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 reasonable human should not be obliged to make conversation with a cop. That's what the "no self incrimination" amendment is for.”
“ I am not detaining you. This is not a search." aren't magic words either. I don't see why we should put the burden on citizens, instead of the cops, to clarify the law.”
Our form of government is for citizens. And yes that means being able to competently interact with different parts of government.
At no point in the interaction described to me in this case have any of my rights been violated. A cop looking at me weird doesn’t mean I get a get out of jail free card if I run.
I think if you look at this case different and not as a criminal then you would not think “detention” happened and it’s very clear. If I am strolling thru a park doing nothing illegal and a cop walks up to me to talk I don’t think I am being detained. What makes people just to detention here is that the person actually was a bad guy.
You're asking someone whether they're forcing you to stay somewhere, with the implication that you will leave unless they threaten force. In the context of a society that says things like, "if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear," it very well can be a self-incriminating statement, and citizens shouldn't be required to say it.
Should citizens have to ask about their detainment status every five seconds? You're telling me this would be too much of a burden on cops, and yet in effect declaring that citizens should have to bear it.
No, I don't think either party should have to use the magic words. But that means that situations where a reasonable citizen might suspect they're being detained have to count as detainment even if the cop doesn't explicitly say "YOU ARE BEING DETAINED." And that very much describes the situation at hand-- where a cop ignores an initial brush off to move ahead of someone and physically block someone's path.
Your standard make it illegal for cops to walk around a neighborhood. That is not reasonable.
The only reasonable standard is people have to talk to each other. Anything else endangering I thought the cops body language was bad and therefore all evidence is suppressed. That is not reasonable.
“if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear”
Under your standard Madoff could walk down the street and claim a cop walk towards him and then throw his briefcase with evidence of a ponzi scheme and then run away and claim everything is suppressed. That is stupid.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link