Ad hominem. Ad hominem. Straw man. Circular reasoning. What's next, so's your old man?Because he's got the world's biggest stick in his craw.
Ad hominem. Ad hominem. Straw man. Circular reasoning. What's next, so's your old man?Because he's got the world's biggest stick in his craw.
You live in the biggest, most fallacious glass house. Careful with those stones.Ad hominem. Ad hominem. Straw man. Circular reasoning. What's next, so's your old man?
In other words, it's fine only when you do it.You live in the biggest, most fallacious glass house. Careful with those stones.
But if you're going to specifically ask for it, here it is: You are the Charlie of gun issues.
That's right. This thread is not at all about the big mess in the produce section, it's about the fact that someone took an orange from the bottom!This quibbling is missing the most important detail that another young black person has been killed by police. I left it out of the thread title to seem slightly less inflammatory.
At least I only do it in threads actually about gun control.In other words, it's fine only when you do it.
Yup. It's only okay when you do it. Because context is for pussies.At least I only do it in threads actually about gun control.
DA Logic -
Then: "You shouldn't be allowed guns because you will shoot people!"
Now: "How can you not be shooting people, you hypocrites?! YOU HAVE GUNS!"
Yup. It's only okay when you do it. Because context is for pussies.
Ooh, swing and a miss AGAIN!View attachment 15638
Maybe next time you should stick to the issues then, instead of trying to use the chip on your shoulder to shoehorn in your pet issue with a veiled personal jab.
Everyone has their trigger issues.At least I only do it in threads actually about gun control.
Relevant Tom Tomorrow cartoon.But guys! Guys! What are the police going to use all these cool weapons and tools President Obama gave them if not on US citizens?
If you give a little boy a knife, you have to expect something is going to be cut. And soon.
I don't think it has overtly nefarious motivations... probably just an excuse to grow government budgets, as always. However, it has and will continue to have unfortunate consequences.Honestly I admit I'm a little paranoid about the increased police militarization. I can't help but think that either we are expecting more foreign attacks on American soil, or that politicians are truly expecting a revolution a little way down the road.
Neither possibility is good.
Actually, I was thinking it was a result of all of the anti-terrorism money being thrown around 10 years ago (and since). The police departments simply snatched up the lavish buffet put before them. Opportunities to better fund their departments with minimal effort? Have at it!I don't think it has overtly nefarious motivations... probably just an excuse to grow government budgets, as always. However, it has and will continue to have unfortunate consequences.
Only thing nefarious would be greed. Local jurisdictions are having money thrown at them in the name of "fighting terrorism" or "the war on drugs". The money's got to be spent, or it's lost. In steps a senator or congressman, or more likely an ex-senator or ex-congressman. They have a lead on firepower that your average grunt in Afghanistan can only dream of getting. And they get a little something something for themselves as a "commision" or "finders fee". Nudge, nudge. Wink, wink. Say no more.I don't think it has overtly nefarious motivations... probably just an excuse to grow government budgets, as always. However, it has and will continue to have unfortunate consequences.
I'm not sure that the graft angle is even necessary. A budget is power and control... increasing it is its own reward.Only thing nefarious would be greed. Local jurisdictions are having money thrown at them in the name of "fighting terrorism" or "the war on drugs". The money's got to be spent, or it's lost. In steps a senator or congressman, or more likely an ex-senator or ex-congressman. They have a lead on firepower that your average grunt in Afghanistan can only dream of getting. And they get a little something something for themselves as a "commision" or "finders fee". Nudge, nudge. Wink, wink. Say no more.
I'm not saying that's what's going on, but in this day and age, it sure feels that way.
The Stars and Bars was the flag of the nation. The one in the picture was the battle flag or naval ensign/jack.That's the chief with the Stars and Bars hanging in his house, right?
About fucking time.Five days after the shooting, and several days after the beginning of excessive police violence, President Obama finally steps up to the podium: http://abcnews.go.com/US/president-obama-excuse-excessive-force-police-ferguson/story?id=24980370
Also http://www.mediaite.com/online/don-lemon-white-people-in-willful-denial-over-racism-in-ferguson/
Good.[DOUBLEPOST=1408066619,1408066584][/DOUBLEPOST]Twitter's saying the crowd is cheering as the "guard is changed" for police/security in Ferguson. The new cops showing up are not wearing SWAT gear.
Does anyone else find that kind of surreal?Palestinians are tweeting tips to Ferguson protesters on how to deal with tear gas.
http://www.dailydot.com/politics/ferguson-protest-palestinians-gaza-tear-gas/
I kinda doubt they planned it that way, but they'll make it work for them.Well, the good cop, bad cop routine really seems to be paying dividends.
The first is a reason to increase your National Guard, not arming police in the style of militaries.can't help but think that either we are expecting more foreign attacks on American soil, or that politicians are truly expecting a revolution a little way down the road.
Neither possibility is good.
It's very apparent that large cities need SWAT teams to handle specialized situations. We learned that during the North Hollywood shootout, where two guys with AKs, drum mags, and full body armor were able to hold off an entire police department until the cops borrowed some hunting rifles from a nearby store. There is definitely a need for them. The REAL issue is that SWAT units cost a fortune to outfit and train for what amounts to something that is only used in a worst case scenario and it's hard not to look at those toys and think "No one would mess with our guys if they ALL looked like that".The first is a reason to increase your National Guard, not arming police in the style of militaries.
There's a reason why you are constitutionally BANNED from deploying the army on home turf. Anything army-like shouldn't be what's enforcing the law. Special SWAT teams? Maybe in very VERY bad areas/cases, but in the vast majority of even your nation, that's not necessary, and shouldn't be part of the repertoire.
As with most things of governmental power, your "give a child a knife" thing is true, with government at least. Private citizens are more trustworthy there IMO because they face the consequences, and know it. As somebody else somewhere said, "I'll believe a corporation is a person when Texas executes one." Same principal, but government departments (and larger). Their bad behavior may OCCASIONALLY cause individuals to go down, but generally they protect themselves from any outside harm or criticism.