I could see him getting scared of a woman publicly not acknowledging his authority, and freaking out over that, though I'm kinda splitting hairs now.
US 2024 Presidential Election
- Thread starter gorfias
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It also in no shape or form matters if he is scared, angry, happy or even horny.
He failed his job. Police officers or soliders dont get to kill someone becuase you are scared or angry. If you cant handle your shit, thats a you problem
That being said, conservatives are ALWAYS scared. Its what they are told to feel by default. It does not suprise me that car driving close by scared them. They regularly get scared by figments of their own imagination
Fire fighter are scared of fires and still act appropriately. Surgeons are scared of unintentionally killing a patient with every surgery and they still act appropriately. Ross might be scared even to react. Understable. Shooting someone? No. The car was not a threat nor was the driver. Just move out of the way like a normal person.
Or better yet, listen to your training and DON'T circle a vehicle like a dumbass. Its traffic stop 101. Ross put himself and everyone else, including the other ICE officers, in danger as soon as he did that
Anger usually arises from fear.
Also, Ross was told to hate certain people. He did not need anger or fear. He was already primed to kill someone.
Many, many hate crimes in the US over the last two centries are caused by white people hating. Later, they say they are scared of minorities even as they lynch them. What specifically is scary to you when you hold all the power as you murder them? Logically nothing. They arent using logic
I don't know these women at all, and very little about the situation they were in. Why should I have a firm opinion about something I don't know much about?
I can tell you that forms of obstruction are common, typical and reasonable forms of protest, and it is simply absurd to equate that with irrationality or psychosis. For an officer in a law agency who must be expected to deal with such occurrences, such a lack of insight or awareness is incompetent and dangerous: precisely because it might incline them to unnecessary or excessive use of force.
I would like to be charitable and say he probably didn't wake up that day wanting to show protestors who is boss by killing one of them.
I suspect a significant possibility is also people frustrated by resistance to their authority. It's Cartman saying "RESPECT MAH AUTHORITAH!", it's Trump telling journalists "Quiet piggy", except these guys are tooled up so have something to threaten someone into subservience or shoot them if needed. This is annoying for anyone in authority, but to people with authoritarian, bullying or arrogant mindsets it may be particularly triggering.
America’s self inflicted and completely avoidable mistake is now in office for a year, and so far it’s even more of a train wreck than even the biggest critics could imagine.
In Trumps first term he was already Buchanan’s only real competition, but now it’s hard to argue he won’t completely surpass him as America’s worst president. If he hasn’t already at this point.
Torching all of America’s alliances and crippling the US’s global influence for no reason and no gain is kinda uniquely terrible. And if you combine that with the brownshirts, rampant corruption, coup and democratic backslide it’s not a good look.
But the US chose this. For absolutely no reason. Trump might be a uniquely awful president but him being in office after this was a long known fact says a lot about American citizens
In Trumps first term he was already Buchanan’s only real competition, but now it’s hard to argue he won’t completely surpass him as America’s worst president. If he hasn’t already at this point.
Torching all of America’s alliances and crippling the US’s global influence for no reason and no gain is kinda uniquely terrible. And if you combine that with the brownshirts, rampant corruption, coup and democratic backslide it’s not a good look.
But the US chose this. For absolutely no reason. Trump might be a uniquely awful president but him being in office after this was a long known fact says a lot about American citizens
While, yes, it also says something about the US two party system. Plenty of blame to go around.
Punk ass bitches. Always has been.
As did those of European or non-American high influence that supported Trump for their own benefits, only to now do something about it, because he's screwing them over.
No funding for ICE.
Fight for the Future (@fightforthefuture.org)
ICE is about to run out of funding. Your reps could vote NO so that ICE and its surveillance panopticon shuts down. Call them using our easy call tool at +1 813-213-3989 or via fftf.link/ICEFunding https://fftf.link/ICEFunding
bsky.app
No Funding for ICE Surveillance Tech!
Last edited:
In a generalized sense, sure, but we are not talking about a generalized sense. We are discussing a specific event. I am not saying, and would not say, that anyone obstructing things is insane, in a generalized sense. I'm talking about this incident.
Yes.
Trust is an often underrated value. When we train medical student, we tell them dishonesty is a high level professionalism failing. Once you've been caught in dishonesty, you've blown your trust and everything you say is suspect. Regaining that trust is very hard. Trust matters for business: if you are caught defrauding insurance, many insurance companies won't give you it, and the remainder will likely charge you a ton more. Trust matters in loans - if you don't honour your debts and your contracts, people will not work with you.
Trump is fundamentally untrustworthy. He lies all the time. He cheats on his partners. He's refusted to pay creditors, whether small businesses or major financial institutions (which is why they mostly blacklisted him too). And now he's in charge of the USA, he's made the USA in his own image. It cannot be trusted to help its allies, it cannot be trusted to uphold its treaties, it cannot be trusted to use its powers responsibly. It will be hard for the USA to regain trust too: and a lot of the advantages, agreements and alliances that the USA has built up over the decades - financial, trade, tech, military - will fade or even wholly unravel.
Trump supporters will say everything's fine. But that's really just because the damage will be slow and gradual, and roll out years-decades into the future.
You want make a concrete claim about that woman's state of mind, then the burden of proof for that is your responsibility. It's not on everyone else to disprove whatever unsubstantiated stuff you feel like claiming.
Don't criticise us for "generalized" arguments when your own is: you have offered pretty much nothing to support her being irrational other than 'I don't understand why people obstruct authority'.
So sort your own shit out and then come back to us when you've something worth replying to.
This isn't about having absolute knowledge, this is about stating a perspective, because the point of this isn't really about her, it's about acknowledging what the ICE agents were seeing.
Because you've all already made concrete claims, just about the mindset of the shooter instead. You have no hesitation in making claims about his mindset if it works toward the narrative you want. You think it ridiculous to suggest he might think that people are nuts when they are tracking him down just to curse at him with a smile, but you think it patently obvious that he's just a power tripping maniac drunk on his own authority.
And then you sit in your country that has stricter immigration laws than mine with tighter enforcement and speak words of encouragement to those who would senselessly riot here over a fraction of your status quo, and tell me to sort myself out? Give me a break.
Nothing to downplay. She got her car in the way of some ICE agents. I am telling you I'm fine with that. You can choose to disbelieve me based on the assumption that everyone secretly agrees with you, but that's arrogant delusion.
We have indeed both made judgements about what we think the people were likely to be thinking.
We can judge both of these people (and their thoughts & motives) only on their actions. The woman's action, which you want us to believe is "psychotic", was getting a car in someone's way. The officer's action, which you want us to believe is much more understandable, was shooting a woman who posed him no imminent danger in the face three times.
You have made one hell of a further leap in judgement here, because of political sympathy and a casual disregard for the lives of people who think differently to you.
Fucking hell. Our law enforcement in the UK is pretty shit quite a lot of the time: institutional racism, sexism, homophobia, excessive heavy-handedness etc. And yet if someone was gunned down in her car, even if they were obstructing the officer, there is absolutely no way they would be fully let off the hook with the head of government slandering the victim. As happened in your country.
No. No, I have not.
For instance, I provided some detailed thoughts in #6670. You can note that the post consistently talks about what could be the case, not what is. Indeed, I start by accepting the possibility you put forward that the ICE agent may have genuinely felt alarm when the car moved towards him, and thus reacted from that. It then takes a clearly negative tone, but because it is designed to explain reasons why people may reason through events, empathise, and take a view much more hostile to the agent than your unusually exculpatory one.
So in fact I have consistently declined to state any definite claims on what the agent or the woman was thinking. Oh I am surely inclined to a negative view of the agent in some way, because he shot a relatively harmless woman in the head. If he shouldn't have, then clearly something he did something wrong, and that requires a negative.
In a sense, and #6670 includes this, there's the possibility that this is in many ways an institutional failing as much or more than personal - that ICE (and other US law enforcement agencies) may be arrogant, heavy-handed, militaristic. That's how they train their staff, or the culture that they have developed, and so that's how their staff treat the civilians they interact with.
You don't downplay something you support without reservation. You know very well that tracking someone down to put your car in their way is not the same as getting a car in someone's way. If someone happens to be in the way while you're driving, that's traffic. If someone follows you to specifically stop you from driving, that's terrifying.
Cause that's never happened there, hmmm?
That post also contains the line "doesn't change the fact that they are bad people."
Maybe you have convinced yourself that you are measured and reasonable, but your real opinions leak through all the same.
Bollocks was it "terrifying". People go out specifically to protest, yes, that's not "terrifying" for the heavily armed and numerous law enforcement agents. You're dipping into hyperbole to make the killing seem more reasonable.
I am telling you I'm fine with what she did. You can point-blank refuse to accept others think differently if you like.
Oh, state actors have certainly been let off the hook here in the UK.
In recent times, no state actor has gunned a civilian down on camera, without any risk to the officer, and then been lauded by the Prime Minister while the victim is slandered. The law enforcement culture in the UK is rancid. The law enforcement culture in the US is inordinately more rancid.
With appropriate context, the argument there is obviously 'if someone is made a bad person by institutional failings, then they are still are a bad person.'
And you know that. That's why you've just clipped out only that specific chunk, which is just dishonesty. I note how you complain about other people doing stuff like that. For all your claims about misrepresentation by the media and other users here, you're just as bad or worse because you deliberately do it as you have done here, which means you're also hypocritical. And for the record, I am making concrete claims here.
That's why people post up clown emojis at stuff you say, because they can see through you. It's why no-one believes you when you claim you're the forum's resident genius. For all that bluster about how smart you are, you drop a lot of balls in debate. And when you get plainly caught out, you get pissy. Pissy like you've got here, where you've switched to trying to score whataboutist patriotism points or making up inflammatory trash. The irritation takes over from the argument, and you lash out. It's like a tell for when you realise you've run out of road.
-You're language is so charged, just using ad hominem attacks that aren't true doesn't help your argument.
-Democrats removed people from ballots last election, republicans did not. Where is your criticism of Nazi tactics when democrats employ them? Nowhere to be found.
-Local law enforcement not helping/working/cooperating with ICE makes things more dangerous. The whole reason ICE is even doing what they are doing now is because local law enforcement stop cooperating with them to begin with.
-You're the one playing dumb. Very little came out of Trump's 1st term and you know it. Both the right and left said the same thing about covid in the beginning, stop trying to rewrite history and gaslight me. Trump administration initiated Project Warp Speed to get a vaccine developed as fast as possible and that is like the most important thing concerning the pandemic. Whereas the left had kids wearing masks outside and closed beaches and parks.
-There's so many left policies that just don't work like say rent control (literally when has that ever worked) that the left keeps trying over and over again expecting different results. That's insanity.
-To say Trump is not a legitimate force in politics is asinine, it's like saying whoever wins the Super Bowl this year is not a legitimate force in football. Stop saying asinine shit.
Socialized grocery stores (and possibly housing) is rather left...
Just repeating Trump is a fascist doesn't make it true.
Someone pointing out things that are objectively undemocratic is right regardless if it's someone you don't like, do like, or a fucking talking squirrel. If Vance said the earth is a sphere would you disagree with him because he's not an astrophysicist? What he said was pretty much all basically true, sure maybe a nit-pick here or there, but 90% of it at least was true. I think it's over 90% of Americans over consistent polls since the 50s that have said they don't want more immigration that what is currently allowed. So people are not for more immigration, let alone out of control immigration. Shouldn't what the majority of people want be enacted in a democracy? Or is it just what you want? Because just doing what you want sounds a lot like that F-word you keep using.