Total posts: 14,582
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
But the fact remains that some jobs require you to take actions that could result in someone's death. If those actions are what is required to do that job, and we want people to do that job, then we need protections for people doing those jobs.
He is the first white officer in Minnesota to be criminally prosecuted in the death of a black civilian. The maximum sentence for third-degree murder is 25 years; the maximum for second-degree manslaughter is 10 years. [LINK]
Well, I guess that means, "nobody will every become a police officer ever again".
Although,
Even if Derek Chauvin is found guilty of murdering George Floyd, he's still eligible to receive a $1.5 million pension [LINK]
So, it might still be "worth the risk".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Manslaughter
The unlawful killing of a human being without any deliberation, which may be involuntary, in the commission of a lawful act without due caution and circumspection. [LINK]
Accidentally killing someone while you're committing a crime is called, "FELONY MURDER".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
my point is that even if you do everything you are supposed to do, people can die in any confrontation that involves physical contact. Presuming that this person is a murderer in this scenario is not a good idea.
I never suggested a murder charge.
My point is that even if you do everything you are supposed to do, people can die as a result of your actions.
It doesn't matter who you are or what you do for a living.
When any average person accidentally kills someone, it's called MANSLAUGHTER.
I'm really not convinced we should make some special exceptions for ANYONE.
Aren't we all supposed to be "equal under the law"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
If that happens, why should the victim of the attack be considered a murderer?
I never suggested a murder charge.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
If you didn't intend to kill a person, then it isn't. It is an accident.
It's also MANSLAUGHTER.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
There is a bias against people who aren't white, and a bias for white people in the system of government.
The only bias I see FOR people is for RICH PEOPLE.
Nobody gets "bonus points" simply for their relative skin-tone.
They might avoid "point deductions" simply for their relative skin-tone.
But "not getting point deductions" (specifically for skin-tone) is not a "privilege".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
According to A.J. Marsden, assistant professor of psychology and human services at Beacon College in Leesburg, Florida, one reason we hate is because we fear things that are different from us. [LINK]
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
I'm pointing out that making everyone who defends themselves a murderer if their attacker dies is not a feasible solution.
In many cases there are no witnesses.
Making a manslaughter charge automatic is the best option (A.LL L.IVES M.AT.TER).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
A basic police takedown can cause someone to die.
I'm going to hazard a guess that cops kill slightly more people with their service weapon than they kill by following proper police standard operating procedure (i.e. NOT resting their body-weight on a subdued suspect's neck or back).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
do you significantly hold back in defending yourself (ie no punching or any other vigorous defense that could potentially kill) and make it easy for the other person to kill you, or do you do everything you can to stay alive and risk going to prison for decades?
On the other hand, do you just shoot someone who looks suspicious because you, "fear for your life"?
For example - - [LINK]
AND,
For instance, the federal law against voluntary manslaughter states that defendants should receive fines, a prison sentence of not more than ten years or both.
California's manslaughter law, on the other hand, gets a little more specific and states that anyone found guilty of manslaughter should receive a prison sentence of between three and 11 years.
In both instances, judges have some leeway to determine the specific sentence that they will give a particular defendant. This is where aggravating and mitigating factors come into play. [LINK]
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
One punch could kill someone.
I wish someone would explain that to Bruce Wayne.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
ok. but when defending yourself, the possibility that the other person could die is always there.
When you get behind the wheel of an automobile, the possibility that another person could die is always there.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
An absence of one specific type of exclusionary bias does not equal "privilege".
Some "whites" are also "deformed".
Some "whites" are also "differently-abled".
Some "whites" do not live in majority "white" geographical regions.
Regional and cultural bias still exists even between people with indistinguishable skin-tones (no-irish, no-jews, no-italians need apply).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
But making it a crime for a police officer to kill someone under any circumstance would guarantee no one would be a police officer.
I disagree.
I do not believe that police cadets EXPECT to kill people (like Judge Dredd).
There is no shortage of brutally efficient NON-LETHAL options.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
those 2 statements contradict each other. Defending yourself is fine, but if that defense ends up killing the other person, you go to prison. Which means that can't really defend yourself.
SELF-DEFENSE =/= KILLING ANOTHER HUMAN
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
So in your world, police don't exist. because no cop is ever going to go on a call if they can go to prison for doing their job. No one has the right to defend themselves because doing so is a crime. This is a society that cannot function.
DEFENDING YOURSELF IS NOT A CRIME.
Killing another human being is the very definition of MANSLAUGHTER.
It seems like it would perhaps maybe sort of kinda be nice to live in a world where police could NEVER kill another human with IMPUNITY.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
I was choosing topics that were the most fun (in fact, I was doing devil's advocate), not the most even.
Have you considered the idea of a "back-to-back" debate?
Where each participant has to argue either PRO or CON in the first 3 rounds and then they switch sides for another 3 rounds.
In order to "win" you must score the highest in BOTH halves of the debate (or at least win one and tie in another).
The idea is kind of like when setting an official land-speed-record, you must get the same (or better) time UP the track AND on your way back DOWN the track.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Just homophobic, doesn't mean being afraid of gay people,
Try this - - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTZK3TCjuhA
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
So if someone tries to kill you and you end up killing them, you think you should go to prison for 25 years? if a cop tries to arrest someone and they pull a gun and shoot at the cop, in ensuing gunfight the guy is killed, the cop should go to prison for 25 years?That seems logical to you?
Killing another human, even in "self-defense" should carry a mandatory manslaughter charge.
This seems manifestly logical to me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
The only banning; the only censorship should be that of individual, personal choice. Why must we accept that only others can make these choices for us? As I argued with HistoryBuff, to abdicate that choice to someone else is a matter of weakness, not strength.
Right, each person should have the option to "mute" (and "unmute") accounts they don't want to see.
Each individual should be able to choose for themselves.
No individual, or "community" (communist collective) should be able to choose what gets "muted" for EVERYONE.
Each individual should be able to subscribe and or unsubscribe to any "censored" view-settings as that individual sees fit.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
EX we should never allow anyone to kill anyone. So self defense, police doing their jobs etc are all criminals because if you allow someone to kill someone that is a slippery slope.
This actually sounds like an amazing proposal.
Classical "self-defense" is supposed to "mitigate the threat" and NOT simply, "fill-'em-fulla-led" cuz dem bad.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Good point.
AND just because two or more individual's skin-tone happen to (roughly) match, doesn't mean "they agree" either.
Not all "blacks" are poor.
Not all "whites" are privileged.
Not all "israelites" own a bank.
Created:
-->
@ebuc
More complex does not = free will.
Well stated.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
No, nothing should be banned. That's a real slippery slope, when you start with ANYTHING
100% THIS.
(IFF) YOU START KILLING PEOPLE JUST BECAUSE YOU READ ABOUT IT IN A BOOK (THEN) YOU WERE PROBABLY JUST LOOKING FOR AN EXCUSE IN THE FIRST PLACE
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
And, both of the groups you mention simply want to BE LEFT THE FUCK ALONE.
Both of the groups you mention simply don't wish to be TOLD WHAT TO DO.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
What word do you use?
Do you call it, "cult(ure)"?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Also, YOU'RE IN A CULT AND YOU JUST DON'T REALIZE IT.
BECAUSE NOBODY CALLS A CULT A CULT WHEN THEY'RE INSIDE IT.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
I find it strange that the "far-left" and the "far-right" spend so much time pointing fingers at each other when they actually agree on core principles.
They should stop straw-manning each other and start working together.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Do you have a specific question?
Created:
-->
@Mopac
Well, without a fixed standard of the best possible ice-cream flavor, how can anyone say that one flavor is "better" than another??
Created:
-->
@Mopac
When the puppets CAN'T see the strings, they just blame themselves and the puppeteer can act with impunity.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
Which flavor of ice-cream does "YHWH" think is the one-true-ultimate-and-perfect flavor of ice-cream?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Undefeatable
To win the war, battles may be lost.
You are not "defeated" until you surrender.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tradesecret
It looks like Seventh-day Adventists, Muslims, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Buddhists top the charts for the most "racially" diverse.
And National Baptist Convention, Lutheran, United Methodist, African Methodist, and Hindus are the least "racially" diverse.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
The Bible calls for violence against unbelievers. Shall we ban the Bible?
And it also calls for violence against adulterers.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tradesecret
Great.
If you say the Church you attend is 50% darker-skin-toned and 50% lighter-skin-toned, that's amazing.
All I'm pointing out is that would be a statistical anomaly.
Most Churches are either 90% darker-skin-toned OR 90% lighter-skin-toned.
Typically when a Church approaches an 80%/20% ratio, the Church will split.
Some small percentage of skin-tone-diversity is always sought-after, but only up-to about a 10% minority population is (subconsciously) tolerated.
Created:
Posted in:
The "far-right" and the "far-left" both distrust the banksters.
The "far-left" and the "far-right" both distrust centralized government.
The "far-right" and the "far-left" both distrust the globalists.
The "far-left" and the "far-right" both distrust the **CORPORATE MOBSTERS**.
The globalist-banksters don't believe in "communism".
The globalist-banksters promise "communism" but **never** deliver.
IT'S THE FUCKING **CENTRISTS** WHO TRUST "BIG GOVERNMENT".
IT'S THE FUCKING **CENTRISTS** WHO TRUST "GLOBAL CORPORATIONS".
We are the members of "Do-it-or-DIE" (D-ie, D-ie, Die).
Do what we say - or we will kill you.
# In 6 minutes and 30 seconds, YOU ARE A CULT MEMBER
# Skip to 1072 seconds, YOU ARE A CULT MEMBER
Cults are everywhere.
There are little pieces of cults in all things.
We all have so many of those "mental traps" already.
We just can't see the traps from the inside.
# Skip to 3325 seconds, YOU ARE A CULT MEMBER
Suppose, you, you're, out of work.
You don't have anything to eat.
You look for a job.
It's considered a wonderful thing to get a job.
It wasn't always that way.
You go back to the origins of the Industrial Revolution.
Mid 19th Century.
Take a look at the literature, the working-class literature.
The idea of "having a job" was considered a, a, totally, intolerable assault.
On elementary human dignity and human rights.
# Everything you will ever need to know about politics was explained in 1945,
The "lesson" of ANIMAL-FARM is that **FEUDAL HIERARCHY** is "the enemy" (DEMAND HOLACRACY + RCV).
The "lesson" of ANIMAL-FARM is that government **promises** are MEANINGLESS.
The "lesson" of ANIMAL-FARM is that whoever controls **"the dogs"** (military-police-cult aged males) can scare everyone else into abject submission (SO THEY CAN LITERALLY GET AWAY WITH MURDER AND OR EPSTEIN).
IT'S THE FUCKING **CENTRISTS** WHO TRUST "BIG GOVERNMENT".
IT'S THE FUCKING **CENTRISTS** WHO TRUST "GLOBAL CORPORATIONS".
# RADICAL ANTI-CENTRIST PROPAGANDA,
SEARCH **ROKU** TV FOR "LOGICZOMBIE"
SEARCH YOUTUBE FOR "LOGICZOMBIE" [LINK]
SEARCH **LBRY.TV** FOR "LOGICZOMBIE" [LINK]
### Human "creativity" is (EITHER) caused by previous influences (OR) indistinguishable from random - - WILL cannot be random - - FREE action cannot be caused by previous influences - - FREE is incompatible with WILL.
+proHUMAN +proFAMILY
Your scathing critique is requested.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
that's because I'm not tied down to a materialist worldview
ATHEIST =/= MATERIALIST - - https://youtu.be/P-2P3MSZrBM?t=1910
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tradesecret
That Christians who are predominantly are Gentiles are able to see this picture is clearly an anti-racist sentiment.
Why are nearly all Christian Churches 90% homogeneous?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
"These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.” (Matthew 10:5–6).
Paul (who was not one of the twelve) apparently didn't get the memo.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tradesecret
The Bible is anti-racist.
Although, not quite as much as you might hope.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
The solution, if this problem exists, is certainly not racial reparations...
Great.
Now we know what you think is NOT the "solution".
What is your policy proposal?
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
If it is true, then people with those names should change their name to something western.
Yeah, that doesn't address the "real problem".
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
...something must be done to prevent it.
What's your policy proposal?
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Not all of them do, but enough gay and bi males have promiscuous sex and as a result, get STDs. People shouldn’t have sex until marriage to prevent STI spreading.
Right, but the important point here is that you can't generalize individual risk.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
This looks pretty dumb as a set up here. First, if everything that exists has an explanation for its existence, you'd now have the question of what explains the exisence of god. And P2 does not in any way follow from P1, it's a leap of leaps. You can replace God with anything and it has the same validity. I know, I know, you only argue for the god of th bible, which makes this argument correct in your view, but it will never move anyone who doesn't already believe as you do. I' mean I'm not familiar with the rest of the argument, but on its face, this is not a very sound syllogism.
Well stated.
Created:
-->
@PGA2.0
Chattel slavery is wrong. It was the standard of many ANE cultures but not Israel. God strictly forbade mistreatment of others except in the case of wrongdoing for the purpose of punishment and to teach a lesson.
The "YHWH" only prohibits chattel slavery OF ISRAELITES.
The "YHWH" does NOT prohibit chattel slavery OF FOREIGNERS.
Created: