Another "I can't breath" death: Police Reform & Protests in the USA

[Mayhem]

you are linking to a video that wants age verification by sending in photo id or verify with credit card...

what? that video asked me if I really wanted to watch this video, that's it.

[Attackrabbit]

you are linking to a video that wants age verification by sending in photo id or verify with credit card...

I managed to watch it just fine without sending ID or verifying with a credit card. Maybe youtube knows you're a little kid?

[Shadowferal]

Poll: Number who think George Floyd's death was murder down more than 20 percent

The proportion of Americans who think that George Floyd's death in police custody last May was murder is down more than 20 percent, according to a USA Today- Ipsos Poll released Friday.

Thirty-six percent of those surveyed described Floyd's death as murder, compared to 60 percent who said the same last June. Seventeen percent said they didn't know how to describe it, compared to only 4 percent who said the same last year.

Eight percent said they believed it was an accident, compared to three percent in June.

[Elegiac]

Poll: Number who think George Floyd's death was murder down more than 20 percent

Gee it's almost as if we have a media system in place that's been blasting bullshit to that effect for the past nine months, I wonder if it's had a demonstrable effect. /s

[DarkTZeratul]

you are linking to a video that wants age verification by sending in photo id or verify with credit card...

YouTube age verification only requires you to be logged in. No idea what you're talking about.

[Endus]

Poll: Number who think George Floyd's death was murder down more than 20 percent

The proportion of Americans who think that George Floyd's death in police custody last May was murder is down more than 20 percent, according to a USA Today- Ipsos Poll released Friday.

Thirty-six percent of those surveyed described Floyd's death as murder, compared to 60 percent who said the same last June. Seventeen percent said they didn't know how to describe it, compared to only 4 percent who said the same last year.

Eight percent said they believed it was an accident, compared to three percent in June.

The alarming thing there is that people are so easily misled and unable/unwilling to engage their actual brains.

"Increasing number of people fall victim to propaganda" is not the hot take you might've thought it was.

[Edge-]

https://www.wlwt.com/article/kentuck...icer/35740899#

Senate Bill 211 includes language that makes a person guilty of disorderly conduct if they accost, insult, taunt or challenge a law enforcement officer “with offensive or derisive words, or by gestures or other physical contact, that would have a direct tendency to provoke a violent response from the perspective of a reasonable and prudent person.”

Man, given the gross abuses of power we've seen from cops already, I'm sure giving them further legal protection to assault and arrest people for anything from filming them across the street, asking them what they're being detained/searched for, using our First Amendment right to give them the middle finger etc.

What the fuck are "offensive or derisive words, or by gestures, that would have a direct tendency to provoke a violent response"?

I can't think of anything off the top of my head, especially for law enforcement who should be held to higher standards than a drunk guy at the bar lookin to throw fisticuffs because someone say he had a small peepee.

Good job, Kentucky. You're trying to make the problem worse.

[Elegiac]

with offensive or derisive words, or by gestures

that would have a direct tendency to provoke a violent response from the perspective of a reasonable and prudent person

Maybe if Republicans spent more time on English and less on STEM they'd see how blatantly contradictory this is. Rofl.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

what? that video asked me if I really wanted to watch this video, that's it.

I managed to watch it just fine without sending ID or verifying with a credit card. Maybe youtube knows you're a little kid?

YouTube age verification only requires you to be logged in. No idea what you're talking about.

Apparently that's a thing in some European Countries

https://support.google.com/youtube/a...united-kingdom

If you’re in the European Union (EU), European Economic Area (EEA), Switzerland or United Kingdom
The Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) is an EU-wide coordination of national legislation on audiovisual media – both traditional TV broadcasts and on-demand services. Recently, AVMSD was revised to extend certain rules to video sharing platforms (VSPs).

In line with AVMSD, you may be asked to re-verify your date of birth when watching age-restricted videos. Follow the prompts to submit an image of a valid ID or credit card. Learn more about what we do with your ID/credit card.

For more info on AVMSD, check out this website.

[Mayhem]

Apparently that's a thing in some European Countries

https://support.google.com/youtube/a...united-kingdom

I'm in the EU.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

I'm in the EU.

I don't know what to tell you...that's just what the page says.

[Edge-]

i am logged in... if i click verifiera then i am sent to another page where the options are to verify my age by sending in photo id or use credit card to verify...

https://support.google.com/youtube/a...united-kingdom

Seems like an EU thing, not Google's fault.

[Mayhem]

https://support.google.com/youtube/a...united-kingdom

Seems like an EU thing, not Google's fault.

Seems like a whatever country he's from thing, because I am in the EU and could just click "yeah sure I want to watch it" and it started.

[Felya]

Pretty sure that wasn't the case when I linked it two weeks ago...but I'll remove the link

It wasn’t... it was community flagged... it started a day or so after your post...

- - - Updated - - -

nope... i get a thing on my screen that says

"finish a quick control to verify that you are old enough to watch this video"

i am logged in... if i click verifiera then i am sent to another page where the options are to verify my age by sending in photo id or use credit card to verify...

What county? I can switch my VPN to it and see what happens?

[Endus]

https://www.wlwt.com/article/kentuck...icer/35740899#

Man, given the gross abuses of power we've seen from cops already, I'm sure giving them further legal protection to assault and arrest people for anything from filming them across the street, asking them what they're being detained/searched for, using our First Amendment right to give them the middle finger etc.

What the fuck are "offensive or derisive words, or by gestures, that would have a direct tendency to provoke a violent response"?

Basically, literally anything the officer decides offends them. "You insulted my dear, sweet mama? I'm gonna beat your face in and then get you a prison sentence, fucko."

Totally fascist bullshit.

[Elegiac]

Basically, literally anything the officer decides offends them. "You insulted my dear, sweet mama? I'm gonna beat your face in and then get you a prison sentence, fucko."

Totally fascist bullshit.

Watch me send the prosecutors into a headspin by telling them that a reasonable or prudent person wouldn't become a cop in the first place. :dab:

[Edge-]

Watch me send the prosecutors into a headspin by telling them that a reasonable or prudent person wouldn't become a cop in the first place. :dab:

I'd genuinely be curious to see this play out in a court of law.

Like, let's get some case-law and precedent set for what is accepted as provoking a "violent response from a reasonable and prudent person.", because I imagine it would overturn quite a lot of assault cases/charges. Unless this is only to protect police for assaulting people for saying they have a small peepee. Which would just like, be the smallest dick energy of all time, proving the allegations of the individual claiming said officer has a small peepee.

[Mayhem]

lol... i'm older than 18...

Well, then maybe youtube doesn't know you're older than 18?

[Felya]

it's sweden...

Still got the US alert... oh well...

[Elegiac]

I'd genuinely be curious to see this play out in a court of law.

Like, let's get some case-law and precedent set for what is accepted as provoking a "violent response from a reasonable and prudent person.", because I imagine it would overturn quite a lot of assault cases/charges. Unless this is only to protect police for assaulting people for saying they have a small peepee. Which would just like, be the smallest dick energy of all time, proving the allegations of the individual claiming said officer has a small peepee.

Chances are this is going to be one of those "we have an equal legal system but not really" things like qualified immunity but still.

It's just absolutely transparent that warrior culture is built on a foundation of severe personal insecurity.