Guns: how much longer will it take ....

You seem to think your opinion on subjects sbout which you know nothing is worth more than someone who actuallk knows something about it because to accept their opinion is appeal to authority, which you regard as a logical fallacy. that's patemnt nonsense. Somewhere around the late middle ages was the last time somebody with some semblance of truth could be described as knowing everything. Today nok one can "know more than a very small fraction of human knowledge, so looking to see what others know about things, i.e. "appeal to authority", is the only way you can gain knowledge, that is incidentally the purpose of education. You clearly do not know as much about legal procedure or the search for truth as the Manhattan DA, so don't try to pretend your opinion is worth more than jackshit. And is far from unbiased too. boot.

Wrong again. Appeals to authority are a logical fallacy.

You resort to logical fallacies because you cannot defend your positions with facts or logic.

This lack of capability is not your fault, by the way. You are attempting to defend the indefensible, and that just isn't possible to do.

So you think faking an allegation, murdering an innocent man and running away before the cops get there is the best course of action.. Jeez, blatant undeniable sociopathy.
s ge t

I said nothing about faking.

Self defense isn't murder.

People who attack other people are hardly innocent.

But otherwise yes, the three S's are clearly the least-bad option these days for people who are attacked by minorities.

And here I thought you claimed to deal only in facts and reality.... A lynching across a forum...that's a new version of reality.

See:
- white men present firearms to a black man, and you say 'they didn't threaten his life', taking the white males explanation for their actions. In reaching this conclusion you ignore the black males fear for his life - his zig zagging , trying to avoid being shot

- black man say a very vague threat to a white woman, and you say he threatened her life, not taking the black males explanation for his words/action . In reaching this conclusion you ignore the white female's lack of fear for her life - her aggresively walking up to the black male and pointing her finger in his face

This is pointing out that you are engaging in a one eyed viewpoint.
You will have to quote where you think I said that. For I did not.

Presumably you also mean that white people are also capable of not attacking people, because anything like this applies both ways, or it becomes racist.

The one that I was defending saying she shouldn't lose her job?

Which I've already said...but you said it was fact that he threatened to kill her. I've said you have no factual basis for that. Only interpretation.

he tried to put her dog on a leash as the rules required. That was the only course of action in the video.. Have you looked at the video and noticed the way she was brutally mistreating her dog, choking him, jerking hi around, dragging him. Why are you not advocating shooting her since that seems to be your remedy of choice for everything.

He told her she wasn't going to like what he was about to do and then tried to lure her pet away from her.

She did not mistreat her dog. She tried to keep it under control in the face of a dangerous threat.

Yeah she wasn't going to like it because she idn't like the rule which required he to keep her dog on a leash, and she flouted it for fun, tho he only wanted her to put the dog on the required leash.

She was the threat. Look at the video again , she was choking the dog, swinging it off its feet while cchoking it. She was irrational and endangering the life of a black man. You as usual try to whitewash the indefensible.

Wrong again. The threat was the guy saying that he was about to do something that she wouldn't like and then trying to lure her pet away from her.

She was trying to keep her pet under control in the face of a dangerous threat.

If the black man did not want to be endangered then he shouldn't have been attacking someone's pet.

There is nothing indefensible about protecting yourself when someone tries to harm your pet.

I am not ashamed of defending innocent people from ruthless lynch mobs.



The guy was wrong to threaten her and attack her dog.

She was right to want to protect herself and her dog. Her mistake was to call 911 instead of using the three S's.



Lynching a woman for calling 911 when a black man attacks her pet is why the three S's are the least-bad option for people who are attacked by a minority.

She wasn't going to like it becsuse he wanted to put the dog on the leash which she clearly didn't like and wasn't about to do herself. She broke the rules for fun and then tried to endanger the life of someone whose only "offense" was topolitely ask her to follow the rule. Her actions were despicable. His were legal and polite. Society has rendered its verdict. Her boss rendered his verdict. She was antisocial and racist. She lost.

If the guy didn't want his life to be "endangered" by having the police called, then he shouldn't have been attacking someone's pet.

His offense was to threaten her and then attack her pet.

Calling 911 when someone threatens you and attacks your pet is hardly despicable.

Calling 911 when someone threatens you and attacks your pet is hardly racist.

The way she is being lynched is clear evidence that the least-bad option people have when a minority attacks them is to apply the three S's.

blahblahblah

he did not attack her pet. he did not attack her either. he did not threaten either . the threat is only your own fantasy. your fantasy life is extremely active tonight.

Wrong again. He told her that she wasn't going to like what he was about to do and then tried to lure her pet away from her.

fantasy,.

Progressives dislike reality, but no. Reality isn't fantasy.

This thug told her that she was not going to like what he was about to do and then tried to lure her pet away from her.

Yes. That's what I do.



It's what you are doing.



Actually I'm not. I recognize their culpability in creating the situation, and I think they are guilty of manslaughter for the death arising from the situation that they created.

But you are refusing to recognize this woman's fear after this guy said that she wasn't going to like what he was about to do and then tried to lure her pet away from her.



She had no access to this explanation (and no reason to believe it even if she did have access to it) when she called the police.



That's because she didn't lack fear. Her fear was just as genuine as the fear of the jogger in Georgia.



She wanted him to go away and stop menacing her.



Except it is you who is doing this, by refusing to look at how it might come across to someone when a stranger says he is about to do something and they aren't going to like it, and then tries to lure their pet away from them.



Here are the parts where you accused her of racism for merely calling 911 when a black man said she wasn't going to like what he was about to do and then tried to lure her pet away from her:

"a racist rant by the girl."
"the white girls racist rant?"
"going on a racist rant"
"her racism"

https://able2know.org/topic/131081-452#post-7013647



Of course white people are capable of not attacking people.



Yes.

That limited defense was nice of course. But supporting the false accusation of racism still supports the lynch mob that is using that false accusation to justify doing actual harm to her.



Ok so it was interpretation.

It was a perfectly reasonable interpretation considering what a total stranger had just said to her, and it is in no way racist or wrong in any other way for her to call the police in such a circumstance.

I'd think you'd prefer a police call to just killing the guy where he stands.

The police can come, sort out what actually happened, tell the girl that she needs to use a leash (maybe even write her a ticket), tell the guy that it's really dumb to say something like that to a stranger, and have everyone go on their way.

By making it impossible for people to call the police in such situations, you are giving them no choice but to gun people down for perceived threats.

I think a2k should leash this rabbid dog here.