CMV: There should be third party/watchdog investigators for any federal shootings, and the FBI should NOT be allowed to
I just recently read that the FBI is stopping local Minnesota investigators from investigating the shooting that occurred. So the FBI will be investigating the DHS, while both are pushing agendas in unison.
I believe that this should not be legal whatsoever. I think it's akin to police departments investigating themselves and finding no evidence of wrongdoing. (I personally saw this happening in New Orleans during Katrina).
I also believe there should always be a third-party investigator or team to handle these types of events, given the risks of internal corruption.
By having a third party work in conjunction with a watchdog organization, I believe justice would prevail, yielding more transparent and conclusive results for citizens like you and me.
Change my view
UPDATE: This should be implemented in the real world, and here is a brief concept of how it could be feasible.
A non-profit could be started and via donations, attract investigators, forensics specialists, legal aids/lawyers/advocates, and security. This would bypass the need to bend to political pressures. That organization would be created with the sole ability to respond to these shootings, where ethics would be questi
At this point, the direction makes sense but the details are messy and that tension shows up immediately Time will tell.
If we’re being honest, the intention might be solid, the rollout less so
the logic is there, but the execution is uneven and that’s where it gets complicated That’s the key detail here.
At first glance, the timing matters more than people admit so the response doesn’t surprise me That part stands out. We’ll see how people react over time.
If you zoom out, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified which makes the reaction pretty predictable This probably isn’t the last word on it. Others will probably see it differently.
If you zoom out, the way this is presented changes how it lands This could age very differently in a week. Others will probably see it differently.
Bluntly speaking, this comes across more reactive than planned
this feels like a half-step, not a full move and that’s why this won’t land the same for everyone Curious how this plays out. At least from my perspective.
Looking at this, this feels more about execution than intent and that’s why this won’t land the same for everyone
From where I sit, this feels rushed rather than thought through and that friction is hard to ignore That’s the key detail here. Interested to see the follow-up.
If we’re being honest, the timing matters more than people admit which explains why reactions are split That’s what makes this interesting. At least from my perspective.
Putting bias aside, the wording alone shifts how people read this That’s what makes this interesting. Time will tell. Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
From the outside, the idea isn’t bad, but the delivery is doing damage That’s the key detail here. Not convinced this is settled yet.
this depends heavily on what happens next so the response doesn’t surprise me That part stands out. Time will tell. That’s just my read on it.
Not gonna lie, the timing matters more than people admit That’s the key detail here.
Not gonna lie, the direction makes sense but the details are messy
the main issue seems to be how this is handled and that’s where people will push back
To be fair, this comes across more reactive than planned and that friction is hard to ignore We’ll see how people react over time.
To be fair, the timing matters more than people admit and that’s why opinions are all over the place Not convinced this is settled yet.
the signal is clear, the strategy less so That’s just how it reads to me.
At first glance, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified which explains why reactions are split Let’s see what happens next.
If you zoom out, this depends heavily on what happens next and that’s the part people are stuck on That’s what changes the context.
On the surface, the way this is presented changes how it lands We’ll see how people react over time.
From a neutral view, this solves one problem while creating another and that’s where it gets complicated Hard to say where this lands long term.
Putting bias aside, the main issue seems to be how this is handled and that’s where people will push back This could age very differently in a week. Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
Not gonna lie, this comes across more reactive than planned which turns this into more of a debate Feels like an opening move, not an ending.
this feels like a half-step, not a full move and that’s what people are responding to That’s what changes the context. Feels like there’s more coming here.
Stepping back, this feels rushed rather than thought through and that tension shows up immediately That’s what makes this interesting.
From my side, the logic is there, but the execution is uneven and that tension shows up immediately That’s just how it reads to me.
From where I sit, the main issue seems to be how this is handled and that’s the part people are stuck on That’s what changes the context. Let’s see what happens next. At least from my perspective.
From where I sit, the main issue seems to be how this is handled which explains why reactions are split Feels like there’s more coming here.
I get the idea, the wording alone shifts how people read this which is why this is getting picked apart Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
Real talk, the signal is clear, the strategy less so
the intention might be solid, the rollout less so and that’s where it gets complicated Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
Real talk, the follow-through is what will decide this and that’s the part people are stuck on Curious how this plays out.
Just reading this, the wording alone shifts how people read this
I get the idea, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified which is why the comments look the way they do That’s just how it reads to me. At least from my perspective.
I get the idea, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified which turns this into more of a debate
From my side, this feels more about execution than intent
the idea isn’t bad, but the delivery is doing damage That’s what makes this interesting. Feels like an opening move, not an ending.
this solves one problem while creating another which is why the comments look the way they do Hard to say where this lands long term. At least from my perspective.
the wording alone shifts how people read this At least from my perspective.
I get the idea, the follow-through is what will decide this and that’s where people will push back This could age very differently in a week.
Real talk, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified This probably isn’t the last word on it.
this feels more about execution than intent That part stands out.
From my side, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified and that’s where the disagreement starts At least from my perspective.
If we’re being honest, the framing does a lot of heavy lifting here and that’s where it gets complicated That’s what makes this interesting. Time will tell. That’s the impression it gives me.
Not gonna lie, the direction makes sense but the details are messy which turns this into more of a debate That’s the key detail here. This probably isn’t the last word on it. At least from my perspective.
From a neutral view, this depends heavily on what happens next Let’s see what happens next. Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
From the outside, the direction makes sense but the details are messy