• 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

plague311 said:
Yeah, this is the article I read previously:



It couldn't have been premeditated as Pujols had no intentions of the old man dying. Per the prosecutors:



Sucks for both sides.
Click to expand...

Yeah, premeditated is the wrong word. "Walking slowly around the counter" shows deliberate intent and threat, though. Not quite losing his cool for a minute and reacting impulsively. If this version is true, Pujols deliberately and "slowly" put himself in striking position.

And I still can't help but think if the old man was some 27 yr old racist, I would consider using a slur against Pujols to be a challenge, and wouldn't blame Pujols a bit for taking a swing.
 
Thermal said:
Yeah, premeditated is the wrong word. "Walking slowly around the counter" shows deliberate intent and threat, though. Not quite losing his cool for a minute and reacting impulsively. If this version is true, Pujols deliberately and "slowly" put himself in striking position.

And I still can't help but think if the old man was some 27 yr old racist, I would consider using a slur against Pujols to be a challenge, and wouldn't blame Pujols a bit for taking a swing.
Click to expand...

He could have been protective of his employees and didn't want them to be exposed to that type of language.

I know this has been hashed but I don't think either of them made any good decisions at all. The old man is a ******* moron for not dropping it, making a point to go inside and spit racial slurs at people. Pujols was a ******* moron for not letting the cops deal with him like he had originally planned, and instead putting him in the ground.

The definition of two wrongs don't make a right.
 
plague311 said:
He could have been protective of his employees and didn't want them to be exposed to that type of language.

I know this has been hashed but I don't think either of them made any good decisions at all. The old man is a ******* moron for not dropping it, making a point to go inside and spit racial slurs at people. Pujols was a ******* moron for not letting the cops deal with him like he had originally planned, and instead putting him in the ground.

The definition of two wrongs don't make a right.
Click to expand...

Tru dis.
 
Emily's Cat said:
<insert side-eye smiley here>

Are you looking at the same animal kingdom that I am? I'm not so certain as you that the reproductive urge is lesser in strength than fight-or-flight... especially as the urge to reproduce is very often the direct cause of fighting.

That said, I think it's entirely reasonable to expect that humans should be able to use their big brains to override their base instincts on both topics. Unfortunately, both rape and violence remain struggles.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm sure. And yes, it is stronger and more urgent than breeding reactions in humans. Some other animals have strong mating seasons and the like.

And situations creating the fight or flight response can arise for many reasons, including reproductive competition, but that's not the same thing as lust being the proximate cause. The lust caused the confrontation and the confrontation causes the fight or flight.
 
plague311 said:
He could have been protective of his employees and didn't want them to be exposed to that type of language.

I know this has been hashed but I don't think either of them made any good decisions at all. The old man is a ******* moron for not dropping it, making a point to go inside and spit racial slurs at people. Pujols was a ******* moron for not letting the cops deal with him like he had originally planned, and instead putting him in the ground.

The definition of two wrongs don't make a right.
Click to expand...

I said it before, but if this guy were my manager, I'd love him forever. It's pretty rare for management to do anything to curtail the abuse of their customer facing employees in situations like this.
 
Ron Obvious said:
No. If the only difference is reversing the races, the reactions shouldn't be different. That's the point.
Click to expand...

We do have to to consider that Africans could have enslaved Europeans to assist with conquering the new world. But alas, they didn’t.
 
Dr. Keith said:
We do have to to consider that Africans could have enslaved Europeans to assist with conquering the new world. But alas, they didn’t.
Click to expand...

As far as this discussion is concerned, that's a non-sequitur. Nobody has the right to punch out anyone else because of historical grievances. Excusing black violence is merely a more subtle form of racism; the typical soft bigotry of low expectations that the left are often guilty of: "you just can't expect to hold black people to the same standards".

Not helpful.
 
plague311 said:
It looks like we have a bit more clarity into the events that happened on that day, if you can trust floridapolitics.com. I did a bit of looking around but didn't find much about their reputation.

It goes into some details that we were wondering about, but doesn't list the word the old man called Pujols. They still don't name the old man.

TL; DR version. The man was in the drive thru, it said he was asked to leave "by staff" but came in and Pujols told a staff member to call the cops. They argue, old man says something racist, Pujols steps out from behind the counter and tells him not to say that again, the old man says it again to his face, and he takes one to the jaw.
Click to expand...

He was asked to leave before he came inside? That changes things a bit, because entering premises after the staff and manager has told you to leave and remaining there, again, after you have been told to leave, means that you are now trespassing.

Doesn't Florida have a "stand your ground" Law? :D
 
Ron Obvious said:
As far as this discussion is concerned, that's a non-sequitur. Nobody has the right to punch out anyone else because of historical grievances. Excusing black violence is merely a more subtle form of racism; the typical soft bigotry of low expectations that the left are often guilty of: "you just can't expect to hold black people to the same standards".

Not helpful.
Click to expand...

You have read a lot into my post that isn’t there. It’s entertaining, but hardly responsive.
 
Darat said:
He's dead, so nothing sucks for him at all.
Click to expand...

Fair point.

As apposed to the hooliganistic yob who is facing 20 odd years in jail.

But hey. At least apparently his staff will love him while he is serving it, according to some posters.

Because doing dumb **** when called names is now good
 
cullennz said:
Fair point.

As apposed to the hooliganistic yob who is facing 20 odd years in jail.

But hey. At least apparently his staff will love him while he is serving it, according to some posters.

Because doing dumb **** when called names is now good
Click to expand...

Dood, why do you keep saying this? No one has said Pujols killing the man is good. There's been some indifference, but no one has shown happiness that the man is dead. ST got close, but even so that wouldn't be "some posters".

It does suck for Pujols, I'm not sure why you seem hellbent on calling him names as usually a single incident doesn't make a person, but he earned that time by doing something stupid. That being said, sticking up for yourself and others when demeaned publicly isn't something that breaks my "he's a terrible person" o' meter. I'm not sure why you've had very little, if anything, negative to say about the man that trespassed in a store for no other reason than to berate and racially slur the staff of a Dunkin Donuts for whatever entitled ******** he thought went wrong. That's...weird.
 
plague311 said:
Dood, why do you keep saying this? No one has said Pujols killing the man is good. There's been some indifference, but no one has shown happiness that the man is dead. ST got close, but even so that wouldn't be "some posters".

It does suck for Pujols, I'm not sure why you seem hellbent on calling him names as usually a single incident doesn't make a person, but he earned that time by doing something stupid. That being said, sticking up for yourself and others when demeaned publicly isn't something that breaks my "he's a terrible person" o' meter. I'm not sure why you've had very little, if anything, negative to say about the man that trespassed in a store for no other reason than to berate and racially slur the staff of a Dunkin Donuts for whatever entitled ******** he thought went wrong. That's...weird.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty happy he's dead, but it's a shame it carries a consequence for our puncher. It would be much preferable if racists were struck by lightning or wandered into traffic, but you gotta take the wins where you find them.

Punching out a racist customer on a tirade, after giving them ample opportunity to stop digging their own grave, strikes me as a pretty reasonable response, even though our laws prohibit it. The dude with an eggshell skull dying as a result was simply an unlikely result that is an inherent risk of unarmed violence.

Yes, the humor of the situation is heavily compromised by the fact that our puncher faces some serious legal problems now.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom