Stacey Abrams adviser said burning police car, smashing windows isn't 'violence' after anti-cop chaos

[eohrnberger]

He was beaten to death over a traffic stop.

Not an answer to the question posted.

Try again: What did this person do to escalate the situation?

Or is it your assertion that cops go around and randomly beat people?

Going around and randomly beating people would be far more characteristic of AntiFa's, and other's, behavior.

It's a bit hard to accept people's moral high ground approach to rioting when they are handwaving brutal and unesssiary police violence.

Again, Is it your assertion that cops go around and randomly beat people?

 

[Variant]

Not an answer to the question posted.

Try again: What did this person do to escalate the situation?

I'll answer what I darn well please. I find there no adequate justification for five people to beat someone to death over a traffic stop.

Never.

Or is it your assertion that cops go around and randomly beat people?

Going around and randomly beating people would be far more characteristic of AntiFa's, and other's, behavior.

Again, Is it your assertion that cops go around and randomly beat people?

It is my assertion that 5 cops should never need to beat someone for three minuets over a traffic stop and cause their death.

I honestly can't think of a single circumstance where that would be warranted or necessary.

The idea that he is somehow at fault is the endless refrain violence enablers like yourself. It doesn't matter what he did, short of pulling out a gun the guy doesn't die in those circumstances, and there is never a reason he gets beaten to death under any circumstances.

So, when you whine about rioting by people who are systematically subject to police violence, I can tell you this.

I don't care, the "violence" is justified just like the violence of the police is. The point of a justice system is to promote fairness, peace and security and it doesn't get people rioting when it is working properly.

 

[eohrnberger]

I'll answer what I darn well please. I find there no adequate justification for five people to beat someone to death over a traffic stop.

Never.



It is my assertion that 5 cops should never need to beat someone for three minuets over a traffic stop and cause their death.

I honestly can't think of a single circumstance where that would be warranted or necessary.

The idea that he is somehow at fault is the endless refrain violence enablers like yourself. It doesn't matter what he did, short of pulling out a gun the guy doesn't die in those circumstances, and there is never a reason he gets beaten to death under any circumstances.

So, when you whine about rioting by people who are systematically subject to police violence, I can tell you this.

I don't care, the "violence" is justified just like the violence of the police is. The point of a justice system is to promote fairness, peace and security and it doesn't get people rioting when it is working properly.

Decisions and opinions made in a vacuum of facts. But, hey, you do you.

 

[bomberfox]

Understanding the root cause of rioting should be our goal. The years and years of mass incarceration and militarized policing. It aint complicated is mass incarceration truly in line with the land of the free? Is toil for slave wages for the profits of private prisons and private prison wardens compatible with a free society? No, that is only freedom for the propertied class and petite bourgeois and suburbanites which is really the freedom the republican party champions.

 

[bomberfox]

I'll answer what I darn well please. I find there no adequate justification for five people to beat someone to death over a traffic stop.

Never.



It is my assertion that 5 cops should never need to beat someone for three minuets over a traffic stop and cause their death.

I honestly can't think of a single circumstance where that would be warranted or necessary.

The idea that he is somehow at fault is the endless refrain violence enablers like yourself. It doesn't matter what he did, short of pulling out a gun the guy doesn't die in those circumstances, and there is never a reason he gets beaten to death under any circumstances.

So, when you whine about rioting by people who are systematically subject to police violence, I can tell you this.

I don't care, the "violence" is justified just like the violence of the police is. The point of a justice system is to promote fairness, peace and security and it doesn't get people rioting when it is working properly.

Theres something to be said about a law and order society and justice. Law and order societies are based on the concept of negative peace.

American society being impervious to virtually any and all systemic change certainly doesnt help things. Police violence is state sponsored violence and people will always be there to justify it.

 

[ClaraD]

Rather nieve.

More effective would be to arrest and prosecute to the fullest those who commit domestic terrorism, such as AntiFa, but for that to happen, you'd have to remove all the district attorneys that Soros and his money got elected.

Since there's not much chance of removing all the district attorneys that Soros and his money got elected, or changing the locals that voted them in voting pattern, the same who continue to vote them in, they'll just have to suffer for their voting decisions until it get bad enough for them to change their voting decisions.

Until then, keep that shit away from me, my family, and my community. Those who continue that insane voting, enjoy what you've voted in, don't you dare try and move out to somewhere else and bring that shit public policy with you.

So, I guess you are happy about the insurrectionists being prosecuted, including those 3 Marines, correct?

 

[ClaraD]

I guess Jan 6 wasn't violence either.

'Hang, Mike Pence' yes, it was a crime of violence, because their intent was to kill someone.

 

[Fishking]

'Hang, Mike Pence' yes, it was a crime of violence, because their intent was to kill someone.

I'd agree with you but the other person said that that type of thing isn't violence.

 

[ClaraD]

I'd agree with you but the other person said that that type of thing isn't violence.

Were they saying 'kill that cop'?

 

[Fishking]

Were they saying 'kill that cop'?

Words aren't violence.

 

[noonereal]

View attachment 67433897
Atop adviser for Stacey Abrams' voting rights nonprofit defended anti-cop activists who set a police car ablaze and smashed windows while protesting the death of an environmental activist this past weekend in Atlanta.
Marisa Pyle, a senior rapid response manager at Abrams' Fair Fight Action, who also worked as a senior manager for Abrams' One Georgia leadership committee during her most recent failed Georgia gubernatorial run, rushed to defend the anti-police protesters and the ensuing chaos'
"You cannot commit violence against a window or a car. Killing a human? Now that, that is violence," Pyle wrote on Twitter this past weekend.

Burning down a proprietor's business isn't violence?
That explains Seattle, Baltimore, Minneapolis, Ferguson, Portland,etc.....

She probably should be gifted a dictionary bookmarked on the page with the word violence.
That said
There is still not a MAGA candidate 8n America i would vote for over Stacy and I can't stand her.

 

[Variant]

Decisions and opinions made in a vacuum of facts. But, hey, you do you.

Give me a situation where you think it would be OK for five cops to beat a person for three minuets until they die if you feel like you have one.

I for one can't imagine one, which is probably why I haven't seen the tapes yet (because they will cause riots).

The picture I showed earlier in the thread was censored by the way. You saw it and tried to justify it immediately. Don't talk to me about bias.

 

[ClaraD]

Words aren't violence.

It is called terroristic threats...so, yeah violence.

 

[eohrnberger]

Words aren't violence.

No matter how much lefty's would want them to be considered as such, in order to silence their political opposition and assume complete political control.

 

[VanceMack]

Of course not. To the idiot left, 500 violent riots with cities left burning is what you call 'mostly peaceful protesting'.

 

[eohrnberger]

Give me a situation where you think it would be OK for five cops to beat a person for three minuets until they die if you feel like you have one.

Can't do that because there's incomplete information, answering the question posed "What did this person do to escalate the situation?" would go fill in the information needed.

If that individual physically resisted arrest, assaulted officers, wielded a weapon, be it a stick, knife, or whatever, it makes a significant difference which you are ignoring, which I'm guessing is purposefully so on your part.

I for one can't imagine one, which is probably why I haven't seen the tapes yet (because they will cause riots).

The picture I showed earlier in the thread was censored by the way.

Funny. Still in this post: #37

You saw it and tried to justify it immediately.

Asking a question is NOT justifying anything, it's asking a question.

Don't talk to me about bias.

This falls under the heading of 'That which the left accuses others is what they themselves are guilty of'.

Let me repeat, in case you've still not got the point: "Asking a question is NOT justifying anything, it's asking a question."
There's no 'bias' involved.

If the officers acted inappropriately, I expect them to be held accountable for those acts, appropriate to their inappropriate acts.
There's no 'bias' involved.

Asking a question is NOT an example of bias, it's asking a question.

 

[Variant]

Can't do that because there's incomplete information, answering the question posed "What did this person do to escalate the situation?" would go fill in the information needed.

That simply indicates that you intend to blame the victim here. It's not a relevant question, trained police officers never need to beat someone to death.

If that individual physically resisted arrest, assaulted officers, wielded a weapon, be it a stick, knife, or whatever, it makes a significant difference which you are ignoring, which I'm guessing is purposefully so on your part.

No, I simply don't care about it. It can not be justified. They are being charged with murder and I am happy.

Hopefully that will help with the social unrest I expect out of the incident.

Funny. Still in this post: #37

Yeah, I find it funny too. Overzealous moderation that doesn't actually do the job.

Asking a question is NOT justifying anything, it's asking a question.

The only answer is that we don't yet know and it couldn't possibly matter.

This falls under the heading of 'That which the left accuses others is what they themselves are guilty of'.

Let me repeat, in case you've still not got the point: "Asking a question is NOT justifying anything, it's asking a question."
There's no 'bias' involved.

If the officers acted inappropriately, I expect them to be held accountable for those acts, appropriate to their inappropriate acts.
There's no 'bias' involved.

Asking a question is NOT an example of bias, it's asking a question.

Your expectation that they will likely be held accountable can only have come from more recent incidents like these.

And frankly that expectation only came from the rioting.

And, I don't care about your question, nor feel any need to answer it. It is irrelevant. If he threatened their lives they should have responded swiftly and if he fought them they should have simply subdued him.

There are no cases where it is proper that he is beaten 5 on 1 for several minuets an dies in the ICU.

 

[eohrnberger]

That simply indicates that you intend to blame the victim here. It's not a relevant question, trained police officers never need to beat someone to death.

It most certainly is a relevant question, the ascertaining of the facts of the matter and does not indicate anything much less assertion of 'intend to blame the victim here'.
Since when are ascertaining of the facts equivalent to 'intend to blame the victim here'.
That's just seriously screwed up thinking.

No, I simply don't care about it.

Now you are asserting that facts don't matter. Nice self-own there.

It can not be justified. They are being charged with murder and I am happy.

Which, should the facts of the matter lead to I would support. Bias? Nope. Yet another of your assertion crumbles.

Hopefully that will help with the social unrest I expect out of the incident.

Yet more 'Summer of Love' mostly peaceful arson and destruction in the billions? Just as long as you support the politics.
Say a lot about you.

Yeah, I find it funny too. Overzealous moderation that doesn't actually do the job.

Meh. Too many posts, not enough time. Mods are only human.

The only answer is that we don't yet know and it couldn't possibly matter.

Again, you are asserting that facts don't matter. Nice self-own there, that's two in a single post. You're going for a record.

Your expectation that they will likely be held accountable can only have come from more recent incidents like these.

No, it is based on a largely functioning criminal justice system, in spite of the Soros paid for and elected progressive DAs which glee at turning violent criminals lose on the communities which can least afford to deal with the death and destruction which they bring with them, which is part of them.

And frankly that expectation only came from the rioting.

I don't agree.

And, I don't care about your question, nor feel any need to answer it. It is irrelevant.

Again, you are asserting that facts don't matter. Nice self-own there, that's now three in a single post. Clearly you really are going for a record.

If he threatened their lives they should have responded swiftly and if he fought them they should have simply subdued him.

Who says that officers didn't do exactly that? You won't even entertain ascertaining of the facts to come to your prejudice.

There are no cases where it is proper that he is beaten 5 on 1 for several minuets an dies in the ICU.

Again, you are asserting that facts don't matter. Nice self-own there, that's now four in a single post. You've got the record now, clearly.

 

[Variant]

It most certainly is a relevant question, the ascertaining of the facts of the matter and does not indicate anything much less assertion of 'intend to blame the victim here'.
Since when are ascertaining of the facts equivalent to 'intend to blame the victim here'.

There isn't a possible justification here so you should quit before you're behind.

 

[eohrnberger]

There isn't a possible justification here so you should quit before you're behind.

Your reading isn't up to par. Where in any of my posts was there any sort of justification of anything?

ProTip: Ascertaining the facts or wanting more facts isn't justification of anything.
Neither is reading in what you want to be there, but isn't there, then using that as a basis for a strawman argument.

If strawman arguments is the best you can do, you don't need me, you can argue with yourself.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

View attachment 67433897
Atop adviser for Stacey Abrams' voting rights nonprofit defended anti-cop activists who set a police car ablaze and smashed windows while protesting the death of an environmental activist this past weekend in Atlanta.
Marisa Pyle, a senior rapid response manager at Abrams' Fair Fight Action, who also worked as a senior manager for Abrams' One Georgia leadership committee during her most recent failed Georgia gubernatorial run, rushed to defend the anti-police protesters and the ensuing chaos'
"You cannot commit violence against a window or a car. Killing a human? Now that, that is violence," Pyle wrote on Twitter this past weekend.

Burning down a proprietor's business isn't violence?
That explains Seattle, Baltimore, Minneapolis, Ferguson, Portland,etc.....

Stacey Abrams another HUGE race hustler, imo, the Dems would be wise to distance themselves from some of this more blatant "anti-racism" (ie: racism against Whites).
It doesnt play well with me.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

This isn't Hollywood. Cop cars aren't made of dynamite.

A gallon of gasoline can explode with the force of several sticks of dynamite under the right conditions. DERP.

 

[Perotista]

View attachment 67433897
Atop adviser for Stacey Abrams' voting rights nonprofit defended anti-cop activists who set a police car ablaze and smashed windows while protesting the death of an environmental activist this past weekend in Atlanta.
Marisa Pyle, a senior rapid response manager at Abrams' Fair Fight Action, who also worked as a senior manager for Abrams' One Georgia leadership committee during her most recent failed Georgia gubernatorial run, rushed to defend the anti-police protesters and the ensuing chaos'
"You cannot commit violence against a window or a car. Killing a human? Now that, that is violence," Pyle wrote on Twitter this past weekend.

Burning down a proprietor's business isn't violence?
That explains Seattle, Baltimore, Minneapolis, Ferguson, Portland,etc.....

Two things, I think Abrams is pretty much done when it comes to running for public office. She’s become a has been. Second, of those arrested for the violence 5 of the 6 came from out of state. In other words, they came to Atlanta to commit violence. It’s my opinion that without the outside, out of state agitators, there wouldn’t have been the violence.

But violence should be condemned regardless of which side of an issue you are on when violence breaks out during one of your protests or demonstration.

 

[Variant]

Your reading isn't up to par. Where in any of my posts was there any sort of justification of anything?

ProTip: Ascertaining the facts or wanting more facts isn't justification of anything.
Neither is reading in what you want to be there, but isn't there, then using that as a basis for a strawman argument.

If strawman arguments is the best you can do, you don't need me, you can argue with yourself.

My comprehension is generally impeccable.

"I was just looking for facts" doesn't fly when the topic is "why did the police beat that man to death" and your question is "what did he do to provoke it?"

Few here are that dense.

If that is your question, I question your mindset. Go sell whatever you are selling somewhere else, don't talk to me.

 

[eohrnberger]

My comprehension is generally impeccable.

"I was just looking for facts" doesn't fly when the topic is "why did the police beat that man to death" and your question is "what did he do to provoke it?"

"My comprehension is generally impeccable."
Apparently not. I asked the question 'What did he do to escalate the situation'. The term 'escalate' is not equivalent to the term 'provoke'.

The question is most certainly pertinent and most certainly relevant in that what occurred isn't the typical police officer response to a situation which hasn't been escalated.

Few here are that dense.

If that is your question, I question your mindset. Go sell whatever you are selling somewhere else, don't talk to me.

Your surrender is acceptable. Have a nice day.