4 ms·
> You're assuming that malice is the reason why there isn't video footage if there was supposed to be There doesn't have to be malice. There has to be account
by inetknght 4y ago
> You're assuming that malice is the reason why there isn't video footage if there was supposed to be
There doesn't have to be malice.
There has to be accountability.
- MichaelCollins 4y agoI share your desire for accountability, but I don't think that's what this remark was about: > "When something happens, conveniently the video footage that should exist, magically doesn't." Magic doesn't exist. When something is said to "magically" not exist, that is a sarcastic way of saying that somebody deliberately made it not exist. I believe that is the most likely explanation, but it's not necessarily true.
- yellowapple 4y ago> Magic doesn't exist. I see sarcasm is one of your strong suits.
- MichaelCollins 4y agoYou can plainly see that I recognize the magic remark as sarcastic, so what is the point of your response?
- yellowapple 4y ago> You can plainly see that I recognize the magic remark as sarcastic Indeed, and I stated such :) > so what is the point of your response? What is the point of yours? The "magical" nonexistence of footage whenever 1. there would ordinarily be footage and 2. that footage happens to record something for which someone doesn't want evidence demonstrates a pattern; that pattern is in and of itself a problem, regardless of whether it's explained by incompetence or malice. Assuming that someone else assumed malice and quibbling on that particular point is a pointless distraction from the actual problem in this case.