It must be nice to be that oblivious to reality (until you catch a deadly virus, that is).
Printable View
It must be nice to be that oblivious to reality (until you catch a deadly virus, that is).
It's funny, I watched it and thought it looked like Birkenhead, which is easily the most depressing place in the UK I've been to. Turns out it's the other side of the river in Warrington. Never been there and hope never to.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
I'd move out because it's Merseyside.
The further out into space we look, the further into the past we see.
But the universe is expanding, and has been for billions of years.
So what we see when we look further and further away is the inside surface of ever decreasingly sized spheres.
The further away we look, the smaller the universe we see.
Just madness.
https://i.redd.it/babt4fwjaqy41.png
Anyone see trends?
i remembered my login
living the dream
assuming some really weird substance ingestion before bed
also, check out my bee truck ha
Attachment 1184
I'm surprised the FBI went after this guy. It's kind of an open secret, and by that I mean no secret at all that senators and congressmen have an inexplicable, and by inexplicable I mean explicable - affinity for IPO shares which fate they have the power to vote on.
Nancy Pelosi be like "The...ya... I don't know what your point is!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVcSVs0pdOg
Neat mountain!Quote:
Originally Posted by daven
How many times have you gotten stung this season?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zp0N5PJxamE
Dude! Long time, no post. How you doing these days?Quote:
Originally Posted by daven
How many hives do you keep?
Any trouble with murder hornets?
That's a beautiful photo. What mountain is that?
We're vainly trying to pull together a corona WW game. You down?
(I promise I'll only call you dozer once or twice, for old times' sake.)
Daven! Nice to know covid hasn't got you yet.
Ima try and guess the mountain, don't tell mojo yet. Fun little game for me!
Mount Hood, Oregon.
Ok I'm bored. If it's not Mount Hood, I give up.
"If, in some cataclysm, all of scientific knowledge were to be destroyed, and only one sentence passed on to the next generation of creatures, what statement would contain the most information in the fewest words?"
It is only through diligently trying to disprove an idea, and failing to do so, that we can have any hope the idea is correct.
seems like I've been stung a lot less frequently this season. I've managed to avoid having to do much beekeeping on cold and rainy days, that's normally when things get a little hectic. A few hundred times maybe?Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
edit: I've got a dozen hives if i include a couple that i do my civic volunteer duty looking after on behalf of a community project, scattered around a few sites. This pic is in Taranaki, New Zealand - the mountain is Mt. Taranaki - looks a bit like Fuji from a few angles, which resulted in nz being the filming location for The Last Samurai years back.
Japanese hornets haven't made it to NZ, i took a few pics of them while travelling in Japan a couple of years ago, showed them to some nz beekeepers asking if i should be worried about these "strange bees" i found, calmed them down with the truth after their initial panic...
sent a pm re werewolf. Although corona hasn't got me, it has resulted in me working from home - and likely to continue doing so through until mid-June = a weird kind of more spare time. Like everywhere, NZ's response to the virus has been controversial. About 5% of the population have now been tested at least once, it's thought that all cases are now known, and that there isn't community transmission happening. We basically went into lockdown the day that case numbers jumped from 150 -> 200, pretty early on.
... a small price to pay for that sweet sweet honey.
Oh yeah daven is NZ. Ok so Mount Hood was wrong.
Back on it.
Mount Taranaki
I'm so full of shit. I saw it in his post. I can't lie to you guys, not unless we're playing ww.
Or if I'm trolling poop.
The speed of light is constant for all observers.Quote:
"If, in some cataclysm, all of scientific knowledge were to be destroyed, and only one sentence passed on to the next generation of creatures, what statement would contain the most information in the fewest words?"
I don't dislike the answer, obviously a key part of all knowledge and understanding. I really like the question, a nice way to distill the key parts of them. Personally I like Feynman's original one maybe best, but things alluding to evolution or electromagnetism or quantum theory seem interesting too, depending on what you expect from the readers.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey
We have a "cute animals and fluffy things" thread in the moderators section that you riff raff don't have access to. Hope you're jealous.
I love that scene in Fight Club where Leonardo Di Caprio Gets beaten to a pulp.
Haha. Yeah... then he's all "Adddrrrriiiiaaaaannnn!!!!"Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
lol this guy is great.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXjHb5QmDV0
He's a less likable and somewhat stupider version of Steve Irwin. Entertaining though.
You'd think a mole would only take one shot.
Lol. Have you gone so feral that you're shooting moles, now?
They're a pest, they dig up the lawn and kill the grass. But it didn't feel good. I think if it was a rat I'd have been pleased with myself, but moles are cute and if it wasn't for the fact they destroy the lawn they'd be ok. The rabbits are safe, we have bunnies munching on the grass right now. We had a mink, too, but I think it might have seen us shooting at targets and we haven't seen it since. It might be a bit smarter than the mole.
lol
You brits and your guns.
My favourite part of these videos is when he's rolling around on the ground screaming and the guy asks him "what are you feeling now?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unk6n3_QdlM
Less catchy but I'd go with E=mc2 or energy = mass x (light speed)squaredQuote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
I thought about E-mc2, but what do you do with that if you're Aristotle?
If you're going to go with Einstein, then probably don't use an approximation like E = mc2
E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2
It's only when p = 0 that E = mc^2
That is, when the momentum is 0, i.e. the object is at rest.
Well I did not know that!
It's kinda like the Pythagorean theorem in the way it looks.
Here's a 2 minute video with nice graphics to link those 2 concepts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnMIhxWRGNw
If blackface is racist, does that mean cross dressing is sexist?
Haven't I always said: if you want change, you have to set shit on fire? Haven't I always said that? I believe I've always said that.
https://media.heartlandtv.com/images...s+fires+22.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZH1T3qU...png&name=small
https://twitter.com/farhad_fza/statu...435179525?s=20
https://twitter.com/MarvinBaron6/sta...925782016?s=20
https://twitter.com/theelovelylaya/s...825818112?s=20
https://twitter.com/Kayleichappel/st...609356805?s=20
(sorry, MMM)
You know what cops fear more than riots? Prison.
^ holy shit
edit: i mean that for Oscar's post. Those people are seriously pissed.
The most striking image for me are the dozens of cops surrounding the house of the murderer protecting him from protestors... instead of you know, arresting the murderer. That these cops even show up for that speaks volumes about their mentality. That would be the day to call in sick if you're not a completely corrupted piece of shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
If he's not under arrest, then of course he needs protecting. If the baying mob get hold of him, this will escalate rapidly. But yeah, he should be under arrest. I've got no problem with him being held in a cell in a station, while being given better treatment by his colleagues than they might perhaps show me, I kinda get that, but they should protect him by putting him in a cell until he's tried.
With that said, and while the reaction is understandable, it's also not something any reasonable person should condone.
I disagree. I think the BLM protests from 2014 onwards were peaceful to a fault. They accomplished nothing. There is a price associated with not acting, and it is much greater than the cost of acting. As just about every extrajudicial killing of a black or poor person since 2014 has shown, police get away with it. Eric Garners killers are free. The cops that beat beat Kelly Thomas to death got acquitted and them smashing that guys head in until it looked like a watermelon until he died in the street was ruled "appropriate force" by a jury. The ex cop that killed Ahmaud Arbery wasn't even prosecuted until months later when the footage of the execution was released to the media...Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
I'm honestly surprised this hasn't happened sooner. I think it is necessary, and the sooner the better because the US is absolutely heading for a civil war and protests like this are not a catalyst, they're an off-ramp. There is a chance for police reform now. Without this level of outrage nothing will happen, and we know that because nothing has happened.
The station's on fire...Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
good point
They only have one station in the entire state? Ask another state then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
I agree that civil war is looming in USA, but I think this could be the catalyst. The problem with direct action is that the police can respond with justifiable brutality. It can only escalate the situation. But you're right, doing nothing doesn't solve the problem either.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
I'd be more on their side if they were just setting fire to cop shops and not Wendy's and whatnot.
What I don't understand is that if you choke someone until they're unconscious, they're still alive and at the same time absolutely zero threat to you. So why not cuff him and stuff him then? Why keep your knee on his neck for two or three more minutes, or however long it takes, until he's dead?
Cops like this are why people riot. Not just killers but others too who abuse their position and/or have anger management issues and/or are openly racist. There's only so much bullshit a people can take.
Is this about Minnesota? I can't see the twitter stuff.
There's a wide margin of error on both how long without O2 before you pass out and again how long after you pass out before you die. I don't think any of that's relevant, though.
5 minutes is 300 seconds to change your mind about choking a handcuffed, unarmed person. If it lasted less than 5 seconds, that would be BARELY forgivable, if the circumstances were much different. 6 seconds is far long enough for rational thought to overcome a gut reaction.
What's this about the station being on fire? The police station was on fire? I didn't see that in the 1 article I just read. Not conclusive research by any means.
Police station was set on fire. A group of 50-100 cops in riot gear is protecting the murderers home. Dozens of cop cars destroyed. This is at least Rodney King levels bad.
State prosecutor now suggests they might not even bring a criminal charge against the officer. This won't end well.
https://twitter.com/BNONews/status/1...874696709?s=20
Here's a YT link with some of the twitter video footage. It is very hard to find on YT without someone putting a "the blacks out there lootin' again!" twist on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97hGi3ac7K8
Yeah. This is real bad.
It's hard to even watch the protest. Like, the destruction, looting, and arson, is hard to watch, not the peaceful protests.
The protestors were even throwing shit at firefighters, so the fire dept. had to just let the police station burn.
Apparently, the police evacuated the station before the fires got out of hand, and just left the area entirely.
There was no police, fire dept, or national guard presence on the scene shortly after sundown, it seems.
Fires are spreading from building to building near the police station.
A reporter said the incident - the knee to the throat - is on camera from 5 angles..?
And no arrest of the officer.
What the hell is this?
It just gets crazier.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1266315061209030658
It seems to me that they are actively trying to encourage disorder.
I got you this time MMM:Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftLzQefpBvM
Yeah, this is pretty bad.
Fascism doesn't get a lot more literal than that. At the same time Trump is encouraging police to shoot protestors on twitter.
^^ The worst thing about that is 1/3 of the country will cheer because of some combination of the sentiments "arresting the fake news" and "arresting a black guy"
FYPQuote:
Fascism doesn't get a lot more literal than that. At the same time Trump is encouraging police to shoot looters on twitter.
Don't be disingenuous. Protesters and looters are different things. Looters getting shot is nothing new. It's how nearly all governments deal with them.
The arresting of journalists is obviously unacceptable.
Pretty sure he says looters because he can't say the n-word in public.
I mean he's probably not talking about officer Umbrellaman doing whatever officer Umbrellaman does: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iC9-ygP87CQ
That's once again being disingenuous.
He said "looters" for two reasons... one, looting rhymes with shooting, and two, governments threatening to shoot looters is what usually happens when riots turn into looting. Was there this kind of outcry when Bush threatened to shoot looters after Katrina? No, most people said "fucking right".
There's a really easy way to stop the riots: arrest the murderer. They can arrest a CNN crew no reason given, they can kill a man during an arrest, but they can't arrest someone who's on video committing murder?
I place zero blame on the looters. I think they're doing the right thing. What good is it to have a city when it's run by fascists. They can decide: hold one man accountable or lose the city.
I'm sorry, where these "very good people" looting?
Those who were protesting at lockdown are imbeciles, but they weren't violent. There's no need to threaten them with violence.
And I dunno if you noticed, but the "thugs" Trump is referring to are not necessarily black.
Agreed, though it has to be said, because it's extremely important in a civilised nation, that he is an alleged murderer, and not a murderer until a court proves him to be. idk what defines "murder" in USA, but in the UK he could only be guilty of manslaughter. I don't think his actions can be legally justified, but I do believe people should be presumed innocent until they face a court.Quote:
There's a really easy way to stop the riots: arrest the murderer.
He called the neonazis in Charlottesville, one of whom murdered a counter protestors "very good people".Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Here's looters giving their loot to people who need it: https://twitter.com/SophNar0747/stat...079510016?s=20.
I usually appreciate accurate language, but in this case I know what I saw. I saw a man who was not resisting arrest being put on the ground in handcuffs and fixated for no reason while a man slowly asphyxiated him until he died. I don't need a judge and jury to tell me what I saw. That was murder.Quote:
manslaughter
Ok so Trump said something idiotic and might even be racist. That doesn't mean that calling looters "thugs" and threatening to shoot them is unreasonable for a leader.Quote:
He called the neonazis in Charlottesville, one of whom murdered a counter protestors "very good people".
This doesn't make it ok. The problem with looting is not the theft, it's the collapse of law and order. People sitting at home start to worry that it'll spread to residential areas, or independent businesses that aren't insured. Others might think "now's a perfect time to get a new TV". When riots turn into looting, the government has to act strongly. That's a given.Quote:
Here's looters giving their loot to people who need it: https://twitter.com/SophNar0747/stat...079510016?s=20.
For it to be murder, in the context I understand that word, then he has to have been actively trying to kill him. I can't draw that conclusion from what I've seen. Maybe in USA reckless endagerment of life causing death is murder, in which case yes I agree what I saw looks like muder.Quote:
I usually appreciate accurate language, but in this case I know what I saw. I saw a man who was not resisting arrest being put on the ground in handcuffs and fixated for no reason while a man slowly asphyxiated him until he died. I don't need a judge and jury to tell me what I saw. That was murder.
But we still live in civilised nations where presumption of innocence underpins our entire legal system.
Trey Gowdy one of the most pathetic Trump bootlickers in congress called it murder. Idk what you're watching that you can consider this to be potentially accidental in any way.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZY0UsddDss
From what I can tell based on a quick bit of research, he could be guilty in USA of "voluntary manslaughter".
"First degree murder" requires it to be planned in advance, rather than spur of the moment.
There are four key points to consider when considering "second degree murder"...
- intent to kill
- intent to inflict serious bodily injury
- extremely reckless disregard for the value of human life
- felony murder rule
1. is subjective and probably not provable,
2. is also subjective but probably easier to prove,
3. is the closest we are getting to accurately calling this guy a murderer,
4. does not apply (refers to dangerous crimes where someone accidentally dies, perhaps a bank robbery).
How the fuck is kneeling on somebody for 10 minutes possibly "spur of the moment"?
He was stopped under suspicion of having paid with a counterfeit $10 bill. Since this has not been confirmed to be true, nor have they smeared the victim with any past charges, I assume they got nothing. It is clear from a surveillance video that he did not at all resist what looked like an unlawful arrest.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you haven't watched the full video. I would encourage you to do so, because I don't see any way you could see anything but an intent to kill by the cop. He kept kneeling long after Floyd stopped moving. Not that there was ever a reason to knee on his neck in the first place.
I think you're misunderstanding what that means in a legal context, but maybe I am. For it to be premeditated, it would mean that he had intent to kill before he arrived on the scene.Quote:
How the fuck is kneeling on somebody for 10 minutes possibly "spur of the moment"?
I'll also remind you that not only are there no murder charges. There are no charges, and the state prosecutor made it sound like there won't be criminal charges against the officers. At that point I think it is your civil duty to burn the city to the ground.
I don't see how this is first degree murder unless it can be objectively proven that he arrived at the scene with intent to kill.
The difference between "second degree murder" and "voluntary manslaughter" in USA isn't that clear to me.
You should still wait for them to complete their investigation and announce no charges are forthcoming. At that point you burn the police station to the ground, not the city.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
With that said, he should be under arrest while they investigate, for his own safety and for the sake of public order.
By the way, I'm only talking about the one guy here. The other three officers are almost certainly not guilty of murder, and might not have even committed a crime. idk, it would be somewhat reassuring if at least one of them spoke out and said "dude he's not resisting, let's get him in the car and book him". That none of them did is alarming. But their actions are certainly not as serious as the knee guy, who in my opinion is the only one who should be arrested and charged with either murder or manslaughter.
It's been 5 years of peaceful protests since Eric Garner was murdered. No officer faced consequences for that. I don't care about semantics. Those who were killed by police don't care what you want to call it legally.
There's a massive systemic problem with police all over the world. Their actual purpose is extremely homeopathic. The only thing they're efficient at is oppression, tyranny and escalation. Police forces need to be massively stripped of their power worldwide - the UK is extremely exemplary when it comes to law enforcement. I think that's what shapes your perspective.
Perhaps. Or maybe it's just the sociopath in me, that I try to view these things without emotion clouding my judgement. I used to react emotionally to global affairs, but as I got older and had issues with depression, I started to put some emotional distance between myself and things out of my control. Maybe that's why I come across as uncaring about these issues, even though I do actually care in the sense I wish this kind of stuff wasn't happening.Quote:
the UK is extremely exemplary when it comes to law enforcement. I think that's what shapes your perspective.
If I thought these riots had any chance of ovethrowing the government and replacing it with something better, I'd be all for it. But that's no more a pipe dream than when I was 13 and thought I'd be a footballer, even though I was shit at football.
Another way of framing the question is whether he'd be sayiing the same thing if it were white people rioting.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
I'm going to guess a big fat 'no' on that one.
Even if this is the case, the problem is not with how he deals with black looters, rather how he deals with white looters. He shouldn't be soft on looters, regardless of their colour.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
And there's an deliberate emphasis on the word "looters" here. Rioting and looting are not the same thing.
Nope. It means he had to have a moment or more to think before or during the act of murder. "Premeditation" in US law means nothing more than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
He clearly had ten minutes to think while he was choking the guy to death. Again, he wasn't under immediate threat and had nothing else going on to worry about while he did this.
A better defense would be he was too ignorant to realise he was murdering the guy and would have stopped if he had known what he was doing. Or, that he has PTSD from years of witnessing himself abusing civilians.
But overall, I think first degree murder implies that you have to knowingly be trying to kill someone, which is hard to prove because he could just be an idiot. Manslaughter would definitely be a slam dunk though imo.
In what scenario is summary execution appropriate punishment for robbery and/or vandalism?Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Funny how these people Trump wants to shoot don't deserve fair process and a trial but the murderer cop does.
FYP. Let's not derail onto general robbery and vandalism. We're talking specifically about looting.Quote:
In what scenario is summary execution appropriate punishment for looting?
And it can be justifiable, for example, after a disaster, such as a hurricane. I'm not sure why you're acting so surprised about this, find me a government that isn't willing to shoot looters on sight in the event of serious public disorder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Looting is a form of theft, so it seems an apt comparison to make.
As it happens, there are no laws on the books in the US or UK that make it legal for the police to shoot looters. Not sure where you got the idea there were.
What's your position on this? Is looting a form of crime where due process can be ignored in your view?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
None of this would happen if there was a functioning law enforcement.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
As for Katrina, a number of those police who shot looters came up on trial. So no, it's not legal to execute looters or suspected looters on sight.
Further, the cop accused of telling them they could shoot looters later denied saying that (same article). So apparently he knew it was illegal too.
https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/wh...-looting-31613
Quote:
In the days after Katrina New Orleans police officers shot 11 civilians, and five were killed, prompting the involvement of the Department of Justice, which is currently investigating the NOPD on eight separate cases. The troubled department has been engaged in an effort to reform itself; the presence of the Department of Justice has certainly helped. So far, a total of sixteen NOPD police officers have been hit with criminal charges for their involvement in shootings of civilians, most which happened in the days after Katrina.
This is pretty weak. Murder is a form of actual bodily harm, you wouldn't then compare the two. Looting is specifically the act of ransacking during times of war or catastrophe. If you want a full definition, google it. Looting is not theft. Theft is a minor crime in most cases. Looting is a serious public order offence.Quote:
Looting is a form of theft, so it seems an apt comparison to make.
You might find this isn't the case if a State of Emergency has been declared.Quote:
As it happens, there are no laws on the books in the US or UK that make it legal for the police to shoot looters. Not sure where you got the idea there were.
As an act of last resort, with adequate warnings issued, yes. But it has to be sustained public disorder during a time of crisis, and they have to be taking goods that are not essential to their immediate wellbeing, like trainers and not water. Under normal circumstances, people get shot without trial due to the perceived threat they pose. In a state of emergency, this is even more likely.Quote:
What's your position on this? Is looting a form of crime where due process can be ignored in your view?
Looting is dangerous, it's more serious than rioting. It can cause people to come out onto the street to protect their property, it's an unacceptable step towards total loss of law and order. When the looting starts, that's when I expect governments to up their game.
Where any of them found guilty? Or did the courts find they were legally justified in their actions?Quote:
As for Katrina, a number of those police who shot looters came up on trial. So no, it's not legal to execute looters or suspected looters on sight.
Whether the courts found police guilty of murder seems like a strange metric of justice if you ask me.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
It's a lot more dangerous to let a militarized police force murder indiscriminately than it is to cause property damage. One is replaceable, the other one strips you of every right you have, including your right to live.
Let's be clear: this is not at all an isolated incident. Getting killed by police is a leading cause of death for black youth in the US.
You'd have to show me that law, 'cause I very much doubt it exists.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
In general, punishment has to fit the crime. You can't just say 'arrrgggh, looters are robbing and smashing stuff, let's kill them all, arrrrgggh!'. It doesn't work that way, as much as you'd like to argue it does.
Ong doesn't your own position strike you as kind of weird... That a man who is on camera from 6 angles killing someone deserves extreme scrutiny to even warrant an arrest, but the theft of property should be met with immediate deadly force?
The knee was on throat for 5 minutes, not 10... as if it matters.
The alleged counterfeit bill was a $20, not a $10... as if it matters.
The officer's hands were in his pockets while he was kneeling on George Floyd's throat, clearly the officer was not threatened in any way.
Looting vs theft vs stealing - None of them are violent crimes. A violent crime is one that poses immediate threat to life, not projected or long-term hardship, not a presumption that vigilantism will happen. Killing unarmed, non-violent people who have not been found guilty by a court of law simply cannot be acceptable.
A black/latino CNN reporter was arrested this morning and held in custody until police verified he worked for CNN, despite the reporter holding his CNN ID in front of him, facing the police the entire time. Meanwhile, the white CNN reporter a block away is not arrested, as his CNN ID (and white skin, presumably) are enough to convince the police.
I'm just completely drained by this. I hate it. I can't support violent protests, but I can't ignore that 70 years of non-violent protests haven't affected any change.
It just becomes more and more obvious over time. Every incident, we're told the police had reason to use force, then videos emerge showing they clearly didn't. This is happening time and time again.
All 4 officers need to be arrested and charged. Maybe not the same charge, but their silence was acceptance, and even support of that knee to the throat. It is what would happen to anyone else. If a bank robbery results in death, then the get-away driver is charged with the same murder charge as the one who pulled the trigger, even though the driver wasn't even in the building, and didn't have a gun. That's what the law is if you're not a police officer. It's what the law should be. Putting officers above the law is the source of the injustice, and it has to end.
That the courts failed to successfully prosecute seems a strange metric of guilt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Well I doubt that the laws recently passed by the govt to enforce lockdown are legally enforceable if challenged to the highest court. Laws require certain processes to be binding, the govt have skipped those due to time being of the essence.Quote:
You'd have to show me that law, 'cause I very much doubt it exists.
If no such law exists, there will be loopholes. Simply declaring a looter a "terrorist" will probably be enough. Looters are a direct threat to national security. People can get shot perfectly legally by the state if the state deems that person to be a threat to national security.
You really do miss the magnitude of looting, don't you? To you it's just a bit of robbing and smashing shit up. To me it's a serious threat to law and orderQuote:
In general, punishment has to fit the crime. You can't just say 'arrrgggh, looters are robbing and smashing stuff, let's kill them all, arrrrgggh!'. It doesn't work that way, as much as you'd like to argue it does.
If you want to define violence to "a direct physical attack" or words to that affect, then sure.Quote:
None of them are violent crimes.
I don't agree though. I consider a threat to public order to be violence. Whether it's justified violence or not is another matter, but it's violence. Looting is very much violent, that's what makes it so much more serious than theft.
I mean we live in a world where "microagression" is a thing. Calling someone a cunt is considered violence. But escalating a state of emergency is not violent?
2020, the year that keeps on giving.
It's not my definition. It's the legal definition.
FFS, it's a war crime to shoot a person fleeing a scene of battle.
How can you argue that it's legal to shoot a looter fleeing a scene of robbery?
The question arises how often the police get let off on serious charges -you may not have noticed this, but is the main impetus for the riots.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
It's not really about what they can get away with though is it? It's about what's correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
No, it really isn't a serious threat to law and order if I smash a window and steal a TV set. It's a crime but it's not treason. And I shouldn't get a bullet in the head from the nearest cop for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
That first sentence, you're right, I do get it. I'm not saying that these protesters should do nothing. But looting is one of the stupidest things they can do, because in doing so they give the authorities all the ammo they need to justifiably clamp down hard.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
No, you haven't absorbed my posts. Not immediate. They should be given adequate warning of the serious nature of the escalation. If after they have been warned, they carry on looting, then they have given the state no choice. So you start off with one or two, hope to cause non-fatal wounds and that be enough to deter further looting. Usually that will suffice, people don't want to risk their life for a TV.Quote:
Ong doesn't your own position strike you as kind of weird... That a man who is on camera from 6 angles killing someone deserves extreme scrutiny to even warrant an arrest, but the theft of property should be met with immediate deadly force?
If looters hadn't got shot in New Orleans, who knows how far it would've gone? Maybe people's houses start getting looted. You have to nip that in the bud before it gets to that point.
And I've said this cop should be arrested and held while investigated.