2019-2020 NHL Thread

[Kin]

It certainly does not but when you resist you greatly increase the chances of the situation going the sideways. The comparison does not work

It highlights the discrepancy between how a black person was treated while not giving cause for lethal violence vs. how a white person was treated while giving cause. That they did not do the same thing is central to the topic at hand. If you don't understand how comparisons are useful even between two dissimilar things then that's on you and your capacity, or lack thereof, for critical thinking.

 

[Bender]

Resisting arrest does not give a police officer the right to shoot someone, holding and using a deadly weapon does. The whole point of the comparison is that Blake was killed without cause while Rittenhouse wasn't even arrested despite cause.

It certainly does not but when you resist you greatly increase the chances of the situation going the sideways. The comparison does not work

And yet holding and firing an assault weapon at peaceful protestors and literally killing people does not put a white person in similar danger. Excuse me? We saw this with Dylan Roof too. How many times do we have to go around this merry-go-round? There's always some level of excuse to justify police brutality and it's getting tiresome. Nobody deserves to be paralyzed for resisting arrest. The police aren't The Punisher or Judge Dredd. Their job is to use the least force possible to subdue somebody and 7 bullets is excessive force. How many of us condoned the killing of Sammy Yatim when it happened here?

Maybe next we're going to say Breonna Taylor shouldn't have been living at her address?, or Philando Castille shouldn't have been driving at all.

 

[Bates]

It certainly does not but when you resist you greatly increase the chances of the situation going the sideways. The comparison does not work

It highlights the discrepancy between how a black person was treated while not giving cause for lethal violence vs. how a white person was treated while giving cause. That they did not do the same thing is central to the topic at hand. If you don't understand how comparisons are useful even between two dissimilar things then that's on you and your capacity, or lack thereof, for critical thinking.

I have seen no evidence that the White person posed any threat so only considering only Race is not a valid comparison. The Officer should be charged

 

[Kin]

I have seen no evidence that the White person posed any threat

He killed two people.

 

[Bates]

Resisting arrest does not give a police officer the right to shoot someone, holding and using a deadly weapon does. The whole point of the comparison is that Blake was killed without cause while Rittenhouse wasn't even arrested despite cause.

It certainly does not but when you resist you greatly increase the chances of the situation going the sideways. The comparison does not work

And yet holding and firing an assault weapon at peaceful protestors and literally killing people does not put a white person in similar danger. Excuse me? We saw this with Dylan Roof too. How many times do we have to go around this merry-go-round? There's always some level of excuse to justify police brutality and it's getting tiresome. Nobody deserves to be paralyzed for resisting arrest. The police aren't The Punisher or Judge Dredd. Their job is to use the least force possible to subdue somebody and 7 bullets is excessive force. How many of us condoned the killing of Sammy Yatim when it happened here?

Maybe next we're going to say Breonna Taylor shouldn't have been living at her address?, or Philando Castille shouldn't have been driving at all.

Careful getting down from your soapbox. The Officer should be charged but that does not mean he should have shot the White guy to be equal, the situations aren't.

 

[Bates]

I have seen no evidence that the White person posed any threat

He killed two people.

To the Officer

 

[Guilt Trip]

Resisting arrest does not give a police officer the right to shoot someone, holding and using a deadly weapon does. The whole point of the comparison is that Blake was killed without cause while Rittenhouse wasn't even arrested despite cause.

It certainly does not but when you resist you greatly increase the chances of the situation going the sideways. The comparison does not work

And yet holding and firing an assault weapon at peaceful protestors and literally killing people does not put a white person in similar danger. Excuse me? We saw this with Dylan Roof too. How many times do we have to go around this merry-go-round? There's always some level of excuse to justify police brutality and it's getting tiresome. Nobody deserves to be paralyzed for resisting arrest. The police aren't The Punisher or Judge Dredd. Their job is to use the least force possible to subdue somebody and 7 bullets is excessive force. How many of us condoned the killing of Sammy Yatim when it happened here?

Maybe next we're going to say Breonna Taylor shouldn't have been living at her address?, or Philando Castille shouldn't have been driving at all.

Careful getting down from your soapbox. The Officer should be charged but that does not mean he should have shot the White guy to be equal, the situations aren't.

But he would have been justified in shooting a man with an assault rifle that shot at and killed protestors. There's no justification for shooting Jacob 7 f'n times in the back.

 

[Kin]

To the Officer

The threat doesn't need to be to an officer to justify force. Killing people, any people, justifies an arrest and force if necessary.

But, again, until you can grasp that situations are comparable even when not identical you're probably just going to keep flailing around pathetically in search of a point.

 

[Bates]

Resisting arrest does not give a police officer the right to shoot someone, holding and using a deadly weapon does. The whole point of the comparison is that Blake was killed without cause while Rittenhouse wasn't even arrested despite cause.

It certainly does not but when you resist you greatly increase the chances of the situation going the sideways. The comparison does not work

And yet holding and firing an assault weapon at peaceful protestors and literally killing people does not put a white person in similar danger. Excuse me? We saw this with Dylan Roof too. How many times do we have to go around this merry-go-round? There's always some level of excuse to justify police brutality and it's getting tiresome. Nobody deserves to be paralyzed for resisting arrest. The police aren't The Punisher or Judge Dredd. Their job is to use the least force possible to subdue somebody and 7 bullets is excessive force. How many of us condoned the killing of Sammy Yatim when it happened here?

Maybe next we're going to say Breonna Taylor shouldn't have been living at her address?, or Philando Castille shouldn't have been driving at all.

Careful getting down from your soapbox. The Officer should be charged but that does not mean he should have shot the White guy to be equal, the situations aren't.

But he would have been justified in shooting a man with an assault rifle that shot at and killed protestors. There's no justification for shooting Jacob 7 f'n times in the back.

I think I have written several times that I think the Officer should be charged. But expecting him to shoot an armed murder who isn't threatening anyone when Officer gets there 8s a bad comparison

 

[bustaheims]

I have seen no evidence that the White person posed any threat

He killed two people.

To the Officer

He was carrying an assault rifle - one that was illegally brought across state lines, for that matter. If he was a black man, there would have been dozens of shots taken at him in the same circumstances.

Jacob Blake did not have a weapon at the time of the shooting, and took 7 shots in the back. He wasn't a threat to anyone's life.

 

[Kin]

But expecting him to shoot an armed murder who isn't threatening anyone

Leaving aside the yammering gibberish you need to somehow pass off as coherent thought to come up with "armed murderer who isn't threatening anyone" nobody said they expected the officer to shoot in both cases the point is Rittenhouse WASN'T EVEN ARRESTED. Saying "Duhhhh, but he didn't resist arrest" is the whole point. HE DIDN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESIST ARREST BECAUSE THEY LET HIM WALK AWAY. Two people doing vastly different things were treated with the inverse reactions of what you should expect given what they did.

A child could grasp that.

 

[Bates]

But expecting him to shoot an armed murder who isn't threatening anyone

Leaving aside the yammering gibberish you need to somehow pass off as coherent thought to come up with "armed murderer who isn't threatening anyone" nobody said they expected the officer to shoot in both cases the point is Rittenhouse WASN'T EVEN ARRESTED. Saying "Duhhhh, but he didn't resist arrest" is the whole point. HE DIDN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESIST ARREST BECAUSE THEY LET HIM WALK AWAY. Two people doing vastly different things were treated with the inverse reactions of what you should expect given what they did.

A child could grasp that.

There's Nik in a nutshell. Someone dares to question his logic and he jumps up on the box and throws a personal attack for good measure. Wonder if the mods are ever going to deal with you are are the site owners happy with 20 members from the League's largest fanbase?

 

[Kin]

There's Nik in a nutshell. Someone dares to question his logic and he jumps up on the box and throws a personal attack for good measure. Wonder if the mods are ever going to deal with you are are the site owners happy with 20 members from the League's largest fanbase?

At some point, maybe after your 1,000th time having multiple people telling you what an obstinate dolt you're being and you crying about how mean I am, it might sink in that not everyone agrees with your perception of these things.

But I wouldn't bet on it.

 

[L K]

If comply or we shoot you is an acceptable stand you opinion really doesn?t mean very much to me.  And yeah I think you are an idiot for having that viewpoint.

 

[bustaheims]

If comply or we shoot you is an acceptable stand you opinion really doesn?t mean very much to me.  And yeah I think you are an idiot for having that viewpoint.

Yup. Unless there is a clear imminent threat to someone's health and safety - and by imminent, I mean a gun raised and pointed at someone, or arms around someone's neck, driving into a crowd with no signs of stopping, etc. Not going into a car where there may be a weapon.

If you don't see a weapon, or someone isn't clearly in a position to do serious harm to someone else, you don't shoot. If Jacob Blake had grabbed his knife and started charging towards the cops, that would be one thing. He never had the opportunity to do that. While there have been assumptions made about him going for his knife, we really don't know what his intent was there. He very easily could have been just trying to get into his car in an attempt to flee - which does not justify 7 shots into his back.

 

[Kin]

The thing is, people looking to apologize for the police murdering someone or trying to shift the blame onto the victim are always going to find something. Tamir Rice wasn't resisting arrest. Philando Castille wasn't. Because they see the police as being fundamental to enforcing existing power structures, and usually they're people who benefit from them, any deviation from some imagined ideal of behaviour makes you culpable.

It's like the issue with sex assault and victim blaming. It's not always within the context of the attacker did nothing wrong, it's looking to mitigate responsibility. "Well, yes, he shouldn't have done that but you were wearing that short skirt" etc. It's nonsense to justify the fundamentally unequal way the laws are applied.

 

[Bender]

But expecting him to shoot an armed murder who isn't threatening anyone

Leaving aside the yammering gibberish you need to somehow pass off as coherent thought to come up with "armed murderer who isn't threatening anyone" nobody said they expected the officer to shoot in both cases the point is Rittenhouse WASN'T EVEN ARRESTED. Saying "Duhhhh, but he didn't resist arrest" is the whole point. HE DIDN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESIST ARREST BECAUSE THEY LET HIM WALK AWAY. Two people doing vastly different things were treated with the inverse reactions of what you should expect given what they did.

A child could grasp that.

There's Nik in a nutshell. Someone dares to question his logic and he jumps up on the box and throws a personal attack for good measure. Wonder if the mods are ever going to deal with you are are the site owners happy with 20 members from the League's largest fanbase?

You're free to your own opinions but not criticism. At some point if your argument isn't holding up it's time to change your perspective, and if you want to go down with this opinion, so be it, but you have to take the criticism that comes along with it. I think also going down the path of bad mouthing Rick's judgment on how he wants the boards run in the same breath is also not a great look.

 

[Bender]

Resisting arrest does not give a police officer the right to shoot someone, holding and using a deadly weapon does. The whole point of the comparison is that Blake was killed without cause while Rittenhouse wasn't even arrested despite cause.

It certainly does not but when you resist you greatly increase the chances of the situation going the sideways. The comparison does not work

And yet holding and firing an assault weapon at peaceful protestors and literally killing people does not put a white person in similar danger. Excuse me? We saw this with Dylan Roof too. How many times do we have to go around this merry-go-round? There's always some level of excuse to justify police brutality and it's getting tiresome. Nobody deserves to be paralyzed for resisting arrest. The police aren't The Punisher or Judge Dredd. Their job is to use the least force possible to subdue somebody and 7 bullets is excessive force. How many of us condoned the killing of Sammy Yatim when it happened here?

Maybe next we're going to say Breonna Taylor shouldn't have been living at her address?, or Philando Castille shouldn't have been driving at all.

Careful getting down from your soapbox. The Officer should be charged but that does not mean he should have shot the White guy to be equal, the situations aren't.

Nice ad hominem jab there. Situations don't have to be exactly equal in order to follow set standards or protocol. I didn't say he should've shot the white guy. I am saying they don't seem to shoot white people brandishing weapons with the same regularity as unarmed black people. So really my argument is if they can bring in an armed murderer without shooting or killing him they can do that with an unarmed black person. Like I said, the job of the police is to use the minimum force required to subdue whoever it is you need to subdue.

 

[Kin]

For the people wondering what the strike could accomplish despite its short length:

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1299398906107887617

 

[Bender]

For the people wondering what the strike could accomplish despite its short length:

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1299398906107887617

Damn straight.