Looking at what I think is the text of the bill, that’d hinge on:
whether multiple people conspired in the act
whether the act specifically violated sections 245, 247, or 249 of Chapter 13 of title 18 of the US code, or section 901 of the Civil Rights Act of 1968
Not a Lawyer, but it looks like this is basically saying that conspiring with someone else to violate those laws results in the same punishment as the actual violation (using the punishment specified in the laws, which would depend on the details of the case and from the looks of it goes all the way down to fines). And from the articles I’ve seen on it, it looks like Paul wants it to only take effect if “substantial risk of death and extreme physical pain” is involved.
When/where I grew up it was the Rebel flag, and thought of as a sign of commitment to local issues - family and community first, over the distant ‘foreign oppressors’ (like state-level, other states, or the federals), and a sign of rebellion and self-autonomy. That includes dodging/defying/defeating cops, of course, as in the Dukes of Hazzard.
I grew up and learned that a lot of people view it very differently, and for very good reason. It has no place anymore - too many other connotations, most of which are quite bad. But other people who grew up like I did haven’t had that realization yet. Or they actually like those things and that’s what they mean to signal with it.
I still never know when I see it which cultural connotations the people who have it are intending. That alone, that it signals such mixed messages, should render it obsolete. Whatever your message, that flag can’t communicate it anymore. You need a new one. But insular people don’t know or care about that - the people that they know all see the same thing in it.
It will be interesting to see what they come up with. If they make a change in a profound way, there will be a lot of people trying hard to make it fail.
And there is a deeper problem in the Twin Cities than the police forces. It is hugely segregated. The only time you see an African-American face on the local news, it’s a mugshot.
A Federal Judge has Ordered Denver Police not to use tear gas / pepper spray and “less lethal” weapons on peaceful protesters.
(From the judge’s decision:)
The most likely potential harm is an increase in property damage. Although I do not agree with those who have committed property damage during the protests, property damage is a small price to pay for constitutional rights - especially the constitutional right of the public to speak against widespread injustice. If a store’s windows must be broken to prevent a protestor’s facial bones from being broken or eye being permanently damaged, that is more than a fair trade. If a building must be graffiti-ed to prevent the suppression of free speech, that is a fair trade. The threat to physical safety and free speech outweighs the threat to property.
Looks like the TRO (among other things) makes the on-scene supervisor (rank of Captain or above) responsible for use of force, including for non-Denver officers involved, and requires them to have personally witnessed specific acts of violence beforehand. And requires all officers to have body cams running and unobstructed at all times, to boot.
This might belong more in the “of the world” thread, but since a lot of the focus is on America at the moment (and since the person’s sporting an American flag in their twitter handle):
I’ll tell you what: generational poverty, food insecurity, houselessness, and for-profit medical care are all problems that can be solved in our lifetimes by rejecting the dehumanizing meat grinder of capitalism and white supremacy.
