3 ms·

Sure. A better reply is: "I am here to state an observation and not to prove anything to anyone since it's not a court room. Believe me if you want, I'll not s

Sure. A better reply is: "I am here to state an observation and not to prove anything to anyone since it's not a court room. Believe me if you want, I'll not stick around to find out".

adwn 5y ago
Well, have you observed that behavior first-hand? Did someone you know and trust observe it first-hand and tell you about it? Etc. We don't ask you to "prove" anything, but some more information instead of vague hints would be helpful.
- pdimitar 5y ago
  I thought the standard benefit of the doubt implies that I am not here to tell stories just because I am bored. I've known such people, yes, three of them. Law-abiding normal people whose only mistake was that they were in a hurry and were slightly rude to the police officers because of it. Technically, each and every claim of somebody can be disputed to death. That's why I invoked your right to not trust what strangers say on the internet. Still, I thought it was a given that I have some exposure to the claimed phenomena.
  - pbhjpbhj 5y ago
    Did any of your acquaintances do anything after their release in response to the police torturing/brutalising them? Go to the press for example, or sue, raise a complaint, etc.? Reading between the lines you're saying torture/brutality following arrest for speeding has been the experience of 3 of your friends? Aside, your combative tone really isn't helping make a useful discussion. Something like "I have no evidence, sorry" would have been far better than attacking people requesting evidence.
    - pdimitar 5y ago
      > Something like "I have no evidence, sorry" would have been far better than attacking people requesting evidence. Agreed, and I started correcting afterwards. I thought it was super obvious that I am sharing an anecdotal evidence and an opinion. I reacted hostile to claims that I somehow have to prove either of these (and both aren't clear-cut facts). EDIT: To answer your questions, no, they haven't pressed charges (and it wasn't speeding, it was "a routine check"). They were even let go on the oral condition that they'll not pursue.
rootusrootus 5y ago
That amounts to taking a dump in the middle of the conversation and walking away. If you aren’t here to participate in the discussion why say anything at all?
- pdimitar 5y ago
  I said it, the other guy says he doesn't believe me. What discussion? That's the discussion stopper, not what I said. I can't prove anything except say it. And it's your choice whether to believe it. What's unclear?
  - notyourwork 5y ago
    What's unclear is you are making pretty wild accusations and saying trust me because I said so. That's as good as any other unfounded claim made on the internet and it doesn't contribute value to the conversation.
    - pdimitar 5y ago
      If you don't like it, report me to the moderators and let them delete my comment(s) if they feel you are right. As far as I am aware, I have a right to post anecdotal evidence without a huge legal trail proving that I am right. And it's your right to not believe it. Why not stop there? EDIT: And yes, this absolutely is one of the unfounded claims that can be found all over the internet. Have I claimed otherwise?

Sure. A better reply is: "I am here to state an observation and not to prove anything to anyone since it's not a court room. Believe me if you want, I'll not stick around to find out".

adwn 5y ago

Well, have you observed that behavior first-hand? Did someone you know and trust observe it first-hand and tell you about it? Etc. We don't ask you to "prove" anything, but some more information instead of vague hints would be helpful.

pdimitar 5y ago
I thought the standard benefit of the doubt implies that I am not here to tell stories just because I am bored. I've known such people, yes, three of them. Law-abiding normal people whose only mistake was that they were in a hurry and were slightly rude to the police officers because of it. Technically, each and every claim of somebody can be disputed to death. That's why I invoked your right to not trust what strangers say on the internet. Still, I thought it was a given that I have some exposure to the claimed phenomena.
- pbhjpbhj 5y ago
  Did any of your acquaintances do anything after their release in response to the police torturing/brutalising them? Go to the press for example, or sue, raise a complaint, etc.? Reading between the lines you're saying torture/brutality following arrest for speeding has been the experience of 3 of your friends? Aside, your combative tone really isn't helping make a useful discussion. Something like "I have no evidence, sorry" would have been far better than attacking people requesting evidence.
  - pdimitar 5y ago
    > Something like "I have no evidence, sorry" would have been far better than attacking people requesting evidence. Agreed, and I started correcting afterwards. I thought it was super obvious that I am sharing an anecdotal evidence and an opinion. I reacted hostile to claims that I somehow have to prove either of these (and both aren't clear-cut facts). EDIT: To answer your questions, no, they haven't pressed charges (and it wasn't speeding, it was "a routine check"). They were even let go on the oral condition that they'll not pursue.

rootusrootus 5y ago

That amounts to taking a dump in the middle of the conversation and walking away. If you aren’t here to participate in the discussion why say anything at all?

pdimitar 5y ago
I said it, the other guy says he doesn't believe me. What discussion? That's the discussion stopper, not what I said. I can't prove anything except say it. And it's your choice whether to believe it. What's unclear?
- notyourwork 5y ago
  What's unclear is you are making pretty wild accusations and saying trust me because I said so. That's as good as any other unfounded claim made on the internet and it doesn't contribute value to the conversation.
  - pdimitar 5y ago
    If you don't like it, report me to the moderators and let them delete my comment(s) if they feel you are right. As far as I am aware, I have a right to post anecdotal evidence without a huge legal trail proving that I am right. And it's your right to not believe it. Why not stop there? EDIT: And yes, this absolutely is one of the unfounded claims that can be found all over the internet. Have I claimed otherwise?