It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Looks like the Left will be destroying St. Louis tonight

page: 28
31
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 12:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

DING DING DING!!!

Times up.

Your posts are nothing but fraud and lies.




posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 12:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

DING DING DING!!!

Times up.

Your posts are nothing but fraud and lies.





Lol, watching the meltdown is priceless.



posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 12:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

DING DING DING!!!

Times up.

Your posts are nothing but fraud and lies.





Lol, watching the meltdown is priceless.


Yep, that's one of about three phrases in your playbook.

I see you can't quote my saying "Blacks aren't capable of understanding statistics" either.

Good to see you posting clearly in support of fraud and lies.



posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 12:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

Why don't you quote me saying that Blacks aren't capable of hearing facts and stats?

Quote it or apologize to me and this forum for such a blatant lie, or be seen as the fraud you are.



You are saying over and over again that we should not quote stats that could explain violent encounters with police because it takes away from the justified visceral anger that blacks have.

you accuse those of us talking of statistics of being like Jim crow, or thinking blacks are inferior.

Prove it or you are a fraud.



posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 12:48 AM
link   
As I predicted pages ago, the semantic obsessions and gross fraud on display here simply goes on and on.

My posts are simple and straightforward. I'm arguing that we have to truly hear and understand the anger that Black Americans in particular are feeling and all of us in general should be feeling as we watch our law enforcement apparatus roll over so many in this country.

Those opposing my posts want us to believe that abstract arrangements of questionable statistics presented in some imagined "unemotional" format is going to change anything. I say, and have said, that we have to get real with each other, understand that anger exists, feelings exist and that they can't and shouldn't be ignored for some dry, passionless, elitist claptrap.

Thanks, and good night.

edit on 18-9-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 12:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: riiver

I haven't said even one time that we should ignore verdicts.


Well, that was certainly the impression I got, from all the talk about how...well, the verdict was wrong, and the cop was really a cold-blooded killer that set out to kill himself a drug dealer and then did so, acting as judge, jury, and executioner, pointing out that the plaintiffs did win the unlawful death suit, etc. Taken altogether, that sounds like you'd like to see the verdict ignored or, better yet, thrown out.


Whenever you feel yourself about to say something like "I mean that's basically what you're saying, right" you're about to hang a strawman.

Pardon my phrasing. Next time I'll say, "I feel as if you're saying..."


If you care about the quality of your argument, don't.

I wasn't making an argument. I was asking a question. The question was, "What do you want to do about it?" Which--thank you--you answered.


What do you want to do? Trust the cops and courts without question?
I didn't say I wanted to do anything. I'm merely observing with interest. And I always ask questions. So nope, I wouldn't trust anyone or anything without question. However, if I had to choose between putting my fate in the hands of the "cops and courts" or those of the general public--hell yeah I'd choose the cops and courts.


What a good little statist!

Aw, thanks. *blushes*



posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 12:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler




posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 12:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler




Good night.



posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 12:55 AM
link   
a reply to: riiver

I wanted to do you the courtesy of a response before turning in ...

In rough order of your offering ...

I'm not sure how you got that impression from anything I said. I focused on the facts about the weapon. I'm not sure why all that "extra" dialogue you just used would be associated with my statements.

I wanted to make it clear why the citizens of St. Louis were upset with good reason.

You can phrase your strawman argument anyway you like ... but if you aren't quoting something, then you're making up an argument and then attacking that.

You made an argument that I want to disregard the verdict. That's not a question.

Good luck with putting your fate in the hands of the cops and the courts. If you have all the right cultural dynamics going for you, I'm sure you'll be fine!




posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 12:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I try to be as accurate as possible.
SOMETIMES said accuracy is a bit MUCH for norms,but I always want the truth all the UGLY, nasty, factual, truth.
Too many lies negate all speech campaign promises,what is said until ACTS are seen.
To much chaos of individual s to quantify here we need a more encompassing model of nurturing for a professional worker in whatever the task one can do.
I KNOW there are a great MANY jobs I temped at ,because I have 2 AAS degrees, that a MONKEY could do.
THAT must screw out MANY folks from a good life
I worked check to check ,no vacations all my life.
I'm making MORE than I ever have on VA and SSI,(BRILLIANT retirement plan accept for the NOT breathing well part)
The ARTS are monopolized and treat talent like trash.
I didn't even TRY.



posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 12:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
As I predicted pages ago, the semantic obsessions and gross fraud on display here simply goes on and on.

My posts are simple and straightforward. I'm arguing that we have to truly hear and understand the anger that Black Americans in particular are feeling and all of us in general should be feeling as we watch our law enforcement apparatus roll over so many in this country.

Those opposing my posts want us to believe that abstract arrangements of questionable statistics presented in some imagined "unemotional" format is going to change anything. I say, and have said, that we have to get real with each other, understand that anger exists, feelings exist and that they can't and shouldn't be ignored for some dry, passionless, elitist claptrap.

Thanks, and good night.


Thanks for your opinions.

I believe your mentality is what is largely why we can't have a rationale discussion that solves any of these problems.

You say citing stats that seek to explain violent police encounters should be ignored, and instead we must start with the argument that the "black americans" anger (which ignores the fact that many black don't feel this way and many whites are the ones rioting) must be looked at as justified.

Consider for a second that people make this same mistake on the other side of the equation. They would say consider that the polices anger or dislike towards BLM groups is justified, and we must here them out and citing any stats about terrible policing should be avoided because it turns focus away from the polices justifiable anger.

This is equally ridiculous.

Getting real with each other means looking at the facts and reasons for why the problem occurs, as opposed to ignoring them in favor of feelings.

I am sorry you don't favor that, much in the same way the rioters don't.



posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 12:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler



Thanks again for your mature contributions!



posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 01:01 AM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7

Your art is amazing. It's a gift.



posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 02:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler





I cited FBI stats, and you ignored them and posted this.


Stats are clearly important to your POV, so any chance you can find me what you consider to be the most accurate stats with regards to how many people died as a result of hurricane Irma in and on the U.S mainland ?

Useful info for me when I have a chance to give a bit of thought to my reply to you on our earlier exchange....



posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 06:52 AM
link   
A few quick points:

My argument in recent posts in this thread is the same core argument I was making all along: the citizens of St. Louis are angered by this latest decision (Stockley verdict) in a long line of questionable killings by police. This anger is deep-seated. This anger is justified and understandable (by many). This anger is going to continue to grow unless the causes are addressed directly.

The anger and resultant civil unrest, rioting, property damage and so forth, are the REALITY in this situation. Those who choose to approach the matter via an elitist, pseudo-intellectual approach, arguing that statistics (that are misleading at best) are the important factor here, are pretending to some "higher" standard of reasoning which totally ignores the REALITY of what we face as a society here, to wit, that a large group of our citizens believe (with reason) that they are targeted by law enforcement and continue to be killed even when unarmed at an alarming rate and further that we are ALL potential victims here as the one statistic that is relevant here is that "killer cops" are on the rise.

The entirety of this thread focused on Black Americans. Of course, dog-whistle terms like "leftist" and "urban" are offered ... but we all know what's going on here. This discussion is another in a long line of not-so-subtle suggestions that somehow Blacks are intrinsically different than other races (as has been OVERTLY claimed here.)

A common tactic that we've seen deployed here, against my posts and others, is that we're claiming that Blacks are inferior. Yet, when these posters are asked to provide evidence of such obnoxious claims being made (by me and others) they cannot do so. Why? Because that's not what I and others are saying.

What we are saying is that there is a very credible threat to all Americans, Black or otherwise, from rising use of lethal force by LEOs.

Arguing that we approach the matters involved here REALISTICALLY is not an appeal to emotion; it's a call to action.
edit on 18-9-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 07:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

Thanks for your opinions.



You're welcome, although you continue to respond to general posts as if they were directed at you. Try not to deal with discussion so emotionally.


originally posted by: Grambler

I believe your mentality is what is largely why we can't have a rationale discussion that solves any of these problems.



My "mentality" is keeping society from finding an answer to anger over our discriminatory law enforcement and judiciary? Wow, I'm quite powerful, eh? What an absurd comment in a long line of asinine posts.


originally posted by: Grambler

You say citing stats that seek to explain violent police encounters should be ignored, and instead we must start with the argument that the "black americans" anger (which ignores the fact that many black don't feel this way and many whites are the ones rioting) must be looked at as justified.



Another blatant lie. What I've said is that the statistics that you and others here keep chanting are misleading, ill-used, out of context and in several cases, simply untrue. I'm saying that we should deal with the reality of the situation, which is the anger and distrust and beliefs that our police and courts are patently unfair.


originally posted by: Grambler

Consider for a second that people make this same mistake on the other side of the equation. They would say consider that the polices anger or dislike towards BLM groups is justified, and we must here them out and citing any stats about terrible policing should be avoided because it turns focus away from the polices justifiable anger.



This isn't an equation and there aren't only two sides. That sort of partisan-based, media-fed nonsense is a big part of the problem here, not to mention, its a strawman stuffed by you to backup your absurd approach to my comments.


originally posted by: Grambler

This is equally ridiculous.



I agree that your sad attempt to inject fallacious reasoning into the discussion at all costs is ridiculous.


originally posted by: Grambler

Getting real with each other means looking at the facts and reasons for why the problem occurs, as opposed to ignoring them in favor of feelings.

I am sorry you don't favor that, much in the same way the rioters don't.



Let's look at the facts instead of the hackneyed, manipulated stats you keep waving around so proudly. Let's look at the REASONS for why these events keep occurring, not the elitist analyses of difference. Your argument that we can't address the REALITIES of anger, distrust and resentment here because you claim these are less worthy of consideration that arbitrary calculations based on questionable data is asinine, backwards, self-serving, arrogant and simply wrong.

As is the stupid remark that "the rioters" are driven only by impulse and passion rather than justifiable resolution.

And stop with the pathetic lies and misrepresentations that you can't back up. Such garbage tears down the quality of these forums.
edit on 18-9-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 07:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Greven


The shooting of Castille who had a CCW was another one that people reached so very far trying to justify the murder of someone allegedly stopped for a tail light issue and doing nothing wrong, but also (while not telling the victim) allegedly for superficial similarities to a robbery suspect.


The Castille case brought up another disturbing issue in that there did not seem to be any protocol or procedure whatsoever for interactions between police and armed members of the public. Absolutely none. And that's a tragedy waiting to happen. There should be some sort of standard procedure -- known to both LE and the public -- which both know and know to follow while interacting with each other. There was absolutely no reason for an officer to fear someone being armed in and of itself, much less shooting him at close range just because he might[/] have been going for a gun -- after voluntarily informing the officer.

And that failure goes all the way to the top. LE especially should have known better and should have put those procedures in place. If someone refuses to follow those procedures, then the officer may have something to worry about. But if procedures are in place, and both parties follow them, then both parties can be fairly assured of each other's good intentions.



posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 07:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

It happened again last night Bo, this time to an LGBT student at Georgia Tech here in Atlanta.



The Georgia Bureau of Investigation is handling the case of an officer-involved shooting that happened on the campus of Georgia Tech.

According to the GBI, the Georgia Tech Police Department responded to a 911 call about a person with a knife and gun in the area of Eighth Street on the campus at about 11 p.m. Saturday.

Officers arrived and found Scott Schultz, 21, armed with a knife outside a Georgia Tech dormitory.



I'm sure he had a gun after all. We all know that brilliant engineering students carry guns, right?



Schultz was not cooperative and would not comply with officers' commands to drop the knife, the GBI said. They said Schultz approached the officers, despite continuous commands.

The GBI said that is when one of the officers shot Schultz.

Schultz was taken to Grady Memorial Hospital and later died, the GBI said.


I believe he was 20 or 21, White, trans*, in the last year of his undergraduate. I wonder what the statistics are on that demographic? (NOT)



In an exclusive interview with our partners at the Atlanta-Journal Constitution, Scout's mother Lynne says her oldest child was active in progressive causes and was a brilliant student despite having medical problems.

She told the paper, "(Scout) suffered from depression and attempted suicide two years ago."


One in five cases of killings by cop involves a mentally-ill person.



Channel 2 Action News was at the scene when the knife Schultz was suspected of holding was still on the ground.

It appeared to be a metal, flip-open, multitool knife that would likely include a small blade.


He was killed over a multi-tool. At one of the most prestigious universities in the country.

So much for this being a problem only in St. Louis, Detroit, Chicago, etc. among a "certain demographic."

Rest in peace, Scott.

WSB-TV Atlanta
edit on 18-9-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 07:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: MysticPearl

Of course you are exactly right.

Here is a way to prove it.

Something like over 90 percent of those shot and killed by police are men, despite being around only 50 percent of the population.

In fact more than any race, religious, age, ecomic or any other catergory, sex is the biggest skewed determined of almost all law enforcement action in the US, including people shot by the police.

People are claiming its a shame that blacks feel that rioting is the only way they can be heard, yet we have academia, political parties, media, celebrities, and even sports stars constantly talking about blacks being shot.

But name me one group of any real power screaming about men being singled out to be killed by police. In fact it is the opposite, most of the group's that I showed that focus on the police killing blacks decry the patriarchy.

Now all of us reasonable people know the reason for this is simple; men commit more violent crimes. Yet the same people that will admit that will someone act like we can't look at the violent crime numbers for blacks.

Its idiotic.

What's idiotic is drawing conclusions from data with a high degree of uncertainty. You cannot simply extrapolate the known information and assume the unknown information.

For example, in 2015 a total of 2,818 women were murdered and 1,180 women were determined to a murderer.
Meanwhile, 10,608 men were murdered and 9,553 men were determined to be a murderer.
A large 4,787 unknown offenders also exists in the FBI statistics for that year, which makes it difficult to draw conclusions about sex or race, given the high degree of uncertainty (though we can say men are more likely to be murderers than women, given the number exceeds the combined unknown and women murderers).

Around a third of murders are never solved - and murders are more likely to be solved than most other offenses:


Think about that for a second (also about how bad police are at solving crimes). Additionally, violent crime is particularly correlated with poverty:

For the period 2008–12, persons living in poor households at or below the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) (39.8 per 1,000) had more than double the rate of violent victimization as persons in high-income households (16.9 per 1,000)
...
Poor Hispanics (25.3 per 1,000) had lower rates of violence compared to poor whites (46.4 per 1,000) and poor blacks (43.4 per 1,000).

Blacks happen to have much higher rates of poverty:

By race,the highest national poverty rates were for American Indians and Alaska Natives (27.0 percent) and Blacks or African Americans (25.8 percent).
...
The 2007–2011 national poverty rate for Whites was 11.6 percent


Perhaps don't draw conclusions from an unclear picture?
edit on 8Mon, 18 Sep 2017 08:05:40 -0500America/ChicagovAmerica/Chicago9 by Greven because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2017 @ 08:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Greven




new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join