Violence Outbreak in Kenosha WI

[Gravlen]

I like the way you're able to say that the Somali people migrating to the US are both too conservative (anti gay rights and religious) and too liberal (supports extreme left-wing policies) at the same time.

That’s entirely possible btw. It’s not out of the norm to be far left yet anti-lgbt

And whom would you then vote for? Doesn't seem to me you'd be a guaranteed vote for the democratic party, since you could vacillate between the values held by the different parties.

(Also a surprise when such a representative spends political capital to secure support for a bill to ban gay conversion therapy.)

[Hurtful Thoughts]

They could, but that's a lot more cumbersome and attention grabbing. Especially if the dude is handcuffed to it.

Not really. They could just wheel the bed out even if he wasn't handcuffed so it wouldn't change how much attention grabbing and cumbersome it would be.

But either way, it's still an utterly ridiculous plan that would be attention grabbing wheelchair or bed, cuffs or no cuffs.

Do these officers have any sense of logic to see that dumping 7 bullets into someone is overkill and cuffing a disabled person to the bed is silly?

I've said this before but this seems like it would be something the Onion would post.

To be fair, the guy managed to tank through getting double-tazed and the first 5 shots failed to drop him.

So they aren't going to take any unecessary risks if he suddenly develops super-healing powers and jitterbugs out of the hospital sporting adamantium bone-claws.

Or y'being racist to think such people need to be all-white canadian comic book characters to pull off such a stunt?

[Ifreann]

I like the way you're able to say that the Somali people migrating to the US are both too conservative (anti gay rights and religious) and too liberal (supports extreme left-wing policies) at the same time.

well "liberals" are not what they used to be

it's not uncommon for Liberals to defend extreme islamic conservatives.

Shocking that people with political philosophies that value equal rights for all tend to defend the rights of a minority whose rights are frequently under attack.

[Bassoe]

well "liberals" are not what they used to be

it's not uncommon for Liberals to defend extreme islamic conservatives.

Shocking that people with political philosophies that value equal rights for all tend to defend the rights of a minority whose rights are frequently under attack.

In this case, the 'right' being attacked is that of being permitted to attack the rights of a different minority group.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

and that would certainly make the community trust them after that. A DA that dragged their feet on the murder of the mayor should be removed from office.

Sounds awfully anti-democratic of you, my dude.

Anti-democratic person decrying someone for being anti-democratic, peak irony.

[Telconi]

Sounds awfully anti-democratic of you, my dude.

Anti-democratic person decrying someone for being anti-democratic, peak irony.

One of us claims to value Democracy, tho.

[Gravlen]

Shocking that people with political philosophies that value equal rights for all tend to defend the rights of a minority whose rights are frequently under attack.

In this case, the 'right' being attacked is that of being permitted to attack the rights of a different minority group.

The first amendment shouldn't apply for the people we don't like, right?

[Nobel Hobos 2]

I like the way you're able to say that the Somali people migrating to the US are both too conservative (anti gay rights and religious) and too liberal (supports extreme left-wing policies) at the same time.

well "liberals" are not what they used to be

it's not uncommon for Liberals to defend extreme islamic conservatives.

We liberals tend to defend freedom of religion we don't agree with. Though being a bit more militantly atheist, I don't go so far with that as the US judiciary ... or some liberals. Actions affecting others, motivated by religion, are just actions.

If you look more closely though, liberals tend not to defend Islamic freedom of speech any more than any other "religious" speech.

That's really a more right-wing thing. Objectively offensive and threatening speech, excused because it's religious? Nah. Liberals don't like that.

[Ifreann]

Shocking that people with political philosophies that value equal rights for all tend to defend the rights of a minority whose rights are frequently under attack.

In this case, the 'right' being attacked is that of being permitted to attack the rights of a different minority group.

Only in the imaginations of right wingers.

[San Lumen]

Anti-democratic person decrying someone for being anti-democratic, peak irony.

One of us claims to value Democracy, tho.

You don’t value democracy in the slightest

[Vassenor]

So it's a crime to give food to protesters, but not to threaten them with guns. Welcome to America.

[Grinning Dragon]

So it's a crime to give food to protesters, but not to threaten them with guns. Welcome to America.

Walking around with a gun slung in front or in holsters is threatening?

[Salus Maior]

So it's a crime to give food to protesters, but not to threaten them with guns. Welcome to America.

It was the gas tanks that arose suspicion, not that they had food.

Read your own source.

[Telconi]

One of us claims to value Democracy, tho.

You don’t value democracy in the slightest

I think it was quite clear I wasn't talking about myself.

[Ifreann]

So it's a crime to give food to protesters, but not to threaten them with guns. Welcome to America.

It was the gas tanks that arose suspicion, not that they had food.

Read your own source.

What's so suspicious about gasoline?

[Salus Maior]

It was the gas tanks that arose suspicion, not that they had food.

Read your own source.

What's so suspicious about gasoline?

It’s used to burn things.

In a time where people burning things is a problem. And apparently they had a few tanks in one car, so if you didn’t know they were powering a generator it’s reasonable to investigate.

[Page]

So it's a crime to give food to protesters, but not to threaten them with guns. Welcome to America.

It was the gas tanks that arose suspicion, not that they had food.

Read your own source.

They could have simply pulled them over and ask what they were doing and let them go on their way after finding out.

The cops responding to shots fired let the shooter walk right past them.

Why is that?

[Ifreann]

What's so suspicious about gasoline?

It’s used to burn things.

So? What's suspicious about that?

In a time where people burning things is a problem. And apparently they had a few tanks in one car, so if you didn’t know they were powering a generator it’s reasonable to investigate.

I don't see why, and I certainly don't see why it's reasonable to charge at people with guns drawn, an act which is inherently a threat to kill them, just because they have gasoline.

[Salus Maior]

It was the gas tanks that arose suspicion, not that they had food.

Read your own source.

They could have simply pulled them over and ask what they were doing and let them go on their way after finding out.

The cops responding to shots fired let the shooter walk right past them.

Why is that?

Because as I understand it, there were multiple people in view that were openly carrying guns. One of the kid’s pursuers also had a handgun. The kid was already appearing to surrender himself to him and they didn’t know he was the culprit.

[Steppe Khanate]

The media has successfully managed to spin the general BLM movement as a violent rioter movement, rather than a peaceful protest. This is why the public perception BLM is much more negative now than it was in June. Oddly enough, it isn’t even right wing media doing it, but all media in general, including notable leftist media like Jacobin Mag and Common Dreams, which is bizarre

[Salus Maior]

It’s used to burn things.

So? What's suspicious about that?

In a time where people burning things is a problem. And apparently they had a few tanks in one car, so if you didn’t know they were powering a generator it’s reasonable to investigate.

I don't see why, and I certainly don't see why it's reasonable to charge at people with guns drawn, an act which is inherently a threat to kill them, just because they have gasoline.

Then you’re just intentionally being dense.

If a group or associates with a group who are known for involvement in street violence and violence towards property were apparently stockpiling on combustible substances, would that raise concern for you?

Just a reminder that molotovs exist and can be used for arson, or as a deadly weapon against people.

[Page]

So? What's suspicious about that?


I don't see why, and I certainly don't see why it's reasonable to charge at people with guns drawn, an act which is inherently a threat to kill them, just because they have gasoline.

Then you’re just intentionally being dense.

If a group or associates with a group who are known for involvement in street violence and violence towards property were apparently stockpiling on combustible substances, would that raise concern for you?

Just a reminder that molotovs exist and can be used for arson, or as a deadly weapon against people.

If it "raised concern" then they could have pulled them over and had a conversation rather than destroying their property and use violence.

[Salus Maior]

Then you’re just intentionally being dense.

If a group or associates with a group who are known for involvement in street violence and violence towards property were apparently stockpiling on combustible substances, would that raise concern for you?

Just a reminder that molotovs exist and can be used for arson, or as a deadly weapon against people.

If it "raised concern" then they could have pulled them over and had a conversation rather than destroying their property and use violence.

Now we’re caring about property?

I don’t think you generally just have a nice conversation with people you suspect are building bombs. At any rate, their charges were dropped and they’re free now.

[Ifreann]

So? What's suspicious about that?


I don't see why, and I certainly don't see why it's reasonable to charge at people with guns drawn, an act which is inherently a threat to kill them, just because they have gasoline.

Then you’re just intentionally being dense.

Yes, but I'm making a point.

If a group or associates with a group who are known for involvement in street violence and violence towards property were apparently stockpiling on combustible substances, would that raise concern for you?

Why should it? Gasoline is not illegal, and is far more often used for entirely law abiding purposes than not.

Just a reminder that molotovs exist and can be used for arson, or as a deadly weapon against people.

So? Why should the mere possession of something that could possibly be used towards illegal ends be cause for the police to hold people at gunpoint?

[Telconi]

Then you’re just intentionally being dense.

Yes, but I'm making a point.

If a group or associates with a group who are known for involvement in street violence and violence towards property were apparently stockpiling on combustible substances, would that raise concern for you?

Why should it? Gasoline is not illegal, and is far more often used for entirely law abiding purposes than not.

Just a reminder that molotovs exist and can be used for arson, or as a deadly weapon against people.

So? Why should the mere possession of something that could possibly be used towards illegal ends be cause for the police to hold people at gunpoint?

It's just common sense fuel control.