top 70 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 98 points 2 weeks ago (58 children)

So the police aren’t completely militarized yet, like here.

  • source
  • hideshow 58 child comments
  • [–] 109 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

    These cops, no. But these aren't riot cops. Riot copsin France are legit monsters. Absolutely horrible.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    Here in Bordeaux they just started gassing the legal movement super heavily, it was 100% peaceful (no shooting stuff or burning or even firecrackers) was moving for only 5 minutes (this is regular stuff, happens often). Old people, handicapped people, parents with strollers. My friend went to them (the riot police) and asked why they started to gas everyone and could they please let them (him) help people out (you get respiratory problems when you're gassed, and people get disoriented, scared etc, people was on the floor, panicked), he got gassed.

    So this seems to be a biig "blunder", I mean if they don't just not give a fuck, which they don't. They don't listen? Well then it's french riot time I guess.

    ✊🏼

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 21 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)
  • [–] 7 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

    Before clicking on that link, guess how many people in the US are killed by police each year. Remember, this includes justified/self-defense kills, not just bad shootings. In a large country with an armed populous.

    How does the actual number compare to your guess?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • China isn't listed, but we couldn't get reliable numbers from them anyway. China counts as a "wealthy" nation, no doubt. Also, France isn't listed.

    I suspect the U.S. number is too low, as well. We all know our cops cover for each other and lie constantly.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 54 points 2 weeks ago (36 children)
  • [+] -12 points 2 weeks ago (35 children)

    The student picked up a stun grenade that had been thrown and it exploded in their hand.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 35 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 2 weeks ago* (3 children)

    He was 15.

    However, regional newspaper La Voix Du Nord quoted a girl, who was reportedly standing near the teenager, as saying he did not pick up the grenade.

    "He didn't pick it up. I was there, I saw it. He didn't pick it up, he didn't catch it," she was quoted as saying.

    And

    Last week, Eden, 14, was badly hurt in Saint-Ouen-l'AumΓ΄ne after reportedly being struck in the head by a tear gas grenade.

    The student suffered "a double jaw fracture" and had to undergo "extremely major surgery", according to his lawyer. Interior Minister Laurent NuΓ±ez has announced an investigation.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9zrdmxp4vy6o

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    If he didn't pick it up or catch it, how did it blow his hand off?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 2 weeks ago (9 children)

    Yeah that's the cops' version. The students around said that they didn't pick it up.

    Also, even if they did... Are you saying that a kid was at fault for picking up explosives thrown at them? That the only problem in the story, is that he grabbed it, otherwise everything else was fine?

    What the fuck.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    I completely agree that explosives should not be used against protestors.

    Still, I fail to see how a stun grenade can blow your hand off if it's not in your hand.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    I'm not sure they are saying it's fine otherwise. But that aside I wonder what would be an outcry if the grenade got back to the police and blown near some cop

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 2 weeks ago

    The same police already sued the government a few days ago, accusing it of endangering them by giving them confusing orders against the terrifying hordes of evil, violent, uncontrollable kids.

    So yeah, if a cop got injured like that they would already be taking out the tanks in the street at this point.

    And then they get shocked when things get more violent, yet they're the ones setting the tone.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -7 points 2 weeks ago* (4 children)

    if they did pick it up, why so?, this is not fucking COD where you just throw back granades, at most daring you should kick them, always run from them instead

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    It's a kid. Do you really expect a kid to know what to do when having grenades thrown at them?

    They are already fucking smarter than most of the population that just sits on their assss waiting for the world to collapse, but on top of that you expect them to have a proper rational immediate reaction when faced with military equipment?

    Also, I repeat: the idea that the kid grabbed the grenade is the cops' version, which can safely be assumed to be a lie (we're talking about french cops, who rape a guy that they arrested in their car with their baton, enough to cause internal damage, and their version is that he fell on it. And yes, nothing happened to the cops), so it's extremely moronic to even debate about the rightfulness of grabbing a grenade in this situation, since it just plays in the narrative of the fascists that try to shut down the protests by all means.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • Yup, agreed, same French cops that:

    • Count their self-inflicted injuries as injuries inflicted by their "suspect" (target).
    • Don't follow most laws and rules about weapon usage, about arrest procedure, about state neutrality, about non-discrimination, rape, etc
    • Cover their violent colleagues up.
    • Threaten a young driver (of color, of course) with "I will blow your head off", while pointing their gun directly to the target's head. Then, when the target drives away to flee, the cop successfully shoots to kill. The whole police institution defend the murderer citing a recent law that in effect extend the legitimate cases for the use of (lethal) force by police to "suspect" that would "probably" harm others while fleeing. (preventive defensive violence... reminds me of something). Some people even donated moreqthan a million euros to said cop to pay for his legal proceedings. The murder was filmed, and the video shared day one, disproving the police lies about the murder from the start.
    • Confiscate protests signs that don't please them enough.
    • Consider police violence and abuses as insignificant, always justified and proportionnate, then treat graffitis and stickers from protesters as violent crimes.
    • Sometimes beat up random people carrying palestinian flags in protests.
    • Throw projectiles (I guess grenades, from the impact sound) from behind the protester lines, probably to trigger their colleagues charge. (And deny doing so when they're caught red-handed by an elected official.)
    • Are fully armored in protests, get collectively knocked down with some serious injuries by their weapon mishandling, but still use these weapons on civilians in plain clothes, directly aiming at them.
    • etc

    Our (french) police intitutions are authoritarian, lethally violent, lying. Our ministers too, since they publicly defend and encourage these intitutions crimes.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    Also, I repeat: the idea that the kid grabbed the grenade is the cops’ version, which can safely be assumed to be a lie

    I mean yes, the cops lie a lot, but if the kid didn't have the grenade in his hand, it seems implausible for it to have blown his hand off.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 40 points 2 weeks ago* (20 children)

    So, a cop threw a stun grenade that blew off a student's hand. Ergo, a cop blew off a student's hand.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [+] -10 points 2 weeks ago (19 children)

    That's a misrepresentation.

    Whether or not you want to hold the cop responsible is irrelevant.

    "a cop blew off a students hand" is intentionally omitting critical information.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    Cops shouldn't have access to anything that could potentially blow off a person's hand, especially not a thing made to be used in public.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -4 points 2 weeks ago

    Again, that's irrelevant.

    I don't really disagree, this is not a conversation about how police should be armed.

    If you're trying to describe the event, "a cop blew off a students hand" is very obviously a misrepresentation.

    You're welcome to make a case that the cop shouldn't have been there or shouldn't have been armed, but "a cop blew off a students hand" does not describe what happened.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 25 points 2 weeks ago (13 children)

    Was the stun grenade required?

    If it was not thrown, would it have been there for someone to pick up in an attempt to throw it and protect those around them?

    They could...like...just pay teachers more. No stun grenades needed to be used on unarmed civilians.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 2 weeks ago (9 children)

    None of that is relevant to the question of whether the statement "a cop blew off a students hand" accurately describes the event.

    You're very obviously omitting key details with intent to mislead and it just undermines your position.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 weeks ago* (8 children)

    I'm literally adding details.

    You're obfuscating and attempting to only follow a very direct throughline. I'm saying to hold the further removed layers accountable.

    What you're doing is essentially saying that the actions and choices of the wealthy elites and legislators is not violence on us simply because they didn't pull the trigger themselves.

    Wage theft is violence. Healthcare denials are violence. Excessive police force is absolutely violence. And it all could've been avoided.

    So yes, the officer that threw the grenade is responsible. The chief of police who ordered them to carry such excessive force for unarmed civilians is responsible. The administration of the school who steal wages, overcharge students, and diminish their educations to turn a larger profit are responsible. The legislators and executives who refuse to protect the people and bend to the whims of the wealthy and allow the situation to continue while they often collect more wealth themselves are responsible.

    So, kindly, stfu if you're blaming a person trying to protect others for the insurmountable harm the system puts us all through. Wake the fuck up. The people you're defending would just as easily throw stun grenades your way without a second thought.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

    Oh please. I'm not defending anyone. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of your statement.

    This kind of hyperbole might impress 16 year olds but in political discourse you just seem like an idiot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 child)

    Hyperbole? It's our lived reality. Policy choices literally kill us, my friends and family are struggling to put food on the table after working hard their entire lives. What kind of elitist "political discourse" bs is this? You have no response, you can't refute it, and instead try to insultand call it absurd. I'd say the rise of the far right is absurd. It doesn't mean it's not happening all around the world currently.

    I'm wasting my time. Someone so propagandized will continue to ignore the harm in front of them and dismiss the actions taken by those fighting for others and lift up those fighting for the state.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

    If instead the person had jumped on the stun grenade to protect others, would you still have a problem with people saying "a cop blew out a students stomach" not be accurate enough for you?

    Theyre functionally the same thing. The cop is the reason why the student is now maimed. Saying that's inaccurate only makes you look like you're defending their actions, and are instead blaming the victim.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    Suppose a cop tripped over a students water bottle, hit his head on the ground and died. Did the student murder that cop?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago* (2 children)

    Sure, if the student intended to harm the cop, and slipped it directly under his foot when he went to step. That would be a fair equivalent, and I would say yeah, the student is in the wrong.

    You can't throw something intended to harm others, and then cry fowl. The cop is the reason that students hand is gone. No clue why you would say otherwise, except tovictim blame.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • Suppose a cop tripped over a students water bottle, hit his head on the ground and died. Did the student murder that cop?

    Sure, if the student intended to harm the cop, and slipped it directly under his foot when he went to step. That would be a fair equivalent, and I would say yeah, the student is in the wrong.

    I think the previous user's reversal comparison was a bad faith rhetoric trap. A good faith reciprocal comparison would have been something like that :

    Suppose that a student brought an explosive device to the protest, primed it, then threw it at the cop or in their vicinity, and that the device's explosion maimed the cop. Did the student maim the cop ?

    Considering your answer, which I agee with, we would probably both answer "Yes" to this question. In my opinion, as in the real case where the student was maimed, whether the victim did make the right decision to handle the explosive menace or not is not relevant.

    You can't throw something intended to harm others, and then cry fowl. The cop is the reason that students hand is gone. No clue why you would say otherwise, except to victim blame.

    Exactly. A "weapon by nature" (designed to be used as weapon in the first place) was used by the cop, so this cop carries heavy responsibilites for the consequences of their action.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    Yeah I'm sure the cop thought "I wouldn't have to do this shit if they payed teachers more" right before he threw the grenade.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    I threw a molotov at you, and you didn't get out of the way correctly. You being on fire is your fault.

    Get fucked.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    In France one of the only groups, maybe the only? not allowed to unionize is the police

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 2 weeks ago

    Not the police, as it is one the most unionized group of public servant workers in France, the biggest police union is called alliance, which is considered to be affiliated with the far right, and their spokespersons go bitching on tv like little crybabies every chance they get. The only group not allowed to unionized in France is historically military personnel, so maybe you're thinking of the gendarmerie who are military and not cops even if most of what they do is cop things.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -14 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

    it's cool they're destroying stuff to get educated better

    i wonder if these guys will pass those courses they so desperately want

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 weeks ago

    You have heard of that demonstration, and not of the (LOT of) other one. So it's a necessary mean. And you may be surprised that it have work in the past. Not always, but CEO whining for the destruction to stop have more chance than union asking politely to not be threaten by their workplaces

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

    I don't think Americans can really throw any shade on anyone about how to protest.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    Violent protests would be extremely counterproductive in the US right now. If you really believe otherwise then you need to step away from the Internet for a while, because you are totally delusional.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    No it isn't. You're just delusional. You think the average French person is sympathetic to violent protests? They are almost always counterproductive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago

    A false dichotomy is the presentation of a problem as a binary choice, when in fact there's a variety of solutions.

    In this case Americans are doing nothing to prevent the rise of fascism.

    You're claiming that you're doing nothing because violent protest is counter-productive, and ignoring all of the other solutions.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -8 points 2 weeks ago

    This is kind of a dumb statement. The French also protested and destroyed a bunch of shit when the government raised the retirement age.

    Guess what happened?

    If you guessed the government raised the retirement age you would be right. So what does rioting and destroying a bunch of shit accomplish in France. If you answered nothing much you would be correct.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 39 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    Most protests was people walking, being happy, singing and talking. What everyone is talking i that 10% shit happening.

    Please, be aware that most of the time people are peaceful. That what everyone have to stick in their brain.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    Anyone who remembers the George Floyd protests remembers that being the case then, too.

    The NYPD funneled the peaceful protesters into one intersection and then attacked.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 2 weeks ago

    And French police is doing the same. They even have an official name for barricading. They trap a group of peaceful protestors into an alley, then send a provocateur dressed as a civilian to start violence. They use the violence as an excuse to detain and injure everyone trapped inside the barricade. When the battle breaks out, they use that to further repress the peaceful protestors.

    It's a worldwide established practice by all police forces.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 53 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

    God I hate how much news is just not shown here in the U.S.. This and the recent No King protests are really only found in alternative places. I keep trying to explaining that marching isn't enough, that it doesn't generate enough fear/anxiety to make them want to change.

    That previous "peaceful" protests like MLK's had targeted strategies that disrupted life on purpose. And still had Malcolm X and the Black Panthers as the muscle of the movement.

    We're just not doing enough, and allies that are willing are just too far apart distance wise to properly coordinate without getting caught. And random acts of violence can be useful, but only if they are actually shocking enough and have follow up. Luigi enacted a small amount of change for a short amount of time. Companies were denying less for a solid year afterwards. The problem is that there wasn't enough follow up. The violence wasn't coordinated enough, or organized with a wider group so they could continue to lay on the fear.

    We're just too passive, too domesticated, and lack the will to properly organize. The only good news is Trump is making these points more salient as time goes on. Especially with his talk of interference, and using the national guard for voter intimidation. I believe the mid terms will be a breakpoint for many depending on how they go. Or I hope it will anyway, as nothing else has been enough so far.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    my gut says people are avoiding giving trump the excuse of shutting down elections before midterms

    after midterms my theory is things are gunna get ugly and all the people who want a show are gunna get one

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    I have to agree. The people I've organized with are also waiting to see how mid terms shake out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 2 weeks ago

    Organized what? baking cookies and waltzing around downtown?

    Guys, the blue pedo fascists might win, let’s not even do that walking downtown with gumption thing until after we know for a fact who our kings are. If it’s the guys we like, we can forget about the fact that we are getting raked over the coals by billionaires. Our walking cookiethons won’t be needed.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child)

    Dude you are so wrong. The point of the no kings protest is to organize people and encourage them to vote early for the election. It isn't supposed to be a disruptive protest.

    Maybe try getting off your ass and actually doing something instead of agitating for violence on lemmy like a terminally online weirdo.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago

    One of is certainly terminally online, but it's not me. Take your projection and fuck off. I've already lost family members to the Concentration Camps, so kindly take your privilege elsewhere and try being useful for once.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next β€Ί
    9 comments in c/crazyfuckingvideos@lemmy.world view that post