Bronx cop assasinated

[agent00f]

Since Phynaz isn't replying to the substance of what you're saying, I'll reply here, noting that I partially agree and partially disagree with you. See below:



Actually, the person in question is not a common criminal. Since he expressed a desire to kill police in retaliation for cases like Eric Garner and Freddie Grey, his actions are more akin to those of the Dallas shooter, which is to say, it was politically motivated terrorism. Or at least politically motivated violence. The danger with this sort of thing is that it encourages others to take similar action for similar reasons, and because it may - wrongly - cast a movement like BLM, who otherwise has legitimate grievances, as being associated with violent intent toward police. Under the circumstances, viewing this like he was some guy high on meth who shot a cop after robbing a convenience store isn't really doing justice to the importance of his conduct.



I agree with you, that police are not prosecuted or convicted as often as they should be. I'm just not so sure that raising this point in this context does anything other than distract from the real issue here, which is that whatever our grievances against cops, violence against cops is clearly not the answer. I'm not saying you disagree with that or that you condone this because clearly you do not. I'm just saying that what one chooses to focus discussion on is a reflection of their priorities. So if, for example, one chooses to raise an issue that the police could maybe in theory have wrongfully shot someone else, and doing so only a few posts into the thread, without saying anything else, one may give the impression that this person would rather focus on cop bashing than addressing the conduct which is the subject of the thread, because that person knows this conduct is indefensible and they'd rather discuss something else.

So in summary, it's not that you're wrong about the police often not facing consequences when they should. And it isn't that there's no legitimate concern over a bystander. It's a question of emphasis and priorities.

Pretty revealing reflection of priorities to carry water for people like Phynaz to divert from why they post threads like this.

 

[zinfamous]

Oh incidentally, Azuma, how did he manage to be such a remarkably awful person in the processors forum? How do you even manage that? I mean, having seen his behavior here I believe it a hundred percent without examples, I just want to know how he pulled it off?

have you spent a lot of time there? The GPU forums are classically filled with some of the worst people. it is much cleaner now, and very, very little is tolerated (lol--my pathetic infraction count) but it remains true that trolling and shilling in the GPU forums is like SPICE to these people.

 

[zinfamous]

Sad to see this happen. Three kids with no mother now. It is also sad to see a few posters have an obvious agenda, and don't give a fuck that a cop was killed in premeditated cold blooded murder. Which is more than are actually sad about it.



CNN is reporting that it was. I thought they were always accurate? It clearly was an assassination, look up the definition and what happened.

Hey man, you can't remove the "fake news" mantle from CNN out of convenience. They're either fake or they aren't.

Which is it?

 

[xthetenth]

Since Phynaz isn't replying to the substance of what you're saying, I'll reply here, noting that I partially agree and partially disagree with you. See below:

Awesome, I really appreciate it. I don't consider an opinion fully formed unless it's seen at least some collision with other ideas and perspectives. Calling a thesis a synthesis when you haven't seen an antithesis is downright dishonest, after all.

Actually, the person in question is not a common criminal. Since he expressed a desire to kill police in retaliation for cases like Eric Garner and Freddie Grey, his actions are more akin to those of the Dallas shooter, which is to say, it was politically motivated terrorism. Or at least politically motivated violence. The danger with this sort of thing is that it encourages others to take similar action for similar reasons, and because it may - wrongly - cast a movement like BLM, who otherwise has legitimate grievances, as being associated with violent intent toward police. Under the circumstances, viewing this like he was some guy high on meth who shot a cop after robbing a convenience store isn't really doing justice to the importance of his conduct.

That is not unreasonable, and the connotations of criminal as I used it were intended to be "someone who gets jailed and sent to prison for doing something illegal" not any commentary on whether or not the crime is particularly uncommon, and to highlight how radically different the actual results of two types of incidents Phynaz is treating as being two interchangeable sides are.

I agree with you, that police are not prosecuted or convicted as often as they should be. I'm just not so sure that raising this point in this context does anything other than distract from the real issue here, which is that whatever our grievances against cops, violence against cops is clearly not the answer. I'm not saying you disagree with that or that you condone this because clearly you do not. I'm just saying that what one chooses to focus discussion on is a reflection of their priorities. So if, for example, one chooses to raise an issue that the police could maybe in theory have wrongfully shot someone else, and doing so only a few posts into the thread, without saying anything else, one may give the impression that this person would rather focus on cop bashing than addressing the conduct which is the subject of the thread, because that person knows this conduct is indefensible and they'd rather discuss something else.

So in summary, it's not that you're wrong about the police often not facing consequences when they should. And it isn't that there's no legitimate concern over a bystander. It's a question of emphasis and priorities.

Right. I see the thread as being framed in a different direction which is why I focused differently. He's specifically using this death as political ammunition to try and make complaints about cops' actions politically untenable by associating them with this. He's not condemning the violence but using it as a springboard to launch an attack against condemnations against other violence.

We all know that the attack on the cop is inexcusable. All of society agrees about it, and it's enshrined in law. There is no discussion there because there is nothing contentious there. So that's not what the thread is about. It's not about sympathy for her. Phynaz didn't even notice when I accidentally misgendered her in my first post before I'd read the article because she's not a person to him, she's just a uniform with a bullet hole to perform some tears in front of for the next time someone else gets shot. None of the details of the story or the person who died or was injured actually matter beyond it being another point in his team's column.

In short, it absolutely sucks, but short of an in depth discussion of how horribly flawed our socioeconomic situation is and how our cultural outlook with regards to law enforcement is a total mess there's not much more to be said than that it utterly sucks.

Pretty revealing reflection of priorities to carry water for people like Phynaz to divert from why they post threads like this.

Nahh, it's cool. He's doing it because I've been specifically asking and is a long way away from Phynaz using a death as political ammunition. He provides a useful contrast to Phynaz and lets me take a break from coming up with fun turns of phrase which is probably a good thing for my speech patterns so I don't accidentally start using colorful turns of phrase at work.

Why is my responding to your thoughts so important to you? You seem to be reaching out for my attention. Are you an only child that is missing the approval of an authority figure?

I'm making it clear to any bystanders that you are utterly incapable of doing so. Which is funny what with this being your proverbial home turf.

 

[agent00f]

Nahh, it's cool. He's doing it because I've been specifically asking and is a long way away from Phynaz using a death as political ammunition. He provides a useful contrast to Phynaz and lets me take a break from coming up with fun turns of phrase which is probably a good thing for my speech patterns so I don't accidentally start using colorful turns of phrase at work.

I'm just pointing out the fact that when it comes down to a choice between the two woolfe can be depended on to shill for degeneracy over any sort of progress.

 

[xthetenth]

I'm just pointing out the fact that when it comes down to a choice between the two woolfe can be depended on to shill for degeneracy over any sort of progress.

I wouldn't call it that so much as an assumption that most of the self-proclaimed conservatives are engaging in something other than active bad faith that hasn't been shaken yet. That's just my guess though.