What’s so hard about this
 

1) That cop killed George Floyd, choked him out and listened to him die for 9 minutes. He should be arrested and tried for murder (probably 2nd degree)

2) The other cops there just let it happen, they should be arrested and tried for accessory to murder (if they are acquitted, at least they were subjected to the same due process many of us would be forced through with similar circumstances)

3) People should be allowed to protest the injustice of the above two items not having happened yet

4) People who are using the ongoing protests as cover to riot and loot should also be arrested and tried for what they are doing

5) #4 is possible without squashing the lawful and justified protests in #3 using military style tactics on American civilians. Many cities during this time have shown that presenting a unified front between police and protestors serves to act as a more effective healing mechanism for the cause of the protests and is a good conversation starter around what change we actually need to see in this world to prevent this from happening again.

All of the above points are true. All of the above points contribute their own piece to the emotions everyone (And I mean everyone) is feeling right now. Highlighting or focusing on any of those points without addressing the others at the same time twists the ongoing situation pain, suffering, anger, frustration and violence in a manner that suits whatever narrative you’re trying to push other than the facts laid out above, which only tell the whole story when told together.

Open up your eyes to the fact that whatever media outlet you’ve been watching is only telling you half the story, no matter which one you’re watching.

Amen
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

#1 has already happened, he has been arrested and charged with murder.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I didn’t say it hadn’t, it was just one of the things that is true along with the others
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Arresting him is the easy part, convicting him is harder.

Let justice take its course. Burn down the public housing, these looters will be sleeping under highways.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The complicated item here is that justice seems to follow a different path in this case. If this had been 4 guys who did this to a cop, the conversation would be entirely different, and the other 3 wouldn't be free right now.

it’s supposed to be hard to convict people. it shouldn’t be easy. Keith Ellison is prosecuting, so you can’t say the victim won’t be represented in the courtroom.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

...and the news wouldn't be bombarding us with it 24x7.

....And there would be no protests/riots
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What the question should be is why the other cops stood there and let it happen.
That they thought that was the correct or their only option.

That Chauvin had 18 complaints on file with his department, still had a job and thought he could get away with that on camera.
Ask an officer about reporting a fellow officer to internal affairs.
It doesn't happen, it's not part of the cop culture.
So abusive cops carry on as they have for years, get covered for and nobody says #^&#^&#^&#^&.

The news would be bombarding us with it, and you know that.

There wouldn’t be protests because there wouldn’t be a systemic issue of ignoring justice when things like that happen. Cops get hurt, their brothers and sisters hunt down the perp and beat the #^&#^&#^&#^& out of them before they get to a DA.

Saying that protests of racial killings leads to riots is diluting the fact that there is a problem in this country with the balance of justice. I don’t know if you’re combining the two intentionally or not, but it’s important that you know the impact of the way you choose to make your point. Whether you choose to recognize that and adjust how you simultanously recognize the obvious imbalance that justifies protests and systematic change AND express your justified outrage at the riots is entirely up to you.

But by conflating the two you ignore the existence of the underlying problem and become part of it.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No they wouldn't, we'd here about for a day or two and it would fade. Last year 48 officers were killed in the line of duty, 9 unarmed black men were. How many of those 48 officers did you hear CNN reporting on?

And stop putting words in my mouth, I never said that racial protests would lead to riots, I said their wouldn't be either of those in the situation You gave.

Right now Minneapolis has a problem with there PD that they need to take a hard deep look at.

You sure do make a lot of assumptions about what I think from two lines of text.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Fair point, I’m not thrilled with the way I made my point, a bit holiest-than-thou than I intended, apologize for that.

What I did want to point out is that the words we use are important, especially around a topic as charged and complex as the one playing out across the country eight now.

You said there would be no protests/riots. Which, as written, insinuates that they come together.

By saying them together you are suggesting, you’ve now confirmed unconsciously, that they go together. This was the point I was trying to make.

Saying “there would be no protests/riots” is a symbolically different way of referring to current events than saying “no one would be protesting it and providing cover for others to riot in their wake.”

I know it sounds like it’s splitting hairs, but the reality is that if we perpetuate the perception that rioting and looting are hand-in-hand with protesting, we are a part of the problem.

Again, wasn’t trying to put words in your mouth, was trying to provide an example of how the words you did use could be interpreted.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It was meant to be read as "and/or" I know they are mutually exclusive.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That is clear to me now, thanks for being understanding.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device