Who Is The Blame For Walter Scott's Death?

[shanm]

Originally Posted by Freedom42

I disagree with your first statement, show me an example when the left wingers were up in arms over an AA LE shooting or being brutal against anyone?

Were you hibernating during the whole Ferguson episode?

[Freedom42]

Originally Posted by shanm

Were you hibernating during the whole Ferguson episode?

It is possible that I missed something. Please show me when the left wingers were up in arms over an AA LE being brutal. What I remember is the constant "Arms up, don't shoot" chant By the left wingers which was repeated nonsstop and ultimately was proven to be made up.

[shanm]

Originally Posted by Freedom42

It is possible that I missed something. Please show me when the left wingers were up in arms over an AA LE being brutal. What I remember is the constant "Arms up, don't shoot" chant By the left wingers which was repeated nonsstop and ultimately was proven to be made up.

It wasn't about "AA" LE. It also wasn't about white LE. It was about the PEOPLE (who are more often than not minorities) that are being oppressed by by our LE (as a WHOLE; not blacks, not whites, AS A WHOLE). It's based on a very verifiable culture of oppression and racism and it would be hilarious to hear you say that everything has become all hunky dory since the 50 years in which we allowed blacks to VOTE.

Many left wingers were outraged at the brutality deployed against Francis Pusok (who is white) by police officers barely less than a week ago. So yeah don't tell me that this is all PC bullshit.

[Freedom42]

Originally Posted by shanm

It wasn't about "AA" LE. It also wasn't about white LE. It was about the PEOPLE (who are more often than not minorities) that are being oppressed by by our LE (as a WHOLE; not blacks, not whites, AS A WHOLE). It's based on a very verifiable culture of oppression and racism and it would be hilarious to hear you say that everything has become all hunky dory since the 50 years in which we allowed blacks to VOTE.

Many left wingers were outraged at the brutality deployed against Francis Pusok (who is white) by police officers barely less than a week ago. So yeah don't tell me that this is all PC bullshit.

Show me the "Many left wingers" that are up in arms over this, how many of the LE in the case were AA? That was my question.

As far as Ferguson, you are simply re-writing history, what you are saying might be your view point, for the left wingers is was all a our the race (not my words, that is what they said). If you can't see that you might have been hibernating.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Freedom42

As far as Ferguson, you are simply re-writing history, .....

That's his "specialty," but the sad part is he's not very good at it.

The other side of his coin is typically liberal in nature ... what's his solution to:

"...the PEOPLE (who are more often than not minorities) .... being oppressed by by our LE (as a WHOLE; not blacks, not whites, AS A WHOLE),"

.... which according to Shanmless is actually happening. Here's an "example"..

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

.... which according to Shanmless is actually happening.

How do we know the latest in an increasingly longer line of LLIdiot's irrelevant pictures is of "Shanmless?"

In the extremely unlikely event that it was "Shanmless," wouldn't that mean that LLIdiot has now broken a board rule and "outted" him?

Well duh!

Then again, the irrelevant pic could actually be of LL and his reckless band of wayward Idiot's?

Perhaps LLIdiot feels it does not violate board rules for him to "out" himself and his Idiot cohorts.

Carry on!

[andymarksman]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

then Slager would re-approach the vehicle, ask Scott, to step to the back so we can talk....

The coded meaning is "You are under arrest," am I right?

[Freedom42]

Originally Posted by andymarksman

The coded meaning is "You are under arrest," am I right?

And if it is, what difference does it make in this discussion?

You keep going with pointless questions and refuse the answer the questions that are being asked of you. If you don't want to answer the questions, at the very least admit that you are wrong about your position that Scott would have been shot if he didn't run.

[andymarksman]

Originally Posted by Freedom42

And if it is, what difference does it make in this discussion?

Now we are having a reasoned discussion! Then you have to agree that Scott would instantly have recognized he was going to be "taken in" by Slager phycically, correct?

[Freedom42]

Originally Posted by andymarksman

Now we are having a reasoned discussion! Then you have to agree that Scott would instantly have recognized he was going to be "taken in" by Slager phycically, correct?

A discussion requires that you answer questions, not just ask pointless ones.

Until you answer the questions that you were asked or admit that you are wrong on your position that Scott would have been shot if he hadn't run, there is no reason to answer your pointless questions.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by andymarksman

Now we are having a reasoned discussion! Then you have to agree that Scott would instantly have recognized he was going to be "taken in" by Slager phycically, correct?

I assume you meant "physically" ... as opposed to ... metaphorically?

Or would that be as in "figuratively" ... or "conceptually"

Hopefully one day there will be the technology to BEAM crooks to the jail cell.

Actually, since the vehicle was occupied by a passenger, who may or may not know the dark side of Scott and his "legal problems," it would be appropriate to discuss Scott's secrets or potentially embarrassing moments in his life outside the hearing and/or presence of someone who may or may not know about them.

Consequently, a discussion away from the passenger would be respectful to Scott.

In addition Slager, who is apparently by himself, will be able to interact with Scott away from the passenger with less a potential threat of having the passenger "join" in on the "meeting" taking place between Scott and Slager whether or not he was invited, which he would not be. See above comment.

It's called "officer safety"! Something probably foreign to you, though.

Of course, you do realize don't you, that the longer you play this little game of yours about dissecting this traffic stop over these past few DAYS it PROVES my point about "split second" decisions officers must make in citizen contacts, and it being inappropriate to EVALUATE their every move over days, weeks, and months of research, critical analysis, photo analysis, and forensics investigation.

I mean you can't even type your first question accurately after a day or two.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Freedom42

....there is no reason to answer your pointless questions.

Actually it appears his questions have a "point" to him. Ilusions....!!!



Dissection of an event into incremental moments to extract variables to either leave voids or to insert extraneous events that did not occur.

Old as dirt, and as transparent as glass. A number of posters do it frequently.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by bigtex

How do we know ....

You mean by "we" ... you and your weekend bottle?

Just a bit of psychological inquiry ... did "they" instruct you at U of H high school to use the word "we" instead of "I" to add validity and value to the inquiry ... or is that something that you began to use to make yourself feel less "alone" in your drunken mental stupor? After all ... I've heard being drunk creates "double vision" ... double images. So "I" becomes "we"? Or is that you need 2 heads instead of one just to post that stupid shit?

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Yet another irrelevant LLIdiot pic! He is as regular as clockwork!

[gnadfly]

BigKotex, a stopped clock is more frequently right than you. And by stopped clock I mean an unplugged LED clock.