The Death of Ahmaud Arbery

Discussion in 'The Thunderdome' started by IP, May 5, 2020.

  1. peelwonder

    peelwonder Member

    We've all seen the video bud. Yes what happened to him should have never happened however nobody knows how those officers were provoked as I'm arguing there are 2 sides to every story.
     
  2. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    Kind of like the feds complaining about lasers in the eyes of officers causing potentially permanent damage, and you can watch any video in Portland and see the feds shining large lasers in people's faces from the rooftops? Like that?

    Escalation. Who is escalating? Arrest people, don't gas them or beat them if you have nothing to arrest them for. That's a crime. You just watched federal (maybe) employees beat a man for NO REASON. That's a CRIME. Why does it not matter?
     
  3. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    What possible provocation warrants use of force against words?

    There is no however.
     
  4. Ssmiff

    Ssmiff Went to the White House...Again

    "Im gonna kill you"
    "Im gonna find your home and kill your family"
    "You are dead, pig"
    Id say any of those, whether at a cop or in everyday mans face, warrants whatever it gets.
     
  5. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    Why? Are you that small of a man that you cannot stand up to those words?
     
  6. peelwonder

    peelwonder Member

    How do you know it was just words, were you there?
     
  7. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    Wow. A "were you there." I haven't seen such a demanding argument since creationists questioned the age of dinosaur bones.

    Let's try it like this, I can see Feds beating on a man. So we'll call that evidence.

    Where is the evidence of anything else?
     
  8. Ssmiff

    Ssmiff Went to the White House...Again

    If people feel threatened, they have the right to do whatever they deem necessary to protect themselves and their families.
    If someone is threatening to kill somebody, they got whatevers coming.
    Small man is the one who wants to threaten or get in somebodys face, and be free from repurcussions, imo.
     
  9. peelwonder

    peelwonder Member

    Actually those are threats and not just words. What would you do if someone if someone threatened your wife or kids?
     
  10. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    A guy who believes there might be repercussions, and still say it, is much, much larger than the one who can't take it. And the one that can take it, is larger still.

    There is no threat from words, ever.
     
  11. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    With words? Laugh at them.
     
  12. Ssmiff

    Ssmiff Went to the White House...Again

    The law disagrees. And i doubt domestic
    violence experts agree with you either.
    Wonder how many women would still be alive had they defended themselves after threats made against them and their children.
     
  13. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    There is no threat from words. Use of violence against someone who has only said words to you is generally not supported by law.
     
  14. Ssmiff

    Ssmiff Went to the White House...Again

    If there is no threat, then why can you get jailtime for threatening.
     
  15. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    For the same reason you can get jail time for speeding. Or lying to Congress. Or filing a false police report. It's the law.
     
  16. peelwonder

    peelwonder Member

    Actually Float what about Emotional abuse?
     
  17. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    What about it? You think physical violence is a solid way to deal with emotional abuse?
     
  18. justingroves

    justingroves supermod

    I've got two employees that have beat the hell out of guys for threatening them on their property. Neither got in trouble
     
  19. justingroves

    justingroves supermod

    Most of the time
     
    InVolNerable and VolDad like this.
  20. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    I imagine that speaks more about the people that they beat on, than the beating itself, wouldn't you say.

    In other words, they had poor representation with the law, not the protection of the law.

    Do you think the outcome would be the same of someone with even a little bit of economic clout?

    Because you are essentially defending a system that willingly [uck fay]s the poor. Not defending a legal system.
     

Share This Page