Alright, well, I’m gonna ignore the passive aggression, mostly because it doesn’t contribute to the conversation and is only damaging to an attempt at civility.
My point, was that police aren’t the only danger, and that plenty of others KILL innocent protestors. I didn’t even include harming other protestors. Like I said in my other comments to you and to others, but you’ve clearly misunderstood that point based on the other comments you’ve made to me, so I’ll reiterate here.
Super clearly:
“Police are undoubetdly part of, if not the majority of the problem. However, we face plenty of other threats from domestic and foreign terrorists in the state. I acknowledge that terrorism in the US has often been used as a scape goat (namely to invade the wrong fucking country - Afghanistan). However, I am identifying the issue of: How do we prevent these attacks and respond w/o the need for police. Which IS NOT implying that I think the police are the answer, but a call to constructive action to solve the problem w/o the need to OVER rely on the police as some kind of protector force. Which we BOTH agree, they are not.”
Get it?
I don’t know how many more times I can say that I believe the ACAB movement before it finally sets in for you. The police are not the only fucking problem we face. And to say otherwise is dangerous and misleading.
The point is the risk of heavy police presence at a protest is not worth the “protection” they do or don’t offer.
Ban protests if you really want to as a nation but stop this “you totally can protest, it is your right! Oh watch out for the tear gas” crap.
I don’t know how many more times I can say that I believe the ACAB movement before it finally sets in for you. The police are not the only fucking problem we face. And to say otherwise is dangerous and misleading.
OK, I will spell it out.
THE HEAVY POLICE PRESENCE AT PROTESTS ARE THE PROBLEM.
And if you just read the next several walls of text you can see that it is not even close.
Alright, well, I’m gonna ignore the passive aggression, mostly because it doesn’t contribute to the conversation and is only damaging to an attempt at civility.
My point, was that police aren’t the only danger, and that plenty of others KILL innocent protestors. I didn’t even include harming other protestors. Like I said in my other comments to you and to others, but you’ve clearly misunderstood that point based on the other comments you’ve made to me, so I’ll reiterate here.
Super clearly:
“Police are undoubetdly part of, if not the majority of the problem. However, we face plenty of other threats from domestic and foreign terrorists in the state. I acknowledge that terrorism in the US has often been used as a scape goat (namely to invade the wrong fucking country - Afghanistan). However, I am identifying the issue of: How do we prevent these attacks and respond w/o the need for police. Which IS NOT implying that I think the police are the answer, but a call to constructive action to solve the problem w/o the need to OVER rely on the police as some kind of protector force. Which we BOTH agree, they are not.”
Get it?
I don’t know how many more times I can say that I believe the ACAB movement before it finally sets in for you. The police are not the only fucking problem we face. And to say otherwise is dangerous and misleading.
The point is the risk of heavy police presence at a protest is not worth the “protection” they do or don’t offer.
Ban protests if you really want to as a nation but stop this “you totally can protest, it is your right! Oh watch out for the tear gas” crap.
OK, I will spell it out.
THE HEAVY POLICE PRESENCE AT PROTESTS ARE THE PROBLEM.
And if you just read the next several walls of text you can see that it is not even close.