Skip to main content

Minnesota Police




The state police in Minnesota pepper sprayed, and detained, journalists trying to cover the demonstrations over recent homicide cases involving policemen as perps.

The spraying and detentions came on Friday, April 16. After this several media organizations asked the governor to intervene. Governor Walz tweeted that in response, " convened a meeting ... with media and law enforcement to determine a better path forward," or at least in the hope that the latter wouldn't put all their knees on the necks of members of the former.  

Then came a backdown. On Saturday, the state police said they would in fact change their behavior.

Golly gee, thanks for not making it impossible for them to do their jobs, just so you can continue to do a due process flaunting version of yours in opaque conditions, the way you'd like it. 

Holly molly we're all grateful. 


Labels:

Comments

  1. HenryApril 29, 2021 at 3:46 PM

    Christopher, I don't find your comments clear. Is it the governor whom you claim is flaunting due process? Or do you mean "flouting" (which is a common error)? Whichever you mean, how does one do that merely by convening a meeting "to determine a better path forward"?

    The governor's real crime is using the superfluous "forward." At least he didn't say "going forward," which has become an abominable cliché. Its use should be banned in any context in which no option of going backward exists. I know that the First Amendment would not permit such a ban, but courts create exceptions to constitutional provisions. If they can allow the government to stop you from falsely shouting fire in a theater, then surely they can allow it to stop you from saying "going forward."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. HenryApril 29, 2021 at 3:49 PM

      I originally wrote my concluding phrase as "then surely going forward they can allow it to stop you from saying 'going forward,'" but I decided that that wouldn't be funny.

      Delete
  2. HenryApril 29, 2021 at 3:48 PM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. ChristopherApril 29, 2021 at 10:24 PM

    Henry, yes, flouting would have been a better word there. But now that the wrong one is in place I think I'll keep it. Anyway: I didn't mean that the Governor was doing the flouting, just that he was overly lenient to the state police, who presumably ARE. Hence the fear of transparency.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti
7 comments
Read more

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers
Post a Comment
Read more

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak
13 comments
Read more