Yeah, woops, something got pooched. I replied to a comment in my messages and it wound up here.
Yeah, woops, something got pooched. I replied to a comment in my messages and it wound up here.
Honestly, the downvotes don’t bother me as much as the gossip and unchecked hysteria in some Lemmy communities. This is a controversial topic and this is a discussion.
But some take differing viewpoints as a personal attack and double down.
I have my own biases, I recognize that, but I try to stick with facts like I have in this thread. But I’ve been on both sides of a police-focused argument before and also massively attacked for assuming police were out to get a company. I backed it up with facts too but that issue was hard to defend.
I may not agree with people here, and you may not agree with me, but votes don’t make you right. You’re free to present evidence the police in this article acted outside their authority anytime; all I hear are soapbox radicals with an axe to grind.
[response to comment posted incorrectly]
That’s why toys have red tips. If there is no red tip, as in a replica, it looks and assumed to be real.
According to the article there were 2 youths.
There is another side.
Unarmed?
Literally armed with a pellet gun. It’s in the title!
WOW do you like your own narrative.
That’s not an admission to lying whatsoever.
That is literally what it says it is: that the video circulating online does not portray the entire incident.
Any armchair editor knows how to add start/stop points to a clip. It could be to emphasize a point, exclude content, or simply meet time constraints.
People these days… so easily radicalized. Take a breather and wait for more info.
I haven’t heard a statement from the other side of the story, but it seems you have. So please, inform us all. Otherwise, your speculation based in distrust and hate is moot.
We only have one source of facts at the moment, with a promise for a more detailed followup so, yeah, it carries weight.
I don’t know why a 13yo would do such a thing, or why they even had a replica gun. I’m not them. I feel sorry for them, but according to the facts I know right now, it was a bad choice. I am especially interested if the red tip were removed designating a toy. As the article references a replica, not a toy, I wonder if that had some influence in the outcome.
I am fully prepared to change my view if new evidence persuades me.
Outcome is unfortunate but pointing a gun, replica or not, at an officer has always been a very bad idea. Nothing is different now vs 30 years ago.
Do we as a society really need reminding don’t point weapons at police? Don’t do it folks.
Price is definitely important, but so is traction. If stopping distance increases because eco materials grip less, that would be a concern.
My criteria are performance results, wear rating, and price.
Haha thanks a lot! I’m going to stay up here with the ground, birds, and air ifyoudontmind.
I, too, watch Always Sunny in Philadelphia.
Also grew up with a solid fear of drain pipes as a kid. That crab v pipe video ages ago… shudder
Naa, I’ll take my …
[$52M ÷ 30 Billion]
… $0.0017 check please. Don’t forget postage.
Could easily be a “Oh shit! What have I done? Need to check vitals.” situation.
I think what he did was wrong too. But over here we have that pesky innocent until proven guilty thing and I’m not wasting mental load on a hypothetical “What if?” dredged up by an internet stranger.
Just pointing out rape was not mentioned whatsoever in either article nor a charge in court, as that would certainly be reported. You made that up.
Removed by mod
Why does it take 3 paragraphs to list the actual substance they are talking about? Oh, increased “engagement” stistics.
Don’t dick with us apnews.com
And my state lists everything as "known to cause cancer and reproductive harm”, even coffee. We don’t understand scale, only detectable levels.
Pointed this out to the mods recently and I could have used that link in my message.
The Guardian does report some things well, but many, many are written to incite. Mediabiasfactcheck.com could scoot that rating a tad further left in my opinion.
Google doesn’t care what end users scream about (such as YouTube ads) but I have a feeling some lawyers had an emergency meeting to explain why this was a crap idea.
I feel like this change is here to stay for a while.
Ahhh! But did you check the cellar? [Authorization was] on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.’
So the “all police are lying murderers until they convince me they’re not, but I won’t let that happen” crowd sort of fit. Then there are the wannabees that try to fit in and fan the flames.
For all you know, we are both AI bots out to steer the course of dialogue and incite our respective groups.
Spooky fingers oooOOOOooooo
If there is anything to take away, talking to all of you in this thread now, is that I love debates and discord among strangers and while we don’t see eye to eye, I’d have a beer with you folks and at the end of the day, wish you all well.
Let’s keep the emotions in check.