metaphysicalyes

4 ms·

1.
by metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
> In the case at hand, however, there is no mistaken identity. No mistaken identity of no-name masked gunmen picking and killing random people in neighborhood. Clearly they must be the 1984 government! > their authority should never b
2.
by metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
You claim to have no information about the shots fired yet you assert "I suspect most never watched the video in detail or interpreted it with hindsight." This kind of asymmetric warfare soliciting unequal effort from others durin
3.
by metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
Do you recognize the freedom and comforts you enjoy is due to the tiny brave and unhinged section of population willing to take actions against their self-interest? It is reasonable you yourself won't take the risk but discrediting tho
4.
by metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
> And also she did hit the officer She made contact with the officer. And that is only because he had to put down his recording phone and take out the gun instead of focussing on stepping out of the way. This framing feels even more egre
5.
by metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
> If anything, it indicts Gruber for wanting to bandwagon I am all for bandwagoning if it makes a dent in spread of fascism. I am all for bandwagoning behind keeping mothers alive. I am all for bandwagoning for the right to human dignity
6.
by metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
I have been curious about this as well. So far what I have discovered, for a significant section, it is schadenfreude borne out of their past injustice. It roughly translates to: nobody was on my side when I was kicked down and this is my m
7.
by metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
I hope you are not claiming perception of intent is enough to claim a life. It is the actual intent that counts. Appeal to mental ineptitude is not a defense of murder. If a person can't distinguish between intention of person to kill
8.
by metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
Very convenient because right around the moments of shooting the video goes blank and the viewer can confirm the below preconceived notions: 1. The masked gunman was in grave danger when in fact he had stepped aside. 2. The car accelerated
9.
by metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
Would you support shooting the ICE driver who made vehicle contact with the protestors when trying to make way? Another scenario, imagine your family member pulling out her parked car when a group of masked gunmen with "POLICE" in
10.
by metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
It is incomprehensible to me how the 2nd and 3rd shot from side window would not count as murder. A neighborhood isn't war zone where a sign of disobedience is a fair kill. Blasphemy of 1st amendment.
11.
by metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
First shot is a red herring. It might be legal in the US to shoot the driver trying to hit you when are already out of the vehicle's way. The more condemnatory are the 2nd and 3rd shot from the side window. This is pure cruelty and dis
12.
by metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
The current administration has made clear that right or wrong is the question of which side has more power. And appeal to human morals has lost its power in dopamine addled society rife with mental issues. To assert their will people resort
13.
by metaphysicalyes 9mo ago
Lets assume you are right. How do you justify the 2nd and 3rd shot from the side window? Very curious how your mind works.