The WOKE Thread (Merged from WTF?)

[Negatory]

3 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

Somebody found their old debate book glossary...

 

 

Curious to know if "left nationalists" are ok.  Is it the political leaning or the "nationalist" part that so offends you?

Also what’s your point? Fallacies are okay?

[di1630]

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[di1630]

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[lloyd christmas]

36 minutes ago, brawnie said:

Yeah ok. If you think a bunch of law enforcement hiding their identities and assaulting citizens with no charges is the same as police protecting property, JFC.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Are you saying you are opposed to the police using unmarked vehicles?  I may have missed it, but I don't see any evidence of the feds "hiding their identities" other than riding around in unmarked cars.  It seems pretty obvious who they are when they are dressed head to toe in tactical gear.  And I can guarantee you they are announcing who they are as they approach a subject.  This may have been said before, but it seems logical to arrest someone when they are away from the crowd.  That protects the perp, the officers and would not escalate things.  It certainly is better than having the feds roll down main street Portland completely overwhelming these rioters.  Either way, you can't destroy property for over 50 days with no consequences.  There are law abiding citizens of Portland who deserve to have their lives and property protected.  Enough is enough.  

[Negatory]

I am opposed to police arresting people with no basis and not being held responsible. Since they are using unmarked cars and obfuscating their badge numbers and identities to do it, yes, I am opposed to those things as well. Here's the last couple months in America:

I am opposed to cops shooting home owners with rubber bullets when they are video taping off of the porch of their own property: https://streamable.com/u2jzoo

I am opposed to cops beating suspects that are cuffed: https://peertube.live/videos/watch/7e1074c8-1f77-4922-b088-4a2069f5b23e (have about 50 more of these, let me know)

I am opposed to cops shooting at people just for recording them: https://peertube.live/videos/watch/b702c820-1837-4025-8a08-91e8a3cdff07

I am opposed to cops giving preferential warning to the Proud Boys (white nationalists) before breaking up groups: https://peertube.live/videos/watch/aec4e019-59bc-4eec-b119-df877024ce57

I am opposed to cops using tactics like getting 6" away from people or literally stopping in front of them to claim that they were assaulted and then arresting them unjustly: https://peertube.live/videos/watch/70c2a732-a9b6-4d5d-8ce4-81625742ccd4

https://peertube.live/videos/watch/8ba7a5d9-7e63-4dc5-a193-e0330c20cee2

I am opposed to cops over-aggressing and using chokeholds on people half their size while pretending that they are the good guys: https://peertube.live/videos/watch/55b36828-a647-478e-87f9-810fc7ab7a55

 

None of these incidents has resulted in a criminal charge. And you aren't going to watch any of them because your mind is already made up.

[Clark Griswold]

2 hours ago, brawnie said:

What do you think about the fact that legalization of marijuana has been relatively successful in many states and countries up to this point? That is, it hasn't caused mass homelessness or deaths or mental illness, and its legalization has actually made its purchase safer while allowing the government to collect revenue (and simultaneously defunding drug dealers). 

Does this make you think that an overarching "war on drugs" is maybe a bit too broad? Maybe the policies of the past were... wrong?

Don't think relatively successful is how to describe it, I would call it a wash with a light residue left behind.  Plenty of evidence of that it is not all sunshine and rainbows when you legalize it at the state level, still illegally federally but hey that's just a rule of law issue, who cares about that stuff anymore?

I'm not for legalization as it is now, I would be for it if it came with stringent regulation to better control what is sold to the public like alcohol is, the weed that is out there now is different than the dope old boomers smoked in the 60s - more potent and the delivery methods being used by the young and foolish (illegal vaping products) are causing injury/deaths.   But like I said, if legalization were done differently and legally in accordance with the primacy of federal laws over state laws, legalization/regulation at the federal level first then states tailoring their laws inside the parameters of that overarching legal limit(s).

I went on a Google spree just to cite some evidence of my neutral to slightly negative assessment of state legalization, looks like other states are taking a pause to legalization as it is a mixed bag at best in the states that have legalized.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/11/191113153049.htm

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/27/marijuana-legal-homeless-denver-colorado

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/03/us/colorado-survey-suggests-legal-marijuana-attracting-homeless/index.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-13/pot-legal-states-struggle-to-stem-rise-in-driving-while-stoned

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/01/30/marijuana-legalization-may-increasing-number-stoned-drivers/4603105002/

https://www.rti.org/news/new-study-suggests-medical-marijuana-legalization-may-be-associated-higher-rates-mental-illness

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6461328/

https://www.mhanational.org/risky-business-marijuana-use

That's not a big bunch of monkey shit I'm throwing at your post but just want to make the point that weed is a vice like many in our society, to be tolerated on a tight leash but not really embraced.

Don't think the policies of the past were wrong per se if you mean the declaration by Pres Nixon of the War on Drugs in 1971 but as you say they were the past, they were what the people then making the decisions thought was the right thing to do and now we can study the results.  That is NOT support to the fallacious idea of saying if they just did X (some more lenient policy) it would have been so much better.  You or I can't prove a hypothetical that would have been done in the past to cause some outcome, we can only speculate.  

Should drug laws, policy towards the illegal drugs in the USA and abroad where we choose to support PNs in counter narcotics be monitored and updated to get the best results and operate inside of our values?  Yup.

Should we continue the War on Drugs?  Yup.  It's my two cents you never get a break from fighting for your society, values and culture.  Like everything living in nature it must constantly strive and fight for its place otherwise it will be no more.

Anyway, that's my rant for the night.  As we are discussing the War on Drugs I will offer this podcast episode I listened to on the subject recently, worth the hour investment of time IMHO:

 

Edited July 22, 2020 by Clark Griswold

[Breckey]

Or cops hitting and pepper spraying an individual literally standing in front of them without any apparent malice or hostile intent.

[Negatory]

57 minutes ago, di1630 said:

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

In this thread: "patriot" shows no concern for authoritarian, unconstitutional actions because it's happening to someone with views different than their own. I'm sure with your vast wealth of historical knowledge you will understand this reference:

"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a socialist."

Edited July 22, 2020 by brawnie

[Negatory]

22 minutes ago, Clark Griswold said:

Don't think relatively successful is how to describe it, I would call it a wash with a light residue left behind.  Plenty of evidence of that it is not all sunshine and rainbows when you legalize it at the state level, still illegally federally but hey that's just a rule of law issue, who cares about that stuff anymore?

I'm not for legalization as it is now, I would be for it if it came with stringent regulation to better control what is sold to the public like alcohol is, the weed that is out there now is different than the dope old boomers smoked in the 60s - more potent and the delivery methods being used by the young and foolish (illegal vaping products) are causing injury/deaths.   But like I said, if legalization were done differently and legally in accordance with the primacy of federal laws over state laws, legalization/regulation at the federal level first then states tailoring their laws inside the parameters of that overarching legal limit(s).

 

Valid points. The biggest one that I didn't realize is that DUI (of marijuana) is probably an increasing crime that needs to be dealt with somehow. I still think that legalizing it is better for society than jailing and ruining people's lives/productivity.

I actually listened to this podcast recently, and I seem to remember him arguing that legalization is actually what would help dismantle the cartels' power, it's just that legalization of cocaine/heroin is so outside of society's political realm that it's unfeasible. With that being said, I have a friend that is going to die of heroin addiction, and I do not believe that heroin/meth/opiods should be legal. At the same time, I do not believe that jailing those that use the drugs actually fixes the problem. In America, the moment you are arrested for doing meth, your life is over for good - there is no redemption, there is no way to remove that, there is no making up for it. Treating drug abuse purely as a crime is a short-sighted approach that doesn't hit the root cause.

[Danger41]

19 minutes ago, brawnie said:

I am opposed to police arresting people with no basis and not being held responsible. Since they are using unmarked cars and obfuscating their badge numbers and identities to do it, yes, I am opposed to those things as well. Here's the last couple months in America:

I am opposed to cops shooting home owners with rubber bullets when they are video taping off of the porch of their own property: https://streamable.com/u2jzoo

I am opposed to cops beating suspects that are cuffed: https://peertube.live/videos/watch/7e1074c8-1f77-4922-b088-4a2069f5b23e (have about 50 more of these, let me know)

I am opposed to cops shooting at people just for recording them: https://peertube.live/videos/watch/b702c820-1837-4025-8a08-91e8a3cdff07

I am opposed to cops giving preferential warning to the Proud Boys (white nationalists) before breaking up groups: https://peertube.live/videos/watch/aec4e019-59bc-4eec-b119-df877024ce57

I am opposed to cops using tactics like getting 6" away from people or literally stopping in front of them to claim that they were assaulted and then arresting them unjustly: https://peertube.live/videos/watch/70c2a732-a9b6-4d5d-8ce4-81625742ccd4

https://peertube.live/videos/watch/8ba7a5d9-7e63-4dc5-a193-e0330c20cee2

I am opposed to cops over-aggressing and using chokeholds on people half their size while pretending that they are the good guys: https://peertube.live/videos/watch/55b36828-a647-478e-87f9-810fc7ab7a55

 

None of these incidents has resulted in a criminal charge. And you aren't going to watch any of them because your mind is already made up.

Thanks for the videos. I watched all you linked and would offer a perspective from someone pitching in as an outsider. Is it possible that “your mind is already made up” on some of these? I suffer from a condition where I try to look at things objectively and it’s hard to do that in 15-30 second clips. 
 

*All of the below are for personal edification so please take the questions as such*

1. Rubber bullets at the house. What was the situation in that area that required that level of police presence? Had they been threatened and/or shot at from porches in that neighborhood? They were repeatedly told to go inside and continued filming. I don’t know the context.
 

2. Beating the cuffed suspect. Looks bad, is bad. What is the objective legal criteria for when a cop has a suspect under control? I doubt it’s handcuffs because someone can still thrash and do a lot of damage while cuffed. Once again, I don’t know.

3. Shot at while being recorded. This one shows me absolutely no proof where that came from and is the ultimate case of a pre-conceived notion fitting a narrative.

4. Proud Boys treatment. Should they get directly in their face and demand that they disperse with force? Or should a cop defuse a situation and get some guys to leave an area? Looks like the type of de-escalatory policing that everyone says they want. A key element of this one is the posture of the suspects. They were standing around and drinking a beer for crying out loud. The tactics work there. Can’t do that with a group screaming into your face. However, it’s once again a short clip that I don’t know the context.

5. Getting in the protesters way. Look at the manner in which that protester is conducting his protest. I don’t buy it, but I can see how an argument could be made that the cop felt threatened by his actions. I thought this one was very cut and dry that cops were in the wrong here.

6. Chokehold on the woman. Looks terrible from where the video started. No idea what happened before it to justify that. It was very rough, but I don’t see the cop doing anything excessive to secure her. You could tell how hard he was choking her (not very) by how well she was able to talk less than 15 seconds after he released her. 
 

I absolutely think that policing (and the criminal justice system in this country as a whole) needs a major overhaul. The fact that many police are acquitted in the deaths of suspects (Freddie Gray, Eric Garner, and Rodney King are three that still make zero sense to me along with many others) is unbelievable and pisses me off. It also pisses me off that leadership at various levels of the government allow something like Portland or CHAZ/CHOP to occur. Protesting is great and I encourage concerned citizens to exercise their first amendment rights. However, if it devolves into an ugly riotous situation, it’s going to look ugly as it’s broken up and everyone with a phone can get that ten second video of a cop smashing a suspect. 
 

This post is partly me playing devil’s advocate (probably a poor phrase given context) and partly me being genuinely curious to understand the issues from both sides. 

[Clark Griswold]

Valid points. The biggest one that I didn't realize is that DUI (of marijuana) is probably an increasing crime that needs to be dealt with somehow. I still think that legalizing it is better for society than jailing and ruining people's lives/productivity.

I actually listened to this podcast recently, and I seem to remember him arguing that legalization is actually what would help dismantle the cartels' power, it's just that legalization of cocaine/heroin is so outside of society's political realm that it's unfeasible. With that being said, I have a friend that is going to die of heroin addiction, and I do not believe that heroin/meth/opiods should be legal. At the same time, I do not believe that jailing those that use the drugs actually fixes the problem. In America, the moment you are arrested for doing meth, your life is over for good - there is no redemption, there is no way to remove that, there is no making up for it. Treating drug abuse purely as a crime is a short-sighted approach that doesn't hit the root cause.

I am truly sorry for your friend and hope that he is the outlier that makes it to the other side.

Concur on partial legalization but not full, it’s not a perfect policy (there is none) but it likely better than what we have now.
Agree on the long term and stigmatized extremely negative effect of a singular encounter or even a second with the criminal justice system for possession and personal use. Distribution is entirely different.
There should be some paths to redemption for some offenses, there is a point where there is not but that point should be quite a ways to cross, not easily.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[di1630]

In this thread: "patriot" shows no concern for authoritarian, unconstitutional actions because it's happening to someone with views different than their own. I'm sure with your vast wealth of historical knowledge you will understand this reference:

"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a socialist."

I got one just for you




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Negatory]

5 minutes ago, Danger41 said:

Thanks for the videos. I watched all you linked and would offer a perspective from someone pitching in as an outsider. Is it possible that “your mind is already made up” on some of these? I suffer from a condition where I try to look at things objectively and it’s hard to do that in 15-30 second clips. 
 

*All of the below are for personal edification so please take the questions as such*

...

I absolutely think that policing (and the criminal justice system in this country as a whole) needs a major overhaul. The fact that many police are acquitted in the deaths of suspects (Freddie Gray, Eric Garner, and Rodney King are three that still make zero sense to me along with many others) is unbelievable and pisses me off. It also pisses me off that leadership at various levels of the government allow something like Portland or CHAZ/CHOP to occur. Protesting is great and I encourage concerned citizens to exercise their first amendment rights. However, if it devolves into an ugly riotous situation, it’s going to look ugly as it’s broken up and everyone with a phone can get that ten second video of a cop smashing a suspect. 
 

This post is partly me playing devil’s advocate (probably a poor phrase given context) and partly me being genuinely curious to understand the issues from both sides. 

You should play devil's advocate. I try to, because I recognize that I am becoming more biased the more I see. And I don't like it. It's hard to stay impartial, and I appreciate your response.

1) https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/02/george-floyd-protest-minneapolis-cops-shoot-paint-people-porch/3123781001/ - The argument is that the police said there is a curfew, and you have to listen to the police. Additionally, they only used paint, not rubber bullets as I said previously - I was wrong. Doesn't change that I don't think that they should have been shot at on their own porch or ordered inside.

2) I think they had this guy under control when they started assaulting him. I get your point, but it's not in play in this video imo.

3) Why does someone have to have pre-conceived notions to believe that you shouldn't be shot at if you don't present a threat? He is literally on a skybridge above the cops (the skybridge is to the Louisville Courthouse), not in the mess. I find it hard to wrap my mind around justification for a shot ever happening here. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/amberjamieson/louisville-shot-fired-security-guard-video

4) I will admit that this video has little context - it isn't even confirmed 100% that those are proud boys. It's a few minutes before a curfew, and they are outside. The cops shouldn't be talking to any specific groups just "so [they] don't look like [they're] playin favorites." The cops ended up apologizing for a perception of impartiality. https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/protests/salem-police-chief-apologizes-in-response-to-viral-video-of-officer/283-d7f4ce66-6f8d-4a25-a478-ae3999648d51

5) There are actually two videos there. Disorderly conduct for bumping into a cop that stops 6" in front of you? YGBSM. It's like being arrested for resisting arrest, and it's a pathetic technicality. https://patch.com/new-york/eastmeadow/3-arrested-east-meadow-protest

6) Okay, fine. No context.

I agree that protesters that take advantage of a legitimate protest to loot and destroy private property should go to jail. It's easy for people to call a whole protest a riot and immediately condemn every person there as a criminal, when it's only a few. And I guess what would come back is that it's just as easy for people like me to call the justice system broken because of the actions of a few bad apples.

I feel confident in saying I don't support cops who support other cops who abused power. And I also don't support protestors who support other protestors who break the law and capitalize on anarchy.

[busdriver]

Proud Boys (white nationalists) .

You happen to see a picture of the dude who took over "leadership" of that group after McGuiness bailed?

The corporate press seems to have a complete inability to understand internet culture. My guess is they have to smash everything into the boxes that define their world view. And that's how you get a "white nationalist" organization with an Hispanic leader

Old school men's club type gang is probably more accurate.

[Negatory]

9 minutes ago, di1630 said:

I got one just for you




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

You mad bro?

If you are still feeling as edgy, here, you can edit the rest of the saying:

[SurelySerious]

5 minutes ago, brawnie said:

You mad bro?

If you are still feeling as edgy, here, you can edit the rest of the saying:

For as much as you decry ad hominem and straw man, you sure do a lot of it. 

[Negatory]

It started with an honest attempt at discourse with di1630. I guess the only thing you can do is just ignore him.

Is it a lot if it happened one time?

Cheers.

[nsplayr]

24 minutes ago, busdriver said:

And that's how you get a "white nationalist" organization with an Hispanic leader

Relevant video, especially since McInnes founded Vice in the 90s: 

 

24 minutes ago, busdriver said:

Old school men's club type gang is probably more accurate.

I mean...that's being extremely generous based on the types of activities they do. I mean some of the Proud Boys chanted, "Jews will not replace us!" in Charlottesville so 🤷‍♂️ Not the type of dudes I'm gonna give the benefit of the doubt to in the vein of, "Oh, we're reformed, etc. etc." after all the shit press from that event.

Edited July 22, 2020 by nsplayr

[di1630]

It started with an honest attempt at discourse with di1630. I guess the only thing you can do is just ignore him.
Is it a lot if it happened one time?
Cheers.

Not mad at all. Questioning your honest attempt at discourse, as all I got was reworded paragraphs. But no matter.

I’m happy to engage in real discourse.

I haven’t found a leftist yet I can’t pummel in a logical argument until they call me a racist or Nazi simply because I disagree.



Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[pawnman]

54 minutes ago, Kiloalpha said:

I think anyone with a rational mind has a divided feeling on the federal officers in Portland. On one side, the rioters have been attacking that federal courthouse and the property surrounding it fairly consistently, and you know that DHS is running their own intelligence on who they think is behind it. They kind of have to use unmarked cars to pick up those folks, because there's zero chance Antifa will let them if they're together in a massive group. Their tactical clothing is bad optics, imo, but not illegal. The other side though is... do we really want to give Antifa/the left a talking point of "abductions" (even thought they're being booked and released)? That's a tough one. Also, they're following the book and taking the people they're detaining to a precinct or jail... but what if the officers weren't so just and people were being abused? Anytime the government flexes its muscle domestically its not a great thing.

So, as a conservative I feel as if I'm being consistent in that I'm not cheering it, per se... but I'm also not decrying it. If we have documented cases of real abductions and/or people being tortured? Different story. Desperate times (mayors/cities refusing to institute rule of law) do call for desperate measures, and so far the government response hasn't veered into fascism. Despite what Twitter says.

As for legalizing drugs, that's a pass from me. I've had family members killed from them. Weed I'll go along with, but we need a concrete way to prevent weed-related DWIs first. I also think that tough laws should exist as to where one can smoke it. Secondhand smoke sucks in general, but no one is getting high from a person smoking a cigar nearby. Some dude getting high from a joint could very well impair the surrounding area via secondhand highs if the circulation is shit.

Also, as a member of the military...I'm not a big fan of federal law enforcement putting on very similar uniforms and conducting these anonymous raids.  As if I didn't have enough to worry about from ISIS and Al Qaeda, now DHS is putting a target on my back for every antifa and BLM wannabe revolutionary.

I'm also not a fan at all of the anonymous aspect.  When they talk about "unmarked", the don't mean the "police" velcro on the uniform.  They mean that there are no visible badge numbers, nametags, or other identification.  No way to hold a bad cop accountable, because no one knows who it is.  My personal thought is that you don't need to hide your name from the people paying your salary unless you're doing something shady.

[Homestar]

9 minutes ago, pawnman said:

My personal thought is that you don't need to hide your name from the people paying your salary unless you're doing something shady.

Lots of undercover work is done with police anonymity for their own safety.

[Sim]

 

13 hours ago, brawnie said:

I thought maybe I'd vote for the libertarian this election like I did in 16....now I'm firmly opposed to the Trump camp.

 

[Guardian]

So because on one or a few examples the whole thing needs redone? Is that what you are saying?

[Guardian]

It’s the assault and arrest of law abiding citizens that bothers me. And it’s the mindset of those that blindly support all police at all costs - even when there are equivocally some that have grossly abused and are abusing power literally right now.
Not the arrest of looters or people that are breaking the law. Lock em up.

Are you assuming they are being arrested vice detained? Both are legal.

[ThreeHoler]

I haven’t read the whole thread but the use of OCPs is to sell the narrative that the Democrat-controlled cities are “war zones.”


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app