Charles Barkley on Breonna Taylor

[meazza]

Just now, Doc Brown said:

Lol.  What?  Prohibition?

For once I agree with tibs.

 

If people want to pollute their bodies, then so be it.

[Numark3]

6 hours ago, DFT said:

C Sec and Tibs have no interest in anything but persistent attempts to get you guys fired up.  They’re both obvious conservative trolls. STOP FEEDING THEM!!!!

 

 

 

 

Hello,

 

This is a friendly notice to inform you that the following post was created by a troll(s) on this forum.  The creator of this post has no intentions of having an adult conversation on the topic they’re intending to create.  While the content or expressions listed by said poster may reflect an actual perspective, the perspective is overshadowed by this posters history of creating topics that are meant to instigate, spam and disrupt an otherwise civilized political conversation.  You can view the content against the poster’s reputation to make an informed decision for yourself (if you choose).  The best way to remove said posters, spam and instigation from a forum is to not respond beyond this message.  Thank you.  

ok but why are you spamming with this?

[DFT]

17 minutes ago, Crayola64 said:

ok but why are you spamming with this?

You think warning other posters of malicious intent by trolls is spamming????

 

 

And I thought 2020 couldn’t get any more groovy!!

[Numark3]

3 minutes ago, DFT said:

You think warning other posters of malicious intent by trolls is spamming????

 

 

And I thought 2020 couldn’t get any more groovy!!

you copying and pasting the same message over and over again is the definition of spamming...

 

If you want to ignore those trolls then IGNORE THEM, I don’t know why you think spamming helps.  Sorry

[TakeYouToTasker]

Imagine making an argument as dumb as the OP made, which requires, as he himself stated, that context is irrelevant.

 

Good grief.

[DFT]

4 minutes ago, Crayola64 said:

you copying and pasting the same message over and over again is the definition of spamming...

 

If you want to ignore those trolls then IGNORE THEM, I don’t know why you think spamming helps.  Sorry

We’ll agree to disagree then.  You think I’m spamming and I think I’m warning others who may think the trolls are actually looking to converse.  Judging by the board’s reactions however, they seem to disagree with your assessment.  While I’m sorry we found our way to this disagreement, I would advise that if you don’t want to see this post, you can certainly take your own advice and add me to your ignore if you haven’t done so already.  I won’t take it personal.  I have no issue with you whatsoever, which I’ve shared with you recently.  Have a good evening and I’m sorry we couldn’t agree.  

[Chef Jim]

Anyone heard from OJ on the SCOTUS situation?  

[GG]

5 hours ago, KD in CA said:

 

Is that seriously what happen??  She was killed by cops returning fire against her boyfriend?  This is literally the first time I've heard that.

 

That's* infuriating.

 

 

 

* 'That' being the lying media and political bullsh--, in case it wasn't obvious.   The only person who should be charged in connection with that event is her boyfriend.

 

Including apparently knocking and announcing that they were the police.

[KD in CA]

30 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

Anyone heard from OJ on the SCOTUS situation?  

 

Is he on Trump's short list?   

[Chef Jim]

9 minutes ago, KD in CA said:

 

Is he on Trump's short list?   

I don’t know. I just thought we were listening to old athletes as if their opinions on anything other than sports meant something. 

[Doc]

13 minutes ago, GG said:

Including apparently knocking and announcing that they were the police.

When they didn’t have to since it was a no-knock warrant. The irony being that if they hadn’t knocked, she would probably still be alive.

[Chef Jim]

1 hour ago, Crayola64 said:

you copying and pasting the same message over and over again is the definition of spamming...

 

If you want to ignore those trolls then IGNORE THEM, I don’t know why you think spamming helps.  Sorry

So you’re agreeing that they are Trolls?  

[SectionC3]

2 hours ago, Doc said:

So you think they just picked out a random address, right? Or that they intentionally killed her because she’s black, right?

 

And I already said that this was a tragedy. Nothing will change that but again the false narrative that was originally put forth created even more damage that was totally unnecessary.

Hoax.  The warrant has the stink of something that was a bit ginned up insofar as the Taylor residence was concerned. Absent that, no incident.  
 

And hoax on your “most damage“ comment.  You initially said that a narrative or words was the most damaging thing that occurred here.   I believe that the loss of human life is the most damaging thing that has occurred. 

56 minutes ago, GG said:

 

Including apparently knocking and announcing that they were the police.

According to whom? 

42 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

So you’re agreeing that they are Trolls?  

You should stop focusing on this troll issue if you want to be my financial adviser. I can’t have my financial adviser worried about what some people say on the Internet.  This myopia does not bode well for your chances to earn my business, sir. 

2 hours ago, DFT said:

You think warning other posters of malicious intent by trolls is spamming????

 

 

And I thought 2020 couldn’t get any more groovy!!

You’re getting all snowflakey on us if you’re worried about “malicious intent” of internet randos in this forum.  Time to relax a bit! 

[Doc]

17 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Hoax.  The warrant has the stink of something that was a bit ginned up insofar as the Taylor residence was concerned. Absent that, no incident.  
 

And hoax on your “most damage“ comment.  You initially said that a narrative or words was the most damaging thing that occurred here.   I believe that the loss of human life is the most damaging thing that has occurred. 

If you want to say that they got bad intelligence, that’s fine. It still doesn’t change the facts that if they had answered the door and that if the boyfriend hadn’t shot first, she would still be alive.  And that their skin color had nothing to do with anything.

And literally the first thing I said in this thread was that this was a tragedy. The false narrative made an even bigger one. 

 

17 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

According to whom?

 

A neighbor of hers/theirs. 

[3rdnlng]

43 minutes ago, Doc said:

If you want to say that they got bad intelligence, that’s fine. It still doesn’t change the facts that if they had answered the door and that if the boyfriend hadn’t shot first, she would still be alive.  And that their skin color had nothing to do with anything.

And literally the first thing I said in this thread was that this was a tragedy. The false narrative made an even bigger one. 

 

 

A neighbor of hers/theirs. 

I believe it was from a guy in the apartment directly above Breonna Taylor's. 

[SectionC3]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

A neighbor of hers/theirs. 

So nobody who could confirm that Taylor and the BF heard it.   Which is not surprising bc the warrant was executed at 1a when most of the world is asleep. 

[keepthefaith]

21 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

So nobody who could confirm that Taylor and the BF heard it.   Which is not surprising bc the warrant was executed at 1a when most of the world is asleep. 

 

It's possible Breonna and BF didn't know it was police.  However, that doesn't change that BF fired at cops and cops fired back to defend themselves.  It may well be an unfortunate accident initiated by BF. 

[Doc Brown]

5 hours ago, meazza said:

For once I agree with tibs.

 

If people want to pollute their bodies, then so be it.

I thought he was referring to alcohol.  My mistake.

[The Frankish Reich]

10 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

 

“Correct address” is sort of the key to the whole thing.  Was the address listed on the warrant?  Yes.  No doubt.  But should the address have been listed on the warrant?  That’s the question. And what was the link between Taylor and the target of the investigation?  A small number of Amazon packages, or something of that sort, IIRC.  Seems like a specious reason to search that apartment to this mind.  

 

And I take issue with your “most damage” comment.  The narrative hasn’t caused the greatest damage.  The loss of life is the greatest damage.  Which has nothing to do with the narrative.  

 

See above.  “Right apartment” depends on whether it should have been the subject of a warrant in the first instance. 

Again, from the NYT Magazine article - the most thorough investigation out there - there absolutely was probable cause to search Breonna's apartment. There's no indication that anything was false in the application for a warrant, and the judge signed off on it. The fact that (as far as we know) nothing was found there related to the drug trade doesn't mean there was a lack of probable cause. And after Breonna was tragically killed, her ex is on recorded phone calls from jail talking about getting bail money from (IIRC) $8,000 that was in Breonna's apartment.

NONE of this is meant to justify the way in which the warrant was executed nor the shoot-out that ensued. There was clearly some poor police work on that front after the warrant was issued. But it is important to know the facts surrounding this whole matter, because those facts help explain what happened, what went wrong, and how police can avoid this type of thing happening again.

[Chef Jim]

5 hours ago, meazza said:

For once I agree with tibs.

 

If people want to pollute their bodies, then so be it.

Just don’t expect me to pay for their sorry ass because they’re too ***** up to take care of themselves. Therein lies the problem. 

[BillStime]

14 hours ago, DFT said:

Also...

 

 

Hello,

 

This is a friendly notice to inform you that the following post was created by a troll(s) on this forum.  The creator of this post has no intentions of having an adult conversation on the topic they’re intending to create.  While the content or expressions listed by said poster may reflect an actual perspective, the perspective is overshadowed by this posters history of creating topics that are meant to instigate, spam and disrupt an otherwise civilized political conversation.  You can view the content against the poster’s reputation to make an informed decision for yourself (if you choose).  The best way to remove said posters, spam and instigation from a forum is to not respond beyond this message.  Thank you.  

Also...

 

[meazza]

1 hour ago, Chef Jim said:

Just don’t expect me to pay for their sorry ass because they’re too ***** up to take care of themselves. Therein lies the problem. 

You’ll pay for it anyway. Does policing actually make a difference ?

Pretty sure that obesity is a bigger cost.

Edited September 26, 2020 by meazza

[BillsToast]

16 hours ago, Tiberius said:

So he was standing his ground against intruders to his place. Stand your ground, home is your castle...I can see the opposite reaction is the people were different 

 

And you're the party against using guns at home. What a joke hahahahhaa

[Alaska Darin]

4 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

Just don’t expect me to pay for their sorry ass because they’re too ***** up to take care of themselves. Therein lies the problem. 

According to a couple studies,  the cost of care for addicts would be significantly less than the costs we currently pay for law enforcement and incarceration.

 

Drugs won the War on Drugs a long time ago.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

 

Curtis Hill: Black Kentucky AG wrongly attacked by other Blacks for not charging cops in Breonna Taylor death

Cameron is one of only two Black Republican state attorneys general in the U.S. I am the other.

By Curtis Hill | Fox News

 

A co-founder of Black Lives Matter has absurdly compared Daniel Cameron — Kentucky’s first Black attorney general — to the infamous White supremacist Bull Connor, following Cameron’s announcement Wednesday that no police officers will be prosecuted for the shooting death of Breonna Taylor, a 26-year-old Black emergency medical technician.

Cameron announced that a grand jury determined that two police officers were justified in firing their guns in Taylor’s apartment March 13 because Taylor’s boyfriend shot at them first after officers used a battering ram to force their way into the apartment during a drug investigation. Tragically and inadvertently, one of the officers fatally wounded Taylor, authorities concluded.

Cameron is one of only two Black Republican state attorneys general in the U.S. I am the other. Comparing him to Bull Connor is an insult that makes no sense and is disconnected from reality.

 

Bull Connor was public safety commissioner in Birmingham, Ala., from 1957 to 1963, and was a staunch segregationist with ties to the Ku Klux Klan. He ordered police to use dogs and firehoses against peaceful civil rights demonstrators, and allowed KKK members to beat freedom riders — who sought an end to segregation — before police officers belatedly responded to the scene.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/breonna-taylor-killing-no-charges-curtis-hill

 

 

[SectionC3]

9 hours ago, keepthefaith said:

 

It's possible Breonna and BF didn't know it was police.  However, that doesn't change that BF fired at cops and cops fired back to defend themselves.  It may well be an unfortunate accident initiated by BF. 

No argument there.  But not an issue if not executed in the middle of the night. 

[SectionC3]

8 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Again, from the NYT Magazine article - the most thorough investigation out there - there absolutely was probable cause to search Breonna's apartment. There's no indication that anything was false in the application for a warrant, and the judge signed off on it. The fact that (as far as we know) nothing was found there related to the drug trade doesn't mean there was a lack of probable cause. And after Breonna was tragically killed, her ex is on recorded phone calls from jail talking about getting bail money from (IIRC) $8,000 that was in Breonna's apartment.

NONE of this is meant to justify the way in which the warrant was executed nor the shoot-out that ensued. There was clearly some poor police work on that front after the warrant was issued. But it is important to know the facts surrounding this whole matter, because those facts help explain what happened, what went wrong, and how police can avoid this type of thing happening again.

Probable cause is a very low bar (supports your point), very easy to gin up (supports my point), and extremely difficult to challenge after the fact (reality that may need to change). 

[Chef Jim]

8 hours ago, meazza said:

You’ll pay for it anyway. Does policing actually make a difference ?

Pretty sure that obesity is a bigger cost.

 

Policing is not the issue it's the legality.  You know for a FACT that if drugs were legalized a LOT more people would be using that do not now use because it's illegal.  Hell how many of us have not even smoked pot in the past because our firms drug test.  I was the Chef of a restaurant and they drug tested the team.  Are you ***** kidding me?  

 

Of course obesity is a huge cost to society.  But you can't outlaw food.  Well you can try. Bezerkely just disallowed stores to sell junk food at the check out.  So now if you want a Mars Bar you have to go find it. 

 

If we outlawed stupidity we'd all be in a much better place.  

[Chef Jim]

5 hours ago, Alaska Darin said:

According to a couple studies,  the cost of care for addicts would be significantly less than the costs we currently pay for law enforcement and incarceration.

 

Drugs won the War on Drugs a long time ago.

 

That a good point but that cost is for the addicts who get care. How many will not seek care? How many will become homeless?  Not saying homelessness is a major cost but is a cost.  It's also blight and a huge health issue.  It's a concern.  Do we then scoop them up and force them into treatment?  I think it's safe to say that along with mental illness and alcohol abuse the biggest cause of homelessness is drug addiction.  And how many of those released from incarceration will have nowhere to go?  How many of them will end up on the streets?  Of course it's a VERY complicated issue and why we, as a society, have turned a blind's eye to it. 

 

 

[Alaska Darin]

Just now, Chef Jim said:

 

That a good point but that cost is for the addicts who get care. How many will not seek care? How many will become homeless?  Not saying homelessness is a major cost but is a cost.  It's also blight and a huge health issue.  It's a concern.  Do we then scoop them up and force them into treatment?  I think it's safe to say that along with mental illness and alcohol abuse the biggest cause of homelessness is drug addiction.  And how many of those released from incarceration will have nowhere to go?  How many of them will end up on the streets?  Of course it's a VERY complicated issue and why we, as a society, have turned a blind's eye to it. 

 

 

The stuff I've read about places that have legalized shows the percentage of "abuse" doesn't change much,  so the downstream effects aren't significantly different.   I will grant that these studies don't have decades of data, so some scepticism is earned but what we're doing now has all the things you're talking about with a ridiculous amount of senseless violence and more militaristic police.  

 

I just don't think we can keep doing this and expect any difference in results. 

[Chef Jim]

5 minutes ago, Alaska Darin said:

The stuff I've read about places that have legalized shows the percentage of "abuse" doesn't change much,  so the downstream effects aren't significantly different.   I will grant that these studies don't have decades of data, so some scepticism is earned but what we're doing now has all the things you're talking about with a ridiculous amount of senseless violence and more militaristic police.  

 

I just don't think we can keep doing this and expect any difference in results. 

 

And yes I know places that have legalized drugs have not seen a spike in drug abuse.  I cannot deny these studies I just personally find it very hard to believe.  A TON of thought needs to be put into this of course.  We can't just legalize drugs and tell the population to "have at it!"  However asking our government to think before doing is a very scary notion. 

 

EDIT:  This thread has taken a turn.  That NEVER happens here.  LOL 

Edited September 26, 2020 by Chef Jim

[Alaska Darin]

Just now, Chef Jim said:

 

And yes I know places that have legalized drugs have not seen a spike in drug abuse.  I cannot deny these studies I just personally find it very hard to believe.  A TON of thought needs to be put into this of course.  We can't just legalize drugs and tell the population to "have at it!"  However asking our government to think before doing is a very scary notion. 

No argument there.

[snafu]

5 hours ago, Alaska Darin said:

According to a couple studies,  the cost of care for addicts would be significantly less than the costs we currently pay for law enforcement and incarceration.

 

Drugs won the War on Drugs a long time ago.

 

Yes, some time ago, I suggested legalizing everything and capitalizing on the profits from the market (like states do now with pot).  Saves law enforcement dollars and makes money for treatment. I got a lot of replies telling me that’s a bad idea.  The war on drugs may be our longest and probably most costly war. 

 

 

[Alaska Darin]

1 minute ago, snafu said:

 

Yes, some time ago, I suggested legalizing everything and capitalizing on the profits from the market (like states do now with pot).  Saves law enforcement dollars and makes money for treatment. I got a lot of replies telling me that’s a bad idea.  The war on drugs may be our longest and probably most costly war. 

 

 

Democrats aren't the only ones who love status quo.  Conservatives have plenty of their own demons they refuse to face. 

[snafu]

5 minutes ago, Alaska Darin said:

Democrats aren't the only ones who love status quo.  Conservatives have plenty of their own demons they refuse to face. 

 

Human nature to resist change. 

[Chef Jim]

3 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

Human nature to resist change. 

 

When it's the only constant. The issue is that when politicians are involved the change often is suggested with zero or little thought regarding the long term ramifications of the change. 

 

The infamous "we have to pass it to see what's in it" sticks out in my mind.  

Edited September 26, 2020 by Chef Jim

[Alaska Darin]

1 minute ago, Chef Jim said:

 

When it's the only constant. The issue is that when politicians are involved the change often is suggested with zero or little thought regarding the long term ramifications of the change. 

No argument there.

[Chef Jim]

4 minutes ago, Alaska Darin said:

No argument there.

 

Stop harshing my PPP buzz.  

[snafu]

16 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

When it's the only constant. The issue is that when politicians are involved the change often is suggested with zero or little thought regarding the long term ramifications of the change. 

 

The infamous "we have to pass it to see what's in it" sticks out in my mind.  

 

 

I agree.

 

 

15 minutes ago, Alaska Darin said:

No argument there.

 

9 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Stop harshing my PPP buzz.  

 

Oh, then I disagree and you are a complete dumbass.

 

 

[meazza]

48 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

And yes I know places that have legalized drugs have not seen a spike in drug abuse.  I cannot deny these studies I just personally find it very hard to believe.  A TON of thought needs to be put into this of course.  We can't just legalize drugs and tell the population to "have at it!"  However asking our government to think before doing is a very scary notion. 

 

EDIT:  This thread has taken a turn.  That NEVER happens here.  LOL 

 

I'm not sure that someone will all of a sudden snort cocaine based on the fact that it's legal.  If you were doing blow off a hookers ass before it was legal, chances are you'll do the same after.  

 

Portugal is an excellent example of how most drugs were decriminalized and the approach was to help users rather than incarcerate them.  

 

PS: This thread may have gotten off topic but this is the real discussion we should all be having as it is the root cause of these kinds of incidents.

 

Edited September 26, 2020 by meazza