Negatory

When the lines are fuzzy it should be morality and constitutionality.

Legality =/= morality. Cheers.

It started with an honest attempt at discourse with di1630. I guess the only thing you can do is just ignore him. Is it a lot if it happened one time? Cheers.

You mad bro? If you are still feeling as edgy, here, you can edit the rest of the saying:

You should play devil's advocate. I try to, because I recognize that I am becoming more biased the more I see. And I don't like it. It's hard to stay impartial, and I appreciate your response. 1) https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/02/george-floyd-protest-minneapolis-cops-shoot-paint-people-porch/3123781001/ - The argument is that the police said there is a curfew, and you have to listen to the police. Additionally, they only used paint, not rubber bullets as I said previously - I was wrong. Doesn't change that I don't think that they should have been shot at on their own porch or ordered inside. 2) I think they had this guy under control when they started assaulting him. I get your point, but it's not in play in this video imo. 3) Why does someone have to have pre-conceived notions to believe that you shouldn't be shot at if you don't present a threat? He is literally on a skybridge above the cops (the skybridge is to the Louisville Courthouse), not in the mess. I find it hard to wrap my mind around justification for a shot ever happening here. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/amberjamieson/louisville-shot-fired-security-guard-video 4) I will admit that this video has little context - it isn't even confirmed 100% that those are proud boys. It's a few minutes before a curfew, and they are outside. The cops shouldn't be talking to any specific groups just "so [they] don't look like [they're] playin favorites." The cops ended up apologizing for a perception of impartiality. https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/protests/salem-police-chief-apologizes-in-response-to-viral-video-of-officer/283-d7f4ce66-6f8d-4a25-a478-ae3999648d51 5) There are actually two videos there. Disorderly conduct for bumping into a cop that stops 6" in front of you? YGBSM. It's like being arrested for resisting arrest, and it's a pathetic technicality. https://patch.com/new-york/eastmeadow/3-arrested-east-meadow-protest 6) Okay, fine. No context. I agree that protesters that take advantage of a legitimate protest to loot and destroy private property should go to jail. It's easy for people to call a whole protest a riot and immediately condemn every person there as a criminal, when it's only a few. And I guess what would come back is that it's just as easy for people like me to call the justice system broken because of the actions of a few bad apples. I feel confident in saying I don't support cops who support other cops who abused power. And I also don't support protestors who support other protestors who break the law and capitalize on anarchy.

Valid points. The biggest one that I didn't realize is that DUI (of marijuana) is probably an increasing crime that needs to be dealt with somehow. I still think that legalizing it is better for society than jailing and ruining people's lives/productivity. I actually listened to this podcast recently, and I seem to remember him arguing that legalization is actually what would help dismantle the cartels' power, it's just that legalization of cocaine/heroin is so outside of society's political realm that it's unfeasible. With that being said, I have a friend that is going to die of heroin addiction, and I do not believe that heroin/meth/opiods should be legal. At the same time, I do not believe that jailing those that use the drugs actually fixes the problem. In America, the moment you are arrested for doing meth, your life is over for good - there is no redemption, there is no way to remove that, there is no making up for it. Treating drug abuse purely as a crime is a short-sighted approach that doesn't hit the root cause.

In this thread: "patriot" shows no concern for authoritarian, unconstitutional actions because it's happening to someone with views different than their own. I'm sure with your vast wealth of historical knowledge you will understand this reference: "First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a socialist."

I am opposed to police arresting people with no basis and not being held responsible. Since they are using unmarked cars and obfuscating their badge numbers and identities to do it, yes, I am opposed to those things as well. Here's the last couple months in America: I am opposed to cops shooting home owners with rubber bullets when they are video taping off of the porch of their own property: https://streamable.com/u2jzoo I am opposed to cops beating suspects that are cuffed: https://peertube.live/videos/watch/7e1074c8-1f77-4922-b088-4a2069f5b23e (have about 50 more of these, let me know) I am opposed to cops shooting at people just for recording them: https://peertube.live/videos/watch/b702c820-1837-4025-8a08-91e8a3cdff07 I am opposed to cops giving preferential warning to the Proud Boys (white nationalists) before breaking up groups: https://peertube.live/videos/watch/aec4e019-59bc-4eec-b119-df877024ce57 I am opposed to cops using tactics like getting 6" away from people or literally stopping in front of them to claim that they were assaulted and then arresting them unjustly: https://peertube.live/videos/watch/70c2a732-a9b6-4d5d-8ce4-81625742ccd4 https://peertube.live/videos/watch/8ba7a5d9-7e63-4dc5-a193-e0330c20cee2 I am opposed to cops over-aggressing and using chokeholds on people half their size while pretending that they are the good guys: https://peertube.live/videos/watch/55b36828-a647-478e-87f9-810fc7ab7a55 None of these incidents has resulted in a criminal charge. And you aren't going to watch any of them because your mind is already made up.

Also what’s your point? Fallacies are okay?

It’s the assault and arrest of law abiding citizens that bothers me. And it’s the mindset of those that blindly support all police at all costs - even when there are equivocally some that have grossly abused and are abusing power literally right now. Not the arrest of looters or people that are breaking the law. Lock em up.

This is what happens when all of your arguments are ad hominem, appeals to authority, and straw man fallacies.

Yeah ok. If you think a bunch of law enforcement hiding their identities and assaulting citizens with no charges is the same as police protecting property, JFC. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

WTF does it matter how the protestors are dressed? I'm all for a good peaceful protest but the simple fact is, the far right cannot stop at that. They'll push things further and further until they get a reaction. No problem with protestors in tactical gear, don't give a foook the design. And I laugh when right nationalists get smacked down. I'm a softcore libertarian but when people go too far (usually the right) I expect the citizens of the state to push back to protect the average citizen's constitutional rights. I thought maybe I'd vote for the libertarian this election like I did in 16....now I'm firmly opposed to the Trump camp. The authoritarian right must be stopped.

What do you think about the fact that legalization of marijuana has been relatively successful in many states and countries up to this point? That is, it hasn't caused mass homelessness or deaths or mental illness, and its legalization has actually made its purchase safer while allowing the government to collect revenue (and simultaneously defunding drug dealers). Does this make you think that an overarching "war on drugs" is maybe a bit too broad? Maybe the policies of the past were... wrong?

Authoritarianism is okay as long as it’s only used on the other guys.

Watch this video and tell me that police reform isn’t a thing that needs to happen. A previous Naval officer wants to go talk to the feds and ask them why they are there constitutionally? They break his hand in 10 seconds and cover him in pepper spray. You better believe that if had as much as thought about pushing away the idiot who started beating him or defending himself they would have arrested him. You and I will never know who those guys who abused their power were. And there’s a problem with that. The worse problem? There are dozens of videos that have emerged in the last month like this where policed think they are invulnerable. Not over-exaggerating. My vote, make a UCPJ, make all police sign an oath that holds them liable to a higher standard, and actually hold them accountable. The military in my opinion does a great job of separating the good core of the organization from the people who don’t uphold organizational values. I’m sure there are ways to stop or at least limit abuses of power by the police, and that starts with reform. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/07/20/us/portland-protests-navy-christopher-david.amp.html

I see your point. I’m not a proponent of socialism whatsoever, and, yeah, sometimes it’s hard having to go with the party that includes viewpoints that are so outside of my own. Joe Biden is not nearly what or who I would select if I could choose, but he’s more closely aligned than the alternatives.

I really am receptive, sorry for the last line. Legitimately would love to discuss issues.

Since this is an anonymous forum where people share anonymous thoughts, I'd like to hear why you all are planning on voting red this year? Specifically, what policies are actually making you interested in the republican platform? Because I can't find many convincing ones? I voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004 and McCain in 2008, but since ~2009, I feel republican views have shifted out of line with my own. Important issues for me where I think dems have a better plan than reps: 1) Infrastructure development/maintenance - a large pointed investment in the Army Corps of Engineers plus an actual plan for future technologies (battery tech at the DoE, renewable energy) seems like a better plan than just saying "We'll put $1T towards infrastructure" and not having a detailed vision 2) Finding a way to deal with the inevitable dystopia as machines displace workers who can't easily retrain (truck drivers, factory workers, manual laborers, single parents with kids, etc) - you have to have strong job retraining programs and a social safety net like never before seen or else society will not handle this transition. This is a legitimately insane thing happening right now with no plan to fix it - even to your jobs (commercial pilots likely won't exist in 50-100 years), and the republican plan is to let the unbridled free market sort this out. 3) A plan to deal with the increasing economic bullshit that we have now seen twice where losses are socialized and gains are privatized. CEOs and stockholders say they take all the risk, but have you ever seen a billionaire go bankrupt when their company didn't save any money and then were hit with a period of economic stability? Oh, all of the airlines and many other companies that just did stock buybacks over the last decade as opposed to having any reserves? Oh, okay. If we keep the system we currently have, we are keeping a system, which has proven to be catastrophic to the average person now twice in the last 12 years. Increase marginal tax rates of the upper echelons, a wealth tax on money over a huge amount of dollars is not that insane, increase worker protections, and let businesses fail. 4) Global warming action - the current Admin's plan to just let free with coal and fossil fuels is a short-sighted terrible one. But I guess that's what happens when you don't believe 99% of scientists and can just say "fake news" to everything that you don't like. It's real, sorry homies. 5) BLM/police brutality/social issues/gay rights/etc - Republican strat is just to not care, democrat strat is to at least talk about the issues. Whether you like it or not, a large part of bringing stability back to the nation is mediating between groups that feel marginalized. It's not effective to just say "suck it up, buttercup" Others: universal healthcare, budget deficit (both sides have no plan here, long gone are the days where republicans were the "deficit hawks"), military action (we don't need to be in Iraq/Syria/Afghanistan/Israel/Saudi, we need to come home and focus on developing future weapons to maintain parity with China), and a bunch more. So go ahead, convince me as to your issues and why the republican party will deliver better results.

Pretty defeatist attitude, huh? I will tell you that a lot of smart people in AFMC are excited that someone is looking to fix some of the things that are wrong with the current acquisition/test/equip structure of the USAF and military at large. If this can help us be quicker and gives us more options, that is a good deal for America. And at the end of the day, that’s what matters.

The US has one of the lowest life expectancies out of 1st world countries. We have one of the highest expenditures on healthcare per capita. Logical DFP - our country/economic model is horribly inefficient compared to most other similar nations and could easily be improved.

It’s unfortunate, but every person I know that’s “100% disabled” can still get around just fine and could easily work. Don’t you also get tax free or something?

Why? I’m not looking to buy, just wondering

Maybe they could use VR/cameras for the landing task? I’d also be concerned about nonstandard g-forces/kinesthetic effects in the cockpit. When you move the pilot position aft, often you will experience a non-intuitive reduction in g (a sinking feeling) initially when you pitch up (as your tail drops). Makes flying by the seat of your pants a lot more difficult.

Just remember y’all (I know, that’s cultural appropriation), if we’ve learned anything from this thread it’s that “libruls” have bad DNA that predisposes them to rioting (and man buns I guess?), and that when you are figuring out how to deal with someone who has a different opinion than you, you should get your guidance from the rootin tootin time of the civil war. got it