COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events - Page 374

starting strength gym
Page 374 of 2395 FirstFirst ... 2743243643723733743753763844244748741374 ... LastLast
Results 3,731 to 3,740 of 23949

Thread: COVID19 Factors We Should Consider/Current Events

  1. #3731
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Woodside, CA (aka The San Francisco Bay Area or as I like to call it, the belly of the beast)
    Posts
    40

    Default

    • starting strength seminar october 2022
    • starting strength seminar december 2022
    • starting strength seminar february 2023
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    That one's a bit lengthy, Dave. If I get time later, maybe. Give us the 5 rules.

    Look at this: LA Mayor Slashes LAPD Budget As Calls To ‘Defund Police’ Slowly Pick Up Steam

    How exactly does this work? It's like Escape From New York was a model for these morons.
    Escape from New York, coupled with 1984, Animal Farm, Brave New World, Rules for Radicals and the Anarchists Cookbook are all required reading/watching and not as a warning of what to avoid, but the recipe for how to get what you want when voting no longer works.

  2. #3732
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Village of Afton, Virginia
    Posts
    947

    Default

    Bus burned in Richmond riot may soon reside in museum. When this first happened, it was blamed on violent looters and condemned by everyone from the mayor to the governor, now apparently it's about the of the ways in which black Americans, People of Color, and their allies have fought for recognition of the problems and redress of the problems.
    Bus burned in Richmond riot may soon reside in museum

  3. #3733
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Murphysboro, IL
    Posts
    30,930

    Default

    It appears the plan to stifle the economy and stifle Trump's re-election by the Blue States may be failing. The jobs report today has vastly disappointed Politico, NPR, and no doubt the DNC. There were 2 million jobs added back to the economy and the Dow Jones is up 818 points and back in the 27,000 range as I type this. It's worthy of note that CA, NY, and IL, all big contributors to the GDP, and with Cuomo threatening some days back to essentially hold the economy hostage for state bailouts, have still got their feet at least half on the brakes in their respective states.

    Not looking good for Bidet.

  4. #3734
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    559

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darrowdisciple View Post
    Assume Chauvin's lawyer can argue that, at least initially, Chauvin was justified in compressing Floyd's neck with his knee.
    Itís a standard department policy. We all know cops have carte blanche to use whatever force they deem necessary during an apprehension.

    Quote Originally Posted by darrowdisciple View Post
    Where that seems to evaporate is when Chauvin is told by another officer that Floyd has no pulse at the wrist, and Chauvin can see that Floyd is motionless and is silent, and Chauvin continues to compress Floyd's neck with his knee. One is hard-pressed to imagine an innocent explanation for that action on Chauvin's part. Legally, you are responsible for the reasonably foreseeable consequences of your actions.
    Iím not a lawyer, Darrow. Iím a ďpeer.Ē That is, Iím one of the people who could be sitting on the jury. If Iím told that I have to send a man to prison for 40 years because there is irrefutable proof that he INTENDED to harm/kill George Floyd, while you as a prosecutor maintain that a motive is not required, then Iím going to say ďNOT GUILTY.Ē

    And, Iím telling you, if the defense indicated to me that this was a tactic talked about in the locker rooms of the precincts, and that, ďYeah, sometimes they black out but they wake up later in jail,Ē and yeah, 30-something cops choked 237 people over the last 5 years, and yeah, the police department never really abolished it.... Then there is a cloud of uncertainty that hangs over Chauvinís expectations of the outcome. If I were the defense, Iíd call as witnesses all of the police who choked those 237 people out and asked what their expectations of the circumstances were.

    Regardless of how sickening and deplorable his actions were to any of us, the problem here is that the law requires me, as a potential juror, to find him NOT GUILTY of murder in the second degree. Trying to say that a cop ďdoing his job within the confines of what heís allowed,Ē had INTENT to harm/kill without motive just doesnít fly.

  5. #3735
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    2,097

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Jackson View Post
    The corporate media's coverage of the destruction, whether biased towards the conservative right or the progressive left, has blamed white "Antifa" political activists, or bizarrely "white supremacists", as guilty of instigating and perpetuating the robbery and violence during the otherwise "peaceful protests". They do not want to touch upon the idea that the violence being perpetrated by black people is motivated by any sort of racial and political ideology of their own, and the right cannot admit these people have their own agency, or group interests, either.

    The left tells us they can explain away the disparities between the races within the prism of its Marxist "victim" and "oppressor" narrative. They tell us the black people are simply the victims of systemic racism, and all of the European traditions, values and ideals responsible for the creation of America are, in fact, just an expression of white supremacy. Therefore, on these grounds, the riots are ethically justified. The conservative right has been powerless to counter this idea because of its own liberal framework.

    Within a liberal, egalitarian society, the left is free to forcefully make their subversive Marxist arguments and pursue its own agenda guilt-free. Meanwhile, the right is forced to back itself into a corner, sit on its hands, and repeat, ad nauseum, that biological, racial differences simply do not meaningfully exist in a liberal, egalitarian society, like America, therefore they have "won" the logical argument by being more rational.

    America isn't currently on fire because of Marxism, or Antifa, or the left, but it is on fire because America's own liberal ontology is based on the lie of egalitarianism. Biological reality is visiting us. America does not know how to deal with this lie within the liberal paradigm. Whatever harsh methods the state should implement to restore law and order and to prevent its own cities from burning to the ground are strictly off-limits because they would be inherently illiberal. For decades, the left has enjoyed the freedom to paint the black, downtrodden protesters as oppressed victims, therefore, to act illiberally now against these people, to preserve the country, would break the very idea of "America".

    When I want to present my political views, I am constantly required to enter into a difficult dialogue about the holy trinity of ultimate European (read: white) evil: the holocaust, colonialism and slavery. This white guilt, they regularly remind me, can never be cleansed from my soul. Even if I try to atone by complying with the latest humiliating act du jour - such as the trending #takeaknee gesture. Even if I actively work against my own ethnic group's interests and start welcoming migrants at the border. Even if I publicly reject and denounce my own national identity.

    Ultimately, in a liberal society, I will never be allowed to advocate for my own group interests. This is because if the liberal system was forced to admit that racial differences actually existed in the first place, and in the real world different ethnic groups naturally pursue their own ethnic group interests as an evolutionary strategy, then their whole ideological superstructure comes crumbling down.

    Does the conservative right's obsession with upholding values of "liberal democracy" and egalitarianism, seemingly above all else, make a country more open to subversion? Can a political party counter the left's ideas, or conserve anything at all, under a framework of liberal egalitarianism? At this point it seems impossible to view America as anything other than a cautionary tale.
    There's a lot of unpack really. You seem to have a lot of views that I guess could be called "race realism", though I'm not sure how much and to what degree. I'm not gonna get into trying to debate that, that is a topic that could be gone into at length and potentially derail the current topic. I do think there is a glossing over of accountability for people rioting. I feel like mainstream right and left are fighting over whether these riots are the fault of Antifa or "white supremacist infiltrators" respectively, when really the blame should be placed at the feet of everyone rioting. There is a sub-culture that exists in these "black communities" that is absolutely racially militant, nurtures crime, and fosters absolute lack of accountability. I don't think it's irredeemably rooted in something biological, as there are black people who break free of it, or at least struggle to, and chalking it up to biology is just absolving these people of responsibility from a different direction. I think the existence of this sub-culture is at least partially the fault of white people on the outside trying to figure out how they can "fix" conditions in these communities, and thus pinpointing potential causes that they can address that have nothing to do with holding people personally accountable for their own actions. This is why over the years the excuses made for this sub-culture have become more and more complex. It's evolved from economic disadvantage to a phantom "systemic racism" that no one can really tangibly point to. But the soil it thrives in is entirely contained in these communities, and I think they need to clean their own house, and more importantly, I think they are capable if enough people decide to actually try.

    That's not to say there isn't a legitimate issue here being protested. Of course there is. Only the most stubborn, hard-line types won't acknowledge it. It's not a new problem. It is one that came right along with the first inception of law enforcement. It is NOT a racial issue, and framing it as one ensures it'll never truly be solved. White people on average may have it impact them less, because they tend to have less run-ins with police on average. But it does happen. And the results aren't any less egregious. Just go back in time and ask Daniel Shaver right before he was gunned down by a psycho with "you're fucked" painted on his gun while begging for his life. Be sure to let him know the cop who's about to kill him is going to not only receive no criminal punishment, but a silly medical retirement package for supposed PTSD caused by the event, even though he now still has another job while collecting that $2,500 a month pension.

    The problem, despite what politicians and protesters alike like to tell us, isn't that we "need to listen". We know what the problem is, we know it exists, and we all want it fixed. The problem is that the politicians will do fuck all to push to really address it. The only "solutions" anyone is putting forward is to defund or disband the police forces under their control. Of course, let's make that budget you've fucked up royally easier to balance, state government. It's not like the policing vacuum won't be filled by organized crime or citizen organized militias anyways, and it's not like those alternatives aren't going to be even HARDER to keep in check than police (without police, who even would?). This is all just deflection. We don't need to listen, politicians. YOU need to roll up your sleeves and get to work. Not join protests. People protest because they CAN'T directly change things. If you are an elected official, YOU can. Politicians protesting is like a guy with an 800 pound deadlift complaining pickle jars are too hard to open.

  6. #3736
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    949

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    That one's a bit lengthy, Dave. If I get time later, maybe. Give us the 5 rules.

    Look at this: LA Mayor Slashes LAPD Budget As Calls To ‘Defund Police’ Slowly Pick Up Steam

    Minneapolis City Council members consider disbanding the police | City Pages

    How exactly does this work? It's like Escape From New York was a model for these morons.

    It is the model and It is intentional. Remember Obama's quips about getting leftists from densely populated blue states to move to less-populated red states? They know the indoctrinated pawns fleeing NY will keep trying to turn my state into NY.

    There are more of them than us. They will simply outvote us. They will continue to import and indoctrinate more immigrants until there are vastly more of them than us.

    Which states might we get to keep after the impending balkanization?

  7. #3737
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    219

    Default

    Its pretty fucking annoying that BLM has taken over the fight libertarians have been fighting for decades. I want criminal justice reform, and I truly hate police officers lack of accountability, along with their lack of respect for property. One issue with the current movement is if you take a look at the BLM website and see what they support, it will turn most non leftists away, and rightfully so. A funny thing is, none of the people on my fb feed are saying shit about Justin amash purposing his ending qualified immunity act today. I do believe there is some racism in this country, but the way to stop police brutality towards blacks is to stop police brutality all together. These pussies taking a knee to people because of their race are a disgrace and arenít helping a single thing.

  8. #3738
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    375

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by muntz View Post
    Not only is this racist, it demonstrates a serious lack of understanding of Marxism, liberalism, democracy, America, and basic humanity.
    I will accept that if you accept your new motto is "If you disagree with any of my opinions on the matter of race, then you're a RACIST!".

    This is the the kind of deceitful and manipulative appeal-to-emotion which could cause the violent deaths of innocent people in your own country tonight. You are the problem.

  9. #3739
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    49,636

    Default

    The accusation of racism is functionally censorship. He wrote another post calling me a racist. I censored him.

  10. #3740
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    73

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank_B View Post
    I’m one of the people who could be sitting on the jury. If I’m told that I have to send a man to prison for 40 years because there is irrefutable proof that he INTENDED to harm/kill George Floyd, while you as a prosecutor maintain that a motive is not required, then I’m going to say “NOT GUILTY.”
    A few things to consider. The jury is not told the potential penalty, and is instructed by the judge not to consider what the penalty might be. That is for two reasons: Some people may think, "Well, the penalty isn't that bad, so let's go ahead and convict him." Others may think, "He's guilty, but the punishment is too harsh, so let's let him go." Presumably, the potential penalty is in the back of their minds, but they are told not to consider it, and studies have shown juries tend to follow instructions.

    The jury will also be instructed that the prosecution is not required to prove a motive, though a motive, or seeming lack of motive, can be considered among all the other evidence. I would argue that the motive is simply Chauvin's anger at Floyd for resisting arrest. Perhaps that is a bit slim, but there is no legal requirement to prove a motive, so I expect the prosecutors not to say much about it.

    Motive and intent are very different. The prosecutor need not prove that Chauvin intended to kill, or even to harm Floyd. All that needs to be proven is that Chauvin committed an intentional act -- there is not doubt he intended to compress Floyd's neck with his knee -- knowing the reasonably foreseeable consequences. From what is publicly known, the Minneapolis Police manual allows for the knee-neck restraint for arrestees who are actively resisting, and then only with a variety of precautions. One can infer from those instructions officers are made aware of the danger in compressing a person's neck. In addition, it is common knowledge that the neck contains vital structures, and that sustained pressure on the neck can lead to serious harm and death. Chauvin will be held accountable for knowing that, as would any reasonable person.

    Here's where Chauvin's defense meets a very hard wall: Give him the benefit of the doubt to the point that he's told Floyd has no pulse at the wrist, Floyd is motionless, and is silent. By all available evidence, Floyd at that point is not resisting. Still, Chauvin keeps pressure, and at some points appears even to increase the pressure, on Floyd's neck. Floyd is rear-cuffed, prone on the pavement, and displaying several manifestations of dying. What would Chauvin or his attorneys posit is the reason for continuing to compress Floyd's neck for nearly three minutes while Floyd is in that condition?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •