GoBills808

Yeh I think I do I want all that and more cause that's what comes with being a top team So I say bring em on

More the merrier imho

Give me a break. I was talking to someone else and you butted in, after tagging me in some thread I wasn't involving myself. I'm barely interested in the other conversation going at the moment as it is. You're elevator music.

A good 80% of what you type in general

Hardly the point unless you want to get into hypotheticals, as we're discussing this particular set of texts.

Notwithstanding our disagreement over whether White's reaction is justified (it is) I find the overall reasonableness of this comment disconcerting

I suppose we're about at that point in the conversation where I ask whether you understand why White's 'behavior' is justified and you accuse me of being a reverse racist. White>>>>>>>>>>>>Fromm and something tells me you're not unfamiliar with arguing that something you shouldn't have sent electronically in the past can and should come back to haunt you professionally

Of course it's a stupid joke. I'm not judging Fromm, I know ***** all about him other than he went to Georgia and we drafted him in the 5th. And clearly everybody is fired up, and I don't blame White in the slightest for not accepting some apology from a rookie who's probably not going to dress on Sundays. So I guess it just tickles me that this comes up and suddenly I can't seem to find the folks that harp on how the NFL is a meritocracy, personal responsibility and all those concepts that get thrown out the window at earliest convenience.

Color me shocked that you agree with the guy who gives Fromm a pass because it's a 'stupid joke in private text' but calls White a POS for responding. No, but they inform both the context in which his texts will be received as well as White's response. To ignore that is misleading at best.

I guess I should have added a 'haha' at the end

All well and good and entirely beside the point. My issue is with your focusing on White's reaction to Fromm's texts in what SOME (not NECESSARILY me, but you can go ahead and throw me in there for good measure) would call a deflection is it completely and probably deliberately misses the context of what precipitated their release and subsequent uproar.

Terrible story and unsure why tagged

OK. Anyone whose response to Fromm's text message faux pas is 'Tre White's a POS' lacks requisite brain functioning to be eligible for arbiter of 'real racist offender' threshhold. Your turn.

You really want to do this, dude? You use way too many adjectives for a guy who wants to be taken seriously.

You mean like this, oh impartial untriggered one?

Yeah, cause you definitely seem like the kind of impartial observer we need defining what a ‘real offender’ looks like.

117%

Isn't it hard to argue that it's just 'a few bad cops' ruining the rest's reputation when 57 of them from one unit resign in solidarity with the two who shoved the guy to the ground?

Appreciate the response. The above is a different statistic than the one we were talking about earlier which I hope you understand is about as meaningless as comparing the velocity of a car to the interest on a savings account. What you have here is the ratio of police killed by black people to the amount of black people per capita. That's a much different formula than originally proposed, and if you really want I guess we could get into the socioeconomic reasons behind the disparity.

Look- imagine for a second there's no political bone to pick. Just for a second. Rate refers to the ratio between two related quantities in different units. Like the rate of velocity is measured in terms of meters per second. You're trying to measure the rate of cops killed to the rate of unarmed black people killed by cops without defining a comparable denominator: you don't have compatible rates. What you are operating under is (police)+(unarmed black people killed by police)/...what?

Those two rates are meaningless as you've set them up. They don't refer to anything that I'd want to use to draw a conclusion.

If you really think it's weird that cops are killed at a higher rate than unarmed blacks are killed by police might I suggest a course in remedial statistics.

I'm going to miss you terribly

When you said this: Unless I am misreading you, your premise is that the difference in police response to the two groups is understandable due to a 'reasonable belief' that one group may be looting the local target or try(ing) to set fire to city hall. I object to the flippant suggestion that your version, and by proxy the police's, of 'reasonable belief' should be applied unilaterally, as illustrated recently by law enforcement's interactions with the segment of society for whom these protests represent.

OK- your assumption that the police apply the same standard to different people is one such privileged view. Your definition of what constitutes reasonable expectation wrt violence against protestors is another.