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 -
A woman in Minneapolis has been killed in an altercation with ICE. I don’t really trust any of the narratives being spun up. Here are
twothree angles:Angle 1
Angle 2 [Twitter] [youtube]
Angle 3 (Emerged as I was writing this)
This is actually a fairly discussed type of shooting. Law enforcement confronts a person in a vehicle, the LEO positions himself in front of the vehicle, the person in the vehicle drives forward, and the cop shoots the person. Generally, courts have found that this is a legitimate shoot. The idea being that a car can be as deadly a weapon as anything.
Those who are less inclined to give deference to law enforcement argue that fleeing the police shouldn’t be a death sentence, and that usually in these situations the LEO has put himself in front of the vehicle.
I have a long history of discussing shooters in self-defense situations [1] [2] [3] and also one of being anti-LEO. However, I’m softer on the anti-LEO front in the sense that within the paradigm in which we exist, most people think the state should enforce laws, and that the state enforcing laws = violence.
The slippery slope for me: “Fleeing police shouldn’t be a death sentence”
“Resisting arrest shouldn’t be a death sentence”
“If you just resist hard enough, you should be able to get away with it”
People really try to divorce the violence from state action, but the state doesn’t exist without it.
The claim that the victim was trying to run an agent over is not only not true, video footage clearly shows that it isn't. That won't stop DHS from lying (again) and claiming that ICE agents were victims instead of perpetrators (again). It's thoroughly unclear why they were trying to stop this woman in the first place, and given ICE's pattern of lying, I have zero confidence in their testimony (see also: Chicago)
The slippery slope here is one we've already slid down: "law enforcement needs certain authority to do their job" has become "law enforcement can do whatever they want if it's allegedly part of their job and it's a spin of the roulette wheel whether they'll ever face consequences." The best you can realistically hope for is an order telling them to stop violating your rights, which is of limited utility when you're dead. Maybe you'll get lucky and there will be earth-shattering protests, but more likely the taxpayers will get stuck footing the bill while nothing of consequence results for the actual perpetrators.
It appears she had parked her car perpendicularly on a small road, presumably to block or otherwise obstruct ICE activity, this being the cause of their apprehending her, which seems legitimate to me.
I will agree she was most likely not specifically trying to run over ICE agents, but rather to flee. However there was an agent on the hood of her car that she certainly did hit.
She is doing a piss-poor job, then, because another car passes in front of her shortly before ICE agents approach her. It looks more to me like she got stopped in the middle of a three point turn.
I have a strong suspicion that ICE deliberately hemmed her in, given that there are ICE vehicles on either side of her. Likely doing the thing they often do where they stop and harass people for observing them. Only this time, the observer panicked and so did ICE.
Where? The agent in front of her was some ways off and she unambiguously turns away from him.
There was a longer video I saw that showed a few minutes beforehand. There were dozens of people on foot "observing" the ICE agents, where "observing" is some dishonest libtard euphemism for "screaming insults and hostility like psychotic banshees in a way that absolutely and obviously made the situation more tense, stressful and dangerous for everyone involved."
Yes. The protestors should all be tried as accessories. In the best case for your take here, they were idiotically engineering the precursors for a tragedy. In the realistic scenario, they were actively hoping for it, plus or minus some dead LEOs.
Frankly, I do not give a fuck. Civilians on the sidewalk being assholes is normal even for regular police ops. The ICE people earn a 100k$/year of taxpayer money, the 'libtards' on the sidewalk do not. You will forgive me for holding the people with the government paychecks and badges to higher standards than the others.
Are you suggesting that they were committing a felony, so that they are guilty of felony murder?
Hm, MN seems to have a rather broad felony murder law](https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.19):
With felony being very broadly defined:
The trade-off is that you only get 2nd degree murder, which does not have a minimum mandatory sentence. So what felony do you think the people yelling at ICE from the sidewalk might be found guilty off?
Of course. Infinitely high standards for ICE agents, whoopsie-daisie we accidentally frauded $10 billion for welfare agents.
Fairness says right-wingers can act like this at every Democrat employed by the state of Minnesota, right? Their offices are paid for by the tax-payers, so they should have no expectation to privacy or not having people scream the most insane, hateful obscenities in their faces every minute they're on the clock.
Maybe if Nick and Dave are literally filming every single form that they fill out, we'll finally get a handle on all the fraud and corruption.
And obviously, if any of them is ever less than perfectly professional about the process, they get fired immediately.
As a principled first amendment fan, i think that you should be able to scream whatever the fuck you want at cops at any time.
Public defenders too then, right?
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