Feetzballer Kaepernick 'protests inequality' at preseason game

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,719
47,408
136
I object to the use of "feetzballer" as the ball pretty much never touches his feetz. Also he's a pratt and should be treated as such, if he can sit it out so can the cops. After all, equality.

Kaepernick isn't sitting out the game, he's sitting or kneeling for approximately two minutes before the game. If the cops want to do that more power to them. Otherwise they should do their job.

I'm pretty tired of police demanding that we treat them like they are special flowers that can't handle criticism. Don't want to be criticized? Do a better job.
 

SNC

Platinum Member
Jan 14, 2001
2,166
201
106
The cops are threatening not to do their jobs because someone made them feel sad. Your example would be more akin to them not electing to buy a ticket, something no one would care about.

A good analogy for ATPN would be me not posting here anymore because there's a person with a weird fixation on me who shows up periodically to complain that I'm not living up to the august standards of an elite member. Much like me, the cops shouldn't care. ;)

Wrong! It's a volunteer position and NOT part of their job. Its done after hours and paid for by the teams. How if at all does that change your position on this? I'm gonna go out on a limb and say it does not change.
 

Chaotic42

Lifer
Jun 15, 2001
33,929
1,097
126
A safe space is a designated area where minorities can relax and interact with other minorities, safely away from the traumatic presence of white people.
So.... their dorm rooms/houses/apartments?

fskimospy said:
The cops are threatening not to do their jobs because someone made them feel sad. Your example would be more akin to them not electing to buy a ticket, something no one would care about.

They're talking about not working details, separate paid security duties, at the events. This isn't the same as them not performing their normal police duties.

https://twitter.com/CBSSacramento/status/771949132684681216/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,719
47,408
136
Wrong! It's a volunteer position and NOT part of their job. Its done after hours and paid for by the teams. How if at all does that change your position on this? I'm gonna go out on a limb and say it does not change.

So you're saying the thing they are paid to do is not a job? That's basically the dictionary definition of a job.

Now that we've established this is in fact their job that they are threatening not to perform because someone was mean to them will you be changing your position? I'm going to go out on a limb and say no. Lol.
 

SNC

Platinum Member
Jan 14, 2001
2,166
201
106
Good on Kaepernick. He is using his First Amendment rights and risking something for it at the same time.

What have most of the jerkoffs in this forum risked?

What exactly has he risked? He was 3rd stringer at best so play time was not a risk, hes got more money than 99% of the people here will ever hope to amass, his health care and financial future is, so long as he doesn't buy 20 million worth of icebergs, better then 99% of the people in the world. So exactly what has he risked? If he wanted to impress me, he could go into the areas he is talking about like the heart of Detroit, New York or Chicago after the sun goes down and help the young-ins not get involved in gangs, drugs and crime. He might assist an elderly lady with her groceries get home safe. Or he might open a gym, athletic center or involved in a votech drive in these areas to get the kids off the street and learn a skill or two. Not standing for the flag...... There are tons of shit-for-brains who do that every day. And it seams to me that the thing he was trying to do was completely lost because hes an ass and cant see past the nose on his face.
 

Chaotic42

Lifer
Jun 15, 2001
33,929
1,097
126
So you're saying the thing they are paid to do is not a job? That's basically the dictionary definition of a job.

Now that we've established this is in fact their job that they are threatening not to perform because someone was mean to them will you be changing your position? I'm going to go out on a limb and say no. Lol.
It's separate contract work which they are choosing not to take. It's not their job until they agree to it.
 

SNC

Platinum Member
Jan 14, 2001
2,166
201
106
So you're saying the thing they are paid to do is not a job? That's basically the dictionary definition of a job.

Now that we've established this is in fact their job that they are threatening not to perform because someone was mean to them will you be changing your position? I'm going to go out on a limb and say no. Lol.

I really didn't think there were people this fucking dense. You've given new meaning to obtuse.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,719
47,408
136
It's separate contract work which they are choosing not to take. It's not their job until they agree to it.

Ever since about 1865 or so every job is not a job until you agree to take it. That doesn't change the fact that they are refusing to do it because Kaepernick sat down and made them feel sad.

Thin skinned babies.
 

Chaotic42

Lifer
Jun 15, 2001
33,929
1,097
126
Ever since about 1865 or so every job is not a job until you agree to take it. That doesn't change the fact that they are refusing to do it because Kaepernick sat down and made them feel sad.

Thin skinned babies.
I think you're being deliberately obtuse here. Refusing additional, optional assignments isn't "refusing to do their jobs". They're declining those additional, optional assignments in an attempt to make a point. There's no dereliction of duty.

Is it the right move? Probably not. It will likely cause more harm than good, but if Kaepernick has proven anything recently, it's that we all have the right to behave like an ass.
 

SNC

Platinum Member
Jan 14, 2001
2,166
201
106
It's separate contract work which they are choosing not to take. It's not their job until they agree to it.
I am pretty sure with this one nothing outside of his version of reality is taken into account when critical thinking is involved. Using his thinking I should fire my guys if they opt to not fix their parents computers after hours, because that's their day job. Or my buddy should loose his job as executive chef because he was unable to provide chefing duties for a party I was throwing.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,719
47,408
136
I think you're being deliberately obtuse here. Refusing additional, optional assignments isn't "refusing to do their jobs". They're declining those additional, optional assignments in an attempt to make a point. There's no dereliction of duty.

Is it the right move? Probably not. It will likely cause more harm than good, but if Kaepernick has proven anything recently, it's that we all have the right to behave like an ass.

I never said it was a dereliction of duty, ever. It's them refusing to do the work they normally do because a guy on a football team called them out (correctly) for being shitty. As I said before this is the behavior of an incredibly entitled and thin skinned group.
 

SNC

Platinum Member
Jan 14, 2001
2,166
201
106
Haha I totally called it. Of course you wouldn't change your mind.

Change my mind because you give a false set of facts? Please, why the fuck would I do that? You keep on with the narrative that this is their JOB, it is not until they take it. There are thousands of openings for security jobs that off duty officers can take, are they all not doing their jobs if they don't take them? What part of this is tripping you up?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,719
47,408
136
I am pretty sure with this one nothing outside of his version of reality is taken into account when critical thinking is involved. Using his thinking I should fire my guys if they opt to not fix their parents computers after hours, because that's their day job. Or my buddy should loose his job as executive chef because he was unable to provide chefing duties for a party I was throwing.

Speaking of someone who doesn't accept anything outside of their version of reality can you point me to the place where I said anyone should be fired? Take as much time as you need.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,719
47,408
136
Change my mind because you give a false set of facts? Please, why the fuck would I do that? You keep on with the narrative that this is their JOB, it is not until they take it. There are thousands of openings for security jobs that off duty officers can take, are they all not doing their jobs if they don't take them? What part of this is tripping you up?

Are you being deliberately obtuse? They do that work at every game and then suddenly decided to stop because a football player happened to publicly protest their racism. You want to ignore this for some reason, but I don't.
 

SNC

Platinum Member
Jan 14, 2001
2,166
201
106
Speaking of someone who doesn't accept anything outside of their version of reality can you point me to the place where I said anyone should be fired? Take as much time as you need.

OK You got me, you never said it word for word, but saying that a police officer is not performing his duties should only result in one thing. So to clarify what would you have done to them for not taking the extra off duty assignment?
Or are you just happy to have something to blowhard about?
 

Chaotic42

Lifer
Jun 15, 2001
33,929
1,097
126
I never said it was a dereliction of duty, ever. It's them refusing to do the work they normally do because a guy on a football team called them out (correctly) for being shitty. As I said before this is the behavior of an incredibly entitled and thin skinned group.
I'll grant you that any criticism of the police or military is pretty much instantly pigeonholed as unpatriotic and that we do need to seriously take a look at institutional racism and police brutality as well as issues of police training, pay, hiring guidelines, and equipment budgets. Not to mention sentencing and for-profit prisons.

Unfortunately someone who makes a really bad spokesperson for rational discussion decided to interject himself and become the face of these issues by doing things that the silent majority, the ones who really need to listen to this discussion, find insulting.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,719
47,408
136
OK You got me, you never said it word for word, but saying that a police officer is not performing his duties should only result in one thing. So to clarify what would you have done to them for not taking the extra off duty assignment?
Or are you just happy to have something to blowhard about?

I'm perfectly happy with what has happened so far, which is public ridicule of them for acting like entitled crybabies. I find it contemptible that police forces are so utterly incapable of accepting criticism, especially when they have done so much to earn it.
 

SNC

Platinum Member
Jan 14, 2001
2,166
201
106
Are you being deliberately obtuse? They do that work at every game and then suddenly decided to stop because a football player happened to publicly protest their racism. You want to ignore this for some reason, but I don't.

So if they opted to not do it because they wanted to go to the water park with the kids that day, you would be OK with it? You are saying it is part of their JOB, if they are not doing their JOB what is the difference why? You have an issue because of the reason but you hang on to the "its their job" line, in a piss poor attempt to validate your argument. The reason why they opted never entered my reasoning, it is the basses of yours.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,719
47,408
136
I'll grant you that any criticism of the police or military is pretty much instantly pigeonholed as unpatriotic and that we do need to seriously take a look at institutional racism and police brutality as well as issues of police training, pay, hiring guidelines, and equipment budgets. Not to mention sentencing and for-profit prisons.

Unfortunately someone who makes a really bad spokesperson for rational discussion decided to interject himself and become the face of these issues by doing things that the silent majority, the ones who really need to listen to this discussion, find insulting.

Sure, the choice of tactics for this protest might end up not being effective, but it's not like other avenues of protest were exactly working either. It's hard for me to imagine what would be effective though, to be honest. My guess is that the people bringing this issue to public awareness would face a strong backlash no matter who they are or how they went about it. It's probably a necessary part of change.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,719
47,408
136
So if they opted to not do it because they wanted to go to the water park with the kids that day, you would be OK with it? You are saying it is part of their JOB, if they are not doing their JOB what is the difference why? You have an issue because of the reason but you hang on to the "its their job" line, in a piss poor attempt to validate your argument. The reason why they opted never entered my reasoning, it is the basses of yours.

Yes, the reason why they opted out is in fact the whole point. If the police had decided to stop working as security at games because they were trying to be better parents to their children we wouldn't be having this discussion.
 

SNC

Platinum Member
Jan 14, 2001
2,166
201
106
I'm perfectly happy with what has happened so far, which is public ridicule of them for acting like entitled crybabies. I find it contemptible that police forces are so utterly incapable of accepting criticism, especially when they have done so much to earn it.


So wait you have proof that these officers or their department is responsible for acts of racism? Or are you just making general sweeping statements for which you have no facts about these particular officers? You know like the very thing you are crying about, prejudicing an entire group for the action of some.
 

SNC

Platinum Member
Jan 14, 2001
2,166
201
106
Yes, the reason why they opted out is in fact the whole point. If the police had decided to stop working as security at games because they were trying to be better parents to their children we wouldn't be having this discussion.


But your entire argument was based on the fact that it was their JOB! So now its not?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,719
47,408
136
So wait you have proof that these officers or their department is responsible for acts of racism? Or are you just making general sweeping statements for which you have no facts about these particular officers? You know like the very thing you are crying about, prejudicing an entire group for the action of some.

Funny, Kaepernick never called out those particular officers for being racists either but they took it as such, haha. This is a silly argument. Anyone criticizing the police for being racist is not saying that every last individual officer is racist and you know that.

The argument is that policing in America in general is racist, it has nothing to do with individual officers. That policing in America on the whole is racist is basically undeniable, so I don't know what your point is.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,719
47,408
136
But your entire argument was based on the fact that it was their JOB! So now its not?

Actually my argument was that they weren't doing their job because someone made them feel sad about police racism. I even said it in the post you quoted. You're the one that made it into a discussion about what a job is or isn't when we should be instead focusing on the racism endemic to police, which is the actual issue.