Did I hear them yelling "Get ready to shoot him"?
I'm getting very tired of people who are not only attacking vehicles with people in them, but preventing them from being able to retreat.
"The western world sips from a poisonous cocktail: Polarisation, populism, protectionism and post-truth"
-Antje Jackelén, Archbishop of the Church of Sweden
video from Portland the other day, the Proud Boys shenanigans. More in the thread, this one is especially blatant though. Can't imagine the Portland Police Department doing..nothing during all this if it was the other side trying to tip over an occupied van.
Now with another police favorite, escorting the violent racists out of the area. Not arresting, that'd be too much like work.
AbsalonLands of Always WinterRegistered Userregular
edited August 2020
They are dangerous in groups. They need to be tracked and exposed as individuals and traced to their homes, employers and families so that discouraging consequences can be applied (WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE LAW). I am talking about the Proud Boys, natch, whether they have their uniforms on or not.
They are dangerous in groups. They need to be tracked and exposed as individuals and traced to their homes, employers and families so that discouraging consequences can be applied (WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE LAW). I am talking about the Proud Boys, natch, whether they have their uniforms on or not.
I'm usually against Doxxing, but it seems to be an incredibly effective tactic with far less risk than direct action, and fuck these guys anyway.
WARNING: GRAPHIC SHOOTING
EDIT: Removed the video since I realized it's too graphic. It can be found on twitter anyway.
Tweet is some rando but the video shows an unarmed man shot in the back by police while getting inside a car, with his family watching on
Ah, I thought it might be the one where a cop lets his dog get too close to a little dog in its yard and behind a fence with the old lady owner in the yard and the cop immediately pulls out his gun and shoots the little dog in the head.
What a depressing thing to be spoiled for choice about.
WARNING: GRAPHIC SHOOTING
EDIT: Removed the video since I realized it's too graphic. It can be found on twitter anyway.
Tweet is some rando but the video shows an unarmed man shot in the back by police while getting inside a car, with his family watching on
Ah, I thought it might be the one where a cop lets his dog get too close to a little dog in its yard and behind a fence with the old lady owner in the yard and the cop immediately pulls out his gun and shoots the little dog in the head.
What a depressing thing to be spoiled for choice about.
DPD's response to that is standard cop callousness, too. "Had no choice".
Fuck off dumb shit. Yank the dog back from the fence. Also, don't let your dog stick it's nose through the fence in the first place!
0
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
WARNING: GRAPHIC SHOOTING
EDIT: Removed the video since I realized it's too graphic. It can be found on twitter anyway.
Tweet is some rando but the video shows an unarmed man shot in the back by police while getting inside a car, with his family watching on
Gonna pull out my psychic powers for this one: police department justify the attempted murder as acceptable use of force because the man was getting back into a car with his family and a car could be used as a weapon.
Extra psychic powers engage: the man is going to have turned out to have not actually done anything wrong, the cops had the wrong individual or were leveling an outright bogus charge, and the person was innocent of any actual wrongdoing. The asshole newspapers will then dig up a list of offenses from the man to make the police look justified, while also phrasing the story as "former criminal shot in altercation with police" instead of "innocent man murdered from behind by police while his family watches in horror".
EDIT: Fuck me, I didn't even think to include that it would be a black man getting shot because I just assumed that was the case since the cops were involved. What a shitty state the nation is in.
EDIT EDIT: Local news station literally wrote the headline "Man injured after officer-involved shooting in Kenosha", holy fuck, I was joking about fucking psychic powers. Just amazed they didn't force in a rap sheet somewhere in there.
His name is Jacob Blake and from what I can tell as of this moment he is still alive.
Yeah, amazingly the cops actually provided immediate aid instead of waiting for him to bleed out and he was airlifted to a hospital.
Wonder how long until we find out the cop that tried to kill him has a long history of racism and violent offenses that the PD has swept under the rug?
Ninja Snarl P on
+6
BrodyThe WatchThe First ShoreRegistered Userregular
His name is Jacob Blake and from what I can tell as of this moment he is still alive.
Yeah, amazingly the cops actually provided immediate aid instead of waiting for him to bleed out and he was airlifted to a hospital.
Wonder how long until we find out the cop that tried to kill him has a long history of racism and violent offenses that the PD has swept under the rug?
And that the cop providing aid got fired for not letting him bleed to death.
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
Kenosha police shot a man Sunday evening, setting off unrest in the city after a video appeared to show the officer firing several shots at close range into the man's back.
The shooting has been identified as Jacob Blake, a Black man, by Wisconsin officials.
If you don't watch the video, it basically goes as follows:
We see it from someone across the street in an upper story through the window.
There is an SUV or the like across the street, driver-side on the side we see.
3-4 cops are talking to someone on the other side of the van.
The guy they are talking to turns around and walks away from the cops.
He comes around the hood of the car, still walking away from the cops and opens the driver's side door.
Cops follow with guns drawn, pointing at his back.
As he opens the door and tries to climb into his car, the cop grabs the back of his shirt.
As he's climbing into the car either the cop holding his shirt (or maybe the other one standing next to that cop, but I'm pretty sure it's the one grabbing the shirt) shoots him in the back. Looks like multiple times.
Onlookers begin screaming at the cops for obvious reasons.
Like straight up this guy is climbing into his car and a cop is grabbing the back of his shirt with one hand and shooting him with the gun in the other.
And this is why the first step to reform is throw every single one of them out on the street and start over. That the shooter isn't currently under arrest for attempted murder tells you all you need to know about the department.
Kenosha police shot a man Sunday evening, setting off unrest in the city after a video appeared to show the officer firing several shots at close range into the man's back.
The shooting has been identified as Jacob Blake, a Black man, by Wisconsin officials.
If you don't watch the video, it basically goes as follows:
We see it from someone across the street in an upper story through the window.
There is an SUV or the like across the street, driver-side on the side we see.
3-4 cops are talking to someone on the other side of the van.
The guy they are talking to turns around and walks away from the cops.
He comes around the hood of the car, still walking away from the cops and opens the driver's side door.
Cops follow with guns drawn, pointing at his back.
As he opens the door and tries to climb into his car, the cop grabs the back of his shirt.
As he's climbing into the car either the cop holding his shirt (or maybe the other one standing next to that cop, but I'm pretty sure it's the one grabbing the shirt) shoots him in the back. Looks like multiple times.
Onlookers begin screaming at the cops for obvious reasons.
Like straight up this guy is climbing into his car and a cop is grabbing the back of his shirt with one hand and shooting him with the gun in the other.
Yeah sorry for the haphazard post, I was about to join a meeting when I realized the video may be too graphic.
And I really should stop reading comments on the vid, the apologia for the cops is just god damn frustrating.
They are dangerous in groups. They need to be tracked and exposed as individuals and traced to their homes, employers and families so that discouraging consequences can be applied (WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE LAW). I am talking about the Proud Boys, natch, whether they have their uniforms on or not.
I'm usually against Doxxing, but it seems to be an incredibly effective tactic with far less risk than direct action, and fuck these guys anyway.
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis that are in public spaces espousing naziism proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
+18
AbsalonLands of Always WinterRegistered Userregular
edited August 2020
I am personally convinced pigs in some states are more ready to fire away because they are thinking that worst-case scenario they create more protests that will give them more chances to break bones, and also make certain demographics in suburbs more concerned about law and order.
They are dangerous in groups. They need to be tracked and exposed as individuals and traced to their homes, employers and families so that discouraging consequences can be applied (WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE LAW). I am talking about the Proud Boys, natch, whether they have their uniforms on or not.
I'm usually against Doxxing, but it seems to be an incredibly effective tactic with far less risk than direct action, and fuck these guys anyway.
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis that are in public spaces espousing naziism proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
And the police will say:
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis Antifa/BLM Protestors that are in public spaces espousing naziism protesting against my Authority(tm) proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
They are dangerous in groups. They need to be tracked and exposed as individuals and traced to their homes, employers and families so that discouraging consequences can be applied (WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE LAW). I am talking about the Proud Boys, natch, whether they have their uniforms on or not.
I'm usually against Doxxing, but it seems to be an incredibly effective tactic with far less risk than direct action, and fuck these guys anyway.
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis that are in public spaces espousing naziism proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
And the police will say:
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis Antifa/BLM Protestors that are in public spaces espousing naziism protesting against my Authority(tm) proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
Or is it ok to just dox those we disagree with?
I agree, police are complicit in these heinous fascist ideologies and that's why they are hiding badge numbers.
They are dangerous in groups. They need to be tracked and exposed as individuals and traced to their homes, employers and families so that discouraging consequences can be applied (WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE LAW). I am talking about the Proud Boys, natch, whether they have their uniforms on or not.
I'm usually against Doxxing, but it seems to be an incredibly effective tactic with far less risk than direct action, and fuck these guys anyway.
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis that are in public spaces espousing naziism proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
And the police will say:
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis Antifa/BLM Protestors that are in public spaces espousing naziism protesting against my Authority(tm) proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
Or is it ok to just dox those we disagree with?
Antifa/BLM are not just another side of a debate with nazis
That being said definitely do not dox protestors since the fascists are imprisoning people...but doxing nazis so their employers and neighbors know who they’re dealing with is 1)a far less severe consequence and 2)good for public safety
Edit: also don’t become a bunch of internet detectives trying to expose people based on shaky video- the people who actually know the fascists in the videos need to speak up
They are dangerous in groups. They need to be tracked and exposed as individuals and traced to their homes, employers and families so that discouraging consequences can be applied (WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE LAW). I am talking about the Proud Boys, natch, whether they have their uniforms on or not.
I'm usually against Doxxing, but it seems to be an incredibly effective tactic with far less risk than direct action, and fuck these guys anyway.
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis that are in public spaces espousing naziism proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
And the police will say:
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis Antifa/BLM Protestors that are in public spaces espousing naziism protesting against my Authority(tm) proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
Or is it ok to just dox those we disagree with?
Antifa/BLM are not just another side of a debate with nazis
That being said definitely do not dox protestors since the fascists are imprisoning people...but doxing nazis so their employers and neighbors know who they’re dealing with is 1)a far less severe consequence and 2)good for public safety
Edit: also don’t become a bunch of internet detectives trying to expose people based on shaky video- the people who actually know the fascists in the videos need to speak up
This is more what I was talking about. https://www.insider.com/st-louis-mayor-faces-calls-to-resign-doxxing-2020-6
They're using the exact same argument, and I think it's harder to take the moral high ground when people are playing internet detective and doxxing individuals left and right, using those same shitty arguments to justify it. Yes, people who recognize these Nazi's should feel free to speak up, but publishing addresses, phone numbers, etc is just downright dangerous (see: SWATing).
Kane Red RobeMaster of MagicArcanusRegistered Userregular
The police are already going to be doxxing as many protestors as they can using far superior tools to anything some internet sleuths can manage. Might as well try and doxx them back.
They are dangerous in groups. They need to be tracked and exposed as individuals and traced to their homes, employers and families so that discouraging consequences can be applied (WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE LAW). I am talking about the Proud Boys, natch, whether they have their uniforms on or not.
I'm usually against Doxxing, but it seems to be an incredibly effective tactic with far less risk than direct action, and fuck these guys anyway.
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis that are in public spaces espousing naziism proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
And the police will say:
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis Antifa/BLM Protestors that are in public spaces espousing naziism protesting against my Authority(tm) proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
Or is it ok to just dox those we disagree with?
I mean? This is how lots of things work.
Plus like. Lots of things change in terms of morality as society breaks down. If we can push back against that then more extreme methods are justified
I don’t want to be in that position but I am not sure how to argue that we are not
It's kind of amazing watching people for whom the law is completely bending over backward to work for think everything would work out fine for them in a lawless society.
They are dangerous in groups. They need to be tracked and exposed as individuals and traced to their homes, employers and families so that discouraging consequences can be applied (WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE LAW). I am talking about the Proud Boys, natch, whether they have their uniforms on or not.
I'm usually against Doxxing, but it seems to be an incredibly effective tactic with far less risk than direct action, and fuck these guys anyway.
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis that are in public spaces espousing naziism proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
And the police will say:
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis Antifa/BLM Protestors that are in public spaces espousing naziism protesting against my Authority(tm) proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
Or is it ok to just dox those we disagree with?
nazis are not just people we disagree with. This is the Paradox of Tolerance all over again.
They are dangerous in groups. They need to be tracked and exposed as individuals and traced to their homes, employers and families so that discouraging consequences can be applied (WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE LAW). I am talking about the Proud Boys, natch, whether they have their uniforms on or not.
I'm usually against Doxxing, but it seems to be an incredibly effective tactic with far less risk than direct action, and fuck these guys anyway.
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis that are in public spaces espousing naziism proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
And the police will say:
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis Antifa/BLM Protestors that are in public spaces espousing naziism protesting against my Authority(tm) proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
Or is it ok to just dox those we disagree with?
nazis are not just people we disagree with. This is the Paradox of Tolerance all over again.
Just because they are repugnant people doesn't mean we can't examine the morality of the methods of fighting back against them. Clearly murdering them would be the most effective, but that's morally and ethically wrong, so we don't do that. I'm simply making the argument that I also think doxxing is ethically wrong, particularly in light of the fact that doxxing has such a high probability of false positive identifications, and the serious and potentially deadly outcomes when the internet brigade can and does get it wrong.
I think there's two different types - can't see the harm in signal boosting any one who has publicly said that they were there marching on the wrong side, on Facebook, a forum or twitter etc. Or in person to you, should that happen.
I don't think there's much risk of outing the wrong guy if they've just outed themselves quietly.
Definitely less keen on doxxing people you think you recognise from pictures or from the event, even less so if you've just got a face to work from and no idea who they are. Chance of a false positive is just too high.
They are dangerous in groups. They need to be tracked and exposed as individuals and traced to their homes, employers and families so that discouraging consequences can be applied (WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE LAW). I am talking about the Proud Boys, natch, whether they have their uniforms on or not.
I'm usually against Doxxing, but it seems to be an incredibly effective tactic with far less risk than direct action, and fuck these guys anyway.
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis that are in public spaces espousing naziism proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
And the police will say:
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis Antifa/BLM Protestors that are in public spaces espousing naziism protesting against my Authority(tm) proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
Or is it ok to just dox those we disagree with?
nazis are not just people we disagree with. This is the Paradox of Tolerance all over again.
Just because they are repugnant people doesn't mean we can't examine the morality of the methods of fighting back against them. Clearly murdering them would be the most effective, but that's morally and ethically wrong, so we don't do that. I'm simply making the argument that I also think doxxing is ethically wrong, particularly in light of the fact that doxxing has such a high probability of false positive identifications, and the serious and potentially deadly outcomes when the internet brigade can and does get it wrong.
Which is fine, but when you frame the contention as purely a matter of "disagreement", you make it seem like the problem is that it's a bloodless disagreement over some philosophical difference, and not that we're opposing hate - which in turn helps to legitimize the fascists. We can discuss the morality of how we act against them without dismissing what they are.
I think there's two different types - can't see the harm in signal boosting any one who has publicly said that they were there marching on the wrong side, on Facebook, a forum or twitter etc. Or in person to you, should that happen.
I don't think there's much risk of outing the wrong guy if they've just outed themselves quietly.
Definitely less keen on doxxing people you think you recognise from pictures or from the event, even less so if you've just got a face to work from and no idea who they are. Chance of a false positive is just too high.
Doxxing is bad primarily because of false positives, yeah, and the fact that people who take up internet sleuthing tend not to actually be sleuths.
They are dangerous in groups. They need to be tracked and exposed as individuals and traced to their homes, employers and families so that discouraging consequences can be applied (WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE LAW). I am talking about the Proud Boys, natch, whether they have their uniforms on or not.
I'm usually against Doxxing, but it seems to be an incredibly effective tactic with far less risk than direct action, and fuck these guys anyway.
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis that are in public spaces espousing naziism proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
And the police will say:
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis Antifa/BLM Protestors that are in public spaces espousing naziism protesting against my Authority(tm) proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
Or is it ok to just dox those we disagree with?
nazis are not just people we disagree with. This is the Paradox of Tolerance all over again.
Just because they are repugnant people doesn't mean we can't examine the morality of the methods of fighting back against them. Clearly murdering them would be the most effective, but that's morally and ethically wrong, so we don't do that. I'm simply making the argument that I also think doxxing is ethically wrong, particularly in light of the fact that doxxing has such a high probability of false positive identifications, and the serious and potentially deadly outcomes when the internet brigade can and does get it wrong.
nazis are not just repugnant people. I would view doxxing anti-maskers as inappropriate, even though their actions directly lead to deaths, but nazis? nazism is inherently a philosophy of violence; it is not interested in polite discourse, it is only interested in acquiring power in order to use it to murder others. The rules of polite discourse do not apply to them. The only questions at play are things like effectiveness, legality, necessity, and so on. You want to talk about how the Internet isn't good enough at doxxing to consistently find the right person? Sure, that's a valid concern, and worthy of discussion. Calling it immoral? No. It's self-defense.
They are dangerous in groups. They need to be tracked and exposed as individuals and traced to their homes, employers and families so that discouraging consequences can be applied (WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE LAW). I am talking about the Proud Boys, natch, whether they have their uniforms on or not.
I'm usually against Doxxing, but it seems to be an incredibly effective tactic with far less risk than direct action, and fuck these guys anyway.
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis that are in public spaces espousing naziism proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
And the police will say:
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis Antifa/BLM Protestors that are in public spaces espousing naziism protesting against my Authority(tm) proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
Or is it ok to just dox those we disagree with?
nazis are not just people we disagree with. This is the Paradox of Tolerance all over again.
Just because they are repugnant people doesn't mean we can't examine the morality of the methods of fighting back against them. Clearly murdering them would be the most effective, but that's morally and ethically wrong, so we don't do that. I'm simply making the argument that I also think doxxing is ethically wrong, particularly in light of the fact that doxxing has such a high probability of false positive identifications, and the serious and potentially deadly outcomes when the internet brigade can and does get it wrong.
nazis are not just repugnant people. I would view doxxing anti-maskers as inappropriate, even though their actions directly lead to deaths, but nazis? nazism is inherently a philosophy of violence; it is not interested in polite discourse, it is only interested in acquiring power in order to use it to murder others. The rules of polite discourse do not apply to them. The only questions at play are things like effectiveness, legality, necessity, and so on. You want to talk about how the Internet isn't good enough at doxxing to consistently find the right person? Sure, that's a valid concern, and worthy of discussion. Calling it immoral? No. It's self-defense.
But the likely real world consequences (false positives) are inherently tied to the action (doxxing). You can't discuss one without the other. This is literally the same argument that police use to justify chokeholds. Because in the perfect setting of the dojo, chokeholds almost never cause any serious harm, they should be ok to use in the real world. The fact that the real world consequences are often deadly, means chokeholds should be banned everywhere.
I think the concept of "it's ok to dox Nazis" would go over better with more people if the definition of "Nazi" hadn't been transformed into "Anyone who disagrees with me on twitter".
The level of dehumanization in this thread, and on this page alone, absolutely astounds me. You guys aren't floundering on the slippery slope, you're greasing up your toboggans.
+3
MalReynoldsThe Hunter S Thompson of incredibly mild medicinesRegistered Userregular
They are dangerous in groups. They need to be tracked and exposed as individuals and traced to their homes, employers and families so that discouraging consequences can be applied (WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE LAW). I am talking about the Proud Boys, natch, whether they have their uniforms on or not.
I'm usually against Doxxing, but it seems to be an incredibly effective tactic with far less risk than direct action, and fuck these guys anyway.
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis that are in public spaces espousing naziism proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
And the police will say:
I am against doxxing private individuals. But Nazis Antifa/BLM Protestors that are in public spaces espousing naziism protesting against my Authority(tm) proudly must want to stand by their convictions. As such their face and name being published is consistent with their belief system.
Or is it ok to just dox those we disagree with?
nazis are not just people we disagree with. This is the Paradox of Tolerance all over again.
Just because they are repugnant people doesn't mean we can't examine the morality of the methods of fighting back against them. Clearly murdering them would be the most effective, but that's morally and ethically wrong, so we don't do that. I'm simply making the argument that I also think doxxing is ethically wrong, particularly in light of the fact that doxxing has such a high probability of false positive identifications, and the serious and potentially deadly outcomes when the internet brigade can and does get it wrong.
nazis are not just repugnant people. I would view doxxing anti-maskers as inappropriate, even though their actions directly lead to deaths, but nazis? nazism is inherently a philosophy of violence; it is not interested in polite discourse, it is only interested in acquiring power in order to use it to murder others. The rules of polite discourse do not apply to them. The only questions at play are things like effectiveness, legality, necessity, and so on. You want to talk about how the Internet isn't good enough at doxxing to consistently find the right person? Sure, that's a valid concern, and worthy of discussion. Calling it immoral? No. It's self-defense.
But the likely real world consequences (false positives) are inherently tied to the action (doxxing). You can't discuss one without the other. This is literally the same argument that police use to justify chokeholds. Because in the perfect setting of the dojo, chokeholds almost never cause any serious harm, they should be ok to use in the real world. The fact that the real world consequences are often deadly, means chokeholds should be banned everywhere.
This isn't an academic time to means test the most effective way to not get murdered and your tut-tutting whataboutism is nauseating.
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline."
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
Posts
I'm getting very tired of people who are not only attacking vehicles with people in them, but preventing them from being able to retreat.
-Antje Jackelén, Archbishop of the Church of Sweden
Now with another police favorite, escorting the violent racists out of the area. Not arresting, that'd be too much like work.
I'm usually against Doxxing, but it seems to be an incredibly effective tactic with far less risk than direct action, and fuck these guys anyway.
Based on the latest developments in the General Covid Thread about Trump’s announcement tonight, that might be a literal answer here.
Spoiler, the Trump Admin is apparently supporting vampirism, in a general sense. :rotate:
Yes, I know there's clinical therapeutics in this regard, but fucked if I think theose people understand that shit.
WARNING: GRAPHIC SHOOTING
EDIT: Removed the video since I realized it's too graphic. It can be found on twitter anyway.
Tweet is some rando but the video shows an unarmed man shot in the back by police while getting inside a car, with his family watching on
PSN: jrrl_absent
Ah, I thought it might be the one where a cop lets his dog get too close to a little dog in its yard and behind a fence with the old lady owner in the yard and the cop immediately pulls out his gun and shoots the little dog in the head.
What a depressing thing to be spoiled for choice about.
DPD's response to that is standard cop callousness, too. "Had no choice".
Fuck off dumb shit. Yank the dog back from the fence. Also, don't let your dog stick it's nose through the fence in the first place!
Gonna pull out my psychic powers for this one: police department justify the attempted murder as acceptable use of force because the man was getting back into a car with his family and a car could be used as a weapon.
Extra psychic powers engage: the man is going to have turned out to have not actually done anything wrong, the cops had the wrong individual or were leveling an outright bogus charge, and the person was innocent of any actual wrongdoing. The asshole newspapers will then dig up a list of offenses from the man to make the police look justified, while also phrasing the story as "former criminal shot in altercation with police" instead of "innocent man murdered from behind by police while his family watches in horror".
EDIT: Fuck me, I didn't even think to include that it would be a black man getting shot because I just assumed that was the case since the cops were involved. What a shitty state the nation is in.
EDIT EDIT: Local news station literally wrote the headline "Man injured after officer-involved shooting in Kenosha", holy fuck, I was joking about fucking psychic powers. Just amazed they didn't force in a rap sheet somewhere in there.
try "shot in the back by cop".
Yeah, amazingly the cops actually provided immediate aid instead of waiting for him to bleed out and he was airlifted to a hospital.
Wonder how long until we find out the cop that tried to kill him has a long history of racism and violent offenses that the PD has swept under the rug?
And that the cop providing aid got fired for not letting him bleed to death.
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
To help because there's zero context here without the video:
https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/crime/2020/08/23/wisconsin-police-shooting-kenosha-cops-shoot-man-sunday-evening/3427347001/
If you don't watch the video, it basically goes as follows:
We see it from someone across the street in an upper story through the window.
There is an SUV or the like across the street, driver-side on the side we see.
3-4 cops are talking to someone on the other side of the van.
The guy they are talking to turns around and walks away from the cops.
He comes around the hood of the car, still walking away from the cops and opens the driver's side door.
Cops follow with guns drawn, pointing at his back.
As he opens the door and tries to climb into his car, the cop grabs the back of his shirt.
As he's climbing into the car either the cop holding his shirt (or maybe the other one standing next to that cop, but I'm pretty sure it's the one grabbing the shirt) shoots him in the back. Looks like multiple times.
Onlookers begin screaming at the cops for obvious reasons.
Like straight up this guy is climbing into his car and a cop is grabbing the back of his shirt with one hand and shooting him with the gun in the other.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
I am completely incapable of having a civil discussion about the police with anyone who even slightly supports them at this point
Yeah sorry for the haphazard post, I was about to join a meeting when I realized the video may be too graphic.
And I really should stop reading comments on the vid, the apologia for the cops is just god damn frustrating.
PSN: jrrl_absent
No attribution.
Do not engage the Watermelons.
And the police will say:
Or is it ok to just dox those we disagree with?
I agree, police are complicit in these heinous fascist ideologies and that's why they are hiding badge numbers.
Antifa/BLM are not just another side of a debate with nazis
That being said definitely do not dox protestors since the fascists are imprisoning people...but doxing nazis so their employers and neighbors know who they’re dealing with is 1)a far less severe consequence and 2)good for public safety
Edit: also don’t become a bunch of internet detectives trying to expose people based on shaky video- the people who actually know the fascists in the videos need to speak up
This is more what I was talking about. https://www.insider.com/st-louis-mayor-faces-calls-to-resign-doxxing-2020-6
They're using the exact same argument, and I think it's harder to take the moral high ground when people are playing internet detective and doxxing individuals left and right, using those same shitty arguments to justify it. Yes, people who recognize these Nazi's should feel free to speak up, but publishing addresses, phone numbers, etc is just downright dangerous (see: SWATing).
Edit: And you're saying people shouldn't be a bunch of internet detectives, but you're endorsing a practice that is 95%+ internet detectives, who can and often do get it wrong. But I guess the people affected when they get it wrong are just collateral damage.
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/06/what-its-like-to-get-doxed-for-taking-a-bike-ride.html
https://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2017/08/17/543980653/kyle-quinn-hid-at-a-friend-s-house-after-being-misidentified-on-twitter-as-a-rac
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunil_Tripathi
I mean? This is how lots of things work.
Plus like. Lots of things change in terms of morality as society breaks down. If we can push back against that then more extreme methods are justified
I don’t want to be in that position but I am not sure how to argue that we are not
nazis are not just people we disagree with. This is the Paradox of Tolerance all over again.
Just because they are repugnant people doesn't mean we can't examine the morality of the methods of fighting back against them. Clearly murdering them would be the most effective, but that's morally and ethically wrong, so we don't do that. I'm simply making the argument that I also think doxxing is ethically wrong, particularly in light of the fact that doxxing has such a high probability of false positive identifications, and the serious and potentially deadly outcomes when the internet brigade can and does get it wrong.
Edit: they chose Nazi so they got rid of their humanity before I took it
I don't think there's much risk of outing the wrong guy if they've just outed themselves quietly.
Definitely less keen on doxxing people you think you recognise from pictures or from the event, even less so if you've just got a face to work from and no idea who they are. Chance of a false positive is just too high.
Which is fine, but when you frame the contention as purely a matter of "disagreement", you make it seem like the problem is that it's a bloodless disagreement over some philosophical difference, and not that we're opposing hate - which in turn helps to legitimize the fascists. We can discuss the morality of how we act against them without dismissing what they are.
Doxxing is bad primarily because of false positives, yeah, and the fact that people who take up internet sleuthing tend not to actually be sleuths.
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
nazis are not just repugnant people. I would view doxxing anti-maskers as inappropriate, even though their actions directly lead to deaths, but nazis? nazism is inherently a philosophy of violence; it is not interested in polite discourse, it is only interested in acquiring power in order to use it to murder others. The rules of polite discourse do not apply to them. The only questions at play are things like effectiveness, legality, necessity, and so on. You want to talk about how the Internet isn't good enough at doxxing to consistently find the right person? Sure, that's a valid concern, and worthy of discussion. Calling it immoral? No. It's self-defense.
But the likely real world consequences (false positives) are inherently tied to the action (doxxing). You can't discuss one without the other. This is literally the same argument that police use to justify chokeholds. Because in the perfect setting of the dojo, chokeholds almost never cause any serious harm, they should be ok to use in the real world. The fact that the real world consequences are often deadly, means chokeholds should be banned everywhere.
The level of dehumanization in this thread, and on this page alone, absolutely astounds me. You guys aren't floundering on the slippery slope, you're greasing up your toboggans.
This isn't an academic time to means test the most effective way to not get murdered and your tut-tutting whataboutism is nauseating.
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor
My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!