Black Out Tuesday

Author: SupaDudz ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 12
  • SupaDudz
    SupaDudz avatar
    Debates: 29
    Forum posts: 10,326
    5
    8
    11
    SupaDudz avatar
    SupaDudz
    Greetings DebateArt community. I am SupaDudz, the person in charge of Discord. 

    We obviously know about the vile, cruel, and disgusting killing of George Floyd by racist cops. These cops have blood on their hands and they committed some horrendous crimes and must be charged

    With that, so much negativity has spread by not only just press, but from people in general. The world is in fear and we are living in a time of fear. But it’s time we distance ourselves from social media. On June 2nd, many people are closing their social media’s for a day, and doing reflecting on the meaning of life and the community. I am in full support of this event to bring awareness to our community by not surrounding ourselves with social media 

    I have decided to take action and close the discord for the day and will be taking part by not posting on DART or Discord for the day. If you would like to make change and spread awareness in a peaceful way, here is an opportunity

    Further, if you would like to donate, a link will be provided 
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 283
    Forum posts: 8,679
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    --> @SupaDudz
    One cop, the other three you cannot simply say murdered him. If we hold them all equally accountable then we begin to change a lot about how and why we punish.

    As for the fund, what's it going towards?

  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 283
    Forum posts: 8,679
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    I spend every day contemplating the meaning of life, I owe the world absolutely nothing and do not need to blackout my online life for an injustice that I had no responsibility in.

    I feel the same agony for every single abuse by cops in North Korea, China, Nigeria and wherever else. This is nothing new, it's just in America.

  • PressF4Respect
    PressF4Respect avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,131
    3
    8
    11
    PressF4Respect avatar
    PressF4Respect
    --> @RationalMadman
    One cop, the other three you cannot simply say murdered him. If we hold them all equally accountable then we begin to change a lot about how and why we punish.
    609.05 LIABILITY FOR CRIMES OF ANOTHER.
    §Subdivision 1. Aiding, abetting; liability.
     A person is criminally liable for a crime committed by another if the person intentionally aids, advises, hires, counsels, or conspires with or otherwise procures the other to commit the crime.

    Aiding and/or abetting a crime carries the same legal weight as committing the crime itself.
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 283
    Forum posts: 8,679
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    --> @PressF4Respect
    Do you have evidence of them planning it or even knowing how close to death that the guy was? Do you have understanding that under the circumstances they were very afraid to get close in fear of getting infected with a lethal virus that even if it didn't kill them, could kill elderly people or people with lung problems that they come into close contact with?

    There were many factors at play here, it was not at all as simple as a four-person planned murder and I refuse to jump onto a bandwagon. I am a person who is rarely a bystander, I am actually quite brave, but I am not about to point fingers and artificially blame people for more than they did wrong. 
  • PressF4Respect
    PressF4Respect avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,131
    3
    8
    11
    PressF4Respect avatar
    PressF4Respect
    --> @RationalMadman
    That's for the court + jury to decide.
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 283
    Forum posts: 8,679
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    --> @PressF4Respect
    No judge or jury member will dare give the rioters or thugs a reason to hurt them and those close to them. This has got to a level where everyone in that courtroom is blackmailed to loathe the cops involved or face severe drawback. At the very least career-destroying drawback, at worst violent. People are frothing at the mouth with seething rage, no one will dare prod that beast. I pity the defense attorney of the cops, I hope he/she stays safe somehow.
  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 40
    Forum posts: 951
    3
    5
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    --> @RationalMadman
    Artificial? Law enforcement, by definition, is holding such to a higher standard than the average citizen. As soon as Floyd was declaring his inability to breathe, that should have been signal to the other three that an inappropriate level of force was being applied and they shold have stepped in to arrest the violation of Floyd's due process rights. They know that by training. They also know, by training, that the force being applied by their fellow officer was beyond the necessary force. Floyd was already handcuffed. What's he still doing on hte street, under a knee, when he shold have been placed in the back seat f the cruiser rather than at its rear wheel? 
  • PressF4Respect
    PressF4Respect avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,131
    3
    8
    11
    PressF4Respect avatar
    PressF4Respect
    --> @RationalMadman
    The jury members can be made anonymous. As they're the ones carrying out the final verdict (unless the judge overturns it), they would be the ones who carry the greatest risk. I don't think anyone would be angry at the judge if the jury decided that they were not guilty. Also, if it proves to be too unsafe to carry out the trial in that particular courthouse, then they can move it to another, safer jurisdiction. Furthermore, both the crown (this is the Canadian name for it, not sure what it's called in the US) and the defence can appeal the verdict. As for our defence attorney, well, he chose to take up the case, so he should be pretty aware of the consequences.
  • Discipulus_Didicit
    Discipulus_Didicit avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,946
    3
    4
    10
    Discipulus_Didicit avatar
    Discipulus_Didicit
    On June 2nd, many people are closing their social media’s for a day, and doing reflecting on the meaning of life and the community.
    This cannot possibly have a non-hilarious outcome.
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 283
    Forum posts: 8,679
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    --> @fauxlaw
    What happened is a tragedy. There is no way that if the other cops knew how truly bad the situation was, they wouldn't step in (on camera) to prevent a scandal as happened. Whether for genuine reasons or to save their own reputations, they'd have stepped in if they knew how bad it was. I cannot fathom a reason stupid enough to justify not stepping in other than them not realising how bad it was.

    Maybe I'm naive and delusional, either way they're screwed.

  • Discipulus_Didicit
    Discipulus_Didicit avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,946
    3
    4
    10
    Discipulus_Didicit avatar
    Discipulus_Didicit
    --> @RationalMadman
    There is no way that if the other cops knew how truly bad the situation was, they wouldn't step in (on camera) to prevent a scandal as happened Whether for genuine reasons or to save their own reputations
    At first glance this seems to make sense. However, does it not suggest that there "is no way" the cop commiting the act would have done it in the first place whether for genuine reasons or to save his reputation? It does seem to suggest this, and since they clearly did not stop that would seem to suggest a flaw in your reasoning.

    Put another way...

    X = Anybody in that situation who was able to stop it and knew how bad it was would have done so (whether for genuine reasons or to save face).

    Y = The perpetrating cop would have stopped if they knew how bad it was (whether for genuine reasons or to save face).

    Z = The other cops would have stopped if they knew how bad it was (whether for genuine reasons or to save face).

    If we assume X is true then Y must be true.

    If Y is true there are only two possible outcomes. Either...

    1) The perpetrating cop stopped (we know this did not happen).

    2) The perpetrating cop did not know how bad it was (we seem to agree this is not likely).

    If neither of the above is true then Y is not true, in which case X is clearly untrue. If X is untrue we have very good reason to suspect that Z is untrue as well.