Murder rates soar dramatically in cities after BLM protests

[Dave Gray]

Maybe you do, maybe you don't. I'm arguing what the black community, media, celebrities, and white guilt/virtue signaling people are saying.

Instead of having a conversation with nebulous groups that aren't here, why not just have a discussion with the people here trying to talk to you?

[pondwater]

Instead of having a conversation with nebulous groups that aren't here, why not just have a discussion with the people here trying to talk to you?

Because that's the real issue here. And some people here fit into those categories.

[Spider-Dan]

You "are fine with the convictions" today... after months of insisting that they shouldn't have been convicted.  But at no point did you admit you were wrong to defend them in the first place. Sidestepping, indeed.

You keep trying to focus on my supposed responsibility to condemn the woke mobs, but that claim rings hollow coming from someone who has personally issued statements that are at least as bad.  So instead of discussing liberal internet boogeymen, we should first address the words coming out of our own mouths.

[pondwater]

You "are fine with the convictions" today... after months of insisting that they shouldn't have been convicted.  But at no point did you admit you were wrong to defend them in the first place. Sidestepping, indeed.

No, I'm fine with a conviction when appropriate. After the trial, WHEN all the facts are out on the table. And although, I think he was guilty and should be held accountable. The political pressure on the jury made them over convict the guy. That's what's wrong with you Woke social justice warrior people, you don't even wait for any facts to come out. You convicted this guy in your mind the minute you found out it happened. I guess there are two ways you could look at it.

A. Chauvin did something stupid, reckless, and extreme and should be held accountable and found guilty of an appropriate charge.

or

B. Chauvin got to the scene and said to himself, "Hey, look it's a nigga. I'm gonna kill this motherfucker. Look at all these witnesses filming me. Fuck it, I'm gonna kill this motherfucker anyway. And Chauvin deserves the maximum sentences on multiple charges for one crime because he "wanted to kill a black person"

You keep trying to focus on my supposed responsibility to condemn the woke mobs, but that claim rings hollow coming from someone who has personally issued statements that are at least as bad.  So instead of discussing liberal internet boogeymen, we should first address the words coming out of our own mouths.

I condemn people when appropriate, after reasonable doubt has been eliminated. I have and do condemn Chauvin's actions. And I have and do condemn Guyger's actions. And WTF are you talking about "liberal internet boogeymen"? You drunk again?

[dolphins4life]

Shortages are here https://www.theblaze.com/news/police-shortage-retirement-recruiting-philadelphia

[Fau Teixeira]

I know the source is super questionable .. but still .. if this is true .. good

now can we do the same thing for border control agents?

[dolphins4life]

I know the source is super questionable .. but still .. if this is true .. good

now can we do the same thing for border control agents?

  Why is this questionable and why is this good? 

[Spider-Dan]

No, I'm fine with a conviction when appropriate. After the trial, WHEN all the facts are out on the table.

Video of cop kneeling on handcuffed man's neck for 9 minutes is released:
"Hold on guys, we need every single fact from the trial before we can fairly say that this cop committed a crime."

Video of suspect brandishing a knife before being shot by police is released:
"The person is obviously a dangerous criminal and lethal force was clearly warranted."

Doesn't seem like you think we should wait for all the facts every time.

That's what's wrong with you Woke social justice warrior people, you don't even wait for any facts to come out. You convicted this guy in your mind the minute you found out it happened.

We convicted him the moment we saw the video, exactly like how you declared Bryant's death was warranted the moment you saw that video.

You also keep insisting that these unarmed people are not being murdered just because they are black, which misses the point in two respects:

1) You, personally, consistently and repeatedly insist that no murder has occurred right until the moment the verdict is delivered saying otherwise (in both the cases of Guyger and Chauvin).
2) It's not about being murdered just because they're black; it's about being pulled over because they're black, being questioned because they're black, being detained because they're black, and having an extreme escalation of force because they're black.  It's about a system that works against black people at every step of the process.

No one is claiming that Chauvin woke up and said, "Gosh, I hope I get to kill a black person today."  That doesn't mean that his actions were not racially motivated.

And WTF are you talking about "liberal internet boogeymen"?

You keep insisting that Fau, Dave and I "condemn the woke mobs" (i.e. liberal internet boogeymen) when we aren't personally saying the things you are criticizing.  Meanwhile, you are personally saying things we are criticizing you for.

So before we condemn the "woke mobs," you should first condemn your own statements (e.g. Floyd merely died from a drug-induced heart attack).

[pondwater]

Video of cop kneeling on handcuffed man's neck for 9 minutes is released:
"Hold on guys, we need every single fact from the trial before we can fairly say that this cop committed a crime."

Video of suspect brandishing a knife before being shot by police is released:
"The person is obviously a dangerous criminal and lethal force was clearly warranted."

Doesn't seem like you think we should wait for all the facts every time.

You're conflating two separate issues to misdirect the thread. They are two totally different situations, one was a trial which uses facts to determine the guilt of the accused. One is an attempted murder in progress that needs immediate attention.

We convicted him the moment we saw the video, exactly like how you declared Bryant's death was warranted the moment you saw that video.

Again, you're conflating two separate issues. An in progress attempted murder and a trial aren't the same thing.

You also keep insisting that these unarmed people are not being murdered just because they are black, which misses the point in two respects:

1) You, personally, consistently and repeatedly insist that no murder has occurred right until the moment the verdict is delivered saying otherwise (in both the cases of Guyger and Chauvin).

So basically you're saying that I'm not the jury and can't deliver a verdict? Because until the jury decides that someone is guilty of murder, no murder has occurred. Only a death has occurred  They could come back with not guilty, manslaughter, or any number of charges. Murder is a legal distinction.

And like I've said many times, both did something wrong and both should be held accountable for the death of another human. That's why we have a trial and legal system and not mob rule. So the facts can be presented and a determination can be made.

2) It's not about being murdered just because they're black; it's about being pulled over because they're black, being questioned because they're black, being detained because they're black, and having an extreme escalation of force because they're black.  It's about a system that works against black people at every step of the process.

George Floyd was pulled over, questioned, and detained for valid reasons. He escalated the situation when he resisted.

Dante Wright was pulled over, questioned, and detained for valid reasons. He escalated the situation when he resisted.

The fat chick didn't get pulled over, questioned, or detained because she escalated the situation by attempting to kill some one.

No one is claiming that Chauvin woke up and said, "Gosh, I hope I get to kill a black person today."  That doesn't mean that his actions were not racially motivated.

Do "you" think: Chauvin purposefully wanted or intended to kill Floyd? Knew Floyd would die? That Floyd's death was racially motivated?

Do "you" think: Kimberly Potter wanted to kill Daunte Wright? That it was racially motivated?

Do "you" think: Nicholas Reardon wanted to kill Ma'Khia Bryant? That it was racially motivated?

You keep insisting that Fau, Dave and I "condemn the woke mobs" (i.e. liberal internet boogeymen) when we aren't personally saying the things you are criticizing.  Meanwhile, you are personally saying things we are criticizing you for.

So before we condemn the "woke mobs," you should first condemn your own statements (e.g. Floyd merely died from a drug-induced heart attack).

You know, it's kind of funny the double standard you push. I've repeatedly condemned Chauvin and Guyger actions. However, you don't seem to condemn Daunte Wright or Ma'Khia Bryant.

[Dave Gray]

Do "you" think: Chauvin purposefully wanted or intended to kill Floyd?

No.

Knew Floyd would die?

Not sure, but he should have known that the actions could cause death.
 

That Floyd's death was racially motivated?

The disregard for his safety was likely racially motivated, yes.

Do "you" think: Kimberly Potter wanted to kill Daunte Wright?

No.

That it was racially motivated?

No.  IMO, this case isn't so much about race, but about a larger question of the general role of over-policing for minor traffic offenses.

Do "you" think: Nicholas Reardon wanted to kill Ma'Khia Bryant?

Yes.

That it was racially motivated?

Not racially motivated, but it's possible, if not likely, that the officer wouldn't have gone straight to lethal force if the girl was white.  There's no way to know that, though, so that's not my claim.

[pondwater]

No.

I agree

Not sure, but he should have known that the actions could cause death.

I disagree, I think that if he actually thought Floyd would die he would have done things much differently.

The disregard for his safety was likely racially motivated, yes.

I disagree. I think the disregard for Floyd's safety was due to his own arrogance and ego.

No.

I agree.

No.  IMO, this case isn't so much about race, but about a larger question of the general role of over-policing for minor traffic offenses.

I agree that it wasn't motivated by race. However, I disagree that this was a minor traffic offense. Wright had a warrant for carrying a pistol without a permit and not complying with law enforcement. Which in turn violated the terms of his bail for aggravated robbery at gun point. So it wasn't over minor traffic offenses. He needed to be off the streets.

On an off note. How can you want more firearm laws when it seems like you don't even want to enforce the firearm laws Daunte Wright was breaking?

Yes.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your answer. Are you saying he actually wanted to kill Ma'Khia Bryant? Or that he intended to kill her?

Not racially motivated, but it's possible, if not likely, that the officer wouldn't have gone straight to lethal force if the girl was white.  There's no way to know that, though, so that's not my claim.

Of course it's possible. But just like with god. You have to prove it was racially motivated, not prove it wasn't racially motivated. So until that evidence is presented and proven to be true, race shouldn't be involved. The officer a had few seconds to make a life or death decision. I've asked you several times and I'll ask again. In this case and the Daunte Wright case, with 2 seconds to make a decision what would you have done in each case?

[Spider-Dan]

pondwater, I don't understand why you even care if the shootings are racially motivated.  The argument you are making - in both the cases of Wright and Bryant - is that the shootings were necessary and appropriate from an objective viewpoint.  So what would it even matter to you what the officer's motivation was?

[pondwater]

pondwater, I don't understand why you even care if the shootings are racially motivated.  The argument you are making - in both the cases of Wright and Bryant - is that the shootings were necessary and appropriate from an objective viewpoint.  So what would it even matter to you what the officer's motivation was?

Here we go again. Why do you even post if you refuse to have a discussion about the topic of the thread you're posting in? Now it's about "why I care". Are you going to bring up the the Kavanaugh confirmation thread next? Basically anything to avoid what we're actually talking about, lmfao.

Maybe why don't you tell me if you think shooting Wright and Bryant was appropriate for the situation. If not, what were the alternatives "in those situations". If you were those officers what would you do?

[Spider-Dan]

Shooting Wright was uncalled for; this claim is supported by the statement of the officer herself, who said that she did not mean to draw her gun (and, therefore, did not believe that lethal force was warranted at that time).  Based on the video, shooting Bryant looks like it was justified.

Your continued focus on whether the shootings were "racially motivated" is a waste of time if we can't even agree on whether the shootings would be justified if we stipulate no racial animus.  This is currently the case for Wright, so it's pointless to discuss that shooting with you (in the context of racism).

[Spider-Dan]

And just to clear something else up:

You're conflating two separate issues to misdirect the thread. They are two totally different situations, one was a trial which uses facts to determine the guilt of the accused. One is an attempted murder in progress that needs immediate attention.

The video of Bryant was arguably that of an attempted murder in progress that was stopped by the police.
The video of Floyd was that of a murder in progress committed by the police.

When you saw the video of Floyd being murdered, you reached for excuse after excuse to exonerate Chauvin, accepting his guilt only after the jury verdict.
When you saw the video of Bryant pulling a knife, you immediately and definitively categorized her actions as attempted murder, and instantly condoned a lethal police response.

This is systemic racism at work.  Any video that vindicates police action against black Americans is definitive and must be quickly acknowledged as conclusive; any video that condemns police action against black Americans must be second-guessed and questioned.