Republicans: continued

Post Reply
User avatar
Sean Hayden
Microagressor
Posts: 17879
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:55 pm
About me: recovering humanist
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Sean Hayden » Sat Mar 06, 2021 2:26 pm

Can you tell me what you think my point was?

User avatar
Cunt
Lumpy Vagina Bloodfart
Posts: 18529
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Cunt » Sat Mar 06, 2021 7:26 pm

No.

Just like you can't say anything about mine.

What a world, eh?

Maybe we could relax in person over a drink, or a freer platform, but if you aren't willing to discuss the particulars of the race-baiting of journalists and media companies, I doubt we can discuss any finer issues.
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists


Joe wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2023 1:22 pm
he doesn't communicate

The 'Walsh Question' 'What Is A Woman?' I'll put an answer here when someone posts one that is clear and comprehensible, by apostates to the Faith.

Update: I've been offered one!
rainbow wrote:
Mon Nov 06, 2023 9:23 pm
It is actually quite easy. A woman has at least one X chromosome.
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 37953
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Brian Peacock » Sat Mar 06, 2021 11:30 pm

I can tell you what Sean's point was. He even repeated a few times just to drive it home. The problem here is that you either haven't been playing attention (but as you've replied to those posts you can hardly claim a defence of ignorance) or you're not really here to discuss anything serious/seriously (which is something you admitted to only a few days ago). So, are you ignorant or trolling?

Anyway, to Sean's point, so you're in no doubt:

The media certainly plays a role here, and one which is worth examining, but the media's tendency to sensationalise, and often trivialise stories belies the fact that many people of all political persuasions in the US have real and legitimate concerns about the criminal justice system based on their direct experience - not just what appears in the media.
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
Sean Hayden
Microagressor
Posts: 17879
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:55 pm
About me: recovering humanist
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Sean Hayden » Sun Mar 07, 2021 12:48 am

Thanks Brian. :cheers:

User avatar
Cunt
Lumpy Vagina Bloodfart
Posts: 18529
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Cunt » Sun Mar 07, 2021 12:49 am

Brian Peacock wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 11:30 pm
I can tell you what Sean's point was. He even repeated a few times just to drive it home. The problem here is that you either haven't been playing attention (but as you've replied to those posts you can hardly claim a defence of ignorance) or you're not really here to discuss anything serious/seriously (which is something you admitted to only a few days ago). So, are you ignorant or trolling?

Anyway, to Sean's point, so you're in no doubt:

The media certainly plays a role here, and one which is worth examining, but the media's tendency to sensationalise, and often trivialise stories belies the fact that many people of all political persuasions in the US have real and legitimate concerns about the criminal justice system based on their direct experience - not just what appears in the media.
I'm with you both, but there isn't any point there.

Nothing you say shows you understand that case study.
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists


Joe wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2023 1:22 pm
he doesn't communicate

The 'Walsh Question' 'What Is A Woman?' I'll put an answer here when someone posts one that is clear and comprehensible, by apostates to the Faith.

Update: I've been offered one!
rainbow wrote:
Mon Nov 06, 2023 9:23 pm
It is actually quite easy. A woman has at least one X chromosome.
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 37953
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Brian Peacock » Sun Mar 07, 2021 2:29 am

The point was that you said media manipulation caused the BLM protests and subsequent disorder and Sean said something to the effect of, "Maybe to some extent, but pretty much everyone in the US has concerns about policing and the criminal justice system," and that highlighting a specific case as emblematic of the whole and pinning it entirely on the media not only downplays and neglects those concerns, but might actually work against attempts to resolve those issues. That's what I took from Sean. Someone interested in honest debate would have taken that on good faith rather than snatching their wig, complaining that their point wasn't being accepted without question, and then implying that their interlocutor was incapable of truly understanding the real situation.

I think the role of the media is important here, particular those media outlet that spend a lot of time telling their audiences that community concerns over policing are neither legitimate nor well-intentioned, that the motives of people calling for change are fundamentally malign and malicious, and that protests over policing and criminal justice policy are just a political stunt to make certain people feel uncomfortable and certain politicians look bad.
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
Cunt
Lumpy Vagina Bloodfart
Posts: 18529
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Cunt » Sun Mar 07, 2021 2:37 am

I didn't say what you think I said, but no matter.

I also didn't imply that he and you didn't understand.

I'll plainly claim that you can't describe the case fairly, and can't say why what the 'Biden/Harris team' did was so reprehensible. You don't have to agree with me, but I know that you can't 'talk about it'.

I don't disagree with anything Sean said about the police concerns, except that I think ignoring what rot these 'case studies' show, is avoiding a significant part of the problem.

Ignoring is the wrong word, since I have no reason to think you both don't know exactly what Blake was doing there, why the police were called, or why it was a shit move for the Biden/Harris team, but still you won't be able to write it out.

Which is indeed, I guess, ignoring it. Look at me, I'm doing it too!

Needless to say, while I don't disagree about the police being a concern, I do think case studies such as what is used by mainstream media to push their agenda, are a key point.

Also, the total lack of a 'law enforcement' perspective is a bit hampering. I've talked to a couple associates in that business, but even more than you two, they are reluctant to engage in specifics.
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists


Joe wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2023 1:22 pm
he doesn't communicate

The 'Walsh Question' 'What Is A Woman?' I'll put an answer here when someone posts one that is clear and comprehensible, by apostates to the Faith.

Update: I've been offered one!
rainbow wrote:
Mon Nov 06, 2023 9:23 pm
It is actually quite easy. A woman has at least one X chromosome.
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.

User avatar
Cunt
Lumpy Vagina Bloodfart
Posts: 18529
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Cunt » Sun Mar 07, 2021 3:18 am

Getting back to the thread topic, I think I found a Republican.
https://twitter.com/ComfortablySmug/sta ... 3428908040
Biden opening child cages to 100% but kids can't go back to school?

Maybe the coyotes should unionize

Axios
@axios
ImageSCOOP: The CDC is allowing shelters handling child migrants to expand to 100% capacity, abandoning a requirement to stay near 50% as a COVID precaution.
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists


Joe wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2023 1:22 pm
he doesn't communicate

The 'Walsh Question' 'What Is A Woman?' I'll put an answer here when someone posts one that is clear and comprehensible, by apostates to the Faith.

Update: I've been offered one!
rainbow wrote:
Mon Nov 06, 2023 9:23 pm
It is actually quite easy. A woman has at least one X chromosome.
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.

User avatar
Sean Hayden
Microagressor
Posts: 17879
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:55 pm
About me: recovering humanist
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Sean Hayden » Sun Mar 07, 2021 3:36 am

Cunt wrote:
Sun Mar 07, 2021 2:37 am
I didn't say what you think I said, but no matter.

I also didn't imply that he and you didn't understand.

I'll plainly claim that you can't describe the case fairly, and can't say why what the 'Biden/Harris team' did was so reprehensible. You don't have to agree with me, but I know that you can't 'talk about it'.

I don't disagree with anything Sean said about the police concerns, except that I think ignoring what rot these 'case studies' show, is avoiding a significant part of the problem.

Ignoring is the wrong word, since I have no reason to think you both don't know exactly what Blake was doing there, why the police were called, or why it was a shit move for the Biden/Harris team, but still you won't be able to write it out.

Which is indeed, I guess, ignoring it. Look at me, I'm doing it too!

Needless to say, while I don't disagree about the police being a concern, I do think case studies such as what is used by mainstream media to push their agenda, are a key point.

Also, the total lack of a 'law enforcement' perspective is a bit hampering. I've talked to a couple associates in that business, but even more than you two, they are reluctant to engage in specifics.
I guess it hasn't occurred to you that while it's true I haven't said anything about Biden calling Blake, I haven't used Blake as an example of the problem with police either.

It's one case. To be fair to people that did show an emotional outpouring, they did so after watching a video of a cop shooting a man in the back 7 times, and this after having recently watched another cop kill George Floyd --those cops have been charged btw. Now, some months later after more facts have been revealed, you've learned --in your opinion-- that it was a justified shooting, and that those who were outraged were played; the media and Biden/Harris used them.

To me that's an irrational conclusion. It certainly doesn't seem to represent what I know about people. Everyone, even the media, is allowed to have an emotional outburst, especially in light of their exposure to so many tragic events relatively close together. A lot of people are going to feel the desire to wish the guy well after learning he survived being shot in the back 7 times. At worst anyone who did so should suffer a bit of embarrassment after learning the facts. :dunno:

I already said examining the media's role is worthwhile. I also asked you if you thought that role was responsible for our concerns. That's really my only point here. I think some people would like it if by discrediting the media they could also discredit anyone calling for change.

User avatar
Cunt
Lumpy Vagina Bloodfart
Posts: 18529
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Cunt » Sun Mar 07, 2021 4:01 am

Sean Hayden wrote:
Sun Mar 07, 2021 3:36 am
I guess it hasn't occurred to you that while it's true I haven't said anything about Biden calling Blake, I haven't used Blake as an example of the problem with police either.
No. The media, and your current president and VP did. With all their knowledge and forethought.

It's one case. To be fair to people that did show an emotional outpouring, they did so after watching a video of a cop shooting a man in the back 7 times,
Look, it's ok for you and me to be emotional, but someone in charge of a country would understand that when deadly force is used, it can mean emptying the gun into the threat.

They didn't make a mistake, they did what they did knowing that either they were being dishonest outright, or going forward without confirming facts.

My guess is that it doesn't matter which is true, because they don't care about accountability for that kind of political theater.
and this after having recently watched another cop kill George Floyd
Do you mean the verdict came in? Or are you saying it was murder before the courts have their say?

If I recall correctly, they were charging him with 2nd degree murder, and that sounds really tough to prove.

In the Floyd case, does it matter if anyone lied and how?

For instance, the second released video, showing more of the event, really changed my perspective on it. Did it do any of that for you?

One important fact, to me, was that the officials could have released it earlier, and diffused some of the outrage at the treatment of Floyd in the last 10 minutes.

They held it until a foreign news agency released it. You saw that one, right?

--those cops have been charged btw. Now, some months later after more facts have been revealed, you've learned --in your opinion-- that it was a justified shooting, and that those who were outraged were played; the media and Biden/Harris used them.
Not my opinion, I would look to...
Who - brought the police
What - were the police called to address
Where - was Blake supposed to be, according to the restraining order
When - was Blake shot (hint, after successfully beating cops, then grabbing a knife)
Why - why would they take such a strong position, but not for the victim of the crime? (Blake's victim)

If you know those things with reasonable accuracy, I'll value your understanding better. As it is, you don't sound very sympathetic to Blake's victim. Nor to the seriousness of Harris's disgusting support of him.

To me that's an irrational conclusion. It certainly doesn't seem to represent what I know about people. Everyone, even the media, is allowed to have an emotional outburst, especially in light of their exposure to so many tragic events relatively close together.
So Harris just had an emotional outburst? What a fucking loser. Sure hope she never gets in charge of anything upsetting.

Like law enforcement.
A lot of people are going to feel the desire to wish the guy well after learning he survived being shot in the back 7 times. At worst anyone who did so should suffer a bit of embarrassment after learning the facts. :dunno:
I would have (yes to both I mean)

But when I learned what he was 'resisting' over, it was enough to stop acting like a jackass. I'm old enough to remember when restraining orders meant the assaulter was a 'bad guy', and the victim was a 'good guy'. Life was simple back then...if a bad guy tried to kill cops or citizens, he got his ass lit up and the President didn't even take notice.

I already said examining the media's role is worthwhile. I also asked you if you thought that role was responsible for our concerns. That's really my only point here. I think some people would like it if by discrediting the media they could also discredit anyone calling for change.
I don't know your concerns, but it looks like you still don't know what Harris, the media and many rioters got wrong, or why Harris might have been willing to risk such a 'mistake', knowing what she does about law enforcement, the case specifically and how the media hold her accountable.
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists


Joe wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2023 1:22 pm
he doesn't communicate

The 'Walsh Question' 'What Is A Woman?' I'll put an answer here when someone posts one that is clear and comprehensible, by apostates to the Faith.

Update: I've been offered one!
rainbow wrote:
Mon Nov 06, 2023 9:23 pm
It is actually quite easy. A woman has at least one X chromosome.
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.

User avatar
Cunt
Lumpy Vagina Bloodfart
Posts: 18529
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Cunt » Sun Mar 07, 2021 4:15 am

Think I found another Republican...
Trigger Warning!!!1! :
Image
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists


Joe wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2023 1:22 pm
he doesn't communicate

The 'Walsh Question' 'What Is A Woman?' I'll put an answer here when someone posts one that is clear and comprehensible, by apostates to the Faith.

Update: I've been offered one!
rainbow wrote:
Mon Nov 06, 2023 9:23 pm
It is actually quite easy. A woman has at least one X chromosome.
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.

User avatar
Sean Hayden
Microagressor
Posts: 17879
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:55 pm
About me: recovering humanist
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Sean Hayden » Sun Mar 07, 2021 4:46 am

Cunt wrote:
Sun Mar 07, 2021 4:01 am
Sean Hayden wrote:
Sun Mar 07, 2021 3:36 am
I guess it hasn't occurred to you that while it's true I haven't said anything about Biden calling Blake, I haven't used Blake as an example of the problem with police either.
No. The media, and your current president and VP did. With all their knowledge and forethought.

It's one case. To be fair to people that did show an emotional outpouring, they did so after watching a video of a cop shooting a man in the back 7 times,
Look, it's ok for you and me to be emotional, but someone in charge of a country would understand that when deadly force is used, it can mean emptying the gun into the threat.

They didn't make a mistake, they did what they did knowing that either they were being dishonest outright, or going forward without confirming facts.

My guess is that it doesn't matter which is true, because they don't care about accountability for that kind of political theater.
and this after having recently watched another cop kill George Floyd
Do you mean the verdict came in? Or are you saying it was murder before the courts have their say?

If I recall correctly, they were charging him with 2nd degree murder, and that sounds really tough to prove.

In the Floyd case, does it matter if anyone lied and how?

For instance, the second released video, showing more of the event, really changed my perspective on it. Did it do any of that for you?

One important fact, to me, was that the officials could have released it earlier, and diffused some of the outrage at the treatment of Floyd in the last 10 minutes.

They held it until a foreign news agency released it. You saw that one, right?

--those cops have been charged btw. Now, some months later after more facts have been revealed, you've learned --in your opinion-- that it was a justified shooting, and that those who were outraged were played; the media and Biden/Harris used them.
Not my opinion, I would look to...
Who - brought the police
What - were the police called to address
Where - was Blake supposed to be, according to the restraining order
When - was Blake shot (hint, after successfully beating cops, then grabbing a knife)
Why - why would they take such a strong position, but not for the victim of the crime? (Blake's victim)

If you know those things with reasonable accuracy, I'll value your understanding better. As it is, you don't sound very sympathetic to Blake's victim. Nor to the seriousness of Harris's disgusting support of him.

To me that's an irrational conclusion. It certainly doesn't seem to represent what I know about people. Everyone, even the media, is allowed to have an emotional outburst, especially in light of their exposure to so many tragic events relatively close together.
So Harris just had an emotional outburst? What a fucking loser. Sure hope she never gets in charge of anything upsetting.

Like law enforcement.
A lot of people are going to feel the desire to wish the guy well after learning he survived being shot in the back 7 times. At worst anyone who did so should suffer a bit of embarrassment after learning the facts. :dunno:
I would have (yes to both I mean)

But when I learned what he was 'resisting' over, it was enough to stop acting like a jackass. I'm old enough to remember when restraining orders meant the assaulter was a 'bad guy', and the victim was a 'good guy'. Life was simple back then...if a bad guy tried to kill cops or citizens, he got his ass lit up and the President didn't even take notice.

I already said examining the media's role is worthwhile. I also asked you if you thought that role was responsible for our concerns. That's really my only point here. I think some people would like it if by discrediting the media they could also discredit anyone calling for change.
I don't know your concerns, but it looks like you still don't know what Harris, the media and many rioters got wrong, or why Harris might have been willing to risk such a 'mistake', knowing what she does about law enforcement, the case specifically and how the media hold her accountable.
Surely the time you've spent defending Trump has taught you that being president doesn't make you immune to error. What you are cynically calling political theater looks exactly the same as responding to the public's concerns. It's not a stretch to imagine the response is genuine as well for the reasons I gave before.

--//--

I've tended to be most concerned about the expansion of policing powers and unequal policing. Republicans are quite fond of the joke that you can't fall out of bed without breaking a law in this country. (You just need to change the context away from BLM to see that these concerns cut across the political spectrum)

For an example of unequal treatment:
Harsh drug laws are clearly an important factor in the persistent racial and ethnic disparities observed in state prisons. For drug crimes disparities are especially severe, due largely to the fact that blacks are nearly four times as likely as whites to be arrested for drug offenses and 2.5 times as likely to be arrested for drug possession. 29) This is despite the evidence that whites and blacks use drugs at roughly the same rate. From 1995 to 2005, African Americans comprised approximately 13 percent of drug users but 36% of drug arrests and 46% of those convicted for drug offenses.30)

Disparities are evident at the initial point of contact with police, especially through policies that target specific areas and/or people. A popular example of this is “stop, question, and frisk.”


https://www.sentencingproject.org/publi ... 0Disparity

User avatar
Cunt
Lumpy Vagina Bloodfart
Posts: 18529
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:10 am
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Cunt » Sun Mar 07, 2021 5:10 am

Sean Hayden wrote:
Sun Mar 07, 2021 4:46 am
Surely the time you've spent defending Trump has taught you that being president doesn't make you immune to error. What you are cynically calling political theater looks exactly the same as responding to the public's concerns. It's not a stretch to imagine the response is genuine as well for the reasons I gave before.
So you excuse a top law enforcement specialist (Harris) because she was emotional, and ignored basic investigative technique in favour of reaching out with feeling.

OK, I think.

Is that it? She is excused for backing the criminal over the victim because it was upsetting?

--//--

I've tended to be most concerned about the expansion of policing powers and unequal policing. Republicans are quite fond of the joke that you can't fall out of bed without breaking a law in this country. (You just need to change the context away from BLM to see that these concerns cut across the political spectrum)

For an example of unequal treatment:
Harsh drug laws are clearly an important factor in the persistent racial and ethnic disparities observed in state prisons. For drug crimes disparities are especially severe, due largely to the fact that blacks are nearly four times as likely as whites to be arrested for drug offenses and 2.5 times as likely to be arrested for drug possession. 29) This is despite the evidence that whites and blacks use drugs at roughly the same rate. From 1995 to 2005, African Americans comprised approximately 13 percent of drug users but 36% of drug arrests and 46% of those convicted for drug offenses.30)

Disparities are evident at the initial point of contact with police, especially through policies that target specific areas and/or people. A popular example of this is “stop, question, and frisk.”


https://www.sentencingproject.org/publi ... 0Disparity
There is plenty of unequal policing. If you think it's limited to racial inequality, well, that sounds pretty blind. Or hyper-focused. As if the top politicians, media pundits and everyone else is touting these cases as evidence that there is something racist about policing.

Only this case doesn't show that.

Nor does the Floyd case.

Nor does many other cases.

And you still haven't said how many unarmed black men were shot in the US by police in 2019, and whether the real number was different from your guess.

State numbers based on what the media tells you, then check. I've been hoping you would comment on your experience.
Shit, Piss, Cock, Cunt, Motherfucker, Cocksucker and Tits.
-various artists


Joe wrote:
Wed Nov 29, 2023 1:22 pm
he doesn't communicate

The 'Walsh Question' 'What Is A Woman?' I'll put an answer here when someone posts one that is clear and comprehensible, by apostates to the Faith.

Update: I've been offered one!
rainbow wrote:
Mon Nov 06, 2023 9:23 pm
It is actually quite easy. A woman has at least one X chromosome.
Strong ideas don't require censorship to survive. Weak ideas cannot survive without it.

User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 5700
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Sun Mar 07, 2021 5:52 am

Meanwhile, Republican luminary Representative Boebert deploys the devastating classic 'no u' riposte. That'll show the vile socialists!

'Lauren Boebert Accuses Democrats of Being "Obsessed With Conspiracy Theories"'
Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado on Saturday night accused Democrats of being "obsessed with conspiracy theories" as she railed against Capitol security measures enforced in the aftermath of the insurrection on January 6.

Speaking on Fox News' Justice With Judge Jeanine, Boebert told host Jeanine Pirro that Capitol security measures should be relaxed because she believes that the threats have subsided.

"No one on the outside can get into the Capitol, it is only staffers and members of Congress who are allowed at the people's house," she said. "At our nation's Capital. This is complete bonkers that we are keeping people out of the U.S. Capitol. There's clearly not a threat. There was nothing that happened on March 4."

User avatar
Sean Hayden
Microagressor
Posts: 17879
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:55 pm
About me: recovering humanist
Contact:

Re: Republicans: continued

Post by Sean Hayden » Sun Mar 07, 2021 6:00 am

Cunt wrote:
Sun Mar 07, 2021 5:10 am
Sean Hayden wrote:
Sun Mar 07, 2021 4:46 am
Surely the time you've spent defending Trump has taught you that being president doesn't make you immune to error. What you are cynically calling political theater looks exactly the same as responding to the public's concerns. It's not a stretch to imagine the response is genuine as well for the reasons I gave before.
So you excuse a top law enforcement specialist (Harris) because she was emotional, and ignored basic investigative technique in favour of reaching out with feeling.

OK, I think.

Is that it? She is excused for backing the criminal over the victim because it was upsetting?

--//--

I've tended to be most concerned about the expansion of policing powers and unequal policing. Republicans are quite fond of the joke that you can't fall out of bed without breaking a law in this country. (You just need to change the context away from BLM to see that these concerns cut across the political spectrum)

For an example of unequal treatment:
Harsh drug laws are clearly an important factor in the persistent racial and ethnic disparities observed in state prisons. For drug crimes disparities are especially severe, due largely to the fact that blacks are nearly four times as likely as whites to be arrested for drug offenses and 2.5 times as likely to be arrested for drug possession. 29) This is despite the evidence that whites and blacks use drugs at roughly the same rate. From 1995 to 2005, African Americans comprised approximately 13 percent of drug users but 36% of drug arrests and 46% of those convicted for drug offenses.30)

Disparities are evident at the initial point of contact with police, especially through policies that target specific areas and/or people. A popular example of this is “stop, question, and frisk.”


https://www.sentencingproject.org/publi ... 0Disparity
There is plenty of unequal policing. If you think it's limited to racial inequality, well, that sounds pretty blind. Or hyper-focused. As if the top politicians, media pundits and everyone else is touting these cases as evidence that there is something racist about policing.

Only this case doesn't show that.

Nor does the Floyd case.

Nor does many other cases.

And you still haven't said how many unarmed black men were shot in the US by police in 2019, and whether the real number was different from your guess.

State numbers based on what the media tells you, then check. I've been hoping you would comment on your experience.
I offered an explanation of her behavior using the context of the public's concerns about policing, concerns which had recently boiled over in response to being exposed to several highly publicized videos of police violence.

--//--

I'm glad you recognize there is a lot of unequal policing. It's not going away just because the media or anyone else gets a case wrong.

It sucks you're still insisting otherwise with goofy comments like "If you think it's limited to racial inequality, well, that sounds pretty blind. Or hyper-focused. As if the top politicians, media pundits and everyone else is touting these cases as evidence that there is something racist about policing." --as if the disparity doesn't exist except for the media's lies... :fp:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 12 guests