248
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 May 2024
248 points (98.4% liked)
politics
18073 readers
3503 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I do not for one second buy that they were "designed" to be bounced off the ground. It's an idiotic concept from the get-go: it's hard enough to aim a conventional firearm. Expecting any kind of accuracy from a ricochet fired by an untrained and easily frightened moron is a fever dream. Fucking no one expected rubber bullets to be bounced into people's legs; it was always an excuse for pigs to shoot into crowds. The casualties are a feature, not a bug.
Bouncing off the ground serves two plausible purposes. One is good and one is bad.
It discourages aiming at specific body parts. Sure, the risk is still there, but officers who shoot at the ground are not able to intentionally aim for people's faces and bouncing off the ground means it is good for scaring crowds with less lethality than regular bullets. This is a good purpose, because it discourages intentionally targeting people and body locations.
Second, it gives police a cover to say they weren't targeting anyone in particular. If multiple cops shoot in the direction of someone in particular they can still effectively aim, but legally they can use it as an excuse. This is a bad reason that encourages overuse.
Both are far less important than the real problem which is using rubber bullets in situations where they wouldn't normally need live ammunition. Rubber bullets are supposed to be an alternative to shooting someone with bullets. They are not supposed to be tools to encourage compliance any more than tasers, which are also less lethal and not non-lethal.
And most importantly, it dodges any corporate liability, the company providing the ammo can say it wasn't used as directed, and police can fall back on qualified immunity, and provide a vague statement about additional training.