The police in the US incident you speak of were tried, convicted, and sentenced to the lengthy prison sentences that are suitable for violent crimes carried out with malice aforethought. Lynching- the reference of your previous point- implies impunity, and the perpetrators did not benefit from impunity in the case you mention. I can brin…
The police in the US incident you speak of were tried, convicted, and sentenced to the lengthy prison sentences that are suitable for violent crimes carried out with malice aforethought. Lynching- the reference of your previous point- implies impunity, and the perpetrators did not benefit from impunity in the case you mention. I can bring up enough anecdotal cases of violent assaults and murders within the previous seven months to fill several feet of this reply thread. If I felt like it, I could comb through news articles on violent crime until I found an example featuring white victims, black perpetrators, and an obvious racial motive.
You know, you posted one incident, and I just posted one. But even in the event that all the officers are found guilty in that case, their convictions won't support a narrative that all black police are sadistic thugs, any more than the case you brought up proves that all white police are violent racists.
The case you brought up has no relevance to the present situation in the UK. The UK and the US have very, very different histories and social challenges. The details of the incident that ignited the rioting in the UK have nothing in common with the details of the case you picked out of the air for your whataboutist apologism, either. The UK police response doesn't have any resemblance to the conduct of the police in the Mississippi case, either.
So my point stands: your comments are still off-topic.
You're also relying almost entirely on an Emotivist appeal, and emotivist appeals should be suspected, because they focus on the horror, pain, and sorrow of the victims in one incident in ways that lead an audience to forget that there isn't anything special about one particular example: every victim of mayhem or violent assault experiences severe suffering. But emotivist appeals are undeniably effective at working people up, which is why they're so often used as a war propaganda tactic. As I write this, both sides of the Ukraine War are doing it. Both sides in the Gaza War are doing it. Emotivism accounts for a lot of what keeps blood feuds going long after the original participants are on the other side of the lawn.
The police in the US incident you speak of were tried, convicted, and sentenced to the lengthy prison sentences that are suitable for violent crimes carried out with malice aforethought. Lynching- the reference of your previous point- implies impunity, and the perpetrators did not benefit from impunity in the case you mention. I can bring up enough anecdotal cases of violent assaults and murders within the previous seven months to fill several feet of this reply thread. If I felt like it, I could comb through news articles on violent crime until I found an example featuring white victims, black perpetrators, and an obvious racial motive.
As for the police angle, I can recall a recent incident in Memphis featuring black police officers who stopped a young black man from northern California and committed a violent assault on him. But in that case, the victim won't have "deep psychological scars for life", because he was beaten to death. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/what-we-know-about-memphis-police-officers-tyre-nichols-death-rcna67861
You know, you posted one incident, and I just posted one. But even in the event that all the officers are found guilty in that case, their convictions won't support a narrative that all black police are sadistic thugs, any more than the case you brought up proves that all white police are violent racists.
The case you brought up has no relevance to the present situation in the UK. The UK and the US have very, very different histories and social challenges. The details of the incident that ignited the rioting in the UK have nothing in common with the details of the case you picked out of the air for your whataboutist apologism, either. The UK police response doesn't have any resemblance to the conduct of the police in the Mississippi case, either.
So my point stands: your comments are still off-topic.
You're also relying almost entirely on an Emotivist appeal, and emotivist appeals should be suspected, because they focus on the horror, pain, and sorrow of the victims in one incident in ways that lead an audience to forget that there isn't anything special about one particular example: every victim of mayhem or violent assault experiences severe suffering. But emotivist appeals are undeniably effective at working people up, which is why they're so often used as a war propaganda tactic. As I write this, both sides of the Ukraine War are doing it. Both sides in the Gaza War are doing it. Emotivism accounts for a lot of what keeps blood feuds going long after the original participants are on the other side of the lawn.