Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Tyndmyr » Sat Jul 20, 2013 7:28 pm UTC

jestingrabbit wrote:
Eomund wrote:All things considered, from what I've seen I would be very scared if he had been convicted. I am hearing a lot of theories about how Zimmerman could have been the aggressor but no evidence. And if a theory is enough to convict someone... *shudder*


How about the absence of much physical damage on either of their hands? or the fact that his story is based on the claim that he got out of his truck to check the street name in a suburb with 3 streets that he does neighborhood watch for? Looking at images 77 to 93, where is it possible to ambush anyone, which is the substance of how Zimmerman claimed the confrontation began?

His defense was always of the form "I did it but...". If the but was "I was insane at the time" wouldn't it be up to him to prove his insanity, not for the state to prove he wasn't? Why do you want such a lenient standard for self defense claims, but not other claims?


*shrug* I know what street I live on, but I don't know the cross street that's in line of sight from my front door, because it's unimportant to me.

As for how it's possible to ambush someone, dark and rain make it a lot easier to miss someone. You'll note that in the earlier pictures, which were apparently taken later at night, everything outside of the camera light is pretty dim. Given that we have an evening encounter with rain on the record, it's fairly easy to imagine someone hiding around a corner or behind a hedge and surprising someone. Now, that doesn't mean it happened for sure, but it certainly is quite plausible that it could have happened.

Insanity is a rather unusual defense. It's not really a great basis for defenses in general, and using it as such would pretty much be abandoning any pretense of the government needing to prove guilt.

sardia wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:
Chen wrote:Note how I mentioned "in a brawl" implying that if you're struggling with someone and both punching and hitting each other, its probably not going to be considered violent enough to suddenly warrant one of the two pulling a gun and blowing the other guy away. I am well aware of how dangerous even a single punch can be, but I suspect if you shoot someone who punches you in the stomac you're probably not going to get away with it under "self-defense" (although I suppose if you used those types of cases as precedent there might be a chance).


Why shouldn't you be able to? I can picture a scenario in which someone is trying to kill me with hands and fists, and in which I can hit back...but see the outcome going very poorly. Why should I not be able to resort to a gun if need be?

Why should the attacker control the terms of the fight, with my actions limited to what he opts to do? How does society benefit from skewing the odds in favor of the attacker?

So cops should be trained to shoot first and ask questions later? If you're gonna differentiate between private citizens and authority figures, how about this: Your picture's in the newspapers, you've made it clear that you're very willing to fire guns, and you've made your position clear about defending yourself from aggressors. If I see you get angry or make someone else angry, should I shoot you immediately?


I think perhaps you're a bit fuzzy on what self defense means...it isn't defense unless an credible attack or threat is made. Someone being willing to defend themselves is not aggression. Even anger is not necessarily aggression. Someone being upset is not an attack. If you think that feelings are an analogue to actual, physical violence and respond by shooting, then you're the aggressor.

Eomund wrote:All things considered, from what I've seen I would be very scared if he had been convicted. I am hearing a lot of theories about how Zimmerman could have been the aggressor but no evidence. And if a theory is enough to convict someone... *shudder*


Yup. That's what it all comes down to in the end. No evidence, but people want to convict him on the base of what "could have" happened. The verdict of "not guilty" is not "innocent". We cannot know with perfect certainty what happened in all cases. However, if we hand the government the power to convict people without any evidence, the potential outcomes of that are quite ugly.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10009
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby addams » Sat Jul 20, 2013 10:48 pm UTC

At this moment in time we have a government that can and does convict people without evidence.
If you need evidence it can be produced.

If you need four men to say it is true, there are four men that will gladly take your money.
The people of the US do not trust the men and women charged with their care; And, for good reason.

The US is a high crime area; From Sea to shining Sea.
The Police around these parts work banker's hours.
We can thank god for small favors?

Are they more or less trouble when in Uniform?
I think it is now possible for cases to be decided before the crime is commited.

Of course, that has always been true.
Is it better today? In this modern world?

There is nothing new about how awful we can be.
The tools are different. The crimes are the same.

We respond to crime the way we always have.
We talk about the latest interesting crime, until a new crime captures our attention.

Like the weather; We talk about it. No one does anything about it.
The high crime rate keeps everyone busy.

It keeps me busy. Somedays more than other days.
I get targeted. Not fun from where I see it.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6562
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby sardia » Sun Jul 21, 2013 4:13 pm UTC

"I think perhaps you're a bit fuzzy on what self defense means...it isn't defense unless an credible attack or threat is made. Someone being willing to defend themselves is not aggression. Even anger is not necessarily aggression. Someone being upset is not an attack. If you think that feelings are an analogue to actual, physical violence and respond by shooting, then you're the aggressor."
I agree with that more than your previous statement, which is
"Why shouldn't you be able to? I can picture a scenario in which someone is trying to kill me with hands and fists, and in which I can hit back...but see the outcome going very poorly. Why should I not be able to resort to a gun if need be?

Why should the attacker control the terms of the fight, with my actions limited to what he opts to do? How does society benefit from skewing the odds in favor of the attacker?"
Making a judgement call between deescalating the situation and killing someone in self defense due to a credible attack is valid. But it shouldn't be an automatic get out of jail card. If it's obvious that someone was trying to kill you or he wasn't gonna stop with one punch, then the evidence will bore that out.

"All things considered, from what I've seen I would be very scared if he had been convicted. I am hearing a lot of theories about how Zimmerman could have been the aggressor but no evidence. And if a theory is enough to convict someone... *shudder*


Yup. That's what it all comes down to in the end. No evidence, but people want to convict him on the base of what "could have" happened. The verdict of "not guilty" is not "innocent". We cannot know with perfect certainty what happened in all cases. However, if we hand the government the power to convict people without any evidence, the potential outcomes of that are quite ugly."
I concur, but this isn't over, nor should it be. Obama gave a great speech about it the other day. Obama's speech is trying to do a good thing by showing everyone all sides. He advocated respecting the rule of law AND for people to have a discussion about the role of our biases in our decision making. So no to the Justice Department stepping in, but yes to having a national conversation about your racial biases.

Do you think there's a racial component to this case? and was it important to the outcome?

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Tyndmyr » Sun Jul 21, 2013 5:57 pm UTC

sardia wrote:"I think perhaps you're a bit fuzzy on what self defense means...it isn't defense unless an credible attack or threat is made. Someone being willing to defend themselves is not aggression. Even anger is not necessarily aggression. Someone being upset is not an attack. If you think that feelings are an analogue to actual, physical violence and respond by shooting, then you're the aggressor."
I agree with that more than your previous statement, which is
"Why shouldn't you be able to? I can picture a scenario in which someone is trying to kill me with hands and fists, and in which I can hit back...but see the outcome going very poorly. Why should I not be able to resort to a gun if need be?


"trying to kill me by punching and kicking" /= talking.

Why should the attacker control the terms of the fight, with my actions limited to what he opts to do? How does society benefit from skewing the odds in favor of the attacker?"
Making a judgement call between deescalating the situation and killing someone in self defense due to a credible attack is valid. But it shouldn't be an automatic get out of jail card. If it's obvious that someone was trying to kill you or he wasn't gonna stop with one punch, then the evidence will bore that out.


SYG is not an automatic get out of jail free card.

There is no reason to suspect that evidence will always clearly demonstrate that a person is innocent.

I concur, but this isn't over, nor should it be. Obama gave a great speech about it the other day. Obama's speech is trying to do a good thing by showing everyone all sides. He advocated respecting the rule of law AND for people to have a discussion about the role of our biases in our decision making. So no to the Justice Department stepping in, but yes to having a national conversation about your racial biases.

Do you think there's a racial component to this case? and was it important to the outcome?


Unfortunately, given the context in which this situation started, the conversation is little more than people yelling at each other. It's a cruddy start to a serious conversation, because it doesn't even contain a nice, clear problem to point to. That wasn't a serious, logical suggestion. That was an applause light.

Not particularly. Race does not seem to be a terribly strong factor in this case, save perhaps in the exploitation of it by the media.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10009
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby addams » Sun Jul 21, 2013 6:01 pm UTC

Do I think there was a Racial component to this case in Florida?
Maybe.
The shooter may reflect our common fear of The Other.
That is not really Racism. Sort of. But; People are afraid of People and for good reason.

I may lose the internet at any moment.
I am going to double post.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10009
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby addams » Sun Jul 21, 2013 6:19 pm UTC

Do I think there was a Racial component to the case in Florida?
Maybe. If it was a Symptom of Gang warfare; The facts support the case.

How frightening is That?

Now did it effect The Outcome?
I don't know.
The court decided the Fear of the Other is a Justifiable reason to kill.
That is Special. Correct? Don't be Scary is the message I take from that.

If the case was decided before the act was commited like in The Bad Old Days.
Then; Don't be Scary is still good advice. Don't be born into a Gang is another piece of good advice.

If born into a Gang. Then What? How would ya' know. Doesn't everyone act like a Gangster?
Not everyone; But, Many. Some are Pirates. They fly the Jolly Rodger.
Some are Gangseters. They wear baggy clothes.
Some are Girls. They wear Tea Gowns. We don't know who someone really is because of the clothes that person is wearing.

To look like a Gangster was so stylish at the turn of the last century.
Gangsters had money. Money looks good on Anyone.

Where were we? Talking about Race?
What Race wears dirty clothes?
Dirty clothes are not a Race; Dirty clothes are a Religion to some people.

If this is a symptom of Gang violence it is still far from the adverage person.
Sure; You could get hit with stray gunfire. That can happen in Hunting Season.

You are not the intended prey. Correct?
I'm not. Am I?
How would you know?

Safe in a Gated Community?
He was not safe.
He died?

Who was he?
I did not know him.
You? Did you?

Race? Maybe.
Not the kind we are used to thinking about.

That man may have been an enemy of someone he had never met.
That is the way Gang Warfare works. Correct?

Where are The Gangs? On TV. Our nation takes Gang lessons every day on TV.
We are at the Mercy of the Marketing Majors. Bow when they walk into a room.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10268
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Jul 22, 2013 8:43 pm UTC

Where are they now?

Apparently pulling people from burning cars.

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Heisenberg » Tue Jul 23, 2013 3:34 pm UTC

Well, Zimmerman is now the pioneer of sitting around listening to the police band until an accident happens that you can use to boost your image.

Next up: Chris Brown helps a cat down from a tree. Awwww. That makes it all better!

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10009
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby addams » Tue Jul 23, 2013 5:15 pm UTC

I agree.
That is, just, good PR.

Who thought of him becoming a local Folk Hero?
DId he think of it? Does he have handlers?

Is he going into Politics? He is in a good Position for it.
Recognizable name. A reputation of being tough on Crime.

He has shown willingness and ability to be there and to be helpful to the Right people.
Is he a Shooting Star? Weeee. Zimmerman and the Guy from Louisiana would be a Dynamic Duo.

Or; Is this a PR stunt to make us feel good about the kind of men that prowl our streets?
Many people listen to the Police Band. Not as common as it once was.

The Police have more privacy, now. How much privacy do they need?
Public Relations. How hard is that? Marketing Majors do PR.

They study that stuff. They know what they are doing.
Do the people of the US want a Folk Hero to Go To Congress for them?

He could be mayor by next week.
Spoiler:
(unofficially, of course. people cheer when he walks into a room. what he says matters. that sort of mayor. the keys to the city type.)

Commissioner by next election Cycle.

Governor by 2016.
Is The White House the goal?
(that is a darn lofty goal.)

Or; Is this man's life to settle down and as he lives his life in Peace?
A few more highly visible acts of selflessness and courage is all it will take to wash any doubt away.

Of Course Zimmerman is a Hero.
He stands for reaching out a hand to people in SUV's.
What could be more American?

PR. I need a PR team.
Lucky Zimmerman.
He is good at PR or knows someone that is.

I am jealous of Zimmerman.
He is a hero. I could not be that kind of hero.

Even if I wanted to shoot a scary stranger, I can't.
I am a not a good shot under best of conditions.

Each gun is a little different. He must have practiced with that firearm.
Do you ever think about that? Some people practice with hand guns using paper people.

(shrug.) Ya' have to do something with The Week-end.
He was asked to study up and help protect his people.
That is what he is doing. Where is the Problem?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10268
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby CorruptUser » Tue Jul 23, 2013 5:20 pm UTC

Heisenberg wrote:Well, Zimmerman is now the pioneer of sitting around listening to the police band until an accident happens that you can use to boost your image.

Next up: Chris Brown helps a cat down from a tree. Awwww. That makes it all better!


What evidence is there that he was listening in on the police band?

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Heisenberg » Tue Jul 23, 2013 5:39 pm UTC

Isn't it obvious? By all accounts he's been cloistered in his home. He told police he didn't witness the crash, yet he arrived on scene before the police did. I mean, good job being a Good Samaritan and all, but people do this kind of work every day and generally go unnoticed. Why does Zimmerman get celebrity status? Is this supposed to make up for killing a child?

Mordus
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:55 pm UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Mordus » Tue Jul 23, 2013 5:59 pm UTC

That's a pretty biased view. I've seen I believe 8 accidents in my life that I did not witness, but was there before the cops. At least 4 of those were quick trips to the store or something along those lines. To say that there is no way that could have happened and that he must have been listening to the police waves waiting for his moment is pretty ridiculous.

It's possible, but not at all a foregone conclusion.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10009
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby addams » Tue Jul 23, 2013 6:11 pm UTC

PR dictates this kind of behavior.

It is nice.
The people are being reassured.

He is a Good Guy.
Will he run for Office?
Is he getting Face Time?

Goodness. He is a celebrity.
Good on him. He did the exhaustive labor.

He learned to use the tools to help keep his people safe.
Do not get on his 'bad side'. Correct?

How does he want us to dress?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Tue Jul 23, 2013 8:11 pm UTC

Zimmerman probably caused the accident himself. Isn't it obvious?
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10268
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby CorruptUser » Tue Jul 23, 2013 8:47 pm UTC

I think many people forced the case into their own narrative, rather than reviewing the case on it's individual merits. Some insist it's yet another case of institutional racism. Others see it as another case of a wannabe cop going crazy. A few see it as another media manufactuversy. A few see it as another case of an innocent white guy being attacked by some thug.

The jury simply said there simply was not enough evidence to say that Zimmerman was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Jul 23, 2013 8:47 pm UTC

Mordus wrote:That's a pretty biased view. I've seen I believe 8 accidents in my life that I did not witness, but was there before the cops. At least 4 of those were quick trips to the store or something along those lines. To say that there is no way that could have happened and that he must have been listening to the police waves waiting for his moment is pretty ridiculous.

It's possible, but not at all a foregone conclusion.


I've seen quite a few accidents before the police myself...it seems statistically likely, because only a small percentage of the population is police. There's almost always going to be a few cars that pass by before police arrive.

Even if he is, for some reason, making a hobby of saving people before the police show up, I'm not sure I understand the dismay. Oh no, he drug someone out of a burning car instead of leaving them there until police showed up. Would it be better to just let 'em burn?

User avatar
Woopate
Scrapple
Posts: 503
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:34 am UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Woopate » Wed Jul 24, 2013 7:09 am UTC

Even if he was listening to a police scanner, the image a few of the articles painted of him was one of someone akin to Paul Blart. A quasi-(or full blown)vigilante. He may well have listened to police scanners as part of his duties as self-appointed neighbourhood watch before he was arrested, and wants to pick up where he left off, tarnished reputation or no. Hell, I listen to police channels on my smartphone whenever I hear of something interesting going on, or as background noise. The car fire says nothing about the shooting, except that it adds a datapoint to a trend that shows that the guy takes matters into his own hands.

User avatar
Gelsamel
Lame and emo
Posts: 8237
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:49 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Gelsamel » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:30 am UTC

I've not really been following any of this, so I really have no idea what is going on. But, sitting around listening to what is going on in the media, it is clear what type of narrative is being presented. Thats why when I stumbled across this video I thought it would be good to link it in a conversation where people are interested in this kind of thing since this video is contrary to the main narrative being presented. Of course it says nothing about what I believe about this case, I just thought it was interesting:

http://youtu.be/Ebu6Yvzs4Ls
"Give up here?"
- > No
"Do you accept defeat?"
- > No
"Do you think games are silly little things?"
- > No
"Is it all pointless?"
- > No
"Do you admit there is no meaning to this world?"
- > No

User avatar
Brace
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Brace » Wed Jul 24, 2013 1:44 pm UTC

Woopate wrote:Even if he was listening to a police scanner, the image a few of the articles painted of him was one of someone akin to Paul Blart. A quasi-(or full blown)vigilante. He may well have listened to police scanners as part of his duties as self-appointed neighbourhood watch before he was arrested, and wants to pick up where he left off, tarnished reputation or no. Hell, I listen to police channels on my smartphone whenever I hear of something interesting going on, or as background noise. The car fire says nothing about the shooting, except that it adds a datapoint to a trend that shows that the guy takes matters into his own hands.


How dare he do things.
"The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves" - Albert Camus

Bsob
Posts: 119
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 12:44 am UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Bsob » Wed Jul 24, 2013 2:03 pm UTC

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:Zimmerman probably caused the accident himself. Isn't it obvious?


Clearly he used his gun to force a black teenager to cause the car accident.

User avatar
EdgarJPublius
Official Propagandi.... Nifty Poster Guy
Posts: 3665
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 4:56 am UTC
Location: where the wind takes me

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby EdgarJPublius » Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:59 pm UTC

Bsob wrote:
TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:Zimmerman probably caused the accident himself. Isn't it obvious?


Clearly he used his gun to force a black teenager to cause the car accident.


That would be difficult considering the Federal government has said he can't have it back despite Florida law saying that he can.

This is a surprising move, normally Holder and Obama are all too happy to give out guns to Hispanics.
Last edited by EdgarJPublius on Wed Jul 24, 2013 5:06 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Roosevelt wrote:
I wrote:Does Space Teddy Roosevelt wrestle Space Bears and fight the Space Spanish-American War with his band of Space-volunteers the Space Rough Riders?

Yes.

-still unaware of the origin and meaning of his own user-title

User avatar
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As the Arbiter of Everything, Everything Sucks
Posts: 8314
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 6:17 pm UTC
Location: I FUCKING MOVED TO THE WOODS

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ » Wed Jul 24, 2013 4:03 pm UTC

EdgarJPublius wrote:This is a surprising move, normally Holder and Obama are all to happy to give out guns to Hispanics.

sick burn
Heyyy baby wanna kill all humans?

Zcorp
Posts: 1255
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:14 am UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Zcorp » Wed Jul 24, 2013 4:13 pm UTC

Gelsamel wrote:I've not really been following any of this, so I really have no idea what is going on. But, sitting around listening to what is going on in the media, it is clear what type of narrative is being presented. Thats why when I stumbled across this video I thought it would be good to link it in a conversation where people are interested in this kind of thing since this video is contrary to the main narrative being presented. Of course it says nothing about what I believe about this case, I just thought it was interesting:

http://youtu.be/Ebu6Yvzs4Ls

'Mixed martial arts blows' require a power of over 9000, so Zimmerman stood no chance at all.

This video is interesting yes, also disgusting, especially when coming from a guy who is talking about how bad journalism is and the posts this crap.

I'd be curious to know which if any of those things are true, but even if they all are the relevance is pretty small. The final shot of Obama smoking really had me wondering if this was supposed to all be sarcastic though.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Jul 24, 2013 7:12 pm UTC

Woopate wrote:Even if he was listening to a police scanner, the image a few of the articles painted of him was one of someone akin to Paul Blart. A quasi-(or full blown)vigilante. He may well have listened to police scanners as part of his duties as self-appointed neighbourhood watch before he was arrested, and wants to pick up where he left off, tarnished reputation or no. Hell, I listen to police channels on my smartphone whenever I hear of something interesting going on, or as background noise. The car fire says nothing about the shooting, except that it adds a datapoint to a trend that shows that the guy takes matters into his own hands.


I'd agree that he does seem to see himself as a protector/helper, and acts on this, sure. I don't really have a problem with that, though. Being a bystander isn't inherently virtuous in my eyes.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10009
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby addams » Wed Jul 24, 2013 7:56 pm UTC

Fantastic Idea wrote:
EdgarJPublius wrote:This is a surprising move, normally Holder and Obama are all to happy to give out guns to Hispanics.

sick burn

That is so Off Topic.
We are supposed to be typing about Gang Warfare and how sophisticated it is in the early 21st Century.

What do you do?
Bring in how silly some of the Intelligence plans are.

It's a great plan if things worked out in Real Life the way they do on paper.
How do You think these things are decided?

It becomes a game of Who knows Who?
Who do you know that has a Gun?
Who do you know that wants one?

What?! I don't!
But; Who does?

Why? The Tea Bags have guns.
Do the Mexicans have guns?

Yes. Yes, they do.
I have seen them.

That has nothing to do with US Gang Wars.
Nothing. Both the shooter and the shootie were US people.
Doing what City People do. They are City People.

Country People do that, too.
City People sometimes go to the countryside and do that shit.

Sometimes they are stupid and do stuff children do.
Like, shoot a gun without thinking about aiming it.

Sometimes they shoot wild. Sometimes they get in arguments and shoot each other.
People with guns use the guns. Even My Mother Did! She shot some guy's car.

She was mad at him. Maybe she was mad at his wife. I don't know. That is grown up stuff.
Adults get angry at one another and they will do the darnedest things. I don't carry a gun. You?

What about Gang Warfare? It explains so much.
That is a way of looking at this that can make most people feel safe.

If you are not in a Gang, No Problem.
If you stay clear of areas where the fighting is Heavy, then No Problem.

I was inside a City and inside an area where gunfire was common.
The people knew the sound of gunfire. It was Gang Warfare.

The people from the House I was visiting were a part of one Gang or the Other.
The men would not call; They would drive, like Paul Ravere, to deliver the News.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Revere

It is very difficult for you and I to know.
We were not There. We don't know those people.

Even when I AM there I often don't know what is going on.
"Who is shooting?" I ask.
"Who is Asking?" I am answered.
"I am nobody. I think I"ll go now."

When those guys told me how to 'get out' away from gun fire, I considered their advice.
In ten or fifteen minutes by car I was in Berkley or Out in the Open Countryside.
Cities are frightening. People shoot at each other for fun. War is fun for some people.

There is No Cause! It is a Lifestyle Choice! Maybe!
Our side against their side. Period. No reason. It Just IS!

So our eyes and our attentions are turned the the Frightening Truth?
People are dangerous. People form groups to intimidate other groups.

In the end it is Fun and it is Easy.
Even little children can learn Them are (X) We are (XX)

oh... if it were only that easy. Everyone gets (XX) and we are all Brothers, again.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Woopate
Scrapple
Posts: 503
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:34 am UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Woopate » Sat Jul 27, 2013 4:06 am UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
Woopate wrote:Even if he was listening to a police scanner, the image a few of the articles painted of him was one of someone akin to Paul Blart. A quasi-(or full blown)vigilante. He may well have listened to police scanners as part of his duties as self-appointed neighbourhood watch before he was arrested, and wants to pick up where he left off, tarnished reputation or no. Hell, I listen to police channels on my smartphone whenever I hear of something interesting going on, or as background noise. The car fire says nothing about the shooting, except that it adds a datapoint to a trend that shows that the guy takes matters into his own hands.


I'd agree that he does seem to see himself as a protector/helper, and acts on this, sure. I don't really have a problem with that, though. Being a bystander isn't inherently virtuous in my eyes.


I could have swore I put an "only" in there. I agree that being a person of action is not blameworthy in any way.

sociotard
Posts: 68
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2011 11:25 pm UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby sociotard » Tue Aug 06, 2013 6:51 pm UTC

The Smithsonian would like to acquire the infamous hoodie.

http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/ ... 5814960229

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10009
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby addams » Wed Aug 07, 2013 8:47 am UTC

sociotard wrote:The Smithsonian would like to acquire the infamous hoodie.

http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/ ... 5814960229

yes. And, it makes sense.
We need artifacts.

Good Museums have educated professionals to support The People and explain things.
I know about some of our 'things'.
We do need the photos of lynchings.
We do need the ropes.
We do need the letters and orders.

We don't need to go to that part of the museum, everyday.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Aceo
Posts: 155
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 8:33 pm UTC
Location: Hull, Yorkshire, UK
Contact:

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Aceo » Thu Sep 05, 2013 11:34 am UTC

GENERATION 19: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

leady
Posts: 1592
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby leady » Thu Sep 05, 2013 1:25 pm UTC

Ah the bastion of justice that are the nations of the UN :)

on a small aside, what on earth does

The specialists referred to official data from US authorities, according to which 71.9 percent of the victims of hate crimes were violently attacked by people with a racist profile.


mean?

User avatar
JBJ
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 6:20 pm UTC
Location: a point or extent in space

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby JBJ » Thu Sep 05, 2013 1:42 pm UTC

leady wrote:Ah the bastion of justice that are the nations of the UN :)

on a small aside, what on earth does

The specialists referred to official data from US authorities, according to which 71.9 percent of the victims of hate crimes were violently attacked by people with a racist profile an anti-black bias.


mean?

It means the author cannot communicate clearly. Fixed the snippet above. Below is the full context.
FBI Hate Crime report wrote:Among the single-bias hate crime incidents in 2011, there were 3,645 victims of racially motivated hate crime.

71.9 percent were victims of an offender’s anti-black bias.
16.3 percent were victims of an anti-white bias.
5.2 percent were victims of a bias against a group of individuals in which more than one race was represented (anti-multiple races, group).
4.8 percent were victims of an anti-Asian/Pacific Islander bias.
1.9 percent were victims of an anti-American Indian/Alaskan Native bias.
So, you sacked the cocky khaki Kicky Sack sock plucker?
The second cocky khaki Kicky Sack sock plucker I've sacked since the sixth sitting sheet slitter got sick.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10268
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Sep 05, 2013 1:57 pm UTC

There's people with anti-native American biases?

Chen
Posts: 5487
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Chen » Thu Sep 05, 2013 2:14 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:There's people with anti-native American biases?


Why wouldn't there be?

User avatar
JBJ
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 6:20 pm UTC
Location: a point or extent in space

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby JBJ » Thu Sep 05, 2013 2:27 pm UTC

Hipster racists. Racism against blacks is too mainstream.
So, you sacked the cocky khaki Kicky Sack sock plucker?
The second cocky khaki Kicky Sack sock plucker I've sacked since the sixth sitting sheet slitter got sick.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10268
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:04 pm UTC

Chen wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:There's people with anti-native American biases?


Why wouldn't there be?


I've never met anyone with anti native biases, nor seen any media produced in the past 50 years that was anti native.


Hispanics (as well as most immigrants historically) are hated by blue collar workers worried about them TERKING ER JARBS!
Asians, Muslims and Jews are hated by people offended that people that are not quite like them are able to be successful.
Black people; they TERK ER CONFEDERACY, they are TERKING ER JARBS, they are TERKING ER GIRLS, they are TERKING ER SUBURBS, etc etc.

Native Americans were hated by people who wanted their land. But they don't really have that anymore. What, someone's upset that one or two native Americans made a couple of bucks fron casinos?

Chen
Posts: 5487
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Chen » Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:16 pm UTC

Off the top of my head, I'd say the stereotypes of native Americans all abusing drugs and alcohol can lead to fairly significant biases against them.

User avatar
Brace
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Brace » Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:21 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Native Americans were hated by people who wanted their land. But they don't really have that anymore. What, someone's upset that one or two native Americans made a couple of bucks fron casinos?


Yes, actually. Also that they receive government assistance or at least qualify for it on the basis of ancestry. Nevermind the folly of envying people statistically worse off than you, it's certainly not an uncommon thing. I mean, really the term "special privileges" was invented as a form of envy for the less well off, so anywhere it's ever applied that's what's going on.
"The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves" - Albert Camus

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Sep 05, 2013 7:27 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:
Chen wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:There's people with anti-native American biases?


Why wouldn't there be?


I've never met anyone with anti native biases, nor seen any media produced in the past 50 years that was anti native.


Hispanics (as well as most immigrants historically) are hated by blue collar workers worried about them TERKING ER JARBS!
Asians, Muslims and Jews are hated by people offended that people that are not quite like them are able to be successful.
Black people; they TERK ER CONFEDERACY, they are TERKING ER JARBS, they are TERKING ER GIRLS, they are TERKING ER SUBURBS, etc etc.

Native Americans were hated by people who wanted their land. But they don't really have that anymore. What, someone's upset that one or two native Americans made a couple of bucks fron casinos?


It's not really a big thing anymore...but back in history it used to be, of course. There's probably still one or two assholes out there, but for the most part, this is consigned to history, like hating of squareheads, and irish, and...well, whatever the new minority is, mostly. Whoever is new to the party tends to get their turn to be hated. Reasons for hatred appear to be really easy to find. Mostly, it seems to be a case of group bias. Like me = good, not like me = bad.

User avatar
folkhero
Posts: 1775
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:34 am UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby folkhero » Fri Sep 06, 2013 10:00 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:There's people with anti-native American biases?

I'm guessing you've never lived in an area with a large native American population
To all law enforcement entities, this is not an admission of guilt...

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10268
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Your clothes were asking for it: Now in mens!

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Sep 06, 2013 10:50 pm UTC

I sort of dated one. If you count Incan as NA, anyway.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: plytho and 20 guests