
De-Escalation Keeps Protesters and Police Safer - oftenwrong
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/de-escalation-keeps-protesters-and-police-safer-heres-why-departments-respond-with-force-anyway/
======
beloch
We should expect police to us less use violence and improve their crowd
management and deescalation skills. The increasing militarization of police is
a trend that must be reversed. However, we should not neglect the other side
of the equation either. This article is, in large part, about just that.

The article points out that many protests in the U.S. went smoothly through
the practice of police and protest organizers meeting and jointly managing
protests, but that this practice fell into disuse after the 1999 Seattle WTO
meeting in which protesters violated the negotiated terms and police responded
with violence.

While some recent (and ongoing) protests have turned violent, many didn't. In
the coming months we'll have time to do a postmortem. I strongly suspect
spontaneous protests without organization will be found to have the most
potential for violence, while those with organizers committed to self-policing
and, ideally, cooperating with police will be found to have fared much better.

Individual people may be intelligent and responsible, but crowds have their
own rules of behaviour and need to be managed. Protests are more dangerous
when unplanned or when their organizers give no thought to self-policing.

There will always be organizers who _want_ violence because it reliably brings
press coverage and attention to their protests, but social media is also
creating new problems. Coordinating a large number of people to show up at the
same time and place used to take considerable planning and effort. When you
have to work _hard_ just to get the even to happen, why wouldn't you plan how
it will unfold as well? Now a couple of tweets or posts on the right reddit
subs will suffice. How can police meet with the organizer of a protest when
it's really just some dude who had a lot of social media followers and might
not even bother showing up himself?

~~~
bjourne
I've been on a few demos that turned violent. Among them the famous one when
George Bush decided to pay a visit. In _all cases_ , the organizers wanted to
cooperate with the police. They knew who were in the "autonomous bloc"
(troublemakers) and would have gladly helped the police zone in on them. In
_all cases_ the police didn't care and charged peaceful and violent
demonstrators alike.

I find it very odd that the police still cannot after all these years and with
all development in surveillance tech distinguish between peaceful
demonstrators and rioters. One could almost believe that they have no interest
in making that distinction.

~~~
briandear
> I find it very odd that the police still cannot after all these years and
> with all development in surveillance tech distinguish between peaceful
> demonstrators and rioters. One could almost believe that they have no
> interest in making that distinction.

I have been in the middle of protests when I worked for Reuters and the
difference between peaceful and violent is very tiny. I was in the no-man’s
land between the KKK and the New Black Panthers in the wake of the James Byrd
Jr. lynching and it went from frenetic but peaceful to riot in 8.3 seconds.
Actual combat is a a lot less ambiguous and disorienting. Not defending police
or condemning them, but when an airborne brick heads your way, it’s a pretty
tall order to expect immediate and accurate identification of friend or foe.

It is fascinating to me how left wing protests seem to frequently degrade into
violence. Recent case in point was the reopen protesters. I don’t think a
single shot was fired by the crowd, nor were any buildings burned or looted.
The Charlottesville, VA protest by the extreme right wing however is a
counterexample — but it’s an exception that proves the rule. The Tea Party
protests were never violent. In almost every large-scale protest that has left
and extreme left wing elements, looting, fires, and violence is a foregone
conclusion. It’s historical record.

It’s really tragic because pretty much all Americans were outraged about
Floyd’s death, but as soon as looting, fires, and violence starts, then a
large portion of the population now starts discussing and being angry about
that rather than the core issue.

~~~
bjourne
> I have been in the middle of protests when I worked for Reuters and the
> difference between peaceful and violent is very tiny.

Can you spot the difference between an African and European swallow? I bet you
can't. But a professional bird watcher could tell them apart in a second.

Same thing with protestors. When I was active I could easily tell the
difference between someone potentially violent and someone peaceful. Woman
with a stroller - probably peaceful. Person in all black with a large backpack
- potentially violent. Admittedly, this was many years ago but I don't think
rioters are any harder to spot these days.

Thing is, most riots are planned and not spontaneous events. Troublemakers
infiltrate the crowds and try to cause confrontations with the police. The
police reacts with heavy handedness causing those who are peaceful to
sympathize with the troublemakers. More of them join the troublemakers side
causing more confrontations and eventually it spirals out of control.

The simple solution to this problem is for the police to target the
troublemakers and to let the peaceful protestors be. It actually is that easy
because organizers almost always knows who the troublemakers are and would
share that info with the police. But the police isn't interested. I suspect
that is because by and large they love riots just as much as the rioters.

~~~
RhysU
> When I was active I could easily tell the difference between someone
> potentially violent and someone peaceful. Woman with a stroller - probably
> peaceful. Person in all black with a large backpack - potentially violent.

Wait for it...

> The simple solution to this problem is for the police to target the
> troublemakers and to let the peaceful protestors be.

You are suggesting that the police should profile individuals based on their
appearance?

~~~
hef19898
I think you are purposefully misreading the comment. There are ways to
differentiate, mom with kid, old man vs. young guy in black clothes with a
backpack.

I think I know what you want to imply, but did you note the complete absence
of race or colour in OPs comment? And alos the completely different
circumstances, crowd control vs. standard law enforcement?

~~~
RhysU
I am not purposefully misreading. I am reading. I was gobsmacked by how ironic
the proposal was and felt compelled to point it out. To show that this stuff
is hard even when folks are entirely well-meaning.

I did notice the absence of race or color and you will note my comment does
not include any notion of race. You added race. I did note judging by
appearance. You added age, out of nowhere.

Using appearance to treat people differently is profiling, though not always
racial profiling. Should non-racial profiling be okay? To your inclusion of
age, should we treat gatherings of youth differently than gatherings of the
elderly?

The GP says "...for the police to target...". No distinction is made between
crowd control and standard law enforcement.

~~~
xphilter
It reads to be that you’re being purposely obtuse. Any security is going to
take into account the appearance of a person. Undoubtedly you understand what
that means in practice in America—-that appearance has been boiled down to
just race: “be on the lookout for a black man.” It’s lazy and should be called
out so that police are forced to do work and learn the difference between a
non-violent angry person and a violent angry person in a crowd.

------
WillDaSilva
"Of course, as Gillham pointed out, negotiating and managing a protest can’t
really work if the protest wasn’t organized ahead of time. That goes double,
he said, if the topic of the protest is police brutality. It’s hard to
negotiate with someone about the best way to demand they be fired."

This point is important. The police can't police themselves, and for a lasting
solution to this problem to emerge there'll have to be major structural
changes to the way police oversight and review is carried out.

I hope these protests are a turning point that'll lead to such reforms, but I
suspect no significant changes will occur. Hopefully I'll be proven wrong.

~~~
m0zg
> wasn’t organized ahead of time

Protests might have been unorganized, but riots most certainly are organized.
Torching a police car carries a minimum 5 year sentence. It's not the
protesters who are doing that.

Moreover, it is still being "organized". Someone keeps dropping off pallets
with bricks. There are agitator leaflets all over twitter. People have been
recorded on video handing out cash to "protesters" from a thick wad of bills.
Someone is organizing and funding the riots.

~~~
drusepth
We had a peaceful protest in Kansas City on Friday where some police joined
in, listened to protestors, took a knee with the protestors, and the mayor
joined the protest as well. It was peaceful and all over the news.

The very next day we had several trucks unloading beds of bricks and large
rocks throughout the Plaza (where protests were and would be again that night)
throughout the day and people were snapping videos of at least two buses full
of protesters in the full black getup unloading on the edge of the Plaza a few
hours before sundown. That night we had 85 arrests, multiple cars set on fire,
multiple officers put in the hospital, and plenty of CS gas in the streets.

After seeing the peaceful protest on Friday, I find it a little bit suspicious
that the crowds grew so quickly and things escalated so quickly (and
intentionally, by the looks of people dropping of brick caches) just 24 hours
later.

~~~
vkou
We had a peaceful protest in Cap Hill in Seattle, where the police knelt in
solidarity earlier today. There was no violence, no looting, no broken glass,
and everyone was being peaceful.

After the photo op was done, the police started macing and tear-gassing the
crowd. The news then ran this video [1], but with the first 20 seconds cut
out, and blamed the protesters on initiating violence.

[1]
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/gv0ru3/this_is_the...](https://www.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/gv0ru3/this_is_the_moment_it_all_happened/?utm_medium=usertext&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=Seattle&utm_content=t1_fsm1kep)

~~~
m0zg
Were you actually there and see it in person, though, or did you hear it from
someone else? Because if it's the latter, it smells like horseshit from a mile
away. That's why in a conflict you need to hear _both_ versions of what
actually happened and try to be impartial.

~~~
vkou
1\. If I was there, on the front line, you'd just dismiss me as either biased,
or unable to see what was going on in other parts of the line. This video has
the widest field of view of _anyone_ present.

2\. Which particular part of this smells like horseshit to you? The news
cutting the clip before airing it? The SPD twitter claiming that the police
retaliated to an attack by rocks and bottles? Do you see any rocks or bottles
thrown in the first 20 seconds of this video? Who are you going to believe - a
cop trying to defend his violent outburst, or _your own two eyes_? In what
universe is what you are observing a defense to an attack? Did you even look
at the video?

3\. Do you deny the neighbourhood being in good shape prior to this? I can
confirm this one in person, by the way. Nothing was looted, windows weren't
broken, no cars were burning.

4\. Here's a first person video account of that, too.
[https://twitter.com/izaacmellow/status/1267679820600668161?s...](https://twitter.com/izaacmellow/status/1267679820600668161?s=21)

~~~
m0zg
> Which particular part of this smells like horseshit to you?

That the police would tear gas people unprovoked. That just doesn't happen in
the United States in my experience, although if provoked, they do not
hesitate.

~~~
vkou
> That the police would tear gas people unprovoked.

Did you look at either of the videos? Do you believe your anecdotal
experience, or your eyes? What kind of evidence do you need at this point, to
convince you that yes, the police do, in fact, gas people unprovoked?

Would you like another one from Seattle?

[https://old.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/gu3qq1/cop_just_ca...](https://old.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/gu3qq1/cop_just_casually_tosses_tear_gas_at_my_feet_like/)

Did that sheriff look like was being attacked? Like anyone was throwing rocks
or bottles at him? Like anyone was setting police cars on fire?

------
coldcode
Of course it does. But politicians who ramp up the rhetoric and threaten to
have people killed does not. Flint and Camden and other cities where the
police sat down or walked with the protestors have no issues. People
connecting to people with understanding rarely results in violence.

I think places where the police still walk a beat (or other regular outreach
over a wide area) and get to know the locals rarely have issues with regular
people. But cities don't want to spend that kind of money on these things as
they would rather not tax people to pay for it. Yet it's an investment in
cities' future; otherwise you wind up with this.

~~~
Consultant32452
There were reports of planned riots in rural Polk County. Knowing they didn't
have the resources to cover wide spread area, the sheriff instructed citizens
to shoot anyone who broke into their home. I support this. Telling citizens
you can't help them, and they must protect themselves is very different than
threatening that the state itself will kill you.

[https://twitter.com/FOX13News/status/1267539936401592320](https://twitter.com/FOX13News/status/1267539936401592320)

~~~
x86_64Ubuntu
You can shoot a home intruder during and outside of riot conditions. I'm not
sure why he posted this.

~~~
Consultant32452
I think it's clearly a message to people watching the looting in the cities
thinking they can get away with that in a rural area. He says it plain and
simple, rural people have guns and they will kill you.

------
PeterStuer
You should not underestimate the extent of undercover/false flag instigators
of violence at protests. At least here in Belgium this is a practice that is
uncovered nearly every time when some violence erupts at demonstrations. The
individuals that start the aggression are later photographed to be chilling
and changing attire behind police lines.

Usually people at large anti-establishment rallies know very well there is
litle to be gained by violence. Those in power otoh know very well how they
can turn media coverage spotlights away from the issues and towards any
disruptions to discredit or mute the actual grievances.

~~~
edanm
That's fascinating, do you have any references that discuss this? (preferably
in English to avoid Google Translate)

~~~
ncallaway
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_provocateur](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_provocateur)

------
asenna
I highly recommend checking out Trevor Noah's recent video on the protests -
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jb4Bg8mu2aM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jb4Bg8mu2aM)

He mentions how society is at its core a contract on how to engage with one
another. Everything we do is in some form conforming to that contract and when
this contract is violated (like the stores being looted and vandalized), it
angers you.

However, to the people who're really affected by this issue at the very bottom
of the society - they feel they're being ripped off in the contract and are
being cheated every single day. After a breaking point they can feel like they
don't really have to adhere to the contract anymore themselves when no one
else sticks to it in their oppressed world.

PS - Please note, he's obviously not justifying the lootings, mainly tries to
make sense of it and how we got to where we are right now.

~~~
aaronchall
The sense I get of it is that he is making excuses for looting behavior.

~~~
nikofeyn
if that's the case, then why is that bad and the fact that the most wealthy,
corporations, and our politicians get away with their excuses from looting
people? their looting is stealing data, not paying their share of taxes,
abusing power, etc., and just because they aren't physical acts doesn't excuse
them.

but it's because they are the status quo, and they define what's looting or
not. i'm not in favor of stealing and violence, particularly because the ones
getting stolen from are at the bottom as well, but it sure seems those at the
top sure live in a different society and under different rules that
conveniently favor their form of "looting".

~~~
lobotryas
One is legal (whether you like it or not) the other is illegal. If you don’t
like that, vote to have the law changed. No one gets to be a vigilante/looter
without legal/social consequences.

~~~
bearjaws
I don't think anyone is looking for no consequences, they really don't care
anymore.

For example, your idea of voting in the minds of the protestors is laughable.
They believe (and I tend to agree) that money controls policy in this nation
and the ultra-wealthy have control over policy, therefor their vote doesn't
matter.

------
balls187
I was observing the BLM protest in DT Renton today.

The Renton PD seemed to employ a "out of plain sight" approach.

Patrol vehicles strategically placed, a few uniform officers were near
occassionally chatting with protestors, and patrol vehicles driving by the
scene.

At one point a team of bicycle cops appeared out of no where rode through
along side the protestors.

Each "side" seemed to be respectful of each other.

The approach of the Renton Police Department not antagonizing the protestors
had it's intended effect--the protestors protested peacefully. In fact, when
police vehicles flashed lights, or chirped sirens in support of the
protestors, the protestors cheered in support back.

~~~
Polylactic_acid
It seems to me that almost every violent protest/riot started peaceful but
then police make it violent.

I have seen this so many times where police stay out of the way and everything
goes smoothly. I think US police actually want a riot. They want to create
violence.

~~~
creato
Seems to you based on what? Reddit posts?

More realistically, I think it is rarely this simple, on either side. I'm sure
that usually there is a feedback loop of escalating responses.

~~~
balls187
> More realistically, I think it is rarely this simple, on either side. I'm
> sure that usually there is a feedback loop of escalating responses.

The premise of the article is Police showing escalating force, increases
escalation of protestors.

While likely it's a feedback loop, the police are expected to keep the peace;
so there exists a higher standard for their behavior.

Yet, an oft criticism is that LE agencies don't always get the de-escalation
training they need.

~~~
johnsonjo
It’s interesting, because I’ve taken a personal firearms course that involved
concealed carry in the US and they talk about de-escalation there (I’m pretty
sure they have to). I would at least expect the same from police (obviously
their training would be much more in depth with all the tools cops get).

------
davros
From afar, it seems to me like the big problem in US policing is a lack of
calm professionalism. The de-escalation approach in the article would to me
but just one aspect of taking a professional approach where safety and
following rules and best practices is paramount (and prioritised over
'winning' against criminals).

~~~
rectang
I have always suspected that US police are shunted into sub-optimal patterns
because there are so many guns here that the odds a simple interaction will
involve a firearm are much higher than they are in less-well-armed societies.
Does anybody know if I'm right about that?

That doesn't mean that they can't do more de-escalation or take other steps,
but the high prevalence of guns does seem like it would be a contributing
factor.

(I realize this touches a hot topic (guns) but it's an honest question, and
sympathetic to law enforcement.)

~~~
pjc50
White protestors were allowed to occupy a state building with guns without a
single bit of teargas.

~~~
frabbit
Not to mention the Malheur Refuge standoff where heavily armed protestors were
handled with kid gloves.

Maybe it's to do with having guns?

~~~
creato
A few of those protestors were chased through a road block and shot at, and
one was killed. It is ironic that you are calling the police killing someone
handling with "kid gloves" in a thread about deescalation between protestors
and police.

(Don't get me wrong, what those protestors did was senseless and the epitome
of entitlement.)

~~~
TulliusCicero
> A few of those protestors were chased through a road block and shot at, and
> one was killed.

This is a highly misleading way of describing the situation.

The police set up a traffic stop to arrest them. They fled the stop. Finicum
told the police he wasn't going to surrender and that they'd have to shoot
him. He reached for his gun in his pocket, and then he was shot.

If black men were only being killed by police after fleeing arrest, refusing
to surrender, challenging the police to shoot them, and then reaching for a
gun...then we wouldn't have much of a police violence problem.

------
xvector
Unpopular opinion: The newfound delusion that peaceful protests have ever
engendered any real change as opposed to their violent cousin is perhaps the
nail in the coffin of freedom and democracy.

~~~
troughway
Very unpopular opinion: wait til the military steps in, then you'll see how
much more ineffective the violent cousin is.

~~~
xvector
When the military starts shooting civilians, those that are shot become
martyrs and the movement becomes explosive. The military will not shoot
civilians without extremely good reason - they aren't cops, after all.

------
fasteddie31003
Imagine being a cop and having to deal with stuff like this
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8k4L97igDjY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8k4L97igDjY)
They literally save this man's life and he kills the guy who saved his life.
Cops don't work in a safe space. Years of working in a violent and hateful
environment must take a serious toll on them.

~~~
arkades
While there's a kernel of validity to what you're saying, cops in every state
and every nation have to deal with a violent and hateful environment. The
variation in outcomes suggests _something else is at play_.

~~~
tasogare
Variation of outcome in other countries can be easily explained by low
availability of weapons (that the case of most places): policemen are less
susceptible to make use of their weapons when people they arrest as low
probability of holding one.

~~~
whymauri
Also, the general trend of militarizing US police forces is a systemic act
against de-escalation.

------
js2
> That, experts say, speaks to a cultural attitude that is endemic to the
> profession, and is hard to change with new chiefs or rules. Thomson
> encountered this when he tried to make change in Camden. The police
> department was so dysfunctional that the city took the unprecedented step of
> disbanding the force and reconstituting a whole new agency from scratch.

This American Life did a story about a new chief trying to reform the
Firehouse culture in Amsterdam in order to combat discrimination:

[https://www.thisamericanlife.org/684/transcript](https://www.thisamericanlife.org/684/transcript)

Spoiler alert: he failed. It's hard to turn an organization around.

~~~
Animats
I didn't know that any city had reconstituted their police department. But
Camden did, in 2012.[1] They fired _all_ their cops and started over with new
ones.

[1] [http://archive.is/BfQIx](http://archive.is/BfQIx)

------
spicyramen
I lived in Mexico City downtown for 15 years. If you don't know if there is a
problem anywhere in the country, people would come to Mexico City main plaza
to protest. Many peaceful protests never really achieve anything, others
utterly violent neither. I witnessed farmers being beat up by the police,
women and kids fighting riot police and building destruction. One common
element is that certain police officers are aggressive by nature and suddenly
get a free card to hurt people. I agree with the article, communication is
key. In many protests I believe there is a lack of miscommunication in all
parties, and others are not well planned or are infiltrated to diminish the
reason of the protest. Some groups advocate for violence as the only way to be
heard (which in some cases is a valid reason, e.g. fascism) but destroying
normal people business vs government Infrastructure I don't think should be
permitted

------
chx
Here is what absolutely boggles my mind: this information is so well know the
USA Department Of The Army Field Manual on Counterinsurgency contains:

> Security force abuses and the social upheaval caused by collateral damage
> from combat can be major escalating factors for insurgencies.

[https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=468442](https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=468442)

~~~
whymauri
Unfortunately, the theory does not translate into practice or hiring. The
military and militarized US police force seem to actively recruit agents who
fundamentally misunderstand principles of de-escalation. Whether that be riot
police antagonizing civilians or armed forces provoking people abroad.

The standards for these positions _must_ be higher, especially domestically
(police).

------
gdubs
I remember being in Grand Central Station, NYC, not long after 9/11, and
noticed a student sitting on a step — right next to their head was the barrel
of a casually dangled rifle, hanging off the shoulder of a cop who happened to
be standing next to them.

We’ve become pretty normalized to it, but a militarized police force wasn’t
always a thing in America.

The scenes of the WTO protests in Seattle two decades ago, of cops in riot
gear shooting tear gas and rubber bullets into crowds of people — those images
were pretty shocking at the time. Now it’s a familiar scene, one that is
currently playing out in cities around the country and beyond.

------
Rapzid
It's not entirely surprising, but it has been rather shocking to see the
groups, some more organized than others, that have been coming in and inciting
these confrontations between police and the rest of the public present at the
location.

From what I've seen of videos posted of the vandals and looters in my own and
other cities it seems a certain, very small, percentage of bad actors are
provoking escalations to the detriment of everybody else. Some of these
parties seem to be doing that as a primary goal, others are simply causing the
escalations as a side-effect of their actions.

Certainly this doesn't account for everything we have witnessed, such as the
NG shooting rubber bullets at people on their porches(srs WTF?), but it has
contributed substantially to the escalation IMO.

------
mempko
Police escalating a peaceful protest to a violent one is part of the plan.
It's a feature not a bug for police.

They do this to scare regular folks from not participating in protests.
Because good and honest people will stay home if they worry about getting
hurt.

The goal of the police is to make protests undesirable and that's what they
do.

Undercover cops, for example have been video taped in many instances of
breaking store windows abd starting fires. The goal being to give ab excuse
for police to disperse crowds.

I know many don't believe me but veteran protesters under this. Go to a
protest and find out for yourself.

------
partiallypro
I'm no fan of the police, but I think it's a lot easier to say something
should be deescalated when you are miles away in your home and not on the
ground with some people throwing objects at you, some of which have in the
past included molotovs. Mob mentality is a very dangerous thing, that goes
both ways.

------
monadic2
At some point society will realize that this “de-escalation” would be better
served by social workers without guns.

~~~
johnsonjo
I don’t know my brother showed me a very uncivil and awful video of a black
man trying to defend his business by telling looters to go away and being
beaten and at least knocked unconcious with a pool of blood around his head.
There were many other videos I saw where people stood outside their businesses
with guns and their businesses didn’t seem to get looted at least. (I know
it’s all anecdotal, but at least it says there are cases of the opposite being
true.)

~~~
monadic2
Sorry, what’s the connection to replacing police de-escalating with social
workers de-escalating? You’ve lost me.

~~~
johnsonjo
Sorry, I should do a better job at explaining why I said what I said. I'll try
to do better at that next time. What I meant to imply is that non-violent
forces like the social worker or the man defending his business (using
pleading and non-violent force) can very easily be met with violent force.
Whereas sometimes even the fear of violence is enough to stop the escalation
of force. I honestly don't even know if that black man that defended his
business lived. I can agree with you police need to be better at de-escalating
they and their departments should be striving for that. Maybe training could
help? Also at the same time I feel, and I'm not saying this is something that
always happens but it's a thing that always happens under the given
circumstances, when something isn't de-escalated without force (such as a
failed de-escalation by a social worker or non-violent de-escalation by
police) it by nature will escalate, so to prevent loss of life sometimes force
can be necessary (such as what the police can do). So, leaving the police
completely out of it in the first place could be dangerous to the social
worker and other parties involved.

------
gerbilly
One suggestion that has been made is to not call the cops at all for certain
kinds of emergencies:

* Mental health (otherwise nonviolent)

* Animal problems

This alone could reduce deaths dramatically. I witnessed an incident where the
cops were called about a stray dog. They shot it. When you have a gun, every
problem looks like a target.

I think it should also be made clear who has priority at a 'scene'
firefighters, paramedics, or police?

Personally I think it's implicitly assumed that it is police that have that
authority. I believe this should be flipped so that medical and fire officials
have authority at the scene of an incident, not police.

In the case of George Floyd, then the paramedics would have had the authority
to get those three cops off the guys back possibly in time to save him.

------
drocer88
The buck stops at the mayor's office.

We need to hold these officials accountable.

Blaming the police is like blaming the soldiers in a war.

It's the regional ELECTED leaders responsible for the budgets and operations
of the police departments who are the problem.

~~~
noobermin
The police (particularly police unions) are very politically powerful with
their endorsements and contributions to politicians. Many mayors across the
country are afraid to discipline their police departments.

------
js2
I'm going to copy/paste the experience of a local state senator from Facebook
because, well, I found it insightful and relevant to this article. This is
from NC State Senator Jeff Jackson. He represents a district in Charlotte.

\----

Last night I went into uptown at around 7:00 p.m. to do my part to help keep
the peace.

Our city had already had a peaceful and powerful protest earlier that
afternoon with a message of love and justice and it was important that the
evening protest stayed safe and civil.

At the beginning there were roughly 1,500 people. That’s about half the number
who were at the afternoon protest. The evening group was also much younger.
I’d put the average age at about 24.

That meant the tone was audibly different. The conversations I had were
different. It was a more personal perspective from people who weren’t just
marching for others - they were also marching for themselves. There were more
people in this crowd who felt that this issue directly concerned them and
their friends, and you could hear that in their voices.

The leaders of the protest had met earlier that day with CMPD to discuss how
to ensure the event was safe. As a result, the leaders placed experienced
activists at the front of the march, in the middle, and in the rear. They kept
the march moving, occasionally stopping for a few minutes to let people re-
group, but not letting too much heat build in any one spot.

Alongside real anger and frustration were constant displays of compassion.
Lots of people brought water bottles and were handing them out. I saw a woman
trip and hurt her leg and the crowd immediately stopped and tended to her.

Law enforcement was present in various ways. There were some officers in
regular uniform walking among the crowd, answering questions and chatting.
There were also several officers on bicycles and motorcycles. Most of the
police presence was blocking certain streets to keep the march from heading
certain directions.

By the time the march got to the police station it had been going for over two
hours and it had shrunk to maybe 300 people. About 10 officers stood outside
the front door, motionless. The protesters got as close as they could to the
police without making contact. One officer raised his fist in solidarity and
was greeted with loud applause and cheering from the crowd. At one point
someone threw a water bottle at the police and everyone turned around and
yelled at him. There were some very tense moments near the police station, but
after about 30 minutes the march headed back uptown.

Now it was about 10:40 p.m. The march had been going for over three hours. It
wasn’t a coherent group anymore. There were less than 200 people. It had
splintered into lots of little groups and there wasn’t any organization that I
could see. I thought it was basically over so I started to head back to my
car.

At 10:50 p.m. I heard the first flashbang. Then I saw the tear gas. I was two
blocks away so I couldn’t tell what, if anything, precipitated its use
(although I later read a CMPD statement that bottles and rocks were being
thrown).

But the flashbang had a catalyzing and organizing effect on the remaining
protesters, who instantly re-formed.

This marked the point of a clear shift in police tactics. Officers lined up
shoulder-to-shoulder and walked block by block, toward the protesters, who
similarly lined up shoulder-to-shoulder and waited for the police to move
toward them.

Officers would then proceed down one block, wait five minutes, use a
loudspeaker to tell the crowd to disperse, and then start walking toward the
crowd. Then they would use tear gas and pepper bullets, which would cause the
crowd to retreat one block.

This continued for several blocks, until eventually the remaining protesters
scattered. Nine arrests were made.

I’m not aware of any injuries. As far as property damage, I heard a few
reports of a few broken windows, but nothing extensive.

It’s really easy to see one picture or hear a snippet on the news and draw a
conclusion about an event like this. What I saw was much more complex, much
more human. If it’s one thing we all owe each other right now, it’s looking
past the surface and trying to learn a little more about what’s really going
on underneath.

What I learned last night is that the tenor of these events can change on a
dime. But you can feel it when it happens. I also learned that the vast, vast
majority of protesters were there to engage in peaceful, safe protest.
Although many of them felt genuine anger, they understood what it meant to
channel it productively and what type of conduct would undercut their message.

My thanks to the leadership of this event for working hard to keep everyone as
safe as possible.

\- Sen. Jeff Jackson

[https://mbasic.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=13209956114...](https://mbasic.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1320995611436357&id=245711905631405)

[https://www.jeffjacksonnc.com/about-
jeff](https://www.jeffjacksonnc.com/about-jeff)

------
kingkawn
Instead of optimizing protesting don't kill black people.

~~~
KuiN
As an outsider watching from across the Atlantic, I am astonished at what is
being posted in these comments. There are hundreds of videos on social media
of wanton police violence towards peaceful protestors. Of course there are
non-peaceful protestors (and I do not defend them) but they are responded to
in incidents of heavy handed violent escalation. Bellingcat have collected
more than 100 reports of protected media representatives being beaten, blinded
and brutalized by police action. This is all happening during unrest caused by
police brutality.

And Hacker News wants to fix the protestors?!

~~~
kingkawn
In America there is a culture of rushing to find center ground between two
points regardless of what the points are. So now they rush to make false
equivalence between large groups of many kinds of people protesting in public
and a professional militarized force with government funding.

------
Skgqie1
I've noticed that many people create a distinction between the police and the
rest of society - as though they're separate to and apart from normal people.

Given police officers are in fact a part of the same society as the people
protesting against them, it seems likely that the issues with brutality, and
racial prejudice, are not endemic to police themselves, but indicative of
problems of the overall society at large.

If people are protesting the symptoms of these broader cultural issues, and
not the underlying cause, it seems an inescapable conclusion that any change
will largely be ineffectual.

I feel that the difficulty with this, is that noone likes to admit that there
are systemic issues in the way their society functions. From a sociological
perspective, most people don't want to be beating a drum that runs counter to
popular opinion.

Similarly, most people are reluctant to engage in confrontation on an
individual level, when encountering behaviour that ultimately leads to these
type of outcomes.

Just as importantly, most people are awful at taking responsibility for their
role in a problem. People prefer to create a false dichotomy, and position
their impact on problems as meaningless, and view solutions as outside their
locus of control.

This effectively leads to a kind of tragedy of the commons, where
responsibility belongs to everyone and is taken by noone - similar to what we
see with climate issues.

To effect meaningful change, it's usually required that both individuals and
groups make their voice heard and actually do something. Yet most people go
about their lives, and only take action when the collective does, in response
to some climax of conditions. This is better than the inverse - of individuals
taking action while groups do nothing - yet usually results in neglibile
change, if any.

I suspect a part of the problem is that a sizable demographic cares, but only
insofar as they care to signal their virtues. Yet when it comes to doing
something themselves, the it's a much lower priority. I also suspect most
people in this situation engage in a cognitive dissonance that's almost
automatic too - and probably aren't even aware that they're doing it.

------
gadders
I think for demonstrators, yes, de-escalation is the key. However, for the
Antifa/domestic terrorist groups that exist only to smash property and cause
violence, they should be arrested on sight and prosecuted.

------
bobmaxup
Why not make universal laws that apply to anyone that can be proven to injure
another human being with economic deterrents?

For example, if you hit a man in the face, cause bruising, lets say that costs
$1,000 across the board. $1,000 for any hematoma, $5000 or any broken bone.
$25,000 for a GSW, $100,000 for a life-threatening injury, etc.

To take it further, if you discharge a weapon at another human being, the fine
is something like $1,000 per bullet, etc.

Additionally, existing laws still apply.

Following the above guidelines, you don't need to prove mens rea. It is just
the cost of doing business.

It would be a violence tax at the individual level.

~~~
genuinebyte
The Rich would be allowed to level anyone they see fit with minimal financial
loss.

~~~
bobmaxup
The hypothetical policy wouldn't replace existing laws, it would just be an
additional tax on violent behaviors that apply to cops, criminals, school
children, etc.

Another thought I had around this was to just fire any police officer that
fires their weapon at another human. If they truly believe that their life is
in danger, they value their life more than their job.

Either of these things would at least add some actual cost to the idea
associated with performing an action with extreme consequences on another
human being's life.

------
nolsoniente
Police violence and stupidity are a big problem. But why Americans make
everything about race? See this white guy suffocated by police while crying
out "I cant breathe":
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/08/01/police-
laug...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/08/01/police-laughed-
joked-he-lost-consciousness-handcuffs-minutes-later-he-died/)

Why no riots and street violence then?

------
glangdale
This is an interesting story; however, much of it seems predicated on the idea
that the police _want_ things to be safer, which seems false. There seems like
a open determination to make things worse - to be confrontational as possible
and demonstrate their impunity. All the people making "you'd think they'd
manage to not do police brutality at the rally about police brutality" jokes
are missing the point - the overtness IS the message.

------
MadNinjaSkills
But if the police are trained to use violent force... just how does that work?
The fact that police will never really be of service to a suicidal person (who
can point a toy gun at them, and then they shoot him/her- granting the
individual's wish to end his/her own life) comes to mind. (Oh, yeah, don't
commit suicide!)

------
alexashka
It takes just a few rotten apples on the side of the protestors to make it go
violent.

It also takes just a few rotten apples on the side of the police to make it go
violent.

Protesting is largely a modern witch hunt. It lets people blow off some steam,
rather ineffectively in the modern protest case, because you don't get to burn
anyone alive at the end of it. Enough people long for that witch hunt finale,
and that's why protests turn violent so often, it's the modern day equivalent
of burning a witch.

I don't know if protestors realize that it is up to them to come up with ways
of fixing systemic issues they're upset about (people in power are fine with
the way things are, by definition) - burning down your local neighbourhood or
yelling out in the streets can only lead to the powers that be going 'ok fine,
go find some witches to burn to appease this mob'. It's never going to fix
actual systemic issues, but perhaps burning witches is good enough, given our
history, and going in circles indefinitely is the way of this species.

~~~
malnourish
Boston tea party

Haymarket riots

Black Friday suffragette riots

Martin Luther King Jr riots

Stonewall riots

~~~
SV_BubbleTime
You’ll want to remove Boston Tea party from that list. Extremely non-violent
event. They broke one pad lock, didn’t steal any tea, and bought the yard a
new padlock the next day.

It wasn’t a “protest” in any comparable way to this.

~~~
slumos
“That evening, a group of 30 to 130 men, some dressed in the Mohawk warrior
disguises, boarded the three vessels and, over the course of three hours,
dumped all 342 chests of tea into the water. ... The property damage amounted
to the destruction of 92,000 pounds or 340 chests of tea, reported by the
British East India Company worth £9,659 worth, or $1,700,000 dollars in
today’s money. The owner of the two of the three ships was William Rotch, a
Nantucket-born colonist and merchant.”

------
archeantus
Just like parenting, police should never resort to violence. Why? It’s a
short-term fix that causes way more problems down the road.

So what kind of parents/police beat their constituents? Men who are angry and
want to assert themselves as macho and in charge. It needs to stop.

------
tomcam
Police should use the minimum violence necessary. But some people refuse to
de-escalate.

------
yters
i wonder if the rioters realize that violence in the streets is exactly how
dictators gain power

~~~
ikeyany
Rioters don't care about the goals of the protestors.

~~~
yters
i've conversed with a couple of people on HN who seem to think rioting is
aligned, and in fact more effective than peaceful protests

they weren't downvoted, whereas my counter comments were

so, it seems this opinion that violence is the way forward is not the minority
position

~~~
ikeyany
If rioters are aligned with protestors in your mind, then aren't cops who
murder innocents also aligned with good cops?

~~~
yters
perhaps if i saw protesters actively stopping violence and looting instead of
just spectating and filming and cheering, as well as comments supporting
violence getting flagged on hn

otherwise, plenty of people may not be personally willing to risk themselves
by being violent, but are happy to stand by as others are violent

anyways, i hope the protesters look forward to trump 2020, because that is the
current trajectory they are pushing

~~~
ikeyany
Protestors actively stopping violence and looting:

[https://facebook.com/fox11la/videos/2620823021579078/](https://facebook.com/fox11la/videos/2620823021579078/)

[https://youtube.com/watch?v=Z9Al_OCpYFk](https://youtube.com/watch?v=Z9Al_OCpYFk)

Consider why you are so unwilling to admit that bad cops who murder innocents
are also the problem.

~~~
yters
consider why you are making assumptions about what I believe?

even if, for sake of argument, bad cops are instigating all the riots and
looting, the media optics will make this a slam dunk for trump 2020 and more
militarized police

exactly contrary to what we really want

consider this

where do all the people live who are most likely to vote against trump?

the big cities

where are all the riots taking place?

the big cities

if trump stops the riots and saves their livelihood, will this make them more
likely or less likely to vote against trump? what do you think?

~~~
ikeyany
Why do you keep bringing up Trump? Ignore the election for a second.

I'm pointing out two issues: rioting, and the police brutality leading to the
rioting are both societal problems. We saw this exact scenario after the
Freddie Gray murder. I'm also trying to find out why you're avoiding admitting
that _both_ rioting and police brutality are problems.

~~~
yters
why are you asking loaded questions? it is almost as if you are not interested
in having a discussion, but would rather post talking points that i already
agree with

hard to understand the point of what you are doing

------
systematical
Good thing we have the de-escalator in chief.

------
rowawey
OR: If the police were more Sheriff in _The Andy Griffith Show_ and less
_Captain America_ meets _Commando._

This is what happens when frightened, under-trained, under-experienced, over-
militarized, desensitized "police" optimize for the wrong thing and defeat
their fundamental mission by becoming an military occupation force of
psychopathic a__holes who don't interact with "civilians" except to harass
people, rather than a community service of human f__king beings.

------
just_steve_h
Folks - don't be obtuse. Police commanders know exactly what will happen when
they escalate with tear gas and rubber bullets.

Pro-police forces WANT mayhem. It makes people watching on TV afraid of the
protests, and it changes the subject away from the widespread peaceful
opposition to racist police violence.

~~~
nostromo
Minneapolis Chief of Police:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medaria_Arradondo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medaria_Arradondo)

Seattle Chief of Police: [http://www.seattle.gov/police/about-us/about-the-
department/...](http://www.seattle.gov/police/about-us/about-the-
department/command-staff)

St Louis Chief of Police:
[http://www.slmpd.org/chief_of_police.shtml](http://www.slmpd.org/chief_of_police.shtml)

Atlanta Chief of Police:
[https://www.projectq.us/atlanta/atlanta_police_chief_erika_s...](https://www.projectq.us/atlanta/atlanta_police_chief_erika_shields_quietly_comes_out_as_gay)

Chicago Chief of Police:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Brown_(police_officer)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Brown_\(police_officer\))

Oakland Chief of Police: [https://climaterwc.com/2019/07/17/san-mateo-police-
chief-sus...](https://climaterwc.com/2019/07/17/san-mateo-police-chief-susan-
manheimer-to-retire-in-december/)

People on HN seem to have a cartoon villain view of police, so I thought I'd
share a few faces of police leadership in effected communities.

~~~
HarryHirsch
It's crocodile tears. Police chiefs knew all along about the deplorable amount
of racism and casual violence on their forces, they just chose to ignore them.
Now the political winds are shifting and they have to go along to keep their
jobs.

~~~
briefcomment
Change does not require looting and beatings does it? Wouldn't looting and
beatings simply give the police more power, and be counter productive against
making police more accountable?

Looters and those who bash people's skulls in are opportunists who don't care
about change. The ones that want change see their opportunity slipping away.

~~~
ikeyany
The problem is that decades of peaceful protesting went ignored. Remmeber how
kneeling during the national anthem against police brutality got mocked?

~~~
thephyber
The police and police wives in my family were the loudest mockers of the
kneeling protests, which were perfectly quiet and peaceful.

    
    
      "Blacks commit crimes at higher rates than others."
      "It's not a police problem, it's a crime problem."
      "I don't want to hear this crap when I get home from work."
    
    

> Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution
> inevitable. -- John F. Kennedy, 1962

The inaction of police to reform themselves and elected officials to reform
the laws that govern them is incentive to make it much easier for domestic
terrorism to thrive.

------
lsh123
Could we please stop calling “protesters” all the people looting jewelry
stores, Target, Nike, etc? These are not protesters, these are looters. Police
should use any means at their disposal to protect lives and property from
looters and rioters.

~~~
komali2
Could we please not waste a second of thought on the relatively minor issue of
broken store windows until we sort the issue of cops indiscriminately killing
black people?

If you care so much, how about petition your local police force to dump their
tear gas at the range and stop firing on peaceful protesters, turning a lot of
sitting people into a riot.

~~~
bluGill
I care about both. Two wrongs are two wrongs.

~~~
jaas
But hopefully you care about one much, much more than the other. They are not
comparable in terms of needing discussion at this moment in history.

(Edit: In the event that you honestly don't know which one is the more
important topic, right now or pretty much any other time - police frequently
murdering black people or some store windows getting smashed and merch stolen
- it's the police murdering black people.)

~~~
AnthonyMouse
I can't actually tell which one you're trying to say is more important right
now. The case for "riots are the bigger problem right now" being that there is
a whole lot more rioting and looting happening right now than there usually
is, whereas the amount of police violence is currently significantly below the
typical level (as a result of the coronavirus and everyone staying inside, but
still).

~~~
silverreads
11,000 claims of abuse in the last 3 days just in seattle is low?

~~~
AnthonyMouse
You can't retroactively justify a riot based on police conflicts with rioters.
It violates causality.

~~~
runarberg
I’m not so sure you can pin causality here. Anecdotally, the protests I’ve
visited in the past have always been exactly as violent as the police
initiates. A peaceful police usually means a peaceful protest in my
experience. A violent police—on the other hand—can sometimes cause a violent
protest, and even a riot.

Crowd control is a science. And you are sort of ignoring the science by
claiming that rioters are the cause of the conflict.

~~~
AnthonyMouse
> Anecdotally, the protests I’ve visited in the past have always been exactly
> as violent as the police initiates.

Things escalate when someone escalates them. Sometimes that's the police.
Sometimes it isn't. And even when it is, you still have to be willing to be
provoked. Don't.

We have people in this thread justifying riots as "we tried kneeling at
football games" as if there is some kind of reasonable progression from there
to looting and burning down churches.

~~~
runarberg
Like I said, crowd control is a science. Even if you have violent actors at
the protest, it is still a failure of crowd control if the whole protest turns
violent.

Reacting when violated is a natural reaction. With a group this big you cannot
think in individual terms. If provoked there and there is a non-zero chance
you’ll see a reaction, you _will_ see a reaction. And now you have a positive
feedback loop between the police and protestors that may escalate into riots.

------
mdoms
You Americans need to be way more angry about what has been happening in your
country for decades (centuries even). Way more angry.

~~~
dang
Please don't take HN threads into nationalistic flamewar, such as by preaching
self-righteously at some other country. That helps nothing.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

------
beepboopbeep
What has stood out to me, even above the violence, is the sheer fear and
stupidity in the eyes of officers. They have zero control over themselves.
They aren't doing a job, they're just fighting people. It's incredible just
how bizarrely amateur they all are. Like it was all one violent LARP to them
until they met their first riot

------
bayonetz
Why would you de-escalate when the POTUS says stuff like this:
[https://soundcloud.com/the-daily-beast-politics/trump-
audio](https://soundcloud.com/the-daily-beast-politics/trump-audio)

------
ilaksh
I was watching someone stream the protests near the White House last night.
The police were being hit with water bottles and sometimes fireworks, but
still they mostly just stood there. The police did not escalate at all until
the protestors lit two fires. One completely took over a small building and
another was like a bonfire in the middle of the street.

So the question is how many fires should you let them light? After that they
became very aggressive and used the year gas and batons and rubber bullets to
take over the area and force the protestors to retreat back a few blocks.
Later on the looting a few blocks away from the police escalated and it does
seem like it could have been partially motivated by the violent tactics from
before. But if you look at the amount of arson and destruction in Minnesota
recently when there was no real police presence, it seems like the result was
worse.

~~~
voganmother42
No police presence? Oh! You mean where they waited to announce anything and
defended the house of the police officer while everything burned? Or do mean
where people on their porches were fired upon for filming? Or maybe that cnn
crew that was attempting to comply?

