police kill unarmed black man

12357…22

Comments

  • HughFreakingDillon
    HughFreakingDillon Winnipeg Posts: 39,473
    Stickman12 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    Stickman12 said:

    HughFreakingDillon said:

    Stickman12 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    PP193448 said:

    People are just too sensitive nowadays... Where's Dave Chappelle when you need him

    What's interesting is what group people think are too sensitive.
    Stickman12 said:

    Words are words and in America you have the right to use them freely even if other find them offensive. You can use any adjective you want to describe a group or persons behavior. Get over it. Savage can apply to an animal as well. No need to differentiate the color of fur to determine if it's offensive or racist.

    Yes, words are words. And as you pointed out, savage also applies to animals, and in this case (and historically) racial minorities. If you say something, expect hearing something in response.
    It comes down to intent. If you can prove to me that the word was intentionally used as a racist reference then you have something. If not then the word is just an adjective(fierce, violent, uncontrolled), noun(primaries and uncivilized), or verb(attack or maul). The word can describe a group or people or a person regaurdless of their skin color. Appearently in your world if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then calling it a duck is offensive and racist.
    historical context also matters. if the duck was named a duck by a bunch of oppressive geese 200 years ago because of the colour of its feathers and the shortness of its neck, then yeah, calling it a duck is offensive and racist.
    "Boy" was also used to talk down to slaves back in the day. Didn't know I was calling my three male offsprings a derogatory racist name all these years.
    Relationship context also matters.
    Seems like you have all these rules for the convience of your stance. My turn then...no it doesn't.

    interesting. you were the first one to come up with the first "rule" of intent mattering. we just expanded on what else also matters. or does this discussion begin and end with your opinion?
    By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.




  • dignin
    dignin Posts: 9,478
    Smellyman said:

    muskydan said:

    More fun times by them "misunderstood youths" in NC going on As We Speak. Looting, Destruction of property, and reports of a protestor getting shot in the head…. basically ANARCHY. Hope and Change…Hope and Change

    Thanks Obama
    image
  • RoleModelsinBlood31
    RoleModelsinBlood31 Austin TX Posts: 6,239
    my2hands said:

    So this guy had a gun... didn't put it down when instructed... maybe has a record for carrying a firearm... Was shot by a black officer... and the police chief is black

    Am I missing something?

    Yes, definitely.


    If we smash the windows of that old dude's electronics shop we can steal an Xbox one and some hair extensions from the accessories shop next door! Get your pillowcase brah, fill 'er up! Aargh I hate whites!
    I'm like an opening band for your mom.
  • Stickman12
    Stickman12 Posts: 504
    edited September 2016
    dignin said:

    mcgruff10 said:

    slang words from over a 100 years ago are not fair game in my opinion. unless you are a historian how the hell do you know certain words were offensive such a long time ago?

    I can read. Funny how we still have literature from over a 100 years ago.
    Seems like your views are restricted to 100 years ago too. If you could provide some sort of slang dictionary from 100 years, it would be appreciated. Please let me know if any of the words I have used thus far are considered racist. Here I was living, talking, and communicating in modern time, boy, I mean male adult, was I missing the boat
  • Go Beavers
    Go Beavers Posts: 9,552
    Stickman12 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    Stickman12 said:

    HughFreakingDillon said:

    Stickman12 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    PP193448 said:

    People are just too sensitive nowadays... Where's Dave Chappelle when you need him

    What's interesting is what group people think are too sensitive.
    Stickman12 said:

    Words are words and in America you have the right to use them freely even if other find them offensive. You can use any adjective you want to describe a group or persons behavior. Get over it. Savage can apply to an animal as well. No need to differentiate the color of fur to determine if it's offensive or racist.

    Yes, words are words. And as you pointed out, savage also applies to animals, and in this case (and historically) racial minorities. If you say something, expect hearing something in response.
    It comes down to intent. If you can prove to me that the word was intentionally used as a racist reference then you have something. If not then the word is just an adjective(fierce, violent, uncontrolled), noun(primaries and uncivilized), or verb(attack or maul). The word can describe a group or people or a person regaurdless of their skin color. Appearently in your world if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then calling it a duck is offensive and racist.
    historical context also matters. if the duck was named a duck by a bunch of oppressive geese 200 years ago because of the colour of its feathers and the shortness of its neck, then yeah, calling it a duck is offensive and racist.
    "Boy" was also used to talk down to slaves back in the day. Didn't know I was calling my three male offsprings a derogatory racist name all these years.
    Relationship context also matters.
    Seems like you have all these rules for the convience of your stance. My turn then...no it doesn't.

    Wow, seriously? You think that's a rule of convenience? It's called a societal rule of basic respect. You can't understand that you can call your son "boy", but not a black person boy? You think that's some sort of PC rule that's oppressing you?
  • Degeneratefk
    Degeneratefk Posts: 3,123
    Ok, so the guy in charlotte was shot after repeatedly being told to drop his gun, right?

    Why are they rioting in Charlotte? Systemic racism? Here's an idea, drop the gun.
    will myself to find a home, a home within myself
    we will find a way, we will find our place
  • Degeneratefk
    Degeneratefk Posts: 3,123
    I'm wondering what that cop in Tulsa was supposed to do. The guy did have his hands up, but continued to back up towards his vehicle, then turns his back to the officer while reaching into the vehicle, no?
    will myself to find a home, a home within myself
    we will find a way, we will find our place
  • Godfather.
    Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    the police reacted to a threatening situation and unfortunately a man died there is no race issue here, misinformation and the media once again led to another riot, some folks are and have been to quick to react in violent way...so the actions of rioters are defended with accusations of racism towards their accusers because it's a great way to turn off the lime light they have shined upon themselves.
    even here on the AMT the ugly finger of racism is pointed freely in the direction of anybody who dare call it out as it truly is.

    Godfather.
  • eddiec
    eddiec Posts: 3,959
    Walk up to a black guy on the street, drop a nickel on the ground and say 'Pick that up for me, boy.'
    When we all cut the bullshit and agree that is a racist statement maybe we can move on and have a real discussion.
  • Degeneratefk
    Degeneratefk Posts: 3,123
    eddiec said:

    Walk up to a black guy on the street, drop a nickel on the ground and say 'Pick that up for me, boy.'
    When we all cut the bullshit and agree that is a racist statement maybe we can move on and have a real discussion.

    Uh, ok...
    will myself to find a home, a home within myself
    we will find a way, we will find our place
  • Smellyman
    Smellyman Asia Posts: 4,528
    Degeneratefk said:

    I'm wondering what that cop in Tulsa was supposed to do. The guy did have his hands up, but continued to back up towards his vehicle, then turns his back to the officer while reaching into the vehicle, no?

    Taser? 4 vs 1? lots of stuff.

    But you're right, shooting dead was probably the only option.
  • Stickman12
    Stickman12 Posts: 504
    Go Beavers said:

    Stickman12 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    Stickman12 said:

    HughFreakingDillon said:

    Stickman12 said:

    Go Beavers said:

    PP193448 said:

    People are just too sensitive nowadays... Where's Dave Chappelle when you need him

    What's interesting is what group people think are too sensitive.
    Stickman12 said:

    Words are words and in America you have the right to use them freely even if other find them offensive. You can use any adjective you want to describe a group or persons behavior. Get over it. Savage can apply to an animal as well. No need to differentiate the color of fur to determine if it's offensive or racist.

    Yes, words are words. And as you pointed out, savage also applies to animals, and in this case (and historically) racial minorities. If you say something, expect hearing something in response.
    It comes down to intent. If you can prove to me that the word was intentionally used as a racist reference then you have something. If not then the word is just an adjective(fierce, violent, uncontrolled), noun(primaries and uncivilized), or verb(attack or maul). The word can describe a group or people or a person regaurdless of their skin color. Appearently in your world if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then calling it a duck is offensive and racist.
    historical context also matters. if the duck was named a duck by a bunch of oppressive geese 200 years ago because of the colour of its feathers and the shortness of its neck, then yeah, calling it a duck is offensive and racist.
    "Boy" was also used to talk down to slaves back in the day. Didn't know I was calling my three male offsprings a derogatory racist name all these years.
    Relationship context also matters.
    Seems like you have all these rules for the convience of your stance. My turn then...no it doesn't.

    Wow, seriously? You think that's a rule of convenience? It's called a societal rule of basic respect. You can't understand that you can call your son "boy", but not a black person boy? You think that's some sort of PC rule that's oppressing you?
    A random black person...no, but I can talk pretty damn freely to my black friends and co workers
  • Degeneratefk
    Degeneratefk Posts: 3,123
    edited September 2016
    Smellyman said:

    Degeneratefk said:

    I'm wondering what that cop in Tulsa was supposed to do. The guy did have his hands up, but continued to back up towards his vehicle, then turns his back to the officer while reaching into the vehicle, no?

    Taser? 4 vs 1? lots of stuff.

    But you're right, shooting dead was probably the only option.
    A man who backs up 20 feet back towards HIS vehicle and reaches inside all while the police are telling him to stop. All comes down to following simple instruction.
    will myself to find a home, a home within myself
    we will find a way, we will find our place
  • Smellyman
    Smellyman Asia Posts: 4,528
    edited September 2016
    Degeneratefk said:

    Smellyman said:

    Degeneratefk said:

    I'm wondering what that cop in Tulsa was supposed to do. The guy did have his hands up, but continued to back up towards his vehicle, then turns his back to the officer while reaching into the vehicle, no?

    Taser? 4 vs 1? lots of stuff.

    But you're right, shooting dead was probably the only option.
    A man who backs up 20 feet back towards HIS vehicle and reaches inside all while the police are telling him to stop. All comes down to following simple instruction.
    Taser him somwhere in that 20 feet. pretty simple.

    Again, you're probably right. Shooting people dead should always be option #1
  • Degeneratefk
    Degeneratefk Posts: 3,123
    Smellyman said:

    Degeneratefk said:

    Smellyman said:

    Degeneratefk said:

    I'm wondering what that cop in Tulsa was supposed to do. The guy did have his hands up, but continued to back up towards his vehicle, then turns his back to the officer while reaching into the vehicle, no?

    Taser? 4 vs 1? lots of stuff.

    But you're right, shooting dead was probably the only option.
    A man who backs up 20 feet back towards HIS vehicle and reaches inside all while the police are telling him to stop. All comes down to following simple instruction.
    Taser him somwhere in that 20 feet. pretty simple.

    Again, you're probably right. Shooting people dead should always be option #1
    I'm convinced I did not say,that was option number 1. I know I'm right when I said the bottom line is if he had followed a simple instruction, he would not have been shot at all.
    will myself to find a home, a home within myself
    we will find a way, we will find our place
  • dignin
    dignin Posts: 9,478
    Degeneratefk said:

    Smellyman said:

    Degeneratefk said:

    Smellyman said:

    Degeneratefk said:

    I'm wondering what that cop in Tulsa was supposed to do. The guy did have his hands up, but continued to back up towards his vehicle, then turns his back to the officer while reaching into the vehicle, no?

    Taser? 4 vs 1? lots of stuff.

    But you're right, shooting dead was probably the only option.
    A man who backs up 20 feet back towards HIS vehicle and reaches inside all while the police are telling him to stop. All comes down to following simple instruction.
    Taser him somwhere in that 20 feet. pretty simple.

    Again, you're probably right. Shooting people dead should always be option #1
    I'm convinced I did not say,that was option number 1. I know I'm right when I said the bottom line is if he had followed a simple instruction, he would not have been shot at all.
    We get it, you are right, he should have followed commands, but that apparently didn't happen and now another black man is dead. Who wasn't armed, and wasn't reaching for a gun. So now how do we move forward so less people die? Just saying he should have followed orders does not offer any kind of solution to this problem. We will get no where if we keep blaming the victim.
  • KC138045
    KC138045 Columbus, OH Posts: 2,716
    Smellyman said:

    Degeneratefk said:

    Smellyman said:

    Degeneratefk said:

    I'm wondering what that cop in Tulsa was supposed to do. The guy did have his hands up, but continued to back up towards his vehicle, then turns his back to the officer while reaching into the vehicle, no?

    Taser? 4 vs 1? lots of stuff.

    But you're right, shooting dead was probably the only option.
    A man who backs up 20 feet back towards HIS vehicle and reaches inside all while the police are telling him to stop. All comes down to following simple instruction.
    Taser him somwhere in that 20 feet. pretty simple.

    Again, you're probably right. Shooting people dead should always be option #1
    he was taser'd and it had no effect. Its being reported he was on PCP and had PCP in his vehicle.
    Columbus-2000
    Columbus-2003
    Cincinnati-2006
    Columbus-2010
    Wrigley-2013
    Cincinnati-2014
    Lexington-2016
    Wrigley 1 & 2-2018
  • KC138045
    KC138045 Columbus, OH Posts: 2,716
    dignin said:


    Degeneratefk said:

    Smellyman said:

    Degeneratefk said:

    Smellyman said:

    Degeneratefk said:

    I'm wondering what that cop in Tulsa was supposed to do. The guy did have his hands up, but continued to back up towards his vehicle, then turns his back to the officer while reaching into the vehicle, no?

    Taser? 4 vs 1? lots of stuff.

    But you're right, shooting dead was probably the only option.
    A man who backs up 20 feet back towards HIS vehicle and reaches inside all while the police are telling him to stop. All comes down to following simple instruction.
    Taser him somwhere in that 20 feet. pretty simple.

    Again, you're probably right. Shooting people dead should always be option #1
    I'm convinced I did not say,that was option number 1. I know I'm right when I said the bottom line is if he had followed a simple instruction, he would not have been shot at all.
    We get it, you are right, he should have followed commands, but that apparently didn't happen and now another black man is dead. Who wasn't armed, and wasn't reaching for a gun. So now how do we move forward so less people die? Just saying he should have followed orders does not offer any kind of solution to this problem. We will get no where if we keep blaming the victim.
    Yeah another black man is dead. Where is all the outrage over the 100 black men shot and killed every week in cities like Chicago. You don't see anyu riots happening on the south side of Chicago. So in their eyes I guess those killings are OK or justified?
    Columbus-2000
    Columbus-2003
    Cincinnati-2006
    Columbus-2010
    Wrigley-2013
    Cincinnati-2014
    Lexington-2016
    Wrigley 1 & 2-2018
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    I would love to see how some of you Monday morning quaterbacks would handle these situations with your lives on the line
  • g under p
    g under p Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,236
    edited September 2016
    Degeneratefk said:

    eddiec said:

    Walk up to a black guy on the street, drop a nickel on the ground and say 'Pick that up for me, boy.'
    When we all cut the bullshit and agree that is a racist statement maybe we can move on and have a real discussion.

    Uh, ok...
    If that black guy is 12 years old or younger I would say no. If that black is a man hell yes that's a racist and demeaning way to speak to a person. Would anyone would walk up to a white man with the same situation and say, *Pick that up for me, boy?* How would that white person feel about that question?

    Peace

    Post edited by g under p on
    *We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti

    *MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
    .....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti

    *The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)


Categories