Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Afroman found not liable in defamation case

nypost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

731–740 of 798 posts

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#731

Post by m0llusk »

roryirvine wrote: post #487
petesergeant wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean the key point there I think is the one where they point out that Brits simply wouldn’t accept police regularly shooting people. Policing for the people by the people.* * and pretend Northern Ireland doesn’t exist, or course

It's rare even in NI. PSNI had one single firearm discharge in the two year period covering October 2023 - September 2025. Plus 948 uses of irritant spray, 496 uses of their baton, and 38 taser discharges in the same period. And 23,489 uses of "unarmed physical tactics". That's for a population of around 2 million. By comparison, SFPD had 10 "officer involved shootings" in the past year for a population of 800k, a ra…

That is bad use of statistics. San Francisco forms the core of an urban conurbation of over eight million people.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#732

Post by lucketone »

akimbostrawman wrote: post #717
t-3 wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got pulled over in Cleveland and had a cop point a gun at me and threaten to shoot - I was apparently wearing the wrong color on the wrong side of town with out-of-state plates and reached for my ID instead of waiting for the cop to tell me to get it. In later stops I've been admonished many times for not preemptively getting out my ID, but I really can't help thinking about almost getting my brains blown out for g…

Hands on the steering wheel for your and the officers safety until they ask you to do something. It really is not that difficult you can always just ask. Legally speaking a traffic stop means you are detained = follow orders. They don't know you or what you could be capable off.

> It really is not that difficult

If you do that daily, sure it is easy. But a lot of human behaviour is automatic, based on what we are accustomed to do daily. (During covid there were many videos, where person on the screen says “… also avoid touching your face …”, while touching his/her face)

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#733

Post by lucketone »

mothballed wrote: post #556
tverbeure wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The relevance is that you don’t need to assume that the knife wielding person can hit you from a distance. One way or the other, this doesn’t seem to be a problem in other countries.

Pulling a percentage out of my ass that can't be terribly inaccurate, 99% of police encounters with guns drawn the police are under 21 ft away, at which distance a knife is as dangerous as a gun. If someone is less than 21 ft from you and they are going to be using a knifes against you, then you should still draw a gun just as often as if they had a gun. So at <21 ft you think guns should be drawn less because they h…

> under 21 ft away, at which distance a knife is as dangerous as a gun.

No, it is not as dangerous.

To use gun from 7 meters away, you have throw it, which takes way more movement hand movement and time. While you should not rely on it, it is very feasible to just move out of the way of the thrown knife.

Other possibility getting closer to you. Running will take 2 seconds. (Not a lot, but definitely not as dangerous as a handgun)

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#734

Post by hollywood_court »

edm0nd wrote: post #654
hollywood_court wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was raised by LEOs. My mother and all four of her husbands were career long LEOs in the South. Of course this is just based on my anecdotes, but LEOs have some of the thinnest skin imaginable. The first time I fought a grown man was when I was 13 and I had to fight my mother's fourth husband. He was a Deputy Sheriff and combat veteran and that dude had the emotional strength of a 12 year old girl who didn't get ask…

>My mother and all four of her husbands were career long LEOs how many of them physically abused her? the stats say 3 out of 4 did.

Only one abused her that I’m aware of, but I know she abused two of her husbands. She was a very violent lady.

She shot my biological father when I was 14 months old.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#735

Post by dplgk »

sixothree wrote: post #703
embedding-shape wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was what I was thinking at first too, but if I was sitting on their side, my mind would still go for "Wait, if we sue him, won't this make the news and make things better for him?" immediately, rather than "Yeah, this will suck for him". I'm not sure how they thought this would be bad for him, legal costs?

I don't think this is "better" for him really. He didn't win any money afaik. He spent a lot of time defending himself against something that could have easily gone in a different direction given a different jury.

It's publicity and positive public perception for a guy who had one hit song decades ago. This is good market for him.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#736

Post by jepj57 »

underlipton wrote: post #283
SaltyBackendGuy wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a common archetype when people get challenged (escalation of commitment), they effectively double down. I don't necessarily think it was racially motivated (but also don't doubt that it could have been).

American institutions were set-up prima facie to be racially-motivated. Explicit references have been removed, but a lot of the structural elements that supported those explicit references remain. I know many people recoil at the idea, because it seems like an affront to their personal self-image and the national ethos (or at least its marketing), but I generally hold that if an institution acts in a way that's consi…

Joe Biden left office Jan 20, 2025.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#737

Post by Shocka1 »

martin_a wrote: post #206
Aurornis wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, bad guys might have guns, but that's the case everywhere around the world. The number of guns in the hands of bad guys caries drastically around the world. You can’t reduce this to “it’s the same everywhere” because it’s not.

True! What I meant is that I think German police, for example, are probably less worried that a traffic stop is likely to get them killed or have them escalate a situation to the use of lethal force. I think this might be different in the US because guns are just much more common there.

Yep, you definitely can't compare the USA to Germany. The rate of non-gun violence alone is a good starting point, then the slew of other stuff. Guns, mental health and tendencies towards violence in both rural and urban low income areas. Icing on top is the deeply polarized attitudes towards police. The list goes on and on...

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#738

Post by roryirvine »

m0llusk wrote: post #731
roryirvine wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's rare even in NI. PSNI had one single firearm discharge in the two year period covering October 2023 - September 2025. Plus 948 uses of irritant spray, 496 uses of their baton, and 38 taser discharges in the same period. And 23,489 uses of "unarmed physical tactics". That's for a population of around 2 million. By comparison, SFPD had 10 "officer involved shootings" in the past year for a population of 800k, a ra…

That is bad use of statistics. San Francisco forms the core of an urban conurbation of over eight million people.

Sure, but SFPD covers only the County of San Francisco which had a population of 827,526 in 2024.

It's certainly not a perfect comparison by any means - but that's more to do with the very different urban/rural splits, forms and structures of inequality, histories of segregation and political violence etc.

If you can suggest another American police department which would make for a better comparison, I'd be interested in seeing the stats... but I strongly suspect that they'd show a very similar contrast.

Re: Afroman found not liable in defamation case

#739

Post by wafflemaker »

martin_a wrote: post #496
wafflemaker wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To get a gun in Norway i need 6 months in a shooting sports club. And then can only take the gun with me for shooting exercise. Strictly prohibited to have a round chambered when not standing on the shooting lane. And then only after an order from the guy running the training.

Again, a bit naive, but that actually sounds okay to me. You'll learn to use the gun responsibly and in a controlled manner. What else would you want to do with it and why?

Sorry for not making it clear in the first post. I just meant to say it's a little harder to get in some countries. The "Europe" is quite diverse.

Still, 6 months or not, from what I've heard, people have their gun permit applications rejected very rarely. Compared to Poland - it's much easier. Also just hearsay, but I've heard that it can be hard to get a permit and it's often rejected without any apparent reason.

But that was about pistols. Hunting rifles seem to be much easier to get in both Poland and Norway, though you still need to be a part of a hunting "club". Not sure what it's called, but it also takes some time and effort, just the rejection rate is lower.

Post reply on HN