octopus_inkHow can we fight back against the police, when they never face consequences, but we do?
They just have to not reach for pots of boiling water after threatening to use it as a weapon.
That’s eems reasonable…
lanolinoilWhen she grabs the pot of boiling water, one deputy steps back “away from your hot steaming water,” he says.
“I rebuke you in the name of Jesus,” she says in response.
“Huh?” the deputy says.
“I rebuke you in the name of Jesus,” she repeats.
“You better fking not or I swear to God I’ll fking shoot you in the f**king face,” Grayson says to her.
Does it? Is a rebuking a threat with a weapon? Why doesn’t the militaries just have shoot if you’re scared rules but USA police do?
Does it? Is a rebuking a threat with a weapon? Why doesn’t the militaries just have shoot if you’re scared rules but USA police do?
You are starting to get that slippery slope thing. If you give humans power for some purpose, the purpose is washed away after some time, but the power isn’t, and it forms its own interests.
Police casually killing civilians still fulfills the interest of keeping the existing order. Cause somebody has given to the state that “monopoly on violence” thing.
And it’s interesting how other barbaric rules, like “insulting the king gets your tongue cut out”, or “touching royalty gets your hand hewed off”, or “not bowing in time gets you beheaded”, have been abolished, but “the king can kill you any time, but since you are his property, he’ll also kill outsiders trying to hurt you” still persists.