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 -
no, the fact that a person doesn't have a right to flee from police means the woman is the initial user of unlawful force which is an element of self-defense
no, the first shot went through the windshield of a 3 shot sequence within roughly 1 second time frame which you can clearly see in the video (the glass fragments shoot up in front of the vehicle from the bullet hitting the windshield)
not that this is dispositive; a person who uses lethal force doesn't actually have to, within 1 second time frame from the point at which the cop was hit by the vehicle, realize the threat of great bodily harm or death is over (and that he wont be dragged alongside the vehicle or slip on the ice and fall under it) in order to use lethal force even if the biological lag of reality means the shots go through the side window
even if you think the above is not true and he didn't shoot through the windshield (which I would bet a significant amount of money that at least one shot went through the windshield) and he gunned the lady down as she drove by, lethal self-defense can be used in the defense of others, e.g., against a felon fleeing after committing aggravated assault with a deadly weapon (her car) driving recklessly thus putting everyone else on that street in danger including other law enforcement
and this isn't going to court because even if some unethical scumbag state prosecutor attempted to bring charges it would be immediately removed to federal court due to a federal officer engaging in lawful federal activities as an agent of the federal government and it will get thrown out at the federal level even in Minnesota
but even if it did, the only way this case brought and not immediately thrown out is because of politics and not because of questions about the legality of this use of lethal force because it is just cut-and-dried legal use of force in every state in the country and at the federal level especially when you consider you would have to disprove the self-defense claim beyond reasonable doubt
More options
Context Copy link