The protests were peaceful - until the police walked in in full military gear and started clubbing and shooting people on sight! Do you really expect protesters to do nothing and let the police brutality on full display pass during protests against police brutality? That's like calling someone out for hitting you and then getting hit twice more as a response. Do you really expect people to stay calm after that? Would you stay calm if somebody punched you in the face and then points a gun right at you?

You're kidding, right? Tell me you're kidding or trolling here.

Due to qualified immunity and police unions taking cities almost literally at ransom, even if someone tries to reprimand them, nothing comes to happen. They could gun down an entire family of innocent people without warning and get out free of charges.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0HNZYJskB0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wl6yXjdMlHI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0QoHvmeduo

Qualified immunity is the main reason why police is so brutal and trigger-happy in the US, since they are practically untouchable from law. The reason the officers who killed George Floyd were not getting protected by qualified immunity is because the outcry and protests were too great when that happened at first and thus courts changed course - but only on those officers.

The second reason is that police unions have cities pretty much by the balls in an iron grip and are actively fending off any reform attempts which would give more clarity or would make them actually even just somewhat accountable for their actions. Basically, Police hijacked their own unions and turned them into a syndicate to protect them from anything the law could throw at them. Counties that don't have police unions are more accountable as qualified immunity has it's limits, and as a result killed far less people than counties with police unions.

But these and many more are:

It's also a common mischaracterization that all or even the vast majority of Civil Rights Era protests - even in the name of leaders like MLK - were peaceful. Yet the fantasy gets used as an impossible standard to discredit and ignore the realities of mass protest since.

Not nearly often enough. Qualified immunity and the Blue Wall of Silence protect bad cops from accountability in far too many cases. It should not take mass protests and round the clock media coverage to hold police accountable for criminal acts. Why aren't Breonna Taylor's killers in jail? Philando Castile? Where is there any accountability for Chris David's attackers or the secret police abducting citizens without charge?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antifa_(United_States)

My definition was never part of the question in the first place.

See above.

You didn't name it, but you did share the video with unfounded claims. Fake news, in other words.

Again you put words in my mouth. I simply asked you to provide the evidence that your video did not, which you apparently cannot.

Sure. I hope you don't use his or other anecdotes to discredit an entire civil rights movement made up of millions of decentralized individuals, though.

I'm still waiting on:
What did Chris David do to warrant law enforcement trying to chop him down like a tree?
Why do you say the protesters are the only ones at fault here?
How do your videos justify police brutalizing citizens that had nothing to do with these acts and were either peacefully protesting, aiding others, walking down the sidewalk, or literally standing still and doing nothing?
How do they justify a bill to criminalize citizens' constitutional right to peacefully assemble - especially in a jurisdiction where they cannot even cite an example of the violence they are supposedly legislating against? (this one's particularly important as it's the entire source of our discussion)

If you want this discussion to continue, you're going to have to do better than this.

Have you actually tried discussing with any trump supporters? Surely trump supporters aren't all stupid snowflakes. Seems like you're saying they're unreasonable as an excuse for not bothering to discuss with them. If I knew any I'd love to know what their reasoning is, not as a catalyst to insult them but to better my understanding. I'm not saying you're wrong, there are definitely people like this, but they're not exclusive to any one side. Talking about extreme reactions like confusion/anger/violence, I doubt most of these rioters (calling it like it is) are trump supporters.

Shouldn't your goal be to convince trump supporters to change their minds? Calling them poorly educated for voting for someone you don't like isn't gonna do that. Perhaps you've already tried on numerous occasions to get people to at least understand your (hopefully logical) arguments, but failed and are now jaded, I know that feel lul. Still it is always worth trying. At worst, you gain understanding, see where they're coming from even if you don't agree. You can then use the knowledge to improve your arguments in the future.

"Steve Bannon charged with fraud in border wall fundraising"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MCJUm9FZyc

Why are so many of trumps people and ones around him all crooks?

Steve bannon looking at 7-9years in prison (max of 20).

All in all he just stole

Another Brick from the Wall

Minneapolis got burnt down. They did the same thing in Atlanta. They looted in LA. They ransacked Santa Monica. You can argue those are not really protesters but when you see someone from BLM calling for the Abolition of the United States and justifying looting as reparations, or people that claim to be part of Antifa calling for Political violence in Social Media, then please do not preach to us that these have been a peaceful activity.

I will not deny that there are peaceful protesters but once again, it sickens me that people are willing to defend these and justify these extremists despite the clear destruction and grief that they have caused. This is just as bad as defending ISIS's extremism or worse, denying the Holocaust.

I have to wonder: What is the point of this conversation?

Yes, some protesters were not peaceful.

Yes, some officers were not peaceful.

There shouldn't be any argument about either of those points, so what exactly are we arguing?

I posted a video about Tennessee trying to pass a bill that would criminalize peaceful assembly on government grounds. Zoom proceeded to claim that no one but the protesters were to blame, then went off on a tangent about violent protesters. I have asked him to support his claims and how they are relevant to the Tennessee bill.

As someone who has spent his life debating with religious people I'm a bit exhausted. That's what fandoms are at their core, religions. Beliefs that become either part of or their whole identity. As soon as it's attached to your identity it's basically impossible to convince people because it is really tough to reject yourself. If someone told me that I've been living a lie all my life and my whole being is invalid I'd probably have a very hard time accepting that too.

I tend to stay far away from zealots of any kind because I do have a realistic fear of their extreme reactions. It's especially tough with conservative zealots because violence is part of their identity and they feel legitimized by their peers to use it. I mean look at this thread where people try to honestly defend the use of police brutality and gun ownership. Of course any zealot is dangerous, I wouldn't go near rioters either, though I'd consider their violence more personal than ideologically motivated. I very much doubt they loot stores out of protest and rather just because they're assholes while using the protests as an excuse.

There isn't really any point trying to understand the other side when you already know their reasoning is completely irrational and based on feelings rather than logic. There isn't a logical reason to vote for Trump unless you are a millionaire. I know why they do what they do and I pity them for it, but it's not like I can do anything about it. All I can do is be frustrated and watch as they destroy society.

I'm interested to see how the hearing goes. My guess would be 3rd degree assault at tops (judging by this clip) because I don't see anything suggesting it was the intent of the officer to cause serious injury. Pushing somebody backwards with a batong isn't considered excessive force per se, especially in crowd/riot control where de-escalation is done beforehand by ordering people to disperse. In this situation, the use of force can be considered excessive and reckless though considering the man's age. He doesn't look like a fragile elderly man though, I would've thought he's in his 60s and officers had no way of knowing his exact age. A fit man who's 60-70 is more than capable to put up a fight. Hell, a 85-year-old granma nearly stabbed my buddy with shears once. And the officer doesn't push him as hard as cops are trained to.

Point of bringing up this video wasn't to justify officer's actions, it's just to add context. And (imo) it gives a reason to futher question the way the man falls down, because he was clearly looking to get something on video. Also considering how worked up he got those protesters I'd say he doesn't come off as a harmless, fragile elderly man. He also knows well he shouldn't approach the police at that point.

I'm not an expert on US justice system and law but 3rd degree assault seems reasonable to me. The whole thing is more of a bad choice of action which leads to much worse outcome than intented and anticipated. We'll see.