Jump to content
IGNORED

American Politics / Current Events Thread


CodysGameRoom

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Hammerfestus said:

Graves has always been trash. He no showed a show here in Omaha and royally fucked the promoters a few years ago. But I remember hearing about him being a conservative for years. He's a racist idiot.

American Psycho is still a good album though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CodysGameRoom said:

Graves has always been trash. He no showed a show here in Omaha and royally fucked the promoters a few years ago. But I remember hearing about him being a conservative for years. He's a racist idiot.

American Psycho is still a good album though.


A lot of Punkers have done the acoustic project thing over the years with some really excellent results.  This dope is not one of them.  I made the mistake of listening to him do Dig Up Her Bones.  It was awful.  Tried a different recording.  Still awful.  He really takes the punk thing of being a terrible musician very seriously.  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hammerfestus said:


A lot of Punkers have done the acoustic project thing over the years with some really excellent results.  This dope is not one of them.  I made the mistake of listening to him do Dig Up Her Bones.  It was awful.  Tried a different recording.  Still awful.  He really takes the punk thing of being a terrible musician very seriously.  

Yea he just cracks me up. Tony Sly and Joey Cape killed it with their acoustic stuff before Tony passed. Anyway... I'm getting off topic. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CodysGameRoom said:
16 hours ago, Rhino said:

Never accept anything the news says

 

16 hours ago, Rhino said:

lol

Here's the full context of Rhino's comment, since you're really efficient at quoting out of context:

 

"Never accept anything the news says about these events at face value. Always look it up yourself and do your own research. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/03/16/lesson-learned-from-the-shooting-of-michael-brown/"

 

I understand where you find the irony in this, but with the full context of his comment, it's clear that the Michael Brown case was falsely outlined by people (BLM/Media) initially. And even though the facts have come out, many (including Link just yesterday) are still referring to this case as an example of police brutality against black people and/or systemic racism, which is just flat-out false. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Silent Hill said:

Here's the full context of Rhino's comment, since you're really efficient at quoting out of context:

 

"Never accept anything the news says about these events at face value. Always look it up yourself and do your own research. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/03/16/lesson-learned-from-the-shooting-of-michael-brown/"

 

I understand where you find the irony in this, but with the full context of his comment, it's clear that the Michael Brown case was falsely outlined by people (BLM/Media) initially. And even though the facts have come out, many (including Link just yesterday) are still referring to this case as an example of police brutality against black people and/or systemic racism, which is just flat-out false. 

I don't give a shit. It's funny to say "don't trust the news" and then share a news link a sentence later. Hence the "lol". I laughed. Humor. Lighten up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, CodysGameRoom said:
10 minutes ago, Silent Hill said:

Here's the full context of Rhino's comment, since you're really efficient at quoting out of context:

 

"Never accept anything the news says about these events at face value. Always look it up yourself and do your own research. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/03/16/lesson-learned-from-the-shooting-of-michael-brown/"

 

I understand where you find the irony in this, but with the full context of his comment, it's clear that the Michael Brown case was falsely outlined by people (BLM/Media) initially. And even though the facts have come out, many (including Link just yesterday) are still referring to this case as an example of police brutality against black people and/or systemic racism, which is just flat-out false. 

I don't give a shit. It's funny to say "don't trust the news" and then share a news link a sentence later. Hence the "lol". I laughed. Humor. Lighten up.

I admitted to seeing the humorous irony, but in all seriousness, do you agree with the point that Michael Brown should not be listed as a "victim" of police brutality/systemic racism?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Silent Hill said:

I admitted to seeing the humorous irony, but in all seriousness, do you agree with the point that Michael Brown should not be listed as a "victim" of police brutality/systemic racism?

It's hard to say. Did he reach for the gun? Apparently. Did he get it and murder the cop with it? No. Did the cop then proceed to shoot him 6 times? Yes. Seems excessive. My opinion is that teenager did not need to die that day. 

The Justice Department did an investigation into the Ferguson Police Department afterwards and found a PATTERN OF SYSTEMIC RACIAL BIAS. This is a FACT which cannot be denied. So if you don't believe it, you then don't believe in the Justice Department. 

So, do you believe the Justice Department was RIGHT to not press charges against the officer but WRONG when discovering a pattern of systemic racial bias in the police department? Because if so, you are picking and choosing. You can't have it both ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, CodysGameRoom said:
51 minutes ago, Silent Hill said:

I admitted to seeing the humorous irony, but in all seriousness, do you agree with the point that Michael Brown should not be listed as a "victim" of police brutality/systemic racism?

It's hard to say. Did he reach for the gun? Apparently. Did he get it and murder the cop with it? No. Did the cop then proceed to shoot him 6 times? Yes. Seems excessive. My opinion is that teenager did not need to die that day. 

The Justice Department did an investigation into the Ferguson Police Department afterwards and found a PATTERN OF SYSTEMIC RACIAL BIAS. This is a FACT which cannot be denied. So if you don't believe it, you then don't believe in the Justice Department. 

So, do you believe the Justice Department was RIGHT to not press charges against the officer but WRONG when discovering a pattern of systemic racial bias in the police department? Because if so, you are picking and choosing. You can't have it both ways.

It's not excessive when acting in self-defense. Nobody is going to wait to be shot before firing. I agree that he didn't need to die, but HIS actions led to the altercation and his death. 

While I haven't read the report (I'll try and carve out time to look into it as it's lengthy), systemic racial bias was not a factor in Michael Brown's death, so their findings (whether right or wrong) are irrelevant in this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Silent Hill said:

Nobody is going to wait to be shot before firing.

He was unarmed...

28 minutes ago, Silent Hill said:

systemic racial bias was not a factor in Michael Brown's death

Source? The Justice Department found systemic racial bias in the department where the officer who murdered Brown was placed. What is your proof that racism was not a factor?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, CodysGameRoom said:

 

lol

Don't accept the news without first doing your own research. Don't accept stories when they first come out because journalists have gotten extremely sloppy lately. They simply want to rush their story and be first without checking on the veracity of the story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Silent Hill said:

Here's the full context of Rhino's comment, since you're really efficient at quoting out of context:

 

"Never accept anything the news says about these events at face value. Always look it up yourself and do your own research. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/03/16/lesson-learned-from-the-shooting-of-michael-brown/"

 

I understand where you find the irony in this, but with the full context of his comment, it's clear that the Michael Brown case was falsely outlined by people (BLM/Media) initially. And even though the facts have come out, many (including Link just yesterday) are still referring to this case as an example of police brutality against black people and/or systemic racism, which is just flat-out false. 

Thank you. He's doing what the media does all the time. Quote only a certain part, leave out the rest, and twist the story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, CodysGameRoom said:

I don't give a shit. It's funny to say "don't trust the news" and then share a news link a sentence later. Hence the "lol". I laughed. Humor. Lighten up.

I said to look it up and do your own research. If you do that, and what you find still backs up what the media says, then of course you can then trust what the news says (well trust as much as you can trust the news these days lol). What I'm getting at is don't accept things at face value initially. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, CodysGameRoom said:

It's hard to say. Did he reach for the gun? Apparently. Did he get it and murder the cop with it? No. Did the cop then proceed to shoot him 6 times? Yes. Seems excessive. My opinion is that teenager did not need to die that day. 

The Justice Department did an investigation into the Ferguson Police Department afterwards and found a PATTERN OF SYSTEMIC RACIAL BIAS. This is a FACT which cannot be denied. So if you don't believe it, you then don't believe in the Justice Department. 

So, do you believe the Justice Department was RIGHT to not press charges against the officer but WRONG when discovering a pattern of systemic racial bias in the police department? Because if so, you are picking and choosing. You can't have it both ways.

When someone reaches for your gun, you have every right to shoot them, end of story. Don't be a f*cking moron and reach for a cop's weapon. It's that simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, CodysGameRoom said:

He was unarmed...

Source? The Justice Department found systemic racial bias in the department where the officer who murdered Brown was placed. What is your proof that racism was not a factor?

But he reached for a cops' gun...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Gloves said:

I'm not familiar with this case; what is the source on that he reached for the cops gun?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/03/16/lesson-learned-from-the-shooting-of-michael-brown/

There are several other sources too. I can find more if you'd like. Imo, this is one of the most misunderstood cases of all time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Gloves said:

I'm not familiar with this case; what is the source on that he reached for the cops gun?

"Brown fought with the officer and tried to take his gun. 

You know it's legitimate too because it's the Washington Post saying it. Historically they're a very left leaning news source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Administrator · Posted
2 minutes ago, Rhino said:

"Brown fought with the officer and tried to take his gun. 

You know it's legitimate too because it's the Washington Post saying it. Historically they're a very left leaning news source.

Ah so just words? Is there video?

There's supposed to be body cams right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Administrator · Posted
Just now, Rhino said:

That I don't know. I believe every police jurisdiction is different on whether or not they have to have body cams.

I'd not believe anything here without video, frankly. Washingtonpost, left leaning, right, or otherwise.

I'd want to know at the least who is making the original claim that he was going for the officer's gun. And if it's the officers on the scene making the claim, it's an untrustworthy one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Gloves said:

I'd not believe anything here without video, frankly. Washingtonpost, left leaning, right, or otherwise.

I'd want to know at the least who is making the original claim that he was going for the officer's gun. And if it's the officers on the scene making the claim, it's an untrustworthy one.

Did you read the article?

"Wilson and other witnesses stated that Brown then reached into the SUV through the open driver’s window and punched and grabbed Wilson. This is corroborated by bruising on Wilson’s jaw and scratches on his neck, the presence of Brown’s DNA on Wilson’s collar, shirt, and pants, and Wilson’s DNA on Brown’s palm. While there are other individuals who stated that Wilson reached out of the SUV and grabbed Brown by the neck, prosecutors could not credit their accounts because they were inconsistent with physical and forensic evidence, as detailed throughout this report."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...