Being a racist while having a soft skull

[plague311]

It is kind of funny to see the same posters who blast the "lookit, he was no angel" argument used against Arbery and others embracing the same thinking here. I mean, is it fallacious or not? Or just when convenient?

My personal outlook is inline with yours in that the past of anyone, as you pointed out, shouldn't be used to rationalize what happened UNLESS it was known to those involved at the time.

Cooks problems were brought to light in 2008, so about 13 years ago. That would have put Pujols the Pedo Pounder at the ripe age of 14ish. I don't know if anyone pointed him out, or if he knew. It did happen in Tampa so it's absolutely possible someone else was familiar with it.

 

[Lithrael]

In the real world, I think it's actually extremely commonplace, maybe even the norm, for someone who has 'lost their temper' in some typical, everyday circumstance, to still act within a certain boundary of 'not going too far,' for whatever value they have of 'too far.' Someone who flies off the handle and throws stuff still won't break their own favorite things or throw stuff through a window of their own home. Lots of people who can get baited into fistfights don't go for a knife even if they had one on hand.

I think that 'angry, and planning an action to do something about it' is one thing, 'angry, and letting yourself get carried away with it (but still having some control in reserve, like, if a baby jumped in the way you'd obviously stop because you didn't want to hit a baby)' is another thing, and 'angry, and going absolutely ape **** berserk' is a whole other thing (that hardly ever happens in everyday circumstances).

 

[Tippit]

In August, 2007, the same George Floyd who is now a martyr for being murdered by Officer Derek Chauvin, committed an armed home invasion with five other men, where he held a woman at gunpoint and robbed her. Does the fact that Floyd was a scumbag mean that he deserved to die without due process at the hands of a cop?

If not, why does a racist pedophile deserve to be summarily executed for an alleged slur? I'm not contending that Pujols intended to kill him, but clearly that's what happened, and according to law, anyone who uses force against someone else is responsible for the consequences.

We have due process for a specific reason - to determine whether accusations made against a suspect are actually true or not, before punishing them.

The double standards in "social justice" are becoming all to obvious for anyone with a brain to see.

 

[Lithrael]

Exactly nobody at all in the thread thinks Pujols should not face the legal consequences of his actions.

 

[dirtywick]

Ignoring your strange claim that this was a summary execution despite not contending that he intended to kill him, there's a number of major differences between the police killing George Floyd using approved police methods and a donut shop manager losing his temper after being provoked and punching a man that resulted in his death. For instance, is there even any doubt that Pujols will be charged and convicted of the killing in the same way there was with Derek Chauvin? So what due process is being denied here?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Exactly nobody at all in the thread thinks Pujols should not face the legal consequences of his actions.

That's not quite true, I think he should be given the key to the city.

This is, admittedly, the outlier position on the thread as far as I can tell.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Ignoring your strange claim that this was a summary execution despite not contending that he intended to kill him, there's a number of major differences between the police killing George Floyd using approved police methods and a donut shop manager losing his temper after being provoked and punching a man that resulted in his death.

Of course there are and everyone know its.

But some pretending they don't know it, stopping the discussion while we discuss it while they pretend not to know it, is the point.

 

[cullennz]

Cullenz for example seemed to be saying that being someone who would throw a punch was enough to make the label 'thug' totally appropriate.

And no, I don't choose the most hurtful words when I am upset and cussing someone out. I barely choose words at all. It's just whatever comes out because of how upset I am. It's the same type of stuff I say when I shut my hand in a door, with a few minor exeptions, like I don't call a door 'mean' (but I do call it a bastard ************).

And no, I wouldn't punch someone in a way to try to inflict as much pain and humiliation as possible. I would punch someone in anger in whatever way I managed to get my hands up and connected.

Or you could actually read my post

 

[Ron Obvious]

That's not quite true, I think he should be given the key to the city.

This is, admittedly, the outlier position on the thread as far as I can tell.

I don't think any of us would really enjoy living in the kind of honour culture you appear to be advocating for, not even you. Western civilisation has mostly advanced past that point.

 

[Lithrael]

Or you could actually read my post

You called this guy a thug with no information outside of the specifics of this story, which are the same sort of lost-temper circumstances I'm trying to argue about with Thermal.

 

[plague311]

In August, 2007, the same George Floyd who is now a martyr for being murdered by Officer Derek Chauvin, committed an armed home invasion with five other men, where he held a woman at gunpoint and robbed her. Does the fact that Floyd was a scumbag mean that he deserved to die without due process at the hands of a cop?

No. I'm not sure if this is directed at me, but if you look at what I said I didn't say the old man deserved to die. I said the world is better without him, and I'm not bothered by his death.

Floyd wasn't just murdered, he was tortured. Being suffocated to death would be, in my opinion, one of the worst ways to go. The fact that it was a cop that did it with complete disregard makes it even worse. George Floyd also didn't escalate the situation at every possible opportunity.

If not, why does a racist pedophile deserve to be summarily executed for an alleged slur? I'm not contending that Pujols intended to kill him, but clearly that's what happened, and according to law, anyone who uses force against someone else is responsible for the consequences.

Can we drop this "alleged" ********? It's in every report, confirmed by witnesses, the law enforcement and the ******* DA. What else do you want to have it not be alleged? Anyway, all but one person here agrees that Pujols should face the consequences. Another difference between Floyd and Cook is that Cook had every chance to walk away. Every single chance, and he went the opposite direction. Floyd was begging for his life and his only request was to not be in the backseat.

We have due process for a specific reason - to determine whether accusations made against a suspect are actually true or not, before punishing them.

Great. Thank you.

The double standards in "social justice" are becoming all to obvious for anyone with a brain to see.

Would "anyone with a brain" fail "to see" the extreme differences between two cases before using one in a failed attempt to chastise others? Asking for a friend.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Admittedly, I feel a whole lot less sympathy for him now. Someone with a past like that shouldn't be consuming resources like air that are put to better use. Ultimately though, it makes no difference in terms of Pujols attack. Unless Pujol actually knew who Cook was? Pretty likely, I would think, as Cooke was front page news down there, and people will say "you see that guy over there? Well, a few years ago..." for many moons.

It is kind of funny to see the same posters who blast the "lookit, he was no angel" argument used against Arbery and others embracing the same thinking here. I mean, is it fallacious or not? Or just when convenient?

Pretty much, yeah.

 

[Emily's Cat]

You called this guy a thug with no information outside of the specifics of this story, which are the same sort of lost-temper circumstances I'm trying to argue about with Thermal.

Yeah... we first covered this several pages ago, which got split and became it's own discussion. Then we covered variations of it just a couple of days ago. Both cullennz and Thermal got some min-lectures, and both have already stepped back and clarified that they didn't intend it as a comment on the entirety of Pujol's character, but as a description of the specific event.

Given that it's already been acknowledged and backed away from, I don't really see any good reason to continue belaboring the point.

 

[Tippit]

That's not quite true, I think he should be given the key to the city.

This is, admittedly, the outlier position on the thread as far as I can tell.

Why shouldn't Derek Chauvin be given the "key to the city" for murdering George Floyd?

Is it because the woman whose home Floyd invaded with 5 others while armed was hispanic, which I guess is close enough to caucasian for you to look the other way?

This would seem evident, given that every other post by you is a new thread employing almost non-stop race baiting. You accused me of being a madbro, but clearly you are pretty upset with the faux systemic racism narrative that you've swallowed, and continue to perpetuate.

 

[smartcooky]

It is kind of funny to see the same posters who blast the "lookit, he was no angel" argument used against Arbery and others embracing the same thinking here. I mean, is it fallacious or not? Or just when convenient?

You have evidence Arbery was a paedophile?

 

[Tippit]

No. I'm not sure if this is directed at me, but if you look at what I said I didn't say the old man deserved to die. I said the world is better without him, and I'm not bothered by his death.

I don't disagree, nor do I think the world is much worse off without Floyd, who held a gun to a pregnant woman in a home invasion. But the most important casualty is our civil liberties, due process, and the presumption of innocence.

Floyd wasn't just murdered, he was tortured. Being suffocated to death would be, in my opinion, one of the worst ways to go. The fact that it was a cop that did it with complete disregard makes it even worse. George Floyd also didn't escalate the situation at every possible opportunity.

I agree, in fact i think there is a case that lethal force could have been used against Chauvin during the assault. Police should be held to a much higher standard than the general population, given the power they have.

Can we drop this "alleged" ********? It's in every report, confirmed by witnesses, the law enforcement and the ******* DA. What else do you want to have it not be alleged? Anyway, all but one person here agrees that Pujols should face the consequences. Another difference between Floyd and Cook is that Cook had every chance to walk away. Every single chance, and he went the opposite direction. Floyd was begging for his life and his only request was to not be in the backseat.

Whether it was alleged or not, a racial slur isn't justification for physical assault. I've been called racial slurs before, that doesn't mean I can draw my gun and kill them out of anger.

Would "anyone with a brain" fail "to see" the extreme differences between two cases before using one in a failed attempt to chastise others? Asking for a friend.

Posters are expressing glee about the death of one scumbag, my question was whether it was inappropriate to feel glee for the death of another scumbag.

 

[Belz...]

If not, why does a racist pedophile deserve to be summarily executed for an alleged slur?

Why does no one know what "execution" means, anymore?

 

[smartcooky]

In August, 2007, the same George Floyd who is now a martyr for being murdered by Officer Derek Chauvin, committed an armed home invasion with five other men, where he held a woman at gunpoint and robbed her. Does the fact that Floyd was a scumbag mean that he deserved to die without due process at the hands of a cop?

If not, why does a racist pedophile deserve to be summarily executed for an alleged slur? I'm not contending that Pujols intended to kill him, but clearly that's what happened, and according to law, anyone who uses force against someone else is responsible for the consequences.

We have due process for a specific reason - to determine whether accusations made against a suspect are actually true or not, before punishing them.

The double standards in "social justice" are becoming all to obvious for anyone with a brain to see.

Because intentionally choking someone for nine minutes until they are dead is indistinguishable from reacting to someone insulting you by punching them

 

[Belz...]

What else do you want to have it not be alleged?

Well the assailant would have to be white, of course, but then he wouldn't have been called the n-word. It's a bit of a catch-22.

 

[cullennz]

You called this guy a thug with no information outside of the specifics of this story, which are the same sort of lost-temper circumstances I'm trying to argue about with Thermal.

I called him a thug for punching someone 50 years older than him in the head