271–280 of 283 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If someone creates a new account in order to make one post based on a screamingly obvious fallacy they deserve what they get.
Just because you claim it to be false does not make it false. You could be wrong. So what exactly does someone "deserve" for expressing a contrary opinion?
we need to look seriously at curtailing the power of the unions. Even yesterday, the leader of the union in MN said that they are going to appeal for the jobs - since these guys were fired without due process.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honest foreigner question: are all US police that "stinky" that any association with them is now bad, or is it an overreaction? Surely there are good police departments, ones that work with the community and not against them? But maybe I'm not seeing it from the perspective of those black employees...
The issue isn't there are good or bad cops. In any large organization there will be "bad apples" (malicious actors), that just statistically will happen. What is very important is how misconduct is handled, and how these "bad apples" are handled. Due to the legal concept of qualified immunity, it is very difficult to sue the police for civil or criminal liability. I understand the intent of qualified immunity. The id…
The reason it's such a big deal is that it can be very difficult to get prosecutors to charge a police officer that did something wrong, and then it can be difficult to get a conviction even if they are tried. In a civil trial you can win by a preponderance of the evidence. So if you go after a cop criminally, where you do a have a lot of evidence and fail, that's it, no further penalties, the cop walks. On the other hand, you probably don't want to loosen it too much or cops will be sued at every opportunity. I don't know what the right answer is, but it's not to make it nearly impossible to hold a cop civilly liable.
I mean, that's how they got OJ, he was found not guilty in the criminal trial, but was found guilty in the civil trial brought by Nicole Brown's family. So allowing cops to get avoid the civil courts is wrong.
Coming from a country where police has been rendered completely toothless by the same policies some people in this country are trying to promote which led to literally lawless areas, I am completely against this movement that's currently for some reason trying to demonize cops. I do not care if you're black, white, asian, gay, lesbian or anything - if you break the law, threaten a police officer, or simply ask comple…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The police aren't enabling a civil society right now. The current policing methods in the US are barbaric to put it mildly. Some third world countries have better behaved police.
Some third world countries have better behaved citizens.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I expect a few on duty officers to protect the house. But this goes well beyond that. How much do you want to twist the logic to make this a justifiable situation?
While police where protecting his house a police station went up in flames. I don’t care who you are, you can see there is wrong on all sides of the picture here. Why so many cops protecting the accused? Why no cops protecting their own station? Why no national guard IMMEDIATELY when it’s obvious the police have zero handle on the situation? Because the leadership at any level could not address this so we are obvious…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because there is a great deal of sentiment that the approaches used in the United States are excessively militarized, racially unjust and insufficiently transparent. Using a problematic customer like that as a marketing highlight is just not a great idea.
What's the alternative though? Pretending that if you needed protection due to crime coming your way/your family's way... you wouldn't call 911? I feel like this entire movement is really taking away credit from the "ok" and "good" cops. How many cops are there in America? Ok, some of them aren't perfect. They are racist/dicks/thirsty for power. Why does this mean as a citizen I should feel less safe because we want…
Why should your feelings trump the safety of human beings? Can you show that defunding the police will lead to less safety for you personally? Are you aware that in the event the police were defunded many of their functions would continue in an unarmed capacity?
>Even if there were 1,000 police brutality related deaths a year (there aren't), police would still be a huge net win for society, no?
You make a very specific claim here. I'd love to hear you articulate how you define a "net win". Please keep in mind that human lives have value too when crafting your response:
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/2016...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but there is almost no way to fully follow through on clear and universal principles. Instead of worrying about that, consider the possibility that our moral feelings are generated by a natural receptivity most of us have to the suffering of others, and that even if these feelings to not appear consistent with a universal and logical philosophical schema, I think it's more appropriate to carefully listen to the…
> it's still unproductive to dismiss someone who disagrees out of hand. My original comment was the opposite of an out-of-hand dismissal. I thought about what he was proposing, carried it to it's logical conclusion, and showed that it was flawed. I then invited him to propose a fix. No fix has been suggested. > I think it's more appropriate to carefully listen to the compassionate concerns of others than to try and d…
[0]: On the grounds that when you give someone something in exchange for a promise of theirs that you are using them as a means to an end. [1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1999/09/11/a...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it's still unproductive to dismiss someone who disagrees out of hand. My original comment was the opposite of an out-of-hand dismissal. I thought about what he was proposing, carried it to it's logical conclusion, and showed that it was flawed. I then invited him to propose a fix. No fix has been suggested. > I think it's more appropriate to carefully listen to the compassionate concerns of others than to try and d…
It's true that many moral intuitions we have end up seeming immoral when we reflect on them further, but this says as much about our difficulty with reasoning morally as it does about the supposed immorality of our moral intuitions. I think it's naive to assume that philosophical or logical approaches have a monopoly on morality. That being said, I also think it's unproductive to outright dismiss any moral appeal on…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's true that many moral intuitions we have end up seeming immoral when we reflect on them further, but this says as much about our difficulty with reasoning morally as it does about the supposed immorality of our moral intuitions. I think it's naive to assume that philosophical or logical approaches have a monopoly on morality. That being said, I also think it's unproductive to outright dismiss any moral appeal on…
You're now resorting to name-calling, so I'm going to end my involvement with this discussion.