Quote: rxwine
Duffman said,
Sure explain why blocking traffic is violent. A guy blocking those tanks -- why is that violent? Don't try to dodge by saying you don't understand.
Tanks are traffic?
Quote: GWAENot everything has to turn political. Can we possibly have a single conversation without it revolving around party lines? I have never done a single thing in my life based on a party. Neither have 95% of the people in the US.
Please let the record show that I was not the first to bring politics up. I replied that I did not like all of this blocking traffic as a form of protest. Let the record show that you and I may be the minority here in that we had a local current event of protest last night. Somehow it turned political after that.
Quote: AZDuffmanDuffman said,
Sure explain why blocking traffic is violent. A guy blocking those tanks -- why is that violent? Don't try to dodge by saying you don't understand.
Quote:Tanks are traffic?
Yup, so are horses pulling wagons. Any other diversions you'd like to try to not answer.
Quote: rxwineYup, so are horses pulling wagons. Any other diversions you'd like to try to not answer.
I feel bad for you if you live in an area where you consider the military being sent to crack down on protests as "traffic." You may want to move.
Quote: AZDuffmanI feel bad for you if you live in an area where you consider the military being sent to crack down on protests as "traffic." You may want to move.
traf·fic
/ˈtrafik/
noun
noun: traffic
1.
vehicles moving on a road or public highway.
YOU'RE STILL WRONG. LOL.
Quote: rxwine
Duffman said,
Sure explain why blocking traffic is violent. A guy blocking those tanks -- why is that violent? Don't try to dodge by saying you don't understand.
Blocking traffic is a show of aggression. I consider aggression to be in violent category. It is basically like trolling, they are doing something to get a rise out of others.
Quote: GWAEBlocking traffic is a show of aggression. I consider aggression to be in violent category. It is basically like trolling, they are doing something to get a rise out of others.
Well at least you answered.
No one said it is isn't irritating.
So like a guy standing in front of guy marching with a drum. That guy is committing violence. I see.
Quote: GWAEDuffman said,
Sure explain why blocking traffic is violent. A guy blocking those tanks -- why is that violent? Don't try to dodge by saying you don't understand.
Blocking traffic is a show of aggression. I consider aggression to be in violent category. It is basically like trolling, they are doing something to get a rise out of others.
Not complying with others' expectations isn't necessarily aggressive and definitely not violent. Is refusing to get up from a bus seat aggression or trolling? Equating aggression with violence is a leap. Hanging up on someone could be considered violent as could smoking in a public place or raising one's voice. Standing in front of others is not violent.
Quote: rxwinetraf·fic
/ˈtrafik/
noun
noun: traffic
1.
vehicles moving on a road or public highway.
YOU'RE STILL WRONG. LOL.
Keep reaching. You are impressing nobody but yourself with your faulty comparison.
If you get blocked in by a group of BLM-type protestors blocking traffic, let us all know how "peaceful" it is.
Quote: AZDuffmanKeep reaching. You are impressing nobody but yourself with your faulty comparison.
If you get blocked in by a group of BLM-type protestors blocking traffic, let us all know how "peaceful" it is.
I was only trying to get you to admit you were wrong on a simple point and your ego is too big to fail. Pretty typical for you though.
Quote: rxwineI was only trying to get you to admit you were wrong on a simple point and your ego is too big to fail. Pretty typical for you though.
But I am not wrong. A group of people blocking a road is violence. Your retort is that of a caller to Tom Leykis or some other talk host saying they know one person who does not fit what he is saying so he must be wrong. Your "example" has nothing to do with blocking traffic and makes no sense to the point being made.
If you want to defend the people blocking traffic, say how great you think it is that they tie up a major road and block traffic for miles. Tell how you think there is no violence in a group of people saying, "you are not allowed to pass!"
Have at it.
Quote: AZDuffmanBut I am not wrong. A group of people blocking a road is violence. Your retort is that of a caller to Tom Leykis or some other talk host saying they know one person who does not fit what he is saying so he must be wrong. Your "example" has nothing to do with blocking traffic and makes no sense to the point being made.
If you want to defend the people blocking traffic, say how great you think it is that they tie up a major road and block traffic for miles. Tell how you think there is no violence in a group of people saying, "you are not allowed to pass!"
Have at it.
I didn't disagree that someone blocking your way is not fun for you, just your description of violence begs what is violent, as opposed to what is illegal. It is most certainly illegal to block a road for an extended time without permission. My road was blocked due to construction, I never considered the barriers as violent even if they were illegal. But they were legal of course.
Quote: MintyBlocking traffic is a show of aggression. I consider aggression to be in violent category. It is basically like trolling, they are doing something to get a rise out of others.
Not complying with others' expectations isn't necessarily aggressive and definitely not violent. Is refusing to get up from a bus seat aggression or trolling? Equating aggression with violence is a leap. Hanging up on someone could be considered violent as could smoking in a public place or raising one's voice. Standing in front of others is not violent.
So I come up to a large group of people standing in the middle of the street. What am I supposed to do? I have every right to be driving on this street. They have every right to demonstrating, but they do not have the right to demonstrate on the road. They should contain it to the sidewalk or a park. If I try to slowly move through the group they will then become violent.
There are some scenes of people in these groups vandalizing property. How does acting like that help in their cause? The problem is a lot of people in these groups arent even out there for the actual reason, they come out just because they feel they can get away with doing things such as smashing garbage cans and breaking windows.
Quote: rxwineI didn't disagree that someone blocking your way is not fun for you, just your description of violence begs what is violent, as opposed to what is illegal. It is most certainly illegal to block a road for an extended time without permission. My road was blocked due to construction, I never considered the barriers as violent even if they were illegal. But they were legal of course.
that is kind of my point. If people want to march then they should file the necessary paper work which would allow them to march all they want in the streets. Why do they feel doing an illegal act would help prove anything. If they think there is a major racist problem between their group and other non minorities and cops then doing illegal acts does nothing to help their cause.
Quote: GWAESo I come up to a large group of people standing in the middle of the street. What am I supposed to do?.
Call the cops, as opposed to getting out of the car and attacking them with your Kung Fu.
Quote: rxwineCall the cops, as opposed to getting out of the car and attacking them with your Kung Fu.
I never said that I would get out. I have the right to drive on that road, they do not have the right to block the road.
Also the cops are already on the scene so there is no one to call. The cops shouldn't be letting them block the road but they are in a tough position. If they move in then there surely would be some actual riotting.
Quote: GWAEWhy do they feel doing an illegal act would help prove anything. If they think there is a major racist problem between their group and other non minorities and cops then doing illegal acts does nothing to help their cause.
I'm not arguing it's a good idea for their cause, just whether sitting in the road is different than say attacking you and your car. I say it is different. When you get out of the hospital you will know the difference in real violence and passive resistance I suspect.
Quote: rxwineI'm not arguing it's a good idea for their cause, just whether sitting in the road is different than say attacking you and your car. I say it is different. When you get out of the hospital you will know the difference in real violence and passive resistance I suspect.
Can't there be different levels of violence? If I feel threatened by a gaggle of people then I perceive that as violence. If I am shot in the face then that is obviously violence.
Quote: rxwineI'm not arguing it's a good idea for their cause, just whether sitting in the road is different than say attacking you and your car. I say it is different. When you get out of the hospital you will know the difference in real violence and passive resistance I suspect.
I was curious if my point made any sense so I google the actual law definition of violence. It reads:
the unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the exhibition of such force
Is blocking the street considered intimidation by exhibition of force?
If so then I think they are being violent when blocking the street.
If not then I just feel threatened in this situation so maybe it isnt violent but just threatening. Either way it is not a situation that is ideal to be in.
Quote: GWAE
If not then I just feel threatened in this situation so maybe it isnt violent but just threatening. Either way it is not a situation that is ideal to be in.
I agree. However if a bunch a women put their babies in basinets in the street for a protest of some sort, that is supposedly a violent action as well. If the NRA parked in my street with their weapons strapped on, I would feel different as well.
I was watching a live feed here locally where they were doing a march. It was not a legal march but it was organized and they kept moving opposed to just blocking traffic. The leader was yelling at the people in her group because they were getting rowdy. Then they attacked a car like this video. You could see the disappointment in the leaders face how it ended. If they would just keep moving and march then they would get good publicity and not people against their cause.
Quote: rxwineI agree. However if a bunch a women put their babies in basinets in the street for a protest of some sort, that is supposedly a violent action as well. If the NRA parked in my street with their weapons strapped on, I would feel different as well.
I think in order to consider it violent there has to be intent or maybe a threat. If there is a street full of basinets then the threat level is nil but the confusion would be through the rough. I also think if a bunch of woman blocked the street with basinets then the end result would be different then a bunch of people holding billy clubs
Jussie Smollet - ALL charges dropped and his record wiped clean of any wrongdoing in the false victimization claims
Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: TigerWuThis got me curious about IQs, and according to this study, seven of the top 10 countries with the highest average IQ are Asian.
And here's a study showing breakdown in the U.S. by state. The highest ranking Southern state is Virginia at #16, and the rest of the South is #29 or lower.
Are you suggesting a demographic reason for this? Less Asians in the south?
No, I said nothing about demographics or race. I don't know how many Asians are in the South vs. other parts of the country.
Quote: darkozBreaking news
Jussie Smollet - ALL charges dropped and his record wiped clean of any wrongdoing in the false victimization claims
I'm sure there is more to come on this. I wonder if he struck a deal or if this is his friends at work?
Quote: TigerWuQuote: AZDuffmanQuote: TigerWuThis got me curious about IQs, and according to this study, seven of the top 10 countries with the highest average IQ are Asian.
And here's a study showing breakdown in the U.S. by state. The highest ranking Southern state is Virginia at #16, and the rest of the South is #29 or lower.
Are you suggesting a demographic reason for this? Less Asians in the south?
No, I said nothing about demographics or race. I don't know how many Asians are in the South vs. other parts of the country.
Just so you know, by the standards liberals have made that statement could be considered racist based on the demographics of the south.
Quote: MaxPenI'm sure there is more to come on this. I wonder if he struck a deal or if this is his friends at work?
Yeah, I'm sure just because he's black and "famous" the Obamas had something to do with it. *eyeroll*
He struck a deal. He essentially paid a $10,000 fine.
Who cares. Worst case scenario, he paid some guys to beat him up and filed a false police report. BFD. Not exactly a career criminal we're dealing with here. Such a non-story that never should have made it out of the local papers or Hollywood gossip rags.
Quote: AZDuffmanJust so you know, by the standards liberals have made that statement could be considered racist based on the demographics of the south.
What statement is racist? That I don't know how many Asians are in the South?
Quote: TigerWu
He struck a deal. He essentially paid a $10,000 fine.
Who cares.
Don't, but do. A fradulent attempt to demonize a sub culture, an attempt to widen the rift if an entire nation, the wasting of a large city's police force, and he faces a lesser charge than if I chug one beer and pop down to the shops.
Liberty and justice for all. Terms and conditions may apply
Quote: TigerWuYeah, I'm sure just because he's black and "famous" the Obamas had something to do with it. *eyeroll*
He struck a deal. He essentially paid a $10,000 fine.
Who cares. Worst case scenario, he paid some guys to beat him up and filed a false police report. BFD. Not exactly a career criminal we're dealing with here. Such a non-story that never should have made it out of the local papers or Hollywood gossip rags.
Who cares? This is the kind of thing that incites riots. We keep hearing how divided the nation is over race. Does this kind of thing help? How serious do you think the next claim of a hate crime will be taken?
Quote: TigerWuWhat statement is racist? That I don't know how many Asians are in the South?
You don't know the demographic makeup of the south?
Quote: FaceDon't, but do. A fradulent attempt to demonize a sub culture, an attempt to widen the rift if an entire nation, the wasting of a large city's police force, and he faces a lesser charge than if I chug one beer and pop down to the shops.
Liberty and justice for all. Terms and conditions may apply
From what little I've read about the case, it sounds like it was dropped due to lack of evidence. Looks like it boiled down to "he said, he said" between Smollet and the two guys that "jumped" him.
Like I said, though, I don't really care that much, so maybe I've missed some information.
Quote: TigerWuFrom what little I've read about the case, it sounds like it was dropped due to lack of evidence. Looks like it boiled down to "he said, he said" between Smollet and the two guys that "jumped" him.
Like I said, though, I don't really care that much, so maybe I've missed some information.
Lack of evidence?
Quote: onenickelmiracleLook at the first post, racial politics are not allowed in this thread. I consider Smollet to qualify.
Good catch, I'll shut up about it.
Quote: AZDuffmanLack of evidence?
It makes no sense. If he's innocent,
what is the 'time served' for. If
he's innocent, why did he let them
keep the $10,000 bond that he should
have gotten back with butt kissing
apologies. Was he falsely arrested?
If so he has the biggest lawsuit in
history. If he was wrongly arrested
why do they get to keep his bond?
He still claims the attack happened,
does that mean his original police
report is now valid? None of this makes
any sense.
Quote: TigerWuFrom what little I've read about the case, it sounds like it was dropped due to lack of evidence. Looks like it boiled down to "he said, he said" between Smollet and the two guys that "jumped" him.
Like I said, though, I don't really care that much, so maybe I've missed some information.
I heard it was because, as is scripture, ChiPD mucked up the case.
Bleh. In any case, I was only here to bitch about slanted justice and I've quite a well to dip from on that account. I too will gladly drop it in deference to OP.
Quote: EvenBobIt makes no sense. If he's innocent,
what is the 'time served' for. If
he's innocent, why did he let them
keep the $10,000 bond that he should
have gotten back with butt kissing
apologies. Was he falsely arrested?
If so he has the biggest lawsuit in
history. If he was wrongly arrested
why do they get to keep his bond?
He still claims the attack happened,
does that mean his original police
report is now valid? None of this makes
any sense.
Chicago is not the cleanest criminal justice system out there. Ever see the court scene in "Thief?" Maybe this guy rested his face on his hands during the motion?
Another example of liberal hate of Chick-Fil-A.
Quote: AZDuffmanChick-fil-A pulled from Buffalo airport after company's alleged 'anti-LGBTQ rhetoric' sparks backlash
Another example of liberal hate of Chick-Fil-A.
It's no different than when Nike supported Kapernick (sp?) and faced conservative backlash, or the time when Dick's made the decision not to sell AR-15s or with Starbucks because their cups weren't Christian or Christmassy enough or when what's her face refused to sell a cake to a gay couple or when.....
It's not "liberal hate" it's people acting on their views in a way that gets results. Conservatives do the same thing.
Quote: MintyQuote: AZDuffmanChick-fil-A pulled from Buffalo airport after company's alleged 'anti-LGBTQ rhetoric' sparks backlash
Another example of liberal hate of Chick-Fil-A.
It's no different than when Nike supported Kapernick (sp?) and faced conservative backlash, or the time when Dick's made the decision not to sell AR-15s or with Starbucks because their cups weren't Christian or Christmassy enough or when what's her face refused to sell a cake to a gay couple or when.....
It's not "liberal hate" it's people acting on their views in a way that gets results. Conservatives do the same thing.
No, conservatives do not "do the same thing."
Conservatives said, "We don't like Kapernick, so we are not going to buy Nike products.
Liberals are saying, "Chick-Fil-A is not falling in line with the gay agenda. We are going to prohibit them from doing business!"
Look beyond the surface.
BTW: The gay couple was free to buy anything in the store, just that the baker would not do a custom job for them.
Quote: AZDuffmanQuote: MintyQuote: AZDuffmanChick-fil-A pulled from Buffalo airport after company's alleged 'anti-LGBTQ rhetoric' sparks backlash
Another example of liberal hate of Chick-Fil-A.
It's no different than when Nike supported Kapernick (sp?) and faced conservative backlash, or the time when Dick's made the decision not to sell AR-15s or with Starbucks because their cups weren't Christian or Christmassy enough or when what's her face refused to sell a cake to a gay couple or when.....
It's not "liberal hate" it's people acting on their views in a way that gets results. Conservatives do the same thing.
No, conservatives do not "do the same thing."
Conservatives said, "We don't like Kapernick, so we are not going to buy Nike products.
Liberals are saying, "Chick-Fil-A is not falling in line with the gay agenda. We are going to prohibit them from doing business!"
Look beyond the surface.
BTW: The gay couple was free to buy anything in the store, just that the baker would not do a custom job for them.
Okay, but how was this any different?
Conservatives said, "We don't like Kapernick, so we are not going to buy Nike products."
Liberals said, "We don't like Chick Fil A, so we are not going to buy Chick Fil A products."
See? Identical, but with chicken instead of shoes. Both are political parties disagreeing with an ideology and boycotting. To say that liberals doing it is wrong but conservatives get a pass is to be completely blind to your own bias and unwilling to even give the thought of criticism to your party.
Quote: Minty
Okay, but how was this any different?
Conservatives said, "We don't like Kapernick, so we are not going to buy Nike products."
Liberals said, "We don't like Chick Fil A, so we are not going to buy Chick Fil A products."
READ THE ARTICLE! It is just the latest.
Liberals are saying, "We do not like Chick-Fil-A, so WE ARE NOT GOING TO LET THEM OPEN STORES!"
This is YOUR GOVERNMENT saying that! Get it? If you do not toe the line, they are using the government to shut down who they do not like!
Quote: MintySee? Identical, but with chicken instead of shoes. Both are political parties disagreeing with an ideology and boycotting.
The government deciding which businesses can and cannot open is a little different from your everyday boycott.
I don't really "boycott" anything because it seems to be a pain in the behind to remember who I am supposed to boycott.
Quote: MintyTo say that liberals doing it is wrong but conservatives get a pass is to be completely blind to your own bias and unwilling to even give the thought of criticism to your party.
I've criticized a lot of different things on my side but I don't really see a lot of it from the other side.
Quote: AZDuffman
If you do not toe the line, they are using the government to shut down who they do not like!
Trump threatening American business when they want to do something different like move a business to a different location.
Should he be interfering or not?