EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 4205
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9168 Posts
| ||
|
Orcasgt24
Canada3238 Posts
On July 08 2016 18:09 GreenHorizons wrote: Wut? They aren't an "organization" like a dart club at a pub. They are the police. Besides that they've got almost all the information they put out about the shooters wrong at least once so far. Beyond that, the police haven't said anything about why the people did what they did. The only clue was "The end is near" which isn't something coming out of BLM. You are right, they are not like a dart club at a pub. It's more like the Marine Corps. They haven't said anything about motive because they almost certainly do not know anything about any of the attackers yet.. They don't even know for sure how many are involved, hence the bad shooter info. They know pretty much only what happened. On July 08 2016 18:12 Shingi11 wrote: And i dont think it is wrong that we hold cops to a higher stranded then just "any" other organization. Cause last time i checked not just any organization is legally allowed to take your life if they deem is necessary. Personally i think its kind of chilling if you believe that they should be able to seek a blood price for a perceived wrong. I'm not saying they should be able to. I'm saying that's what will probably happen. Police are human too. They feel same bonds with fellow officers as soldiers in the army. When one goes down, they all get pissed. I don't disagree about holding police to a higher standard. They have power. That requires restraint and I would say 99.9999% of the time they show restraint when exercising that power | ||
|
kapibara-san
Japan415 Posts
exmilitary people going nuts and doing crazy shit domestically feels like some sort of karmic retribution for the fact that tons of military people go through incredibly harrowing shit that breaks their minds based on the misguided or manipulative desires of the higherups in dc or whatever corresponding shot-calling organization again, not condoning or or saying anything is "right," just posting my random thoughts on the way it seems to go if you're still somehow offended by my thoughts, let me put it this way when i'm turning off empathy in my head, i also turn off desire for progress or any presumption that my thoughts need to be "good" when i do this, i read all events and stories as if they were in a centuries-old-book, and it's just my interpretation of some sort of novel you should do the same with my posts... pretend they're from a faraway place | ||
|
kapibara-san
Japan415 Posts
On July 08 2016 18:16 Dan HH wrote: I mean isn't this exactly why you say have guns? The most common pro-gun argument I encounter online from Americans is 'to be able to fight our government if it becomes tyrannical'. Surprise, surprise, perceived 'tyranny' is subjective. this is incredibly on-point in my opinion i hate the way the 2nd amendment is commonly interpreted because it helps people justify shit like this i hate constitutional glorification in general... look at the consequences of each popular interpretation, don't just buy into the good-sounding parts wholesale | ||
|
Orcasgt24
Canada3238 Posts
| ||
|
kapibara-san
Japan415 Posts
On July 08 2016 18:21 Orcasgt24 wrote: I'm not saying they should be able to. I'm saying that's what will probably happen. Police are human too. They feel same bonds with fellow officers as soldiers in the army. When one goes down, they all get pissed. the distinction between "should happen" and "likely will happen" seems to be incredibly often lost idealistic thinking vs realistic thinking | ||
|
Godwrath
Spain10137 Posts
On July 08 2016 16:36 GreenHorizons wrote: Still up on the PD's twitter (and elsewhere) as a suspect. Like wtf? Wasn't he carrying an ar-15 to a manifestation ? The reason they are not dropping it could be one you just aren't thinking about, but could perfectly be. It's sad that i yesterday was talking about people expecting too much out of the police when you have a heavily armed population, to wake up into this, and that people will still push the racism vs tyranny narrative when it's obvious what the real problem is when it comes to deads by gunfire. | ||
|
Orcasgt24
Canada3238 Posts
On July 08 2016 18:25 kapibara-san wrote: the distinction between "should happen" and "likely will happen" seems to be incredibly often lost idealistic thinking vs realistic thinking It is pretty easy to mistakenly pass off one as the other online too since text has no tone to judge a statement with. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On July 08 2016 18:16 Dan HH wrote: I mean isn't this exactly why you say have guns? The most common pro-gun argument I encounter online from Americans is 'to be able to fight our government if it becomes tyrannical'. Surprise, surprise, perceived 'tyranny' is subjective. Most Americans are ignorant about the Second Amendment and the historical context. It's up for debate whether the Second Amendment is really a right of insurrection. Even if it is, that was one of the minor purposes of it (given we didn't actually have an army at the time.) There were other, more important benefits that have been replaced over time. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23617 Posts
On July 08 2016 18:33 Godwrath wrote: Wasn't he carrying an ar-15 to a manifestation ? The reason they are not dropping it could be one you just aren't thinking about, but could perfectly be. I'm not sure what your saying but it's his right to carry the gun there and the NRA says that's how he's supposed to protect himself in situations like that. There's video of him giving his gun over post haste on his brothers advice to avoid getting murdered by the police, he was on the street helping people when the shots started. The police have released him and said tough cookies and good luck with the death threats. They can't pretend like they don't understand why people were protesting in the first place. | ||
|
kapibara-san
Japan415 Posts
On July 08 2016 18:36 Jibba wrote: Most Americans are ignorant about the Second Amendment and the historical context. It's up for debate whether the Second Amendment is really a right of insurrection. Even if it is, that was one of the minor purposes of it (given we didn't actually have an army at the time.) There were other, more important benefits that have been replaced over time. wish people could evaluate each popular interpretation sans historical context because whatever people think is the best interpretation vis-a-vis historical context is not gonna win anymore, nor is it even really that relevant tons of people with conflicting stances all think they have the writ of original interpretation just think of the potential consequence of many people thinking they have a right to challenge the state with weapon-based violence as soon as they think the state's out of control and then think about how many people already think the state's out of control or almost out of control feel like these memes added up together are gonna cause more events like this not that people are suddenly gonna start holding my interpretation or anything sigh On July 08 2016 18:37 GreenHorizons wrote: I think the police may be intentionally trying to manipulate the narrative at this point. We'll see if it fits the narrative they know everyone is going with at the moment or if the truth ends up running counter to that. i think you underestimate the multiplicity of narratives overall there are a lot of shades of grey; not everyone's a sheep who completely follows someone else's words just because they themselves arent constantly talking the way you describe "the police" as if they have one narrative, as if all police departments of every district, county, and state have some sort of coordinated stance, seems off to me | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On July 08 2016 18:11 bardtown wrote: How do you demilitarise the police when you have a population that prides itself on being militarised? Frankly, I don't think it's possible. Quite frankly, I'm not sure. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23617 Posts
On July 08 2016 18:39 kapibara-san wrote: wish people could evaluate each popular interpretation sans historical context because whatever people think is the best interpretation vis-a-vis historical context is not gonna win anymore, nor is it even really that relevant just think of the potential consequence of many people thinking they have a right to challenge the state with weapon-based violence as soon as they think the state's out of control and then think about how many people already think the state's out of control or almost out of control feel like these memes added up together are gonna cause more events like this not that people are suddenly gonna start holding my interpretation or anything sigh i think you underestimate the multiplicity of narratives overall there are a lot of shades of grey; not everyone's a sheep who completely follows someone else's words just because they themselves arent constantly talking I don't literally mean everyone. But several papers have already posted images of their covers exclaiming they know that BLM is in someway responsible, The Wrap even posted an article blaming BLM with a picture of the cleared suspect basically calling him a cop killer, took down the picture and didn't even bother to mention on the article they got it wrong at first. | ||
|
kapibara-san
Japan415 Posts
On July 08 2016 18:42 GreenHorizons wrote: I don't literally mean everyone. But several papers have already posted images of their covers exclaiming they know that BLM is in someway responsible, The Wrap even posted an article blaming BLM with a picture of the cleared suspect basically calling him a cop killer, took down the picture and didn't even bother to mention on the article they got it wrong at first. that's kind of precisely my point, taking the words of papers as if lots of people will automatically believe them with 0 grains of salt seems kind of off maybe it's more right than i think though the dumbest 90% of each side (kinda takes some magnitude of dumbness to even "take a side" w/ regard to popular narratives) are always gonna believe dumb stuff... just gotta hope its not stupid enough to destabilize everything and fuck everything up | ||
|
ahswtini
Northern Ireland22212 Posts
| ||
|
kapibara-san
Japan415 Posts
On July 08 2016 18:45 ahswtini wrote: i know where greenhorizons's biases lie. this is the guy who called out why TL had no black mods i do too but i engage the words rather than go straight to ad hominem without adding anything else thanks for adding to my mental notebook on your biases and habits of discussion though; nothing new, really | ||
|
Godwrath
Spain10137 Posts
On July 08 2016 18:37 GreenHorizons wrote: I think the police may be intentionally trying to manipulate the narrative at this point. We'll see if it fits the narrative they know everyone is going with at the moment or if the truth ends up running counter to that. I'm not sure what your saying but it's his right to carry the gun there and the NRA says that's how he's supposed to protect himself in situations like that. There's video of him giving his gun over post haste on his brothers advice to avoid getting murdered by the police, he was on the street helping people when the shots started. The police have released him and said tough cookies and good luck with the death threats. They can't pretend like they don't understand why people were protesting in the first place. What ? On a manifestation ? Are you all that messed up on USA ? For all i know the police could think that he intended to be on the shooting but backtracked last minute. But yeah i will stop posting because i certainly don't understand the US culture enough, its alien to me that you want to carry a gun to a demonstration which could end up on violence. | ||
|
kapibara-san
Japan415 Posts
On July 08 2016 19:00 Godwrath wrote: its alien to me that you want to carry a gun to a demonstration which could end up on violence. it's the fundamental culture of distrust and paranoia, that "what if something goes wrong, i might need to shoot the bad guy or defend myself," that only you can defend yourself comes with diversity tbh... and i don't mean just race, i mean ideologies and tons of subcultural groupings... some of which fall along professional lines... police think of themselves essentially as a cultural unit, and many other subcultures think of them the same way but yea gun culture itself was a slippery slope... once there were enough guns and enough people thinking they had a right to having all their guns; at some point in game theory, it just becomes the safe move for everyone to get their own gun... if you ignore complications involving accidental and negligent gun deaths (i think it's funny here that people say "if everyone was responsible, stuff like this wouldnt happen" yet call out the impracticality of "if nobody had a gun, stuff like this wouldn't happen." both are equally far-fetched hypotheticals to me) | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23617 Posts
On July 08 2016 18:45 ahswtini wrote: i know where greenhorizons's biases lie. this is the guy who called out why TL had no black mods I don't think I gave a why (it's because there aren't really black people here, Zero's the first I've heard of since Ace) But that conversation was understanding why moderation took things like gay slights/insults more seriously than racially charged stuff, and it makes perfect sense if they have no black mods. People went on about how it doesn't matter, and such but this probably isn't a good time to hash that out, at least not here. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22073 Posts
On July 08 2016 19:00 Godwrath wrote: What ? On a manifestation ? Are you all that messed up on USA ? For all i know the police could think that he intended to be on the shooting but backtracked last minute. But yeah i will stop posting because i certainly don't understand the US culture enough, its alien to me that you want to carry a gun to a demonstration which could end up on violence. The NRA believes that the best way to stop gun crime is to give everyone a gun. That the best way to prevent school shootings is to have ever kid bring a gun into class. They think the problem is that there are not enough guns around to stop bad people from killing others. The rest of the world sees this for the insanity that it is. | ||
| ||
