On assaulting Nurses and Pro Football players.

[kandrathe]

I don't understand what is hard about de-escalating hostile situations. It's got to be a dominance thing, or ego thing, or bad training. I mean, the recruiters should be able to filter police applicants. Bullies need not apply.

More consequences...
17 year veteran officer who assaulted nurse fired, lieutenant who ordered it demoted two ranks to officer.

They can and will appeal. Maybe some obscure union rules will unwind it. I think if it sticks, this is justice, and sends a message to other veteran curmudgeons who bully.

[FireIceTalon]

I’ve heard it was horrendously performed with nearly zero chance for integrity. Imagine if all the separatist Texans held an election, on their personal laptops with no verification of who voted, or how many times. Then, the bulk of the opposition was told by the US government not to participate in the illegal election, so hardly any opposition votes even showed up. One sided non-victory for propaganda value. On the other hand I can understand Catalonia’s anger at being promised autonomy, then having it’s autonomy overruled by Spanish courts.

Here's an idea. Perhaps, in 1776, France (and Spain, ironically), who backed US independence and helped lead the American Revolution to victory, should have instead declared support for ‘George III’s British Parliament’s constitutional measures to keep the Crown’s empire 'united’ and have allowed Washington, Jefferson, Hancock, et al., to have been thrown in prison for thirty years for daring to split...

Point being, the US is so hypocritical its absurd. For non-aligned nations, be they in Eastern Europe, Asia, the Middle East, or Africa, partition or independence movements are consistently applauded and hailed at the work of so called 'freedom fighters'; but when it comes to allied nations it is almost widely condemned. Surprise surprise. Everything from their 'one Iraq policy', East Timor, Scotland and now Catalina. Of course, they absolutely had no problem splitting the former Soviet Union up into a dozen or so separate nations, and many American political ideologues on both the right and left aspire to split up Syria, N. Korea, Iran, Cuba and ultimately the Russian Federation to varying extents as well. The US does NOT care about the independence of certain nations and its peoples - it cares about its own imperialist interests and will only support independence of a nation if its in their or their allies interests.

Just thought I would point that out for those here who are anti-independence for Catalina. My personal opinion of Catalonian independence is complex and a bit conflicted. Some comrades have brought up the interesting point that this movement has a bourgeois character to it, as Catalonia is the wealthiest part of Spain and does not want its sources redistributed (at least to the degree they currently are); and that socialism is not ultimately on the table for an independent Catalonia. On the other hand, who the hell am I to say Catalonians do not deserve their independence?

[FireIceTalon]

As for Texas, I say let them (try to) secede. Would probably be quite a bit less rednecks, reactionaries and white nationalists in the nation then

But from an econcomic standpoint: It would never work for them, though. Way too much oil and other commerce there for the American bourgeoise to let that happen.

[Alram]

According to this poll a substantial majority of the people of Catalonia are opposed to secession from Spain: 58.3% opposed and 33.5% in favor.
click

[kandrathe]

I cannot think of a moment in history, anywhere, where police ever took the side of normal, working people ...

How about you play this scene over in your head a few times...

Police: Woman sets fire to home, stabs Volusia deputy shielding man from harm.

Woman accused of setting ex’s home on fire over teddy bear.

[FireIceTalon]

I cannot think of a moment in history, anywhere, where police ever took the side of normal, working people ...

How about you play this scene over in your head a few times...

Police: Woman sets fire to home, stabs Volusia deputy shielding man from harm.

Woman accused of setting ex’s home on fire over teddy bear.

I think we both know very well this has absolutely nothing to do with the context which I was speaking. There is no relevance here whatsoever.

[Archon_Wing]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maksim_Gel..._by_Lozito

This does though.

In response to the suit, attorneys for the City of New York argued that police had no duty to protect Lozito or any other person from Gelman.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politi...otect.html

But this is why legal experts say to never talk to police. Because they are just not on your side. "Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law"... Note that it never says anything about saying things that will be used for you.

[kandrathe]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maksim_Gel..._by_Lozito

This does though.

In response to the suit, attorneys for the City of New York argued that police had no duty to protect Lozito or any other person from Gelman.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politi...otect.html

But this is why legal experts say to never talk to police. Because they are just not on your side. "Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law"... Note that it never says anything about saying things that will be used for you.

Not a "constitutional duty" - in that they have the right to keep themselves safe from harm. But...

Departmental Policy
Some departments have internal policies that stipulate the circumstances in which a special relationship may exist. The San Jose (Calif.) Police Department’s policy for rendering first aid, for example, states that officers who have begun rendering aid have created a special relationship with a victim and now have a duty to continue providing care unless one or more of the following conditions is present:

1.) The scene becomes unsafe,
2.) The officer is too physically exhausted to continue,
3.) The officer is relieved by someone of same or higher medical authority, or
4.) The victim revives

A source of confusion for some officers may be that while federal law is clear that there is no liability for failure to act when no special relationship exists between law enforcement and an individual, some liability may exist in certain situations where the state legislature enacts laws mandating an officer’s duty to take action. One such state-mandated duty to an individual arises in the area of domestic violence. Throughout the country for many years, officers failed to take seriously the dangers of family violence. As a result, states enacted legislation mandating special provisions and protections for victims of child and spousal abuse. As further documented in the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training domestic violence workbook23, these requirements include that officers shall make every reasonable effort to identify the “dominant aggressor,” shall complete a report in all domestic violence cases, and shall take custody of any firearm or deadly weapon in plain sight.

A Solemn Pledge
While legislated exceptions to the public duty doctrine exist, the officer must still understand that in only certain circumstances will he be exposed to liability for failure to act. This misunderstanding can lead an officer to take inappropriate action which violates an individual’s constitutional rights and could ultimately lead to litigation against the officer and the department.

Law enforcement personnel are moral and honorable public servants. Most sworn officers take their oaths of office as a solemn pledge — a pledge to safeguard life and property. Officers lose their lives every day attempting to fulfill this oath. Officers, however, often put themselves at risk because they incorrectly believe that they have a duty to act when, in fact, no such duty exists. Officers must balance the pros and cons of taking action against the rights, responsibilities, and the limitations of the profession imposed upon them by the Constitution, statute, and case law.

Proper training on the principles of the public duty doctrine and how it applies to police officers is essential to avoid liability on the part of the department and officers. The training should include a full and comprehensive review of the exceptions to this doctrine and any statutory requirements to act or protect individuals, as well as those situations in which, through an officer’s actions or omissions, create a “special relationship” resulting in a duty to persons.

https://www.policeone.com/police-jobs-an...-doctrine/

[Occhidiangela]

FIT, if Corbyn is a capitalist, you're a nuclear reactor. Words have meanings. Please try to use them.

[FireIceTalon]

FIT, if Corbyn is a capitalist, you're a nuclear reactor. Words have meanings. Please try to use them.

Perhaps you should take your own advice and think carefully about what you just said next time you try to bash communism/communists as being nothing more than zealots. Oh wait, nvm; the logic only applies when it fits YOUR (misguided) perspective.

[kandrathe]

FIT, if Corbyn is a capitalist, you're a nuclear reactor. Words have meanings. Please try to use them.

You might be on to something...




Jeremy Corbyn vows to end UK’s ‘failed model of capitalism’ as he promises new deal for tenants and women workers

[kandrathe]

Nothing? Not even a “haha”? ?

[FireIceTalon]

At least you can still hear the crickets churp, I assume.

[kandrathe]

Well, I thought it was High Larry Ous.

[Occhidiangela]

I cannot think

And at that point, the factual content in your post ended.

Perhaps you should take your own advice and think carefully about what you just said next time you try to bash communism/communists as being nothing more than zealots. Oh wait, nvm; the logic only applies when it fits YOUR (misguided) perspective.

Actually, I wasn't painting all communists with that brush. Go back and read that post again. Mostly I was addressing the zealot/broadcast only mode of communication in evidence, complete with tired rhetoric laced with generalizations and epithets.

[FireIceTalon]

And at that point, the factual content in your post ended.

You've yet to provide a single shred of evidence proving so.

Mostly I was addressing the zealot/broadcast only mode of communication in evidence, complete with tired rhetoric laced with generalizations and epithets.

So you like talking to yourself? I see....

[Archon_Wing]

Nothing? Not even a “haha”? ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXGVF77fgUI

[eppie]

Back off topic.

Hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets of Catalonia’s capital Barcelona on Sunday to express their opposition to declaring independence from Spain, showing how divided the region is on the issue.

A crowd estimated by local police to number 350,000 waved Spanish and Catalan flags and carried banners saying “Catalonia is Spain” and “Together we are stronger”...
Turn-out for the referendum was just 43 percent, with most residents who wish to remain in Spain staying home.

Reuters

Regarding the irregularities in the voting, including people voting multiple times: irregularidades

It is a difficult situation. The spanish ruling parties, especially the Partido Popular is populated by Francoists (I don't need to say neo-francoists because these are the same people that were involved in the Franco dictatorship). They have been very cruel to some of the states in Spain (Catalunya, Basque Country).
I can very well imagine that many Catalunyans want to separate from Spain. A country known for having incompetent politicians and extreme catholic conservatism.

Example: catalunya bans the cruel and old fashioned practice of bull fights (basically because in Catalunya not everybody is a 19th century moron) and some time later the SPanish government overrules that ban again.

About percentages of people pro and con separation......many spanish people moved to Catalunya for economic reasons....so these are spanish people with not connection to catalunyan heritage. All these people can vote of course so it is quite difficult to get a high percentage of pro separation.


Of course one of the reasons many people want to separate is an economic reason.....and that I just find stupid......first because they make a lot of money from trade with the rest of Spain, and things will not get better for them if they would be independent.


So as a person who is against right wing extremism I would support the separation but as a person who is economically left wing I think they should stay with spain.

[Alram]

The spanish ruling parties, especially the Partido Popular is populated by Francoists (I don't need to say neo-francoists because these are the same people that were involved in the Franco dictatorship)...

I speak with several Spaniards on a regular weekly basis and communicate on a forum with others. The above remarks did not ring true to me and so I asked my friends about it. I will quote the detailed response given by Fernando for your edification. It is long and detailed. The short version is that the above statement is incorrect.

In short, Alianza Popular (AP) got all the people who were at the right part of the political spectrum of UCD but were OK with democracy. All the people who were real Francoists arrived to far-right parties (Falange, Fuerza Nueva).

When UCD dissappeared, AP got all the right part of the electorate (liberals, christian democrats, some social democrats, conservatives and the like). Francoists were "outside" (Fuerza Nueva, Democracia Nacional).


To put things in context: Franco died on Nov, 20th. Any politician who had some responsability in Franco times is dead or with prostate problems.

After Franco died, you had in the political spectrum:

a) Opposition to Franco:
- Communists (by far, the main force)
- ETA
Contubernio de Múnich - Wikipedia, la enciclopedia libre
- Socialists (who had just left Marxismus behind)
- Monarchists, Christian democrats, liberals (tiny groups)
- Nationalists (Basque and Catalans, specially)

b) People with some responsabilities in Franco government included after 40 years of government, from hardcore Civil War generals to social democrats. Most of them were willing to open the country to a democracy (more or less "controlled", since they were afraid to death of a Communist return, for the welfare of the country as well as for their personal security).

For the first democratic elections (1977, 1979), Communists were expected to win. However, they got around 10% of the vote, while the rest organized as
Elecciones generales de España de 1977 - Wikipedia, la enciclopedia libre

a) Socialists (PSOE) got all the vote of the left which were afraid of a new civil war if Communists/Francoists arrived to power.

b) UCD got all the vote of the centre and the right which were afraid of a new civil war if Communists/Francoists arrived to power.

c) AP got a bad result (6%), directed by former Franco minister Manuel Fraga, who was in the "open" faction of the people who had had responsability in Franco times.

d) Fuerza Nueva Fuerza Nueva - Wikipedia, la enciclopedia libre got the votes of Francoists who wanted to be alive in democracy (many simply did not enter in the political game and were simply "retired"). For them, UCD and AP were just the same: traitors to Franco regime.

In the next years, UCD eventually dissappeared and AP concentred all the vote of the political right and center-right, including liberals (UL), Christian Democrats (PDP). In 1989 was "re-founded" to get rid of their most Conservative (Francoists if you like) elements and Aznar was named candidate to presidency (he had not achieved it until 1996).

Today, even the far-right is not mostly Francoist. They tried to copycat Front National or UKIP, turning to the inmigration as their main leit motiv, with no success.

I can very well imagine that many Catalunyans want to separate from Spain. A country known for having incompetent politicians

What country doesn't have incompetent politicians? Our choices for president were Hillary and Trump -- How much worse can you get?

[eppie]

What country doesn't have incompetent politicians? Our choices for president were Hillary and Trump -- How much worse can you get?

In most of southern Europe it is very normal to be fascist. In Italy, Spain, Greece and of course also in the former Yugoslav republics nobody would raise an eye.
That Spanish people see this different, I can imagine....for them is quite normal. Many of my best friends are from Spain, and they also don't agree with me......but I have also never had the idea they understood a lot of politics.
The background is in in the power of the traditional christian churches (Catholic and othodox) they have a long history of unofficialy supporting fascism. (that the current Pope seems an allright guy doesn't change this)

In the north of Europe we also see bigger right wing extremist movements, especially the last 10 years, but this is comepletely different than in the south were right wing extremism is much more woven into everyday life.


Of course every country has its problems with politicians but you know the issues that the south of europe had during the crisis? Political parties were only busy undoing what the previous one in charge had done....and the othe way around. I complain a lot about politics in my own country but it is not comparable to that in Spain, Italy and Greece.



I would anyway not be surpised that the US had something to do with the failure of the communists after Franco times. Just like they were doing in Italy just after WW2.