Lurker > chaosbowser

OhhhJa posted...

I understand that they're still learning about the virus. I've actually already stated that in earlier posts. I'm saying that shouldn't be putting misleading statements when they themselves don't have 100% understanding of the virus. Its dangerously stupid to be giving the green light on protests period point blank right now.

My goalposts haven't shifted. Nobody should be protesting right now. People should be wearing masks as much as possible and only poeple working should be absolutely essential

Paternalistic medicine is really more of a 1960s thing if youre doctors to tell people how they should live their lives youre going to be severely disappointed. Older doctors may be relics of that era but its just not todays medicine. The CDC is recommending things but it is fully aware it cannot stop people from doing what they want so it is recommending to not from groups larger than 100 people. Really man.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Florida today has reached zero ICU availability across the entire state and it's not because of the protests. This is a state that rushed back to reopening and put very few precautions in place afterward to prevent continued spread. All because the big ol orange in command wanted it.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

streamofthesky posted...

People were trying to figure out why there wasn't a huge spike from the BLM protests specifically.
Which, in order to even be pondering that question, is to accept that gathering in a big mass like that should be a bad idea, health and safety-wise.
ie, the exact opposite of trying to make excuses for it

Also this. We already pointed out that regardless of how unsafe protesting sounds they are not what's causing a second wave. You have no ground to stand on so you're just crying out nonsense at this point. You're not moving on points already proven to be untrue.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

OhhhJa posted...

It was either the CDC or WHO that said asymptomatic people aren't likely to transmit it like 2 weeks ago my dude

Once again people ask the CDC for questions they don't really have the answer to because it's fairly new. We cannot really 100% claim anything because there's just not enough data. The field of medicine is incredibly complicated with an insane number of variables to account. So yes. Expect rapid changes to recommendations. During a surgery scrub training session at the hospital for one of my rotations the clinical educator informed us that PPE recommendations in the first few months of this pandemic changed daily before finally reaching a somewhat stable state a month ago.

Their reasoning for likely asymptomatic transmission is described here :

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/7/20-1595_article

OhhhJa posted...

Imagine being so stuck up your own ass that you think your protests are ok but others aren't. Like you're so self righteous, you only believe protests that you agree with should be allowed and that just because the government currently aligns with you in that front that they should be allowed to continue to cherrypick in the future. Considering the CDC and WHO are still trying to figure out how the virus is transmitted it seems a little disingenuous to be encouraging protests of any kind

Didn't say that at all. Pretty sure I even said at some point I was not a fan of protests during the pandemic.

OhhhJa posted...

Of course the goalposts shifted as soon as leftists started protesting. Now, the narrative is "its ok because most of them have masks on" despite being way more crowded together butt to nut than the stay at home protesters were

You're the only moving goalposts at this point. I've explained that nothing about the CDCs stance on protests suggest that they want any protests to be happening at all. They just aren't condemning them because honestly they know they have no business telling people they can't protest. On top of that adjl has mentioned these are medical recommendations not government mandates. The government hasn't told you that you cant do your protests but doctors are saying that they would prefer you would not. Hence the recommendation to not confuse them not condemning protests with being permissive of them in general. They are going to speak against stay at home protest because once again these are doctors explaining their recommendations. Anti-stay at home protests go against their recommendations.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

OhhhJa posted...

I'm sorry but the government doesn't get to decide what protests are ok and which ones aren't

You are really far up your own ass aren't you. The government isn't really saying what protest is okay to attend. Your hypersensitive snowflake mind just tried to find the worst way to read a fairly neutral stance. They basically aren't condemning protests and they're not encouraging them either. They clearly don't want you to do protests a all if it could be helped. They are however discouraging protesting stay at home orders because its in direct opposition to what they recommend.

OhhhJa posted...

let's not even talk about the arbitrarily decided on number of 100 for protests lol. Protesters haven't been following that guidelines anyway but somehow I'm guessing the CDC and WHO didn't scientifically surmise that 100 is totally cool. Let's also not mention that at least when its your friends or family gathering, you can actually ask if anyone is sick or not and decide whether or not to meet with them

I mean people are asking the CDC for a lot of answers they really don't have answer for so yeah 100 is a bit arbitrary. A bit beside the point. As for friends and family that's a pretty bad way to prevent spread. The whole reason this thing is as widespread as it is has to do with the fact that many people are asymptomatic carriers.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

OhhhJa posted...

That's a whole lot of words to make excuses for this obvious bs contradiction. And then saying one protest is ok but another one isn't. Lol what a fucking joke this is

It isn't really contradictory though.

Their reasoning just requires you to use your brain. They are not "condemning" protesting and it later even states that this should not be confused with being permissive to the idea of large gatherings in general. This means they aren't going to condemn the protests but would obviously prefer people not do large gatherings. They make a point to address anti-stay at home protests because these are basically protests challenging their own policies which OF COURSE they won't be okay with.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

KnoxKorner posted...

On the surface level this does seem like a pretty funny contradiction. However, it seems we are being serious so lets explain why they're different. A social gathering likely runs under the assumption that a bunch of people familiar with each other are spending time together. This means that most likely there's no precautions being taken with these people like mask wearing. A protest is a bunch of people likely unfamiliar with one another so they're going to be likely taking some precautions like mask wearing. I mean there's not really much hard math behind either recommendation but basically they feel gatherings of more than a 100 make even social distancing + mask wearing possibly not sufficient for preventing spread. I was not a fan of people protesting during a pandemic either but it seems places where the virus has spiked are not protest hotspots. They're mainly southern and western states that have made pretty weak efforts to curb viral spread through policy in general so the protests are unlikely the cause of our current second wave.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Yeah... I may hate Trump but his China policies are probably his ONLY decent ones so you're not going to see me fight him on this one. TikTok is Beijing based and with the majority of our counterintelligence being related to China these days I can see why banning TikTok makes sense.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Zeus posted...

Beats the alternative... well, specifically the alternative of them outliving you.

Not much of an overexplanation. I'm not entirely sure you understand how overexplaining works. The point of overexplaining is to go into excruciating detail regarding the subject matter, to the extent that it seems like you're explaining the concept for the first time... and then going ten steps further. It also helps to reiterate or otherwise restate the concept, which means to use different words to drive the idea home. Of course, to overexplain, it helps if you understand the concept first, which I'm not sure you do.

If you're going to try to antagonize me, I'd prefer you bring your A game, which is really more like an average poster's B or C game. Right now I wouldn't even give you a C for effort, although I expect you were hoping for some D.

Once again. You've missed the point. There was not much more excruciating detail to go into. We were already so far down into parsing the information into easy to understand pieces that I couldn't have actually overexplained anymore than I already had. Nice try though bud.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Zeus posted...

You attempted to overexplain what happened as an insult by pretending I didn't get what he said, so I'm overexplaining what I did then overexplaining my overexplanation.

Then let me overexplain again. I was also implying your comeback was shit since what you responded with was so weak it seemed like you completely missed the point.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Zeus posted...

Certainly hasn't seemed that way, but you're something of an expert on living a terrible life so I'll take your word for it.

*shakes head* Things going over his head again. He's saying that even in spite of those things you said she's probably still better off.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

RedPixel posted...

Lol dude they aint got shit on him. You're all blind to what ISN'T being said on the news, there's a silent war going on with DeepState right now. Trace it all the way back to 1913, this entire 2020 shit show has been a chess game against a bunch of rich fucks who own the Federal Reserve and control the Vatican.

Follow the money. It isn't Trump. They clearly hate him. I'm not into politics or religion, I just read everything I can so I have more dots to connect and rule out.

You guys all pick your favorite cancers/politicians and argue about it like it's a bar fight. That's not being a good analyst.

Ah yes that damned deep state trying to stop Trump from...uh...perpetuating racism...and uh...abusing his position. We are in real big trouble guys.

Real talk if that's what the deep state is doing then sign me the fuck up.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Xfma100 posted...

KH lore was better before BBS. Everything that came after KH2 just made the lore and story worse imo.

Not saying KH1-KH2 have great lore, but at least it wasn't so drawn out. And it didn't involve time travel.

BBS wasn't about time travel. It was 3DS that really sunk the lore boat.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Zeus posted...

I identify as a centrist, but the tests identify me as a left-leaning centrist with a mild libertarian streak.

*snort* Yes and I'm the ghost of Kobe

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Zeus posted...

I'm going to need you to exercise reasoning ability one of these days. Considering that attorneys are always investigating somebody, your real argument is "attorneys should never be fired."

Zeus you must be a troll account at this point. He clearly was referring to him investigating Rudy Giuliani who is Trump's personal lawyer. At least before you attempted to sound at least a little intelligent. Now you're just straight up uninformed and plain wrong.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

He didn't resign. He was fired because he refused to resign.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Krazy_Kirby posted...

dumb protocol there.

a taser is considered a deadly weapon because you can incapacitate someone, and they can't do anything after

Tasers are not THAT good. They temporarily stun people for like less than a minute some people may not be stunned at all.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Muscles posted...

I agree with that, but you can think the police were wrong to kill him and still think he was an idiot for grabbing their taser and trying to shoot them with it

Sure but trying to argue we shouldn't feel bad for idiots is something you should expect people to give you shit for and people will obviously not agree with you on it. It's an opinion so it cant be wrong or right but it is one that is rather cold and inflammatory in nature.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

This is the problem with black and white thinking. There are degrees of "okay", we have various degrees of murder and manslaughter with various degrees of sympathy for them because severity matters.

A mild problem requires a mild response; if we had a protest everytime McDonalds got your order wrong we'd be in a civil war by now. When officers are expected to forcibly arrest people, injuries are a mild deviation from the expectation. It's unreasonable to treat police shooting a criminal wrongly the same as a pedestrian shooting another person wrongly.

Nice try bud but this isn't black and white thinking. I didn't think I'd have to explain the specifics of why killing isn't just a mildly wrong thing but this too for you I will explain. This isn't a mild deviation. While it may not be an outright lynching like Floyd it is still very far into the territory of not okay. Someone was murdered for something petty and most definitely not because the cops lives were in danger. We have long ardous processes for murder row victims yet someone stealing a taser gets not one but 4 bullets loaded into him with resultant death. Believing he deserved it on the account of his stupidity is irrelevant to the fact that these actions far exceed the bounds of what our society and laws deem as okay for murder.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

It being excessive does not mean it is as grievous and the George Floyd case.

Who said it had to be ? Honestly there's a lot of attempting to pivot away from the point happening for those trying to defend the cops. The degree of grievousness doesn't really change that it's...not okay. It's still excessive force. It's national headlines are because we have another black man being killed with excessive force in the middle of a national outcry against exactly that. It's basically just more fuel for the fire no one said it had to be an entirely new fire to matter.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Muscles posted...

Go ahead and feel sorry for the dude stupid enough to grab a taser from a cop and try to use it on them. I'll focus on the people that got killed despite doing nothing wrong.

The fact that you don't feel sorry that someone died for something incredibly pretty is irrelevant. People have been trying to tell you that it's not about feeling sorry for the now dead man but that killing someone for what he did is unacceptable.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Revelation34 posted...

If that's how cops were trained then literally everybody who has committed a crime would have been shot instead of arrested.

Well...it's not exactly what we do but I don't think an 8 week course is all that far from it. Clearly the nuances of being a cop are more complicated than that. Apparently in many countries becoming a cop requires 4 years of training. An equally interesting point is that Canada also trains their cops for a short 8 weeks and has the same issues with police brutality that we do.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Because cops are meant to intervene and use force to control situations. It's like how if a boxer gives another brain damage they don't go to prison because it was a reasonable expected risk of how boxing works. This is different from if you have a bar brawl and give someone brain damage as you shouldn't be fighting to begin with.

Muscles posted...

Read the rest of the post, being a little excessive on someone attacking the police is completely different than cold blooded murder of an unarmed citizen

Y'all really did miss the whole "excessive force" and "police brutality" part of this hot button issue didn't you?


---

I love people.
I hate people.

not__shawn__z posted...

The politics board, as well as any internet forum that discusses current events or politics, is mainly comprised of stagnating at life, still at moms house far leftists man children.

Or course you shouldnt.

Yes just far leftists. There's no way there are far right man children doing the same ....

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Voxwik posted...

Yes, a small handful of police make horrific mistakes so let's tear down everything. That's anarchy to me. And I stand by the stance it's hypocritcal for people to not stand up against the absolutely vile dehumanizing bullying against all police.

What happened to George Floyd was horrific, but some people act as if outright thieves robbing people at gunpoint getting shot and killed is a terrible crime too. It's insane.

I don't think you really understand that defunding doesn't necessarily mean completely tearing them down. Although that is what Minneapolis did and that's something the city itself decided. I have no idea if they're right in taking such an aggressive approach but their goal isn't to have no law enforcement but for it to be remade from the ground up. That is for them to wade through as they've already committed to it. Defunding in most states is reducing their funding and redirecting it to social programs. Which is entirely fair. I did an edit to the previous post discussing how police spend a lot of time enforcing laws that have questionable benefits for our society. The idea the need less funding makes sense to me.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Voxwik posted...

My wording was poor, but the burden on proof is on the accusers. Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? You sound exactly like a racist.

By sheer virtue of the statistics, it's a tiny minority of officers, and that's even if you include the ones that were justified in using deadly force (which is most of them concerning armed people).

Edit:
And to be clear I support the peaceful protests for the murder of an unarmed man.

I do not support the dehumanization and demonization of police officers, nor the anarchist takeover of the narrative with the ridiculous defund the police insanity.

Defunding the policy is hardly anarchy. They are excessively militarized as they are now and redirecting funds elsewhere is a fair idea. They are used for many pointless things like what is the point of speed traps during a pandemic? Stop one person from driving at 90 miles per hour with literally no one else on the road? For what purpose ? Who does that actually help ? Do they really have nothing better to do? We still criminalize marijuana in most states and for that matter really shouldn't be criminalizing drug use because it opens up exactly these kinds of scenarios. What purpose are the cops serving in those scenarios? Putting miserable broken people in jail which also happen to be disproportionately black. Who does that actually help? No one. It just puts them into a literal spiral of failure for having a felony on their record.

Defunding them makes sense.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Historically parties put up their best candidates, but that's not what we're dealing with here.

Did they really though? Lets be real.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Zareth posted...

He's right unfortunately.

Also we haven't had a 1 term president since George Bush, and that was mainly because Perot split the votes.

His popularity numbers are like...really bad though. Meta aggregate polling on Five Thirty Eight shows his disapproval rating is like 54% right now and never really dipped bellow 50%. Historically no president has actually been reelected with such terrible ratings.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

OhhhJa posted...

Man, by your own self composed definition, a whole heap of terrorist organizations just became mere ideas that we shouldnt bother designating as dangerous!

And really? The underage ad hominem? C'mon you can do better. But maybe you're too angry about antifa to be creative

They are not a terrorist "organization" precisely because they are not organized. There are terrorists which identify with antifa but they are not part of any real organized group with an agenda. Occasionally a bunch of crazy leftists get the idea to gather to do something violent but there is no leader nor frequent gatherings of them as a group. Its sort of a pointless assertion to label them terrorists.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

I normally play persona games on the highest difficulty but with the terrible AI OF p3 i was like NOPE.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Junpei was pretty hot

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Yeah its not just SMT games but SMT games in particular that is one their calling cards.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Blighboy posted...

So I'm getting the sense from this topic that theres like a 90-10 Male-female toon distribution in this game

Yes. Just yes.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

Love this game. All time favorite. Started playing about a year ago.

https://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/character/23566808/

Currently working on getting every job to 80.

---

I love people.
I hate people.

hypnox posted...

PC

Cool. Time to move on to other topics.

---

I love people.
I hate people.