Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Doomblade187]

There's no "was shot seven times by the weapon" it's "was shot seven times for no reason by the murderous bitchboi racist who pulled him over" dammit, fuck off with that sort of weasel word bullshit.

Can't we all just agree that mistakes were made, in the normal course of events, and put the whole unfortunate incident behind us.

You're playing devil's advocate here.

...right?

You wouldn't... Believe their story here, would you?

[Iduno]

There's no "was shot seven times by the weapon" it's "was shot seven times for no reason by the murderous bitchboi racist who pulled him over" dammit, fuck off with that sort of weasel word bullshit.

Can't we all just agree that mistakes were made, in the normal course of events, and put the whole unfortunate incident behind us.

You're playing devil's advocate here.

...right?

You wouldn't... Believe their story here, would you?

That's the usual line that's trotted out to excuse murders that were obviously intentional. Prior to being proven intentional, the murder victim was a thug, and had either drugs or a weapon.

[nenjin]

/whoosh

[Doomblade187]

/whoosh

It is impossible to detect sarcasm over the internet.

[Iduno]

/whoosh

It is impossible to detect sarcasm over the internet.

There's a thing other than sarcasm?

[Doomblade187]

/whoosh

It is impossible to detect sarcasm over the internet.

There's a thing other than sarcasm?

Of course. :3

[Reelya]

There's no "was shot seven times by the weapon" it's "was shot seven times for no reason by the murderous bitchboi racist who pulled him over" dammit, fuck off with that sort of weasel word bullshit.

Can't we all just agree that mistakes were made, in the normal course of events, and put the whole unfortunate incident behind us.

You're playing devil's advocate here.

...right?

You wouldn't... Believe their story here, would you?

That's the usual line that's trotted out to excuse murders that were obviously intentional. Prior to being proven intentional, the murder victim was a thug, and had either drugs or a weapon.

The point being, my statement was just four generic weasel-word fragments chained together. It's completely generic so it can hand-wave literally anything, so details about the victim are irrelevant here. Consider the original statement but in response to major war crimes or similar.

"Can't we all just agree that <Hitler had no choice but to invade Poland>" (if not clear, this implies you're unreasonable for disagreeing, but makes no attempt to support the assertion)
"mistakes were made <in the conduct of the Holocaust>" (note passive voice, lack of assignment of blame and characterizing of crimes as "mistakes"
"and in the normal course of events <of the Nazi's conduct of the war>" (implies events had a "normal course" that no specific person is responsible for)
"and put the whole unfortunate incident <of World War II> behind us" (implies that you're being unreasonable for not getting over it)

[nenjin]

It read to me as pretty obviously one of those blanket statements.

[Naturegirl1999]

It read to me as pretty obviously one of those blanket statements.

Yep, that was the point, I saw the blanket statement too

[Doomblade187]

It read to me as pretty obviously one of those blanket statements.

Yep, that was the point, I saw the blanket statement too

Once you hear someone use them sincerely in defense of these situations, it becomes hard to tell what's sarcasm.

[Naturegirl1999]

It read to me as pretty obviously one of those blanket statements.

Yep, that was the point, I saw the blanket statement too

Once you hear someone use them sincerely in defense of these situations, it becomes hard to tell what's sarcasm.

Fair point

[SOLDIER First]

I'm confused; did another unarmed, innocent black man get six warning shots to the back while he was running away while I wasn't looking?

[Frumple]

Think this one was handcuffed (and belted in?) in the passenger seat of a patrol car?

[Yoink]

Oh hey, it just occurred to me that I should link this video in here.   
It's some pretty confronting, disturbing stuff, looking at the (usually unpleasant) interactions between police and the mentally ill in the US, and specifically increasing efforts by the San Antonio PD to provide specialised agencies to deal with the mentally ill as gently as possible, as well as providing mandatory training for all officers on how to approach such situations.   

[Rolan7]

This is one of those legal review channels which mostly consist of reading a long document out loud, very completionist, but it starts with a summary and has analysis towards the end. 

"Impaired" Aurora Police Officer Won't Be Charged
22:42 stops to cover a previous case which established a questionable, relevant precedent.  If I understand correctly, testimony from New Jersey police is considered coerced if they had to answer or be fired.  In other words, they can't be fired for refusing to testify.

My summary: Aurora police found one of their detectives passed out in his car, smelling of alcohol, with a bottle of clear liquid.  When they determined he was impaired they turned off their body cameras, and nothing was done until local reporting somehow caught the story months later.  Current police leadership denounces how it was handled, but there's nothing they can do about it due to lack of legally usable evidence.

tldr; Bunch of cops covered up for a drunk detective, obvious double standard, everybody acknowledges that it happened but he's protected by special cop laws.

Edit:  In fact, here's the "best" 5 seconds which makes me particularly upset.  I'm always calling for more body cameras.  Just... that real, visceral disgust from the officer- while instantly moving to cover up the incident.  It's second nature for them to defend each other.  I actually understand that a lot.  I haven't worked in the police or military, but I've worked dangerous jobs.  That instinct to cover for peers, hiding the truth from safe observers who won't understand, is actually relatable.

But it can NOT be allowed in law enforcement!
(also law enforcement is not nearly as dangerous as appears to be, those jobs I did were statistically more dangerous)