There are so many countries around the world that do fine without the violence, brutality and military gear the US forces use. I could not imagine images like the ones I see now in the US in countries like Germany, Denmark, Austria, Sweden, … All use better tactics and seem to be able to handle even large crowds without shooting and explosives. They normally try to DE-escalate (unlike in the US).
But if I read the basic police training in the US is 6 month or less and even hair cutters need more training, this ship seems to have sailed until better training is in place. I am really shocked about what is going on in the US.
If the George Floyd protests were as harmless as this video then I'd be happy. "Getting physical" is a natural result of using less dangerous weapons. Without use of rubber bullets the protesters have a reasonably fair chance to fight back and innocent bystanders and peaceful protesters can avoid injury if they don't show resistance. With rubber bullets it only takes one trigger pull and suddenly you are permanently disabled and might have to go to the hospital if you don't want to die.
Thanks for the video. Sure and that's terrible and there is a lot to improve, no doubt. But how often does this happen, even in a single protest? Can you find a video where the German police shoots rubber bullets into people's faces on purpose on a protest? Without any provocation whatsoever? Hunting and hurting press? Shooting from far distances at them? Kneeling on people's necks? Throwing tear gas explosives and flash bangs? Driving with cars into groups of people? Kicking protesters on the floor in their heads as, individually and as group? Having no accountability (granted, this is needs also a lot of improvement also in Germany)? Dragging people out of their cars without any explanation whatsoever and a pregnant woman inside?
Wikipedia [1] says in the US 28.4 people per 10 million people are killed in the US by the police. In Germany this rate is at 1.3. In Europe all countries except for Malta and Luxembourg (no idea what's going on there) have a rate lower than 6 (or exactly 6 like Sweden). Regardless these killings are of course distressing, especially because if seems to often happen in connection with psychotic episodes of the victims [2]: "Police violence is well-documented in the United States, so well-documented that people, even in Germany, tend to think of the US first when they think of police violence. And also (from [2]):
> But here in Germany, there are people - and not just a few - who are killed in these encounters," Peter said. "It's a German problem, if on a much smaller scale than the US."
>
> Because US officers might kill or injure more people in a week than Germany's do in a year, police here are much more likely to be given the benefit of the doubt. "The cases of death that are reported here are not like in the US, where unarmed minorities are shot," Behr said. "As a rule, there is not an intent to kill," he added.
I have lived in both the US and Germany for a long time. In Germany I never feared for my life or to get hurt by the police (even on protests). This might be luck, sure, but I also don't know anyone who did. In the US I had multiple encounters where the police tried to bully me and make me feel uncomfortable (shouting aggressively, following me, pointing a gun at me for getting to them to ask a question, …). And I am regular white dude, who doesn't look scary.
If the US Police was not militarized and/or had proper disciplinary procedures for officers there would not be any protests right now for them to have to deescalate
Honestly is not the training (or lack there of) that is the problem, it is lack of accountability, the lack of transparency, and the Military Tactics/Gear/Structure that are the problem
I need to correct myself, this seems to happen also in Germany, but I have never seen the use of grenades so far. In another reply someone posted this video with typical spray canisters and other incidents: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyrCiq_pQuo
Not on purpose. I didn't mean to provide a full list, but only a few examples that I feel I can speak about. To be fair, there is a stereotype about French police being more violent than others. But still, I wouldn't expect that they would shoot rubber bullets into people's faces on purpose and hunt down press like in the US.
The French only did that in Algeria (like the UK did it to the Irish). We're mostly more civilised closer to home. I guess the othering of black Americans means most US cops don't really feel like they are firing on their 'own' people.
The problem here is that the police are failing to distinguish between groups peacefully protesting and groups who are tearing things up. They're rounding up all the protestors. The police have a responsibility to distinguish targets. Their job is to police, not to suppress. Even in the middle of a peaceful protest they should be making an effort to police the protest by differentiating between people maintaining civil order and people who are not. They should not arrest or attack anyone who is maintaining civil order.
I think the biggest issue with police forces is that they're all basically trained to treat all situations with equal gravity. They fear for their lives even when it is not warranted. And because of that they respond more like a military force, with a level of violence out of all proportion to the situation.
The police are a bigger deterrent to peaceful protest in this country than any politician, and they have been since they came into existence.
You're ignoring the fact that crowds of nonviolent protestors are being sprayed and gassed without any provocation. The cops are being blatantly abusive in their application.
Sure, violent mobs. But last night they used it to disperse a peaceful crowd so that trump could get his picture taken across the street they were occupying. Sounds like an egregious use of force to me.
When you have violent mobs committing arson and vandalism I think bringing out the tear gas is reasonable and not a misuse of force.
But police keep tear gassing people who are not being violent, and were doing this before any rioting and looting. That's why people began escalating in response.
From 1970 the amount of money the UK spent on healthcare per capita bobbed kept bobbing around between 90% and 100% of 1970 levels (when adjusted for healthcare inflation of all G7 countries) until 1992. There was then a slight increase until 1998, large increases until 2004, then it dropped until 2012. It jumped massively in 2013, then dropped slightly in 2014, remaining steady through 2017.
Since the 2007 financial crash, UK health funding dropped in 9 years, and increased in 3 years
(figures from OECD total health spending per country)
So you're saying that government investment in the NHS has refused to keep pace with the population increase, when both the investment requirements and the taxation income can be assumed to be reasonably proportional to population size? Seems like either incompetence or malevolence to me.
Either way, yes you are 'technically correct' that you didn't mention per capita. Hope that gives you the warm fuzzy feeling you're looking for. Well done!
IMHO focussing on the NHS budget seems myopic. I haven't got the faintest clue about public health spending but there are so many things you can question like
- What is medical inflation compared to overall inflation?
- What do other countries spend?
- Are we getting value for money?
- Are key statistics getting worse despite increase budgets?
Are you suggesting that one should only look at the absolute numbers? Staying at the previous year's funding is usually - in practice - a reduction for most welfare services.
With aging populations and more expensive healthcare funding, health inflation is far higher.
The only real way to compare is to create a healthcare inflation index on a per capita basis from a group of like countries and look at funding that way.
