US riots

This is for discussions about news, politics, sports, other games, culture, philosophy etc.
User avatar
Austria knusch
Pro Player
EWTDonator 01
Posts: 1113
Joined: Jul 25, 2015

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by knusch »

n0el wrote:
knusch wrote:
n0el wrote:@RefluxSemantic it has less to do with judges, and more to do with the basis of the law itself. the law is written to protect the owner class. who do you think that is?
pretty sure the point with regards to instutional racism in the judicial system is that laws r not apllied equally as before linked report regarding sentencing simplies.
yes, they aren't.
sure. but there is clearly a difference with what u wrote, right?
u suggest a problem with what the law is based on, not how it is applied
User avatar
United States of America n0el
ESOC Business Team
Posts: 7068
Joined: Jul 24, 2015
ESO: jezabob
Clan: ķŒ€ ķ•˜ģš°ģŠ¤

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by n0el »

I am not sure how the justice system works in Europe, so I have nothing to compare it to. Here is two examples. First, cocaine law. Crack cocaine (black drug) and powder cocaine (white drug) are enforced completely differently. It takes 500 grams of powder to get the same sentence as 5 grams of crack. Who do you think that is targeting systemically? The law is not being applied equally. Cocaine as a drug is listed in the same enforcement category regardless of its type.

The second part is the way our court system works. If you have money, laws don't apply in the same way to you because the judge has authority to change sentencing at will. if I (white person) get a violation for drinking in public, I can often call a lawyer and get it reduced to a small fine. Whereas a black person with no money, has to rely on a "public defendant" has to serve jail time because they have no sway with the judge. There's an extreme gray area in all of this in terms of sentencing.
mad cuz bad
User avatar
Great Britain oats13
Lancer
Posts: 618
Joined: Aug 13, 2015
Location: Dorsetshire

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by oats13 »

I understand that the specific laws on crack and cocaine have been changed- https://americanaddictioncenters.org/co ... with-crack

Apparently the original 100>1 ratio was designed to reflect how much coke was needed to make crack, but according to the above it has been reduced to 18>1.

Still it is a good example of how what should be simply a scientific approach can exacerbate a problem when it is applied in an unequal environment.

Some of the arguments here are going round in circles, showing evidence of an unequal outcome in an isolated manner constitutes an argument that x might be the result of y but it can never be conclusive.

Unfortunately refusal or unwillingness to look at all factors reduces the likelihood of reaching a proportional overview, or indeed of 'isolating' one portion of those factors and thus having an informed and proportionate view of it.

@RefluxSemantic your definition of racism is more or less accurate , I would define it as 'arbitrary and primarily negative discrimination based on race' - however both our definitions are not the ones being used widely at the moment and indeed would be argued as being racist in themselves by some.

Worth knowing IMO.
We hold these truths to be self-evident. All men and women created by the you know, you know the thing.
User avatar
Austria knusch
Pro Player
EWTDonator 01
Posts: 1113
Joined: Jul 25, 2015

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by knusch »

n0el wrote:I am not sure how the justice system works in Europe, so I have nothing to compare it to. Here is two examples. First, cocaine law. Crack cocaine (black drug) and powder cocaine (white drug) are enforced completely differently. It takes 500 grams of powder to get the same sentence as 5 grams of crack. Who do you think that is targeting systemically? The law is not being applied equally. Cocaine as a drug is listed in the same enforcement category regardless of its type.
i think this would be a good example systemic rasicm regarding law, if there is no reason that warrants a difference in sentencing. idk if there was an intend to punish black ppl more when this was passed or how they came up with this ratio. from what i've read the disparity regarding punishment has been reduced in 2010 yet not eliminated.
but they treated as different offenses nevertheless. I wouldn't see this as an example of "law not equally applied"
n0el wrote: The second part is the way our court system works. If you have money, laws don't apply in the same way to you because the judge has authority to change sentencing at will. if I (white person) get a violation for drinking in public, I can often call a lawyer and get it reduced to a small fine. Whereas a black person with no money, has to rely on a "public defendant" has to serve jail time because they have no sway with the judge. There's an extreme gray area in all of this in terms of sentencing.
right, u have this everywhere. money helps
is this racist tho?
User avatar
Great Britain oats13
Lancer
Posts: 618
Joined: Aug 13, 2015
Location: Dorsetshire

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by oats13 »

knusch wrote:
n0el wrote:I am not sure how the justice system works in Europe, so I have nothing to compare it to. Here is two examples. First, cocaine law. Crack cocaine (black drug) and powder cocaine (white drug) are enforced completely differently. It takes 500 grams of powder to get the same sentence as 5 grams of crack. Who do you think that is targeting systemically? The law is not being applied equally. Cocaine as a drug is listed in the same enforcement category regardless of its type.
i think this would be a good example systemic rasicm regarding law, if there is no reason that warrants a difference in sentencing. idk if there was an intend to punish black ppl more when this was passed or how they came up with this ratio. from what i've read the disparity regarding punishment has been reduced in 2010 yet not eliminated.
but they treated as different offenses nevertheless. I wouldn't see this as an example of "law not equally applied"
n0el wrote: The second part is the way our court system works. If you have money, laws don't apply in the same way to you because the judge has authority to change sentencing at will. if I (white person) get a violation for drinking in public, I can often call a lawyer and get it reduced to a small fine. Whereas a black person with no money, has to rely on a "public defendant" has to serve jail time because they have no sway with the judge. There's an extreme gray area in all of this in terms of sentencing.
right, u have this everywhere. money helps
is this racist tho?
The argument is that if more whites have money then it is indeed racist.

Discuss.
We hold these truths to be self-evident. All men and women created by the you know, you know the thing.
User avatar
No Flag fightinfrenchman
Ninja
Donator 04
Posts: 23505
Joined: Oct 17, 2015
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by fightinfrenchman »

This is escalation

Dromedary Scone Mix is not Alone Mix
Image
User avatar
Austria knusch
Pro Player
EWTDonator 01
Posts: 1113
Joined: Jul 25, 2015

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by knusch »

oats13 wrote:
The argument is that if more whites have money then it is indeed racist.

Discuss.
obvsly i dont think it is. no matter white, black, brown, green, w.e. color, u gonna be better off with money xD
User avatar
United States of America 007Salt
Dragoon
Posts: 366
Joined: Jun 25, 2019

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by 007Salt »

Goodspeed wrote:
princeofcarthage wrote:can we rename this topic to US Riots May 2020 or something as it is no longer limited to minneapolis @Goodspeed
I'm not the OP
@007Salt
If that title is more relevant then I'm all for it. I'll let you decide @Goodspeed but I think it is at this point.
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: Minneapolis riots

  • Quote

Post by Dolan »

@XeeleeFlower Here's a more balanced article on that FBI report:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-minn ... SKBN23A1KU
In part of a June 1 internal, intelligence assessment of the protests viewed by Reuters, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials said most of the violence appears to have been driven by opportunists.

The assessment, prepared by the departmentā€™s intelligence and analysis unit, said there was some evidence based on open-source and DHS reporting that the anarchist movement Antifa may be contributing to the violence, a view shared by some local police departments in public statements and interviews with Reuters.

Reuters reviewed only a portion of the document and could not determine if it addressed the tactics of the groups involved in the protests in greater detail elsewhere. [They admit their report is based on partial information, which is what the media should always do.]

The part of the document seen by Reuters did not provide any specific evidence of extremist-driven violence, but noted that white supremacists were working online to increase tensions between protesters and law enforcement by calling for acts of violence against both groups. There was no evidence, however, that white supremacists were causing violence at any of the protests, the document said.
So, there are a few things that pop out from this article:
  • Most violence is carried out by opportunists
  • There is some limited evidence antifa is involved in the violence from these protests
  • White supremacists are active online, stoking tensions, but there's no evidence of them being involved in the violence from these protests
  • And Reuters admits it had access to parts of the report, so it cannot verify if more things are presented elsewhere in the report.
Now, let's see what "The Nation" reported.
Headline: "The FBI Finds ā€˜No Intel Indicating Antifa Involvementā€™ in Sundayā€™s Violence"
Well, the Reuters article clearly mentions there is limited evidence of antifa involvement in the violence. However, what Reuters points out is that Trump's statement that antifa violence is the driving force behind the violence is not supported by facts.
By contrast, The Nation spins this as a typical leftwing outlet: orange man bad, absolutely no evidence of antifa involvement.

Then The Nation goes on to say that, by contrast, there is evidence that white supremacists are involved in social media groups where they call for provocateurs to attack federal agents. There's no mention that there's no evidence of this group's involvement in actual protests.

So, you can see how they use some "confidential and exclusive" information to frame the story in a way that serves their editorial line and keeps their public fed with the narrative they're looking for.
User avatar
Great Britain oats13
Lancer
Posts: 618
Joined: Aug 13, 2015
Location: Dorsetshire

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by oats13 »

knusch wrote:
oats13 wrote:
The argument is that if more whites have money then it is indeed racist.

Discuss.
obvsly i dont think it is. no matter white, black, brown, green, w.e. color, u gonna be better off with money xD
That is indeed true, I think the problem is people interchange personal,institutional and effective racism.

It's complex ofc.
We hold these truths to be self-evident. All men and women created by the you know, you know the thing.
User avatar
Great Britain oats13
Lancer
Posts: 618
Joined: Aug 13, 2015
Location: Dorsetshire

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by oats13 »

Dolan wrote:@XeeleeFlower Here's a more balanced article on that FBI report:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-minn ... SKBN23A1KU
In part of a June 1 internal, intelligence assessment of the protests viewed by Reuters, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials said most of the violence appears to have been driven by opportunists.

The assessment, prepared by the departmentā€™s intelligence and analysis unit, said there was some evidence based on open-source and DHS reporting that the anarchist movement Antifa may be contributing to the violence, a view shared by some local police departments in public statements and interviews with Reuters.

Reuters reviewed only a portion of the document and could not determine if it addressed the tactics of the groups involved in the protests in greater detail elsewhere. [They admit their report is based on partial information, which is what the media should always do.]

The part of the document seen by Reuters did not provide any specific evidence of extremist-driven violence, but noted that white supremacists were working online to increase tensions between protesters and law enforcement by calling for acts of violence against both groups. There was no evidence, however, that white supremacists were causing violence at any of the protests, the document said.
So, there are a few things that pop out from this article:
  • Most violence is carried out by opportunists
  • There is some limited evidence antifa is involved in the violence from these protests
  • White supremacists are active online, stoking tensions, but there's no evidence of them being involved in the violence from these protests
  • And Reuters admits it had access to parts of the report, so it cannot verify if more things are presented elsewhere in the report.
Now, let's see what "The Nation" reported.
Headline: "The FBI Finds ā€˜No Intel Indicating Antifa Involvementā€™ in Sundayā€™s Violence"
Well, the Reuters article clearly mentions there is limited evidence of antifa involvement in the violence. However, what Reuters points out is that Trump's statement that antifa violence is the driving force behind the violence is not supported by facts.
By contrast, The Nation spins this as a typical leftwing outlet: orange man bad, absolutely no evidence of antifa involvement.

Then The Nation goes on to say that, by contrast, there is evidence that white supremacists are involved in social media groups where they call for provocateurs to attack federal agents. There's no mention that there's no evidence of this group's involvement in actual protests.

So, you can see how they use some "confidential and exclusive" information to frame the story in a way that serves their editorial line and keeps their public fed with the narrative they're looking for.
Much of the problem here is that 'Antifa' as such is just a loose umbrella term and they don't carry membership cards ;)

When I used to be involved with the animal rights movement here in the U.K. there were a few different groups such as the Hunt Sabs, Class War, A.L.F etc. but it was the same bunch on every demo etc. ofc they were all white and mainly middle class xd.

As time has gone on their equal and opposites have cropped up but by definition these are subsets of subsets and such incrementally fewer in number as they almost exclusively exist in opposition to another subset etc.

Sometimes it really is a bear shitting in the woods.
We hold these truths to be self-evident. All men and women created by the you know, you know the thing.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by Goodspeed »

007Salt wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:
princeofcarthage wrote:can we rename this topic to US Riots May 2020 or something as it is no longer limited to minneapolis @Goodspeed
I'm not the OP
@007Salt
If that title is more relevant then I'm all for it. I'll let you decide @Goodspeed but I think it is at this point.
It's your thread. The title is yours to choose. I'm not in the business of editing people's posts or titles because there is a chance I'll misrepresent them.
France iNcog
Ninja
Posts: 13236
Joined: Mar 7, 2015

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by iNcog »

-- deleted post --

Reason: on request (off-topic bulk delete)
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/incog_aoe
Garja wrote: ā†‘
20 Mar 2020, 21:46
I just hope DE is not going to implement all of the EP changes. Right now it is a big clusterfuck.
User avatar
Kiribati princeofcarthage
Retired Contributor
Posts: 8861
Joined: Aug 28, 2015
Location: Milky Way!

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by princeofcarthage »

VinyanyƩrƫ wrote:
princeofcarthage wrote: Riots are currently subsection of protests. Peaceful protests are used as cover for the acts by opportunistic individuals and/or groups with some motive or whatever reasons. (lets not go into those details right now) Quelling the protests will stop the riots as well, as they lose their cover they are subject to more police presence, and stricter action. If riots and protests were 2 distinguishable things, I would agree with you. However they are not mutually exclusive.
This is not the requested proof of anything that I asked. I did not dispute that stopping the protests would also stop riots.
princeofcarthage wrote: These are the current stats of HK protests after 18 months.
Deaths - 2
Injuries ~2600+
Arrests ~9000
No meaning can be assigned to these in a vacuum.
princeofcarthage wrote:You are missing the point, violence was there but it was largely limited to few incidents that sparked. It was quickly controlled either by police or by protesters themselves.
There was organized violence by HK protesters against police. For example (source: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/17/worl ... diers.html):
New York Times wrote: Hundreds of Hong Kong activists armed with firebombs and bows-and-arrows on Monday battled riot police who have laid a days-long siege to a university, the most violent confrontation yet in a half-year of protests.

Early Monday, the police tried storming the campus at the main entrance and made some arrests. But the occupiers fought back with dozens of firebombs and set barricades ablaze, forcing the police to retreat.
I can provide further examples as needed, but I'll need to again ask what would be required to falsify your claim.
princeofcarthage wrote:Pelting stone or tear gassing is obviously violent but subjective.
What does this mean? You made the claim "(X) or (Y) isn't violence", I'm asking for clarification on what you consider to be violent acts.
princeofcarthage wrote:If you are going to claim that police tear gassing to disperse the crowd which was visibly riling up to avoid further confrontations and/or violence then idk what to say.
If I'm going to claim what?
Okay...

1) If acquiescing to demands stops protests surely it will stop riots. I don't deny that. But, what exactly are the demands? How do you even implement those changes (instantly). The issue at hand is an educational issue and the issue of mindset. It is process which will take long time to achieve. We can surely say that racism is lot less now compared to the past. At most government can more actively and aggressively push towards the desired change but it will still take years, and in the mean time these acts of racism will continue to occur albeit less frequently. Not to mention that agreeing to demands sets a very bad precedent.

2) Again what you mean by violence is subjective. Throwing a flash bang to disperse the visibly growing and riled up crowd to avoid potential confrontation and risk to public life and property isn't violence. It is the view you see with.

Violent : "using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something."

Intent here isn't to hurt anyone, rather to avoid getting hurt.

3) Police manpower is spread too thin. These rioters smartly disguise themselves with large crowds of protesters. When they arrive at specific location they split up, loot, destroy and run off. Right now it is not practically possible for police to identify, separate, and arrest few specific individuals from the crowds of hundreds, thousands. Even if they do manage they are at the receiving end as they will be accused brutality and racism, even if the actions were justified. That leaves only one option of catching them red-handed, which they are trying but to difficult.

HK:
We are talking about acts of violence from protesters not police brutality. Your examples are of police trying to suppress protests.
Fine line to something great is a strange change.
User avatar
Kiribati princeofcarthage
Retired Contributor
Posts: 8861
Joined: Aug 28, 2015
Location: Milky Way!

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by princeofcarthage »

Goodspeed wrote:
princeofcarthage wrote:can we rename this topic to US Riots May 2020 or something as it is no longer limited to minneapolis @Goodspeed
I'm not the OP
@007Salt
Ah sry, I thought you as off-topic mod you also had changed/merged the democratic primary and election thread, so
Fine line to something great is a strange change.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by Goodspeed »

I didn't do that, noel must have.
User avatar
United States of America vardar
Lancer
Posts: 787
Joined: Jul 3, 2015
ESO: VardarB98/DemonDeacs
Location: us of a

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by vardar »

duckzilla wrote:
vardar wrote:Then quit saying ā€œfuck the policeā€

Your words are powerful and the translation to that statement is so wrong. People are throwing that around and it just makes such a hostile environment for many cops who want to do their job. Cops trying to solve a gang murder case but are instead bombarded with ā€œfuck you, pigsā€ and ā€œIā€™m not saying shit to you fucking killers.ā€
The police =/= a single cop.
The slogan "Fuck the police!" is not directed at every single police officer, but at the police system which is accused of institutionalized racism. Of course it makes a hostile environment. On the other hand, why don't good cops en masse quit their job in protest of the brutality of their peers? Why don't the good cops protest at all against an institutional racism?
vardar wrote:How is racism still institutionalized? Point that in my direction? Because a number of black men are killed by police, and are incarcerated at a higher rate, means that is racist. Could it? Yes. But I have yet to see that correlation truly connect. I believe the effects of Jim Crow and slavery have created an extreme wealth inequality, education inequality which has thus created the high violence and crime in the black community that keeps them down. Racism no longer holds them down, the effects of racism certainly have. Thereā€™s a difference. Why I believe in policies to destroy this cycle like affirmative action and education funds for inner cities.

To think this idea is fascist, racist, or any other term you can come up with: I think is wrong.
You say that racism no longer holds people of color down. What do you think about the central park incident between the two Coopers? Isn't that racism? And don't the consequences of (racist?) behavior like this affect people of color more than whites?

Where do you see racism fade into "the effects of racism"? Doesn't the cycle you portray show that it is precisely the racism of the past which drives today's racism?
Given that the extreme wealth inequality, the resulting lack of education, and increase in crime apparently characterize "the black community", modern day racist prejudices (blacks are criminals) are a result of past racism. I cannot see a big difference here.
The affirmative action and education funds are often used by racists as an official acknowledgment of inferiority, since people of color are "free" today and it cannot be the effects of racism which hold them down today. And affirmative action is inherently racist in itself, because it does not target anyone with a bad social background but only people with a specific background that is often described as "race" in the US. They are now positively discriminated, which they may benefit from. However, the signal is that they are "different" than others, making affirmative action necessary.

I don't see racism go away, because people have difficulties to ignore a person's skin color and everything they instantly believe to know about this person.
So I get itā€™s not supposed to be directed at every cop. I clearly understand that. But itā€™s effect is on all police regardless of what they do and how they go their job.

This may be a controversial statement but I want to say it and see a reaction:

Police reforms and the judicial system arenā€™t the only things holding the black community back. They are not even the largest factors holding them back. The largest is the wealth inequality, in-proportionate crime rates, and loss of a core family unit that perpetuates this cycle of little social mobility and high involvement with the criminal justice system. All of which stem from the days of terrible institutional racism.

Letā€™s look at the fact that black men spend a longer time than their white counterpoints when they commit the same crime. Okay, I admitted this was astonishing and looks to be a problem. BUT, how does this hold the black Americans that are legally following the law back? If it werenā€™t for crime in the first place, they wouldnā€™t be there. Iā€™m saying letā€™s also focus our attention on this part of the problem as well.

Because a disproportionate amount of black Americans are poorer, have higher chance of getting into crime which then makes them have a higher risk of being involved with police, this is institutional racism? These black men are swinging crack rocks because of institutional racism? They are shooting each other because of institutional racism? They are, because theyā€™re grandparents had zero opportunity, literally, and they were born into this. But this new generation of black Americans have the opportunity, itā€™s harder because of their wealth and education but not because of societal discrimination. They are poor and uneducated. Why they canā€™t get a good job. Not because a firm doesnā€™t like black people. A gas station is not going to hire someone who has had trouble with the law, even if they explain how they are no longer about that life, because a store owner doesnā€™t want that risk. It isnā€™t racial. There are particular instances where a employer will deny because of someoneā€™s race. The vast majority of Americans condone that and there really isnā€™t debate on that as far as Iā€™m concerned and it certainly isnā€™t rampant. You could argue it is rampant, and we will disagree.

This usage of institutional racism gives a reason for gangs, violence and a reason for fathers to not be father figures. When does all of this crime and terrible family dynamics stop? When blacks start serving more equal prison sentences? When the percentage of affected blacks can afford a proper ID to vote?

All of this stems from when black Americans were not allowed to get an education or work, they literally werenā€™t allowed to. But at this point, there needs to be accountability along with this realization of where it all stems from, in todayā€™s society a black man can be a lawyer IF he has the money and proper life skills, not because he is institutionally racially discriminated against like blacks were in the days of segregation. This is a sensitive subject for you guys and you are really just trying to paint me as someone who is full of racial hatred and stupidity instead of trying to see this perspective. Itā€™s a very popular one but so many that have it are honestly terrified to bring it up because they are vilified and seen as fascists who want to see blacks and other minorities in poverty forever.




I really like this guy, Larry Elder. Heā€™s a lawyer. He is really good with words and is a strong willed, intelligent man that has a lot of good things to say. The title of this video is stupid and I realize that but watch it and maybe you get a better idea of what Iā€™m saying. What he says in this video is quite powerful.



Also this guy, Brandon Tatum. Iā€™ve seen his social media and I actually disagree with him as he supports Trump and his political views are not all mine. Actually donā€™t like the guy that much. But, you canā€™t just put someone aside because of other beliefs they have. He has a good message here that I think is powerful. He was an NFL prospect but his college coach screwed his chances of getting drafted. Heā€™s also a Christian, which I am not, so he has a lot to say about those beliefs. And he is a retired cop....

I canā€™t expect you to watch both of these videos as they are somewhat time consuming but if you really want to be serious about this subject then you really should. I watched and read the stuff yā€™all recommended to me and would like to see some reciprocation and quality feedback.
c0ns!
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by Dolan »

vardar wrote:@Dolan and btw really liked your posts on the whole rap music point I was bringing up. Think you did a good job explaining. Wonā€™t go any further than that as I think there was enough talked about it for my liking in this thread and weā€™ve moved on.
Thanks. I'm very opinionated on this subject, even though I know what I'm saying is not likely to be very popular here. But I wouldn't write anything just to fish for popularity.
User avatar
Netherlands Mr_Bramboy
Retired Contributor
Donator 01
Posts: 8219
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: [VOC] Bram
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by Mr_Bramboy »

God damn American identity politics have flown over to Europe and are now infecting my beautiful country. I didn't sit inside for months to see people protest in large numbers. I hope the police uses excessive force to dispel this mass of idiots.

User avatar
Netherlands Mr_Bramboy
Retired Contributor
Donator 01
Posts: 8219
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: [VOC] Bram
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by Mr_Bramboy »

http://prntscr.com/st5b2k

Also, this guy gets the real problem, as I explained earlier in this thread.

"The only minority we have to combat is the rich class"
User avatar
Netherlands Mr_Bramboy
Retired Contributor
Donator 01
Posts: 8219
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: [VOC] Bram
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by Mr_Bramboy »



We don't need police brutality to fix stupid!
User avatar
Kiribati princeofcarthage
Retired Contributor
Posts: 8861
Joined: Aug 28, 2015
Location: Milky Way!

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by princeofcarthage »

"Mass of idiots"
Fine line to something great is a strange change.
User avatar
No Flag fightinfrenchman
Ninja
Donator 04
Posts: 23505
Joined: Oct 17, 2015
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by fightinfrenchman »

This is so fucked up, obvious escalation for no good reason

Dromedary Scone Mix is not Alone Mix
Image
User avatar
United States of America vardar
Lancer
Posts: 787
Joined: Jul 3, 2015
ESO: VardarB98/DemonDeacs
Location: us of a

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by vardar »

I donā€™t think you understand the security measures when it comes to the White House. All it takes is one person in that crowd to do damage to very high up officials. Whether you like it or not, when it comes to the White House, they donā€™t mess around.

Even if you hop the White House fence to do some hot yoga they will tackle you and it probably wonā€™t be friendly. It doesnā€™t matter who the president is.

If it was Bill Clinton in office, a guy I canā€™t stand just as much as Trump, I would still be fine with clearing people away from the White House like this. You really donā€™t mess with the White House and youā€™re stupid if you do, regardless of who is president.
c0ns!
User avatar
No Flag fightinfrenchman
Ninja
Donator 04
Posts: 23505
Joined: Oct 17, 2015
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Minneapolis riots

Post by fightinfrenchman »

@vardar No reason for them to be completely anonymous and not affiliated with any actual branch of law enforcement.
Dromedary Scone Mix is not Alone Mix
Image

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

Which top 10 players do you wish to see listed?

All-time

Active last two weeks

Active last month

Supremacy

Treaty

Official

ESOC Patch

Treaty Patch

1v1 Elo

2v2 Elo

3v3 Elo

Power Rating

Which streams do you wish to see listed?

Twitch

Age of Empires III

Age of Empires IV