Police response to N.J. mall fight sparks outrage after Black teen cuffed as white teen watches

[Metaphor]

I remember you bringing this up near the beginning of the thread. The premise that the female cop was intimidated by the white kid. That that's why she behaved as she did.

No, I did not say she was intimidated. You will not find me saying that, because I did not say that.

It seemed implausible to me from the beginning, before I'd seen the video. Having now seen the video your premise is kinda ridiculous. Whatever was happening there, she wasn't intimidated by that kid.
Tom

If what you mean is "the video does not support a belief I imagined that Metaphor held and that I projected on to him", I agree.

 

[Metaphor]

We have obviously had different life experiences.

Yes. You seemed to have been shaped by life experiences that allow you to feel entitled to promulgate falsehoods about other people's positions, and neither acknowledge that you made those misrepresentations nor apologise for doing so, nor feel any obligation to stop promoting misrepresentations in the future.

 

[TomC]

, I did not say she was intimidated. You will not find me saying that, because I did not say that.

True, you did not use the word "intimidated".

But in post #19

In particular, the female cop, if I can be frank, seems as if she would be at the mercy of the white boy, had he chosen to fight back. Given his height and weight and male physique advantage over her, I doubt she could have forced cuffs on him had he chosen to resist.

that's sure what it sounds like.
Tom

 

[laughing dog]

We have obviously had different life experiences.

Yes. You seemed to have been shaped by life experiences that allow you to feel entitled to promulgate falsehoods about other people's positions, and neither acknowledge that you made those misrepresentations nor apologise for doing so, nor feel any obligation to stop promoting misrepresentations in the future.

Not only did that destroy every irony in this universe, it destroyed every irony meter in the future.

Still waiting for you to address the central issue - racism - instead of these evasion tactics.

 

[Metaphor]

True, you did not use the word "intimidated".

I did not imply it either.

that's sure what it sounds like.
Tom

The passage you quoted makes no reference whatever to anybody's internal state or feelings. So if it 'sounds like' I said she was or would feel 'intimidated', that is your own, unjustified invention.

My words on here are scrutinised more than most, and I am aware of that extra scrutiny. But no matter what standard I am held to, I do not believe people should make up things I have not said or implied, and then refuse to acknowledge their error.

 

[Toni]

I remember you bringing this up near the beginning of the thread. The premise that the female cop was intimidated by the white kid. That that's why she behaved as she did.

No, I did not say she was intimidated. You will not find me saying that, because I did not say that.

It seemed implausible to me from the beginning, before I'd seen the video. Having now seen the video your premise is kinda ridiculous. Whatever was happening there, she wasn't intimidated by that kid.
Tom

If what you mean is "the video does not support a belief I imagined that Metaphor held and that I projected on to him", I agree.

From your post #19:

But I already did answer. The white boy and the black boy were treated differently to each other, but there are reasons other than 'racist cops' that could account for that difference. Indeed, the two boys differed in more ways from each other than just race. But of course, the perceived race of the boys may have been an influence on their treatment, but so could other things.

And as I thought I had made plain, the sex of the two different officers, and what each did when they got to the scene, seemed something that might have been worth discussing. In particular, the female cop, if I can be frank, seems as if she would be at the mercy of the white boy, had he chosen to fight back. Given his height and weight and male physique advantage over her, I doubt she could have forced cuffs on him had he chosen to resist.

From your post 113:

I've a question for you, Rhea. If the white boy had not been co-operative, if he'd resisted the female officer in any significant way, do you think she had a chance of actually getting him on the ground and cuffing him

More of your bon mots:

It is dangerous and delusional to foster a belief that most women are not at the physical mercy of most men. There's a reason why women are afraid of what men could to do them physically, if the men were so inclined.

Had Franco decided not to be so cooperative with the female cop, she'd have risked unnecessary injury to herself or to Franco to subdue him, if she could have subdued him at all.

I'm sure there are more but my program has just come on and I really have wasted too much of my time on you already

 

[Metaphor]

Still waiting for you to address the central issue - racism - instead of these evasion tactics.

Yes. I am just dying to address a debate where you have framed the terms of reference by begging the question and where the two sides are 'affirmative' and 'wrong and evil'.

 

[TomC]

So if it 'sounds like' I said she was or would feel 'intimidated', that is your own, unjustified invention

What was the point to your statement?
"At the mercy of the white boy"?

I'm trying to understand why you posted what you did. I'm telling you what it looked like to me and asking you to illuminate.
Tom

 

[Metaphor]

From your post #19:

That post makes no reference to anybody's internal state whatever.

From your post 113:

That post makes no reference to anybody's internal state whatever.

More of your bon mots:

Thank you for quoting them. I do agree they are well written.

I'm sure there are more but my program has just come on and I really have wasted too much of my time on you already

I hope I haven't made you feel intimidated.

No acknowledgment or apology for your multiple misrepresentations of my position? I don't mean all the ones you've ever made, just the ones today.

 

[Metaphor]

What was the point to your statement?
"At the mercy of the white boy"?

I'm trying to understand why you posted what you did. I'm telling you what it looked like to me and asking you to illuminate.
Tom

I really explained my viewpoint quite thoroughly already.

I believe in a physical situation, if it was a physical contest between that female officer and Franco, had Franco decided not to be co-operative (and he was nearly comically co-operative, as can be seen in the video and by the fact of his later statements), the female officer would have been overpowered by him ("at the mercy of"). Now, of course, as I already said, she probably could subdue him if he were unco-operative, by using a weapon* (a baton, or shooting him with a taser or gun), but that would fall into the category of "unnecessary injury" to herself or Franco. I think the more people who can be arrested without having to shoot them, the better.

But nowhere did I reference her internal state or feelings of being 'intimidated'.

*Or a well-placed blunt trauma attack on his balls (hey Toni there you go a genuine reference to genitalia from me rather than one of your imagined ones! This one is on the house!)

 

[laughing dog]

Still waiting for you to address the central issue - racism - instead of these evasion tactics.

Yes. I am just dying to address a debate where you have framed the terms of reference by begging the question and where the two sides are 'affirmative' and 'wrong and evil'.

Wow, you will say anything in order to continue your evasion tactics.

Nothing and no one is stopping you from coming up with an explanation. I realize it would interrupt your persistent flow of ad hom flinging,
and derailing from the topic, but it has a decent chance of being interesting,

 

[Metaphor]

Wow, you will say anything in order to continue your evasion tactics.

Nothing and no one is stopping you from coming up with an explanation. I realize it would interrupt your persistent flow of ad hom flinging,
and derailing from the topic, but it has a decent chance of being interesting,

I have called out the misrepresentations of my position, certainly, and that does involve calling out the people who made those misrepresentations.

 

[laughing dog]

Wow, you will say anything in order to continue your evasion tactics.

Nothing and no one is stopping you from coming up with an explanation. I realize it would interrupt your persistent flow of ad hom flinging,
and derailing from the topic, but it has a decent chance of being interesting,

I have called out the misrepresentations of my position, certainly, and that does involve calling out the people who made those misrepresentations.

While flinging ad homs and misrepresentions of your own. Pretty clear from your evasions you have nothing of substance on the OP subject.

 

[Metaphor]

Wow, you will say anything in order to continue your evasion tactics.

Nothing and no one is stopping you from coming up with an explanation. I realize it would interrupt your persistent flow of ad hom flinging,
and derailing from the topic, but it has a decent chance of being interesting,

I have called out the misrepresentations of my position, certainly, and that does involve calling out the people who made those misrepresentations.

While flinging ad homs and misrepresentions of your own. Pretty clear from your evasions you have nothing of substance on the OP subject.

I usually enter most threads optimistic, but I can recognise the futility of engaging with unpersuadables.

 

[laughing dog]

Wow, you will say anything in order to continue your evasion tactics.

Nothing and no one is stopping you from coming up with an explanation. I realize it would interrupt your persistent flow of ad hom flinging,
and derailing from the topic, but it has a decent chance of being interesting,

I have called out the misrepresentations of my position, certainly, and that does involve calling out the people who made those misrepresentations.

While flinging ad homs and misrepresentions of your own. Pretty clear from your evasions you have nothing of substance on the OP subject.

I usually enter most threads optimistic, but I can recognise the futility of engaging with unpersuadables.

Now you know how most of your audience feels.

And still more evasion.

 

[Jarhyn]

I just find it so stupid that some people wish to make this fight about what people of different sizes did or did not do, or worse allude to the FALSE idea that women are somehow lesser despite the fact that in the OP, the woman officer responded more appropriately to her side of the encounter.

As it is, I am... Well, I didn't mature much in any direction but tall. I'm skinny as a twig, and a stiff breeze could knock me over. I've had beef with a woman or two who could probably break me in half.

I can say that how someone responds to a conflict is entirely their own choice.

Oftentimes the only thing that anyone needs to do is pull the fighting parties apart and keep them separated while giving them respect as people and talking to them as adults so as to find out what happened.

If this was the first response, if cops weren't covered with weapons that make others fear them and them some fearful of others turning their own weapons upon them... Maybe they could do this thing, then, of serving, protecting everyone.

I think I recall various studies about firefighting teams with women thinking around problems in better, more effective, more efficient ways overall, mostly because people have to think smarter around problems when they have less brute force to apply, if they are to succeed.

Maybe someone who is less lazy than me can find such again.

It comes down to "the woman cop was more competent at the start of the encounter," or "racism in spades," or potentially both.


It is a mystery.

 

[Metaphor]

Now you know how most of your audience feels.

And still more evasion.

You'd think evasion would be difficult whilst simultaneously dying on multiple hills. But my DEX score might be higher than I thought!

 

[ZiprHead]

I believe in a physical situation, if it was a physical contest between that female officer and Franco, had Franco decided not to be co-operative (and he was nearly comically co-operative, as can be seen in the video and by the fact of his later statements), the female officer would have been overpowered by him ("at the mercy of"). Now, of course, as I already said, she probably could subdue him if he were unco-operative, by using a weapon*

You seem to forget that police officers are trained in hand to hand combat and the white kid was obviously an inexperienced fighter. Also your statement is complete conjecture. You have no real knowledge of what the female cop was thinking or why she did what she did, unless you're a mind-reader. You've lashed yourself to a point you think is valid but to make it work you have to misrepresent the parameters of the situation.

 

[Toni]

Wow, you will say anything in order to continue your evasion tactics.

Nothing and no one is stopping you from coming up with an explanation. I realize it would interrupt your persistent flow of ad hom flinging,
and derailing from the topic, but it has a decent chance of being interesting,

I have called out the misrepresentations of my position, certainly, and that does involve calling out the people who made those misrepresentations.

Poor poor misunderstood Metaphor!

 

[Toni]

US Women’s soccer generates more revenue than dues US men’s soccer. On the international stage, US wimen’s soccer teams vastly outperform US mens soccer teams.

As a sport, soccer is growing in the US. Women’s professional teams represent an extremely good opportunity to build enthusiasm for the sport, especially among girls and women.