• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Being a racist while having a soft skull

Thermal said:
Yeah, but there is a spectrum of name-calling. At one end, the eyelash fluttering used so often on these hallowed fora. At the other, something so hateful and insulting that to utter it is the opening volley of a fight.
Click to expand...

Nah. You don't get to claim a special word that instantly justifies you assaulting people.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
Pujols was management. He might have got fired after the fact because often these stores have policies of refusing to protect the dignity and safety of their workforce from abusive customers, but its hard to argue that he didn't have authority to eject someone screaming racial slurs from the establishment at that moment in time.

People get forcibly bounced from open-to-the-public businesses for far less.
Click to expand...

I think there's a rather yawning chasm between "having the managerial authority to reject someone from the premises" and "punching a customer in the face over a slur personally directed at you".
 
Thermal said:
I think there's a rather yawning chasm between "having the managerial authority to reject someone from the premises" and "punching a customer in the face over a slur personally directed at you".
Click to expand...

Yes, there was a chasm of escalation that got leapt over, hence the criminal conviction.

A shot to the jaw as an opening salvo doesn't really pass the legal smell test, like you say. Telling a belligerent customer to leave, then start frogmarching them to the door when they refuse seems 100% fine. Defending yourself when this kind of person inevitably start throwing punches would also be fine.

When it comes to snuffing out racists legally, you really got to dot your I's and cross your T's. Pujols lost sight of that unfortunately.
 
Last edited:
Warp12 said:
Probably because it is a pathetic attempt to turn this debate into a racial one. And, of course, I have already mentioned that I don't support any pedo's, here or elsewhere. I am not one of those types who does so selectively. There is another thread where we can see that is clearly the case for some.

Still waiting for answers to my question, from those who are celebrating this guy's death.

But I understand the silence.
Click to expand...

Here's you blaming a black man for his own illegal death at the hands of white cop and, now convicted felon.

Tell us more about the compassion you feel for this dead white pedophile.
 
Thermal said:
It reflects intent to provoke a foreseeable consequence. That's the first shot in my book.
Click to expand...

It is foreseeable if the other party has no self-control..that doesn't make it acceptable. Look at this case, the name-caller was 77...the killer, 27. I mean, who acted more egregiously, here? I'd say Jack Dempsey behaved like a scumbag, in his own right. And was likely more prone to violence than average.
 
So we've established that literally nobody actually thinks this guy going down for murder is a bad thing.

So outside of the context of "Yeah would be nice if it happened the other way" what's to discuss? It's a nothingburger with a side of nothingfries.

And yet... certain people *cough cough* are going to act like this incident proves or means something.

What does it mean? Someone be so kind as to share it with me.

But you won't. Because you can't.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
Pujols was management. He might have got fired after the fact because often these stores have policies of refusing to protect the dignity and safety of their workforce from abusive customers, but its hard to argue that he didn't have authority to eject someone screaming racial slurs from the establishment at that moment in time.

People get forcibly bounced from open-to-the-public businesses for far less.
Click to expand...

This seems incredibly obvious to the point that I'm not sure why it's being debated.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
Yes, there was a chasm of escalation that got leapt over, hence the criminal conviction.

A shot to the jaw as an opening salvo doesn't really pass the legal smell test, like you say. Telling a belligerent customer to leave, then start frogmarching them to the door when they refuse seems 100% fine. Defending yourself when this kind of person inevitably start throwing punches would also be fine.

When it comes to snuffing out racists legally, you really got to dot your I's and cross your T's. Pujols lost sight of that unfortunately.
Click to expand...

Really not sure about the hilite. Here in NJ, there have been legions of successful lawsuits regarding laying hands on customers when legitimately bouncing. Generally, any use of force against a non violent person gets the hammer. The OP incident was where, Florida IIRC?
 
Warp12 said:
It is foreseeable if the other party has no self-control..that doesn't make it acceptable. Look at this case, the name-caller was 77...the killer, 27. I mean, who acted more egregiously, here? I'd say Jack Dempsey behaved like a scumbag, in his own right. And was likely more prone to violence than average.
Click to expand...

Warp12 thinks a black guy who punches someone is more prone to violence than a white guy who raped and abused children.

Nope, no racism there at all.
 
Warp12 said:
His actions directly led to his death. That doesn't mean the cop didn't deserve to be convicted. I stated this in the thread. As usual, you are post-mining without giving the context of my statements.

I don't have any compassion for this guy. Again, you are way off.
Click to expand...

And there it is....
 
Warp12 said:
His actions directly led to his death. That doesn't mean the cop didn't deserve to be convicted. I stated this in the thread. As usual, you are post-mining without giving the context of my statements.

I don't have any compassion for this guy. Again, you are way off.
Click to expand...

Did the actions of this pedophile lead to his death?
 
JoeMorgue said:
So we've established that literally nobody actually thinks this guy going down for murder is a bad thing.

So outside of the context of "Yeah would be nice if it happened the other way" what's to discuss? It's a nothingburger with a side of nothingfries.

And yet... certain people *cough cough* are going to act like this incident proves or means something.

What does it mean? Someone be so kind as to share it with me.

But you won't. Because you can't.
Click to expand...

"Going down for murder"? He got house arrest and community service, lol.
 
Warp12 said:
His actions directly led to his death. That doesn't mean the cop didn't deserve to be convicted. I stated this in the thread. As usual, you are post-mining without giving the context of my statements.

I don't have any compassion for this guy. Again, you are way off.
Click to expand...

It's pretty damn weird that you blame a person for their own death when someone else has been found legally responsible for it.
 
Warp12 said:
It is foreseeable if the other party has no self-control..that doesn't make it acceptable. Look at this case, the name-caller was 77...the killer, 27. I mean, who acted more egregiously, here? I'd say Jack Dempsey behaved like a scumbag, in his own right. And was likely more prone to violence than average.
Click to expand...

I think we all agree that Pujols went too far. At least I hope so. What interests me is how far provocation can be taken to be an incitement. Here, I'd say Pujols would have been clean to drag Old Pedo out by the scruff of the neck and bum's rush his ass out the door, whether generally legally permitted or not. Extenuating circumstances and all. Punching a very old man, racist or not, has to be looked at as a lethal assault though. A young blood can generally take what's coming to him. A senior citizen, not so much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom