Active Users:192 Time:20/05/2024 02:46:26 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Yeah, you really misunderstand me, apparently - Edit 1

Before modification by aerocontrols at 07/08/2018 08:54:57 PM

and I don't feel like it's my fault. I agree with BLM like 95% and I think they're (and you!) making a tactical mistake of trying to push me away (and successfully pushing away others, as evidenced by polling data) and all you want to do is argue about the 5% and mischaracterize my beliefs about the 95%.


View original post
No. Did I make that argument?


View original postYes, you did. Not that there was a constitutional amendment. But if BLM arguing for justice for "really bad dudes" makes it hard for you to support criminal justice reform, you are saying that criminal justice for "really bad dudes" doesn't matter.

It's fascinating how you read their positions and behaviors with such understanding and can come away from my initial post believing I hold the exact opposite stance that I actually hold. Did you miss my final paragraph? Was it confusing? Did I say they drove me to oppose even a single reform I believed in before they existed? Maybe in the abstract you think BLM and criminal justice reform are the same thing, but concretely you have to know they're not, right?



View original post
Oh I'm crying a river of tears over this.

I guess you win the drama award?


View original postBut we don't, or didn't, have such a broad definition of "when necessary", and we certainly don't think shooting people because of their skin color is acceptable. Yet, since "really bad dudes" who are black get shot more often than "really bad dudes" who are white, we have this situation where the guns we give cops that they can use in the defense of their lives, or to stop worse bloodshed, is used to murder unarmed men, and then the most often badly trained, horrible excuses for cops get to call this "self defense", because, you see, they genuinely thought their life was threatened.

So you still don't believe me, I guess. Because this mostly just looks like you repeating the first sentence of my final paragraph back at me, and pretending that you're telling me something I don't already know or care about.


View original postThen you don't need to read Toxoplasma or Rage, or anything else, to know that whoever BLM holds up as a cause for concern, the fact is there is way too many unarmed men being killed by cops.

No I didn't. I needed to read it to understand why BLM takes a large role in a wide-ranging argument over a shooting in Ferguson and stuff like Eric Garner's killing is barely on the radar. It was also helpful to me to understand why you seem to be so upset with me and apparently won't stop looking for cracks in my support for something you claim to care about despite my assertions that I also care about it.



View original postI'm not sure you're thinking this argument of yours through. So you claim to have the right view of a morally awful situation. But because you perceive others with a similar position as being too angry, too insistent... whatever, you find yourself losing support for the view you yourself think is correct. Uhh.. kudos?

I have a view I think is correct. I didn't say I was losing support for my view. I said I can't support them, and your form of argument turns me off to you, which you say you don't care about, except you can't stop arguing over it. I still hold the same views as before.

You think I've changed or moderated my views, and what I'm saying is that my views remain unchanged, despite the objections I've expressed. I really don't know how to discuss this with you, when you so consistently misrepresent what I've written.


Return to message