The abominable side of the USA

[Jamezz]

The only error with the part you quoted was "grabbed", when ""kept" was a better description.

And so what's your point, what are you trying to say Mr?

 

[Stifle Tower]

Republicans have held the House since 2010. It's the Senate they just took over.

yes, that is correct. should have said Senate instead of House.

 

[TroutBum]

Conviction. Look it up.

You, like many (most) others, seem to feel it's wrong to stand strong on one's beliefs. Stand strong bro. State it loud and proud. Whatever it may be. Stand/fall thingie.

Is it possible that you have (most) people figured incorrectly? I am all for standing strong for your beliefs, just as long as the person standing has given those beliefs, the actions associated with those beliefs, and the potential pros and cons of those beliefs, a thurough and non-emotional quality control check (couldn't think of a better word or phrase -- but I hope you see my point). Starting threads about "racist pigs who kill black kids for funsies" without knowing even a fraction of what really happened is an emotional response to a tragedy that I'm sure we're all guilty of in some form or another. It is the people who weeks later, after facts are released, that are still calling for the death of those "pigs", regardless of what those facts may be, that make me irate. In short, stand up for what you believe, but make sure that what you believe isn't a load of ****. Moreover, realize that what you're standing for might cause harm to you or other people. Reconcile that to the best of your ability, and go for it. It's the lazy assholes who read the daily headlines and are all of a sudden genius criminal investigators, crime scene specialists, and forensic experts who cause riots, incite mobs, and burn down their own homes and businesses. Pure stupidity.

Why would people be willing to have a unemotional discussion about a profoundly emotional topic? For your benefit?

WTF? How about for the benefit of themselves, their families, and their community? Since when is it a bad thing to take a deep breath, step back, and use your brain instead of your emotionally charged fists?

 

[One Brow]

WTF? How about for the benefit of themselves, their families, and their community? Since when is it a bad thing to take a deep breath, step back, and use your brain instead of your emotionally charged fists?

It's a bad thing when it's a tactic uses to de-emphasize the pain and suffering of others. Some arguments are, by their nature, unable to be discussed in a purely rational manner.

 

[TroutBum]

It's a bad thing when it's a tactic uses to de-emphasize the pain and suffering of others. Some arguments are, by their nature, unable to be discussed in a purely rational manner.

Your first sentence is rubbish. I agree with your second sentence though, which is why I stated that people need to take a deep breath, step back, and proceed logically instead of emotionally. That takes time, and isn't likely to happen right after an emotional event. However, human beings are more than capable of discussing any/all things in a rational matter, but only if they choose to. It all boils down to choice. Do you want to be emotionally charged? Do you want to step back and reevaluate? Up to the person, I suppose. You think that people can't control themselves, I disagree.

 

[trigg3r]

The forensic evidence showed three entrance wounds in the inside of Brown's forearm, which means his palms were facing Brown in some manner. Please tell me how you reconcile that with Brown 1) reaching into his waistband for no reason at all while he was running toward Wilson.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-does-michael-brown-autopsy-reveal-about-ferguson-shooting/

Do I really need to say anything more? You're wrong.

Check the mirror.

Take your own advice.

Had the protests not turned to violence, Brown would have been just another black man shot down for no justifiable reason, and there would have been no more national coverage than in your scenario.

This story was a national story prior to the Grand Jury deciding not to indict. I think you have selective memory which is pretty typical for you.

 

[One Brow]

Your first sentence is rubbish.

I'm not saying heyhey, specifically, is engaging in it, but it certainly happens on a regular basis. When you have the unsympathetic side, emotionally, and want to downplay that disadvantage, one tactic is to say that emotion has no value in the discussion.

I agree with your second sentence though, which is why I stated that people need to take a deep breath, step back, and proceed logically instead of emotionally. That takes time, and isn't likely to happen right after an emotional event. However, human beings are more than capable of discussing any/all things in a rational matter, but only if they choose to. It all boils down to choice. Do you want to be emotionally charged? Do you want to step back and reevaluate? Up to the person, I suppose. You think that people can't control themselves, I disagree.

I suppose "unable" was the incorrect word. A better word would be "improper". 'The continual killing of black men by police' is an example of a topic where a purely rational debate, with no emotional component, is improper and poor form.

You talk about not doing this right after an emotional event, but such deaths occur so regularly that there will never be such a time in the foreseeable future. Why should justice wait until you decide you are ready for it to be discussed?

 

[TroutBum]

I'm not talking about me; I suck at it. I'm talking about people in general, or more specifically, HH and his type.

 

[One Brow]

Do I really need to say anything more? You're wrong.

You should actually read what you link to, before you start talking about what it proves.

The nature of the first bullet wound to Brown's right forearm, as detailed in the official autopsy, casts doubt on the claim of surrender, according to Kobilinsky.

"If one is in the process of surrendering, one's palms are forward," Kobilinsky said, adding that the bullet would enter on the underside of the arm. However, the round entered on the other side of Brown's arm.

"People don't give up, they don't surrender with their palms facing in. So for that round, I think the simplest explanation is the arms were down, rather than up."

Even here, though, there is conflicting data that underscores the challenge of reaching a definitive conclusion: another round hit Brown's arm from the exact opposite trajectory.

There were six bullet wounds. One to the front of the head, one to the front of the chest, and four to the arm. You are looking at the first shot, which did not enter the inner arm. How many does that leave?

I think I can do that math. 6 shots - 1 to the head - 1 to the chest - 1 not to the inner arm = 3 shots that entered the inner arm.

Here's a link with a picture:

https://www.newsweek.com/michael-br...ruggle-darren-wilson-thc-his-blood-and-279155

The one down by the thumb was obviously done with Brown's arms raised. I await your explanation of how the other three happened while Brown was charging Wilson with one arm tucked inside the front of his pants, as Wilson claimed. Any time.

Take your own advice.

I do, regularly.

This story was a national story prior to the Grand Jury deciding not to indict. I think you have selective memory which is pretty typical for you.

The first round of violence happened two days after the shooting, back in August.

https://www.theblaze.com/stories/20...arming-militarization-of-local-police-photos/

Good call on that selective memory thing, but toward the wrong person.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Is it possible that you have (most) people figured incorrectly? I am all for standing strong for your beliefs, just as long as the person standing has given those beliefs, the actions associated with those beliefs, and the potential pros and cons of those beliefs, a thurough and non-emotional quality control check (couldn't think of a better word or phrase -- but I hope you see my point). Starting threads about "racist pigs who kill black kids for funsies" without knowing even a fraction of what really happened is an emotional response to a tragedy that I'm sure we're all guilty of in some form or another. It is the people who weeks later, after facts are released, that are still calling for the death of those "pigs", regardless of what those facts may be, that make me irate. In short, stand up for what you believe, but make sure that what you believe isn't a load of ****. Moreover, realize that what you're standing for might cause harm to you or other people. Reconcile that to the best of your ability, and go for it. It's the lazy assholes who read the daily headlines and are all of a sudden genius criminal investigators, crime scene specialists, and forensic experts who cause riots, incite mobs, and burn down their own homes and businesses. Pure stupidity.



WTF? How about for the benefit of themselves, their families, and their community? Since when is it a bad thing to take a deep breath, step back, and use your brain instead of your emotionally charged fists?

Tl; dr

 

[One Brow]

I'm not talking about me; I suck at it. I'm talking about people in general, or more specifically, HH and his type.

Not sure if you mean HH or hh. I've expressed by disagreements with both of their styles in the past.

 

[trigg3r]

You should actually read what you link to, before you start talking about what it proves.

Irony at its best. Read below to the next response(quote).

There were six bullet wounds. One to the front of the head, one to the front of the chest, and four to the arm. You are looking at the first shot, which did not enter the inner arm. How many does that leave?

I think I can do that math. 6 shots - 1 to the head - 1 to the chest - 1 not to the inner arm = 3 shots that entered the inner arm.

Here's a link with a picture:

https://www.newsweek.com/michael-brow...ood-and-279155

The one down by the thumb was obviously done with Brown's arms raised. I await your explanation of how the other three happened while Brown was charging Wilson with one arm tucked inside the front of his pants, as Wilson claimed. Any time.

The official county autopsy, which was performed by Dr. Gershom Norfleet, showed Brown was shot in the hand at close range based on the finding of “foreign matter ‘consistent with products that are discharged from the barrel of a firearm,’” in a wound on Brown’s hand, the Post-Dispatch reports. "[This] guy is reaching for the gun, if he has gunpowder particulate material in the wound,” Dr. Judy Melinek, a forensic pathologist in San Francisco, told the Post-Dispatch.

The official autopsy also “did not support witnesses who have claimed Brown was shot while running away from Wilson, or with his hands up,” the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports. These witness statements would lead protesters to raise their hands in a stance of surrender while facing police during demonstrations, chanting “Hands up, don’t shoot.”

Brown's being shot in the hand at close range appears to confirm the account Wilson told to investigators—that Wilson and Brown had “struggled for Wilson’s pistol inside a police SUV and that Wilson had fired the gun twice, hitting Brown once in the hand”—a source with knowledge of Wilson’s statements told the Post-Dispatch.

That pretty much throws your "hands up" argument out the window. Watch the explanation in the video I linked earlier in the thread as well as the arm motion argument when he put his head down and charged the officer(as Wilson puts it). Or don't, you seem to have already made your mind up regardless of the evidence.

The first round of violence happened two days after the shooting, back in August.

https://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014...police-photos/

Good call on that selective memory thing, but toward the wrong person.

Is the NYT not a Nationally accepted News Source? Michael Brown was killed on August 9th. This article appeared on August 10th.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/11/us/police-say-mike-brown-was-killed-after-struggle-for-gun.html

 

[One Brow]

Irony at its best. Read below to the next response(quote).

That pretty much throws your "hands up" argument out the window.

I've already agreed that one bullet wound was did not happen when his hands were raised. You have still failed to account for the other three wounds in the arm. 1 =/= 4.

Now, if you can find a link that says all four bullet wounds in the arm were created in the car, lets see it. If you can find one saying the entrance wounds were not on the inner arm, let's see that. Otherwise, going on about the one wound and ignoring the other three just makes you sound stupid.

Watch the explanation in the video I linked earlier in the thread as well as the arm motion argument when he put his head down and charged the officer(as Wilson puts it). Or don't, you seem to have already made your mind up regardless of the evidence.

Which link do you mean?

Wilson also claims that Brown stuck his hand into his waistband. If Brown were going to charge a police officer, why would Brown do that (he had no weapons)? Wilson's testimony is obviously not reliable.

Is the NYT not a Nationally accepted News Source? Michael Brown was killed on August 9th. This article appeared on August 10th.

Is every story that appears once in the NYT a national news story? You wouldn't have heard of Brown if not for the violence that broke out, just like you never heard of the men killed May, June, or July until you heard of Brown.

 

[♪alt13]

Why would people be willing to have a unemotional discussion about a profoundly emotional topic? For your benefit?

You do not have to be unemotional to be rational. Many of your posts come across as both rational and emotional. So do dodo's. I'm not sure why you think I asked anyone to be unemotional.

No one has any obligation to me. I am not a mod. I have no control. Hell I have never even once reported a user. I can only make requests that no one is obligated to listen to.

 

[One Brow]

You do not have to be unemotional to be rational. Many of your posts come across as both rational and emotional. So do dodo's. I'm not sure why you think I asked anyone to be unemotional.

No one has any obligation to me. I am not a mod. I have no control. Hell I have never even once reported a user. I can only make requests that no one is obligated to listen to.

My apologies. I misinterpreted you.