General Current Events/Political Discussion

[Link | 2,768]

11 hours ago, Tabonga said:

It wasn't always that clear cut. 

During the 1863 New York Draft riots blacks, abolitionists, government officials, businesses that blacks used (and their owners) wealthy people and sundry other folks were targetted by the rioters. The rioters objected to the draft because they feared emancipated blacks would take their jobs* and also because they objected to the fact that wealthy people could literally buy their way out of the draft.  (I suspect that many also didn't want to become the disposable  cannon fodder that incompetent Union commanders needed in their battles.) 

One of the  targets was a black orphanage which was thoroughly looted and then was burned to the ground.  The offical figure of the number killed was 119 - although the number was likely much higher.  How many were black is unknown but was likely a fairly high percentage.

As good as the movie "Gangs of New York" was they glossed over this aspect in the rather abrupt (and very out of place) ending with the Union warshops shelling the city.

*There had been a violent protest by white laborers earlier in the year by dockworkers protesting the hiring of black dockworkers by some companies.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cool story. Is your point that there were people in New York who wanted to keep the status quo? If not could you elucidate further? 

I am with you on the censorship thing. In the case of the strategy games, it doesn’t make sense. Fictionalize things all the way or keep the depictions accurate. In fact I think they should put more context in rather than removing things.
I’m not sure how to address that with toy soldiers other than maybe a parental advisory

[Jono1874 | 144]

3 hours ago, RegularGuyGamer said:

Rumor has it that the rioters/ looters are moving to the suburbs this weekend. Looking to "burn them down". 

I'd think if they thought they could get away with it, they'd have already tried. Homeowners don't play games with tear gas and pepper balls. It's just lead, and lots of it.

[cartman | 195]

Are the obduction reports trustworthy? They have found Floyd had underlying medical problems and had drugs in his system, that he didn't die of choking. Policing methods can be questioned regardless but if there is or isn't a risk of dying makes a big difference.

[Tabonga | 2,363]

4 hours ago, Link said:

Cool story. Is your point that there were people in New York who wanted to keep the status quo? If not could you elucidate further? 

I am with you on the censorship thing. In the case of the strategy games, it doesn’t make sense. Fictionalize things all the way or keep the depictions accurate. In fact I think they should put more context in rather than removing thiss.
I’m not sure how to address that with toy soldiers other than maybe a parental advisory

The point is that there are always nuances and there are often shades of grey (no pun intended)  - so it is IMHO often somewhat misleading to take a simplistic blanket view.  For example there were a few black slave owners -and some native American slave owners.  (One of the first times slavery is mentioned in the colonial records was that of a black man trying to enslave another black man (said endeavor was successful).  This odd situation occurred because (contrary to very recent popular teachings) there was a window where blacks brought over (obviously against their will) were treated as indentured servants and like more than a few whites in the same category would gain their freedom if they sruvived (life was generally hard in the colonies back then and people died fairly easily) - this was because the early colonies had no provision in their charters regarding slavery - they did however have laws in those charters regarding indentured servants . Not everyone in the north wanted to free the slaves - and not everyone in the north supported the war*,  Lincoln himself at one point said that if he could restore the Union without freeing  a single slave he would do it.  Lincoln's first choice to lead the Federal armies was Robert E. Lee - despite the fact that Lee owned slaves. 

*There was in fact a very vocal (and organized) group who opposed the war who were known as the Copperheads.

--------------------------

The problem with removing history is that people almost invariably get carried away - I fear that the current passion for removing statues will escalate to the point where Confederate statues/plaques/etc. on battlefields (such as Gettysburg) will be removed - those statues/plaques/etc. are  an essential part of the stories to be found on those battlefields and indeed the narrative becomes much less understandable  if you remove them.  

I don't think the toy soldiers need to have the flags removed at all nor an advisory (I would prefer to see a very simple historical blurb - if anything) - the history should be taught fairly early in any event and if a child (unlikely) has any questions about the Confederate flag they can be told at that point.  I know I had little army sets with Confederate soldiers/flags and it didn't make me want to own slaves.   It did lead me to start reading about the Civil War at a very early age (I was more than somewhat precocious when it came to reading).  

 

 

Edited June 5, 2020 by Tabonga

[RegularGuyGamer | 2,021]

3 hours ago, Jono1874 said:

I'd think if they thought they could get away with it, they'd have already tried. Homeowners don't play games with tear gas and pepper balls. It's just lead, and lots of it.

Idk I feel like they've just started, especially if you isolate the organized crime and domestic terrorism. Once all the stores in the city are looted, boarded up or burned then what's next? It's only been 6 days. A lot of these people had been planning this since the last riots in 2016 which they saw as a missed opportunity. 

The cities I saw mentored were in Texas and Illinois which have both been hit hard from what I've seen. Still, I think you'd have to want a death with venturing into the suburbs of Texas looking for trouble. 

[Tulpa | 3,569]

4 hours ago, cartman said:

Are the obduction reports trustworthy? They have found Floyd had underlying medical problems and had drugs in his system, that he didn't die of choking. Policing methods can be questioned regardless but if there is or isn't a risk of dying makes a big difference.

Every autopsy concludes that he died as a result of homicide, i.e., the officer's actions.

[cartman | 195]

33 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

Every autopsy concludes that he died as a result of homicide, i.e., the officer's actions.

Is it homicide regardless if the technique would not have killed a person with "regular" health?

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

About This being an echo chamber -

 

 

I challenge any Trump Fan to Give us 3 reasons (with evidence of course) of what Trump has Done to make the country better, or improved the lives of all americans - Not just Rich white corporation owners. 

 

Prove the echo chamber wrong and put us in our place, thats the MAGA WAY. 

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

7 minutes ago, cartman said:

Is it homicide regardless if the technique would not have killed a person with "regular" health?

That cant be proven. Plus there is video of his neck being kneeled on for over 8 minutes, while pleading for his life.   Over a fucking counterfit 20$ bill

[cartman | 195]

6 minutes ago, MrWunderful said:

That cant be proven. Plus there is video of his neck being kneeled on for over 8 minutes, while pleading for his life.   Over a fucking counterfit 20$ bill

Why could it not be proven? Yes i know about the video. I thought it was clearcut that it was choking for that reason but apparently it wasn't. Yeah the guy was saying that he couldn't breathe and at that point you should have to stop and adjust your restraining procedure because harming someone shouldn't be the objective. 

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

5 minutes ago, cartman said:

Why could it not be proven? Yes i know about the video. I thought it was clearcut that it was choking for that reason but apparently it wasn't. Yeah the guy was saying that he couldn't breathe and at that point you should have to stop and adjust your restraining procedure because harming someone shouldn't be the objective. 

Bingo. Its a technique that should just be used to restrain temporarily to get cuffs on. 
 

For the record I dont think it should be outlawed personally. But the training around it would have to change considerably. 

[arch_8ngel | 1,597]

14 minutes ago, cartman said:

Why could it not be proven? Yes i know about the video. I thought it was clearcut that it was choking for that reason but apparently it wasn't. Yeah the guy was saying that he couldn't breathe and at that point you should have to stop and adjust your restraining procedure because harming someone shouldn't be the objective. 

What should be clear is that kneeling on ANYONE's neck in that way for 8 minutes is more likely than not going to kill them...

[cartman | 195]

2 minutes ago, MrWunderful said:

Bingo. Its a technique that should just be used to restrain temporarily to get cuffs on. 
 

For the record I dont think it should be outlawed personally. But the training around it would have to change considerably. 

I'm not talking about whether the technique is good or bad in general but whether it's deadly.

[cartman | 195]

2 minutes ago, arch_8ngel said:

What should be clear is that kneeling on ANYONE's neck in that way for 8 minutes is more likely than not going to kill them...

Ofcourse if there's enough force applied you will choke out and die. But he didn't die from choking out and we don't know that it was done in a way that you're "more likely than not" to die it's an assumption.

[Tulpa | 3,569]

10 minutes ago, cartman said:

Ofcourse if there's enough force applied you will choke out and die. But he didn't die from choking out and we don't know that it was done in a way that you're "more likely than not" to die it's an assumption.

The autopsy concluded it was cardiac arrest due to neck compression, i.e., the officer's knee on his neck. His underlying conditions were significant, but not the ultimate cause.

 

[cartman | 195]

4 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

The autopsy concluded it was cardiac arrest due to neck compression, i.e., the officer's knee on his neck. His underlying conditions were significant, but not the ultimate cause.

 

That i think is the main point: that the action itself is the ultimate cause. If someone is weakened to the point that his body causes most of the damage then it's a different thing. But if the officer caused most of the damage that lead to death then 2nd degree murder seems right by the "reckless" paragrapgh of the law.

[Strange | 1,706]

31 minutes ago, cartman said:

Ofcourse if there's enough force applied you will choke out and die. But he didn't die from choking out and we don't know that it was done in a way that you're "more likely than not" to die it's an assumption.

We do know. Every independent autopsy has stated the asphyxiation from the officer’s knee was the cause of death.

”You weren’t healthy enough for us to choke for 9 minutes” is not an excuse.

[Estil | 1,267]

20 hours ago, MrWunderful said:

True - We both like Cats too Though (And video games) Probably would agree on more things outside of politics too.

 

And for the record, I can be convinced of anything, as long as one shows me proof. 

As I talked with Tabonga about, I wonder why you don't see hardly any R's and/or conservatives (in the political sense) and/or Trump supporters here or other video game sorts of places?  As Michael Jordan would say, don't R's and/or Trump supporters play video games too?

As for your latest request, maybe if there were at least a few truly dedicated Trump supporters here (I do for the most part match up with R's more on the overall balance sheet of issues but I usually don't feel all that strongly about most political figures unless they really give me a reason not to) who can in fact make their case in a good convincing matter that'd be great.  As far as your repeated demands for evidence you and the others most definitely don't put yourselves up to that same standard; shoot you even labeled my South Park analogy as "fox news fed bs" when I haven't watched hardly any traditional TV at all in years!  I always prefer a good fair fight, not any of this going up 6-8 against one kind of thing.  The same is true for the upcoming Presidential election...I would much prefer a good fair fight but honestly I don't see how Biden could even handle live debates in his condition.  Like I said before, at this point, Sanders could be a card carrying member of the Communist Party and he could put up a better fight!

TBH it's kinda hard for me to feel all that strongly one way or the other about individual politicians because I'm more into history rather than the here and now (and that's true for UK basketball too BTW) and things look very different when we've had at least a 5-10 year cool down period to look back at it with (hopefully) a fairer and clearer mind.  Remember I've been reading those World Book/Britannica yearbooks the past few years and it's quite clear that even the greatest of political figures in recent history (Churchill, DeGaule, Eisenhower, and so on) were just as if not more under harsh attacks/criticism, polarization, controversy and such that you see today.  The only real difference is that for back then it's mostly words on text and it's really hard to do what happened justice compared to what can be done/shown with today's tech. 

You said you can be convinced of anything...well if it's a particular issue (ultimately I think the issues are what really count) that I actually know about, try me.  I know I once gave my thoughts on why I feel the way I do about organized religion for example but apparently that issue was way too hot even for here.

[Tulpa | 3,569]

16 minutes ago, Estil said:

As I talked with Tabonga about, I wonder why you don't see hardly any R's and/or conservatives (in the political sense) and/or Trump supporters here or other video game sorts of places?  As Michael Jordan would say, don't R's and/or Trump supporters play video games too?

 

If you're defining Rs  and/or conservatives as "people who support Trump no matter what," I'm not surprised you don't find them often. Those people are a vocal, loud minority whose numbers are less than what they appear to be (and less than what they want you to believe.) Trump didn't win on them; as I said before, he won on people who thought they'd give him a chance (and he blew it) or those who just didn't want Hilary in (but would probably vote for Biden.)

Plenty of people here can have right leaning and/or conservative beliefs and still voice disapproval of the current president.

Because this president is fucking awful by many objective standards.

 

 

16 minutes ago, Estil said:

 The same is true for the upcoming Presidential election...I would much prefer a good fair fight but honestly I don't see how Biden could even handle live debates in his condition.  Like I said before, at this point, Sanders could be a card carrying member of the Communist Party and he could put up a better fight!

I've seen you and others talk about Biden that way, but have you seen Trump talk? He can't stay on topic, or articulate a point beyond his limited catchphrases or go-to slogans. Biden has a lifelong stuttering issue, but if that amounts to evidence of some "condition," invoke the 25th amendment on Trump. Now. Because he has it just as bad if not far worse. 

Edited June 5, 2020 by Tulpa

[cartman | 195]

1 hour ago, The Strangest said:

We do know. Every independent autopsy has stated the asphyxiation from the officer’s knee was the cause of death.

”You weren’t healthy enough for us to choke for 9 minutes” is not an excuse.

The Hannepin Country medical examination states cardiopulmonary arrest and the the pvt. investigation asphyxiation from what i gather so they are not in agreement on that part. But both conclude homicide.

 

Edited June 5, 2020 by cartman

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

11 minutes ago, Estil said:

As I talked with Tabonga about, I wonder why you don't see hardly any R's and/or conservatives (in the political sense) and/or Trump supporters here or other video game sorts of places?  As Michael Jordan would say, don't R's and/or Trump supporters play video games too?

As for your latest request, maybe if there were at least a few truly dedicated Trump supporters here (I do for the most part match up with R's more on the overall balance sheet of issues but I usually don't feel all that strongly about most political figures unless they really give me a reason not to) who can in fact make their case in a good convincing matter that'd be great.  As far as your repeated demands for evidence you and the others most definitely don't put yourselves up to that same standard; shoot you even labeled my South Park analogy as "fox news fed bs" when I haven't watched hardly any traditional TV at all in years!  I always prefer a good fair fight, not any of this going up 6-8 against one kind of thing.  The same is true for the upcoming Presidential election...I would much prefer a good fair fight but honestly I don't see how Biden could even handle live debates in his condition.  Like I said before, at this point, Sanders could be a card carrying member of the Communist Party and he could put up a better fight!

TBH it's kinda hard for me to feel all that strongly one way or the other about individual politicians because I'm more into history rather than the here and now (and that's true for UK basketball too BTW) and things look very different when we've had at least a 5-10 year cool down period to look back at it with (hopefully) a fairer and clearer mind.  Remember I've been reading those World Book/Britannica yearbooks the past few years and it's quite clear that even the greatest of political figures in recent history (Churchill, DeGaule, Eisenhower, and so on) were just as if not more under harsh attacks/criticism, polarization, controversy and such that you see today.  The only real difference is that for back then it's mostly words on text and it's really hard to do what happened justice compared to what can be done/shown with today's tech. 

You said you can be convinced of anything...well if it's a particular issue (ultimately I think the issues are what really count) that I actually know about, try me.  I know I once gave my thoughts on why I feel the way I do about organized religion for example but apparently that issue was way too hot even for here.

I have repeatedly given links with evidence to support my arguments, even though you are saying “nobody on the other side gives proof”. So have others. 
 

Yet I have yet to see one scrap of evidence from ProTrump folks. The closest was m308gunner, at least he presented an good argument. 
 

I LITERALLY GAVE YOU A LINK TO BRAD PARSCALE’S STATEMENT PROVING MY POINT
 

You should at least be able to tell me how your life has improved since Trump has been elected right?
 

Because when he changed the SALT deduction on Taxes, I got Fucked out of 15k.  So did a lot of folks in CA. 
Thats how my life improved with Trump. 

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

5 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

If you're defining Rs  and/or conservatives as "people who support Trump no matter what," I'm not surprised you don't find them often. Those people are a vocal, loud minority.

Plenty of people here can have right leaning and/or conservative beliefs and still voice disapproval of the current president.

Because this president is fucking awful by many objective standards.

 

 

I've seen you and others talk about Biden that way, but have you seen Trump talk? He can't stay on topic, or articulate a point beyond his limited catchphrases or go-to slogans. Biden has a lifelong stuttering issue, but if that amounts to evidence of some "condition," invoke the 25th amendment on Trump. Now. Because he has it just as bad if not far worse. 

No idea why people keep saying that. Trump has zero communication skills, and other than saying everything is the best ever in the world and lying, he sounds like a babbling idiot. 
 

Biden is going to cream him, Trump has NO knowledge of any substance on realistic policy. He barely knows how the government works. 

[Silent Hill | 276]

Curious to hear what others think Biden's plan would be to eliminate "systemic racism", which according to today's media is rampant, though I'm conflicted after I started researching a bit. 

 

EDIT: I also heard Biden's statement on 'if you're voting for Trump, you ain't black" which is a pretty rough thing to say. He either implied Trump is racist and shouldn't get the support of the black vote or that black people who vote for Trump, really aren't "black people" which is troubling. To me, the latter comes off as someone who cares about the votes, more than the rights of/or the voters themselves.

Edited June 5, 2020 by Silent Hill

[Estil | 1,267]

1 minute ago, Tulpa said:

If you're defining Rs  and/or conservatives as "people who support Trump no matter what," I'm not surprised you don't find them often. Those people are a vocal, loud minority.

Plenty of people here can have right leaning and/or conservative beliefs and still voice disapproval of the current president.

Because this president is fucking awful by many objective standards.

I've seen you and others talk about Biden that way, but have you seen Trump talk? He can't stay on topic, or articulate a point beyond his limited catchphrases or go-to slogans. Biden has a lifelong stuttering issue, but if that amounts to evidence of some "condition," invoke the 25th amendment on Trump. Now. Because he has it just as bad if not far worse. 

I used the and/ors to show they're not the same things.  And voicing disapproval is much different than sheer utter contempt and hatred towards Trump supporters.  Just like how you blasted me at one of the other topics for bringing up the recent riots when I clearly said "riots =/= protests".  And recently Biden has increasingly gone quite beyond mere "stuttering" and thinking "FDR got on TV in 1929 to help us out of the Depression"...honestly I feel bad for the guy.  

And in most cases the anti-Trump people constantly use half-quotes/half-truths and (worse of all) strawman his main issues (for example, pretending he is against immigrants in general or pretending that he's only doing the no TG's in the military thing just to be mean).  So forgive me if I don't just take Trump haters word for it.  I mean I don't think it's wise anyway to just take things at face value no matter what but I do find it kinda suspicious that Trump haters hardly ever bring up the specific issues.  Like I've said before, issues are what count the most.

[Tulpa | 3,569]

1 minute ago, Estil said:

I used the and/ors to show they're not the same things.  And voicing disapproval is much different than sheer utter contempt and hatred towards Trump supporters.  Just like how you blasted me at one of the other topics for bringing up the recent riots when I clearly said "riots =/= protests". 

The thread said not to get political and you did. That's why I brought it up, and others agreed given the likes on my post. You take things too personally. I don't have contempt for YOU.

2 minutes ago, Estil said:

 And recently Biden has increasingly gone quite beyond mere "stuttering" and thinking "FDR got on TV in 1929 to help us out of the Depression"...honestly I feel bad for the guy.  

 

I honestly don't see that. He's been that way for YEARS. People have commented about it for years. No one has said it indicates any medical condition. It's just another right wing attack on the presumptive nominee, because they want to grasp any flaw as a reason he's unfit. He's a real threat to Trump, and most people on the right know this.