NY MLK Day March Turned Violent

[Syne]

NYPD Commissioner Says Anti-Racism Protesters at MLK Day March That Turned Violent Were Trying to 'Destroy Our Way of Life'

On Martin Luther King Jr. Day, hundreds of demonstrators marched over New York City’s Brooklyn Bridge in honor of King’s legacy. The march—called the Black Liberation March—reportedly started out peaceful but ended in clashes between participants and police officers. Twenty-nine people were arrested, several officers reported suffering minor injuries, and, as usual, demonstrators and police disagree on which group started the violence.

On Tuesday, New York Attorney General Letitia James let it be known which side she’s on by pointing out via Twitter that the clash between the NYPD and what she described as “peaceful protesters,” happened just days after she sued the department over alleged brutality committed by cops against protesters.

So the NY AG is getting in on the trend of enabling violent protests.

[confused2]

So the NY AG is getting in on the trend of enabling violent protests.

Or trying to do something about police violence. In fairness there are people who specialise in provoking violence. A police force that could only deal with people that obeyed when asked nicely would hardly be a police force at all. On the TV you see (American) police shout "Freeze" and the guy freezes - my guess is that the "Freeze" means "Freeze or I fire" - seems fair enough to me.

[Syne]

Police violence is largely proportional to the threat, and in the case of these protests, often a lesser response than an attacking mob would merit.

And even though most of the outrage is for 100% legal and justified uses of police force, it is telling that they largely only happen in leftist cities. Maybe the politicians letting so many criminals off the hook has led to escalation the police cannot handle without force.

[confused2]

In fairness, as far as I am aware, American politicians at every level (particularly local) 'emerge' from the area - it may turn out that the area they emerge from has more power over them than they have over that area. As I understand it America is defined not by 'All men are born equal' but by 'All men have an equal opportunity to prosper or fail.' Fair?
To run a failed city is to fail the people of that city. I suggest there is a need to engage (italics>) constructively with those politicians. As to whether Biden can do that (being one of them?) - the entrails are looking just like entrails to me.

[Syne]

"All men are born equal" and "All men have an equal opportunity to prosper or fail" are not mutually exclusive. Both can be true at the same time.

Yes, areas already governed poorly are more likely to continue to be governed poorly or worse. It take the people voting for something different for things to change. The voters are the only ones who can engage their own politicians. Biden will only try to lord his elitism over everyone, without ever listening to half the country. Unlike Trump, Biden shows no signs of improving the economy to benefit everyone.