This list of injuries seems consistent with falling out of a sixth-story window in Russia. I would have hoped that a sworn officer of the LAPD would have had more sense than that.
I'm inclined to disagree. We need to be reminded every once in a while that authoritarian and unaccountable institutions produce authoritarian outcomes, and that there are fewer institutions more authoritarian or unaccountable in this country than the precinct a few blocks up the street from my apartment.
This community often directs its ire at abuses by the secret federal police, but as with many other political problems, the biggest problems in your life are often[1] not in Washington - but rather, next door.
That's fine, I agree, and your reminder is reasonable. I have no issue with what issues you've raised here plainly. I just feel that flippant sarcastic zingers are poor way to conduct that conversation as a metter of principle. It's shallow and allows everyone to read their own narratives in between the lines for and against the issues. Your point was not well made.
Compare this to many other comments in this thread who delve into the story. What do we know happened? What makes this suspicious? What are the compounding concerns? What is only speculation thus far?
It is unclear if you responding because you've familiarised yourself with the story? Or is it a simple dismissal because "Fuck LAPD"? A shallow quip directs the conversation to cheer around generic platitudes like this and everyone gets to go home with their own biases reaffirmed without any new knowledge gained.
It's the worst of Twitter
Edit: probably an unnecessary rant, but it's been on my mind a while.
I mean that specifically raises a very good question: are they the onion?
When you see a legal document the onion made explicitly to make a point about legal documents, you know more or less what to expect, and how you are intended to interpret it.
Is that true of a hacker news comment? Every hacker news comment?
