Having discretion about which laws to enforce gives too much power to law enforcement, and allows unjust laws to stay on the books.
For what it’s worth, I personally agree with @TAFNAC on the amount of discretion given to DA’s. It’s too much. It’s actually one of the issues I’ve seen addressed in the BLM movement, because that discretion can obviously be used for nefarious reasons against black people (or against any group or person really). On the topic of the protestors, one article I saw said that the Manhattan DA’s office typically drops curfew charges after 6 months if the accused stays out of trouble during that time. From what I can tell, the DA is dropping those charges without the 6 month period. It’s different, but not drastically different, and not a serious crime or charge in either case. I saw there were over 1600 arrests of protestors in Manhattan over the past week, maybe he just doesn’t want his department to have to deal with all that paperwork?
Not justice at all. Here's the flip argument. How you gonna purge racists cops and fascist drones in most depts? You can't. Nothing that's been tried internally ever works. This may be the only way. Force them to resign. Real police will get regular jobs or serve otherwise. Racists and tyrants will find other outfits to join where they can openly display their more canine natures. You can look at how police react and see whose a servant of the people and whose a salaried dog on some fat cats leash.
I disagree. Your argument is the same Jesuit argument. The...You can't survive without us because we keep you safe from witches and demons argument. And that's why the devil needs an advocate. And why he gets good deals.
@blazer5 @rube @fsudog21 @TAFNAC @BlueMouse "I am dropping all charges for RIOTING that resulted from the protests in Fort Worth" Call the original report fake news for being a degree off, fine--but Manhattan got the ball rolling by not charging for illegal assembly based on political ideology, and now Fort Worth is dropping chargers for RIOTING. Destruction of property.
I'm sure the businesses that had their property destroyed appreciate that. I anxiously await our new world of insurance company sponsored private security...
Some do, some dont. Most poeple buy all the insurance you can get. How carefully does your doctor read over the literature on the pills the drug supplier bribed him to push on you if he has no fear of you beating him in righteous anger or at the very least suing him when he is protected by millions of dollars worth of malpractice insurance? Not very much. For this and many other more obvious reasons insurance is criminal. Selling security is and has always been the oldest confidence game known to man. It is the original religion. Some only cary the insurance required by law. Others will take advantage of any opportunity. Law is paper. As long as your papers are in order you are lawful. So you only need to have insurance for as long as you need to procure paperwork. And you only need to call an agent until you get into an accident. They have no problem setting your start date retroactively. The agent wants his commision. That is all his minds eye can see. He is a slave to the ancient regime and will corrupt himself without realizing it upon every opportunity. It is the nature of the roman modal of capitalism. Wait im going on a tangent. Point is that I believe insurance to be an attack, eastern style. And police that act as enforcers of property rights and the status quo/state and not protectors of the common man are hopetobe petty tyrants with a badge that can can be easily turned into nazi zombis that will march and shoot and kill like a plague of faceless nameless drones. What you call private security I call Schutzstaffel. Hall monitors who turn their olive drab uniforms for crimson red coats. Which you can already see on our streets. The department of prisons has sent their best and brightest to the streets as if citizens are inmates. Wearing military uniforms but without any form of identification as to who they are or what organization they represent. And refusing to answer questions as to who sent them or what their name and rank is. If a soldier fails to identify himself and is not wearing any markings then they are to be considered enemy combatants. Terrorists. The paperwork says that a dog must have proof of ownership. A soldier is either an avenging angel or he is a hellhound. There is no try.
I see what they're trying to do, but man this sets a dangerous little precedent in this political climate. And how does this affect insurance claims? Bigger picture though, hopefully this is followed by actual reform, otherwise it's just an empty gesture.
Playing around with the law in this (or any) fashion is no way to gesture regardless. I have to plead ignorance for not understanding how this is allowed to occur. People are having enough problems with insurance claims and I'm assuming loss of revenue (raided inventory and having to shut down for days) is not covered. Idk.
You liked Mouses's initial comment on this topic and thought you might be interested in how the story is developing.
In addition to removed and/or censored movies, there is now a call to rename military bases. https://www.npr.org/2020/06/10/8734...me-army-bases-that-honor-confederate-officers “Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”