Helpful reminder: you are much more likely to be killed by police than terrorists

[Gulo Blue]

I've already said it 3 times now - you can't compare justifiable killings by cops to deaths by acts of terrorism. It's not a difficult concept and it's been my point since the beginning. You've accused me of muddying the waters by adding that tidbit after the fact, which I demonstrated was completely false and you still ignore the distinction and the fact that my message has been consistent. It's your MO - you did the same w/ the Pride argument, except that time when I proved I said from the beginning what you insisted I didn't say, you just walked away from the thread. This time you continue to ignore it and make the apples and oranges comparison of murders by terrorists to justified shootings by cops. I know you have this knee jerk reaction and need to disagree with everything I say and defend every nonsensical stupid thing michturd says. But your consistent pattern of pedantic nit picking, distorting or lying about what I've said and your 100% of taking the other side kinda kills your credibility. Maybe not with turd but he has even less credibility so that's pretty much meaningless.

Thing is, I never once disagreed with that. And this is your MO. You try to assign argumentative positions to people opposite to your own, even if that's not what they're saying. I actually made the (incorrect) assumption that terrorist victims, not counting 9/11, still outnumbered justified (or unjustified) police killings. You saw it. You responded "Ding, ding, ding."

I brought up a question about if 500-1000 deaths is so trivial, people shouldn't be whining and blogging about it (as you said), then how big should our response to terrorism be. You dodged the question with your justified/unjustified talk. Trying to get me to weigh in on your justified/unjustified thing.

I forget how the pride conversation ended, but I thought I'd had made my point sufficiently. I do remember it was the same BS from you. You were trying to drag me into a position I didn't hold. I said something about which fanbases cheered for each other more and you wanted to argue about which fanbase had more jerks. I didn't argue that one fanbase had more jerks than the other in that thread and I didn't argue whether or not it we should count justifiable police killings in this one.

...and accusing me of lying is a good way to bring an end to our conversations. No skin off my nose, but that's not fun or interesting.

 

[Spartanmack]

It was like they were the quarterback and the defense was offsides. A free play, why not throw the home run ball, right?

yep, downside protection, even if the punter muffs the snap. Too soon?

 

[Gulo Blue]

And that's why I'm so adamant about police using body/vehicles cameras. It helps protect citizens from shitty cops and it helps protect good cops from shitty citizens. I don't really see the downside.

I definitely understand why people wouldn't want to wear cameras. All things being equal, I could see body cams actually making life better for police, if people grew to trust the cameras, bad apples were weeded out, and people finally grew to have better relations with police. We could have more of that Andy Griffith thing going on. But the problem is that trust is so difficult to build. One or two well-publicized cases a year of cameras being turned off at key times, and people won't build trust.

 

[Gulo Blue]

The whole justified/unjustified thing isn't the point. If 1000 or 500 or 50 isn't worth blogging about, then why should we militarize police over similar numbers? Militarizing police is a bigger step than blogging by way more. Whatever the multiplier is, it has a lot of digits.

 

[sggatecl]

I certainly wouldn't want my boss to put a camera in my office and record every minute of my day.

I don't know what your profession is but I'm willing to bet it doesn't come with the liability and danger that a police officer must deal with.

*edit* I should preemptively add that I don't think cameras solve everything. There are cons to cameras too. I just think that we're reaching a tipping point and the pros outweigh the cons. Hopes, dreams, and Facebook prayers aren't going to cut it. Something needs to be done.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I don't know what your profession is but I'm willing to bet it doesn't come with the liability and danger that a police officer must deal with.

*edit* I should preemptively add that I don't think cameras solve everything. There are cons to cameras too. I just think that we're reaching a tipping point and the pros outweigh the cons. Hopes, dreams, and Facebook prayers aren't going to cut it. Something needs to be done.

Same here. It's worth trying, at least in select places to see how it goes.

...now, what if they figure out down the road to do face recognition and apply big data technology to everything those cameras see...I don't know.

 

[tomdalton22]

I don't know what your profession is but I'm willing to bet it doesn't come with the liability and danger that a police officer must deal with.

*edit* I should preemptively add that I don't think cameras solve everything. There are cons to cameras too. I just think that we're reaching a tipping point and the pros outweigh the cons. Hopes, dreams, and Facebook prayers aren't going to cut it. Something needs to be done.

You are right...my job does not have the danger or liability. That said...if I were a police officer I don't think I would feel that I would be safer or less liable if my entire day were recorded. I would probably feel that my liability would increase.

 

[sggatecl]

You are right...my job does not have the danger or liability. That said...if I were a police officer I don't think I would feel that I would be safer or less liable if my entire day were recorded. I would probably feel that my liability would increase.

And that's fair, I have 3 cops in my immediate family. 2 are for it, 1 is against it. I'm sure there are tons against it. Curious to see what ideas are brought forth in the coming weeks and months by the people against them though.

 

[Spartanmack]

Thing is, I never once disagreed with that. And this is your MO. You try to assign argumentative positions to people opposite to your own, even if that's not what they're saying. I actually made the (incorrect) assumption that terrorist victims, not counting 9/11, still outnumbered justified (or unjustified) police killings. You saw it. You responded "Ding, ding, ding."

I brought up a question about if 500-1000 deaths is so trivial, people shouldn't be whining and blogging about it (as you said), then how big should our response to terrorism be. You dodged the question with your justified/unjustified talk. Trying to get me to weigh in on your justified/unjustified thing.

I forget how the pride conversation ended, but I thought I'd had made my point sufficiently. I do remember it was the same BS from you. You were trying to drag me into a position I didn't hold. I said something about which fanbases cheered for each other more and you wanted to argue about which fanbase had more jerks. I didn't argue that one fanbase had more jerks than the other in that thread and I didn't argue whether or not it we should count justifiable police killings in this one.

...and accusing me of lying is a good way to bring an end to our conversations. No skin off my nose, but that's not fun or interesting.

that's not even close to the what happened here. Not sure if you intentionally distorting the order (i.e. lying) or just not following what I actually said and when and what I said it in response too.

You're also incorrect about what happened in the fan base argument. there again, you inserted yourself into the conversation to take exception to something i said to byco, not you. And then you went on and on nit picking the difference between a "jerk" and person who actively cheered against another team. I'd forgotten about that one. The one I referred to was the pride argument where after pages of back and forth you tried to say like my argument would have made sense if I made the distinction between different definitions of the word pride. Then I showed you than in my first post on the thread, that was exactly what I did. And then you disappeared.

No biggie, no skin off my nose if a guy who makes his mission to disagree with me distorting my arguments and droning on about pedantic nonsense walks away - it wasn't always like that but now that it's regressed to what it's become, the bs has gotten old and tired.

The politics board in general is one big circle jerk led by dimwitted clown spewing bs propaganda, hate and bigotry. That's why I left for most of the summer but now that I've come back briefly I see it's basically gotten worse.

 

[Spartanmack]

The whole justified/unjustified thing isn't the point. If 1000 or 500 or 50 isn't worth blogging about, then why should we militarize police over similar numbers? Militarizing police is a bigger step than blogging by way more. Whatever the multiplier is, it has a lot of digits.

IT actually is the point but I can't make you see that.

 

[Gulo Blue]

The one I referred to was the pride argument where after pages of back and forth you tried to say like my argument would have made sense if I made the distinction between different definitions of the word pride. Then I showed you than in my first post on the thread, that was exactly what I did. And then you disappeared.

You mean the one where people were asking for it to stop. That's why I stopped.

 

[Gulo Blue]

IT actually is the point but I can't make you see that.

It's A point that you're going on about with other people. Not a point I've argued about at all. I'm comparing the sizes of threats and the sizes of the appropriate reactions on two issues where you've weighed in on both.

If you don't want to talk about it, that's fine. But don't get frustrated and start hurling accusations because I'm not making the argument you wish I was making.

 

[Gulo Blue]

And then you went on and on nit picking the difference between a "jerk" and person who actively cheered against another team.

That's not nit-picking. Those aren't the same at all.

 

[Spartanmack]

You mean the one where people were asking for it to stop. That's why I stopped.

Wasn't that a convenient out? Just as you made a completely false claim about my argument someone complains about the thread going on and on so you take the high road and comply. Well done.

 

[Spartanmack]

It's A point that you're going on about with other people. Not a point I've argued about at all. I'm comparing the sizes of threats and the sizes of the appropriate reactions on two issues where you've weighed in on both.

If you don't want to talk about it, that's fine. But don't get frustrated and start hurling accusations because I'm not making the argument you wish I was making.

It's THE point I've made all along. One you said I wasn't trying to make initially and then changed my argument mispdstream, which I demonstrated was completely inaccurate. And I'm not hurling accusations. I'm pointing out a major flaw in your argument

 

[Gulo Blue]

Wasn't that a convenient out? Just as you made a completely false claim about my argument someone complains about the thread going on and on so you take the high road and comply. Well done.

It wasn't the first time that week or the only thread where I did that. Just bailed because people asked for it. Partially because I agreed there was too much Spartan talk going on.

I still think you were playing dumb, seeing nothing cringeworthy of pushing both Spartan Pride" and "pride comes before the fall."

 

[Gulo Blue]

It's THE point I've made all along. One you said I wasn't trying to make initially and then changed my argument mispdstream, which I demonstrated was completely inaccurate. And I'm not hurling accusations. I'm pointing out a major flaw in your argument

I asked you a question. It had nothing to do with the argument you were having with other people except that it related to a point you made in that argument. You didn't answer, you just tried to lump me in with the people you were already arguing with, even when I made it pretty clear that I wasn't fighting the distinction you were making. Then you accused me of lying.

 

[Gulo Blue]

It's THE point I've made all along. One you said I wasn't trying to make initially and then changed my argument mispdstream, which I demonstrated was completely inaccurate. And I'm not hurling accusations. I'm pointing out a major flaw in your argument

And what flaw in my argument?

The number of people killed by cops compared to the number of people killed by terrorists is somewhere in the 60:1, 1:1, or 1:20 depending on which set of numbers you want to use. (That's the argument you want to draw me into.)

Militarizing police nation wide compared to whining and blogging are different reactions by some tremendous number.

But you call the whining and blogging hysteria and think the militarization of the police is reasonable.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I looked it up. It does look like I mistook your meaning on the pride thing from the start, but there's two days between that mistake and my last post and when you brought it up. It's two days after people asked to end the thread, and in the middle of a 5-day window where I made only one post.

link

That doesn't make me a liar, you jackass.

...but I still think you're playing dumb about "Spartan Pride"/"pride comes before the fall."

Edit: for people that want to know how this works. Gulo posts, and posts, and posts...all quite reasonable of course. Then you add beer, and you get colorful language like "jackass". Probably well-deserved. Just one. That's all it takes to loosen the screw.

 

[Michchamp]

...http://detroitsportsforum.com/showthread.php?t=20908&page=33

That doesn't make me a liar, you jackass.

...

my goodness