Derek Chauvin Murder Trial


The Thriller

Well-Known Member
Didnt want to create another thread. But just more and more evidence on how law enforcement is one of our nation’s biggest cancers. They’re “policing” themselves. Which, as the Catholic Church has taught us, always ends up well. Alsays


Internal affairs investigators reviewing hundreds of allegations of misconduct and excessive force by other Los Angeles police officers during last summer’s mass protests against police brutality are ruling on the side of the officers in most cases.
I just don’t understand why we give police this type of power and protection. Why are police allowed to police their own? We all know that leads to zero accountability.
 


White Chocolate

Respect All, Fear None
Contributor
Just jumping in this thread now. Not sure if it has been mentioned but his previous crimes/record mean zero to me in this case and should mean zero to everyone else. I hate how people use that to justify him dying. "He was a criminal high on drugs is it really that big of a deal?" Well, yes, yes it is a big deal. We should value human life more than that. Just ridiculous.
 

Jazz4ever

Well-Known Member
Just jumping in this thread now. Not sure if it has been mentioned but his previous crimes/record mean zero to me in this case and should mean zero to everyone else. I hate how people use that to justify him dying. "He was a criminal high on drugs is it really that big of a deal?" Well, yes, yes it is a big deal. We should value human life more than that. Just ridiculous.

You're correct in determining causation his record will have zero effect/influence. It will effect the length of sentence if convicted (12.5 years on 2nd degree with no priors vs up to 40 years with priors)
 

Gameface

IT'S TIME TO GET YOUR GAMEFACE ON!
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
Just jumping in this thread now. Not sure if it has been mentioned but his previous crimes/record mean zero to me in this case and should mean zero to everyone else. I hate how people use that to justify him dying. "He was a criminal high on drugs is it really that big of a deal?" Well, yes, yes it is a big deal. We should value human life more than that. Just ridiculous.
We should value human life and we should not empower police to kill people in the street just to make sure everyone knows how much authority they have.
 

Saint Cy of JFC

Well-Known Member
How many cops are bad cops? 50%? 80%? 99% 5%? This is very interesting to me to see responses on this, maybe I should make a poll. What percentage of cops do people think are just racist assholes baiting everyone they can so they can kill someone legally, and how many are just regular guys doing a very difficult job with poor tools and following their conscience the best they can?
Acab
 

Saint Cy of JFC

Well-Known Member
Anyone acting like "cracker" is a serious racial slur is being completely ridiculous. It's really sad how much the modstapo on this forum care about protecting white fragility.
 

gandalfe

Well-Known Member
Anyone acting like "cracker" is a serious racial slur is being completely ridiculous. It's really sad how much the modstapo on this forum care about protecting white fragility.
I felt like "cracker" wasn't the problem, it was his general abusive behavior. Like, if he had left the word cracker, even that whole sentence out, he still would have been banned.
 

Eenie-Meenie

Well-Known Member
Anyone acting like "cracker" is a serious racial slur is being completely ridiculous. It's really sad how much the modstapo on this forum care about protecting white fragility.
Not a racial slur, but what I did was stereotyping, which is a similar thought process with racism. Of course racism has such a huge history, you can't compare calling someone a cracker with being racist. I assumed JFBama was racist because he was so quick to defend the police and attack George Floyd for his prior criminal record. And I did apologize to him but he has yet to say he accepts it.
 

Eenie-Meenie

Well-Known Member
I felt like "cracker" wasn't the problem, it was his general abusive behavior. Like, if he had left the word cracker, even that whole sentence out, he still would have been banned.
Can you elaborate on that. You mean my sarcasm?

Ok let's revisit the inappropriate things I said:

"You're an idiot"
"You are so ignorant."
"You must be a bleeping racist. Figures, you're from Alabammy."

"Hey, A-hole, I just sent you a private message."


Then he actually copied my private message on the site, which I feel was not only inappropriate but a violation of privacy.

And below is the cracker comment in the private message:

"But you don't understand that because you're a stupid cracker from Alabama."

Then I talk about those who fly the Confederate flag and explain what that flag represents. You can go back and read it if you like. Yes, I admitted I went overboard in my demeaning comments and assuming he was racist because he is from Alabama, which was wrong, but it wasn't the only reason for my assumption. I felt he was supporting a policeman who murdered a black man. Who knows maybe he was just supporting the police and not Chauvin. Maybe he can respond now. All I know is that anyone who can support Chauvin is as cruel and heartless as he is.
 
Last edited:

Top