• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Chaos In Minneapolis: Looting Occurring In the City, Tear Gas Being Used

dixon01767 said:
All the riiots following the Michael Brown shows they weren't after fairness or justice. They wanted revenge against an innocent police officer.
Click to expand...

Agreed. All indications are that Brown's companion presented a trumped-up story to exacerbate tensions and he succeeded beyond his wildest dreams. The only saving grace is that it doesn't sound like he profited much thereby, whereas a lot of the rioters are probably making out like bandits.
 
Bucky said:
White people are not victims of sytemtic racism you idiot.

Blacks, Asians, Muslims, Hispanics - all of these groups have legitimate claim to racism and being suppressed.

Whites? Even though many claim they are victims of racism... they are not.
Click to expand...

If a black man kills me because he hates white people-- and yes, there have been a *few* such deaths-- then, yes, that's still death by racism.

You can try to airbrush away the racial ugliness by claiming that it's not "systemic," but to say it's not racism as such is nonsense.

Not surprisingly, one of the earliest advocates of the "people of color can't be racists" was that dipstick Spike Lee.
 
DiAnna said:
A trip to the nearest Optometrist should rectify that problem with your eyesight. :lol:
Click to expand...

You know when someone corrects you, you should at least take the time to ascertain why and if they were correct. But not you. Instead of finding out on your own or asking for evidence that you are wrong, you continue holding on to your absurd assertions.


He was wearing a black gloves at that point in time just as the other officer was.
You can see him move his hand with that glove on. It was not in his pocket.

So you need to follow your own advice and get your eyes checked
In addition, if you stopped making claims where you do not actually know what you are saying, it would greatly help you also.
 
JasperL said:
They have no right or authority to try to stop anyone.
Click to expand...
Please show everybody this law you made up.
Absent a law against said activity, a person has every right and authority to try and stop someone to talk to them.
So stop making things up.


JasperL said:
And to Arbery, there's no difference at all between "stop" by two guys armed with guns, and "detain" him.
Click to expand...
You do not know that and absent evidence you can not speak for Arbery or what he thought, especially as you are not a mind reader, let alone someone who speak to the dead.


JasperL said:
He clearly did not want to be "stopped"
Click to expand...
Which can be ascertained from his known actions of refusing to stop the first time and from his attacking instead of stopping and talking.


JasperL said:
and the two thugs tried to force him with guns to "stop."
Click to expand...
What a stupid reply. No evidence exists that says they used their guns to try and get him to stop.


JasperL said:
What clear avenue of 'egress' was open to him?
Click to expand...
All avenues to the left, the right and to the rear.


JasperL said:
Right, no reason to be concerned, just a black man in the south with a truck, a car, and three armed assholes following you and blocking your path. Anyone who didn't see that was obviously harmless is an idiot....or something.
Click to expand...
You are making things up to believe again.
There is no evidence that he knew the two were armed to begin with. There is no evidence to suggest that there was any knowledge of the third person being armed (if he even was).
Only after the son was out and had a shotgun in his hands would he have known, and instead of taking off in another direction and at a faster pace, he chose to attack when he did not have to.


JasperL said:
A truck doesn't block foot traffic?
Click to expand...
Your replies are getting more and more ridiculous. No. A vehicle in it's lane does not block foot traffic were the foot traffic is supposed to be.


JasperL said:
Sure, but for the truck in one lane, and a thug with a shotgun in the other. And he has no obligation to turn around - he's a free man, and these assholes had NO authority to impede his route.
Click to expand...
iLOL Pointing out the avenues available is not saying he had to take them.
It is a rebuttal showing your argument of "blocked" is absurdly wrong.



JasperL said:
He's moved from the center of the left lane to in front of the truck and was moving further right in that picture.
Click to expand...
No he wasn't. He was being pushed back at that point.



JasperL said:
If the thug son had stayed in the left hand lane, there's no problem. What would you do if some thug with a shotgun starts running toward you as you're passing the truck?
Click to expand...
This is not about what I would do. This is about the evidence and it's relevance.
Trying to stop someone to talk with them is not illegal.
Attacking someone is.



JasperL said:
Bottom line is these dumb rednecks had no authority to block his route, or detain him, or stop him for questioning.
Click to expand...
He was not blocked and he was not detained.
And they had every right in the world to try to stop to someone to talk to them. That in and of itself is not illegal activity.


JasperL said:
Arbery was at that time a free man and didn't have ANY obligation to listen to these guys.
Click to expand...
No one said he did. How many times does that need to be made clear to you?


JasperL said:
He tried to avoid them - they tried to block him.
Click to expand...
Trying to stop someone to talk to them is not blocking.


JasperL said:
It's on them.
Click to expand...
It really isn't but since the State decided to prosecute they will have to prove their case.


JasperL said:
If you want to defend this, that's fine, but if the two Gomer Pyle's want to play cop, they need to pass the tests, and get hired and get a badge.
Click to expand...
Irrational commentary at it's best.




SkyFox76 said:
Looks like you just sunk your argument on your own. In an enhanced video Travis can be seen raising the shotgun and aiming it at Arbery.
Click to expand...

So now you choose to make idiotic replies while still not paying attention to what is actually being argued. Figures.
The argument you clearly are not paying attention to is speaking of an attempt to get him to stop so they could talk to him. There was no pointing the gun in regards to that.
The gun later pointing at Arbery becasue he attacked is not relevant to the argument of trying to stop him to talk to him.

It is so sad you can not pay attention to what is being argued.
Though I do believe you are capable, so keep plugging away slugger.
 
Excon said:
Please show everybody this law you made up.
Absent a law against said activity, a person has every right and authority to try and stop someone to talk to them.
So stop making things up.


You do not know that and absent evidence you can not speak for Arbery or what he thought, especially as you are not a mind reader, let alone someone who speak to the dead.


Which can be ascertained from his known actions of refusing to stop the first time and from his attacking instead of stopping and talking.


What a stupid reply. No evidence exists that says they used their guns to try and get him to stop.


All avenues to the left, the right and to the rear.


You are making things up to believe again.
There is no evidence that he knew the two were armed to begin with. There is no evidence to suggest that there was any knowledge of the third person being armed (if he even was).
Only after the son was out and had a shotgun in his hands would he have known, and instead of taking off in another direction and at a faster pace, he chose to attack when he did not have to.


Your replies are getting more and more ridiculous. No. A vehicle in it's lane does not block foot traffic were the foot traffic is supposed to be.


iLOL Pointing out the avenues available is not saying he had to take them.
It is a rebuttal showing your argument of "blocked" is absurdly wrong.



No he wasn't. He was being pushed back at that point.



This is not about what I would do. This is about the evidence and it's relevance.
Trying to stop someone to talk with them is not illegal.
Attacking someone is.



He was not blocked and he was not detained.
And they had every right in the world to try to stop to someone to talk to them. That in and of itself is not illegal activity.


No one said he did. How many times does that need to be made clear to you?


Trying to stop someone to talk to them is not blocking.


It really isn't but since the State decided to prosecute they will have to prove their case.


Irrational commentary at it's best.






So now you choose to make idiotic replies while still not paying attention to what is actually being argued. Figures.
The argument you clearly are not paying attention to is speaking of an attempt to get him to stop so they could talk to him. There was no pointing the gun in regards to that.
The gun later pointing at Arbery becasue he attacked is not relevant to the argument of trying to stop him to talk to him.

It is so sad you can not pay attention to what is being argued.
Though I do believe you are capable, so keep plugging away slugger.
Click to expand...

Is there a reason you're posting this on a thread about Minneapolis?
 
Excon said:
Please show everybody this law you made up.
Absent a law against said activity, a person has every right and authority to try and stop someone to talk to them.
So stop making things up.


You do not know that and absent evidence you can not speak for Arbery or what he thought, especially as you are not a mind reader, let alone someone who speak to the dead.


Which can be ascertained from his known actions of refusing to stop the first time and from his attacking instead of stopping and talking.


What a stupid reply. No evidence exists that says they used their guns to try and get him to stop.


All avenues to the left, the right and to the rear.


You are making things up to believe again.
There is no evidence that he knew the two were armed to begin with. There is no evidence to suggest that there was any knowledge of the third person being armed (if he even was).
Only after the son was out and had a shotgun in his hands would he have known, and instead of taking off in another direction and at a faster pace, he chose to attack when he did not have to.


Your replies are getting more and more ridiculous. No. A vehicle in it's lane does not block foot traffic were the foot traffic is supposed to be.


iLOL Pointing out the avenues available is not saying he had to take them.
It is a rebuttal showing your argument of "blocked" is absurdly wrong.



No he wasn't. He was being pushed back at that point.



This is not about what I would do. This is about the evidence and it's relevance.
Trying to stop someone to talk with them is not illegal.
Attacking someone is.



He was not blocked and he was not detained.
And they had every right in the world to try to stop to someone to talk to them. That in and of itself is not illegal activity.


No one said he did. How many times does that need to be made clear to you?


Trying to stop someone to talk to them is not blocking.


It really isn't but since the State decided to prosecute they will have to prove their case.


Irrational commentary at it's best.






So now you choose to make idiotic replies while still not paying attention to what is actually being argued. Figures.
The argument you clearly are not paying attention to is speaking of an attempt to get him to stop so they could talk to him. There was no pointing the gun in regards to that.
The gun later pointing at Arbery becasue he attacked is not relevant to the argument of trying to stop him to talk to him.

It is so sad you can not pay attention to what is being argued.
Though I do believe you are capable, so keep plugging away slugger.
Click to expand...

Your replies are getting more and more ridiculous.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Ethnonationalism nearly destroyed civilization— not just western civilization— outright.

Forty million dead wasn’t enough for you lot, and so the slaughter has continued, over and over and over again, from Rwanda to Yugoslavia to Indonesia.

Ethnonationalists have always seen members of the group who won’t join in or support thr slaughter as a bigger threat than even the minorities they want to “get rid of” so your rage against “white liberals” comes as no surprise.

Do you realize nobody cares what you think? Seriously, your posts, other than being a mildly interesting view into a long discarded and disgraced past, have no importance whatsoever.

So crying about how much of a victim you think you are and face the real world.
Click to expand...

Of all the posters with your point of view I admire the way you put into words your disdain for my point of view!!!!

The melting pot turned millions of descendants of European immigrants into Americans! Because of that success
the Liberals therefore suggest we can bring in countless millions from every country & culture & still be able to
create a stronger, better happier more united nation than the America of Eisenhower & Kennedy. To them I ask,
where in history has diversity caused anything but chaos & disharmony!!!!

Eisenhower’s & Kennedy's America was a nation of 160 million with a European Christian core and a culture uniquely its own. The
USA was a country then. What will hold this country together if we don't control both legal & illegal immigration.
It will become a stew of 450 million of every creed culture & color from every country on earth.

It was a period when the USA was at the top of the world. '3/4 of all the cars driven in the world were driven on
USA roads. Pennsylvania still produced 45% of the steel produced in the entire world. America's ethnic mix was
88% European ethnics and 11% black.'

Racially, culturally, & politically America is disintegrating. The last two generations have killed the great
nation it inherited. Slowly but surely the USA will lose the status of a country & be considered nothing
more than a geographical location.
 
gdgyva said:
look...we have over 800k current law enforcement officers across the country

and we get what...2 or 3 of these idiots on film a year? if that? and you call that, systemic racism

yes, we have some BAD cops patrolling our streets....going to happen when you are hiring that many people into a very high stress, high anxiety, relatively low pay job

the VAST majority of LE officers are really good people who care about the job they do, and the community they serve

but just like every other profession out there, only takes a few bad apples to give the whole barrel a bad smell

so maybe ease up on the rhetoric....

i agree the cop(s) in Minneapolis have a lot of questions to answer for....which is why i want the entire footage of the bodycams released to see if there were things we dont know about....i cant see what that might be, but i am willing to have an open mind

if nothing on the bodycams, then i think the one cop needs to go down for manslaughter and the other 3 for accessory....for standing by while he was basically murdered
Click to expand...

Yup, systemic racism. And it is more than just a few bad cops, it is a reasonable number of bad cops. Now not as bad as the people who killed this guy but the problem is not just restricted to a few cops.



This is a video of a student picking up trash outside the dorm where he lives when he is being harassed by an officer because he may have been "trespassing" while picking up the trash. He threatened him with tasering him, guns were drawn on him because he continued to do his job, picking up the trash. The officer claimed he had a blunt object and was a threat, the blunt object was a device with 2 tongs to pick up trash from the ground which he put in his bucket. He had shown his ID as a student and still the officer kept

harassing him and claimed he was being detained to check on a possible trespass crime. The white building manager had to come to the aid of the student who at that time was surrounded by numerous officers. All for the crime of PICKING UP TRASH!!!!

The police officer resigned shortly after and was later found to have broken 2 police policies.



This is a black doctor unloading boxes out of his car in front of his own house, doing nothing when a police officer confronted him and handcuffed him for "having an attitude". The man was busy testing homeless people for covid and had boxes with supplies for homeless people, in the middle of the day unloading his van. He was unloading a car while black.

This is a story from Arkansas where an officer was fired for telling black men "they don't belong in his town

Arkansas officer fired day after video showed him telling black men they didn't belong in his city

This black kid was sitting at home, door closed, the police opened the door. Then claimed the door had been open, illegally entered the home and started choking the kid.



These are not just mere incidents. And I know, this also happens to white and latino people but for some reason the black community gets this more than any other community and it has to stop IMO.
 
apdst said:
That's no excuse for violence.

No surprise that you make blanket accusations to condone violence.
Click to expand...

You are making false accusations, prove where I said that I condone this violence? You can't because you are making incorrect accusations.
 
j brown's body said:
Right-wingers are all in for people being armed to overthrow an oppressive government and then become upset when people actually act. Their devotion to the second amendment as a protector of freedom is just a self-serving rationale to support a rather ugly cultural trait.
Click to expand...

I can understand the black people being frustrated by the continued lack of any progress in these kinds of situations but rioting is not a valid/legal/acceptable response. People caught looting have to be locked up and jailed for their crimes.
 
PCB66 said:
We expect Blacks to be looters and rioters. They have been doing it for decades. Thieving, violence, destruction and bad behavior is embedded in their culture. We see it every few years.

What is pathetic is when you see the pathetic weak minded confused pink ***** hat White Guilt Libtard Moon Bats joining them. That comes from bad parenting.
Click to expand...


This guy nails it.

 
Excon said:
Wrong. I stated fact.


That is your opinion based in an assumption. Not fact.


Irrational nonsense.
Click to expand...

Yeah, your usual response I see, making nonsensical claims. Tell me again, he was healthy/alive when out of the car, he was alive when handcuffed, an idiot officer kneeled down on his neck. He was stating he could not breathe and the officer just kept doing what he did and then I am making an assumption :lamo
 
dcaraz said:
You give away your totally biased rewrite of history.
Most riots are not tied directly to the president sitting in the White House, so enough with your need to blame riots on Obama.

Notice the trend in this historical list of US riots: List of incidents of civil unrest in the United States - Wikipedia

If attitudes and outcomes surrounding racial justice don't improve we may be looking at a repeat of the 1960s in the 2020s.

91 riots prior to 1900

66 in 1910s

13 in 1920s

18 in 1930s

13 in 1940s

5 in 1950s

62 in 1960s

33 in 1970s

7 in 1980s

10 in 1990s

15 in 2000s

33 since 2010
Click to expand...

Haha, that's an interesting list. It turns out that the 1950's, which leftists always point to as a horrible decade of racial inequality and white supremacism being rampant, had the least number of riots of any decade. And the horrible Reagan 80's had the second least. :lamo Leave it to liberals who run the MSM to not know a damn thing about reality.
 
TurtleDude said:
I was comparing the looters during the police brutality protests with the white demonstrators against lockdowns who caused garment soiling by those who whined that these protestors were packing heat.
Click to expand...

The comment I made was about white riots, was there are riot during the armed threatening of elected officials? Nope, so I clearly was not talking about that. That comment was made about the Charlottesville riots I was talking with Truth about.
 
DiAnna said:
Police, experts condemn knee restraint used on George Floyd

800.jpeg


THIS is reality. It is blatant, it is brutal, it is illegal and he has been arrested and charged with murder and manslaughter. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

Even Trump admitted it was wrong. That is how psycho his answer is,
 
Excon said:
Please show everybody this law you made up.
Absent a law against said activity, a person has every right and authority to try and stop someone to talk to them.
So stop making things up.
Click to expand...

Sure.

O.C.G.A. 16-5-41 (2010)
16-5-41. False imprisonment

(a) A person commits the offense of false imprisonment when, in violation of the personal liberty of another, he arrests, confines, or detains such person without legal authority.
Click to expand...

One of those thugs was charged with attempting the above, which is of course also a crime. Bottom line is the Gomer Pyle wannabes didn't have any authority to stop, question, detain, or even to force Arbery to choose another route and yet they did it repeatedly, and Arbery is dead.

And the redneck thugs have been charged with murder, so the law and those in charge of enforcing it in GA don't agree with your idiotic defenses of these morons. We'll see what happens in court.
 
slick said:
Of all the posters with your point of view I admire the way you put into words your disdain for my point of view!!!!

The melting pot turned millions of descendants of European immigrants into Americans! Because of that success
the Liberals therefore suggest we can bring in countless millions from every country & culture & still be able to
create a stronger, better happier more united nation than the America of Eisenhower & Kennedy. To them I ask,
where in history has diversity caused anything but chaos & disharmony!!!!

Eisenhower’s & Kennedy's America was a nation of 160 million with a European Christian core and a culture uniquely its own. The
USA was a country then. What will hold this country together if we don't control both legal & illegal immigration.
It will become a stew of 450 million of every creed culture & color from every country on earth.

It was a period when the USA was at the top of the world. '3/4 of all the cars driven in the world were driven on
USA roads. Pennsylvania still produced 45% of the steel produced in the entire world. America's ethnic mix was
88% European ethnics and 11% black.'

Racially, culturally, & politically America is disintegrating. The last two generations have killed the great
nation it inherited. Slowly but surely the USA will lose the status of a country & be considered nothing
more than a geographical location.
Click to expand...

Uh....thank you, I suppose.

The melting pot succeeded at more than just turning Europeans into Americans. People from all over the world, from Hmong to Cubans, Haitians to Filipinos, have come to this country and become Americans. I know people who aren’t even citizens, yet are serving in the United States military. Diversity is better than mindlessly following the same way of doing things all the way off a cliff. Look at what happened to Japan, one of the most xenophobic nations on the planet. If they had been more accepting of different ways of doing things and the experiences and knowledge different groups have to offer, well, Tojo and his clique of psychopaths couldn’t have so throughly wrecked the country.

History shows us European Christians slaughter each other just as happily as they slaughter those of other cultures. Having a common religion or common skin tone is no guarantee of stability or tranquility, and pretending otherwise is naive at best. The British and Irish are both Christians, and yet they fought each other for at least nine hundred years in one way or another.

It was like that, in major part, because most of the world had been burned to the ground. The US was able to emerge so dominantly because there basically was no competition. That was never going to last even if the US didn’t let another immigrant in between then and doomsday(and doing that would have hurt the country to no end, but I digress).

The rule of law. The constitution of the United States of America. The founding principles of the country, like, you know, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. All men are created equal. That is what makes America great, not obsessing over the racial composition of the country.

People have been claiming that for well over a hundred years at this point with each new wave of immigrants, and each time things turns out just fine.
 
Excon said:
Just as you were wrong about having his hand in his pocket you are wrong in your personal assessment as well. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

Uh.....you can very clearly see his hand in his pocket in the picture.
 
dcaraz said:
You give away your totally biased rewrite of history.
Most riots are not tied directly to the president sitting in the White House, so enough with your need to blame riots on Obama.

Notice the trend in this historical list of US riots: List of incidents of civil unrest in the United States - Wikipedia

If attitudes and outcomes surrounding racial justice don't improve we may be looking at a repeat of the 1960s in the 2020s.

91 riots prior to 1900

66 in 1910s

13 in 1920s

18 in 1930s

13 in 1940s

5 in 1950s

62 in 1960s

33 in 1970s

7 in 1980s

10 in 1990s

15 in 2000s

33 since 2010
Click to expand...

I wasn't able to edit my comment, so here's the second half.

In the 1960s, Democrats controlled the White House for all but one year. Obama was President for most of the 2010s, and we see the number of riots spike in that decade, to more than twice the number of the previous decade.

The White House chooses the direction of the upper levels of law enforcement, and I don't think its a fluke that during the Obama years, that riots more than doubled. Holder and Lynch seemed more sympathetic towards rioters and terrorists than they did towards law enforcement.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Uh....thank you, I suppose.

The melting pot succeeded at more than just turning Europeans into Americans. People from all over the world, from Hmong to Cubans, Haitians to Filipinos, have come to this country and become Americans. I know people who aren’t even citizens, yet are serving in the United States military. Diversity is better than mindlessly following the same way of doing things all the way off a cliff. Look at what happened to Japan, one of the most xenophobic nations on the planet. If they had been more accepting of different ways of doing things and the experiences and knowledge different groups have to offer, well, Tojo and his clique of psychopaths couldn’t have so throughly wrecked the country.

History shows us European Christians slaughter each other just as happily as they slaughter those of other cultures. Having a common religion or common skin tone is no guarantee of stability or tranquility, and pretending otherwise is naive at best. The British and Irish are both Christians, and yet they fought each other for at least nine hundred years in one way or another.

It was like that, in major part, because most of the world had been burned to the ground. The US was able to emerge so dominantly because there basically was no competition. That was never going to last even if the US didn’t let another immigrant in between then and doomsday(and doing that would have hurt the country to no end, but I digress).

The rule of law. The constitution of the United States of America. The founding principles of the country, like, you know, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. All men are created equal. That is what makes America great, not obsessing over the racial composition of the country.

People have been claiming that for well over a hundred years at this point with each new wave of immigrants, and each time things turns out just fine.
Click to expand...

I'll leave you with this and I suppose we'll resume another verbal tug of war when future racial conflicts rears their ugly heads:

1) Is Britain stronger now that London is Londonistan than is was in the days of 'Hope & Glory' now than Mullahs defend Muslim bombers
2) Israel does not wish to build a multiethnic society refusing to allow palestinians back who once inhabited the lands
3) Diversity certainly is not the wish of Scots & Welsh who desire to follow the Irish to independence
4) Has diversity in the Balkans ever been anything but the cause for troubling times
5) The divide between Christians & Muslims in Lebanon is anything but a success story for diversity

Rarely in history has diversity been anything but trouble

The immigration to Europe from 3rd worlders is advancing with more waiting to come and those lined up
behind them stagger the mind. America should view Europe as the canary in the coal mine.

This countries future is already rooted in ethnic conflicts. Those who think that 'people are happier and the country
is better than ever in history' were either not alive in 1960 or just are not aware or are deceiving themselves.
 
dcaraz said:
To call Black Lives Matter a radical group makes me assume that you're a card-carrying John Bircher? :lol:
Click to expand...

I remember when they shut the Bay Bridge down a few years ago, by walking into the driving lanes that connect San Francisco to Oakland, and drivers had to wait several hours or find another route.

I remember when they would stand on the street in Portland, even blocking ambulances that were trying to get to sick patients, where a few seconds can mean the difference between life and death.

I remember the shooting death of a small black child, that BLM tried to say was carried out by a white man, in order to foment more unrest and riots. The black man who was arrested for that crime couldn't have been mistaken for being white under any reasonable circumstance.

I remember when a black terrorist used a BLM rally in Dallas, to kill 5 police officers. The media drew no conclusion that perhaps BLM draws extremists in the Dallas quintuple homicide, and then accused the Unite the Right groups of this very thing a year later, when only 1 person died at Charlottesville.

BLM engages in radical activism, based upon a narrative which isn't even true to begin with. They're not only radical, they're inept bumbling radicals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom