421–430 of 1001 posts
Total deaths in US caused by police. (2019, full year): 1112 [1] Total deaths in US caused by coronavirus (last Friday, one day): 975 [2] [1] https://www.theroot.com/here-s-how-many-people-police-killed... [2] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think there's a lot of rose colored history about the civil rights movement. We're mostly taught one side of it in school - that good people protested and won out over bad people. We don't, in general, talk about the horrible things that were happening back then. Only unlike a lot of racial problems today, they happened in plain sight and were celebrated. I know Rand Paul got a lot of hate for his recent speech aga…
Most people don't even know who Fred Hampton was. Even people who lived through the civil rights movement don't recall his name. My own parents downplay the violence of the 70s in favor of the rhetoric du jour that they're fed from mainstream media, and they lived in DC from 1972 until late in 1980 (and, all things considered, they are leftists, not liberals, which makes it even more astonishing to me). It's quite as…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I remember the 1980 Miami Riots and the 1992 LA riots. This is basically nothing like that. Fundamental difference the protestors aren't the ones engaging in violence, the cops are.
I seem to have missed the police setting buildings on fire and beating up shopowners. Not to say that the police haven't committed a ton of violence in these protests, but it's not all them.
Sure, and the other ones look the other way. Totally "good" guys just lettin' bad guys be bad guys. Until the "good" guys start going after and punishing the "few bad ones", they are all bad.
If we're going to use the "just some bad apples" argument, then it might be prudent to apply it to the protestors, too?
At this point it's borderline ignorant to be unaware of the ongoing police brutalities. And if one -is- aware, it's disingenuous to compare what they're doing to some stores being set on fire- turns out people really, really care about property damage suddenly. [0] [1]
[0]: https://github.com/2020PB/police-brutality/blob/master/repor...
[1]: https://github.com/2020PB/police-brutality/blob/master/repor...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but that was a choice by our government to not bail out the people—again, the death cult.
Do you have an example of any economic system in any country in the world, past or present, that could survive the majority of able-bodied people not working for a long period of time?
Anyway, I can't even guess how you think the economy works if you think we need to open up or something bad will happen that nobody ever names. Oh no, a U shaped recovery and not a V shaped recovery? How will my 401k ever recover in the next six months?!? Think about all that risk to my capital! :'( How can this country ever recover from such a critical loss of portfolio value?
Instead of actually ensuring people can survive this crisis, we've bought corporate debt and told people to get back to work. It's a goddamn joke of any understanding of economics. Honey, every person that's ever read adam smith could do better than that. "developing countries" are putting us to shame, and good for them, because we're on the bus in Speed.
For the non-factual topics, such as whether there an epidemic of unjustified police violence against black people (the data does not clearly show that there is - and in fact imo shows that there is not), stating their opinion on the political topic means their scientific opinion loses credibility immediately for significant percentages of the population.
Why do any scientists talking about the spread of virus need to say that they support the cause? When they say that they do support the cause, why should the 40% of the country who voted for Trump and watches Fox News still follow their scientific advise?
I can't help but look back on the anti-lockdown protests and sympathize with those people's skepticism and animosity toward scientists.[1]
It feels to me as the hard sciences have been inflicted with the same political ideology that has dominated the arts+social sciences and that the scientists are scared to share their scientific opinions in an apolitical way. The same reason that your dishsoap company emailed you to let you know their political beliefs.
I remember seeing photos during the anti-lockdown protests of medical workers standing in front of cars: https://api.time.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/denver-count...
And a few weeks later photos spreading virally of medical works supporting protests: https://imagesvc.meredithcorp.io/v3/mm/image?url=https%3A%2F...
It feels to me that in much of America, politics are not allowed to be public unless they align with liberal views.
Is there any reason to have renewed confidence in these influential people and institutions?
[1]https://twitter.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1267281387486412801
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That don't need to be armed with firearms You're asking police officers to be less armed then the general public. 43 states are "shall-issue" and allow residents to conceal carry a firearm after completing required training and submitting an application.
> You're asking police officers to be less armed then the general public. But most policing tasks don't involve interactions with people looking to fight to the death. Do people really react to being stopped for speeding by starting a firefight? Is that genuinely a routine concern?
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/08/a-closer-lo...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the gist is to avoid aggressively picking apart minor details, and instead discuss the main points. This is in line with another section of the guidelines: “ Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. ”
It’s a good idea in principle, the problem is that the devil is often in the detail and people can say things that seem broadly like a decent argument while slipping in details (whether intentionally or not) that completely reverse the meaning or make the meaning quite different. This is why cross examination in needed in trials - of course everyone tries to make a plausible argument, so noticing the incongruities is…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree that public assembly is essential regardless of what is going on. But why were the people protesting the lock downs and business shutdowns and the limiting of freedoms the yahoos and crazy murderers? Why did nurses block them from protesting but not one would block someone now?
First I'll say I think a lot more distancing should be in place at these recent protests and even with high mask usage it is taking a huge risk with the elderly and vulnerable. > Why did nurses block them from protesting but not one would block someone now? I think the reason would be something like: the first group was protesting not being able to go to Applebee's, the second group is protesting systemic racism and…
This is such a terribly uncharitable assumption and ruins any sort of ability to have reasoned discourse.
Are you aware how many people are unemployed in this nation right now because of the lockdown? Are you aware how many people’s businesses are destroyed, shut down permanently? And your assumption is that the only reason anybody could be upset is because they can’t go to their favorite restaurant!?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You're asking police officers to be less armed then the general public. Can we at least agree that off-duty police officers working as security guards at a hospital or elsewhere should not under any circumstance carry a weapon (other than perhaps a stick or something) while on non-police duty? > Soon, from inside the room, there was shouting, sounds of a scuffle and a loud pop. During an altercation, two off-duty H…
imagine a day in the life of an inner city cop and then re-read your post to see how ridiculous it sounds.
People that don't know the average day don't have any basis to accurately imagine the average day, it's not a useful activity at that point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is the very definition of professional.
So then, if I am a “professional” software developer, and my employer asks me to put a secret back-door in some code to be shipped to consumers... I should say nothing, because I’m a “professional?” Or what if I’m doing renovations, and someone asks me to make something I know to be unsafe. I point that out, but they insist... Again, do I just do what they ask because, “professional?” I suspect you are conflating “pr…
