Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 251: Cop Out

(+) Yeah! (+)

You downplay the criminals as "just jewel thieves" when they've already opened fire on people twice, civilians once and police once, and took a hostage.

Both acts show a blatant disregard for human life, both others and their own.

And you say the cops should have just ran off and let them go when they started firing the second time.

I don't know, man. This just sounds like going hard with wanting to blame the cops, instead of putting any responsibility on, you know, the armed criminals that got into one shootout with civilians, took a hostage, then opened fire on police.

That's the kind of rhetoric I'm talking about that I think is sickening. You're kinda going out of your way to downplay the fault of the criminals in order to call the cops murderers.

---

The criminals are at fault for their actions.

The cops, you know, the people who have sworn to "Protect and Serve", are held to a different standard than the people who are going to be arrested and tried for their actions, if they don't get shot first.

That should not be a particularly large revelation.

---

StealThisSheen posted...

And you say the cops should have just ran off and let them go when they started firing the second time.

They started firing when the cops started approaching them with their guns drawn.

StealThisSheen posted...

I don't know, man. This just sounds like going hard with wanting to blame the cops, instead of putting any responsibility on, you know, the armed criminals that got into one shootout with civilians, took a hostage, then opened fire on police.

That's the kind of rhetoric I'm talking about that I think is sickening. You're kinda going out of your way to downplay the fault of the criminals in order to call the cops murderers.

Im just confused why were not allowed to say they made a bad choice when dealing with a bad situation?


---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Im just confused why were not allowed to say they made a bad choice when dealing with a bad situation?

You are. I literally even said "I'll agree to disagree because I don't think there's a right answer" to our discussion.

The only reason I'm still replying at this point is because Moogle replied to that post saying "Nah, they murdered him." and has yet to even hold the criminals to any fault whatsoever, instead outright downplaying their crimes.

---

Nevermind that reply, Gilded. I misread what you meant.

---

You misread my post.

The criminals will be arrested and charged for their actions if they don't get shot first. The system is very good at handling the aftermath of their actions.

---

StealThisSheen posted...

You downplay the criminals as "just jewel thieves" when they've already opened fire on people twice, civilians once and police once, and took a hostage.

Both acts show a blatant disregard for human life, both others and their own.

And you say the cops should have just ran off and let them go when they started firing the second time.

I don't know, man. This just sounds like going hard with wanting to blame the cops, instead of putting any responsibility on, you know, the armed criminals that got into one shootout with civilians, took a hostage, then opened fire on police.

That's the kind of rhetoric I'm talking about that I think is sickening. You're kinda going out of your way to downplay the fault of the criminals in order to call the cops murderers.

The criminals are dead, they faced the maximum repercussion for what they did already, and no one is under any illusion that what they were doing was right. Theres nothing to be gained from criticizing them at this point.

The cops, however, are alive and well and may face no punishment for their actions. They have people defending their choice as correct. People should be critical of what they did so maybe next time theres a hostage situation the hostage wont be in more danger from the police than from their captors.

Thats the crux of why I find this situation so upsetting. The hostage would have been better off if the police had just stayed home. Their bullets killed the person they were supposed to save
---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

The hostage would have been better off if the police had just stayed home.

The problem is that you don't know this.

Nobody does.

But what we DO know is that these were violent criminals with no regard for human life, and proved they were fine with attempting to kill people previously before even taking the hostage.

Why are you assuming they would have let the hostage live in the end?

---

StealThisSheen posted...

The problem is that you don't know this.

Nobody does.

But what we DO know is that these were violent criminals with no regard for human life, and proved they were fine with attempting to kill people previously before even taking the hostage.

Why are you assuming they would have let the hostage live in the end?

I dont know if they would, its very possible they wouldnt. Ill rephrase: theres no way it could have been worse for the hostage if the police had stayed home.
---

They might have killed the hostage anyway, but they might not have. What advantage is there to killing a hostage?

---

That's why earlier I told Tony I'll have to agree to disagree, because I don't think there's a right answer.

What if they do kill the hostage? What if they get in a wreck with a family in a car and kill them? What if they run down somebody when going over a curb? What if they get out on foot and start shooting as they try to escape that way?

Then people'd be going "Why didn't the cops do anything when they had the chance to stop them?"

It's a horrible situation.

---

EDIT: The entire point I'm making is that these weren't "just jewel thieves," so assuming their potential following actions based on them being "just jewel thieves" is silly. These were violent criminals.

When i said just jewel thieves it wasnt my intent to downplay what theyve done, it was just to say that anything they did was in service of the robbery and their escape, so I dont think they would be randomly murdering people.

To your other hypotheticals, its impossible for me to know for sure obviously, but I would think that it is unlikely they would plow through people or shoot anyone else had the cops backed off because that just draws more attention to them. Theoretically if theyre not being chased by police their motivation to do things that endangers others goes way down.
---

https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1203093051859750912?s=21
---

I love her

---

also last thing I want to post on this because I posted so much:

when I first posted about the shootout I got a couple oh that moogle hates cops so much thats what this is about, but Im really not the total ACAB dude you seem to think I am.
I think part of what made this story so upsetting to me is that it broke some of the faith I had in the police, and I wouldnt have had that faith if I was a full-on cop hater.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1203093051859750912?s=21

Bravo! That's the leadership the Democratic Party needs. Hillary would have taken a million dollars to give a couple speeches to Amazon execs and approved the subsidies.

---

Jakyl25 posted...

https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1203093051859750912?s=21

TotallyNotMI posted...

I love her

---

AOC is amazing.

---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

also last thing I want to post on this because I posted so much:

when I first posted about the shootout I got a couple oh that moogle hates cops so much thats what this is about, but Im really not the total ACAB dude you seem to think I am.
I think part of what made this story so upsetting to me is that it broke some of the faith I had in the police, and I wouldnt have had that faith if I was a full-on cop hater.

I dont mean to paint you as a cop hater, I apologize if it came off that way. Thats just the rhetoric going around on Twitter and its just like... Its a horrible situation that the robbers seemed to make sure wasnt going to have a happy outcome regardless, and you just see way too many people just jumping at the chance to go fuck the police on something that for once wasnt entirely their fault. Like, trust me, they deserve the hate most of the time, but this was a situation they didnt really have much choice in. Theyre damned if they back off and damned if they go in.

---

https://www.bernietax.com/

Fun with math.

---

"Your annual disposable income would be lower
with a Sanders tax plan."

Ruh roh

Still voting for him, though

---

And that makes you a great person!

---

VintageGin posted...

"Your annual disposable income would be lower
with a Sanders tax plan."

Ruh roh

Still voting for him, though

My second favorite candidate but yeah, this.

...am I the one percent?

---

Hey my disposable income would be higher

Let's go Bernie

---

Lower.

biden it is

---

I already have free healthcare and college so I know Im not gonna benefit, but I want all my friends to have it too.

---

My disposable income would be lower mainly because my employer pays for my health insurance currently. Not a surprise and not a big deal.

---

I appreciate the honesty from Bernie btw. He could have set it up so that only the 1% would get lower on the calculator, but that would be not very believable.

---

Re AOC and Amazon: Amazon is apparently bringing 1500 jobs to NYC rather than the 25000 they would have originally brought, so I dont really think a victory lap is warranted.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Re AOC and Amazon: Amazon is apparently bringing 1500 jobs to NYC rather than the 25000 they would have originally brought, so I dont really think a victory lap is warranted.

The 25,000 jobs were not a sure thing, and I don't think giving them 120,000 dollars per a job is a good deal.

---

I mean, I think it's fair if you want to argue that the original deal wasn't good for NYC (though I disagree), but the fact is that they're getting 6% of the deal for free, which is just not cause to go "see I was right all along, the tax incentive ask was a scam and they're giving everything to us anyway"

---

The full Stern Clinton interview's been uploaded on youtube. Here's part 1 if anyone's interested:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kHUA-Zma1U

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

The 25,000 jobs were not a sure thing, and I don't think giving them 120,000 dollars per a job is a good deal.

The Amazon deal falling through was a huge backfire for NY.

---

$1,066.00
Your annual disposable income would be lower
with a Sanders tax plan.

Hmmmm.

---

The thing about that Bernie tax plan site as well is the healthcare cost isn't just about what you pay for your insurance. It's what you pay for you insurance PLUS any spending on health care associated with it as well like copays, medications, anything you currently are not covered for with the added benifit of not having to worry about if you are "in network". Have a feeling people just don't realize the second part in that under M4A they might be taxed more than they currently pay for insurance but actually would save a shit ton of money since all the nickle and dime stuff throughout the year wouldn't be there anymore.

---

Honestly, right now we have the lowest unemployment rate in 50 years. If there is ever a good time to stand up to evil corporations, it's now.

Incidentally, drove past Amazon HQ in Seattle at night recently. It has all the charm of Stamford, Connecticut or Jersey City, so it's like they're already in an NYC suburb.

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

https://www.bernietax.com/

Fun with math.

This says my disposable income would be about $600 lower. This is because of my significantly below average healthcare costs (I'm essentially just paying insurance premiums and my premiums are very low). If I double my healthcare spending (which still puts it below the calculator's average), I come out nearly $600 ahead

$600/yr is absolutely worth it from me (especially when so many people would see their effective incomes go up under this plan). And if literally anything happens to me, I come out ahead financially, compared to the current system.

That's to say nothing of my parents, who would be financially significantly better off according to this calculator. I'm basically in the worst possible position for Bernie's tax/M4A plan as a decently-earning single guy with no real health issues or expenses, and the financial loss I would've taken this year (the aforementioned $600) is absolutely nothing by comparison to the gains that society as a whole makes (not even factoring in the individual gains which are going to be heavily concentrated into the hands of those worse off than I am)

Basically everyone under 50 has "significantly below average health care costs"

Government spending on health care is essentially a giant transfer of wealth from young, productive people to old, retired people. Who are already wealthier than us on average anyway, by far.

---

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/07/politics/xiyue-wang-released-iran-prisoner-swap-intl/index.html

Credit where its due. Good job Trump Administration.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

I mean, I think it's fair if you want to argue that the original deal wasn't good for NYC (though I disagree), but the fact is that they're getting 6% of the deal for free, which is just not cause to go "see I was right all along, the tax incentive ask was a scam and they're giving everything to us anyway"

I am arguing that Amazon doesn't pay taxes, has horrible history with workers, refuses to be a part of a union, and we should not be giving them money.

---

SmartMuffin posted...

Basically everyone under 50 has "significantly below average health care costs"

Government spending on health care is essentially a giant transfer of wealth from young, productive people to old, retired people. Who are already wealthier than us on average anyway, by far.

They already have Medicare lol

---

Corrik7 posted...

$1,066.00
Your annual disposable income would be lower
with a Sanders tax plan.

Hmmmm.

This is very close to mine and I pay $0 for my healthcare.

Sounds like you have incredible employer-provided healthcare, in which case your employer would probably have to increase your wages if they stop providing you that benefit.

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

This is very close to mine and I pay $0 for my healthcare.

Sounds like you have incredible employer-provided healthcare, in which case your employer would probably have to increase your wages if they stop providing you that benefit.

It depends on whether your employer's taxes are going up under the Bernie plan. They probably are so you might not get it back in the form of a raise.

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

I am arguing that Amazon doesn't pay taxes, has horrible history with workers, refuses to be a part of a union, and we should not be giving them money.

1500 free market jobs is much better than 25000 jobs subsidized by the taxpayers. Given how mobile society is today a big share of those jobs are not going to end up with native New Yorkers anyway.

---

red sox 777 posted...

1500 free market jobs is much better than 25000 jobs subsidized by the taxpayers. Given how mobile society is today a big share of those jobs are not going to end up with native New Yorkers anyway.

I know that! Red Sox you talk sense like 45% of the time.

---

Trump taking a bold stance against... birth

https://twitter.com/NTarnopolsky/status/1203435271611650048

---

Damn lotm aoc calling 1500 vs 25k "gop disinformation" and breaking down some facts on Twitter.

---

Is this the police shooting y'all were arguing about?

https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1203150083753009152?s=19

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Trump taking a bold stance against... birth

https://twitter.com/NTarnopolsky/status/1203435271611650048

This is a policy I can get behind
---

Jakyl25 posted...

This is a policy I can get behind

After being born is illegal, babies will go straight from the hospital to jail. Except for those pardoned by President Trump.

---