Skip Navigation

Posts
2
Comments
122
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • So intent is the main thing, for you? One malicious murder is worse than a hundred negligent manslaughters?

    Is there not more intent to murder involved in a mass shooter than a cop shooting someone trying to shoot the cop? Or are you one of those people who thinks that cops only sign up to be cops because they'll have a better chance to kill people, and every single death-by-cop is murder, even in self-defense?

  • I haven't heard a single person call for doctors to be abolished, despite them being 50-100x more deadly, and yes, despite them being just as bigoted as cops, as you rightfully point out.

  • What question are you answering with that?

    How do you feel about XYZ?

    "it means you're an idiot."

    or

    Do you XYZ?

    "it means you're an idiot."

  • Look up Tamir Rice.

    I'm well aware of Tamir Rice. You're completely unaware of how statistics work.

    Unless you think Tamir Rice is 100% of black children holding things, and no black child has ever held anything before nor will hold anything again? That's your position here?

    Rread this article about how the police works internally by an ex-officer. There is nothing that can be done at this point to reform the American police other than a complete do-over.

    So your counter to my statement of fact that law enforcement has been reformed over time is some interview with a single guy, and your re-statement of an impossible to prove or disprove position?

    M8, are you intentionally wasting both of our time? What are you trying to accomplish by such obvious bad faith tactics?

  • How do you feel about doctors killing 50-100x as many Americans per year as cops do?

    Do you make the same calls to abolish medicine and hospitals?

  • Context doesn’t bring dead people back to life.

    True, but refutes nothing I said.

    Reducing higher numbers of dead to a “per capita” statistic is straight up lying to dismiss the pain of communities destroyed by police violence.

    I don't think you know what "lying" means.

    Unless they’re black and holding something, on which case it becomes 100%.

    A straight up lie. See earlier point about ridiculous arguments.

    You cannot reform the police.

    You definitely can. Virtually all societies have improved their police over the short and long term.

    If you heard what they say about civilians in a daily basis you’d be demanding all of their heads on pikes like everyone who wants ICE to be abolished and every agent trialed for crimes against humanity.

    No I wouldn't. I generally do not call for the execution of assholes, let alone displaying their corpses to out-do them on cruelty.

  • And if there's anything we know about nimby curmudgeons, it's that they're on the rise and rewarded for their behavior, generally. Just look at the lady who retired off of calling a toddler the n-slur for social media.

    The 2/2 (I think?) arrests I've made for Disorderly Conduct, both times reminded me of how bizarre it is that the statute is so incredibly powerful and nobody seems to notice or care.

  • Jokes are supposed to be funny.

    Reddit hasn't been majority nerd for at least a decade now.

    Lemmy, on the other hand...

    In other words, people in glass houses probably shouldn't throw stones at people in brick houses.

  • When we're trying to do an Apples to Apples comparison, implying cops are more deadly than mass shooters, context is important.

    Put a kid in front of a mass shooter, they'll shoot them.

    Put a kid in front of a cop, they'll shoot them 0.00001% of the time (citation needed, feel free to do the math on total police encounters vs. shootings of children).

    That's bad, but to state or imply that they're even close to as bad is ridiculous and makes people interested in police reform look ridiculous.

  • God, it always feels so weird to see people lying to themselves to have a circle-jerk about something they dislike.

  • First off, 90% of your comment is ad hominem or straw-man.

    Secondly, it's abundantly clear you don't know what a political ally is. You're confusing the term with "friend" or "exactly the same in beliefs."

  • Me.

    Presumably you're doing all this shit-stirring because you think the US is on the wrong path (i.e. oppressing people), so people who want to stop the oppression it's doing are on your side. Even if you only care about certain people it's oppressing, and they only care about certain people it's oppressing, you both want to stop the oppression, yes?

    Otherwise I guess you're just an agitator with no real goal, which would be kinda funny if you're just openly admitting to out of the blue.

  • Because it’s going to it might be far more than one person.

    Fixed that for you.

    How many? 2? 5? Will that number be over the line in the sand for enough Americans to Do Something™?

    Obviously we'll probably see shortly, but my suspicion is we'll mostly hold up some signs in the street or in Congress, complain on social media that nobody is doing anything, and move on with our paycheck-to-paycheck existence.

    We are an inherently selfish people; few of us will risk our necks for others.

  • I mostly agree with you (because most of it is pure fact and not opinion) and it mostly doesn't refute what I said (because it's also factual).

  • MAGAs see that reading the Communist Manifesto is a requirement for entry and simply don't bother. They have X, Truth Social, Reddit, etc. to party on, and they're fine with the downsides of those platforms, i.e. supporting oligarchy/technocracy.

    It's not that they "get their asses handed to them," they're just not here.

    Compare your perception of reality with election results. Even if Trump cheated like he probably did, I doubt it was bigger than single digit percentages.

    TL;DR: You simply don't witness enough MAGAs and you naturally assume they must not exist.

  • So you've confirmed your goal here is to get into a nasty fight with your (alleged) allies.

    I'll pass on the offer, but enjoy your day.

  • I think 1 is unlikely because it’s NYPD and ICE

    I don't know where you got that opinion from. Such things are truly routine for large local and most federal agencies. You don't hear about it for the same reason you don't hear people discussing gum chewing techniques; it's simply mundane and near-universal to them. There's going to be crossover between ICE and some of the more frequent federal deputizers, i.e. the U.S. Marshalls. I know this because I used to be a cop and plenty of my colleagues would be routinely snatched up and deputized for some quick federal thing, which was treated as an absolute nothing burger by all parties.

    Comforting yourself with the idea that your opponent is so overwhelmingly incompetent that there's no way they could do anything dangerous is such a bad plan.

    2 is true broadly because there isn’t a law forbidding it in general, but there is a law against lying about being a public servant.

    Frankly, I read the New York statute on the matter the other day and it didn't give me a clear idea that what they (allegedly) did in this case is illegal. They are "public servants" by the apparent definition New York uses. Will it be argued in court very soon? I surely hope so, and I surely hope they carve out a more explicit ban on this kind of thing.

    But as you say, it's all barely worth discussing because few prosecutors would risk their literal or metaphorical necks going after ICE/NYPD.