Rhino
-
Posts
507 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Feedback
0%
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Events
Homebrew Games
Store
Downloads
Posts posted by Rhino
-
-
2 hours ago, Californication said:
Nobody is jumping to conclusions. Eleven witness plus the victim out weigh one witness and the police. If the police announced themselves they clearly didn't do it well enough. Unless you are saying that the police and their one witness opinions out weigh the other witnesses that may be black. Camera's are not needed to figure out that the police didn't announce themselves properly. They wanted this to go to trial so we could all find out what happened and the police don't want to do that because they are clearly at fault.
Not necessarily. Tons of witnesses said Michael Brown was telling hands up don't shoot but that never happened. Just curious, where did you see the 11 witnesses thing? I'm not saying anyone's opinion outweighs anyone elses. I'm saying we simply don't know for a fact what happened. If two sides are saying different things, someone is wrong and our "facts" of the case aren't truly facts. The police definitely did a lot of things wrong if they truly didn't announce themselves.
-
1
-
-
32 minutes ago, Californication said:
For announing themselves it's not he said she said. lt's 11 witnesses said they didn't hear them and one witness that said they did.
All I'm saying is it's not 100% clear what exactly happened. The police very well could've not announced themselves, or they could have. There is no body can footage. Maybe there are surveillance videos that caught it that haven't been released yet who knows. Jumping to conclusions before all evidence is out is dangerous and can lead to misunderstandings of what truly happened like with Ferguson. Once we have the full picture then we can have a better discussion.
-
6 hours ago, Californication said:
Hard to say if there was racism in the initial act itself. The officers expected they were going to a black home. Racism could have played a part, but that is open to debate.
I think the problem people are having is. 1. the efficacy of no-knock warrants (although this was not a no-knock scenario.) 2. The racism in the lack of accountability for the police. The one officer who looks like he might get in some real trouble is because he sexually assaulted white women. How is he getting in trouble for sexually assaulting a white women, but not for hisbpart in killing a black woman lying in her bed.
You say it's not murder, it's clearly this wasn't just a tragedy this was caused by the police officer's incompentence making it manslaughter at a minimum. Those guys were trained and given guns and are over there playing like it's a movie.
How is it that after all the gun fire was going they still hadn't said anything. How is it that the boyfriend watching his girlfriend die had the capacity to call the police, but these jack asses shooting into someones bedroom couldn't yell out this is the police don't shoot.
I think there's still way too much we don't know for certain yet. It's a he said she said type of thing. The cops say they did announce who they were before breaking in. Walker says he didn't hear anything.
When gunfire is ringing out, things get crazy and accidents can happen. Does it excuse what the officers did, no. Could they have done things better and differently, absolutely. They could probably charge the one cop who fired and killed Breonna with manslaughter but I don't think that is going to stick. Like I said, this is definitely not murder. Manslaughter at the very most.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, CodysGameRoom said:
lol. Somehow it's NEVER racism with you guys. Always some mental gymnastic explanation. No possible chance it could be racism, because that's not a problem.
Get real.
How is what happened in this tragedy racism? Not every white cop on black victim shooting is racism.
2 hours ago, Link said:How was Walker supposed to know who was breaking into his home?
He wasn't. He should've defended himself. It's an unfortunate tragedy. I haven't heard anyone say he shouldn't have fired at the police. What I'm saying is this was not murder. It shouldn't have happened, it sucks, and it's a tragedy but it's not murder.
-
On 9/24/2020 at 8:03 PM, Shmup said:
Yeah but that will never happen because the general populace is lazy or can't be bothered and FB and Google know this and exploit it. Also a lot of countries or areas of cities are very badly educated, so they will actually believe what is written on a social media post because that is their research.
Changes can be made on social media and with tech giants, but none were really presented, which I found to be a small negative on what was overall a pretty good documentary.
You're right. I'm wondering what changes can be done. Maybe a grading system for news articles done by a 3rd party? Better algorithms to sort out what's fake news and what's real?
-
47 minutes ago, Shmup said:
I’ve watched it and enjoyed it.
I never got the impression that it was trying to say social media is why the world is divided. It for the most part lets you make your own conclusions (which is rare for a Netflix documentary).
It looks more at how things like FB target audience its users based on likes and how long they stay on a video.
It shows how easy it is to go down a rabbit hole because of the way the algorithm works. You watch one anti 5G video then the next thing your YouTube or FB is full of anti 5G videos. Which in turn can manipulate users that are easily influenced by things (especially teenagers).
If you work in IT, most of the stuff you will already know. I think if you don’t, this will be an eye opener.
My only complaint is that it didn’t really offer any solutions. I wish it had pushed for change, because I’m definitely in the camp that there needs to be regulation on some social media, just like other media platforms.
I also found it very ironic that it was on Netflix which uses the same algorithms haha.
The change is people need to do their own research and stop taking every single thing presented to them online as fact right off the bat.
-
1 hour ago, Hammerfestus said:
Well that certainly seems like an nice scapegoat for decades of anti intellectualism and Inflammatory rhetoric.
edit: you know what the real problem is? It’s definitely that scary technology. Definitely not the way the same venomous demagogues are using it.
You should watch the documentary. You'll see what I'm getting at. It's both. How the technology is used and the technology itself. When the technology is focused solely on getting your attention and feeding you whatever it can to get your attention, but it doesn't or can't check the veracity of what it is giving you, that's when it's alarming.
53 minutes ago, Code Monkey said:This is actually good? I kept seeing it pop up in my suggested films but the description sounded stupid. It mentions that our generation is addicted to our phones and social media. Well.......yeah, we like absorbing information, I don't understand how that's a bad thing. Thanks for pointing out something we all knew already.
Are you saying I should still watch it?
It's very interesting. It gets at how social media basically slowly manipulates you and the way you think over time and how it doesn't care about what the truth is, only what gets your attention. There are other things too like how suicides and depression have gone up since smart phones were introduced (I think they were trying to go for this is causation but it's definitely correlation. It's difficult to say x caused y without w and z also effecting y).
-
4 hours ago, The Strangest said:
I was dismissed in an earlier iteration of this thread when I said I was afraid Trump wouldn’t peacefully give up power if he lost the election.
”There won’t be a transfer, frankly. There will be a continuation.”
I hope he's not that crazy. His real quote seems to be that he's confident he'll win if mail in ballots are done safely and timely, and that there won't need to be a transfer of power because he'll still be president. He has florida and arizona now. The race is definitely getting much more interesting. Biden had it in the bag a month ago but it has gotten way closer. It'll come down to Michigan and/or Wisconsin.
-
You know what's crazy about the Breonna Taylor case? The fact that the media ignores this critical piece of information. Walker is Breonnas boyfriend.
"After the police broke the door off its hinges, Mr. Walker fired his gun once, striking Sergeant Mattingly in a thigh. The police responded by firing several shots, striking Ms. Taylor five times."
Walker fired first at cops, and they defended themselves. How were they supposed to know who had the gun? They entered, were shot at by Walker, then they returned fire. Had they not done so, they could've died. Self defense and a tragic accident. No murder here.
-
Everyone should check this out. It's alarming what is happening. Perhaps this is part of why the U.S is so divided right now. Thoughts? https://www.thesocialdilemma.com
-
1
-
-
On 9/12/2020 at 6:18 PM, Nes Freak said:
nintendo will become more evil every year lol jk
What if they made Mario bad and bowser good in one game?
-
17 hours ago, Californication said:
The stimulus checks were $290 billion. The unemployment plus up was like $250 billion. I believe the last total I heard from the Fed spending was $7 trillion, but I will need to confirm. They gave us pocket change.
The reason that $540 billion makes such a big difference in the economy compared to the seven trillion is because most of the people they are giving it to can't afford to save it
Most of the businesses that are receiving money from the Fed aren't investing it in their business because overall people aren't spending money. So even though the Fed is shoving it out the door, it is not stimulating the economy.
At least people got that much. Could've been $0. A lot of people I know spent it on really stupid stuff they don't need like eating out at nice places or buying TVs. If you let all these big companies fall, that'd be terrible for the economy overall. Once big companies fall, it's a trickle down effect and everything else fails. They need to help everyone and that's what they've done, admittedly disproportionately.
5 hours ago, CodysGameRoom said:Here's what is going on in my neck of the woods:
Well that is disgusting and should not be tolerated. These kinds of people disgust me. Sadly I don't think anything will be done about the message on that truck.
-
5 minutes ago, Californication said:
Wait a minute. You said "Republicans support programs just not to the extent Democrats do."
The Republicans did a two trillion dollar tax cut for corporations. That might be bigger than all the U.S. social programs combined. And on top of that the Republican party is just pouring out money to all the big corporations.
Republicans like welfare. They just don't like giving welfare to the poor and middle class. Republicans give their welfare to the rich.
What about the $1200 they gave everyone who made what was it less than $100k? Then the extra $500 per kid you have too. What about all the extra unemployment benefits they've given out during the past 6 months? I can't remember any time in history where the U.S government has given out this much money to most of it's citizens this quickly. I realize part of it is Trump trying to prop up the economy until the election, but still, there's a crap ton of money that has been handed out since COVID-19 started, and not only to big corporations.
-
8 hours ago, CodysGameRoom said:
Yea, me either! LOL
I understand the philosophy. I'm speaking from my life experience. All the way back to high school here in Nebraska I can cite numerous examples of people saying they would gladly choose to end programs like that to save their own money. Selfish kids influenced by their selfish parents, who grow up to be selfish adults. I've seen the selfishness here. You can't tell me it's not the same elsewhere.
I'd call someone who made a choice on who to vote for based on one issue uneducated.
You can call it lame, but it's the world I live in here in Nebraska and many other places too. Once again, I'm speaking from experiences, things I have seen and heard, in person, and in my local area. My cousin who draws social security disability (because he absolutely needs it to survive) voted for Trump because he said he was going to build a wall and keep America safe. They ABSOLUTELY take advantage of the poor/disadvantaged/uneducated by using fear tactics to distract them from issues that would be more important to them. No Mexican person is ever gonna cross the border and attack my cousin. But it's all he'd talk about. It's a non issue but it was the most important thing to him. It's manipulation.
So nah, I don't think it's lame to assume that a large majority of voters and uneducated about what their vote actually means.
Both sides use fear tactics to sway voters. If you're dumb enough to fall for those tactics, that's on you.
People often vote with their wallet. Some of it might be selfishness, but on the flip side, people could be legitimately concerned about not being able to afford any extra tax raises if they have to support more programs. Maybe they also really do just want some more money. Some might say that's not being selfish. Where do my taxes go? How do I know they actually go towards what they're supposed to go towards. Furthermore, what if I don't agree with the program my taxes are going towards? Imagine if some of your tax dollars went towards supporting the KKK. You wanting to end that program to save yourself some money isn't being selfish. You're wanting to end it because it doesn't align with your beliefs and you don't want to support it. Yes before you put words in my mouth or anything, I realize supporting disability and social programs is not the same as supporting a hypothetical KKK program. The premise is still the same though. If I believe you should work your @ss off to make ends meet if you are physically able to work, instead of living off welfare, that's not me being selfish. That's me saying you should stop being lazy and living off the system. You know, earn your way through life. Stop complaining about everything and wanting everything handed to you. People can make ends meet with less money if they're smart with their finances. That's a completely different discussion though.
-
44 minutes ago, CodysGameRoom said:
Explain to me how wanting someone to die is the same thing as killing them? Maybe work on your reading comprehension and then come back to the big boy thread.
Way to dodge my other questions, though.
I don't even know where to begin with your post and frankly it doesn't matter what I say. None of you take me seriously anyways. I can't speak for Republicans and why many don't support welfare and disability programs, but I can guess. My best guess is they feel people should earn their way through life and not be handed everything. I highly doubt it's because they want them to die as you suggest.
You're saying taking away those programs leading to their deaths isn't an indirect way of killing them? Wanting someone to die doesn't mean you want to kill them but you're making it sound like they want to defund these programs, thus in a way kill these people by not giving them the stuff they need.
I'll await your response. Not sure why I even bother responding sometimes lol.
-
4 hours ago, CodysGameRoom said:
Those people don't understand how the world works. They are voting against their own best interests. I know tons of people like that around here. I know people on disability who vote for GOP candidates cause "MERICA!" and "build the wall!" when those same candidates would end social programs that help those people immediately if they could, destroying their income and livelihood. They are not educated enough to understand how things work.
I never said they want to "kill" them. They just want them gone so they don't have to deal with them and help pay for their needs. Not their problem.
Explain to me why most Republicans do not support the Affordable Care Act. Explain to me why most conservatives do not support "social" programs like welfare and disability. Provide valid reasons that have nothing to do with money.
It's. All. About. Money.
If you don't think it is, you're fooling yourself.
A really stupid thing to say but please twist my words however you'd like to fit your narrative.
On 9/4/2020 at 10:27 AM, CodysGameRoom said:Really? How would it work? Destroy the Affordable Healthcare Act... Destroy programs that help poor/disabled people like welfare, etc...
They want poor and disabled people to die so they can save their money, because they only care about themselves. It's pretty obvious. It's all about money. Why help the poor/disabled/marginalized? They instead can keep their money. They are selfish. They would rather those people die and they keep their money.
As the great officer Hops from Zootopia would say, "Actually it's your word against yours."
-
For the first time we have a poll saying Trump is ahead in Florida. The race is getting closer. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
-
Cool stuff. What's your next prediction?
-
9 hours ago, B.A. said:9 hours ago, CodysGameRoom said:
Really? How would it work? Destroy the Affordable Healthcare Act... Destroy programs that help poor/disabled people like welfare, etc...
They want poor and disabled people to die so they can save their money, because they only care about themselves. It's pretty obvious. It's all about money. Why help the poor/disabled/marginalized? They instead can keep their money. They are selfish. They would rather those people die and they keep their money.
I think that's a stretch. Not being for certian social programs does not equal wanting people dead. I'm not going down to the homeless tent cities and inviting them to come live in my house, or giving them access to my bank account, that doesn't mean I want them all dead. I guess that means I'm selfish?
A big stretch. His argument falls apart immediately. There are millions of poor and disabled Republicans. So the Republicans' master plan is to destroy programs that help disabled and poor people so that they can kill tons of poor and disabled Republicans and Democrats so that they the Republicans can save their money and so that Trump will win his reelection, got it. Makes perfect sense to me.
Your argument also hinges on assuming Democrats aren't rich. Only rich Republicans could come up with such a diabolical plan.
@B.A. you're just the worst. So selfish. How dare you not donate your money. How dare you kill the homeless.
-
8 hours ago, CodysGameRoom said:
Who's on the other side of the "aisle"?
The NRA? They don't want to stop this.
The GOP/RNC? They want poor people dead so they can't vote and the GOP can stay in power.
I get your point but it's just not going to happen. You have to look at things more realistically. It's nice to think about how things should be but America should be focused on how things are and how to solve them.
Man you say some funny stuff. You really think the GOP wants poor people dead so they can stay in power? I'm trying to wrap my head around how this would even work if this truly was their master plan.
-
7 hours ago, Kguillemette said:
After watching the videos, it is clear to me that this kid is not a hero. He is a wannabe vigilante that should have stayed home and stayed far away from trouble and danger. From my perspective, he chased a person who threw what appeared to be a Molotov cocktail at a building with his weapon. That's when others intervened, not knowing why he was chasing down a dude with a gun. The man with the skateboard began attacking him as Rittenhouse tried to escape his pursuers. Another man pulled a firearm.
Now consider the fear of the 17 year old kid who in his misguided head, thinking he is acting as police friendly vigilante only helping the small business that is having bombs thrown at it. Now 3 men are forcibly trying to take the gun from his hands. Any reasonable human being, never mind a 17 year old kid would absolutely fear for their life. Laying on the ground wounded from being bludgeoned with a skateboard, he also sees another man pointing a pistol at him. In his head he has seconds to react or he is going to die. So he opens fire on his attackers to save his own life.
One thing we need to do is stop labeling all these people as protesters. As previously pointed out, the survivor is a felon with no business holding a pistol. One of the gentleman who died was a convicted child molester who served 10 years in prison. The dude with the skateboard by all accounts seemed to be a decent human being, but what was he doing trying to disarm Rittenhouse with a skateboard? Perhaps he did not see the context that Rittenhouse was pursuing someone? After all, it's not like Rittenhouse was uniformed. Maybe he didn't see what appeared to be a bomb lobbed at a building? So he went into a form of vigilantism himself. Only he clearly outgunned. So he very foolishly tried to disarm him and paid the ultimate price for this terrible lapse in judgement.
The bottom line is that I can't stand here after watching the video that this kid went out looking to kill someone. Being pro-cop and a Trump supporter doesn't make you a murderer. But if he really wanted to help the police, he should have just stayed home. It's enough that police have to deal with dudes throwing bombs at buildings(or at least things that strongly resemble them). Now they need to deal with 4 numbnuts playing with guns that had no business being out there in the first place, and the bomb thrower runs away into the night.
And if you want to protest, do so in an organized assembly. Just rolling up into bedlam does nothing for BLM and only stands to hurt the cause. And BLM is one the most important causes this century.
Finally someone looking at this case objectively and not politically. I agree, this kid is not a hero. To be clear for everyone, I don't think that's what either I or @Silent Hill are saying. We're saying this kid acted in self defense. Was he an idiot, should he have stayed home, could he have done numerous things differently, sure, but he didn't and here we are.
I also agree with your points about labeling these people as protestors. I feel like a lot of people at these protests are just there to stir sh!t up, or for the fun of it, or to be a part of history or whatever. They're not actually there to protest. Most legitimate protests are peaceful.
I think everything is even more heated now since it's an election year and the polls are getting narrower and narrower.
-
8 hours ago, Californication said:
You guys get along because you are almost always on the same side of every issue.
@SilentHill said that, "
Which I think is laughable. I thinks it's a lot easier to see what side of issues your on. All we have to do is see what side of an issue blacks and minorities are on and almost every time you two will be on the other side.
Let's take a look at the last 40 pages
Pg. 163 Rhino explains why it's discrimination not to eat at Chiq Fil A if you don't like their political or religous stances.
Pg 165 - Rhino explains why brand like Aunt Jemima are not racist.
pg - 171 SH People are promoting racial divide by talking abouy systemic racism.
Pg 175 - SH doesn't believe systemic racism existed except prior to the civil war.
pg 175 affirmative action has uintended negative results "this is a privelige that white people don't have."
Pg 1 - Rhino explains why it was Michael Browns fault he was killed by police.
Pg. 9 - SH explains how link's data on racial profiling is probably because of other reasons then racial profiling.
Pg 9 SH explains how the cop that killed George Floyd tried to de-escalate the system (despite greeting Floyd with a knock on the window with a gun).
Pg 4 - SH explains why stop and frisk is not racist.
Pg 7 - Rhino explains why disproportionate arrest of minorities isn't racist.
(The old thread is on pg 4 of everything else)
What's your point?
-
8 hours ago, Silent Hill said:9 hours ago, CodysGameRoom said:20 hours ago, Rhino said:
I do think he will get charged with something. Just not murder.
He was already charged. With intentional murder. Twice. Among other charges.
Probably meant "convicted".
I did thanks
-
30 minutes ago, ChickenTendas said:
Not going into whether or not his pulling of the trigger was justified, because that's entirely subjective, but he wasn't even of legal age to carry an assault-rifle style weapon. I don't believe it matters if he was acting in self-defense if he clearly wasn't supposed to be carrying the rifle. Gun activists talk about illegal guns all the time, yet when this comes out, it's somehow okay for this kid to carry? At this point in time, he was not legally allowed to have the weapon on him, let alone use it. I don't even want to know what this kid was reading if he thinks that car dealerships and police need more protection than unarmed people of color.
Sources:
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/29/iv/304
Finally some sense in here with articles to back up points. You make an interesting point. I do think he will get charged with something. Just not murder. Some unlawful gun related charge, sure, I could see that. I do wonder like you said, does having a gun illegally make your act of self defense (if they do determine it to be that in court) null and void? I don't think it does. He could've been dual wielding modified ARs and it'd probably still be self defense if his life was in danger and one of those guys pulled a gun on him. The legality of the weapon doesn't negate how he acted to save his own life.
American Politics / Current Events Thread
in threads
Posted
There could be racism or agism or sexism or lots of things for any scenario. Without some evidence however, it's only speculation as to why an event occurred. Parts of a police system could be racist, while also still having good non-racist cops. Is there any evidence at all that the cops involved with the Breonna Taylor tragedy are racist? Is this another example of white cop kills black victim, therefore it's automatically racism? It's odd to me that it's only ever racism when a white cops kills a black victim. Just think about that for a minute. Why does the media focus solely on that narrative? Why is there only outrage for black victims? Surely there are incidents where cops of all races kill victims of all races.