Shooting at San Diego Synagogue

[Modder_Mode]

Again I will ask, what are minority groups supposed to do when there is a sitting president and party willin to legislate and enact violence against them?

Are they supposed to sit down and take it?

You aren't an ally to those groups, at best your a bystander twiddling their thumbs.

Where was your protest when Obama was in office deporting millions, where was your protest when Obama was in office bombing countless Middle Eastern countries, where was your protest when Obama was in office enacting travel bans on certain Middle Eastern countries...?

 

[El_Machinae]

It's true. For some reason, we trust the underlying logic a little bit more when it is our side performing the action. Obama was able to not close Guantanamo Bay. Bush was allowed to run massive deficits. Kushner is allowed to have private email.

I think it's because we are more likely to trust that our side at least tried, but that there were circumstances beyond control

 

[Senethro]

I won't give a figure because I have no evidence to support one estimate against many possible others. Could be that 3% of accusations are false. Could be 20% or higher. I don't know and I assert people claiming they *do* know are lying.

What I do know is that the overwhelming majority of these cases don't have enough evidence to pin down that a crime occurred. That makes claims about "rape rates" based on accusations rather than convictions disingenuous.

I know we've moved on so I'll keep this short, but using the actual outcomes of the american police/justice/correcitonal system as the only acceptable standard of knowledge is pretty damn stupid.

I mean, imagine you did that on something with a racial aspect?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I know we've moved on so I'll keep this short, but using the actual outcomes of the american police/justice/correcitonal system as the only acceptable standard of knowledge is pretty damn stupid.

I mean, imagine you did that on something with a racial aspect?

I'm not opposed to other objective, measurable/reproducible information per se'. I do hold that it is absurd to have a sub 10% conviction rate for real/false accusers combined and then turn around and claim any confidence in what is going on with the other 90%. You really do need some kind of objective data beyond what the justice system puts out to have a credible basis for making estimates.

I mean, imagine you did that on something with a racial aspect?

There is useful information by demographic in the crime information, in general. It only lets you track what occurs however, not cause.

 

[Senethro]

I'm not opposed to other objective, measurable/reproducible information per se'. I do hold that it is absurd to have a sub 10% conviction rate for real/false accusers combined and then turn around and claim any confidence in what is going on with the other 90%. You really do need some kind of objective data beyond what the justice system puts out to have a credible basis for making estimates.

Laughable that you suggest american police statistics are objective! As is your suggested claim that large numbers of women are lying with nothing otherwise at stake.

I also imagine that you wouldn't be in favour of collecting sufficient resolution of data on the population at large that we could meet your standard for knowledge, so thats a nice defensible position you've got yourself. A strict rape-agnostic. We cannot know, we cannot ever know.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

As is your suggested claim that large numbers of women are lying with nothing otherwise at stake.

I made no such claim. I gave actual examples of important things at stake earlier.

I also imagine that you wouldn't be in favour of collecting sufficient resolution of data on the population at large that we could meet your standard for knowledge, so thats a nice defensible position you've got yourself. A strict rape-agnostic. We cannot know, we cannot ever know.

Knowing rate statistics is not as useful as being better at correctly identifying and punishing rapists directly. Even if we knew for a fact any given person is 90% likely to have committed rape, that's still junk when it comes to convicting that particular individual. Evidence for that case is useful, in contrast.

We don't know that 90% figure, or any other figure with reasonable certainty, and it's worth pointing out people who claim they do are lying.

Yes, I do support due process and the concept of being innocent until proven guilty. I also hold that the burden of proof is higher than claiming "x did it".

 

[Patine]

Where was your protest when Obama was in office deporting millions, where was your protest when Obama was in office bombing countless Middle Eastern countries, where was your protest when Obama was in office enacting travel bans on certain Middle Eastern countries...?

Every U.S. President after Herbert Hoover has a huge stack of war crimes, crimes against humanity, funding and organizing terrorist and organized crime groups (very notably the CIA, but also others), blatantly overstepping their authority of office and abusing the U.S. Constitution and violating the stated limits of their power, malign and deliberately misspending of taxpayers' money in black-money funds to finance these very crimes, with no transparency or consultation by taxpayers to these expenditures (in fact, taxpayers do not even have the right to know and if they acquire such knowledge on their own, they are charged for "sedition" and "espionage"), etc. Since I live, and have been resident my whole life, in Canada, no protest I make will really mean anyone or seem poignant in Washington, D.C. But, how do 300 million Americans stand, day-in-and-day-out, being governed by among the biggest successive chain of high-level criminals in the modern world?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

blatantly overstepping their authority of office and abusing the U.S. Constitution and violating the stated limits of their power

It still bothers me that congress handed away some of this power to the presidency even before I was born. USA has been on its trends for a while.

But, how do 300 million Americans stand, day-in-and-day-out, being governed by among the biggest successive chain of high-level criminals in the modern world?

Similarly to quite a few other governments in history. Enough information is covered up and few enough people are harmed in noticeably immediate/direct ways.

Given the laws passed in much of the western world recently I see no reason to hold most other governments in higher regard when it comes to treatment of own citizens. I do agree the US track record of interacting with other countries is pretty awful, and really has been since after WW2.

 

[Lexicus]

But, how do 300 million Americans stand, day-in-and-day-out, being governed by among the biggest successive chain of high-level criminals in the modern world?

The great majority of the crimes have been to continue the state of affairs whereby Americans , comprising less than 5% of the world's population, consume 24% of its energy (I'm assuming energy is a reasonable proxy for the share of total consumption, I could be wrong about that). So most Americans are totally fine with the criminals and will continue to be totally fine with them. Indeed, merely bringing up the criminality is enough to destroy a person's political career in most of the country.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

What percentage of the world's energy does the USA produce? Leading in consumption/production of energy is *not* inherently a crime, in contrast to say a huge portion of military forces employed abroad over the past several decades which carries domestic and foreign action components.

Other countries could in principle also produce/consume more, so more is needed to establish an issue with that.

 

[Lexicus]

Leading in consumption/production of energy is *not* inherently a crime,

When that energy is derived by burning fossil fuels it damn well is. But that isn't what I claimed, and I don't disagree.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

When that energy is derived by burning fossil fuels it damn well is. But that isn't what I claimed, and I don't disagree.

I felt more fleshing out needed. You can make some case for burning fossil fuels. You can make an incredibly strong case for intentionally sourcing those fossil fuels from elsewhere, often while intentionally destabilizing the region to mess with costs/defeat resistance to it...all while hoarding the same resource locally which will of course increase in value as it necessarily becomes more scarce.

Basically there's a big difference each between a strong solar farm in Arizona, burning local coal/oil, and waging wars under flimsy pretense to burn someone else's oil. Since coal and oil are finite and not ideal for several other reasons (and not *just* environmental ones), these should be tapered off as quickly as we can manage, but I consider that small ball compared to what has mysteriously happened to any nation with a leader challenging the dollar or those specifically with a useful resource. At least in terms of calling out behaviors as potentially criminal.

 

[Senethro]

What percentage of the world's energy does the USA produce? Leading in consumption/production of energy is *not* inherently a crime, in contrast to say a huge portion of military forces employed abroad over the past several decades which carries domestic and foreign action components.

Other countries could in principle also produce/consume more, so more is needed to establish an issue with that.

Its damaging other peoples property. Lots of coastal regions with infrastructure. Kind of a big deal.