• Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      My point was that soldiers are less likely than cops to unnecessarily use lethal force, and you think that cops using lethal force is somehow a counterexample? Logic.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      To be fair those incidents aren’t inconsistent with his hopes, that the national guard may be more restrained than the police forces that did those actions.

      Police have spent an entire career actively considering the civilian population potential enemies at all times, with less vetting and training than you’d hope they should have.

      National Guardsmen have access to equipment and training, but their careers are less likely to have been antagonistic to civilian populations.

      This may be an overly optimistic viewpoint, but it’s not one disproved by those incidents just yet.

    • outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      To be fair, that was a cop, trained to panic

      Edit: nevermind. Got on wifi and watched video. That was a cop trained that there are no consequences for its actions, and getting off on the impunity.

    • tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Not trying to defend NG or any US troops, but those examples were from the LA police, not the national guard. Of all the worst direct violence I’ve seen so far from LA, National Guard haven’t been the ones attacking. From reports I’ve heard they are mostly standing around federal property because that’s all they have jurisdiction at.