Author Topic: Trump outrage of the day  (Read 297421 times)

sherr

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1273
  • Age: 35
  • Location: North Carolina, USA
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3800 on: August 27, 2020, 06:31:40 PM »
Quote
<someone complains about constant strawman arguments toward conservatives>
<reply with a strawman argument>
Today I learned that providing direct quotes from one of the biggest names in conservatism is a "strawman argument".

Quote
"How shocked are we that 17 year olds with rifles decided they had to maintain order when no one else would?"
-Tucker Carlson Tonight, the most popular program in all cable news.

Yep, sure seems that way.

You didn't directly say it, but it's clear that you are implying:

"Tucker Carlson said X. All conservatives support X."

I don't believe that you are an honest person to have a discussion with, so this will be my last response to you.

I was directly responding to the claim made, which was that "conservatives [in general] do care about unnecessary loss of life."
My response implied that I see no reason to believe that's true, given the people that conservatives like the most and what they are saying about the issue. And also the actions (or non-actions) of conservatives in general.

You may not agree with my assessment, but that's not a strawman argument. I'm not attacking a "strawman", I'm attacking actual fucking conservatism based on what actual fucking conservatives say it is directly into the camera of their conservative-adored show. You can't dismiss any point you don't like by calling it a "strawman".

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3882
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3801 on: August 27, 2020, 07:18:55 PM »
I think it's disturbing that there are some people celebrating that three people were shot in Kenosha with two killed and one wounded with an arm amputation. This is a tragedy. You can make the argument that the government should have intervened before it escalated to this level, but nobody should be treating the shooter like he's some kind of hero.

Bah, he just shot a bunch of libtards, they are just animals, not really people at all. So stupid and following the media like sheep, who cares? Amirite?

Maybe conservatives do care about the unnecessary loss of life, but very few engage with this forum because of the constant stream of straw-man arguments.

I am repeating attitudes actual people have expressed in real life. Every conservative in my life who has bothered to comment on either the police shooting or the vigilante shooting has justified it and if I say anything they have told me, yet again, that any outrage I feel is disrespectful and a result of media manipulation.

@ixtap You aren't. It isn't.

It does sound like you're following an ineffective strategy for persuading the conservatives around you. That may be simply that they are in a place where they are unpersuadable.

ixtap

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2434
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3802 on: August 27, 2020, 07:27:10 PM »
I think it's disturbing that there are some people celebrating that three people were shot in Kenosha with two killed and one wounded with an arm amputation. This is a tragedy. You can make the argument that the government should have intervened before it escalated to this level, but nobody should be treating the shooter like he's some kind of hero.

Bah, he just shot a bunch of libtards, they are just animals, not really people at all. So stupid and following the media like sheep, who cares? Amirite?

Maybe conservatives do care about the unnecessary loss of life, but very few engage with this forum because of the constant stream of straw-man arguments.

I am repeating attitudes actual people have expressed in real life. Every conservative in my life who has bothered to comment on either the police shooting or the vigilante shooting has justified it and if I say anything they have told me, yet again, that any outrage I feel is disrespectful and a result of media manipulation.

@ixtap You aren't. It isn't.

It does sound like you're following an ineffective strategy for persuading the conservatives around you. That may be simply that they are in a place where they are unpersuadable.

The latter. Demonstrating anything logically is being on a high horse. I generally avoid engaging once they have shown their true colors (ie, if you don't know how Obama ruined the country, you are just too stupid for me to explain it to you), but some insist. There are other, quieter conservatives in my life, but none of them are Blue Lives Matter Trump supporters. In previous cases, they have cared more about the rioting than the death that lead to the riots, but I think federal agents kidnapping people off the streets freaked them out the most.

gentmach

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 391
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3803 on: August 28, 2020, 04:13:22 AM »
I think it's disturbing that there are some people celebrating that three people were shot in Kenosha with two killed and one wounded with an arm amputation. This is a tragedy. You can make the argument that the government should have intervened before it escalated to this level, but nobody should be treating the shooter like he's some kind of hero.

The arm was not amputated.

The victim also expressed regret that he did not "empty his magazine" into the shooter.

https://archive.md/ORmHc

gentmach

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 391
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3804 on: August 28, 2020, 04:17:10 AM »
Then the Governor should have deployed the National Guard. It's crazy to me that several of these Governors haven't when protests have turned into riots. Seems to me like they hate Trump so much they're willing to let their cities burn.

Two things can be true at once: This kid had no business being there. Every shot he took was in self defense.

Current theory is they wanted a "photo-op." For Trump to unilaterally send in the National Guard, then Democrats would have images of the National Guard marching in cities, army vehicles prowling the streets and a 10 second clip of a guardsman smashing a person in the face. Then they could all claim "this is Trump's America!"

Problem is... It isn't working.

Don Lemon points out that this is showing up in polling.
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/513742-cnns-lemon-warns-of-democratic-blind-spot-on-riots-it-shows-up-in-the-polling

Oregon Governor Kate Brown is asking for the "Violence and Vandalism to end". Really odd statement since the violence was because of the feds and they supposedly left a month ago. Can't figure out what she is talking about.
https://mobile.twitter.com/OregonGovBrown/status/1298355206753681408?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Minneapolis Mayor has requested the National Guard be brought in to quell the violence.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/08/26/minneapolis-protests-national-guard-curfew-police-misinformation/5641474002/

Democrats gave themselves a black eye and are trying to get things under control again. Which, again, are odd requests because everyone is saying "Peaceful Protests." I can't fathom why Democrats would sic the National Guard on peaceful protestors.

Question. Why is a 17 year old from a different city, going into an area of protests with a semi automatic weapon? He says he is surrounded and shoots a person in the head. More people try to take the weapon from him (to prevent a mass shooter incident) and also get shot. I'm sorry I don't see self defense here. Not when you have shot multiple people, who would not have been shot if you weren't there.

I believe he works in the area. He considers it to be... Not his "home town" exactly but his "stomping grounds." He was there to support BLM but also prevent people from looting. He was trying to walk a tight rope and slipped.

More Dem unrest, apparantly. Oh wait.....
https://www.yahoo.com/news/kyle-rittenhouse-teen-charged-kenosha-034206711.html

Don't worry, Tucker will certainly condemn this murderer. Here is what he said in reference to the killing "decided to maintain order when no one else would.” What in the actual fuck?

Must be that law and order Trump is apparently known for. Or "war is peace?" A 17 year old Trump supporting white kid carrying an assault rifle and opening fire might as well be the theme for the Trump party and all if it's apologist.

Would it change things if he was attempting to stop a looter? Everyone here claims the protests are peaceful except for "a few instigators." A few problematic people.

The timeline seems to be:
He confronted the looter.
They chased after him.
He shot one in the head.
Called the police to turn himself in.
More people chased after him.
He trips.
Second guy attempts to kick him. He gets shot.
Third guy attacks with a skateboard and gets shot.
The fourth guy pretends to surrender only to go for a gun. Gets his elbow blown apart for his asshattery. He is still gripping the gun.

I do not have the video of the shooter attempting to turn himself in to the police.

Sources.
https://mega.nz/file/wwJi1ABA#7wul-mk-1yhEI0jrdVZwk3rfOxyMy4jNK0YNz__QqwQ
https://mega.nz/file/gsgT0bjI#5XBrqvdhpfm7f_4GJS_W8c995g9WpTy-7N6H3GsJjaI

This is what community policing will actually look like. People taking the situation into their own hands when the social workers fail.

1) He was illegally open carrying
2) He was out past curfew.

So, this thug was already out committing crimes before any of this happened. This is not community policing, this is criminal activity. Followed by murder. If he had been at home in Illinois instead of out committing crimes, none of this would have happened.

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/crime/2020/08/26/wisconsin-open-carry-law-kyle-rittenhouse-legally-have-gun-kenosha-protest-shooting-17-year-old/3444231001/

The open carry issue can be debated it seems.

The curfew thing works for everyone involved.

As long as he shuts up and gets a good lawyer those murder charges would be self defense. He attempted to retreat only for the threat to follow him. A rational person surrounded by a mob that started attacking them would believe their life was at risk.

I think everyone is jumping the gun on the Kenosha deaths.

There's nothing known about what happened before the videos.

There is video of the first shooting victim aggressively lunging at the armed people while asking them "Are you gonna shoot me?!"

Whether double dog daring an armed person in a tense situation is a wise decision or not will be a question for the ages.

Would 2 people be dead, 1 injured and the shooter facing murder charges had the shooter followed the law? 

I will agree if you agree people probably shouldn't have been looting and rioting in the first place.
Simple yes or no will suffice.

And I'm trying to strike a deal with you sir. I will say "No, those people would still be alive" if you say "People should not have been looting."

It is an argument on the internet. You have nothing to lose from simply admitting there was "minor looting." Would that make you feel better? Only a single instance of looting in the entirety of the protests.

I agree there was looting. But last time I looked, looting does not carry a death sentence or require deadly force to stop it. And I don't see why anyone, including or especially law and order folks being OK with people carrying guns into crowds after curfew and taking the law into their own hands up to and including shooting people. If I think some police even with their training are not being responsible with using force, I sure as hell don't think some random civilian who is armed is going to do better about judging situations and restraint. On the contary it's a recipe for disaster.

I guess if you are OK with this kid doing this, then I guess you are OK with black men carrying weapons up to and including AKs into neighborhoods where they are routinely targeted and harrassed. After all, they are only carrying their gun for their own protection. If you do have a problem with it, then ask yourself why, in one case it's OK and the other case it is not.

It is okay for people to carry guns. Just don't be surprised if you start acting the fool people will shoot back.

LennStar

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2108
  • Location: Germany
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3805 on: August 28, 2020, 04:18:55 AM »
It seems to me that too often we resort to extreme and overwhelming force, and then are surprised when that tactic results in unnecessary and unintended deaths, including for the officers involved.
Do tell me why you think US interior politics should differ vastly from US exterior politics?

Quote
Care to inform me what is so bad about what he said?
Maybe it's just the base of his lines that have the implicit agreement that it is okay to severely harm people that are "only" damaging property. Which is a stance I can see everywhere when Reps talk about "protesters" or "looters".

Anway, we know nothing of that would have happened if there were just more people with guns, right?

gentmach

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 391
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3806 on: August 28, 2020, 04:22:47 AM »
More Dem unrest, apparantly. Oh wait.....
https://www.yahoo.com/news/kyle-rittenhouse-teen-charged-kenosha-034206711.html

Don't worry, Tucker will certainly condemn this murderer. Here is what he said in reference to the killing "decided to maintain order when no one else would.” What in the actual fuck?

Must be that law and order Trump is apparently known for. Or "war is peace?" A 17 year old Trump supporting white kid carrying an assault rifle and opening fire might as well be the theme for the Trump party and all if it's apologist.

Would it change things if he was attempting to stop a looter? Everyone here claims the protests are peaceful except for "a few instigators." A few problematic people.

The timeline seems to be:
He confronted the looter.
They chased after him.
He shot one in the head.
Called the police to turn himself in.
More people chased after him.
He trips.
Second guy attempts to kick him. He gets shot.
Third guy attacks with a skateboard and gets shot.
The fourth guy pretends to surrender only to go for a gun. Gets his elbow blown apart for his asshattery. He is still gripping the gun.

I do not have the video of the shooter attempting to turn himself in to the police.

Sources.
https://mega.nz/file/wwJi1ABA#7wul-mk-1yhEI0jrdVZwk3rfOxyMy4jNK0YNz__QqwQ
https://mega.nz/file/gsgT0bjI#5XBrqvdhpfm7f_4GJS_W8c995g9WpTy-7N6H3GsJjaI

This is what community policing will actually look like. People taking the situation into their own hands when the social workers fail.

FYI the "4th guy" wasn't pretending to surrender. He was actually holding his hands up to not pose a threat as he just watched another guy get shot in the chest. He reached for the gun in attempt to subdue the assailant. Printed across his hat in big letters are the words "Paramedic." He has a paramedic bag as well. He has a gun because he was actually there with the armed protesters. The guy you called an asshat was actually there to try and help. Nice!

Please look at attached photos.

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13520
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3807 on: August 28, 2020, 04:55:00 AM »

It is okay for people to carry guns. Just don't be surprised if you start acting the fool people will shoot back.

Are you endorsing these actions?

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13520
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3808 on: August 28, 2020, 04:55:55 AM »
It seems to me that too often we resort to extreme and overwhelming force, and then are surprised when that tactic results in unnecessary and unintended deaths, including for the officers involved.
Do tell me why you think US interior politics should differ vastly from US exterior politics?

My statement wasn’t limited to interior politics.

NorthernBlitz

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 485
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3809 on: August 28, 2020, 04:58:39 AM »
It seems to me that too often we resort to extreme and overwhelming force, and then are surprised when that tactic results in unnecessary and unintended deaths, including for the officers involved.
Do tell me why you think US interior politics should differ vastly from US exterior politics?

Quote
Care to inform me what is so bad about what he said?
Maybe it's just the base of his lines that have the implicit agreement that it is okay to severely harm people that are "only" damaging property. Which is a stance I can see everywhere when Reps talk about "protesters" or "looters".

Anway, we know nothing of that would have happened if there were just more people with guns, right?

For better or worse, we're certainly running that experiment now.

With a run on guns following the lockdowns and another following the riots.

I bet a lot of the people waiting on backordered shot guns right now are formerly anti-gun suburbanites that are worried that the government can't or won't enforce the law.

And I think the natural course of the path we're on is more vigilantism.

And I think it's stupid and we need to throw the fucking book at vigilantes (which includes rioters).

And I think it could be avoided pretty easily if governments did what they are charged with doing (which includes policing the police).
« Last Edit: August 28, 2020, 05:04:19 AM by NorthernBlitz »

bloodaxe

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 204
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3810 on: August 28, 2020, 04:58:43 AM »
Quote
<someone complains about constant strawman arguments toward conservatives>
<reply with a strawman argument>
Today I learned that providing direct quotes from one of the biggest names in conservatism is a "strawman argument".

Quote
"How shocked are we that 17 year olds with rifles decided they had to maintain order when no one else would?"
-Tucker Carlson Tonight, the most popular program in all cable news.

Yep, sure seems that way.

You didn't directly say it, but it's clear that you are implying:

"Tucker Carlson said X. All conservatives support X."

I don't believe that you are an honest person to have a discussion with, so this will be my last response to you.

I was directly responding to the claim made, which was that "conservatives [in general] do care about unnecessary loss of life."
My response implied that I see no reason to believe that's true, given the people that conservatives like the most and what they are saying about the issue. And also the actions (or non-actions) of conservatives in general.

You may not agree with my assessment, but that's not a strawman argument. I'm not attacking a "strawman", I'm attacking actual fucking conservatism based on what actual fucking conservatives say it is directly into the camera of their conservative-adored show. You can't dismiss any point you don't like by calling it a "strawman".

I apologize, it was not a straw man.

MasterStache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2628
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3811 on: August 28, 2020, 05:40:33 AM »
More Dem unrest, apparantly. Oh wait.....
https://www.yahoo.com/news/kyle-rittenhouse-teen-charged-kenosha-034206711.html

Don't worry, Tucker will certainly condemn this murderer. Here is what he said in reference to the killing "decided to maintain order when no one else would.” What in the actual fuck?

Must be that law and order Trump is apparently known for. Or "war is peace?" A 17 year old Trump supporting white kid carrying an assault rifle and opening fire might as well be the theme for the Trump party and all if it's apologist.

Would it change things if he was attempting to stop a looter? Everyone here claims the protests are peaceful except for "a few instigators." A few problematic people.

The timeline seems to be:
He confronted the looter.
They chased after him.
He shot one in the head.
Called the police to turn himself in.
More people chased after him.
He trips.
Second guy attempts to kick him. He gets shot.
Third guy attacks with a skateboard and gets shot.
The fourth guy pretends to surrender only to go for a gun. Gets his elbow blown apart for his asshattery. He is still gripping the gun.

I do not have the video of the shooter attempting to turn himself in to the police.

Sources.
https://mega.nz/file/wwJi1ABA#7wul-mk-1yhEI0jrdVZwk3rfOxyMy4jNK0YNz__QqwQ
https://mega.nz/file/gsgT0bjI#5XBrqvdhpfm7f_4GJS_W8c995g9WpTy-7N6H3GsJjaI

This is what community policing will actually look like. People taking the situation into their own hands when the social workers fail.

FYI the "4th guy" wasn't pretending to surrender. He was actually holding his hands up to not pose a threat as he just watched another guy get shot in the chest. He reached for the gun in attempt to subdue the assailant. Printed across his hat in big letters are the words "Paramedic." He has a paramedic bag as well. He has a gun because he was actually there with the armed protesters. The guy you called an asshat was actually there to try and help. Nice!

Please look at attached photos.

Actually I was wrong in that he was there volunteering as a paramedic for the BLM protesters not the armed protestors. Again there to help. He had a gun and certainly could have used it. Instead he tried to get the gun away from the assailant. Or what you called "asshatery." I have no idea why you posted another photo as it contradicts your original claim that he "was going for a gun." He already had the gun in his hand when the 2nd victim was being shot in the chest.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2020, 05:50:00 AM by MasterStache »

Kris

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5649
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3812 on: August 28, 2020, 06:56:33 AM »
I think it's disturbing that there are some people celebrating that three people were shot in Kenosha with two killed and one wounded with an arm amputation. This is a tragedy. You can make the argument that the government should have intervened before it escalated to this level, but nobody should be treating the shooter like he's some kind of hero.

The arm was not amputated.

The victim also expressed regret that he did not "empty his magazine" into the shooter.

https://archive.md/ORmHc

You mean, self-defense?

cliffhanger

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 150
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3813 on: August 28, 2020, 07:16:51 AM »
https://video.foxnews.com/v/6184852089001#sp=show-clips

"It could have been a dozen other places in this country; the violence has been building unabated for three months now. Every day the mob becomes more radical."
- Lie, lie, and lie.

You left out the rest of that quote. "By some accounts 30 Americans have died so far in these riots. Democrats have openly encouraged them. Republican leaders have been too fearful to stop them. Some have applauded it all."

Now you may disagree with the wording here, which is certainly loaded with Tucker's biases. That's fine, but isn't your central argument is to counter what I stated?
Maybe conservatives do care about the unnecessary loss of life..
It's pretty clear that Tucker does care that 30 Americans have been killed during these riots and wants them to stop.

"The riots have been personal and painful for this country."

"A party that tolerates rioting, has no future in a democracy. Human beings crave order, it's a prerequisite for life. They fear uncertainty above all. People will trade virtually anything for a relief from chaos. That's a fact of human nature; it's always true. And politicians who understand that, win. Rudy Giuliani got elected twice in an overwhelmingly Democratic city twice because he knew, that underneath it all, everyone hates lawlessness. Everyone."

I don't need to insert my own opinions to interpret his words. You can decide for yourself if what Tucker said broadcasts to his audience that conservatives don't care about the unnecessary loss of life.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

We can go through the rest of your points if you like (I don't particularly care to as we won't find much agreement). However I did stop at this one because I found this example kinda humorous and I love to bash CNN.

"Big media organizations have sought to downplay and ignore the violence."
- Blatant lie that is impossible to fact check. This is headline news everywhere. Just more standard "all news is lying to you except for Fox" propaganda.

CNN cyron says "violent." Cyron goes away breifly. Comes back with exactly the same wording but "violent" has been removed. Yes, it's a minor example, but so silly on their part to do that imo.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

Finally,
See now this is an actual strawman argument. You are putting words in my mouth that I did not say in an attempt to make me seem unreasonable ("dumb hick right winger").

There's a difference between me sarcastically calling myself a dumb hick right winger and people on this forum disparaging conservatives with the same stereotype.

sherr

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1273
  • Age: 35
  • Location: North Carolina, USA
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3814 on: August 28, 2020, 07:55:45 AM »
https://video.foxnews.com/v/6184852089001#sp=show-clips

"It could have been a dozen other places in this country; the violence has been building unabated for three months now. Every day the mob becomes more radical."
- Lie, lie, and lie.

You left out the rest of that quote. "By some accounts 30 Americans have died so far in these riots. Democrats have openly encouraged them. Republican leaders have been too fearful to stop them. Some have applauded it all."

Now you may disagree with the wording here, which is certainly loaded with Tucker's biases. That's fine, but isn't your central argument is to counter what I stated?
Maybe conservatives do care about the unnecessary loss of life..
It's pretty clear that Tucker does care that 30 Americans have been killed during these riots and wants them to stop.

"The riots have been personal and painful for this country."

"A party that tolerates rioting, has no future in a democracy. Human beings crave order, it's a prerequisite for life. They fear uncertainty above all. People will trade virtually anything for a relief from chaos. That's a fact of human nature; it's always true. And politicians who understand that, win. Rudy Giuliani got elected twice in an overwhelmingly Democratic city twice because he knew, that underneath it all, everyone hates lawlessness. Everyone."

I don't need to insert my own opinions to interpret his words. You can decide for yourself if what Tucker said broadcasts to his audience that conservatives don't care about the unnecessary loss of life.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

"Democratic have openly encouraged encouraged them."
- Lie. Democrats support solving the problems at the base of the protest, not "looting".
- “The needless violence won’t heal us.” -Joe Biden

No, it's "pretty clear" that Tucker only cares about the loss of life so he can use it as a fear-mongering tool to help Trump get re-elected.

Which is why he (and all conservatives that I see) are simultaneously glorifying and excusing the murderer, while attempting to blame Democrats for the murders.

That is entirely consistent with the general trend of Tucker's (and Trump's, and all other conservative's) love of fear-and-hate-mongering, and not at all consistent with a regard for life. Or else, you know, conservatives would be condemning the right-wing domestic terrorists too.

And Democrats do not "tolerate rioting". That's yet another blatant lie. Democratic leaders have been speaking out against violence in the protest for months. Democrats have been attempting to de-escalate. It's Republicans that have consistently been pro-political violence. It's Republicans who have been attempting to escalate every situation to violence to provide more fuel for their "law and order" rhetoric.
"The military is on the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts!"
"Let's just shoot people trying to cross the boarder."
"When you see these thugs being thrown into the back of a paddy wagon, you just seen them thrown in, rough. I said, 'Please don't be too nice,'"
<About Republican Representative Gianforte, who famously assaulted a reporter who dared ask him about his position on health care> "'Any guy that can do a body slam, he is my type!' Trump said on Thursday to cheers."

I mean we could go on and on. Republicans (president, congresspeople, talking heads on TV) are regularly calling for and glorifying violence. Tucker included, in this video, by implying that vigilante murders are good and necessary to stop the "violent rioters" (never mind that the violence is being instigated/committed by the vigilantes).

Democrats are not, Democrats are universally condemning it. I'm sure you can find some internet idiot on the left that's glorifying it, but you know that's not a fair comparison.

Tucker is not stating a neutral fact that "everyone hates lawlessness". He is saying that people should vote for Trump, because apparently Trump's re-election to the presidency will allow him to stop the "lawlessness" that he is unable to stop now. Tucker is not sad that these murders happened, he is very explicitly saying that they are justified and righteous, and that more people should be like Rittenhouse.

So no, this video does not back up your claim that conservatives [in general] are sad about unnecessary loss of life.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2020, 08:03:14 AM by sherr »

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5780
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3815 on: August 28, 2020, 07:59:26 AM »
https://video.foxnews.com/v/6184852089001#sp=show-clips

"It could have been a dozen other places in this country; the violence has been building unabated for three months now. Every day the mob becomes more radical."
- Lie, lie, and lie.

You left out the rest of that quote. "By some accounts 30 Americans have died so far in these riots. Democrats have openly encouraged them. Republican leaders have been too fearful to stop them. Some have applauded it all."

Now you may disagree with the wording here, which is certainly loaded with Tucker's biases. That's fine, but isn't your central argument is to counter what I stated?
Maybe conservatives do care about the unnecessary loss of life..
It's pretty clear that Tucker does care that 30 Americans have been killed during these riots and wants them to stop.

"The riots have been personal and painful for this country."

"A party that tolerates rioting, has no future in a democracy. Human beings crave order, it's a prerequisite for life. They fear uncertainty above all. People will trade virtually anything for a relief from chaos. That's a fact of human nature; it's always true. And politicians who understand that, win. Rudy Giuliani got elected twice in an overwhelmingly Democratic city twice because he knew, that underneath it all, everyone hates lawlessness. Everyone."

I don't need to insert my own opinions to interpret his words. You can decide for yourself if what Tucker said broadcasts to his audience that conservatives don't care about the unnecessary loss of life.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

We can go through the rest of your points if you like (I don't particularly care to as we won't find much agreement). However I did stop at this one because I found this example kinda humorous and I love to bash CNN.

"Big media organizations have sought to downplay and ignore the violence."
- Blatant lie that is impossible to fact check. This is headline news everywhere. Just more standard "all news is lying to you except for Fox" propaganda.

CNN cyron says "violent." Cyron goes away breifly. Comes back with exactly the same wording but "violent" has been removed. Yes, it's a minor example, but so silly on their part to do that imo.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

Finally,
See now this is an actual strawman argument. You are putting words in my mouth that I did not say in an attempt to make me seem unreasonable ("dumb hick right winger").

There's a difference between me sarcastically calling myself a dumb hick right winger and people on this forum disparaging conservatives with the same stereotype.
Can you verify tht "30 Americans dead"?  Because I hadn't heard that and thought I might have, given the amount of publicity that has been given to the 2 Americans dead, shot by a 17 year old white boy who seems to have bought into Trump's propaganda.

cliffhanger

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 150
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3816 on: August 28, 2020, 08:26:47 AM »
Can you verify tht "30 Americans dead"?  Because I hadn't heard that and thought I might have, given the amount of publicity that has been given to the 2 Americans dead, shot by a 17 year old white boy who seems to have bought into Trump's propaganda.

I've certainly heard it in the conservative circle. With a, admittedly shallow, search here's the least bias filled article I could find. At Least 12 Have Died In Nationwide Protests. Here’s Who They Were. (Dated June 3rd) So it seems to me that since it's been almost 3 months since these 12 deaths, 30+ is a plausible number. Obviously the details matter, which will take investigation of each individual death. Were these due to protests? We don't know.

cliffhanger

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 150
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3817 on: August 28, 2020, 08:33:28 AM »
https://video.foxnews.com/v/6184852089001#sp=show-clips

"It could have been a dozen other places in this country; the violence has been building unabated for three months now. Every day the mob becomes more radical."
- Lie, lie, and lie.

You left out the rest of that quote. "By some accounts 30 Americans have died so far in these riots. Democrats have openly encouraged them. Republican leaders have been too fearful to stop them. Some have applauded it all."

Now you may disagree with the wording here, which is certainly loaded with Tucker's biases. That's fine, but isn't your central argument is to counter what I stated?
Maybe conservatives do care about the unnecessary loss of life..
It's pretty clear that Tucker does care that 30 Americans have been killed during these riots and wants them to stop.

"The riots have been personal and painful for this country."

"A party that tolerates rioting, has no future in a democracy. Human beings crave order, it's a prerequisite for life. They fear uncertainty above all. People will trade virtually anything for a relief from chaos. That's a fact of human nature; it's always true. And politicians who understand that, win. Rudy Giuliani got elected twice in an overwhelmingly Democratic city twice because he knew, that underneath it all, everyone hates lawlessness. Everyone."

I don't need to insert my own opinions to interpret his words. You can decide for yourself if what Tucker said broadcasts to his audience that conservatives don't care about the unnecessary loss of life.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

"Democratic have openly encouraged encouraged them."
- Lie. Democrats support solving the problems at the base of the protest, not "looting".
- “The needless violence won’t heal us.” -Joe Biden

No, it's "pretty clear" that Tucker only cares about the loss of life so he can use it as a fear-mongering tool to help Trump get re-elected.

Which is why he (and all conservatives that I see) are simultaneously glorifying and excusing the murderer, while attempting to blame Democrats for the murders.

That is entirely consistent with the general trend of Tucker's (and Trump's, and all other conservative's) love of fear-and-hate-mongering, and not at all consistent with a regard for life. Or else, you know, conservatives would be condemning the right-wing domestic terrorists too.

And Democrats do not "tolerate rioting". That's yet another blatant lie. Democratic leaders have been speaking out against violence in the protest for months. Democrats have been attempting to de-escalate. It's Republicans that have consistently been pro-political violence. It's Republicans who have been attempting to escalate every situation to violence to provide more fuel for their "law and order" rhetoric.
"The military is on the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts!"
"Let's just shoot people trying to cross the boarder."
"When you see these thugs being thrown into the back of a paddy wagon, you just seen them thrown in, rough. I said, 'Please don't be too nice,'"
<About Republican Representative Gianforte, who famously assaulted a reporter who dared ask him about his position on health care> "'Any guy that can do a body slam, he is my type!' Trump said on Thursday to cheers."

I mean we could go on and on. Republicans (president, congresspeople, talking heads on TV) are regularly calling for and glorifying violence. Tucker included, in this video, by implying that vigilante murders are good and necessary to stop the "violent rioters" (never mind that the violence is being instigated/committed by the vigilantes).

Democrats are not, Democrats are universally condemning it. I'm sure you can find some internet idiot on the left that's glorifying it, but you know that's not a fair comparison.

Tucker is not stating a neutral fact that "everyone hates lawlessness". He is saying that people should vote for Trump, because apparently Trump's re-election to the presidency will allow him to stop the "lawlessness" that he is unable to stop now. Tucker is not sad that these murders happened, he is very explicitly saying that they are justified and righteous, and that more people should be like Rittenhouse.

So no, this video does not back up your claim that conservatives [in general] are sad about unnecessary loss of life.

Yeah dude, we're not gonna agree on anything here. People can watch the video, listen to his own words, and decide for themselves. I sincerely feel pity for you that you have come to conclusion that conservatives don't care about the unnecessary loss of life.

MasterStache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2628
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3818 on: August 28, 2020, 08:36:58 AM »
Yeah dude, we're not gonna agree on anything here. People can watch the video, listen to his own words, and decide for themselves. I sincerely feel pity for you that you have come to conclusion that conservatives don't care about the unnecessary loss of life.
Serious question, do you think the majority of conservatives see preservation of life as equal among everyone to include minorities, immigrants etc?

gentmach

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 391
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3819 on: August 28, 2020, 08:46:01 AM »
I think it's disturbing that there are some people celebrating that three people were shot in Kenosha with two killed and one wounded with an arm amputation. This is a tragedy. You can make the argument that the government should have intervened before it escalated to this level, but nobody should be treating the shooter like he's some kind of hero.

The arm was not amputated.

The victim also expressed regret that he did not "empty his magazine" into the shooter.

https://archive.md/ORmHc

You mean, self-defense?

As the video shows, the shooter was retreating. The man here was chasing after him. He cannot claim self defense if he the aggressor.

More Dem unrest, apparantly. Oh wait.....
https://www.yahoo.com/news/kyle-rittenhouse-teen-charged-kenosha-034206711.html

Don't worry, Tucker will certainly condemn this murderer. Here is what he said in reference to the killing "decided to maintain order when no one else would.” What in the actual fuck?

Must be that law and order Trump is apparently known for. Or "war is peace?" A 17 year old Trump supporting white kid carrying an assault rifle and opening fire might as well be the theme for the Trump party and all if it's apologist.

Would it change things if he was attempting to stop a looter? Everyone here claims the protests are peaceful except for "a few instigators." A few problematic people.

The timeline seems to be:
He confronted the looter.
They chased after him.
He shot one in the head.
Called the police to turn himself in.
More people chased after him.
He trips.
Second guy attempts to kick him. He gets shot.
Third guy attacks with a skateboard and gets shot.
The fourth guy pretends to surrender only to go for a gun. Gets his elbow blown apart for his asshattery. He is still gripping the gun.

I do not have the video of the shooter attempting to turn himself in to the police.

Sources.
https://mega.nz/file/wwJi1ABA#7wul-mk-1yhEI0jrdVZwk3rfOxyMy4jNK0YNz__QqwQ
https://mega.nz/file/gsgT0bjI#5XBrqvdhpfm7f_4GJS_W8c995g9WpTy-7N6H3GsJjaI

This is what community policing will actually look like. People taking the situation into their own hands when the social workers fail.

FYI the "4th guy" wasn't pretending to surrender. He was actually holding his hands up to not pose a threat as he just watched another guy get shot in the chest. He reached for the gun in attempt to subdue the assailant. Printed across his hat in big letters are the words "Paramedic." He has a paramedic bag as well. He has a gun because he was actually there with the armed protesters. The guy you called an asshat was actually there to try and help. Nice!

Please look at attached photos.

Actually I was wrong in that he was there volunteering as a paramedic for the BLM protesters not the armed protestors. Again there to help. He had a gun and certainly could have used it. Instead he tried to get the gun away from the assailant. Or what you called "asshatery." I have no idea why you posted another photo as it contradicts your original claim that he "was going for a gun." He already had the gun in his hand when the 2nd victim was being shot in the chest.

You are correct. Problem is he made motions to surrender and then charged. (And considering that AntiFa likes to invoke the Geneva Convention, faking surrender is a war crime. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy)  That is the asshattery I refer to.


It is okay for people to carry guns. Just don't be surprised if you start acting the fool people will shoot back.

Are you endorsing these actions?

As long as people are acting civil there shouldn't be a problem.

caracarn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1620
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Ohio
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3820 on: August 28, 2020, 08:46:56 AM »
My views are conservative for certain, though I also feel certain items like decriminalizing marijuana and offering a reasonable, affordable health insurance option for all are good goals to help with lowering incarceration and improving quality of life.  I've typically voted Republican, but I do look for the candidate I think will be best for the nation based on my views, so does that make be independent?  Never been able to get everyone to agree.  I state all this as a backdrop to where I tend to fall on the spectrum, and I personally identify as Republican when I am asked by people because that has tended to be the state of issues I most closely align with.

With that I understand the point sherr is making that not being upset with a leader of the party who clearly glorifies and endorses violence with his statements while claiming that somehow shows Republicans care about unnecessary loss of life creates a disconnect.  I am appalled that the Republican party has been co-opted by Trump and his ideology and that all decorum and attempt to marginalize it has gone out the window. 

cliffhanger

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 150
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3821 on: August 28, 2020, 08:54:56 AM »
Yeah dude, we're not gonna agree on anything here. People can watch the video, listen to his own words, and decide for themselves. I sincerely feel pity for you that you have come to conclusion that conservatives don't care about the unnecessary loss of life.
Serious question, do you think the majority of conservatives see preservation of life as equal among everyone to include minorities, immigrants etc?

Yes

Samuel

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 510
  • Location: the slippery slope
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3822 on: August 28, 2020, 08:56:24 AM »
I think it's disturbing that there are some people celebrating that three people were shot in Kenosha with two killed and one wounded with an arm amputation. This is a tragedy. You can make the argument that the government should have intervened before it escalated to this level, but nobody should be treating the shooter like he's some kind of hero.

The arm was not amputated.

The victim also expressed regret that he did not "empty his magazine" into the shooter.

https://archive.md/ORmHc

You mean, self-defense?

A whole lot of lawyers are going to make a whole lot of money determining the answer to that question, for both the shooter and the shot.

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5780
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3823 on: August 28, 2020, 09:03:38 AM »
Yeah dude, we're not gonna agree on anything here. People can watch the video, listen to his own words, and decide for themselves. I sincerely feel pity for you that you have come to conclusion that conservatives don't care about the unnecessary loss of life.
Serious question, do you think the majority of conservatives see preservation of life as equal among everyone to include minorities, immigrants etc?

Yes
So why are they against policies which might start to put the preservation of the lives of black men into practice?

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5780
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3824 on: August 28, 2020, 09:05:20 AM »
Can you verify tht "30 Americans dead"?  Because I hadn't heard that and thought I might have, given the amount of publicity that has been given to the 2 Americans dead, shot by a 17 year old white boy who seems to have bought into Trump's propaganda.

I've certainly heard it in the conservative circle. With a, admittedly shallow, search here's the least bias filled article I could find. At Least 12 Have Died In Nationwide Protests. Here’s Who They Were. (Dated June 3rd) So it seems to me that since it's been almost 3 months since these 12 deaths, 30+ is a plausible number. Obviously the details matter, which will take investigation of each individual death. Were these due to protests? We don't know.
Thank you for answering my question.  Apparently the answer is: no, you can't verify the figure of 30 Americans dead - whether in protests or in riots (which are different from protests although they do piggyback on the existence of protests).

sherr

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1273
  • Age: 35
  • Location: North Carolina, USA
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3825 on: August 28, 2020, 09:10:33 AM »
Yes
So why are they against policies which might start to put the preservation of the lives of black men into practice?

I actually watched the Tim Scott videos that cliffhanger posted last page. They're both half an hour long of Tim outright preaching a sermon, but basically his conclusion is "they're not, but the Democrats want to make them seem like they are because they're playing politics".

Whether you find that at all convincing or not is up to you. I do think that Tim Scott seems like a decent fellow. Too bad more Republicans aren't like him.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2020, 09:14:12 AM by sherr »

Glenstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2656
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2027 (maybe?)
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3826 on: August 28, 2020, 09:12:40 AM »
It's pretty clear that Tucker does care that 30 Americans have been killed during these riots and wants them to stop.

"The riots have been personal and painful for this country."

"A party that tolerates rioting, has no future in a democracy. Human beings crave order, it's a prerequisite for life. They fear uncertainty above all. People will trade virtually anything for a relief from chaos. That's a fact of human nature; it's always true. And politicians who understand that, win. Rudy Giuliani got elected twice in an overwhelmingly Democratic city twice because he knew, that underneath it all, everyone hates lawlessness. Everyone."

I don't need to insert my own opinions to interpret his words. You can decide for yourself if what Tucker said broadcasts to his audience that conservatives don't care about the unnecessary loss of life.

One could also convert Carlson's words to, "A party that tolerates murder by the police, has no future in a democracy. Human beings crave freedom from oppression, it's a prerequisite for life."

There was broad condemnation of the killing of George Floyd across the political spectrum because it was so overt that there was no room for interpretation or giving the officer the benefit of the doubt. Beyond that, the right has largely been silent to dismissive of the reality that Black Americans face with regard to law enforcement. And it isn't just murder. See the report prepared under consent decree in the aftermath of Ferguson. The police systematically targeted the Black/minority populations for tickets, etc using them as a piggy bank. It was and is disgusting. So, back to Tucker Carlson. What is missing from his statements is also telling. By concentrating on the rioting and looting, he makes an appeal to order (note that this is not law and order, but simply order. "Law and Order" types are often more concerned about he O than the L when it comes to getting O. See the blind eye to heavy handed and illegal tactics by the police in response to the riots). He  does not address the reason that the protests are happening in the first place. Quite frankly, we see this same thing in this thread where there is lip service to the police systematic killing of Black Americans (and yes, more white people die by police firearms in a given year, but on a per capita basis it just simply isn't even the same ballpark) but much hand wringing about the property damage.

I will believe that the conservative ecosystem cares genuinely about "all lives" once they are as outraged on a consistent basis about the list of names below as spray paint on a wall, broken windows, and a few burned out cars. I know many people in my own life who lean conservative and do care about individuals in a genuine way, but at the national level and what is happening in conservative discourse - which does shape opinion - I don't see true caring for the law and order for ALL Americans.

Quote
David McAtee, August 3, 1966 - June 1, 2020
Louisville, Kentucky
Shot: June 1, 2020, Louisville Metropolitan Police Officer

George Perry Floyd, October 14, 1973 - May 25, 2020
Powderhorn, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Knee on neck/Asphyxiated: May 25, 2020, Minneapolis Police Officer

Dreasjon “Sean” Reed, 1999 - May 6, 2020
Indianapolis, Indiana
Shot: May 6, 2020, Unidentified Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Officer

Michael Brent Charles Ramos, January 1, 1978 - April 24, 2020
Austin, Texas
Shot: April 24, 2020, Austin Police Detectives

Breonna Taylor, June 5, 1993 - March 13, 2020
Louisville, Kentucky
Shot: March 13, 2020, Louisville Metro Police Officers

Manuel “Mannie” Elijah Ellis, August 28, 1986 - March 3, 2020
Tacoma, Washington
Physical restraint/Hypoxia: March 3, 2020, Tacoma Police Officers

Atatiana Koquice Jefferson, November 28, 1990 - October 12, 2019
Fort Worth, Texas
Shot: October 12, 2019, Fort Worth Police Officer

Emantic “EJ” Fitzgerald Bradford Jr., June 18, 1997 - November 22, 2018
Hoover, Alabama
Shot: November 22, 2018, Unidentified Hoover Police Officers

Charles “Chop” Roundtree Jr., September 5, 2000 - October 17, 2018
San Antonio, Texas
Shot: October 17, 2018, San Antonio Police Officer

Chinedu Okobi, February 13, 1982 - October 3, 2018
Millbrae, California
Tasered/Electrocuted: October 3, 2018, San Mateo County Sheriff Sergeant and Sheriff Deputies

Botham Shem Jean, September 29, 1991 - September 6, 2018
Dallas, Texas
Shot: September 6, 2018, Dallas Police Officer

Antwon Rose Jr., July 12, 2000 - June 19, 2018
East Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Shot: June 19, 2018, East Pittsburgh Police Officer

Saheed Vassell, December 22, 1983 - April 4, 2018
Brooklyn, New York City, New York
Shot: April 4, 2018, Four Unnamed New York City Police Officers

Stephon Alonzo Clark, August 10, 1995 - March 18, 2018
Sacramento, California
Shot: March 18, 2018, Sacramento Police Officers

Aaron Bailey, 1972 - June 29, 2017
Indianapolis, Indiana
Shot: June 29, 2017, Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Officers

Charleena Chavon Lyles, April 24, 1987 - June 18, 2017
Seattle, Washington
Shot: June 18, 2017, Seattle Police Officers

Fetus of Charleena Chavon Lyles (14-15 weeks), June 18, 2017
Seattle, Washington
Shot: June 18, 2017, Seattle Police Officers

Jordan Edwards, October 25, 2001 - April 29, 2017
Balch Springs, Texas
Shot: April 29, 2017, Balch Springs Officer

Chad Robertson, 1992 - February 15, 2017
Chicago, Illinois
Shot: February 8, 2017, Chicago Police Officer

Deborah Danner, September 25, 1950 - October 18, 2016
The Bronx, New York City, New York
Shot: October 18, 2016, New York City Police Officers

Alfred Olango, July 29, 1978 - September 27, 2016
El Cajon, California
Shot: September 27, 2016, El Cajon Police Officers

Terence Crutcher, August 16, 1976 - September 16, 2016
Tulsa, Oklahoma
Shot: September 16, 2016, Tulsa Police Officer

Terrence LeDell Sterling, July 31, 1985 - September 11, 2016
Washington, DC
Shot: September 11, 2016, Washington Metropolitan Police Officer

Korryn Gaines, August 24, 1993 - August 1, 2016
Randallstown, Maryland
Shot: August 1, 2016, Baltimore County Police

Joseph Curtis Mann, 1966 - July 11, 2016
Sacramento, California
Shot: July 11, 2016, Sacramento Police Officers

Philando Castile, July 16, 1983 - July 6, 2016
Falcon Heights, Minnesota
Shot: July 6, 2016, St. Anthony Police Officer

Alton Sterling, June 14, 1979 - July 5, 2016
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Shot: July 5, 2016, Baton Rouge Police Officers

Bettie “Betty Boo” Jones, 1960 - December 26, 2015
Chicago, Illinois
Shot: December 26, 2015, Chicago Police Officer

Quintonio LeGrier, April 29, 1996 - December 26, 2015
Chicago, Illinois
Shot: December 26, 2015, Chicago Police Officer

Corey Lamar Jones, February 3, 1984 - October 18, 2015
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida
Shot: October 18, 2015, Palm Beach Gardens Police Officer

Jamar O’Neal Clark, May 3, 1991 - November 16, 2015
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Shot: November 15, 2015, Minneapolis Police Officers

Jeremy “Bam Bam” McDole, 1987 - September 23, 2015
Wilmington, Delaware
Shot: September 23, 2015, Wilmington Police Officers

India Kager, June 9, 1988 - September 5, 2015
Virginia Beach, Virginia
Shot: September 5, 2015, Virginia Beach Police Officers

Samuel Vincent DuBose, March 12, 1972 - July 19, 2015
Cincinnati, Ohio
Shot: July 19, 2015, University of Cincinnati Police Officer

Sandra Bland, February 7, 1987 - July 13, 2015
Waller County, Texas
Excessive Force/Wrongful Death/Suicide (?): July 10, 2015, Texas State Trooper

Brendon K. Glenn, 1986 - May 5, 2015
Venice, California
Shot: May 5, 2015, Los Angeles Police Officer

Freddie Carlos Gray Jr., August 16, 1989 - April 19, 2015
Baltimore, Maryland
Brute Force/Spinal Injuries: April 12, 2015, Baltimore City Police Officers

Walter Lamar Scott, February 9, 1965 - April 4, 2015
North Charleston, South Carolina
Shot: April 4, 2015, North Charleston Police Officer

Eric Courtney Harris, October 10, 1971 - April 2, 2015
Tulsa, Oklahoma
Shot: April 2, 2015, Tulsa County Reserve Deputy

Phillip Gregory White, 1982 - March 31, 2015
Vineland, New Jersey
K-9 Mauling/Respiratory distress: March 31, 2015, Vineland Police Officers

Mya Shawatza Hall, December 5, 1987 - March 30, 2015
Fort Meade, Maryland
Shot: March 30, 2015, National Security Agency Police Officers

Meagan Hockaday, August 27, 1988 - March 28, 2015
Oxnard, California
Shot: March 28, 2015, Oxnard Police Officer

Tony Terrell Robinson, Jr., October 18, 1995 - March 6, 2015
Madison, Wisconsin
Shot: March 6, 2015, Madison Police Officer

Janisha Fonville, March 3, 1994 - February 18 2015
Charlotte, North Carolina
Shot: February 18, 2015, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Officer

Natasha McKenna, January 9, 1978 - February 8, 2015
Fairfax County, Virginia
Tasered/Cardiac Arrest: February 3, 2015, Fairfax County Sheriff Deputies

Jerame C. Reid, June 8, 1978 - December 30, 2014
Bridgeton, New Jersey
Shot: December 30, 2014, Bridgeton Police Officer

Rumain Brisbon, November 24, 1980 - December 2, 2014
Phoenix, Arizona
Shot: December 2, 2014,  Phoenix Police Officer

Tamir Rice, June 15, 2002 - November 22, 2014
Cleveland, Ohio
Shot: November 22, 2014, Cleveland Police Officer

Akai Kareem Gurley, November 12, 1986 - November 20, 2014
Brooklyn, New York City, New York
Shot: November 20, 2014, New York City Police Officer

Tanisha N. Anderson, January 22, 1977 - November 13, 2014
Cleveland, Ohio
Physically Restrained/Brute Force: November 13, 2014, Cleveland Police Officers

Dante Parker, August 14, 1977 - August 12, 2014
Victorville, California
Tasered/Excessive Force: August 12, 2014, San Bernardino County Sheriff Deputies

Ezell Ford, October 14, 1988 - August 11, 2014
Florence, Los Angeles, California
Shot: August 11, 2014, Los Angeles Police Officers

Michael Brown Jr., May 20, 1996 - August 9, 2014
Ferguson, Missouri
Shot: August 9, 2014, Ferguson Police Officer

John Crawford III, July 29, 1992 - August 5, 2014
Beavercreek, Ohio
Shot: August 5, 2014, Beavercreek Police Officer

Eric Garner, September 15, 1970 - July 17, 2014
Staten Island, New York
Choke hold/Suffocated: July 17, 2014, New York City Police Officer

Dontre Hamilton, January 20, 1983 - April 30, 2014
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Shot: April 30, 2014, Milwaukee Police Officer

Victor White III, September 11, 1991 - March 3, 2014
New Iberia, Louisiana
Shot: March 2, 2014, Iberia Parish Sheriff Deputy

Gabriella Monique Nevarez, November 25, 1991 - March 2, 2014
Citrus Heights, California
Shot: March 2, 2014, Citrus Heights Police Officers

Yvette Smith, December 18, 1966 - February 16, 2014
Bastrop County, Texas
Shot: February 16, 2014, Bastrop County Sheriff Deputy

McKenzie J. Cochran, August 25, 1988 - January 29, 2014
Southfield, Michigan
Pepper Sprayed/Compression Asphyxiation: January 28, 2014, Northland Mall Security Guards

Jordan Baker, 1988 - January 16, 2014
Houston, Texas
Shot: January 16, 2014, Off-duty Houston Police Officer

Andy Lopez, June 2, 2000 - October 22, 2013
Santa Rosa, California
Shot: October 22, 2013, Sonoma County Sheriff Deputy

Miriam Iris Carey, August 12, 1979 - October 3, 2013
Washington, DC
Shot 26 times: October 3, 2013, U. S. Secret Service Officer

Barrington “BJ” Williams, 1988 - September 17, 2013
New York City, New York
Neglect/Disdain/Asthma Attack: September 17, 2013, New York City Police Officers

Jonathan Ferrell, October 11, 1989 - September 14, 2013
Charlotte, North Carolina
Shot: September 14, 2013, Charlotte-Mecklenburg  Police Officer

Carlos Alcis, 1970 - August 15, 2013
Brooklyn, New York City
Heart Attack/Neglect: August 15, 2013, New York City Police Officers

Larry Eugene Jackson Jr., November 29, 1980 - July 26, 2013
Austin, Texas
Shot: July 26, 2013, Austin Police Detective

Kyam Livingston, July 29, 1975 - July 21, 2013
New York City, New York
Neglect/Ignored pleas for help: July 20-21, 2013, New York City Police Officers

Clinton R. Allen, September 26, 1987 - March 10, 2013
Dallas, Texas
Tasered and Shot: March 10, 2013, Dallas Police Officer

Kimani “KiKi” Gray, October 19, 1996 - March 9, 2013
Brooklyn, New York City, New York
Shot: March 9, 2013, New York Police Officers

Kayla Moore, April 17, 1971 - February 13, 2013
Berkeley, California
Restrained face-down prone: February 12, 2013, Berkeley Police Officers

Jamaal Moore Sr., 1989 - December 15, 2012
Chicago, Illinois
Shot: December 15, 2012, Chicago Police Officer

Johnnie Kamahi Warren, February 26, 1968 - February 13, 2012
Dothan, Alabama
Tasered/Electrocuted: December 10, 2012, Houston County (AL) Sheriff Deputy

Shelly Marie Frey, April 21, 1985 - December 6, 2012
Houston, Texas
Shot: December 6, 2012, Off-duty Harris County Sheriff's Deputy

Darnisha Diana Harris, December 11, 1996 - December 2, 2012
Breaux Bridge, Louisiana
Shot: December 2, 2012, Breaux Bridge Police Office

Timothy Russell, December 9. 1968 - November 29, 2012
Cleveland, Ohio
137 Rounds/Shot 23 times: November 29, 2012, Cleveland Police Officers

Malissa Williams, June 20, 1982 - November 29, 2012
Cleveland, Ohio
137 Rounds/Shot 24 times: November 29, 2012, Cleveland Police Officers

Noel Palanco, November 28, 1989 - October 4, 2012
Queens, New York City, New York
Shot: October 4, 2012, New York City Police Officers

Reynaldo Cuevas, January 6, 1992 - September 7, 2012
Bronx, New York City, New York
Shot: September 7, 2012, New York City Police Officer

Chavis Carter, 1991 - July 28, 2012
Jonesboro, Arkansas
Shot: July 28, 2012, Jonesboro Police Officer

Alesia Thomas, June 1, 1977 - July 22, 2012
Los Angeles, California
Brutal Force/Beaten: July 22, 2012, Los Angeles Police Officers

Shantel Davis, May 26, 1989 - June 14, 2012
New York City, New York
Shot: June 14, 2012, New York City Police Officer

Sharmel T. Edwards, October 10, 1962 - April 21, 2012
Las Vegas, Nevada
Shot: April 21, 2012, Las Vegas Police Officers

Tamon Robinson, December 21, 1985 - April 18, 2012
Brooklyn, New York City, New York
Run over by police car: April 12, 2012, New York City Police Officers

Ervin Lee Jefferson, III, 1994 - March 24, 2012
Atlanta, Georgia
Shot: March 24, 2012, Shepperson Security & Escort Services Security Guards

Kendrec McDade, May 5, 1992 - March 24, 2012
Pasadena, California
Shot: March 24, 2012, Pasadena Police Officers

Rekia Boyd, November 5, 1989 - March 21, 2012
Chicago, Illinois
Shot: March 21, 2012, Off-duty Chicago Police Detective

Shereese Francis, 1982 - March 15, 2012
Queens, New York City, New York
Suffocated to death: March 15, 2012,  New York City Police Officers

Jersey K. Green, June 17, 1974 - March 12, 2012
Aurora, Illinois
Tasered/Electrocuted: March 12, 2012, Aurora Police Officers

Wendell James Allen, December 19, 1991 - March 7, 2012
New Orleans, Louisiana
Shot:  March 7, 2012, New Orleans Police Officer

Nehemiah Lazar Dillard, July 29, 1982 - March 5, 2012
Gainesville, Florida
Tasered/Electrocuted: March 5, 2012, Alachua County Sheriff Deputies

Dante’ Lamar Price, July 18, 1986 - March 1, 2012
Dayton, Ohio
Shot: March 1, 2012, Ranger Security Guards

Raymond Luther Allen Jr., 1978 - February 29, 2012
Galveston, Texas
Tasered/Electrocuted: February 27, 2012, Galveston Police Officers

Manual Levi Loggins Jr., February 22, 1980 - February 7, 2012
San Clemente, Orange County, California
Shot: February 7, 2012, Orange County Sheriff Deputy

Ramarley Graham, April 12, 1993 - February 2, 2012
The Bronx, New York City, New York
Shot: February 2, 2012, New York City Police Officer

Kenneth Chamberlain Sr., April 12, 1943 - November 19, 2011
White Plains, New York
Tasered/Electrocuted/Shot: November 19, 2011, White Plains Police Officers

Alonzo Ashley Jr., 1982 - July 18, 2011
Denver, Colorado
Tasered/Electrocuted: July 18, 2011, Denver Police Officers

Kenneth Harding Jr., August 5, 1991 - July 16, 2011
San Francisco, California
Shot: July 16, 2011, San Francisco Police Officers

Derek Williams, January 23, 1989 - July 6, 2011
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Blunt Force/Respiratory distress: July 6, 2011, Milwaukee Police Officers

Raheim Brown, Jr., March 4, 1990 - January 22, 2011
Oakland, California
Shot: January 22, 2011, Oakland Unified School District Police

Reginald Doucet, June 3, 1985 - January 14, 2011
Los Angeles, California
Shot: January 14, 2011, Los Angeles Police Officer

Derrick Jones, September 30, 1973 - November 8, 2010
Oakland, California
Shot: November 8, 2010, Oakland Police Officers

Danroy “DJ” Henry Jr., October 29, 1990 - October 17, 2010
Pleasantville, New York
Shot: October 17, 2020, Pleasantville Police Officer

Aiyana Mo'Nay Stanley-Jones, July 20, 2002 - May 16, 2010
Detroit, Michigan
Shot: May 16, 2010, Detroit Police Officer

Steven Eugene Washington, September 20, 1982 - March 20, 2010
Los Angeles, California
Shot: March 20, 2010, Los Angeles County Police

Aaron Campbell, September 7, 1984 - January 29, 2010
Portland, Oregon
Shot: January 29, 2010, Portland Police Officer

Kiwane Carrington, July 14, 1994 - October 9, 2009
Champaign, Illinois
Shot: October 9, 2019, Champaign Police Officer

Victor Steen, November 11, 1991 - October 3, 2009
Pensacola, Florida
Tasered/Run over: October 3, 2009, Pensacola Police Officer

Shem Walker,  March 18, 1960 - July 11, 2009
Brooklyn, New York
Shot: July 11, 2009, New York City Undercover C-94 Police Officer

Oscar Grant III, February 27, 1986 - January 1, 2009
Oakland, California
Shot: January 1, 2009, BART Police Officer

Tarika Wilson, October 30, 1981 - January 4, 2008
Lima, Ohio
Shot January 4, 2008, Lima Police Officer

DeAunta Terrel Farrow, September 7, 1994 - June 22, 2007
West Memphis, Arkansas
Shot: June 22, 2007, West Memphis (AR) Police Officer

Sean Bell, May 23, 1983 - November 25, 2006
Queens, New York City, New York
Shot: November 25, 2006, New York City Police Officers

Kathryn Johnston, June 26, 1914 - November 21, 2006
Atlanta, Georgia
Shot: November 21, 2006, Undercover Atlanta Police Officers

Ronald Curtis Madison, March 1, 1965 - September 4, 2005
Danziger Bridge, New Orleans, Louisiana
Shot: September 4, 2005, New Orleans Police Officers

James B. Brissette Jr., November 6, 1987 - September 4, 2005
Danziger Bridge, New Orleans, Louisiana
Shot: September 4, 2005, New Orleans Police Officers

Henry “Ace” Glover, October 2, 1973 - September 2, 2005
New Orleans, Louisiana
Shot: September 2, 2005, New Orleans Police Officers

Timothy Stansbury, Jr., November 16, 1984 - January 24, 2004
Brooklyn, New York City, New York
Shot: January 24, 2004, New York City Police Officer

Ousmane Zongo, 1960 - May 22, 2003
New York City, New York
Shot: May 22, 2003, New York City Police Officer

Alberta Spruill, 1946 - May 16, 2003
New York City, New York
Stun grenade thrown into her apartment led to a heart attack: May 16, 2003, New York City Police Officer

Kendra Sarie James, December 24, 1981 - May 5, 2003
Portland, Oregon
Shot: May 5, 2003, Portland Police Officer

Orlando Barlow, December 29, 1974 - February 28, 2003
Las Vegas, Nevada
Shot: February 28, 2003, Las Vegas Police Officer

Timothy DeWayne Thomas Jr., July 25, 1981 - April 7, 2001
Cincinnati, Ohio
Shot: April 7, 2001, Cincinnati Police Patrolman

Ronald Beasley, 1964 - June 12, 2000
Dellwood, Missouri
Shot: June 12, 2000, Dellwood Police Officers 

Earl Murray, 1964 - June 12, 2000
Dellwood, Missouri
Shot: June 12, 2000, Dellwood Police Officers

Patrick Moses Dorismond, February 28, 1974 - March 16, 2000
New York City, New York
Shot: March 16, 2000, New York City Police Officer

Prince Carmen Jones Jr., March 30, 1975 - September 1, 2000
Fairfax County, Virginia
Shot: September 1, 2000, Prince George’s County Police Officer

Malcolm Ferguson, October 31, 1976 - March 1, 2000
The Bronx, New York City, New York
Shot: March 1, 2000, New York City Police Officer

LaTanya Haggerty, 1973 - June 4, 1999
Chicago, Illinois
Shot: June 4, 1999, Chicago Police Officer

Margaret LaVerne Mitchell, 1945 - May 21, 1999
Los Angeles, California
Shot: May 21, 1999, Los Angeles Police Officer

Amadou Diallo, September 2, 1975 - February 4, 1999
The Bronx, New York City, New York
Shot: February 4, 1999, New York City Police Officers

Tyisha Shenee Miller, March 9, 1979 - December 28, 1998
Riverside, California
Shot: December 28, 1998, Riverside Police Officers

Dannette Daniels, January 25, 1966 - June 7, 1997
Newark, New Jersey
Shot: June 7, 1997, Newark Police Officer

Frankie Ann Perkins, 1960 - March 22, 1997
Chicago, Illinois
Brutal Force/Strangled: March 22, 1997, Chicago Police Officers

Nicholas Heyward Jr., August 26, 1981 - September 27, 1994
Brooklyn, New York City, New York
Shot: September 27, 1994, New York City Police Officer

Mary Mitchell, 1950 - November 3, 1991
The Bronx, New York City, New York
Shot: November 3, 1991, New York City Police Officer

Yvonne Smallwood, 1959 - December 9, 1987
New York City, New York
Severely beaten/Massive blood clot: December 3, New York City Police Officers

Eleanor Bumpers, August 22, 1918 - October 29, 1984
The Bronx, New York City, New York
Shot: October 29, 1984, New York City Police Officer

Michael Jerome Stewart, May 9, 1958 - September 28, 1983
New York City, New York
Brutal Force: September 15, 1983, New York City Transit Police

Eula Mae Love, August 8, 1939 - January 3, 1979
Los Angeles, California
Shot: January 3, 1979, Los Angeles County Police Officers

Arthur Miller Jr., 1943 - June 14, 1978
Brooklyn, New York City, New York
Chokehold/Strangled: June 14, 1978, New York City Police Officers

Randolph Evans, April 5, 1961 - November 25, 1976
Brooklyn, New York City, New York
Shot in head: November 25, 1976, New York City Police Officer

Rita Lloyd, January 27, 1973
New York City, New York
Shot: January 27, 1973, New York City Police Officer

Henry Dumas, July 20, 1934 - May 23, 1968
Harlem, New York City, New York
Shot: May 23, 1968, New York City Transit Police Officer

MasterStache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2628
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3827 on: August 28, 2020, 09:14:43 AM »
Yeah dude, we're not gonna agree on anything here. People can watch the video, listen to his own words, and decide for themselves. I sincerely feel pity for you that you have come to conclusion that conservatives don't care about the unnecessary loss of life.
Serious question, do you think the majority of conservatives see preservation of life as equal among everyone to include minorities, immigrants etc?

Yes

Hmm, that doesn't seem to jive with their overwhelming support of their leader who has a long history of treating non-whites differently.
It definitely doesn't seem to jive with their desire to see race as a non-issue and their intent to remain skeptical of systematic racism despite the facts.

This certainly doesn't help the ideal that Conservatives care about preservation of life. I assume we'll see Fox news, Tucker, and Trump speaking out against Ann's comments? No?
« Last Edit: August 28, 2020, 09:22:05 AM by MasterStache »

NorthernBlitz

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 485
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3828 on: August 28, 2020, 09:15:56 AM »
Yeah dude, we're not gonna agree on anything here. People can watch the video, listen to his own words, and decide for themselves. I sincerely feel pity for you that you have come to conclusion that conservatives don't care about the unnecessary loss of life.
Serious question, do you think the majority of conservatives see preservation of life as equal among everyone to include minorities, immigrants etc?

I think that the answer to this is "yes".

I also think that the answer to this is "yes" for liberals even though they also tend to be more vocal about deaths they think will provide political advantage.

But I'm also not generally into dehumanizing people (liberal / conservative, US national / immigrant, my religion / other religion / no religion, etc) based on a single piece of information about them. Although I also find it very sad that the hiveminds make it so knowing political affiliation tends to provide great guesses on stated opinions on a variety of issues (too much purity testing on both sides IMO).

sherr

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1273
  • Age: 35
  • Location: North Carolina, USA
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3829 on: August 28, 2020, 09:18:06 AM »
Yeah dude, we're not gonna agree on anything here. People can watch the video, listen to his own words, and decide for themselves. I sincerely feel pity for you that you have come to conclusion that conservatives don't care about the unnecessary loss of life.

And you are making the mistake of assuming that everyone in your identity group is like you. I personally know conservatives that are non-evil, my parents and in-laws included. But judging by all the evidence available that does not seem to be the default case, and I feel nothing but disgust for a 2020 Trumper.

cliffhanger

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 150
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3830 on: August 28, 2020, 09:22:16 AM »
Yeah dude, we're not gonna agree on anything here. People can watch the video, listen to his own words, and decide for themselves. I sincerely feel pity for you that you have come to conclusion that conservatives don't care about the unnecessary loss of life.
Serious question, do you think the majority of conservatives see preservation of life as equal among everyone to include minorities, immigrants etc?

Yes
So why are they against policies which might start to put the preservation of the lives of black men into practice?

Tim Scott authored a police reform bill. Rand Paul authored Justice for Breonna Taylor bill (he's also been speaking for criminal justice reform for a long time). Bipartisan congress passed and Trump signed FIRST STEP act. And that's just off the top of my head.

bacchi

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4990
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3831 on: August 28, 2020, 09:25:36 AM »
As the video shows, the shooter was retreating. The man here was chasing after him. He cannot claim self defense if he the aggressor.

In Florida, he could.

NorthernBlitz

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 485
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3832 on: August 28, 2020, 09:26:34 AM »
So why are they against policies which might start to put the preservation of the lives of black men into practice?

Another serious question:

Do you believe that defunding the police will reduce the number of lives lost (black, male, or otherwise)?

To me it seems pretty likely that it would do the opposite and that the cost will be disproportionately paid by poor people and people of color.

bacchi

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4990
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3833 on: August 28, 2020, 09:31:14 AM »
So why are they against policies which might start to put the preservation of the lives of black men into practice?

Another serious question:

Do you believe that defunding the police will reduce the number of lives lost (black, male, or otherwise)?

To me it seems pretty likely that it would do the opposite and that the cost will be disproportionately paid by poor people and people of color.

It depends on where the money goes once it leaves the police budget.

If it's spent on roads? Not helpful.

Social services for the homeless*, better housing for the working class, better training for the poor, etc.? Helpful.

In other words, addressing why crime happens may just work better than addressing crime after it happens.


* Homeless cost a lot per year going in and out of jail and the emergency room.

Glenstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2656
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2027 (maybe?)
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3834 on: August 28, 2020, 09:32:34 AM »
Yeah dude, we're not gonna agree on anything here. People can watch the video, listen to his own words, and decide for themselves. I sincerely feel pity for you that you have come to conclusion that conservatives don't care about the unnecessary loss of life.
Serious question, do you think the majority of conservatives see preservation of life as equal among everyone to include minorities, immigrants etc?

Yes
So why are they against policies which might start to put the preservation of the lives of black men into practice?

Tim Scott authored a police reform bill. Rand Paul authored Justice for Breonna Taylor bill (he's also been speaking for criminal justice reform for a long time). Bipartisan congress passed and Trump signed FIRST STEP act. And that's just off the top of my head.
A read of the history of the FIRST STEP act is an interesting read, and paints a slightly more nuanced and not as rosy picture:
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/how-first-step-act-became-law-and-what-happens-next

bacchi

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4990
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3835 on: August 28, 2020, 09:34:33 AM »
Rand Paul authored Justice for Breonna Taylor bill (he's also been speaking for criminal justice reform for a long time).

McConnell: *crickets*

MasterStache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2628
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3836 on: August 28, 2020, 09:35:41 AM »
As the video shows, the shooter was retreating. The man here was chasing after him. He cannot claim self defense if he the aggressor.

In Florida, he could.

The video doesn't show the shooter retreating at all. He is on the ground the whole time. You can't logically chase after someone on the ground. Gentmach has once again entered troll territory. Although it was pretty obvious when he called the actions of a Paramedic attempting to get the gun away from a kid who just shot 2 people, instead of killing the kid himself "asshatery."
« Last Edit: August 28, 2020, 09:39:15 AM by MasterStache »

NorthernBlitz

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 485
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3837 on: August 28, 2020, 09:39:48 AM »
So why are they against policies which might start to put the preservation of the lives of black men into practice?

Another serious question:

Do you believe that defunding the police will reduce the number of lives lost (black, male, or otherwise)?

To me it seems pretty likely that it would do the opposite and that the cost will be disproportionately paid by poor people and people of color.

It depends on where the money goes once it leaves the police budget.

If it's spent on roads? Not helpful.

Social services for the homeless*, better housing for the working class, better training for the poor, etc.? Helpful.

In other words, addressing why crime happens may just work better than addressing crime after it happens.


* Homeless cost a lot per year going in and out of jail and the emergency room.

I generally agree with the last statement, although I do think that law enforcement provides some level of disincentive as well (though it's clearly not great at this).

But it seems to me like it's best to try funding the new things while maintaining police budgets first.

Then you test the hypothesis that [insert proposed new measure] reduces crime before you pull back from what you already have.

But I'm also generally in favor of evidenced based decisions (which is why I'm growing to dislike big parties more where the only metric they tend to care about is electoral math).

Defunding the police before you try those other things (e.g. before you think about what those other things should be) seems like a big gamble to me.

And like many political endeavors, it seems to me like the bet is placed by more privileged people and the cost of being wrong would be paid by less privileged people.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2020, 09:42:05 AM by NorthernBlitz »

MasterStache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2628
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3838 on: August 28, 2020, 09:44:39 AM »
Paul authored Justice for Breonna Taylor bill (he's also been speaking for criminal justice reform for a long time). Bipartisan congress passed and Trump signed FIRST STEP act. And that's just off the top of my head.
I'll add to this. Trump rolled back Obama's police reform and lied about it. Why not add on to it? We know the answer to that. Rand Paul actually spoke out against some of Trump's rollbacks. Good for him! Rand Paul also stalled a bill that would make lynching a federal hate crime because we had to suppose, he didn't like that it was renamed? It was supported overwhelmingly on both sides.

cliffhanger

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 150
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3839 on: August 28, 2020, 09:46:04 AM »
Yeah dude, we're not gonna agree on anything here. People can watch the video, listen to his own words, and decide for themselves. I sincerely feel pity for you that you have come to conclusion that conservatives don't care about the unnecessary loss of life.
Serious question, do you think the majority of conservatives see preservation of life as equal among everyone to include minorities, immigrants etc?

Yes
So why are they against policies which might start to put the preservation of the lives of black men into practice?

Tim Scott authored a police reform bill. Rand Paul authored Justice for Breonna Taylor bill (he's also been speaking for criminal justice reform for a long time). Bipartisan congress passed and Trump signed FIRST STEP act. And that's just off the top of my head.
A read of the history of the FIRST STEP act is an interesting read, and paints a slightly more nuanced and not as rosy picture:
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/how-first-step-act-became-law-and-what-happens-next
The previous poster claimed conservatives are against polices like this, and I responded. Yes, I'm certain that there is nuance to the bill.

But do you not see the irony in your post now calling for nuance in the conversation to a bill Trump signed, while your last post compared Michael Brown and Walter Scott?

bacchi

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4990
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3840 on: August 28, 2020, 09:55:56 AM »
So why are they against policies which might start to put the preservation of the lives of black men into practice?

Another serious question:

Do you believe that defunding the police will reduce the number of lives lost (black, male, or otherwise)?

To me it seems pretty likely that it would do the opposite and that the cost will be disproportionately paid by poor people and people of color.

It depends on where the money goes once it leaves the police budget.

If it's spent on roads? Not helpful.

Social services for the homeless*, better housing for the working class, better training for the poor, etc.? Helpful.

In other words, addressing why crime happens may just work better than addressing crime after it happens.


* Homeless cost a lot per year going in and out of jail and the emergency room.

I generally agree with the last statement, although I do think that law enforcement provides some level of disincentive as well (though it's clearly not great at this).

But it seems to me like it's best to try funding the new things while maintaining police budgets first.

Perhaps.

There's a budget problem there, though. Seriously funding a plan to reduce the root of crime is expensive. Funding both the police department + that program is not in many municipal budgets.

Also, if you take away an activity from the police -- responding to non-violent mental illness calls, for example -- then why wouldn't you also take away some budget? If social workers, instead of police, respond to the drunk homeless guy in the grocery store, why wouldn't some of that money go elsewhere?

Quote
And like many political endeavors, it seems to me like the bet is placed by more privileged people and the cost of being wrong would be paid by less privileged people.

Are you assuming that "defunding" means taking away ALL money from police departments? It doesn't, unless you're paying attention to a few loud voices on twitter.

How would it be worse for the less privileged?

bloodaxe

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 204
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3841 on: August 28, 2020, 09:57:08 AM »
Paul authored Justice for Breonna Taylor bill (he's also been speaking for criminal justice reform for a long time). Bipartisan congress passed and Trump signed FIRST STEP act. And that's just off the top of my head.
Rand Paul also stalled a bill that would make lynching a federal hate crime because we had to suppose, he didn't like that it was renamed?
Quote
Paul has said he is concerned it could allow more minor altercations to be punishable as lynchings.

"Bruises could be considered lynching," Paul told reporters Wednesday. "That's a problem, to put someone in jail for 10 years for some kind of altercation," referring to the measure's penalty for conspiring or attempting to conspire to commit a lynching.

Lynching is already a crime, it falls under murder 1. It also has been considered a hate crime in the past.

The most recent incident of lynching in the US occurred in 1998 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_James_Byrd_Jr.):

Quote
...it was determined by state law enforcement officials that the murder was a hate crime...

Berry, Brewer, and King were tried and convicted for Byrd's murder. Brewer and King received the death penalty, while Berry was sentenced to life in prison. Brewer was executed by lethal injection on September 21, 2011, and King was executed on April 24, 2019.

Please don't spread misinformation.


Samuel

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 510
  • Location: the slippery slope
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3842 on: August 28, 2020, 10:00:30 AM »
So why are they against policies which might start to put the preservation of the lives of black men into practice?

Another serious question:

Do you believe that defunding the police will reduce the number of lives lost (black, male, or otherwise)?

To me it seems pretty likely that it would do the opposite and that the cost will be disproportionately paid by poor people and people of color.

Sadly, I think you're right.

I'm a bit baffled why we on the left have apparently decided BLM activists have a better plan to fix policing issues than President Obama's Task Force on 21st Century Policing did. We seem to be intent on running this Defund experiment in some of our more liberal cities, though. I'm also pretty sure the least well off will bear the brunt of the consequences but we shall see.

Fireball

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 289
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3843 on: August 28, 2020, 10:03:55 AM »
Edit: bacchi beat me to it
« Last Edit: August 28, 2020, 10:06:11 AM by Fireball »

NorthernBlitz

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 485
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3844 on: August 28, 2020, 10:17:50 AM »
So why are they against policies which might start to put the preservation of the lives of black men into practice?

Another serious question:

Do you believe that defunding the police will reduce the number of lives lost (black, male, or otherwise)?

To me it seems pretty likely that it would do the opposite and that the cost will be disproportionately paid by poor people and people of color.

It depends on where the money goes once it leaves the police budget.

If it's spent on roads? Not helpful.

Social services for the homeless*, better housing for the working class, better training for the poor, etc.? Helpful.

In other words, addressing why crime happens may just work better than addressing crime after it happens.


* Homeless cost a lot per year going in and out of jail and the emergency room.

I generally agree with the last statement, although I do think that law enforcement provides some level of disincentive as well (though it's clearly not great at this).

But it seems to me like it's best to try funding the new things while maintaining police budgets first.

Perhaps.

There's a budget problem there, though. Seriously funding a plan to reduce the root of crime is expensive. Funding both the police department + that program is not in many municipal budgets.

Also, if you take away an activity from the police -- responding to non-violent mental illness calls, for example -- then why wouldn't you also take away some budget? If social workers, instead of police, respond to the drunk homeless guy in the grocery store, why wouldn't some of that money go elsewhere?

Quote
And like many political endeavors, it seems to me like the bet is placed by more privileged people and the cost of being wrong would be paid by less privileged people.

Are you assuming that "defunding" means taking away ALL money from police departments? It doesn't, unless you're paying attention to a few loud voices on twitter.

How would it be worse for the less privileged?

I specifically used the word defund (instead of abolish) to not be inflammatory here.

I don't think anyone can rationally believe that abolishing the police is a good policy and I don't want to argue with strawmen.

So I assume that defund means divert some of the police budget to some other things that might be something like social work.

I think that's a good faith interpretation, but I'm happy to hear other interpretations.

If it wasn't clear from what I said above, I think our current situation shows us that we need more total money looking at crime prevention / law enforcement. And that probably comes at the expense of higher taxes (and / or larger deficits).

I agree with more funds going to things that are not traditional policing.

And if those non-traditional methods are shown to work, I think that means that money should be reduced from traditional policing efforts because they won't be needed as much.

But I think cutting current police budgets and diverting that to unproven methods is a bad experiment (e.g. putting the cart before the horse).

Even if the methods work (and I hope they will), I think it will take time (and money) to figure out the right way to implement these new ideas.

And it seems sensible to me not to weaken the current backstop that's available if these things fail or it take time to learn how to implement them well.

Glenstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2656
  • Location: Seattle!
  • Target FI date 2027 (maybe?)
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3845 on: August 28, 2020, 10:26:20 AM »

I specifically used the word defund (instead of abolish) to not be inflammatory here.

I don't think anyone can rationally believe that abolishing the police is a good policy and I don't want to argue with strawmen.

So I assume that defund means divert some of the police budget to some other things that might be something like social work.

I think that's a good faith interpretation, but I'm happy to hear other interpretations.

If it wasn't clear from what I said above, I think our current situation shows us that we need more total money looking at crime prevention / law enforcement. And that probably comes at the expense of higher taxes (and / or larger deficits).

I agree with more funds going to things that are not traditional policing.

And if those non-traditional methods are shown to work, I think that means that money should be reduced from traditional policing efforts because they won't be needed as much.

But I think cutting current police budgets and diverting that to unproven methods is a bad experiment (e.g. putting the cart before the horse).

Even if the methods work (and I hope they will), I think it will take time (and money) to figure out the right way to implement these new ideas.

And it seems sensible to me not to weaken the current backstop that's available if these things fail or it take time to learn how to implement them well.

This is a pretty rational approach. The transition of responsibilities from police to other social services requires infrastructure and thoughtfully planned out procedures and methods. This will take time. It will also take a recognition that it will get some stuff wrong and a commitment to progressive development of the programs instead of a "well that didn't work, let's go back" response. I see this as taking decades to fully implement to a different and functional system. I also think that it will be better for society and police (who have too many responsibilities beyond a reasonable scope of training).

I also think that this needs to happen in tandem with increased accountability for police and a shift away from warrior culture.

NorthernBlitz

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 485
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3846 on: August 28, 2020, 10:27:07 AM »
So why are they against policies which might start to put the preservation of the lives of black men into practice?

Another serious question:

Do you believe that defunding the police will reduce the number of lives lost (black, male, or otherwise)?

To me it seems pretty likely that it would do the opposite and that the cost will be disproportionately paid by poor people and people of color.

Sadly, I think you're right.

I'm a bit baffled why we on the left have apparently decided BLM activists have a better plan to fix policing issues than President Obama's Task Force on 21st Century Policing did. We seem to be intent on running this Defund experiment in some of our more liberal cities, though. I'm also pretty sure the least well off will bear the brunt of the consequences but we shall see.

Maybe I'm being too cynical, but I think it's about the electoral math.

I think the Democratic Party is worried that leftists and progressives will stay home (again?) since they went with another super-establishment candidate (maybe as a McCain-like sacrificial candidate since the economy was still doing well when they told the other candidates to fold up shop).

My guess is that Democratic support for these things stops the day after the polls close and the election is won.

LennStar

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2108
  • Location: Germany
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3847 on: August 28, 2020, 10:44:59 AM »
Yeah dude, we're not gonna agree on anything here. People can watch the video, listen to his own words, and decide for themselves. I sincerely feel pity for you that you have come to conclusion that conservatives don't care about the unnecessary loss of life.
Serious question, do you think the majority of conservatives see preservation of life as equal among everyone to include minorities, immigrants etc?

Yes
So we know have established that the majority of Republicans is never shown in the news.

Do you believe that defunding the police will reduce the number of lives lost (black, male, or otherwise)?
Let me put it like this: Since the US has not only the highest military expenditure on the planet, but probably also the highest on police, while it is more likely to be shot to death in an US city than in some countries with an actual civil war... I am very tempted to say that the money currently is not placed in good way.

Quote
In other words, addressing why crime happens may just work better than addressing crime after it happens.
You mean "give those who need" instead of "eye for an eye"?
How shocking socialistic!
« Last Edit: August 28, 2020, 10:51:45 AM by LennStar »

MasterStache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2628
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3848 on: August 28, 2020, 10:56:07 AM »
Lynching is already a crime, it falls under murder 1. It also has been considered a hate crime in the past.
This is a non-sequitur. The bill is to make lynching a federal crime. This has nothing to do with Paul's objections either.

Quote
The most recent incident of lynching in the US occurred in 1998
Again, non sequitur and irrelevant. 

Quote
Paul has said he is concerned it could allow more minor altercations to be punishable as lynchings.

"Bruises could be considered lynching," Paul told reporters Wednesday. "That's a problem, to put someone in jail for 10 years for some kind of altercation," referring to the measure's penalty for conspiring or attempting to conspire to commit a lynching.
Meh, that code already exists

Quote
Please don't spread misinformation.
Feel free to point any concrete information I provided that is incorrect. If you are taking issue with the word "supposed" in my reference to Paul objecting to the bill, feel free to Google the definition. I would also encourage you to read about the history of the bill and similarities to another bill passed by both the Senate and House unanimously in 2019.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2020, 11:23:17 AM by MasterStache »

cliffhanger

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 150
Re: Trump outrage of the day
« Reply #3849 on: August 28, 2020, 11:01:39 AM »
Serious question, do you think the majority of conservatives see preservation of life as equal among everyone to include minorities, immigrants etc?

Yes
So we know have established that the majority of Republicans is never shown in the news.
Oh man, you are unintentionally spot on. lol