or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › WTF over-zealous police?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

WTF over-zealous police? - Page 305

post #4561 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawyerdad View Post

Doesn't that depend in part on whether or not their interactions with police are likely to be dangerous and what makes them so?

Yes, and what generally makes interactions with police dangerous?
post #4562 of 6095

I've always been curious, do lawyers actually say stuff like false dichotomy and strawman in court? I thought that was just for internet kids who fallaciously cite fallacies to defend themselves. Nothing to do with this thread, genuinely curious.

post #4563 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnoldh View Post


Yes, and what generally makes interactions with police dangerous?

 

In America?  Historically speaking just being a member of certain ethnic groups has been enough of a reason to make police interactions potentially dangerous.  I would hazard that for members of those ethnic groups who had been treated unfairly by the police and the government in general going back to the birth of the nation, it might take a long time for those deep rooted fears to be assuaged.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unless you have one of these

 

latest?cb=20110504061635

post #4564 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumpelstiltskin View Post

In America?  Historically speaking just being a member of certain ethnic groups has been enough of a reason to make police interactions potentially dangerous.  I would hazard that for members of those ethnic groups who had been treated unfairly by the police and the government in general going back to the birth of the nation, it might take a long time for those deep rooted fears to be assuaged.






Unless you have one of these

latest?cb=20110504061635

Every word you say well may be true.

But also, doesn't committing crimes, carrying illegal weapons and resisting arrest generally make someone's interactions with police potentially dangerous too?
post #4565 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnoldh View Post


Every word you say well may be true.
 

 

Some might say that one would have to be willfully ignorant to insinuate that what I said is not true

 

The fact remains that if an ethnic group not only has an extensive oral history as well as documented history of being "mistreated" by the police or the government, it will colour members every interaction with the government and the police.  

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by rnoldh View Post



But also, doesn't committing crimes, carrying illegal weapons and resisting arrest generally make someone's interactions with police potentially dangerous too?

 

Isn't that a separate discussion?  

post #4566 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumpelstiltskin View Post

Isn't that a separate discussion?  

Not if the aggrieved group is also inordinately guilty of the second set of reasons.

Whether they are inordinately guilty, is a separate discussion perhaps.
post #4567 of 6095
This idea that these protestors hate police because of Selma or Nat Turner or whatever is just ridiculous. They have little or no living memory of segregation or institutional racism (that's not discriminating in their favor, that is) and only a vague idea about such things happening in the past.

The real reason is that a quarter to a third of black men end up in prison (not jail, prison) at some point in their lives. It's hard to love the cops when, if you have a father and a brother, one of you has probably been to prison because of them.
post #4568 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnoldh View Post


Not if the aggrieved group is also inordinately guilty of the second set of reasons.

Whether they are inordinately guilty, is a separate discussion perhaps.

 

I referenced historical mistreatment of ethic groups in America and you referenced specific criminal cases.  Separate topics, no?

post #4569 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumpelstiltskin View Post

I referenced historical mistreatment of ethic groups in America and you referenced specific criminal cases.  Separate topics, no?


If you mean me, I meant groups as a whole and not individual criminal cases.
post #4570 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by accordion View Post

I've always been curious, do lawyers actually say stuff like false dichotomy and strawman in court? I thought that was just for internet kids who fallaciously cite fallacies to defend themselves. Nothing to do with this thread, genuinely curious.
Sure. We use established terminology to call out familiar fallacies and diversionary arguments. Tends to go over better with judges than "I call bullshit on that!"
post #4571 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawyerdad View Post


Sure. We use established terminology to call out familiar fallacies and diversionary arguments. Tends to go over better with judges than "I call bullshit on that!"

 

Stop appealing to authority.

post #4572 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnoldh View Post

Every word you say well may be true.

But also, doesn't committing crimes, carrying illegal weapons and resisting arrest generally make someone's interactions with police potentially dangerous too?
Mostly for accordian's entertainment, I'll point out that that's another false dichotomy. Most complex social problems don't really come down to binary sloganeering like "is it because cops racist or are nigras dangerous criminals"?

There was at least one straw man argument in the preceding posts as well.

Supreme Court opinion rejecting an argument premised on a "false dichotomy": http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/12-9012_3e04.pdf

Thurgood Marshall dissent criticizing majority opinion for rely on (purported) straw man argument:

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/412/


Law review article referencing, at page 355, an opinion from the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals rejecting an argument as a straw man ( also using the more formal latin terminology, which I've never used because I never bothered to learn that shit).
http://digitalcommons.law.msu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1444&context=facpubs218/
post #4573 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

Stop appealing to authority.
Fuck your Midwestern ad hominem.
post #4574 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawyerdad View Post

Mostly for accordian's entertainment, I'll point out that that's another false dichotomy. Most complex social problems don't really come down to binary sloganeering like "is it because cops racist or are nigras dangerous criminals"?

Per this definition, It was not a false dichotomy

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/false_dichotomy

in that I did not deny his point of view nor infer my view was the only one.

AAMOF I think that both his and my viewpoints are contributory to the whole, and neither negates the other in any way.
post #4575 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnoldh View Post

Per this definition, It was not a false dichotomy

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/false_dichotomy

in that I did not deny his point of view nor infer my view was the only one.

AAMOF I think that both his and my viewpoints are contributory to the whole, and neither negates the other in any way.
I agree with your last statement, so it's possible I misunderstodd the intent of your previous comment.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › WTF over-zealous police?