• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: American Politics

dredd-1.jpg
 
I mean, this is all popping off because a cop thought that it was a good idea to keep a black man from breathing for 9 minutes and appears to have stayed on him long after they established that he had no pulse.

Your answer to this is allowing the same people who continued choking a corpse for minutes to pick our targets in a target rich environment for more extrajudicial justice.
 
CH1 said:
IMO, this is encompassing way more than the brutal Floyd murder at this point -- people of all stripes are getting their licks in. Just like COVID is accelerating our digital disruption, being locked up has also magnified all types of despair, resentment and hopelessness of being left behind.
Click to expand...

Yup.

But... I get people protesting, strenuously, his unlawful death. It was a lynching by police, plain and simple.

I’m less interested in revolutionaries with Guy Fawkes masks.

But here’s the rub. Racist douchenozzles are almost always the cause of this shit. And the political right always seems to try to ride out the consequences.
 
LeafOfFaith said:
Pro-arsonist. And I’m part of the problem. You’re actively taking the side of the arsonist over the innocent business owner.
Click to expand...

"Police shouldn't be able to shoot someone about to set fire to an empty building" is not "pro" anything other than pro rule of law.
 
MindzEye said:
I mean, this is all popping off because a cop thought that it was a good idea to keep a black man from breathing for 9 minutes and appears to have stayed on him long after they established that he had no pulse.

Your answer to this is allowing the same people who continued choking a corpse for minutes to pick our targets in a target rich environment for more extrajudicial justice.
Click to expand...

Your answer is you prefer to let an arsonist flee than to apprehend him for a crime that destroys property and risks lives. Let’s just hope he uses better judgment next time.
 
MindzEye said:
"Police shouldn't be able to shoot someone about to set fire to an empty building" is not "pro" anything other than pro rule of law.
Click to expand...

You’re changing the facts around to suit you. I never said they should shoot someone they can apprehend in another safer way. I said if it’s between the guy getting away and not paying for his crime, or taking a non lethal shot and getting arrested and brought to justice, I take the second option for sure. If you don’t, you’re messed up.
 
LeafOfFaith said:
Your answer is you prefer to let an arsonist flee than to apprehend him for a crime that destroys property and risks lives.
Click to expand...

You must jerk off to architectural digest or something.

Yes, my answer is to not let police fire on suspects in crowded areas, or to discharge their weapons to stop anyone from fleeing a crime scene unless they are protecting lives. Not property, lives. You know, kind of according to the SOP of every police agency in the western world.

Yeah, that's my answer.
 
MindzEye said:
You must jerk off to architectural digest or something.

Yes, my answer is to not let police fire on suspects in crowded areas, or to discharge their weapons to stop anyone from fleeing a crime scene unless they are protecting lives. Not property, lives. You know, kind of according to the SOP of every police agency in the western world.

Yeah, that's my answer.
Click to expand...

Like I said in my previous reply. Don’t start attributing bullshit statements to me to support your position.
 
lecoqsportif said:
How many of these businesses have insurance?
Click to expand...

I dunno, but I read this sad story of an African immigrant dad in Minny who watched his entire life savings burn to the ground with a shop he just opened. It didn't sound like he had insurance...but I'm assuming he'll get enough media attention to be bailed out via donations.
 
LeafOfFaith said:
Like I said in my previous reply. Don’t start attributing bullshit statements to me to support your position.
Click to expand...

You're literally saying these things yourself. Your "clarifications" continue to point towards you believing in some loony shit. Like the same people choking a corpse should have the power to fire "non lethal" shots at people instead of actually pursuing them and catching them. It's flat out insane that you went to law school, are a lawyer, and believe any of this is okay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top