George Floyd murder / Derek Chauvin guilty of murder

There is nothing to address. You proposed a false argument.

A. You take facts that are true "how BLM is anti-police, or divisive, or trying to shoehorn a Marxist agenda into American politics," e.t.c and call them bullshit nuance argument. In essence trying to undermine the fact they are true.
I mean 'divisive' is an opinion. 'Anti-police' is an opinion. And 'trying to shoehorn a Marxist agenda into American politics' is a conspiracy theory that would embarrass David Icke. But it's nice to see that I was able to nail the talking points so accurately, because you've apparently gone for all of them.

Then turn around and disparage the character of millions of Americans with no evidence to back it up

1. Black people are not being murdered by police. At least not at a number disproportionate to their level of interactions with the police.
Arguing points I haven't made, I see.

2. In the case where police misconduct has occurred such as in the Floyd case, everyone is appalled by Chauvin.

Hence why generalized pronouncement like yours really needs to go.
I mean they're demonstrably not. Immediately after the news broke, there were a significant number of people online commenting that they were happy about him getting bail, he was only doing his job, etc. To a man (or woman), Trump supporters, which you can tell because on social media you can see all of their other posts, links and affiliations. Now there are lots of bots stirring shit up too, obviously.
 
I mean 'divisive' is an opinion. 'Anti-police' is an opinion. And 'trying to shoehorn a Marxist agenda into American politics' is a conspiracy theory that would embarrass David Icke. But it's nice to see that I was able to nail the talking points so accurately, because you've apparently gone for all of them.
I just quoted your sentence. But yes, these are not just arguments meant to be a ruse. They are legitimate ones.
Arguing points I haven't made, I see.


I mean they're demonstrably not. Immediately after the news broke, there were a significant number of people online commenting that they were happy about him getting bail, he was only doing his job, etc. To a man (or woman), Trump supporters, which you can tell because on social media you can see all of their other posts, links and affiliations. Now there are lots of bots stirring shit up too, obviously.
Fair enough. Perhaps there are those who individually are doing this, albeit Twitter is cluster fuck like the internet. You can find enough people doing anything you can imagine. So if you want to generalize about any group, you can find few people to represent them.

And I agree on your point about bots. Personally, I believe a lot of the discord is manufactured or at least purposely being amplified by outside forces.

This new age of unshared reality is a boon for those who are profit from chaos.
 
This new age of unshared reality is a boon for those who are profit from chaos.
Which of course makes you wonder who posted his bail. Who has something to gain from the inevitable outrage, and let's be honest, possibly endangering the accused himself? I'm surprised the judge allowed it in the first place, to be honest.
 
Which of course makes you wonder who posted his bail. Who has something to gain from the inevitable outrage, and let's be honest, possibly endangering the accused himself? I'm surprised the judge allowed it in the first place, to be honest.
Interesting thought. Id alwa assumed he'd be unable to pay bail. Surprised he came up with the money.

But it would have been be unethical for the court not to set bail.
 
Interesting thought. Id alwa assumed he'd be unable to pay bail. Surprised he came up with the money.

But it would have been be unethical for the court not to set bail.
I don't think it's unusual for a judge to refuse bail though if there's good reason. Flight risk is the most obvious example, but also if they're judged to be a danger to others or if they're judged to be in danger themselves.

Associated Press have done a decent story on it. Looking at the AP story it seems like he was a wrong-un before this. He and his wife were charged in July with multiple counts of tax evasion after failing to declare $464k of income over 5 years. This suggests they must have been earning significantly more than this. They also sold their home in August for $279k so he couldn't use that as collateral (I don't know if that's even an option), but had a $100k BMW and a second home in Florida.

The police union have denied helping them out (I doubt they'd want to deal with the inevitable mess that followed), and it's worth mentioning that all three of the other defendants managed to come up with $750k bail each, which suggests that they're getting help from somewhere. I hope they've got some decent journalists over there that can follow the money.
 
There is nothing to address. You proposed a false argument.

A. You take facts that are true "how BLM is anti-police, or divisive, or trying to shoehorn a Marxist agenda into American politics," e.t.c and call them bullshit nuance argument. In essence trying to undermine the fact they are true.

Then turn around and disparage the character of millions of Americans with no evidence to back it up

1. Black people are not being murdered by police. At least not at a number disproportionate to their level of interactions with the police.

2. In the case where police misconduct has occurred such as in the Floyd case, everyone is appalled by Chauvin.

Hence why generalized pronouncement like yours really needs to go.
No1 is bollpx with a get out clause.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.