3 ms·

> The people elected the politicians who appointed the Supreme Court justices (the governed giving their consent). I seem to recall a recent instance where a S

> The people elected the politicians who appointed the Supreme Court justices (the governed giving their consent). I seem to recall a recent instance where a Supreme Court seat was stolen from the politician with the right to appoint them. But, sure, we all consented to these specific justices. Sure. > We overwhelmingly voted Ah… that is not at all how the vote went. The popular vote, as I’m sure you know, was a difference of less than 2%. The electoral college ensures that it looks “overwhelming,” but you and I both know that this administration was not elected with an “overwhelming” in any sense of the word. It’s propaganda. The middle of your rant is just kinda filled with dog-whistles and half-truths, so I’m not going to bother with that. > Suddenly this admin is no longer "within the strict bounds of the law," and the biggest issue you take with all of this is that your rioters, activists, and misfits spent a day in jail for civil disobedience, and that the cops are wearing masks? They’re arresting citizens on the street with no probable cause, and publicly lying about why the arrests were made and the circumstances around them. Yes, it is a huge issue. And yes, the masks bother me: accountability matters in law enforcement. The reason you don’t care is that you think somehow this cruelty will benefit you and people who look like you. It won’t.

jimbo808 1y ago
No probable cause? So you are truly convinced that out of hundreds of thousands of interactions with ICE, those 170 people who were actually arrested, didn't meet any of these criteria for arrest? Are you really that far gone? A protestor's actions are arrestable if they meet statutory elements: - Physically blocking police movement or access (e.g., surrounding a patrol car or blocking arrests). - Touching, grabbing, or standing too close after a lawful order to back away. - Ignoring a lawful dispersal order after being warned. - Using amplification or crowd behavior that prevents officers from issuing commands or making arrests. Officers typically move to arrest when: - They’ve given clear, repeated commands (e.g., “Move back,” “Clear the street”) that are ignored. - The person’s proximity or actions create a safety risk (blocking traffic, interfering with detainment). - A dispersal order is issued and disobeyed. - The crowd shifts from peaceful to physically obstructive or destructive. >> "The reason you don’t care is that you think somehow this cruelty will benefit you and people who look like you." This doesn't work anymore. If you're this committed to being a victim, and claiming racism whenever you experience cognitive dissonance, that's your problem. But I'm not going to lose sleep over it anymore, and it would probably do you and others like you a benefit to read the room.
- drewbug01 1y ago
  > So you are truly convinced that out of hundreds of thousands of interactions with ICE What time frame are you thinking of here? It’s very easy to minimize problems if you’re defining the time frame to be years, or something. It’s better to focus on the stark changes in enforcement behavior more recently, I would think. > those 170 people who were actually arrested, didn't meet any of these criteria for arrest? Are you really that far gone? For starters, as the article notes - 170 was just the number of US citizens that were arrested, and specifically the number that ProPublica could verify independently, since the government does not keep the statistics themselves. I think that’s important to call out, since the scale of the problem is important. But the bigger problem is that you’re defining the “typical” behavior - and the “typical” behavior is not what’s happening. Just yesterday, for instance, a judge in IL stated that she was extremely concerned that ICE was not following her orders regarding tear gas - that it was being deployed with no warnings. And moreover, a different district court judge in IL and three different judges on appeal held that the stories coming out of DHS appear to be completely unreliable! So - yes, I actually feel pretty good about asserting there likely wasn’t a reason for those arrests. Perhaps there were in some cases, but the lies from the administration make it nearly impossible to tell. > This doesn't work anymore. If you're this committed to being a victim, and claiming racism whenever you experience cognitive dissonance, that's your problem. But I'm not going to lose sleep over it anymore, and it would probably do you and others like you a benefit to read the room. What doesn’t work, exactly? And when you say “others like you” - what do you mean by that? What kind of person do you think I am? Why do you assume I experience cognitive dissonance?
  - jimbo808 1y ago
    > What doesn’t work, exactly? And when you say “others like you” - what do you mean by that? What kind of person do you think I am? Why do you assume I experience cognitive dissonance? Well since you’re the one who started playing identity politics and making assumptions about “people who look like me,” implying that I’m racist because I have a different opinion about a topic, how about you start out by clarifying what you meant about “people who look like me?” I’d respond to your other points, but since we’re playing this game, it’s clear that you’re debating in bad faith.

jimbo808 1y ago

No probable cause? So you are truly convinced that out of hundreds of thousands of interactions with ICE, those 170 people who were actually arrested, didn't meet any of these criteria for arrest? Are you really that far gone? A protestor's actions are arrestable if they meet statutory elements: - Physically blocking police movement or access (e.g., surrounding a patrol car or blocking arrests). - Touching, grabbing, or standing too close after a lawful order to back away. - Ignoring a lawful dispersal order after being warned. - Using amplification or crowd behavior that prevents officers from issuing commands or making arrests. Officers typically move to arrest when: - They’ve given clear, repeated commands (e.g., “Move back,” “Clear the street”) that are ignored. - The person’s proximity or actions create a safety risk (blocking traffic, interfering with detainment). - A dispersal order is issued and disobeyed. - The crowd shifts from peaceful to physically obstructive or destructive. >> "The reason you don’t care is that you think somehow this cruelty will benefit you and people who look like you." This doesn't work anymore. If you're this committed to being a victim, and claiming racism whenever you experience cognitive dissonance, that's your problem. But I'm not going to lose sleep over it anymore, and it would probably do you and others like you a benefit to read the room.

drewbug01 1y ago
> So you are truly convinced that out of hundreds of thousands of interactions with ICE What time frame are you thinking of here? It’s very easy to minimize problems if you’re defining the time frame to be years, or something. It’s better to focus on the stark changes in enforcement behavior more recently, I would think. > those 170 people who were actually arrested, didn't meet any of these criteria for arrest? Are you really that far gone? For starters, as the article notes - 170 was just the number of US citizens that were arrested, and specifically the number that ProPublica could verify independently, since the government does not keep the statistics themselves. I think that’s important to call out, since the scale of the problem is important. But the bigger problem is that you’re defining the “typical” behavior - and the “typical” behavior is not what’s happening. Just yesterday, for instance, a judge in IL stated that she was extremely concerned that ICE was not following her orders regarding tear gas - that it was being deployed with no warnings. And moreover, a different district court judge in IL and three different judges on appeal held that the stories coming out of DHS appear to be completely unreliable! So - yes, I actually feel pretty good about asserting there likely wasn’t a reason for those arrests. Perhaps there were in some cases, but the lies from the administration make it nearly impossible to tell. > This doesn't work anymore. If you're this committed to being a victim, and claiming racism whenever you experience cognitive dissonance, that's your problem. But I'm not going to lose sleep over it anymore, and it would probably do you and others like you a benefit to read the room. What doesn’t work, exactly? And when you say “others like you” - what do you mean by that? What kind of person do you think I am? Why do you assume I experience cognitive dissonance?
- jimbo808 1y ago
  > What doesn’t work, exactly? And when you say “others like you” - what do you mean by that? What kind of person do you think I am? Why do you assume I experience cognitive dissonance? Well since you’re the one who started playing identity politics and making assumptions about “people who look like me,” implying that I’m racist because I have a different opinion about a topic, how about you start out by clarifying what you meant about “people who look like me?” I’d respond to your other points, but since we’re playing this game, it’s clear that you’re debating in bad faith.