- Joined
- May 18, 2016
- Messages
- 5,138
- Reaction score
- 2,125
- Location
- North America
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Other
I was responding to a poster who said this:
Context is important, the only "mixup" seems to be on your part in not following the timeline that led to my post.
As for the rest of your post, how many hypothetical questions can you and your ilk put out there where what you claim to be happening isn't really happening on the scale you portray it to be happening on?
I'm all about punishing dirty cops. The video above, even when show in it's entirety (not the edited version that was originally submitted) shows a cop using excessive force. The cop should be punished IMO. But as is the case with so many of these incidents, videos are edited or additional videos from a different angle, show a completely different picture than what what we were led to believe. Most cops are good people and good cops. But just as with any large section of individuals, there are going to be a few bad apples. Doesn't matter if they're cops, politicians, judges, doctors, lawyers or sanitation workers. I understand that cops have quite a bit of authority and that the dirty cops should be dealt with in the judicial system.
If that's how you wanna spin it in your mind, last I checked "I haven't seen a cop beat anyone on tv" is a separate clause from "and I watch tv nearly every day". You're stating that you have never seen a cop beat anyone on tv. At any time. Period. And then add the second clause stating that you would know because you watch tv nearly every day. Now if you had wanted to counter that persons statement with the sentiment you claim you did, it would look more like. "I haven't seen the cops beating people on tv everyday and I watch tv nearly everyday". Notice I used the cops, instead of "a cop." Also notice instead of anyone, I use the plural "people". This makes the sentence more in line with what you're stating you intended. Regardless of the post you're responding to, and what context you feel is there that should be picked up on.
I claimed the OP as a hypothetical situation, because he offered no video, news reports, or anything of substance as to the event actually happening. Which makes you and your ilk (see how I did to you what you did to me there) fall into an echo chamber of "fake news, didn't happen, so forth and so on".
I didn't show you the video for any other reason than you stated you had never seen one on tv, I chose that one because it was shown on tv. I have no idea why they edited it. That's on the news station. If you had followed the progression of your posts in context, you would have known why I responded with that and in that way.
And then I asked how many videos would you need to see for it to become a concern. Not how hypotheticals, but how many videos. You're mis-characterization of my question is telling, as is your spin when caught in a statement you later indicated was a lie with. "I saw this video earlier." Which doesn't jive with "I haven't seen a cop beat anyone on tv" Now instead of calling you a liar, I asked if you had a wording mix-up. You shouldn't have doubled down in my opinion. Now you have even less credibility in my eyes.
I'm glad you're all for punishing dirty cops. This isn't about dirty cops. It's about the police, all police's attitude that "If you don't respect my authority, I won't respect you as a person." regardless of whether a crime is committed or not. You may be fine with that attitude in the police, but many, many people are not. And my and my ilk have just as much right to an opinion on how the police conduct themselves as you do.
Btw, I asked the question how many videos it would take, because there are a lot of videos concerning the police. Almost none of them make it to the news. And there are a lot of videos showing the police doing everything right. But not as many, or close to as many...
Which is telling in this day and age, when everything the police do is caught on camera and uploaded to youtube. You can surf around youtube and look for yourself, or continue believing there isn't a problem because it's not showing up on tv. "Ignorance is bliss" as they say.