Liberal Protests

[Tiberius]

10 minutes ago, westside2 said:

Maybe the left needs to execute five year old white kids to get the message across?  You know, for george floyd.

That dudes in jail, right? 

5 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Unfortunately, yes, I agree.  Laborers are voting against their own interests, and Trump’s lies have eaten away at union strength.  Unions don’t vote as a block like they used to.  

Divide by race and conquer 

[ziltoid]

14 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

 

Legally, what is within her rights to do?  Just lean a little further back into her chair?  Accept the covid spittle into her mouth and eyes?

 

@SectionC3, you're a lawyer right?  Care to weigh in?

[RochesterRob]

27 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Unfortunately, yes, I agree.  Laborers are voting against their own interests, and Trump’s lies have eaten away at union strength.  Unions don’t vote as a block like they used to.  

  You are missing the point.  The unions were in steep decline long before Trump came along and I do not agree with your assessment regarding him.  AMC's best years were from the mid 1950's (when a bunch of smaller companies such as Nash were combined to form AMC) when AMC was formed until the late 1980's when AMC was bought and most of its products were discontinued.  A shame in some respects as some designs such as the Eagle lived on in other manufacturers lines namely Subaru.  

Edited August 25, 2020 by RochesterRob

[Deranged Rhino]

 

 

(Already covered -- but good point)

 

 

[All_Pro_Bills]

32 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Unfortunately, yes, I agree.  Laborers are voting against their own interests, and Trump’s lies have eaten away at union strength.  Unions don’t vote as a block like they used to.  

Although its fashionable to blame Trump for everything the decline of union membership has nothing to do with Trump and everything to do with the globalization movement.  The decline began in the late 1970's and accelerated into the end of the 20th century.  First factories and businesses fled the Northeast and Midwest for the union-free South and "right to work" states.  Later to other countries like Mexico with NAFTA and China via the granting of most favored nation trade status.  The deal with China  and other Asian countries like Japan was a trade of American jobs and access to the lucrative U.S. market in exchange for creating a market for the purchase of U.S. debt that funded deficit spending and all shorts of social and defense programs. 

These former union and middle class workers that saw their standard of living downsized voted for Trump because nobody else even recognized their existence.  Or provided them any hope for the future.  Certainly not the Democratic party or Hillary Clinton who labeled them as "deplorables".   The Democrats long abandoned these people for fringe social causes that caused the party platform to drift to the left while embracing the promise of the new economy and the technology provided by the silicon valley oligarchs.  

So here we are today with a hollowed out economy massively in debt with no hope of paying any of it back with everybody on their iPhones hiding in their homes watching riots and looting in the streets demanding all kinds of free stuff and payoffs while we wait for a November election disaster and what should be a long and painful economic depression when it finally hits home that there's nothing left to redistribute and everybody's on their own.       

Edited August 25, 2020 by All_Pro_Bills

[SectionC3]

12 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  You are missing the point.  The unions were in steep decline long before Trump came along and I do not agree with your assessment regarding him.  AMC's best years were from the mid 1950's (when a bunch of smaller companies such as Nash were combined to form AMC) when AMC was formed until the late 1980's when AMC was bought and most of its products were discontinued.  A shame in some respects as some designs such as the Eagle lived on in other manufacturers lines namely Subaru.  

I’m not missing the point.  Union members, at least in the manufacturing sector, typically are white males who buy Trump’s lies.  Yes, that collectivity and strength was fading before Trump.  But Trump has accelerated the process.  Good for rich people, bad for the working class. 

[SectionC3]

Just now, All_Pro_Bills said:

Although its fashionable to blame Trump for everything the decline of union membership has nothing to do with Trump and everything to do with the globalization movement.  The decline began in the late 1970's and accelerated into the end of the 20th century.  First factories and businesses fled the Northeast and Midwest for the union-free South and "right to work" states.  Later to other countries like Mexico with NAFTA and China via the granting of most favored nation trade status.  The deal with China  and other Asian countries like Japan was a trade of American jobs and access to the lucrative U.S. market in exchange for creating a market for the purchase of U.S. debt that funded deficit spending and all shorts of social and defense programs. 

These former union and middle class workers that saw their standard of living downsized voted for Trump because nobody else even recognized their existence.  Or provided them any hope for the future.  Certainly not the Democratic party or Hillary Clinton who labeled them as "deplorables".   The Democrats long abandoned these people for fringe social causes that caused the party platform to drift to the left while embracing the promise of the new economy and the of technology provided by the silicon valley oligarchs.  

So here we are today with a hollowed out economy massively in debt with no hope of paying any of it back with everybody on their iPhones hiding in their homes watching riots and looting in the streets demanding all kinds of free stuff and payoffs while we wait for a November election disaster and what should be a long and painful economic depression when it finally hits home that there's nothing left to redistribute and everybody's on their own.       

 

I agree with you on the “recognition” point.  See my Prada and pearls comment.  

 

I think you’re focusing on manufacturing, and your points about the flight of manufacturing jobs (due in some part to bad trade deals and in other, significant part to the fact that it’s simply cheaper to make things when you pay people only a couple of bucks an hour) largely is fair.  The problem, of course, is that crappy trade deals or not, those people always were going to be left behind as technology evolved.  Trump said he would do something for them, and he really hasn’t.  On top of that, with respect to unions as a whole, Trump and Republicans did grave damage to public unions through the Supreme Court’s Janus decision — an assault upon stare decisis if ever there was one — and ignored the rule of law to manufacture a result that significantly undercut non-manufacturing unions, such as teachers unions, police unions, and elements of unions representing health care workers.  

 

The disaster point is something with which I probably disagree.  If you’re suggesting that Biden will be a disaster, I couldn’t disagree more strongly.  (As an aside, if this current state of affairs isn’t a disaster, I don’t know what is.)  If you’re suggesting the election will be a mess because it’s going to take time for largely Democratic absentees to arrive and to be counted, and that those arrivals will be Biden’s margin of victory, and that in the meantime Trump will lie and claim a rigged election and the idiots who follow him will buy it and threaten to throw the country into chaos, then yes, I agree.  I worry about that every day. 

[BillStime]

 

[SectionC3]

28 minutes ago, BeerLeagueHockey said:

 

Legally, what is within her rights to do?  Just lean a little further back into her chair?  Accept the covid spittle into her mouth and eyes?

 

@SectionC3, you're a lawyer right?  Care to weigh in?

 

Isn’t the virus a hoax?  So the spittle point, assuming there was spittle, is not moving to me.  (And she has a mask on, so I’m not going to worry about the mouth issue.  And it also doesn’t appear that she was spat upon, so we’re going to skip right past that.) 

 

Your question otherwise is pretty vague.  Can she talk or get up and walk away?  Sure.  Why not?  If you’re getting at an application of force question, the first thing she has to do in this scenario (involving a “threat” of non-deadly force and not involving a burglary of her home, assuming she’s in Wisconsin and the law there is the same as it is in NYS) is retreat.  It doesn’t look like anyone or anything blocked that.  So if you’re suggesting that she should have been able to strike/shoot/whatever one of the people around her, I don’t think it would have been justified based on what I saw.  

 

[Reality Check]

18 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

I’m not missing the point.  Union members, at least in the manufacturing sector, typically are white males who buy Trump’s lies.  Yes, that collectivity and strength was fading before Trump.  But Trump has accelerated the process.  Good for rich people, bad for the working class. 

 

[All_Pro_Bills]

26 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

 

I agree with you on the “recognition” point.  See my Prada and pearls comment.  

 

I think you’re focusing on manufacturing, and your points about the flight of manufacturing jobs (due in some part to bad trade deals and in other, significant part to the fact that it’s simply cheaper to make things when you pay people only a couple of bucks an hour) largely is fair.  The problem, of course, is that crappy trade deals or not, those people always were going to be left behind as technology evolved.  Trump said he would do something for them, and he really hasn’t.  On top of that, with respect to unions as a whole, Trump and Republicans did grave damage to public unions through the Supreme Court’s Janus decision — an assault upon stare decisis if ever there was one — and ignored the rule of law to manufacture a result that significantly undercut non-manufacturing unions, such as teachers unions, police unions, and elements of unions representing health care workers.  

 

The disaster point is something with which I probably disagree.  If you’re suggesting that Biden will be a disaster, I couldn’t disagree more strongly.  (As an aside, if this current state of affairs isn’t a disaster, I don’t know what is.)  If you’re suggesting the election will be a mess because it’s going to take time for largely Democratic absentees to arrive and to be counted, and that those arrivals will be Biden’s margin of victory, and that in the meantime Trump will lie and claim a rigged election and the idiots who follow him will buy it and threaten to throw the country into chaos, then yes, I agree.  I worry about that every day. 

First all politicians lie.  The entire system depends on lying.  And I believe that no matter who "wins" the election there's going to be trouble.  Expect court battle over vote fraud and/or suppression in the hotly contested battle ground states.  We might not know the winner for months.  This will cause all kinds of social and economic disruptions.  And if Trump happens to pull it off again in November the fringe left is going to completely freak out.  If Biden wins I don't see him completing the entire 4 year term.  I'm expecting trouble with the economy no matter which candidate wins.  There's simply too much debt and not enough productive activity. Eventually, all that borrowing which pulls future consumption to the present consumes all of your income.  Most important, the U.S. is afforded a "grand privilege" from the world's use of the U.S. dollar as the official reserve and trade settlement currency of the world.  It's a blank check that others do not have the ability to access and use.  Its what allows huge deficits and the consumption of goods and services way over and above what we produce.  That is slowly but surely coming to an end.  If there's one place where Trump has done the most damage it has been in pulling forward this day of reckoning.  The immediate impacts will be much higher prices for everything and a downward adjustment in everyone's standard of living that doesn't do some preparation and planning for that event.       

Edited August 25, 2020 by All_Pro_Bills

[RiotAct]

22 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

I mean, yeah, laws exist for a reason.

[SectionC3]

6 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

First all politicians lie.  The entire system depends on lying.  And I believe that no matter who "wins" the election there's going to be trouble.  Expect court battle over vote fraud and/or suppression in the hotly contested battle ground states.  We might not know the winner for months.  This will cause all kinds of social and economic disruptions.  And if Trump happens to pull it off again in November the fringe left is going to completely freak out.  If Biden wins I don't see him completing the entire 4 year term.  I'm expecting trouble with the economy no matter which candidate wins.  There's simply too much debt and not enough productive activity. Eventually, all that borrowing which pulls future consumption to the present consumes all of your income.  Most important, the U.S. is afforded a "grand privilege" from the world's use of the U.S. dollar as the official reserve and trade settlement currency of the world.  It's a blank check that others do not have the ability to access and use.  Its what allows huge deficits and the consumption of goods and services way over and above what we produce.  That is slowly but surely coming to an end.  If there's one place where Trump has done the most damage it has been in pulling forward this day of reckoning.  The immediate impacts will be much higher prices for everything and a downward adjustment in everyone's standard of living that doesn't do some preparation and planning for that event.       

Suppression will be the day of the election, and perhaps the time leading up to the election (see Brian Kemp’s stunts in GA).  The litigation is going to lie in the debates about which absentee ballots should be counted, and whether the Trump Post Office scam to delay the arrival of ballots should be allowed to knock out late-arriving absentees.  I think you and I agree that it’s going to be a mess.  I’m very worried that Biden’s margin of victory is going to be sitting in bins in post offices and boards of election on November 3, not to be counted for days and during which time Trump is going to lie, claim victory, and cause chaos.  We all have to be prepared to wait about 10 days for a result.  Even then, Trumper liars in places like Georgia or Arizona could threaten the election by not certifying their state’s delegates (assuming Biden wins, needs that certification to hit 270, and Kemp/Ducey throw their respective states and therefore the election, again assuming that Republicans retain enough state delegations should this thing reach the house) to Trump.  Arizona is what really, really, really worries me right now.  It’s going to be tight and Ducey is a hopeless Trumper who puts fealty ahead of country. 

[Reality Check]

1 minute ago, SectionC3 said:

Suppression will be the day of the election, and perhaps the time leading up to the election (see Brian Kemp’s stunts in GA).  The litigation is going to lie in the debates about which absentee ballots should be counted, and whether the Trump Post Office scam to delay the arrival of ballots should be allowed to knock out late-arriving absentees.  I think you and I agree that it’s going to be a mess.  I’m very worried that Biden’s margin of victory is going to be sitting in bins in post offices and boards of election on November 3, not to be counted for days and during which time Trump is going to lie, claim victory, and cause chaos.  We all have to be prepared to wait about 10 days for a result.  Even then, Trumper liars in places like Georgia or Arizona could threaten the election by not certifying their state’s delegates (assuming Biden wins, needs that certification to hit 270, and Kemp/Ducey throw their respective states and therefore the election, again assuming that Republicans retain enough state delegations should this thing reach the house) to Trump.  Arizona is what really, really, really worries me right now.  It’s going to be tight and Ducey is a hopeless Trumper who puts fealty ahead of country. 

 

[SectionC3]

10 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

First all politicians lie.  The entire system depends on lying.  And I believe that no matter who "wins" the election there's going to be trouble.  Expect court battle over vote fraud and/or suppression in the hotly contested battle ground states.  We might not know the winner for months.  This will cause all kinds of social and economic disruptions.  And if Trump happens to pull it off again in November the fringe left is going to completely freak out.  If Biden wins I don't see him completing the entire 4 year term.  I'm expecting trouble with the economy no matter which candidate wins.  There's simply too much debt and not enough productive activity. Eventually, all that borrowing which pulls future consumption to the present consumes all of your income.  Most important, the U.S. is afforded a "grand privilege" from the world's use of the U.S. dollar as the official reserve and trade settlement currency of the world.  It's a blank check that others do not have the ability to access and use.  Its what allows huge deficits and the consumption of goods and services way over and above what we produce.  That is slowly but surely coming to an end.  If there's one place where Trump has done the most damage it has been in pulling forward this day of reckoning.  The immediate impacts will be much higher prices for everything and a downward adjustment in everyone's standard of living that doesn't do some preparation and planning for that event.       

I think we might agree on the economy.  This whole thing is a house of cards built on credit.  And it’s a huge wealth transfer opportunity for people who can afford securities.  I have no idea what the solution is, but I know that it’s not firing up coal plants again. Unfortunately we wasted $2 trillion this year when we chose to buy time without having a plan to defeat the “hoax” of a virus.  Now we have nothing to show for that.  So the next round of stimulus has to result in something, e.g., green energy innovation, infrastructure, rural broadband, whatever.  We can’t light it on fire again. 

[Reality Check]

2 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

I think we might agree on the economy.  This whole thing is a house of cards built on credit.  And it’s a huge wealth transfer opportunity for people who can afford securities.  I have no idea what the solution is, but I know that it’s not firing up coal plants again. Unfortunately we wasted $2 trillion this year when we chose to buy time without having a plan to defeat the “hoax” of a virus.  Now we have nothing to show for that.  So the next round of stimulus has to result in something, e.g., green energy innovation, infrastructure, rural broadband, whatever.  We can’t light it on fire again. 

 

[BillStime]

19 minutes ago, RiotAct said:

I mean, yeah, laws exist for a reason.

Hmmm not for this guy 

 

[Reality Check]

15 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Hmmm not for this guy 

 

 

[B-Man]

4 minutes ago, Reality Check said:

 

 

 

He re-runs almost all of his material RC.

 

So feel free to do the same.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Paulus]

39 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Hmmm not for this guy 

 

 

[Reality Check]

22 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

He re-runs almost all of his material RC.

 

So feel free to do the same.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[IDBillzFan]

 

When will the DNC denounce BLM?

 

 

[B-Man]

 

 

 

WELL, THEY PRETTY MUCH HAVE TO SINCE THEY CONTROL THE CITIES AND THE PEOPLE BURNING THEM: 

 

Democrats are pretending the cities aren’t burning.

 

 

 

 

 

[All_Pro_Bills]

2 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

I think we might agree on the economy.  This whole thing is a house of cards built on credit.  And it’s a huge wealth transfer opportunity for people who can afford securities.  I have no idea what the solution is, but I know that it’s not firing up coal plants again. Unfortunately we wasted $2 trillion this year when we chose to buy time without having a plan to defeat the “hoax” of a virus.  Now we have nothing to show for that.  So the next round of stimulus has to result in something, e.g., green energy innovation, infrastructure, rural broadband, whatever.  We can’t light it on fire again. 

A primary driver of income inequality has been federal reserve monetary policy especially QE.  The Fed buys government and corporate debt from the primary banks and dealers then the banks need to do something with the money.  Other foreign central banks do this too.  They also buy stocks and ETFs.  The Bank of japan is the biggest holder of all ETFs on the Tokyo market.   The Bank of Switzerland is one of the biggest shareholders of Facebook.  The banks could buy more bonds and sell them to the Fed but with interest rates lower and lower there's not enough profit margin.  So they buy stocks and with that major indexes and share prices rise.  Who owns most of the equities?  People with a lot of assets, rich people, well-off baby boomers that benefit simply because of age and timing, major insiders and corporate officers with generous stock options selling into the uptrend.  It's all quite a nice little racket.  Welfare for the rich.  This happens whomever is in the White House. 

 

That's why you see a lot of 55+ guys driving around in new Corvettes and Porches all over town.  Meanwhile, I'm driving around town in a 13 year old vehicle, you have younger workers or those entering the workforce, or working poor that have no "extra" funds to invest in markets.  They're not benefiting at all from all the Fed monetizing of debt because none of it gets into the "real" economy.  And as an added kicker they get to pay for it all with hidden and ignored inflation in things they need to live which further erodes their living standards.  By the way the Fed denies any hand in all of this.  They're quite the con artists.

 

By the way, I consider myself a fiscal conservative.  I agree with my liberal friends that something is seriously wrong with income disparities and opportunity.  I just don't agree with them on how to solve the problem and what solutions should be implemented. 

Edited August 25, 2020 by All_Pro_Bills

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

1 hour ago, IDBillzFan said:

 

When will the DNC denounce BLM?

 

 

 

...well the "BLM Bossman" said looting "is a form of reparations"....so AGAIN, BLM is a fraudulent ruse for "The Gimme Crowd"......exactly why the Dems' NON-response to riots and looting fits.....racial injustice my arse....how many BLACK OWNED BUSINESSES have been destroyed??...................

[SectionC3]

8 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

A primary driver of income inequality has been federal reserve monetary policy especially QE.  The Fed buys government and corporate debt from the primary banks and dealers then the banks need to do something with the money.  Other foreign central banks do this too.  They also buy stocks and ETFs.  The Bank of japan is the biggest holder of all ETFs on the Tokyo market.   The Bank of Switzerland is one of the biggest shareholders of Facebook.  The banks could buy more bonds and sell them to the Fed but with interest rates lower and lower there's not enough profit margin.  So they buy stocks and with that major indexes and share prices rise.  Who owns most of the equities?  People with a lot of assets, rich people, well-off baby boomers that benefit simply because of age and timing, major insiders and corporate officers with generous stock options selling into the uptrend.  It's all quite a nice little racket.  Welfare for the rich.  This happens whomever is in the White House. 

 

That's why you see a lot of 55+ guys driving around in new Corvettes and Porches all over town.  Meanwhile, I'm driving around town in a 13 year old vehicle, you have younger workers or those entering the workforce, or working poor that have no "extra" funds to invest in markets.  They're not benefiting at all from all the Fed monetizing of debt because none of it gets into the "real" economy.  And as an added kicker they get to pay for it all with hidden and ignored inflation in things they need to live which further erodes their living standards.  By the way the Fed denies any hand in all of this.  They're quite the con artists.

 

By the way, I consider myself a fiscal conservative.  I agree with my liberal friends that something is seriously wrong with income disparities and opportunity.  I just don't agree with them on how to solve the problem and what solutions should be implemented. 

 

I agree with most of this.  It’s a mess right now.  I think passive investing plays a part in it, too.  Many people I know don’t have savings accounts, they have a Vanguard S&P index.  So they money keeps on rolling in, stock values keep rising, and the disconnect between Main and Wall Street grows. If you’re in the market, things are dandy right now.  If you’re not, you’re screwed.  Huge wealth transfer in the last six months.  It’s ridiculous (and this is coming from a guy who made a killing based on timing and selection of stocks in early March). 

[Doc]

18 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

A primary driver of income inequality has been federal reserve monetary policy especially QE.  The Fed buys government and corporate debt from the primary banks and dealers then the banks need to do something with the money.  Other foreign central banks do this too.  They also buy stocks and ETFs.  The Bank of japan is the biggest holder of all ETFs on the Tokyo market.   The Bank of Switzerland is one of the biggest shareholders of Facebook.  The banks could buy more bonds and sell them to the Fed but with interest rates lower and lower there's not enough profit margin.  So they buy stocks and with that major indexes and share prices rise.  Who owns most of the equities?  People with a lot of assets, rich people, well-off baby boomers that benefit simply because of age and timing, major insiders and corporate officers with generous stock options selling into the uptrend.  It's all quite a nice little racket.  Welfare for the rich.  This happens whomever is in the White House. 

 

That's why you see a lot of 55+ guys driving around in new Corvettes and Porches all over town.  Meanwhile, I'm driving around town in a 13 year old vehicle, you have younger workers or those entering the workforce, or working poor that have no "extra" funds to invest in markets.  They're not benefiting at all from all the Fed monetizing of debt because none of it gets into the "real" economy.  And as an added kicker they get to pay for it all with hidden and ignored inflation in things they need to live which further erodes their living standards.  By the way the Fed denies any hand in all of this.  They're quite the con artists.

 

By the way, I consider myself a fiscal conservative.  I agree with my liberal friends that something is seriously wrong with income disparities and opportunity.  I just don't agree with them on how to solve the problem and what solutions should be implemented. 

 

Living below ones means is the first step.  The thing is, people don't want to do it.  If you spend all that you earn, much less more than you earn, you'll never get ahead.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

2 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Living below ones means is the first step.  The thing is, people don't want to do it.  If you spend all that you earn, much less more than you earn, you'll never get ahead.

 

....REGARDLESS of race, creed, color, ethnicity, et al, how many think the "American Way" is to live "paycheck to paycheck"??.....when do we get back to "Personal Responsibility" versus catering to "The Gimme Crowd"?....that gang is the Dems' bread and butter voting base......

[Tiberius]

Shot in the back, unarmed in front of his children 

[Sig1Hunter]

20 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Shot in the back, unarmed in front of his children 

Unarmed? There are reports that he had a knife. Why don’t you wait for more info before making this proclamation?

[MiltonWaddams]

20 minutes ago, Sig1Hunter said:

Unarmed? There are reports that he had a knife. Why don’t you wait for more info before making this proclamation?

Why don’t you watch the video and see that he didn’t have a knife? Do we all just see and hear what we want to hear and see? Fox News would like it if you did. Do we think that being shot in the back seven times is sufficient when carrying a knife and walking away from police officers?

i’m not going to sit here and tell you that looting and rioting is the answer, because it’s not. However, the number of police killings of black men and women this year alone has got to create uproar in the black community. You cannot imagine how much fear you would live in unless you walk in their shoes. Despite the number of marches, protests and riots that have occurred the last three months, these cops continue to make life ending, and altering, decisions that cannot be solely attributed to the actions of the individuals being killed and seriously injured. There is either a fear or a complete lack of respect for black people among a far too sizeable portion of the police force. That has to stop.

Edited August 25, 2020 by MiltonWaddams

[Tiberius]

28 minutes ago, Sig1Hunter said:

Unarmed? There are reports that he had a knife. Why don’t you wait for more info before making this proclamation?

 

28 minutes ago, Sig1Hunter said:

Unarmed? There are reports that he had a knife. Why don’t you wait for more info before making this proclamation?

Unarmed, shot in the back right in front of his children 

9 minutes ago, MiltonWaddams said:

Why don’t you watch the video and see that he didn’t have a knife? Do we all just see and hear what we want to hear and see? Fox News would like it if you did. Do we think that being shot in the back seven times is sufficient when carrying a knife and walking away from police officers?

i’m not going to sit here and tell you that looting and rioting is the answer, because it’s not. However, the number of police killings of black men and women this year alone has got to create uproar in the black community. You cannot imagine how much fear you would live in unless you walk in their shoes. Despite the number of marches, protests and riots that have occurred the last three months, these cops continue to make life ending, and altering, decisions that cannot be solely attributed to the actions of the individuals being killed and seriously injured. There is either a fear or a complete lack of respect for black people among a far too sizeable portion of the police force. That has to stop.

Seven times, wtf 

[Sig1Hunter]

7 minutes ago, MiltonWaddams said:

Why don’t you watch the video and see that he didn’t have a knife? Do we all just see and hear what we want to hear and see? Fox News would like it if you did. Do we think that being shot in the back seven times is sufficient when carrying a knife and walking away from police officers?

i’m not going to sit here and tell you that looting and rioting is the answer, because it’s not. However, the number of police killings of black men and women this year alone has got to create uproar in the black community. You cannot imagine how much fear you would live in unless you walk in their shoes. Despite the number of marches, protests and riots that have occurred the last three months, these cops continue to make life ending, and altering, decisions that cannot be solely attributed to the actions of the individuals being killed and seriously injured. There is either a fear or a complete lack of respect for black people among a far too sizeable portion of the police force. That has to stop.

Ive watched the video. Ive also seen still shots from the video zoomed in that show something in his left hand that appears to be a knife. Add that up with the cops identifying that he has a knife, and I’m willing to wait for more information before coming to my own conclusion. If he did have a knife, and was in a close quarters struggle with the cops, after they gave him multiple verbal commands,  fought with him, and tased him, they are absolutely justified in shooting him - in the front, in the side, or in the back. Sorry to burst your bubble. 
 

Feel free to draw your conclusions before all the evidence is in. Thats your prerogative. Its idiotic, however.

[BillsFanNC]

 

[Sig1Hunter]

9 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

 

Unarmed, shot in the back right in front of his children 

Seven times, wtf 

What if it comes out that he was attempting to take the kids without the consent of the mother, who had custody? What if thats the reason that the cops were there to begin with? And, what if it comes out that he had a knife in hand and and was preparing to flee with the kids (armed kidnapping)? Would that change your viewpoint at all? Just curious..

[Unforgiven]

1 hour ago, Sig1Hunter said:

Unarmed? There are reports that he had a knife. Why don’t you wait for more info before making this proclamation?

He can't. He's a grifter hoping to win the Joe Biden reparation lotto.

[Sig1Hunter]

7 minutes ago, Unforgiven said:

He can't. He's a grifter hoping to win the Joe Biden reparation lotto.

It was mostly a rhetorical question anyway.

“The narrative must be protected at all costs!”

[MiltonWaddams]

39 minutes ago, Sig1Hunter said:

What if it comes out that he was attempting to take the kids without the consent of the mother, who had custody? What if thats the reason that the cops were there to begin with? And, what if it comes out that he had a knife in hand and and was preparing to flee with the kids (armed kidnapping)? Would that change your viewpoint at all? Just curious..

And what if he was unarmed and had just broken up a domestic disturbance which has been reported as well? Would that change YOUR opinion?

[TH3]

3 hours ago, Doc said:

 

Living below ones means is the first step.  The thing is, people don't want to do it.  If you spend all that you earn, much less more than you earn, you'll never get ahead.

Federal Government should set the example

44 minutes ago, Sig1Hunter said:

What if it comes out that he was attempting to take the kids without the consent of the mother, who had custody? What if thats the reason that the cops were there to begin with? And, what if it comes out that he had a knife in hand and and was preparing to flee with the kids (armed kidnapping)? Would that change your viewpoint at all? Just curious..

Easy with that trigger finger bro!

[Sig1Hunter]

10 minutes ago, MiltonWaddams said:

And what if he was unarmed and had just broken up a domestic disturbance which has been reported as well? Would that change YOUR opinion?

Did you not read what I wrote? I’m waiting for evidence to come out before I come to conclusions. You, however, have already appeared to make up your mind based on your predetermined narrative that cops love shooting unarmed black men in the back. See the difference? (That’s another rhetorical question, BTW)

 

And, who the hell let you out of the basement?

Edited August 25, 2020 by Sig1Hunter