George Floyd Death and the Wider Consequences

[DynamicSpirit]

I'm really surprised there doesn't yet seem to be a thread on this topic yet. (Hopefully I haven't just missed an obvious thread).

What are people's views on how events are panning out and the responses and various demonstrations after George Floyd's death?

To me, it goes without saying that the circumstances of his death are shocking, as is the wider context of many deaths in police custody in the US. And Donald Trump's response is - as usual - insensitive and largely idiotic. I also though find it very surprising that we are seeing such a large reaction in the UK, including well attended demonstrations here - about something that is surely the responsibility of the authorities in the US, not the UK.

I also feel slightly concerned that I'm seeing a fair amount of stuff on social media that tries to excuse the looting etc. that has been happening in the US - when to me it seems that the looting is just as wrong as some of the actions of the US police, and we ought to be equally condemning both.

Thoughts?

 

[Geezertronic]

Let me be clear, the murder of George Floyd was brazen, shocking, idiotic, and unnecessary. People have a right to protest and they should protest. People in influential positions (including celebrities) should quite rightly speak out. People are right to say that Black Lives matter, and while All Lives matter too, on this occasion that misses the point.

However people excusing the rioting and looting are part of the problem. No one who is rioting and looting are doing it in the memory of George Floyd, they are doing it because they feel they can get away with it at the moment. They are taking the focus away from the murder of George Floyd and deserve to be condemned - as do the celebrities and such who excuse their actions.

 

[telstarbox]

I would ask that people who say "it's just a US thing" (and especially if you're white) do a bit more reading, for example this article:

Systemic racism and police brutality are British problems too | Kojo Koram

Those who argue that Black Lives Matter protesters are jumping on an American bandwagon wilfully miss the point, says academic Kojo Koram

www.theguardian.com

 

[Butts]

I'm sure a lot of us remember the looting in London and other English Cities in 2011.

Nothing to do with the unfortunate death of Mark Duggan , but that event allegedly a catalyst for such action.

This is possibly controversial, but I think if the Police had opened fire on looters in the 2011 English riots it would have stopped pretty rapidly.

 

[telstarbox]

Two more things I forgot to say last night. I'm not trying to pick on @DynamicSpirit , I'm glad that they started the thread.

I also feel slightly concerned that I'm seeing a fair amount of stuff on social media that tries to excuse the looting etc. that has been happening in the US - when to me it seems that the looting is just as wrong as some of the actions of the US police, and we ought to be equally condemning both.

Looting causes damage or theft of inanimate property which can generally be replaced or insured against. Brutality inflicted by heavily armed police causes loss of life or serious life changing injuries. So they don't have equally serious outcomes (and may not affect the same individuals) and they shouldn't be equally condemned.

It's also clear that sometimes "polite" political action doesn't achieve change. Here we can see the "Remain" campaign after the 2016 referendum. Three years of marches, petitions, the People's Vote campaign, MPs changing parties, two general elections and we still left the EU without any meaningful concessions to the Remain side.

 

[nlogax]

This is possibly controversial, but I think if the Police had opened fire on looters in the 2011 English riots it would have stopped pretty rapidly.

Indeed it would have, but had that happened I dread to think of where the country would be now.

 

[Robin Edwards]

I don't want to detract from the issues around Racism that dreadfully afflicts our country and/or US but does anyone recall the Police brutality from the 70s and 80s? A good friend of mine was a police constable at the time who was earning significant overtime being 'bussed' north to 'beat the s*** out of the protesting miners in Nottinghamshire' - his quote rather than mine. The Police serve the politics of the time rather than the ordinary people and I don't see that having changed.

 

[AM9]

Indeed it would have, but had that happened I dread to think of where the country would be now.

Agreed. What would have happened is that the rioters would have come back the next day, better armed. And if there were serious injuries or even deaths as a result of police action, there would be an increasing support from the public at large.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Two more things I forgot to say last night. I'm not trying to pick on @DynamicSpirit , I'm glad that they started the thread.

Looting causes damage or theft of inanimate property which can generally be replaced or insured against. Brutality inflicted by heavily armed police causes loss of life or serious life changing injuries. So they don't have equally serious outcomes (and may not affect the same individuals) and they shouldn't be equally condemned.

OK. Firstly, a possible misunderstanding. By saying ' we ought to be equally condemning both', I didn't mean that we should give exactly the same level of condemnation to both, but simply that we should be prepared to condemn both. I've seen far too much stuff on social media that (rightly) condemns the police brutality and racism in the US and but then either doesn't mention the looting and violence by demonstrators at all, or even seeks to excuse all the looting and arson as being somehow OK because it was justified by the police actions. To my mind, that's wrong.

Secondly, I would in any case disagree with the implication in your argument that how much you condemn a crime should be based solely on the outcome: Motivation is important too. Compare, for example, (a) hitting someone on the head because you are surrounded by hostile people and genuinely believe that if you don't strike now, you'll be injured or killed, and (b) hitting someone on the head because that person is (say) black and you hate blacks. Both actions have the same consequences to the victim, but I think most people would agree the second scenario is a rather worse crime. The relevance to the demonstrations and looting should be obvious. Basically no-one goes looting because they think they'll be hit by the police if they don't steal those designer shoes. They go looting because they fancy free goods and don't give a monkeys that those goods belong to someone else who may have worked their socks off to build up their business. On the other hand, at least some (certainly, not all) of the violence between police and demonstrators, terrible though it is, may be because people genuinely felt threatened in the heat of the moment. (To be clear, that doesn't excuse that the police should be taking care not to overreact and to use the absolute minimum of force required - and it's pretty obvious that wasn't the case at at least some of the US demonstration).

It's also clear that sometimes "polite" political action doesn't achieve change. Here we can see the "Remain" campaign after the 2016 referendum. Three years of marches, petitions, the People's Vote campaign, MPs changing parties, two general elections and we still left the EU without any meaningful concessions to the Remain side.

Surely you're not suggesting that, if Remain campaigners had resorted to looting and arson, that would've somehow swayed public opinion and we'd therefore still be in the EU?

 

[thejuggler]

As this demonstrates any protest coverage immediately focuses on the extremes.

As there is no vetting, membership form, or permission required to join a protest it is impossible to know who the looters are and what their motives are, never assume they are there doing things off their own back.

 

[Geezertronic]

Looting causes damage or theft of inanimate property which can generally be replaced or insured against. Brutality inflicted by heavily armed police causes loss of life or serious life changing injuries. So they don't have equally serious outcomes (and may not affect the same individuals) and they shouldn't be equally condemned.

George Floyd was apparently no saint but did not deserve to die in the way he did, and people are quite right to protest in the US and around the world about Racism and people are quite right to speak out. Looting and rioting has nothing to do with this. The antisocial behaviour in the form of violence that comes with looting can also cause loss of life or serious life changing injuries as have been seen in the US recently and before, and in the past in the UK. Also the damage or theft caused by looting can have a serious detrimental effect on someone who has built that business up over years - it is not just large companies that are affected, it is normal people who are having their livelihoods smashed to bits because of these idiots. It is not a victimless crime. Rioters and looters should quite rightly be equally condemned because they do not care about the cause, they only care about what they can steal.

 

[Mojo]

Could I just say how grateful I am to our hard working police officers in London.

Whilst the rest of the capital is sporting quite incredible tans like they’ve been sunning it up on a nice island somewhere despite being lounging around at home on near full pay, our police have been working flat out, with many rest days cancelled, shifts extended, and so on, making us all safer whilst enforcing the law in close proximity to people outside their household. And all this on quite paltry salaries, certainly not enough to live on in London!

 

[yorkie]

Looting causes damage or theft of inanimate property which can generally be replaced or insured against.

Maybe your post did not intend to come across in the way that it did, but I am extremely disappointed and disturbed to read this; are you actually condoning looting or merely belittling the consequences?

You are talking about peoples' livelihoods. Make no mistake: if I learnt that looting was taking place in my city, I would absolutely want to be part of any efforts to defend my city against the looters.

Brutality inflicted by heavily armed police causes loss of life or serious life changing injuries.

The actions of looters and violent protesters can have similar outcomes, and this has indeed happened in the United States in recent days. Wrongs on both sides do not make it right. In this country, we are better than that.

So they don't have equally serious outcomes (and may not affect the same individuals) and they shouldn't be equally condemned.

All violence and vandalism should be condemned. Furthermore, anyone who attempts to disrupt racial harmony should also be condemned, regardless of which 'side' they are on or who they purport to represent, in my opinion.

You do realise, that if looting and violent acts occur in this country, the likes of Tommy Robbinson and his ilk will be absolutely milking it, and will use this to further their own arguments?

Is an escalation form both 'sides' really what we want in this country?

I do hope you will join me in condemning all acts of violence, vandalism and any act that seeks to disrupt community cohesion and racial harmony in the UK?

It's also clear that sometimes "polite" political action doesn't achieve change. Here we can see the "Remain" campaign after the 2016 referendum. Three years of marches, petitions, the People's Vote campaign, MPs changing parties, two general elections and we still left the EU without any meaningful concessions to the Remain side.

I am not sure how that subject is on topic, but if your argument is to promote violent acts rather than peaceful demonstrations and/or a suggestion that any side that acts violently, should get what they want, I would strongly disagree with this and say that is a very dangerous thing to appear to wish for.

And if you are not saying that, what are you saying?!

 

[deltic]

What has been shocking has been the continuing brutality shown by some police who dont seem to care that they are being filmed doing it. Police training in some parts of the US is supposedly poor and basic leading to untrained and frightened officers - over 150 police are killed on duty each year in the US.

Condemning looting is a classic way for the establishment to ignore the underlying problems a community faces. There would be no or little looting if people felt part of society and had access to the same resources as everyone else.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

What has been shocking has been the continuing brutality shown by some police who dont seem to care that they are being filmed doing it. Police training in some parts of the US is supposedly poor and basic leading to untrained and frightened officers - over 150 police are killed on duty each year in the US.

I agree the brutality of the police there is shocking (anyone in any doubt of that - just watch this video, which shows the incident in Buffalo in which police knocked an old man to the ground causing him head injuries. It looks very clear on the video that the man posed no threat to the police officers concerned and no justification for their actions. Hard to believe that other officers have now resigned in support of the officer concerned when he looks so obviously in the wrong.

Condemning looting is a classic way for the establishment to ignore the underlying problems a community faces. There would be no or little looting if people felt part of society and had access to the same resources as everyone else.

And here I disagree. It's perfectly possible to condemn police brutality AND condemn the looting. Why do you condemn one act of violence but seek to excuse another act of violence that is just as mindless and roughly as bad?

 

[yorkie]

And here I disagree. It's perfectly possible to condemn police brutality AND condemn the looting. Why do you condemn one act of violence but seek to excuse another act of violence that is just as mindless and roughly as bad?

Quite. I also disagree with @deltic in the strongest possible terms. I find it extremely concerning , disturbing and upsetting that some people on this forum have such views.

I was brought up in a school that was very diverse and inclusive; I didn't realise racism was a thing and thought nothing of having friends of different religions and skin colours.

I then moved nearly 200 miles at the end of Year 6 and discovered my new school had people who discriminated against people based on hair colour, accent, and simply not being from their county, let alone being of a different skin colour.

I'm pleased to say that same school is now vastly different to how it was and people of all backgrounds can now feel safe and welcome there.

Change may take time and be at a different pace in different areas but violence, theft and vandalism is not the way to bring about that change. Do you agree with this, @telstarbox and @deltic?

 

[Esker-pades]

Obviously the looting is wrong. I will make a couple of observations.

1: The looting is by a minority of protestors. That doesn't make it OK, but it does make the attempts by some to paint the looters as indicative of the wider movement wrong (as has been attempted by the usual suspects - Fox News et al).
2: The looting is not necessarily done by protestors. Rather, it is done by people at the same time who have no affiliation with BLM (black lives matter), or other protest organisers. They're just opportunistic expletives who see the police otherwise engaged with brutalising a peaceful protest and think "I could get myself a nice TV while they're occupied".

Don't excuse looting. Don't say that the looting invalidates the protest.

 

[deltic]

Quite. I also disagree with @deltic in the strongest possible terms. I find it extremely concerning , disturbing and upsetting that some people on this forum have such views.

I was brought up in a school that was very diverse and inclusive; I didn't realise racism was a thing and thought nothing of having friends of different religions and skin colours.

I then moved nearly 200 miles at the end of Year 6 and discovered my new school had people who discriminated against people based on hair colour, accent, and simply not being from their county, let alone being of a different skin colour.

I'm pleased to say that same school is now vastly different to how it was and people of all backgrounds can now feel safe and welcome there.

Change may take time and be at a different pace in different areas but violence, theft and vandalism is not the way to bring about that change. Do you agree with this, @telstarbox and @deltic?

@yorkie sadly I dont. While there are examples of real social change taking place after peaceful persuasion there are many examples where the powers that be have only taken notice when people have reached their end of their tether and resorted to violence. One could argue it has taken riots in this country to changes attitudes towards inner-city deprivation and police racism. People now applaud the suffragettes but they undertook many acts of violence in their time. The whole situation in Northern Ireland came about because of repression and while there are many points of view on the matter many would argue that without a campaign of violence nothing would have changed.

Should we resort to violence - no. Do I understand why some people do - yes.

 

[C J Snarzell]

As an ex-police officer myself, I am quite appalled by what has happened to George Floyd. Despite his background, no one deserves to be humiliated and killed like that.

I cannot comment too much about America, but I do know that racism is rife in a handful of US states and sadly many people in the black community there are treated very badly and forced to live in poverty and are some times alienated in some areas.

I do think the issue in the UK has swung in the opposite direction. The Metropolitan Police's handing of the Stephen Lawrence murder in 1993 more or less rocked British policing to its core, and quite rightfully too.

What has happened since then is that the UK police seem to walk on egg shells now around anything involving diversity and race. The Rochdale grooming scandal has been allowed to go unchallenged for many years because police bosses were afraid of upsetting Asian communities because all the identified offenders were in fact Asian men.

I will openly admit that when I was a serving officer I would think twice of challenging or stopping black/Asian people because I didn't want to be labelled racist. There were countless times when I was confronted by the remark ''you've only locked me up because of my skin colour!''

I generally think that the UK as a country has come along way in recent years to turn the tides on racism. Even organisations like the English Defence League seem to have had lost their momentum and with the exception of the odd bigot, everyone treats one another equally.

I do find that like Mark Duggan's death, many members of society will use this tragedy to simply go out on the rampage to thieve and loot from businesses which has nothing to do with upholding the memory of the person who has lost their life.

CJ

 

[deltic]

As an ex-police officer myself, I am quite appalled by what has happened to George Floyd. Despite his background, no one deserves to be humiliated and killed like that.

I will openly admit that when I was a serving officer I would think twice of challenging or stopping black/Asian people because I didn't want to be labelled racist. There were countless times when I was confronted by the remark ''you've only locked me up because of my skin colour!''

CJ

Not sure what you mean by "despite his background".

Given according to Government statistics "between April 2018 and March 2019, there were 4 stop and searches for every 1,000 White people, compared with 38 for every 1,000 Black people" do you really think police officers have gone to far the other way in dealing with ethnic minorities?

 

[Mojo]

Not sure what you mean by "despite his background".

Given according to Government statistics "between April 2018 and March 2019, there were 4 stop and searches for every 1,000 White people, compared with 38 for every 1,000 Black people" do you really think police officers have gone to far the other way in dealing with ethnic minorities?

Do these figures take into account the time and location of such searches, based upon the demographics of people in the locality around the time of the search?

What exactly is your suggestion - that the Police target and search people that they don’t consider may be breaking the law, or that they ignore people that they think might be?

 

[Esker-pades]

Not sure what you mean by "despite his background".

Given according to Government statistics "between April 2018 and March 2019, there were 4 stop and searches for every 1,000 White people, compared with 38 for every 1,000 Black people" do you really think police officers have gone to far the other way in dealing with ethnic minorities?

It is public that he had spent 5 years behind in prison (2009-14) for an assault and armed robbery. Some people have been using that as a way to excuse police actions. The point I believe @C J Snarzell was making is that whatever his previous criminal convictions, the police officers were completely unjustified in their killing of him.

 

[NorthOxonian]

Given according to Government statistics "between April 2018 and March 2019, there were 4 stop and searches for every 1,000 White people, compared with 38 for every 1,000 Black people" do you really think police officers have gone to far the other way in dealing with ethnic minorities?

I'm not convinced that's a fair comparison - take Oxfordshire as an example. Most of the black people in the county live in one or two very working class estates on the southern edge of Oxford. How often are white people from those same estates stopped and searched? I would bet money that the figure for them is close to the figure for the area's black population.

I have a vested interest in this - I grew up in a pretty rough area, and there was a lot of distrust between us and the police, I was stopped a few times during my youth (very few of my mates from the nicer parts of town ever were). So I'm rather irritated by attempts to make it seem like there's just a racial disparity in police treatment - the reality is much more complicated.

 

[Bantamzen]

I'm sure a lot of us remember the looting in London and other English Cities in 2011.

Nothing to do with the unfortunate death of Mark Duggan , but that event allegedly a catalyst for such action.

This is possibly controversial, but I think if the Police had opened fire on looters in the 2011 English riots it would have stopped pretty rapidly.

I strongly disagree. I lived in the epicentre of the 2001 riots in Bradford, and I can honestly say hand on heart that had the police used weapons against rioters it would have exploded into a cycle of violence.

 

[UP13]

I'm not convinced that's a fair comparison - take Oxfordshire as an example. Most of the black people in the county live in one or two very working class estates on the southern edge of Oxford. How often are white people from those same estates stopped and searched? I would bet money that the figure for them is close to the figure for the area's black population.

I have a vested interest in this - I grew up in a pretty rough area, and there was a lot of distrust between us and the police, I was stopped a few times during my youth (very few of my mates from the nicer parts of town ever were). So I'm rather irritated by attempts to make it seem like there's just a racial disparity in police treatment - the reality is much more complicated.

It would be interesting to see a breakdown of arrests/stop and search by race in specific areas. I.e. in a particular housing estate. It's a blurry line between what is down to race and what is down to class.

Having said that I've known middle class black people who have been pulled up by the police....

 

[deltic]

Do these figures take into account the time and location of such searches, based upon the demographics of people in the locality around the time of the search?

What exactly is your suggestion - that the Police target and search people that they don’t consider may be breaking the law, or that they ignore people that they think might be?

Are Black people 10 times more likely to be breaking the law than white people? May be the police should be targeting wealthy white people like Gove and Johnson who consume the hard drugs at their parties that leads to the gangs that operate in my local area.

 

[deltic]

I'm not convinced that's a fair comparison - take Oxfordshire as an example. Most of the black people in the county live in one or two very working class estates on the southern edge of Oxford. How often are white people from those same estates stopped and searched? I would bet money that the figure for them is close to the figure for the area's black population.

I have a vested interest in this - I grew up in a pretty rough area, and there was a lot of distrust between us and the police, I was stopped a few times during my youth (very few of my mates from the nicer parts of town ever were). So I'm rather irritated by attempts to make it seem like there's just a racial disparity in police treatment - the reality is much more complicated.

Between April 2018 – March 2019 the Met Police conducted 9,614 stop and searches under Section 60 Criminal Justice & Public Order Act, a power which doesn’t require individual reasonable suspicion. Black people were stop and searched 11 times the rate of whites. Under PACE Section 1 stop and searches where there needs to be reasonable grounds that a prohibited item may be found then Black people were stopped over 4 times the rates of whites.

A study found that when police stopped people on suspicion of carrying cannabis based on smell – Whites were over 25% more likely to be carrying drugs than Blacks. Of the latter fewer than a third were actually in possession of drugs.

In your example why do most Black people live on the poor estates.

There has been long standing and endemic racism in this country, not as bad as the USA but it is still there.

 

[158747]

I find itunacceptable for these protests to be taking place at this time due to the ongoing Coronavirus pandemic but probably not a lot could have been done to stop them without it escalating into a riot.
I find it quite ironic to see all these protesters with their black lives matter placards on display disregarding the social distancing rules and putting theirs and the lives of others at risk especially as the black and ethnic minority community are more vulnerable to this disease.

 

[Mojo]

My heart just sank when I saw the tearing down of that statue in Bristol this afternoon. How truly awful to destroy history and public amenity like that.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

My heart just sank when I saw the tearing down of that statue in Bristol this afternoon. How truly awful to destroy history and public amenity like that.

Agreed. It also amounts to mob rule - and to my mind, if politicians on all sides don't strongly condemn that vandalism, it will set a very worrying precedent. Yes, the statue is of someone with an unpleasant past, and I can understand why some would feel it should no longer be there. But in the end, the UK is a democracy - if people strongly feel that a statue is inappropriate, then we have procedures for lobbying local authorities etc. to have changes to public amenities made.

The people involved with tearing down the statue have basically just committed a very public and fairly severe act of vandalism, for which they should be prosecuted.