Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
If that's what they will do to a unarmed attractive female Australian white reporter while being filmed, what they are doing to minorities must be fucking horrendous.
Exactly. They're already willing to beat them to death on camera. What the fuck are they doing with so many of them flooding the streets and kidnapping people?
Let's not jump to conclusions here, there is still time for them to kidnap her and deport her to El Salvador!!
I know "deport" is technically correct by the definition of the word, but I feel like we need to start using different terminology when they're sending people to a mega prison in a third country that they've likely never been to and have no historical or familial connection to.
This is rendition. They (we) are kidnapping and imprisoning people with no due process. It's shameful. I'm ashamed.
Human Trafficking.
Prison? We've seen the photos. Time to call it what it is.
It's a concentration camp.
Concentration Camp is the term we’re looking for.
It’s a Concentration Camp.
A 9News reporter has been caught in the crossfire of chaotic protests that have engulfed parts of Los Angeles.
Did we watch the same video? The cop did that on purpose. There wasn't anyone else to shoot at there.
The only other people were other press. There were camera and microphone operators. Looking at the video, it's so obvious that the cop aimed at the press and then shot.
Is there any way to tell what kind of cop that was?
My extensive experience leads me to think he is a bastard
Well that totally narrows it down...
A bastard.
Also, crossfire? Nobody else was shooting. It was just cops.
On reddit they said these people are like fox News over there so they are pro trump they wouldn't claim the police did anything wrong but still obviously have to say something as it's live TV
Channel 9 are not quite Fox News level but definitely Fox Lite. They're careful in their written news articles to only be centre-right, but their video and TV news broadcasts are heavily favoured to right-wing bias and favourable story selection, and always very critical of any left wing interests.
I'm not sure of their YouTube channel is available worldwide, but if you check that out if you can and you'll quickly see it's got all the same talking points as Sky News Australia (News Corp - Murdoch, Sky News is the Aussie version of Fox News).
They're pretty much your bog standard right-wing media. They don't endorse ridiculous conspiracy theories or the overthrow of democracy like Fox News does in America or Sky News does in Australia, and they basically try to stick to relatively factual reporting. But they also, as you say, bias towards the right in story selection. And they're relatively low-brow, going for sensationalism rather than good journalism, more often than not.
Rubber bullets are lethal at that range. Not "less lethal"; lethal. And that cunt cop 100% knows this. It's in the training. This was attempted murder of a member of the press.
Ok.
So, when people throw around the phrase 'rubber bullet'... it tends to conjure in most people's minds... a projectile, made of rubber, that is about the same size as a bullet.
They are not the same size as a bullet.
They are the same size as a grenade launcher round, between 30mm and 40mm, generally speaking.... which is about 3x to 5x the size of most actual bullets from a pistol or rifle, albeit not travelling as fast as either of those.
They also tend to have a metal inner core.
So its more like a slug round from an 8 to 4 gauge shotgun, with rubber coating, were you to roughly extrapolate existing shotgun gauge size/naming conventions:
Also, the actual usage manuals for these things state that... you are not to fire them directly at someone closer than approximately 200-400 feet, what you are supposed to do is fire them at the ground at a shallow angle, such that they bounce or ricochet upward at a shallow angle...
... because there is so much energy in one of these rounds that they need to be dissapated by that bounce, otherwise they are quite likely to cause serious injury or even kill someone.
That is to say, 'less than lethal' means 'potentially lethal' when used improperly, and cops routinely use them improperly all the time.
This cop who fired that round, at that range (under 200 feet, under the minimum safe distance for any kind of firing)... not only was he too close to safely fire the thing at all, it looks like he just fired it directly at her, between her knees and hip, without a bounce.
When cops say, when people say cops 'need better training', the technical details I have just outlined are part of that better training... which, in practice, they disregard all the time.
Similar wild deviations exist between manufacturer suggested usage guidelines for tasers, and how they are routinely, actually used by cops.
Another example of intentional bullshit perversion of proper use procedures is the cop 'at ease' stance, where elbows are bent and each hand is roughly up at each pectoral... this is a common, general 'idle' stance... and it often is used to obscure the view of chest mounted body cams.
In conclusion: Yes, this absolutely was an intentional attempt to murder or grievously injure a journalist, basically 2nd degree attempted murder if this was done by not-a-cop.
Also, the actual usage manuals for these things state that… you are not to fire them directly at someone closer than approximately 200-400 feet, what you are supposed to do is fire them at the ground at a shallow angle, such that they bounce or ricochet upward at a shallow angle…
This is incorrect, but a very widespread misunderstanding.
Guidelines from the Geneva Human Rights Platform suggest that rubber bullets should be directed at the lower body (the guidelines actually caution against “skip-firing” or shooting at the ground first, because it makes them too unpredictable). The potential for a rubber bullet to ricochet, Heisler explains, makes for a dangerous situation. https://www.inverse.com/mind-body/rubber-bullets-cannot-be-used-safely
What you are calling a misunderstanding is based on.... not citing manufacturer guidelines, nor police training documents.
Skip-firing is (correctly) declared too dangerous because of the potential to ricochet into the head, which can be lethal.
The older, 'less lethal', 40mm rubber rounds, police were using 5, 10+ years ago?
Yeah, their official training docs did state that you should skip-fire them, because the older rounds were of a much more primitive design, and would in fact cause greivous injury when used in direct fire, ie point at what you want to hit.
The cops did not want to give up their toys, so they invented a new official usage doctrine that 'made them safer', while also not really following it in many cases.
This resulted in, within the last 5 to 10 years, the development of 40mm launchers and projectiles that are of a bit more advanced design, with lower muzzle velocities, which are now marketed with the phrase 'Direct Impact' somewhere in the name or description of the thing.
And these are not really 'rubber bullets' either, they are basically a dense foam that deforms much more than an actual bullet would.
So ... I don't know if you can identify exactly what weapon and round was used in this instance.
If it was an older models, and many police agencies often keep many older models around, then uh yeah, those things are unsafe to use in the manner depicted.
If they are the newer models, then it was used in the 'correct' manner, as described by modern mfg guidelines and training/usage manuals.
So... yeah.
This is all rather complicated because ... well just in general police are secretive and lie all the time about how they actually do things, and different police agencies have different loadouts and gear, there is not 100% standardization across every city, country, and federal LE agency... and the same variation applies for usage doctrine, both theorertical and actual.
I'll admit that my info is maybe a bit out of date, but not fundamentally wrong: if we could identify the exact weapon and round used, that would be helpful.
EDIT:
So uh, in addition to ... large sized 'less lethal' impactor rounds giving people heart attacks with a chest shot, breaking limbs, permantly blinding someone or literally killing them with a headshot...
Exploding testicles.
A good number of cases of men being hit in the crotch, and yep, ruptured testes, blew apart your balls.
Fun Stuff!
You can see the cop aims low. His intent was to harass and drive away. A real chud.
There have been cases of reporters getting hit with plastic or less-lethal rounds in the head... With a helmet on... And being brain damaged for life.
The reporter must be made of steel because she laughs it off but those rounds can blind or break bones.
She's laughing it off because she is relatively young, in good shape, has media training... and is in all likelihood currently in shock, flooded with adrenaline.
Within 6 hours she will have a bruise the diameter of a soccer ball, and she almost certainly has a or multiple fractured bones, though they are likely hairline, fissure or impacted partial fractures, not complete breaks.
EDIT: Reporter must be made of steel you say?
“Hit by rubber bullet” as if it was a stray. Watch the live broadcast and it’s clear as day the shooter lifted his gun and aimed straight at her without provocation
Ya, wtf, I opened it up and was like that dude shot her on purpose. Standing there with a film crew around her. Should charge that cop with assault.
They should have used the photo of the officer aiming at her.
And the title... I hate the passive voice shit with pigs.
"Hit by rubber bullet"
The man aimed at her and opened fire. It's on camera. "Shot by cop."
Are we great again yet? Or do we need to be made great again again again and again?
Unpopular Opinion: Y'all were never great. The country had one brief period of some sanity before it got dropkicked out the door by Reagan. The only difference between the United States and Russia is good PR and even better propaganda. The United States is offensive to common sense and human decency on every fundamental level, from it's inception until today. Things are just more obvious now. That's the only difference.
We're getting greater. Gotta get rid of anybody with pronouns, skin, or who is awake.
That includes you, queers, and you, darkies! And you, brownies! And don't forget the people that believe in gods. And likely the people that don't, too. And anybody that disagrees.
Ok. Now, who's left?
Now who doesn't fit in? Who's the deviant, now? We gotta keep pruning and killing and sowing unhappiness.
Only once we reach the end, will we be great.
What legal reason would the police have for shooting journalists who are in no way in the midst of any violence?
edit: looks like they are going to claim she was blocking traffic, even though the car could have used the other lane.
Is it standard to shoot people who are blocking traffic?
In capitalist america, they shoot you for blocking traffic
In America where drivers have more rights than anyone. Yes, it is acceptable to shoot people who are blocking traffic.
There is no legal reason, whatever they say here is bullshit.
It's the BLM protests all over again... Including them taking shots at the press.
People seem to be rising up, at least. Finally. Hopefully momentum keeps them going and they start organizing a bit better and being more impactful.. Let's start the revolution.
National Anthem need some lyric change:
~~And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air, Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there;~~
And the riot-police gear,
gunshots echo through the air,
Gave proof though the night
that our flag is no longer there;
