All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Ferguson Police should be outlawed
9/2/2014 2:07 PM
I suppose I could say that I have a witness statement from a priest who said that Lollie dropped his pants and took a **** on the security guard's desk.

Can you believe that?

9/2/2014 2:19 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 9/2/2014 2:08:00 PM (view original):
I suppose I could say that I have a witness statement from a priest who said that Lollie dropped his pants and took a **** on the security guard's desk.

Can you believe that?

That would clearly change things? Do you?

Oh, that's right. You don't. You just really don't want anyone to be able to blame this on racism. Which is a weird stand to take.

9/2/2014 2:20 PM
Posted by The Taint on 9/2/2014 2:00:00 PM (view original):
Jesus Christ.


Yeah, but the teacher hasn't passed the Miketec smell test of credibility yet. Guilty before proven innocent, the new American way.
I'm just asking if you have any reason to believe said teacher was a credible witness. 

There are people out there who swear they've seen a bigfoot.    Credible enough for taintluck?
9/2/2014 2:29 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 9/2/2014 2:19:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 9/2/2014 2:08:00 PM (view original):
I suppose I could say that I have a witness statement from a priest who said that Lollie dropped his pants and took a **** on the security guard's desk.

Can you believe that?

That would clearly change things? Do you?

Oh, that's right. You don't. You just really don't want anyone to be able to blame this on racism. Which is a weird stand to take.

If racism is at the root of this, then so be it.  Let the guilty parties get what they deserve.

It just seems that there's more to the story that we DON'T know than we DO know.  So jumping to a RACIST!!! conclusion seems a bit unsubstantiated.

IMO, unsubstantiated accusations of RACISM!!!! probably does more to set back racial relations than move them forward.  Creating controversy and racial division where it may not exist doesn't seem like a very good way to bring people together.

So . . . good job, dumbass.

9/2/2014 2:31 PM
Here's the deal:

taintluck believes that the Ferguson shooting and MN incident were obviously racism at it's finest.
The rest of us aren't so quick to jump to that conclusion.   Personally, I think both incidents could have gone differently if the poor victims were white.  But, unlike taintluck, I have no reason to insist the outcome could have been different if they were. 

I'm just not willing to say every interaction gone bad between white cop/black citizen is because of skin color. 
9/2/2014 2:36 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 9/2/2014 2:29:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/2/2014 2:19:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 9/2/2014 2:08:00 PM (view original):
I suppose I could say that I have a witness statement from a priest who said that Lollie dropped his pants and took a **** on the security guard's desk.

Can you believe that?

That would clearly change things? Do you?

Oh, that's right. You don't. You just really don't want anyone to be able to blame this on racism. Which is a weird stand to take.

If racism is at the root of this, then so be it.  Let the guilty parties get what they deserve.

It just seems that there's more to the story that we DON'T know than we DO know.  So jumping to a RACIST!!! conclusion seems a bit unsubstantiated.

IMO, unsubstantiated accusations of RACISM!!!! probably does more to set back racial relations than move them forward.  Creating controversy and racial division where it may not exist doesn't seem like a very good way to bring people together.

So . . . good job, dumbass.

Based on what we do know, racism is definitely a viable explanation. There is no competing narrative. No one--not the cops, not the security guard, not the witnesses--is publicly alleging that Lollie was doing anything other than sitting in a public place.

There's no reason to believe he was doing anything else than just that. He was there to pick up his kids from preschool, he wasn't there protesting or vandalizing or breaking into an office in the building. 

Actively arguing against racism in the hope that sticking your head in the sand will somehow bring everyone together is stupid.
9/2/2014 2:43 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/2/2014 2:31:00 PM (view original):
Here's the deal:

taintluck believes that the Ferguson shooting and MN incident were obviously racism at it's finest.
The rest of us aren't so quick to jump to that conclusion.   Personally, I think both incidents could have gone differently if the poor victims were white.  But, unlike taintluck, I have no reason to insist the outcome could have been different if they were. 

I'm just not willing to say every interaction gone bad between white cop/black citizen is because of skin color. 
No one thinks that every interaction gone bad is because of skin color.

I'm curious why you and tec are so steadfast in your assertions that this specific incident in Minnesota absolutely isn't a case of pure racial profiling?
9/2/2014 2:44 PM
Sure, it's a viable explanation.

It's just not the only explanation.

You and taint seem to think it is.

And I'm not actively arguing against racism.  I'm actively arguing against focusing on only one explanation to the exclusion of all others when all the facts are not known.

That's what you're doing in the St Paul case, and that's what you're doing in the Ferguson case.

9/2/2014 2:56 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 9/2/2014 2:44:00 PM (view original):
Sure, it's a viable explanation.

It's just not the only explanation.

You and taint seem to think it is.

And I'm not actively arguing against racism.  I'm actively arguing against focusing on only one explanation to the exclusion of all others when all the facts are not known.

That's what you're doing in the St Paul case, and that's what you're doing in the Ferguson case.

It's the best explanation in the Minnesota case. There isn't a competing theory.
9/2/2014 2:56 PM
The Ferguson case is more complicated.
9/2/2014 3:07 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 9/2/2014 2:44:00 PM (view original):
Sure, it's a viable explanation.

It's just not the only explanation.

You and taint seem to think it is.

And I'm not actively arguing against racism.  I'm actively arguing against focusing on only one explanation to the exclusion of all others when all the facts are not known.

That's what you're doing in the St Paul case, and that's what you're doing in the Ferguson case.

Guy has a bad day.   Security guard comes by and say "Sir, I'm going to have to ask you to leave.  Company policy."    Guy say "Go **** yourself" without becoming animated.  SG calls the cops and says a man is behaving in a belligerent manner.   Cops arrive and say "Sir, could we see some ID?"   "Go **** yourself" without becoming animated.   "If you weren't wearing a badge, I'd beat the **** out of you, take your wallet, get your address then go **** your wife and kids.  Leave me alone.  I know my rights."

On video, it's two guys talking. 
9/2/2014 3:12 PM
But that isn't what happened.
9/2/2014 3:20 PM
Oh, that's right.  You were there.
9/2/2014 3:32 PM
Posted by toddcommish on 9/2/2014 3:20:00 PM (view original):
Oh, that's right.  You were there.
The video had audio.
9/2/2014 3:52 PM
The amusing thing is that Taint and BadLuck are arguing that it was racism in MN, but not just plain BAD COPS.  As if cops can't overreact or be abusive ON THEIR OWN without a racial trigger.  



So, I guess black cops never abuse their authority and use excessive force....
of 50
All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Ferguson Police should be outlawed

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.