Another "I can't breath" death: Police Reform & Protests in the USA

[Elegiac]

Lol, you even posted the source where people say it isn't a German saying at all. Maybe read the comments before reposting it.

You mean those comments where the OP, a German, rebuts by saying he heard it plenty growing up in Germany? Lol. Maybe you should try reading the source rather than scanning for the most facile talking point, burner.

No your claim was "American police hurt more than they help". You tried to back that up with nonsense, and now are moving goal posts.

Which...they do.

A greater police presence statistically makes people more unsafe, as shown by the data in the articles regarding NYPD subway policing. More high profile instances of police violence also make people feel more unsafe around police, as shown in the data in the other articles - and that erosion of trust aggravates a situation of what is basically civil conflict between law enforcement and citizens.

So, no. American police as they stand hurt more than they help - both in terms of the net risk they post to bystanders in their numbers, poor training, and militarized equipment, and by the lack of trust their high profile cases of police brutality inspire in the community.

Again; y'all are really, really bad at this. Do you honestly think this isn't an issue that hasn't been studied in depth for decades? We've seen all your talking points before, Nancy Reagan.

[Luwo]

Enjoy!!!

https://www.nber.org/papers/w22399

That paper doesn't dispute anything I say, only enforces it more. Repeating my own post: "Calling those police racist? Where is the proof for that? Power hungry abusers? Of course there are those, but calling everybody that?"

Now what is the paper about? Titel is "An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force". From there we go "On non-lethal uses of force, blacks and Hispanics are more than fifty percent more likely to experience some form of force in interactions with police." But also "the probability that any civilian is subjected to such treatment is small".

So again, making a broad statement that applies to maybe a very small part of the police.

[AeneasBK]

Everyones got so much energy today to engage so heartily with an obvious troll and burner account.

"Hurr durr I can deliberately misrepresent and misunderstand things because it's super cool and the kids on 4chan were doing it!"

I mean, have fun with it I guess

[Elegiac]

Everyones got so much energy today to engage so heartily with an obvious troll and burner account.

"Hurr durr I can deliberately misrepresent and misunderstand things because it's super cool and the kids on 4chan were doing it!"

I mean, have fun with it I guess

I'll still vibing from the Chromatica drop, to be entirely honest. Have you heard this collab between Gaga and Blackpink????

[Luwo]

You mean those comments where the OP, a German, rebuts by saying he heard it plenty growing up in Germany? Lol. Maybe you should try reading the source rather than scanning for the most facile talking point, burner.

Maybe if you are so certain, show me ANY other source than 1 person on twitter being disputed by a lot of other GERMAN people. Sore loser, if you fall back to calling other people burners, as if that means anything at all.

Which...they do.

A greater police presence statistically makes people more unsafe, as shown by the data in the articles regarding NYPD subway policing. More high profile instances of police violence also make people feel more unsafe around police, as shown in the data in the other articles - and that erosion of trust aggravates a situation of what is basically civil conflict between law enforcement and citizens.

So, no. American police as they stand hurt more than they help - both in terms of the net risk they post to bystanders in their numbers, poor training, and militarized equipment, and by the lack of trust their high profile cases of police brutality inspire in the community.

Again; y'all are really, really bad at this. Do you honestly think this isn't an issue that hasn't been studied in depth for decades? We've seen all your talking points before, Nancy Reagan.

Again, in very specific situations/ environments. You can't extrapolate that to ALL interaction with police.

- - - Updated - - -

Everyones got so much energy today to engage so heartily with an obvious troll and burner account.

"Hurr durr I can deliberately misrepresent and misunderstand things because it's super cool and the kids on 4chan were doing it!"

I mean, have fun with it I guess

Mostly the posters here on MMO-C are misrepresenting things, and "burners" show they are wrong. But hey, guess you are part of the "new normal" already and accept that kind of behavior and even engage in it yourself?

[Elegiac]

Maybe if you are so certain, show me ANY other source than 1 person on twitter being disputed by a lot of other GERMAN people. Sore loser, if you fall back to calling other people burners, as if that means anything at all.

Less than nothing, tbh. I'm just getting my Casey Frey energy on.

Again, in very specific situations/ environments. You can't extrapolate that to ALL interaction with police.

That specific situation being "in the United States", yes.

That's why it's called a systemic problem, sweetheart.

[AeneasBK]

I'll still vibing from the Chromatica drop, to be entirely honest. Have you heard this collab between Gaga and Blackpink????

It's no Applause. The beat is kinda mellow tho, which is groovy.

[Luwo]

Less than nothing, tbh. I'm just getting my Casey Frey energy on.



That specific situation being "in the United States", yes.

That's why it's called a systemic problem, sweetheart.

Nah, you sources only refer to specific cities and even specific environments in these cities. You get proven to be wrong all the time, shown how in your hurry to "prove" your claims you make even bigger gaffes than Biden, and then move goal posts. Maybe ask your tuition money back...

[Elegiac]

It's no Applause. The beat is kinda mellow tho, which is groovy.

Well we can't all be ArtPop, Deborah.

[Coolthulhu]

Quite the opposite, the confusion stems from the idea that despite there being 4 cops already at the scene with 3 of them pinning down the victim, calling the cops would've actually achieved anything. I mean, one was already casually standing there watching the victim die, calling the cops on the cops would've done what? Do you think they'd be on the mic talking with the dispatcher, "yeah, no, we need back up because we have a hard time killing this guy"?

If you don't live in a country where abuse by LE can be reported and gets dealt with by other members of LE, then you don't get to say "quite the opposite", because it's clearly not a civilized country. Quite simply, you'd be telling the dispatcher there are some cops killing a guy who has been neutralized. Nice job showing your true colours after calling me a troll, by the way.

[Aurrora]

I'm curious why you seem to think I'd care if Twitter got shut down. Fuck that place, lol.

The issue is that your clumsy ass pretense at governing has now run the risk of bringing down the legal framework supporting a free internet. Barring that, who gives a shit if the Rapist-In-Chief can't get his message out to his OnlyKlans subscribers?

I'm not sure where you got the idea I thought you cared, I'm just explaining to the legal basis as to why they should be treated as a publisher.

It doesn't bring down the legal framework for the free internet, the sites acting in good faith as platforms continue to enjoy the the freedoms of platforms. The ones selectively applying their rules do not. Chinese politicians were allowed to post conspiracy theories of the U.S. army bring the coronavirus to Wuhan for months without a fact-checking until Twitter's hypocrisy was pointed out, just today Twitter decided to mark Trump's tweet about using the national guard to fight looters as "glorifying violence" while tweets promoting rioting, arson and looting remain unflagged. This is what makes them a publisher.

[Elegiac]

I'm not sure where you got the idea I thought you cared, I'm just explaining to the legal basis as to why they should be treated as a publisher.

It doesn't bring down the legal framework for the free internet, the sites acting in good faith as platforms continue to enjoy the the freedoms of platforms. The ones selectively applying their rules do not. Chinese politicians were allowed to post conspiracy theories of the U.S. army bring the coronavirus to Wuhan for months without a fact-checking until Twitter's hypocrisy was pointed out, just today Twitter decided to mark Trump's tweet about using the national guard to fight looters as "glorifying violence" while tweets promoting rioting, arson and looting remain unflagged. This is what makes them a publisher.

Then let me explain this to you in as juvenile terms as I can.

The executive branch unilaterally messing with Section 230 sets a legal precedent of them being able to bully platforms into compliance with the threat of legal liability for the content they host.

That is a bad thing, and is the opposite of a free internet.

[szechuan]

Chinese politicians were allowed to post conspiracy theories of the U.S. army bring the coronavirus to Wuhan for months without a fact-checking until Twitter's hypocrisy was pointed out, just today Twitter decided to mark Trump's tweet about using the national guard to fight looters as "glorifying violence" while tweets promoting rioting, arson and looting remain unflagged. This is what makes them a publisher.

You're angry that Trump has been getting a Complete Free Pass from Fact Checking until recently?

[Aurrora]

You're angry that Trump has been getting a Complete Free Pass from Fact Checking until recently?

No, I’m just pointing out that selectively enforcing things is what makes them a publisher and not a platform.

[Luwo]

You're angry that Trump has been getting a Complete Free Pass from Fact Checking until recently?

Pointing out facts (selective enforcing rules) is not important, more important is that somebody is (or isn't) a Trump supporter. The sadness of these people. They found a great bubble here on MMO-C.

[Pannonian]

No, I’m just pointing out that selectively enforcing things is what makes them a publisher and not a platform.

You have somewhat of a point here. They're treating him differently because he is the president. Every other person with that post history would be banned.

I'm just not sure that this makes them publishers... seems a bit like a stretch.

[szechuan]

No, I’m just pointing out that selectively enforcing things is what makes them a publisher and not a platform.

You want Twitter to Fact Check every Tweet from Trump?

- - - Updated - - -

Pointing out facts (selective enforcing rules) is not important, more important is that somebody is (or isn't) a Trump supporter.

People getting a Free Pass from Fact Checking is the Issue?

[Kathandira]

Stopped by to check on the latest on this situation.

Holy freakin derail batman! Close this thread, it is cursed.

[Luwo]

You want Twitter to Fact Check every Tweet from Trump?

- - - Updated - - -

People getting a Free Pass from Fact Checking is the Issue?

Don't so it selectively. The second example Aurrora gave tells it all. There are tweets by Colin Kaepernick and even politicians calling for violence, but nothing there. It's like the moderators on these forums, they apply the forum rules only when they want to, not when they must.

Your stupid replies to a very clear post are telling...

[Aurrora]

You want Twitter to Fact Check every Tweet from Trump?

Does twitter fact check every tweet from its other users? The uneven application is what makes them a publisher.