urbanMSP

Just the unions for people that legally carry guns, get away with shooting unarmed people, and elect people like Bob Kroll and this guy in St. Paul for their leadership.

If this guy worked for Target, and he posted instructions of how to shoplift from Target to Facebook, I'm sure Target would find a way to fire him. "Due Process" is a legal term, and we're not accusing him of a crime (free speech and all that). But there must be some exceptions to the union contract for officers unfit for police service.

One of the most fascinating things about the BLM movement is actually how aggressively the progressive left has come out against what they otherwise view as a sacrosanct institution for workers.

If this guy worked for Target, and he posted instructions of how to shoplift from Target to Facebook, I'm sure Target would find a way to fire him. "Due Process" is a legal term, and we're not accusing him of a crime (free speech and all that). But there must be some exceptions to the union contract for officers unfit for police service.

It’s easy to do that at Target (and most private companies) because almost nobody in the private sector is represented by a union anymore. If they were, there would still be due process unless the contract stipulates otherwise.

Many on the progressive left have come out (as they have in past decades) against a sacrosanct institution for workers that they don't feel should apply to a branch of government charged with using force in and against the public, and with a long history of being precisely the people who broke up union actions with violence once upon a time. The idea that police unions are a subset of the labor movement marching hand in hand with them is very recent and not universally accepted.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/01/the- ... -unionism/

Basically - I like unions for teachers and plumbers and clerical workers because I rarely have to worry that they'll consider it their duty to defend and hush up routine assault and murder by members on the clock. On the flip-side of the armed coin, police unionizing is problematic for the same reason military unions are illegal - do we really want governmental keepers of the peace going on strike all that often?

Just the unions for people that legally carry guns, get away with shooting unarmed people, and elect people like Bob Kroll and this guy in St. Paul for their leadership.

Which are also the ones that regularly lie to the press: https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/2016020 ... lse-report

And whose lies are dutifully printed by the press.

Not sure that getting rid of them is a solution though.

If this guy worked for Target, and he posted instructions of how to shoplift from Target to Facebook, I'm sure Target would find a way to fire him. "Due Process" is a legal term, and we're not accusing him of a crime (free speech and all that). But there must be some exceptions to the union contract for officers unfit for police service.

"Due process" means different things in different contexts. If the guy is an at will employee, there's little or no process due (subject to prudently documenting that he was not fired for discriminatory reasons).

If he's an employee with a contract, whatever process is in the contract is due. Same if it's a collective bargaining agreement.

Anyway, protests that provides an incentive to move the process along doesn't sound like a bad thing.

Many on the progressive left have come out (as they have in past decades) against a sacrosanct institution for workers that they don't feel should apply to a branch of government charged with using force in and against the public, and with a long history of being precisely the people who broke up union actions with violence once upon a time. The idea that police unions are a subset of the labor movement marching hand in hand with them is very recent and not universally accepted.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/01/the- ... -unionism/

Basically - I like unions for teachers and plumbers and clerical workers because I rarely have to worry that they'll consider it their duty to defend and hush up routine assault and murder by members on the clock. On the flip-side of the armed coin, police unionizing is problematic for the same reason military unions are illegal - do we really want governmental keepers of the peace going on strike all that often?

This^ big time. There are different forces at work.

Anyway, protests that provides an incentive to move the process along doesn't sound like a bad thing.

Yeah, but... I just feel like it's operating in bad faith to threaten to shut down a public event unless they do "x", and you know full well that they can't do "x". I mean, if you want to hold a protest and disrupt people's lives to make a point, just do it -- don't issue meaningless ultimatums.

Anyway, protests that provides an incentive to move the process along doesn't sound like a bad thing.

Yeah, but... I just feel like it's operating in bad faith to threaten to shut down a public event unless they do "x", and you know full well that they can't do "x". I mean, if you want to hold a protest and disrupt people's lives to make a point, just do it -- don't issue meaningless ultimatums.

Perhaps, but if there is no focus on X, then X may be forgotten, and possibly swept under the rug. Protests are by definition an attention-getting exercise, and the more disruptive they are the more attention they (and the target "demands") receive. If the protest is well-attended, then the people in charge of the process will be reminded that the public cares about this issue, and will take care to get the ruling right (whatever the outcome).

I can't count the number of times I've seen people holding signs nicely on the plaza of the US Courthouse, and drove by without remembering what the point of the protest was. And when my suburban family members complain about when black people will decry gang violence, I point out any number of candlelight vigils and memorial services that are routinely ignored by the 10 o'clock news.

Yeah, but... I just feel like it's operating in bad faith to threaten to shut down a public event unless they do "x", and you know full well that they can't do "x".

Okay, but by now don't we know that they aren't going to shut down the public event and that they don't actually expect X to happen immediately?

I mean, if you want to hold a protest and disrupt people's lives to make a point, just do it -- don't issue meaningless ultimatums.

And leave themselves open to "why can't they ask for something specific?"

I mean, if you want to hold a protest and disrupt people's lives to make a point, just do it -- don't issue meaningless ultimatums.

And leave themselves open to "why can't they ask for something specific?"

That's a fair point. Damned if you do damned if you don't.

That said, I see the point. Seems like you'd be better off asking or something you are likely to get and then claim victory. That's the problem with ultimatums. If you don't get your way, what do you do? You've basically boxed yourself into a winner take all situation where if you don't get what you want you've put self-imposed limits on your future course of action.

That said, I see the point. Seems like you'd be better off asking or something you are likely to get and then claim victory.

But don't you think they are going to get it eventually? And do they really want it before the protest? I wouldn't think so.

Yeah, I do. That's why I was just thinking as opposed to asking for an effective suspension of contract rights (unlikely), simply say the guy should be fired. Then protest, he gets canned, "hey, we won!"

apparently a bunch of white supremacists plan on protesting the Beyonce concert at TCF in May...

Two protesters showed up to the supposed massive demonstration at the NFL headquarters today. No one is showing up in May.

And even if a few do, they will be swapped in a sea of fans.

Yeah, and you really shouldn't cross the BeyHive.

Another Minnesota LEO in trouble over Facebook posting.

http://wtop.com/politics/2016/02/minnes ... ook-posts/

If you were ever unsure whether a lot of people are overtly racist, read these comments.

https://www.facebook.com/fox9kmsp/posts ... 0992004138

There's no question that vanity license plates should cost $10,000 per year, yeah.