5 ms·

"Killing fewer people than literal murderers is not an accomplishment worth celebrating." You're straw-manning and you know it. This is exactly what the above

"Killing fewer people than literal murderers is not an accomplishment worth celebrating." You're straw-manning and you know it. This is exactly what the above commenter was referring to.

jjk166 6y ago
No, trying to compare the murder rate to the police killing rate and thus misconstruing the original proposal as focusing on police killings instead of preventing murder (when I had made no such claim) is the the straw man. GP comment made the claim that since fewer people are killed by police than murderers that therefore actions that decrease murder rates increase efficacy even if they also increase police killings. My comment refutes that.
- CountDrewku 6y ago
  I don't see anywhere in the comment where the individual suggested less deaths were worth celebrating as you so eloquently put it. In fact, I don't think comment says anything that would make a person believe police shootings are a good thing. Alas, you're attacking his arguments like he supports killing innocent people....
  - jjk166 6y ago
    I take it english isn't your first language. Celebrated in this context doesn't mean throwing a party or rejoicing, it is being used here as a synonym for praised or lauded. And specifically, saying something like this should not be celebrated is meant to convey that this ought to be considered normal as opposed to exceptionally good. Most people would consider fewer deaths to be good, but in this cases there hasn't been any reduction - these are just two different sources of deaths. No one at any point was saying police shootings are a good thing. The other poster is saying that dealing with police shootings should be a lower priority than dealing with murder, and that there is conflict between these goals. I on the other hand am saying that there is not conflict between the goals and that their priority is irrelevant. I believe his method to be ineffective, not ill-intentioned.
    - CountDrewku 6y ago
      My English is just fine you just don't seem to understand what you're writing I guess. I know exactly what you meant by celebrated. You think I thought you were talking about throwing a literal party and I'm the one that doesn't understand English? Huh? The commenter most certainly wasn't saying police shootings should be praised. Try again. You're just trying to twist words to support your silly straw-man and it's not working.

"Killing fewer people than literal murderers is not an accomplishment worth celebrating." You're straw-manning and you know it. This is exactly what the above commenter was referring to.

jjk166 6y ago

No, trying to compare the murder rate to the police killing rate and thus misconstruing the original proposal as focusing on police killings instead of preventing murder (when I had made no such claim) is the the straw man. GP comment made the claim that since fewer people are killed by police than murderers that therefore actions that decrease murder rates increase efficacy even if they also increase police killings. My comment refutes that.

CountDrewku 6y ago
I don't see anywhere in the comment where the individual suggested less deaths were worth celebrating as you so eloquently put it. In fact, I don't think comment says anything that would make a person believe police shootings are a good thing. Alas, you're attacking his arguments like he supports killing innocent people....
- jjk166 6y ago
  I take it english isn't your first language. Celebrated in this context doesn't mean throwing a party or rejoicing, it is being used here as a synonym for praised or lauded. And specifically, saying something like this should not be celebrated is meant to convey that this ought to be considered normal as opposed to exceptionally good. Most people would consider fewer deaths to be good, but in this cases there hasn't been any reduction - these are just two different sources of deaths. No one at any point was saying police shootings are a good thing. The other poster is saying that dealing with police shootings should be a lower priority than dealing with murder, and that there is conflict between these goals. I on the other hand am saying that there is not conflict between the goals and that their priority is irrelevant. I believe his method to be ineffective, not ill-intentioned.
  - CountDrewku 6y ago
    My English is just fine you just don't seem to understand what you're writing I guess. I know exactly what you meant by celebrated. You think I thought you were talking about throwing a literal party and I'm the one that doesn't understand English? Huh? The commenter most certainly wasn't saying police shootings should be praised. Try again. You're just trying to twist words to support your silly straw-man and it's not working.