Real World

C'mon now Pujo, be reasonable. Did they fire Glocks?

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
Leo Tolstoy, 1897

Pujo

This is the second time in a week that you've taken a hypothetical example (those start with "what if") literally. The question is what constitutes an appropriate response to urine-bottle throwing?, and the example I gave was obviously an example of something that wouldn't. This is to show that unine-throwing can't be used as justification for every possible response.

Real World

Oh, my bad, so you didn't post that reply to counter FTW's point that the urine throwing was reason enough.

Hypothetical and all, it was a ridiculous statement.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
Leo Tolstoy, 1897

Pujo

Fine, it was ridiculous to ask a cop where he would draw the line. One guy throws urine, everyone gets beaten with batons. Works for the LAPD!

Real World

Yup, they were beating EVERYBODY with batons, and it was only one guy who threw urine.

This is what i mean by drama, and politicizing an incident. It moves to extremism, and idioticy. There's a large rally, or protest, whichever you prefer, and some people get unruley with the cops, to which they move to disperse. From there it goes to the police violating rights, and being totally at fault. When the issue if presented on both sides, people start posing ridiculous hypotheticals that have nothing to do with the actual incident at hand. When that isn't enough, they resort to extremism of one guy throwing piss, and the cops beating up EVERYBODY.

And another thing, in the video I first saw about this incident, some lady complained they didn't warn them, and just moved them out of the way or something. In the video FTW provided, they had choppers flying over head telling the crowd to disperse. None of this means the cops were right in what they did. All I am trying to point out, is how one side always tends to be presented until further notice.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."
Leo Tolstoy, 1897

Harry Boy

__________________
Harry Boy (Genius)

In The Absence Of Law And Order Society Will Surely Destroy Itself