Lurker > Nemu

UnfairRepresent posted...

wut.

There is plenty that can be done and whether or not you pull a number out your ass is not relevant.

No

That might be acceptable for Walmart but police? Doctors? No.

"All we can do is reduce the amount of black people they murder in the street and accept out unchangable fate."

What nonsense

You can change the entire system which is what half the country is calling for.

You can remove qualified immunity so the bad cops are actually held accountable.

You can weaken police unions so they stop taking the piss

You can end 3rd strike laws and the war on Drugs so it's harder for cops to harras black men.

You can fire every cop who stands around watching "bad cops" do bad things without stopping them

You can have open transparency with the population

You can stop giving cops military equipment.

You're being ridiculous

And is any of that going to stop some percentage of people from being murdered? No. It's not going to stop some guy from unfairly shooting someone. It's not going to stop someone from purposely murdering someone. All it will do is reduce the likelihood of it happening or make it more likely the person will face consequences for their actions. Most of that should be implemented, but it's not going to stop a minority of bad people from doing bad things. The point is, if we're dealing with a small minority, is that you can only do so much to curb insanity. If we're dealing with a larger minority, reform will have greater effect if we can target certain characteristics. Like, if you told me 75% of State X's County Y police were corrupt and need change, that would be much more believable and an easier target than some broad, unspecific percentage.

UnfairRepresent posted...

1. You switched horses. You've gone from "You cannot quantify the amount of 'Bad cops'" to "You cannot quantify the issue"

You can quantify the issue, the issue is that the police and justice system the US has doesn't work and hasn't for a century. It needs a complete overhaul.

2. You can fix an issue without quantifying it pretty easily. If you're watching a shitty movie that you hate but can't put your finger on why you hate it so much, you can still turn the movie off and put on a better one

False.

Even if it's 0.5% of cops that are bad. They still ruin police. They still kill people. There is still no trust.

The entire system needs fixing

Bomb! You've finally begun to understand the issue. The current police and justice system is impossible to fix. The system needs to change

This makes no sense.

"IF only 2% are bad then you can't fire them but if 15% are bad then we can solve this" is just wordsalad.

The point is that if someone is shouting "most cops are bad," such as that guy with his insane 75%, they need show it and rationalize it. Otherwise, it's just reactionary bunk that helps nothing. If it's 0.5%, there is nothing that can be done to stop them from existing. There is a minimum threshold of our population that will be insane sociopaths. There is a minimum threshold that will be in every profession. Now, if the population of insane sociopaths in the police system is dramatically higher than in the general population, then we can do something to figure out what the fuck is wrong. If it's not, all we can do is introduce realistic measure to hopefully reduce their chances of committing crimes while in power.

If it's one time, sure. If it's for years on end, he's definitely some form of bisexual. Like, even if you don't enjoy it, there's no way they can willingly fuck a woman for years unless they're doing it for maximum coverage to stay in the closet or they're a prostitute.

UnfairRepresent posted...

It's impossible to quantify

1. We don't know what most cops do most of the time.

2. The cops are protected so when they do unjust things, no one finds out.

Cops have been caught lying so frequently that now we can't trust what they do tell us, and what they tell is is only a fraction of what they do in the first place.

Going "No it's not 2% of cops that are bad, it's more like 13% or 27%" doesn't really matter. The entire system is broken.

If we cannot quantify the issue, it's impossible to fix. Trying to fix an issue you can only generalize doesn't work. If it's only 1% or 2%, then there's not a lot of fixing to be done. We're pretty close to the threshold of unremovable bastards. They're going to exist in the system no matter what you do, no matter how many changes you make. You can only get rid of them when they do something wrong. You can fix the system to make sure they're caught more often for sure, but you cannot remove them. If it's 10%-15%, you can try to figure out common trends and deal with it.

Zikten posted...

Besides Bad Apple being a tone deaf term, people also tend to greatly minimize the number of "bad apples". Trump wants people to think that 99.99% of all cops are heroes. But that doesn't even add up to logic. If bad cops were that rare then there would not be so many incidents in the news. And we have all seen live footage of cops committing brutal attacks on protestors all over the country for 3 weeks now

Then you need to actually quantify how many you think are bad. Pretty much nobody does it, so it's about as useless to the conversation as saying there are no bad cops at all.

If misuse of a taser has the capacity to kill, seems fair. If not, then not sure how you'd justify shooting him unless he was an immediate threat to someone else.

Tactical_Spork posted...

And lol @ this

If you think life is as easy as "increase the minimum wage to $X and everyone is happy," then you don't know how any kind of business works.

Now does the whole minimum = livable account for reduced hours due to lack of available funds to pay that? Not all jobs can really afford to do that, so they would just make more stuff part time to account for that,

solosnake posted...

The current CFR for closed cases is @ 10% through 4.5 million people

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Of tested cases. The likelihood the number of tested cases is anywhere close to the true total is laughable considering the shitty testing practices around the world, especially in the US.

Yes, because we have critical infrastructure that requires the constant movement of people. Due to that, someone is always going to have it, so it's not feasible. The only time literally shutting down the country on marshal law or something would make sense would be a 10-25%+ death rate across the board.

I mean, not all of those are deserved, but a generally great game is going to get similar scores.

No, those are minor cases. When tens of thousands of people are angry and ten people harass someone on Twitter, that is literally a description of extreme cases.

How many jobs even start with minimum wage any more? I feel like even fast food starts people between 10-12 at this point.

Bananana posted...

Said poverty cannot be addressed without also discussing the racism that caused it

If we're discussing what caused the poverty and what can be done to address it, yes, but you can have circumstances where impoverished people across the board are equally affected regardless of skin color. Conflating everything with pure racism can kind of cause people to lose the plot.

archedsoul posted...

Because a lot of the people in poverty are there because of the systemic racism. There was a study released recently that said white people with just a highschool diploma make more than minorities with bachelors.

Yes, but the poverty itself is not racist. I agree that a variety of factors, many racist, have brought about the state where a disproportionate amount are in poverty, but we shouldn't act like factors that can be solely attributed to that poverty are racist. It muddles up the discussion.

I don't get why they always say racism when it's usually poverty that's the issue. Said poverty may certainly largely be influenced by racism, but it doesn't change the fact that the poverty itself is more often the issue than skin color.

We're getting to the point where graphics matter less than what you can do with the in-game worlds. The problem is that a lot of that back end stuff isn't shiny, so it's hard to sell that to the consumers.

I don't understand this recent idea that criticizing something is somehow bad. The only bad kind of criticizing is when it gets into insane shit like hounding the devs on Twitter 24/7, or literal threats of violence. For some reason, people see those insane cases and somehow extrapolate it to be the norm, as with everything else on the internet.

There are certainly institutional changes that can be made across the board regarding police accountability, but I do think people have unrealistic expectations of what is possible.

BathroomWater posted...

I wonder if the same users complaining about $100,000 stolen also complain about the trillions of dollars stolen from laborers over the years.

Depends if youre talking about a nuanced discussion on the value of labor or just going full unrealistic communist.

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

On the contrary, the timing is almost too convenient considering this happened right after that viral image went around showing that Qal-Mart only locks up black hair products.

Isn't that something that's been happening for years, and with anything they lock up, it's stuff that is stolen to an insane degree?

I'm so confused by the people condoning this shit as if it has anything to do with proper protesting. Lives are more important than property only makes sense if the destruction of property somehow helps save lives. I do not see how literally getting some people killed, ruining the lives of others, or simply making their cause look worse would save any lives whatsoever. Instead of condemning all looters and vandals as bad, they either condone it across the board or blame it all on a boogeyman (though there are some real outside agitators but likely not enough to make any considerable difference).

Sure, but I'd just give them the value of whatever I fucked them out of whenever I get my riches. Doubt that would make complete amends, but I'd feel better at least.

Yeah, I'd totally love to see that world where mom and pop shops can handle the infrastructure needed to supply goods to millions of people.

I'd say the chances of it being murder are higher given the wonky circumstances, but it'd be silly to entirely rule out a provocative suicide.

Colorahdo posted...

why do you want to play the same games over and over?

I love nintendo for always trying new things

There's a difference between innovation and throwing away the entire formula. 64 > Sunshine > Galaxy > Odyssey each have their own gimmicks, but TTYD > SS was like if Galaxy had the gameplay of Captain Toad.

It's not a full return to form, but I think I'll pick it up. That there are no consumable battle items shown so far and the inclusion of this semi-partner system gives hope that it'll at least be an enjoyable experience.

Nothing too interesting. I'll wait for the pro/slim/XL SuperMega version.

Eh, hopefully the second edition looks better.

It'll likely spur discussion, but most of the stuff happening is either feel good bunk that won't change anything or overly reactionary measures that'll be reversed with time. Real change will take years of discussion and legislation.

This idea that diversity is either inherently good or bad really needs to go away. We just need a marketplace that allows for diversity without people creating hurdles for people based on specific characteristics. That anyone feels either personal shame for not being diverse enough or feels they have to virtue signal by pretending they actually care is really stupid.

Johnny Depp shows it does. It only doesn't exist if you're defining it as literal cancellation of everything about the person, but that's always been a weird deflection. "Oh, he still has hundreds of millions of dollars so it's not at all a problem that he lost a $60 million dollar contract from pure allegations with no proof due to fear of backlash from fans."

The Trent posted...

WRONG there is no question there is no scenario at all in existence that explains why the roided out officer is being so forceful

There are circumstances where he's being an absolute animal, and there are circumstances where he's taking action to avoid getting himself or a bystander shot. There's a chance the kid was doing nothing and they're basically just beating the shit out of someone, and there's a chance the kid was fucking wrestling with the other cop and had an opportunity to try to grab the gun.

The question would be if he potentially has direct access to the other cop's gun and how he got on top of the other cop. If there is a chance of someone being shot and he's actively resisting, not sure what else you'd expect.

Funniest thing about the idea of outright abolishing the police is when they say we should replace the police with the police.

No. Freedom of speech. Any private platform that wants to ban it can ban it, but otherwise any moron should be free to display whatever racist shit they want at potential cost of their livelihood.

The_Bitcoin posted...

not really, no.

babies are usually spared because the population has to be replenished. This is also why you cant fish for certain species too (its not like clams are cute and cuddly when theyre babies lol)

I would assume that's accounted for if the bill only deals with "inhumane practices." If not, then that is another issue with the bill, but the notion that killing a baby animal is inherently inhumane is silly. Large bears and wolves have just as much character and emotion as the young ones.

Killing animals is killing animals. The only thing that matters is that they don't suffer unnecessarily, but otherwise caring about their age is just a sentimental gesture and nothing more. The removal of protection on some species seems to be the worse part of it.

Unions in general seem to be like 10% employee rights and 90% sketchy, so taking a deep dive into them to clear out the gunk certainly wouldn't be a bad thing.

Realistically, it's some kind of variant, but there's really no reason to argue with someone on it.

Probably homeless shelters. That we dont have enough to house every homeless person is pretty insane. There will always be some minor subset that will be impossible to house due to their lifestyles, but you should be able to give 95% of them roof.

Questionmarktarius posted...

Go take a shower and think about it.

If we're going to go down the rabbit hole of attributing every usage of black and white to skin color, then that's going to be a long ass fall.

I'm confused on the Cleanse one. Is there some symbolism that's not as blatant as the other one?

I guess it's a fact that a repeat criminal is going to have a higher chance of meeting with a corrupt cop, but doesn't really change the fact he was up and up murdered.

I don't think it really matters so long as they have a clean bill of health. Issue with Trump and Biden is that one could have a heart attack and the other might wake up one day having forgotten everything.

No reason not to in the dire circumstance that they actually need to use them. Of all the issues with police and police funding, this seems like a silly talking point.

I don't get why people react so viscerally to the idea in the first place. We obviously are in no place where that could be enacted on a governmental level, but individual people can certainly come to hold that mindset. That is a possible consequence of any group founded on a specific trait if they aren't open enough with those on the outside of the group. Institutional power isn't the only form of supremacy.

It can be applied both logically and illogically, but it's more often used illogically. It's not inherently seen as a fallacy, but it's often cited as one due to the latter usage.

Zikten posted...

I don't think so. unless something really bad happens in society, I think 200 years from now, nobody will care if you watched porn. we will probably be considered prudes by the people 200 years from now if anything

I'd say eating meat would be a better parallel. It's entirely possible the sensibilities of people two hundred years from now could see any killing of animals as just as bad as killing humans.