1) accusations of racism / Sinophobia (2) screwing up any chance in the future of access to China and (3) possibly p1ssing off your owners if they do business in China
Yes. It is basic cowardice, avarice, and self-preservation which prevents proper journalism.
Ironically Trump has been prepared to take on China over the 'China virus' and imposing tariffs on their exports to the USA.
Obama-Biden did very little to stand up to China.
India too has recently been in conflict with China at their border
That's true and not true.
Obama was happy to sail warships down the Formosa Straight than Trump is. I suspect the Taiwanese felt more comfortable when Obama was in the White House.
Trump, on the other hand, was quicker to mete out sanctions. (Albeit he removed a lot of them when people weren't looking.)
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
There was no intention to kill the woman, so it wouldn't be murder. Furthermore, the officers were under fire, and therefore are rightly given lattitude in how their actions are judged.
But ultimately, the fault is with US policing, which emphasises the idea the the police are at war.
No, I think the ultimate fault is America's revolutionary history, and the 2nd Amendment.
America is an armed state with a populace which is uniquely happy to own, carry and use guns, and let their fellow citizens do the same.
As a result, American police are acutely aware that they might be shot dead in any random moment, unlike almost any other police force worldwide, so they resort to violence much sooner. Of course there are issues with terrible training and embedded racism, but these are somewhat ancillary to the central issue.
Guns.
I'm sorry, but that's insufficient.
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
But it all stems from America's love affair with Revolution and guns, the armed militia ready to take on the overmighty state.
It's in America's DNA (as, tragically, is racism, via the slave trade and Deep South culture)
Countries are like personae, forever influenced by early events. France is a fascinating example: because of its own Revolutionary history, it has a tradition of vibrant and sometimes volatile rebellion (strikes, 1968, Gilets Jaunes) which makes it a a hard country to reform, except by massive rupture.
Germany cannot escape Hitler. Britain - or England - cannot stop marvelling at itself in the mirror that is the Blitz, and a long history of peace and non-conquest-by-others, which leads to exceptionalism.And Brexit.
I give American police a lot of slack, because they are faced with people with guns. And they are under enormous stresses, and they're scared. And people make mistakes when they're scared.
It's also worth remembering that, while the US murder rate peaked in the mid-1980s, the number of people killed by the police has just kept on rising and rising and rising.
Yes, that's fair. There are sad problems. I do not deny it. I am just bewildered as to why Europeans seem to obsess over the minutiae of policing in America whereas China is actually going full on genocide, and no one really speaks of it.
Moreover, you could once - just about - have justified this unbalanced perspective by saying America is a much more important country, the global hegemon, the dominant superpower.
That is simply no longer the case. China is far bigger in population, is roughly the same or bigger in economic size (by PPP), is more important in trade for most nations, in many ways it is more potent than the USA, and global trends will only increase this shift to Asia.
Yet we STILL wank on about America. I think it's because journalists are a bit lazy, they can go to America and speak English, and it's easy to report, and make it colourful, and criticizing America makes European liberals feel good, and so on.
Criticizing China is harder, practically, for so many reasons, and reporting is more difficult, so better and easier to just ignore it. This is a grave failure.
Criticising China also risks (1) accusations of racism / Sinophobia (2) screwing up any chance in the future of access to China and (3) possibly p1ssing off your owners if they do business in China
It's also economics.
Articles criticizing China don't generate as many Likes and Shares as those criticizing America.
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
There was no intention to kill the woman, so it wouldn't be murder. Furthermore, the officers were under fire, and therefore are rightly given lattitude in how their actions are judged.
But ultimately, the fault is with US policing, which emphasises the idea the the police are at war.
No, I think the ultimate fault is America's revolutionary history, and the 2nd Amendment.
America is an armed state with a populace which is uniquely happy to own, carry and use guns, and let their fellow citizens do the same.
As a result, American police are acutely aware that they might be shot dead in any random moment, unlike almost any other police force worldwide, so they resort to violence much sooner. Of course there are issues with terrible training and embedded racism, but these are somewhat ancillary to the central issue.
Guns.
I'm sorry, but that's insufficient.
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
But it all stems from America's love affair with Revolution and guns, the armed militia ready to take on the overmighty state.
It's in America's DNA (as, tragically, is racism, via the slave trade and Deep South culture)
Countries are like personae, forever influenced by early events. France is a fascinating example: because of its own Revolutionary history, it has a tradition of vibrant and sometimes volatile rebellion (strikes, 1968, Gilets Jaunes) which makes it a a hard country to reform, except by massive rupture.
Germany cannot escape Hitler. Britain - or England - cannot stop marvelling at itself in the mirror that is the Blitz, and a long history of peace and non-conquest-by-others, which leads to exceptionalism.And Brexit.
I give American police a lot of slack, because they are faced with people with guns. And they are under enormous stresses, and they're scared. And people make mistakes when they're scared.
It's also worth remembering that, while the US murder rate peaked in the mid-1980s, the number of people killed by the police has just kept on rising and rising and rising.
Yes, that's fair. There are sad problems. I do not deny it. I am just bewildered as to why Europeans seem to obsess over the minutiae of policing in America whereas China is actually going full on genocide, and no one really speaks of it.
Moreover, you could once - just about - have justified this unbalanced perspective by saying America is a much more important country, the global hegemon, the dominant superpower.
That is simply no longer the case. China is far bigger in population, is roughly the same or bigger in economic size (by PPP), is more important in trade for most nations, in many ways it is more potent than the USA, and global trends will only increase this shift to Asia.
Yet we STILL wank on about America. I think it's because journalists are a bit lazy, they can go to America and speak English, and it's easy to report, and make it colourful, and criticizing America makes European liberals feel good, and so on.
Criticizing China is harder, practically, for so many reasons, and reporting is more difficult, so better and easier to just ignore it. This is a grave failure.
Criticising China also risks (1) accusations of racism / Sinophobia (2) screwing up any chance in the future of access to China and (3) possibly p1ssing off your owners if they do business in China
Yes. It is basic cowardice, avarice, and self-preservation which prevents proper journalism.
Not a good look just after two LA Deputies were shot in an ambush.
However, I doubt it will hurt Hamilton too much. F1 fans are well off middle class types who are unlikely to put their heads above the parapet by criticising someone who supports BLM.
To be fair to Hamilton, he is genuinely talented unlike Colin Kopernick who literally was going nowhere until wokedom propelled him to fame and fortune.
Why is it not a good look?
He's not saying "F**k the Police" or "ACAB" etc - he's saying to arrest killers.
If arresting killers is controversial we've got a long way to go yet.
This is the case where the police were enacting a search warrant. They knocked the hinges off the door and a man inside immediately fired on officers. The police then returned fire and this woman was killed.
So they should be arrested.
They didn't knock on the door or identify themselves in any reasonable way. Armed intruders burst through the door, people are entitled to self-defence. If the Police don't knock on the door or identify themselves then how is anyone at home supposed to know who has burst through the door?
It is the people at the home who have the right to shoot not the Police who killed someone in her bed who burst through the door without knocking on the door.
The law allows them to conduct no knock warrants.
You can say well that's a terrible policy / law. IMO so is the second amendment.
The underlying problem in the US is civilians are armed, so criminals are definitely armed, so the police need to be armed and have to presume they will face criminals who are armed and willing to fire on them.
So how about surrounding the property and knocking on the door? Is a start.
Or how about only shooting if they can see who is shooting at them and not shooting into the dark and killing an unarmed person?
The details of the case aren't as black and white as you're making out. It was a no knock warrant, the suspect fired at officers, officers fired back blind in self defence and very sadly a woman died. It is a depressing case study on everything that's wrong with American policing. No one is at fault and the reason the officers haven't been arrested is because they fired back in self defence, the chances of conviction are basically zero, it would be a show trial.
There was no intention to kill the woman, so it wouldn't be murder. Furthermore, the officers were under fire, and therefore are rightly given lattitude in how their actions are judged.
But ultimately, the fault is with US policing, which emphasises the idea the the police are at war.
No, I think the ultimate fault is America's revolutionary history, and the 2nd Amendment.
America is an armed state with a populace which is uniquely happy to own, carry and use guns, and let their fellow citizens do the same.
As a result, American police are acutely aware that they might be shot dead in any random moment, unlike almost any other police force worldwide, so they resort to violence much sooner. Of course there are issues with terrible training and embedded racism, but these are somewhat ancillary to the central issue.
Guns.
I'm sorry, but that's insufficient.
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
But it all stems from America's love affair with Revolution and guns, the armed militia ready to take on the overmighty state.
It's in America's DNA (as, tragically, is racism, via the slave trade and Deep South culture)
Countries are like personae, forever influenced by early events. France is a fascinating example: because of its own Revolutionary history, it has a tradition of vibrant and sometimes volatile rebellion (strikes, 1968, Gilets Jaunes) which makes it a a hard country to reform, except by massive rupture.
Germany cannot escape Hitler. Britain - or England - cannot stop marvelling at itself in the mirror that is the Blitz, and a long history of peace and non-conquest-by-others, which leads to exceptionalism.And Brexit.
I give American police a lot of slack, because they are faced with people with guns. And they are under enormous stresses, and they're scared. And people make mistakes when they're scared.
It's also worth remembering that, while the US murder rate peaked in the mid-1980s, the number of people killed by the police has just kept on rising and rising and rising.
Yes, that's fair. There are sad problems. I do not deny it. I am just bewildered as to why Europeans seem to obsess over the minutiae of policing in America whereas China is actually going full on genocide, and no one really speaks of it.
How many American TV shows do you want? American movies? How many American books do you read? How many American songs do you listen to?
Same questions for China.
How many people in the UK watch on a regular basis a show like Law & Order or an equivalent American drama? How many watch a Chinese equivalent?
We are far more interested and involved in what happens in America. For good or bad.
It is for bad.
For the record, I read The Three Body Problem trilogy this year. It was good, but not amazing.
It is an odd trilogy. I wondered why the 2nd book was so different in tone from the first and then I realised that a different translator had been used. I did not like the 3rd book at all - it seemed all over the place and I never managed to finish it.
Sensible Tories boggle that their government would trash Britain’s reputation as a trustworthy international partner, wreck our trade and security relations with our closest neighbours and risk the prospects of many existing British businesses so that Number 10’s self-appointed genius can fantasise that he is a cross between Elon Musk, Sergey Brin and Masayoshi Son while splashing taxpayers’ money at any “moonshot” idea that launches off the top of his head. This is a most surreal place for the Conservative party to have got to.
When I put in a call to one senior Tory, our conversation began with him asking: “Covid or Brexit? Which shitshow do you want to talk about?”
There are plenty of skilled diplomats and civil servants working for the British government with the connections and expertise to have spotted how badly this reckless gambit would backfire, but the behaviour of Number 10 deters them from offering candid advice. As one senior Tory puts it: “The climate of fear in Whitehall that they (Johnson and Cummings) have created means that officials do not rush to warn them when they are about to make a mistake.”
This is all true, but at the last election the choice was between this lot and Prime Minister Corbyn. Unless that is taken into account politics won't make sense. Two unappointable people were put up as the only possible PMs. Can anyone suggest what the poor old voter should have done?
Only vote for parties that will change the electoral system.
I find the argument that some of these historical genius should have known better for their out of date views, because well they were a genius, rather odd.
Not only must they have confirmed to a perfectly virtuous life (by modern standards), they must have also been able to see the future and know what they had wrong in advance.
e.g. Considering that black Africans were intellectually inferior to white Europeans, when at the time virtually nobody had visited Africa, let alone have any empirical evidence. Rather it is based on hearsay about things like level of development in those civilisations and what was considered "backward" beliefs they had in comparison to the enlightened European civilisation.
But of course our own civilisation 200 years ago is massively backward in their beliefs of how the world works in every subject from today. And in 200 years will be looked back on what idiots we were today.
There is also the flawed assumption that history has a particular poltical or ethical direction. That's really not true. It's entirely plausible that some of the "right on" things of today will become unacceptable once more in the future, and vice versa.
Interesting comment. Could be right but I'm not sure. Need to think about it.
Can you or anybody else give a few examples of something (non trivial) that used to be socially acceptable but is now unacceptable - e.g. drink driving - that we can envisage becoming acceptable again in the foreseeable future?
Loads of things to do with drug usage and sex have flip and flopped between what is acceptable, and wouldn't be surprised if they continue to do so.
Drugs and sex? Ok. But specifically something that was acceptable, is now unacceptable, but is likely to become acceptable again - not much is springing to mind.
Are you phrasing it in that way to rule out the opposite? Abortion seems the most likely to reverse simply because it is a fundamental conflict of rights.
Not only that, but it's one where modern science and medicine are making it increasingly obvious that in particular later term abortions are very wrong. Given the age at which premature babies regularly survive is now less than the current abortion limit, its remarkable that the limit (in a UK context) has not already been moved back considerably.
At some future date, its not unthinkable that it will be possible to support a baby outside the womb from a fertilised egg to "birth". At that point, there is no rights based argument left for abortion.
Comments
Take "swatting".
If the police think that there is a hostage being held in a house they should surround it and starve the perpetrator out.
What they should not do is burst in (without discovering if it was a hoax ahead of time) guns firing, and kill an innocent person. Whether the hostage situation was real or not, it doesn't seem that bursting in with a SWAT team is the right first response.
Breonna Taylor did not receive any medical attention until 20 minutes after being shot.
All I see is more of the same, that the UK/JPN agreed deal is different to the UK/EU negotiating position.
There's a difference between a deal and a negotiating position. Always has been.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=42&LAB=39&LIB=5&Brexit=1&Green=4&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=20.5&SCOTLAB=17.4&SCOTLIB=5.5&SCOTBrexit=1.1&SCOTGreen=1.1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=53.5&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019
So the Tories would be 4 short of a majority and the DUP would hold the balance of power again as they did after 2017.
Therefore holding this vote to remove the border in the Irish Sea is clearly an attempt by Boris to win over the DUP if he needs them after the next election, if Parliament votes down amending the WA he can tell them he tried but MPs decided otherwise
It's in America's DNA (as, tragically, is racism, via the slave trade and Deep South culture)
Countries are like personae, forever influenced by early events. France is a fascinating example: because of its own Revolutionary history, it has a tradition of vibrant and sometimes volatile rebellion (strikes, 1968, Gilets Jaunes) which makes it a a hard country to reform, except by massive rupture.
Germany cannot escape Hitler. Britain - or England - cannot stop marvelling at itself in the mirror that is the Blitz, and a long history of peace and non-conquest-by-others, which leads to exceptionalism.And Brexit.
The Tories have shown they are perfectly capable of bribing minor parties over the wekkend after the GE.
Yet we focus on this American crap like it is happening in our back gardens. It is quite odd, and it warps our politics and media in a bad and weird way.
If someone has been shot then getting medical attention should be a priority, but putting them in handcuffs and ignoring the fact someone is dying seems to be routine instead.
But it's also worth reading these two articles:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/05/07/the-spy-who-came-home
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/08/warrior-cop-class-dave-grossman-killology.html
It's also worth remembering that, while the US murder rate peaked in the mid-1980s, the number of people killed by the police has just kept on rising and rising and rising.
Moreover, you could once - just about - have justified this unbalanced perspective by saying America is a much more important country, the global hegemon, the dominant superpower.
That is simply no longer the case. China is far bigger in population, is roughly the same or bigger in economic size (by PPP), is more important in trade for most nations, in many ways it is more potent than the USA, and global trends will only increase this shift to Asia.
Yet we STILL wank on about America. I think it's because journalists are a bit lazy, they can go to America and speak English, and it's easy to report, and make it colourful, and criticizing America makes European liberals feel good, and so on.
Criticizing China is harder, practically, for so many reasons, and reporting is more difficult, so better and easier to just ignore it. This is a grave failure.
Same questions for China.
How many people in the UK watch on a regular basis a show like Law & Order or an equivalent American drama? How many watch a Chinese equivalent?
We are far more interested and involved in what happens in America. For good or bad.
Early indications suggest the UK may avoid a major spike in deaths as young people drive new infections
By Sarah Newey"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/hopes-flicker-britains-second-wave-will-see-lower-death-rate/
We know that China is an evil totalitarian dictatorship. Oppression of its own people is what we expect. The police in a free Republic do not long kill their own citizens in such numbers as the police in the US. It's not a stable state of affairs. The people will either cease being free, or they will restrain the police.
It is possible you will get fined tomorrow for something which has not even yet been written down, let alone debated in parliament.
"We know that Nazi Germany is a racist totalitarian dictatorship. Extermination of the Jews is what we expect. So it's boring and let's look at police SWAT teams in LA instead and blah blah"
No. Germany IS the story.. Or should be.
https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2020/09/peter-hitchens-how-the-government-is-wading-into-the-swamp-of-despotism-one-muzzle-at-a-time.html
Obama-Biden did very little to stand up to China.
India too has recently been in conflict with China at their border
The things is that our very familiarity with the US makes its problems instantly comprehensible, and it seems to many of us that Trump is the worst leader of any major country in the modern world, so his struggle to hold on is fascinating theatre and therefore the basis for good journalism. Always remember that journalism is at heart an entertainment industry - the supply of news, sadly, has long been only a secondary objective.
Is Xi struggling to hold on? Few of us know,, as we don't follow it in detail and it's largely secretive anyway. If his position was being undermined by someone we've not heard of, that would be important and it would interest us politics nerds, but you can't expect journalists to write just for us.
Obama was happy to sail warships down the Formosa Straight than Trump is. I suspect the Taiwanese felt more comfortable when Obama was in the White House.
Trump, on the other hand, was quicker to mete out sanctions. (Albeit he removed a lot of them when people weren't looking.)
Articles criticizing China don't generate as many Likes and Shares as those criticizing America.
The public aren't that interested though.
This thread is now breaching the Mingling directive and must not be used
At some future date, its not unthinkable that it will be possible to support a baby outside the womb from a fertilised egg to "birth". At that point, there is no rights based argument left for abortion.