This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Anyways, you know what else is not normal? Following 12 yo girls around the park taping them with your camera in order to report them to the police.
Even allowing your hypothesis that the girls are l.h.c. (likely) and had the weapons to impress their friends (rather than fend off rapists) -- how about just, like -- leave them alone?
I guess the current parlance would be "don't be a Karen" (particularly when you're in somebody else's country) -- but I prefer good old MYOB for pithyness and broad applicability to all of life's struggles.
This is a terrible response to public disorder. These youths are able to get away with this stuff precisely because of the attitude of resigned acceptance with which they’re treated by passersby.
Get away with what stuff?
I suspect that the kids were walking about acting disorderly, yelling at people and/or waving weapons around.
On 2)- any person waving an actual axe around and yelling at people is a police matter. In the US she would have been shot(and the shooter would walk free), assuming that this is indeed what happened.
Really? A twelve-year-old girl? I'm not saying it could never happen, but still, hardly business as usual. Now if we were talking about a boy, especially one with a couple of years on her - maybe. Hell, if she had a gun. But I don't think "tween girl is messing around with a hatchet" would inevitably, or even likely, end with a dead body. And if it did, I'm confident there would be a massive media circus, nor would I gamble on the shooter's odds of "walking free".
Oh itd be controversial, but the cop who shot a girl(and I suspect her US equivalent is black) for waving an axe around after yelling at her to put it down would not serve time.
Well, you've turned the "shooter" from your first cop into specifically a cop, which already changes the odds a bit. I do agree a cop who'd shot her would have better odds at the trial than a civilian who'd shot her in self-defense, which was where my mind initially went.
Still, I just don't think that that's realistically how it would go. Forget the legal risks - cop or not, nobody wants a twelve-year-old girl's death on his conscience. And, more cynically, nobody wants to be known for the rest of their life as the guy who killed a twelve-year-old girl at point blank range. Unless she's actually coming for your jugular right now, I just don't think you pull the trigger. Come to that, I'm pretty sure someone drawing a gun would be enough to make the girl drop the hatchet; we aren't dealing with a berserk druggie here.
tl;dr, it's not so much "the shooter would walk free" that strikes me as particularly implausible so much as the assertion that "in the US she would have been shot". It would certainly have been a more likely outcome than in the UK, but it doesn't scan as what would inevitably happen, not by a longshot.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link