102 arrested, 27 officers injured in 94 shutdown

[MikeChipshop Member]

4 hours ago, freqnasty said:

Hey Mikey.....sure I do. I know the various groups that fall under the guise of "left wing". Maybe I was being a bit harsh referring to you as being an anarchist, which would be at the extreme end of the left.

Do you consider yourself to be left of centre?

Well for one thing you aimed the comment at both myself and Depicts, and we were clearly on opposite sides of our respective disagreement. Depicts already attested to being right of the centre and you were somewhat correct about me, I do indeed lean left, but as left as you clearly think. For example, I'm for the working unions and immigration, but at the same time for Trident.

 

Anarchy can also exist in any belief. Whether left wing, right wing or psychopathy.

 

Lastly, I'd be caught dead sibging Anarchy in the UK. The Sex Pistols were the least anarchy based bans if their time and no more anarchistic than any other mass produced, corporate boy band.

[MikeChipshop Member]

10 hours ago, Emn1ty said:

The UK is also not bordered with crime ridden countries like the US

Dunno about that. Canada seems to be doing alright despite its border with a crime ridden country.

[FloatingFatMan]

23 minutes ago, MikeChipshop said:

Lastly, I'd be caught dead sibging Anarchy in the UK. The Sex Pistols were the least anarchy based bans if their time and no more anarchistic than any other mass produced, corporate boy band.

Pretty sure the Sex Pistols weren't corporate shills, Mike. 

 

[MikeChipshop Member]

13 minutes ago, FloatingFatMan said:

Pretty sure the Sex Pistols weren't corporate shills, Mike. 

 

They where the One Direction of their day. Malcolm McLaren specifically set them up to follow an emerging trend to capitalise on it. He sold rights to the music and style far and wide to all that would pay.

It was one big marketing exercise. How much money can we squeeze out of disenfranchised youths? All while real punk bands across the country and across other countries such as the US (Blag Flag etc) were doing it for the message.

 

Malcolm McLaren <> Simon Cowell

[Depicus]

3 hours ago, MikeChipshop said:

They where the One Direction of their day. Malcolm McLaren specifically set them up to follow an emerging trend to capitalise on it. He sold rights to the music and style far and wide to all that would pay.

It was one big marketing exercise. How much money can we squeeze out of disenfranchised youths? All while real punk bands across the country and across other countries such as the US (Blag Flag etc) were doing it for the message.

 

Malcolm McLaren <> Simon Cowell

Wow that's twice I've agreed with the hard left I'm being turned 

[MikeChipshop Member]

46 minutes ago, Depicus said:

Wow that's twice I've agreed with the hard left I'm being turned 

Haha see my previous comment, i'm not hard left

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

7 hours ago, freqnasty said:

I was merely pointing out groups that were left wing. Anarchists (traditionally) and communism are both on the left side of politics. Anarchists largely don't like capitalism or establishment.

Right they do not like authority on either side

 

Full Definition of anarchist

1 :  a person who rebels against any authority, established order, or ruling power

2 :  a person who believes in, advocates, or promotes anarchism or anarchy; especially :  one who uses violent means to overthrow the established order

anarchist

or

anarchistic

play \ˌa-nər-ˈkis-tik, -(ˌ)när-\ adjective

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anarchist

[theyarecomingforyou]

13 hours ago, Raze said:

There is a very active dialog occurring in this country about the use of a bomb to kill Micah Johnson.   Many people are stunned that it was even considered let alone actually used.  A remark that it may become tolerated/accepted is way off base.  More of your extreme notions.

The militarisation of the police is part of a long running trend in the US. There is no enough of an outcry against it. If this sort of tactic isn't challenged and criminalised it opens the door to more extreme measures. I'm not exaggerating when I say that I believe the deployment of armed drones used to kill suspects is only a matter of time in America. I mean, here we're talking about an armed drone being used to kill someone - it's already here. Flying drones and lethal robots are the next logical step.

 

13 hours ago, jjkusaf said:

Wow...so you think that after a cop fires his weapon ... nothing happens?  As in ... no investigation into why the cop fired his/her weapon.

 

Really? 

There is no meaningful consequence, absolutely. Even when action is taken against police it is usually always overturned by police unions. Police in the US are able to kill suspects and keep their jobs.

 

13 hours ago, ctebah said:

Of course it was vengeance.  From the moment this guy started shooting cops, they were going to kill him without apprehension.  

And that's wrong. That's murder. Killing him should have been a last resort and it wasn't.

 

8 hours ago, restroom said:

Lol. I've not attacked you mate. Sorry if you feel that way. You must be easy to upset.

I wasn't upset, I was simply pointing out that you directed your criticism towards me as an individual rather than what I was saying. I don't take anything personally. People are free to disagree with me - in fact they frequently do. 

 

7 hours ago, restroom said:

No. A debate is about taking in board someone's view point and coming back with a counter argument.

 

In that guys case he literally takes people's posts either totally out of context or twists them to argue you have said something you haven't.

 

Just read through the thread and you'll see how many times he had done this to people.

 

I am throwing my toys out of the pram admittedly. Not because I've lost the debate against him, but because it's impossible to debate with them for the above reasons.

I tried to discuss this topic with you and you chose to walk away because you didn't like me challenging what you had to say. You have avoided a real discussion at every opportunity. I am happy to have my opinions challenged but I'm not afraid to defend them when I believe I'm right.

[restroom]

 

52 minutes ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

 

I wasn't upset, I was simply pointing out that you directed your criticism towards me as an individual rather than what I was saying. I don't take anything personally. People are free to disagree with me - in fact they frequently do. 

Which is in itself, an indication of your lack of ability to present a proper discussion.

 

52 minutes ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

 

I tried to discuss this topic with you and you chose to walk away because you didn't like me challenging what you had to say. You have avoided a real discussion at every opportunity. I am happy to have my opinions challenged but I'm not afraid to defend them when I believe I'm right.

So I and mostly everyone else is wrong and your right... Ok mate, what ever makes you happy

 

 

[Emn1ty]

9 hours ago, Depicus said:

I thought that was the whole idea of debating is that both sides put their views forward. Much like life the two sides are so extrinsically and diametrically opposed that consensus is impossible. If you don't like somebodies argument you have to rebut their points, throwing your toys out of the pram is just an admission that you lost. 

There is no winner or loser in a debate, your first mistake was coming into a discussion with goal of "winning" it.

[Emn1ty]

23 hours ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

That's completely wrong. Per million there are 1.42 white people killed and 3.33 black people killed (The Guardian); the figures also highlight an under-reported trend, which is that Native Americans are killed at a rate of 3.4 per million. Please don't claim you 'saw statistics' without verifying their authenticity, as that is how misinformation spreads. If you weren't sure you should have gone and checked for yourself rather than erroneously challenging me.

http://newobserveronline.com/far-more-whites-killed-by-us-police/
 

Quote

For example, according to the US Department of Justice (“Homicide Trends in the United States, 1980–2008“), blacks accounted for 52.5 percent of homicide offenders from 1980 to 2008, with whites 45.3 percent and “other” 2.2 percent.

 

Quote

Robberies with white victims and black offenders were more than 12 times more common than the reverse.

See, I can play the statistics game, too. Yes, blacks are killed a lot but not disproportionately to the amount of crime they are involved in.

[Nogib]

Same morons were blocking a different freeway in the area this morning: http://www.kare11.com/traffic/i-35w-reopens-after-protest/271802357

 

I don't understand why it is so hard for them to understand that freeways are prohibited to pedestrians.  This does not rally people to their misguided and fundamentally wrong cause, it just makes people justifiably hate them.

[Depicus]

43 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

There is no winner or loser in a debate, your first mistake was coming into a discussion with goal of "winning" it.

Odd, many a debating society will probably disagree with you 

 

 

"Debating is ... carried out for educational and recreational purposes, usually associated with educational establishments and debating societies... The outcome of a contest may be decided by audience vote, by judges, or by some combination of the two..."

[Emn1ty]

2 hours ago, Depicus said:

Odd, many a debating society will probably disagree with you 

 

"Debating is ... carried out for educational and recreational purposes, usually associated with educational establishments and debating societies... The outcome of a contest may be decided by audience vote, by judges, or by some combination of the two..."

I didn't know this was a contest, probably because on forums I don't assume I am competing with my fellow members so much as participating with them. All a debate is, in its most simple form, is a formal discussion: 

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/debate "a discussion between people in which they express different opinions about something."

But feel free to keep competing to be the "winner" in discussions where there is no clear cut right or wrong 

 

[Depicus]

2 minutes ago, Emn1ty said:

But feel free to keep competing to be the "winner" in discussions where there is no clear cut right or wrong 

 

Nobody wins on a forum debate  but it's fun sometimes.

[Emn1ty]

Just now, Depicus said:

Nobody wins on a forum debate  but it's fun sometimes.

It is fun, but it shouldn't be about winning or losing. People would have a much more civil discussion if they left their egos and their convictions out of it.

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

2 hours ago, Nogib said:

Same morons were blocking a different freeway in the area this morning: http://www.kare11.com/traffic/i-35w-reopens-after-protest/271802357

 

I don't understand why it is so hard for them to understand that freeways are prohibited to pedestrians.  This does not rally people to their misguided and fundamentally wrong cause, it just makes people justifiably hate them.

The second word of your post explains it all.

[xrobwx71]

On 7/10/2016 at 2:28 PM, Circaflex said:

How is this supposed to help the public and police relationship? What good comes of "protests" like these? All this is doing is confirming much of the populations thoughts on the matter.

Some times I feel like protesting about certain things going on in America but the problem is,  I have a job and a Family to support. 

[Jim K Global Moderator]

7 hours ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

There is no meaningful consequence, absolutely. Even when action is taken against police it is usually always overturned by police unions. Police in the US are able to kill suspects and keep their jobs.

Source?  Cops get fired, get thrown in jail, etc., if found that they have broken policy, procedure or the law.  Refute!

 

[theyarecomingforyou]

5 hours ago, Emn1ty said:

http://newobserveronline.com/far-more-whites-killed-by-us-police/

That article only supports the point I have been making, which is that relative to population substantially more black people are killed than white people. Also, your source lacks any credibility when it describes The Guardian as a 'far-left extremist' publication. You should really be more careful about where you get your news from.

 

5 hours ago, Emn1ty said:

See, I can play the statistics game, too. Yes, blacks are killed a lot but not disproportionately to the amount of crime they are involved in.

I bet you weren't expecting me to say this but you're partially right - black people are responsible for more crime. However, the framing of race is unhelpful as it's not because they're black that they're committing more crime - it's because of poverty, broken families, poor education, workplace discrimination, etc. One also has to look at other factors - there is racism within legislation, with laws biased against ethnic minorities; there is racism within policing, with black people substantially more likely to be stopped and therefore more likely to be charged with a crime (stop a greater proportion of white people and you'd see more arrests of white people); judges and juries are harsher against ethnic minorities. Race isn't the root cause of the issue, it is one of many factors. And yes, I would argue that race is overplayed by both sides in this debate. However, there is institutionalised racism within US policing and it is clear that police respond more aggressively towards ethnic minorities - in fact many police forces recognise that.

 

The reality is that the situation is so complex that any assessment will be necessity be an over-simplification. 

 

However, one only has to look at how police handle situations to see why people have no trust in them. Police are beating a suspect simply for the sake of beating him - it's not justified. That angers onlookers, with the situation spiralling out of control. Look how many police officers are needed to apprehend a single person because they don't have the respect of the public:

 

How about this one where a police officer initiates violence against a suspect where none was required:

 

Or this:

 

There are just too many incidents to list and so many more we don't have footage for. Policing in America is disgraceful. The police create hostility, they enflame situations that would be more easily and better dealt without the use of violence.

 

But let me be clearly, whilst there is a clear racial element to police brutality it isn't by any means limited exclusively to a particular race. Policing in the US is overly violent and confrontational and that needs to end. Until officers are prosecuted and jailed for the crimes they're committing people cannot have faith in the police, as they will be seen as above the law.

 

4 minutes ago, jjkusaf said:

Source?  Cops get fired, get thrown in jail, etc., if found that they have broken policy, procedure or the law.  Refute!

This article lists the cases where police have been charged with murder. Given that over a thousand people are killed each year by police that list is pitifully small. Between 2005 and 2011 just 45 officers were charged with manslaughter or murder, which is less than one percent of all police killings - of those even those convicted receive light sentences, sometimes walking away with just probation. Given all the high profile abuses we've seen do you honestly believe that police are being held accountable for the people they kill?

[Jim K Global Moderator]

4 minutes ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

This article lists the cases where police have been charged with murder. Given that over a thousand people are killed each year by police that list is pitifully small. Between 2005 and 2011 just 45 officers were charged with manslaughter or murder, which is less than one percent of all police killings - of those even those convicted receive light sentences, sometimes walking away with just probation. Given all the high profile abuses we've seen do you honestly believe that police are being held accountable for the people they kill?

Yep.

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

Chicago BLM Activist: 'We Need to Abolish the Police'

 

Watch the Video on What THe BLM activist has to say. It will make your day.

[Emn1ty]

1 hour ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

That article only supports the point I have been making, which is that relative to population substantially more black people are killed than white people. Also, your source lacks any credibility when it describes The Guardian as a 'far-left extremist' publication. You should really be more careful about where you get your news from.

I didn't highlight the "far left" portion of this article, that's on you. I am not trying to discount the guardian because it is left affiliatied (even if the article says it is). But the numbers this article puts forth (unless you are denying the accuracy of their numbers) don't disappear just because they made an appeal to bias. Which, ironically, is what you're doing here. Who cares about the source or the affiliations of that source just look at the numbers.

 

1 hour ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

I bet you weren't expecting me to say this but you're partially right - black people are responsible for more crime. However, the framing of race is unhelpful as it's not because they're black that they're committing more crime - it's because of poverty, broken families, poor education, workplace discrimination, etc. One also has to look at other factors - there is racism within legislation, with laws biased against ethnic minorities; there is racism within policing, with black people substantially more likely to be stopped and therefore more likely to be charged with a crime (stop a greater proportion of white people and you'd see more arrests of white people); judges and juries are harsher against ethnic minorities. Race isn't the root cause of the issue, it is one of many factors. And yes, I would argue that race is overplayed by both sides in this debate. However, there is institutionalised racism within US policing and it is clear that police respond more aggressively towards ethnic minorities - in fact many police forces recognise that.

I never said anything about it being "because they are black". Of course it's because of poverty, broken families, education, etc. Don't put words in my mouth. I am trying to point out that they are disproportionately killed because they are disproportionately criminal (regardless of why they are criminal). When you account for criminality, the numbers aren't so biased. But that doesn't fit the narrative. Just as you've pivoted away from statistics and jumped into motive and racial bias. A huge slippery slope that's resulting in Blacks being in the state they're in entirely because of others. Of course, the entire world is designed to put Blacks into the economic and social hell-hole they're in and nothing they do contributes to that, right?

It's not about race, it's about a community (which self identifies with its race) that perpetuates harmful behavior and culture. One that idolizes gangs, guns, drugs and violence. A community who's identity revolves around being a victim of white "oppressors". Rather than focus on why Blacks have terrible graduation rates, why they are constantly singe parent families, etc we'd rather look at numbers that are more likely a result of these factors than a cause and correct those.

Edited July 13, 2016 by Emn1ty

[restroom]

Found the below very interesting.

 

The black cop who has a problem with 'Black Lives Matter' - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-36777582

[Depicus]

7 hours ago, Emn1ty said:

One that idolizes gangs, guns, drugs and violence.

Quite a few white people idolise the almighty gun and pray at the NRA alter