News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
And at large protests...
This is what allies are for.
This is what guns are for.
Both can be true. But only if you have enough people in either case.
If you want for the police to get an excuse to mow you down with a tank that is. They so wish some of you have guns so they can kill you and have a ready and ironclad excuse
It's not like they're above shooting unarmed protestors. Just compare how cops dealt with cop city with the Bundy occupation.
But that's the thing. Shooting unarmed protestors is fucked up even by their standards, they aren't above it, but they have to hide it and not everyone is having a good time about it, so there is tension and hesitation.
Shooting armed protestors is why they joined in the first place, it's what they dream of, it's everything that a cop ever wanted.
And a big portion of population that is not OK with the first scenario is also dreaming of the second one.
All they need is one agent provocateur for that, then.
One agent in a crowd of unarmed people will not cause that effect. But if everyone is on edge and carrying a gun, then yes, one will be enough to cause full blown massacre.
It will if police are present and are looking for an excuse to violently quash protest.
I just want you to recognise the difference between "police mows down a crowd of unarmed protesters" and "police crushed armed insurrection in an intense shootout".
It just takes one provocateur to make that difference. The number of actual firearms at the protest doesn't matter as long as there's one, which the provocateur can bring.
No, it's demonstrably not true. Or do you think nobody ever does protest around the world and we can't study this shit?
Hell, there was the exact same situation in Ukraine in 2014, it's one of the best documented revolutions of the current era. Putin's cronies tried to do provocaterur shit, and shot back, and there was so much backlash to it from everywhere, this ultimately brought them defeat.
I once again want you to recognise the difference between “police mows down a crowd of unarmed protesters” and “police crushed armed insurrection in an intense shootout”, but this time I want you to do it for real, not just knee-jerking canned response.
When the police call the latter the former, you will believe them.
There's a difference in reality, yes. But in most of the US, whatever the pigs say is believed immediately and without question.
Are you aware of the existence of a videocamera? It's a cool new thing on the block
And they make no difference. People see what they already want to see, even in the face of video evidence. Have you not heard "Yeah, but what happened before the cameras were rolling" or "he was clearly reaching for the cop's gun/his waistband" or "just comply and this won't happen!"? Because if you haven't, you should ask yourself whose side you've been taking in discussions regarding police misconduct.
Police do not have freedom to easily arrest people at large protests. This whole protest was breaking the law at various points and the article didn't even know if anyone has been arrested.