Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac banner

21421 - 21440 of 21468 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,538 Posts
I think it goes without saying that images and video can be manipulated to produce a certain result. Which part of the on-the-street-no-pauses video from ten feet away by the 17 year old in Minnesota of the death of George Floyd while in police custody with a knee on his neck did you find to be ambiguous or inconclusive?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,404 Posts
I think it goes without saying that images and video can be manipulated to produce a certain result. Which part of the on-the-street-no-pauses video from ten feet away by the 17 year old in Minnesota of the death of George Floyd while in police custody with a knee on his neck did you find to be ambiguous or inconclusive?
I think what can be missing from a video is context. I have not seen the video, I do not like to watch people dying or being executed and I am defending the officer, more the point. The video is one element but it is not all. Could there be things outside of the videos recording that could have officers on edge or distracted trying to keep a man down to arrest while externally things are progressing that has his attention as well. These are probably poor reasons but there could be a variety of factors and circumstances that makes an officer act/react in a certain way. I think you need more than just a video, as black and white as it may appear, you need a broader understanding of the situation. I would imagine that was all looked at in court and would like to be able to trust the legal system to take all the evidence from the situation at hand to get to the conclusion they got to.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,759 Posts
I think what can be missing from a video is context. I have not seen the video, I do not like to watch people dying or being executed and I am defending the officer, more the point. The video is one element but it is not all. Could there be things outside of the videos recording that could have officers on edge or distracted trying to keep a man down to arrest while externally things are progressing that has his attention as well. These are probably poor reasons but there could be a variety of factors and circumstances that makes an officer act/react in a certain way. I think you need more than just a video, as black and white as it may appear, you need a broader understanding of the situation. I would imagine that was all looked at in court and would like to be able to trust the legal system to take all the evidence from the situation at hand to get to the conclusion they got to.
My main concern about the guilty verdict would be if fear that the Burn, Loot & Murder gang would go on a rampage entered into the equation.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,404 Posts
My main concern about the guilty verdict would be if fear that the Burn, Loot & Murder gang would go on a rampage entered into the equation.
That is definitely a big issue. There was a lot of social pressure and presumed guilt before the trial even started. This is a scary thing when guilt is determined by social media and not the truth. I still hope and believe that this was not the case here and justice has been served for the sake of justice and not revenge.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,538 Posts
I think what can be missing from a video is context. I have not seen the video, I do not like to watch people dying or being executed and I am defending the officer, more the point. The video is one element but it is not all. Could there be things outside of the videos recording that could have officers on edge or distracted trying to keep a man down to arrest while externally things are progressing that has his attention as well. These are probably poor reasons but there could be a variety of factors and circumstances that makes an officer act/react in a certain way. I think you need more than just a video, as black and white as it may appear, you need a broader understanding of the situation. I would imagine that was all looked at in court and would like to be able to trust the legal system to take all the evidence from the situation at hand to get to the conclusion they got to.
I’m pretty certain they looked at all of the evidence, but in the end, if there hadn’t been video evidence, Derek Chauvin might very well have got off. This was not like the Rodney King video from years ago. This was high resolution and close up. George Floyd was already in custody with his hand behind his back. A knee to the neck was not necessary nor was it protocol. If you ever do see the video, even part of it, you’ll see what I mean. Chauvin has no defence for his actions.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,747 Posts
Due process is hair-splitting?

I feel the point is he was found guilty, on all three counts in a court of law, based on substantial evidence, not declared guilty by social media based on a video clip that was circulated.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,404 Posts
Only on account of this thread did I watch this Ben Shapiro video. Seems like there is more then enough there for some reasonable doubt.


I think Shapiro pointed out a few reasonable doubts in this case and don't think he was trying to proclaim innocence, just that it is not as cut and dry as it seems.
 

·
peek-a-boo
Joined
·
16,511 Posts
And that’s why he was found guilty. On all three counts. If he had a defence it was a pretty sh!tty one. Hair-splitter.
I don’t think anyone actually read your post Freddie. No where did I see you suggest the video was the only evidence at trial, nor did you suggest the defendant shouldn’t have due process. These posters will make up anything to fight it seems. And now I see the blindingly stupid suggestion that it was a ‘social media video’. It was evidence at a trial you nitwit. Anyway, macfury is merely trolling you with his useless posts. As usual. I think those that suggest this rare guilty verdict is because the jury was afraid of violent reprisals should consider the facts before spewing stupidity, and perhaps offers even a shred of evidence. But we won’t will we…

another useless ehmac tussle no reasonable person wants to participate in!

Good job macfury!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,404 Posts
I don’t think anyone actually read your post Freddie. No where did I see you suggest the video was the only evidence at trial, nor did you suggest the defendant shouldn’t have due process. These posters will make up anything to fight it seems. And now I see the blindingly stupid suggestion that it was a ‘social media video’. It was evidence at a trial you nitwit. Anyway, macfury is merely trolling you with his useless posts. As usual. I think those that suggest this rare guilty verdict is because the jury was afraid of violent reprisals should consider the facts before spewing stupidity, and perhaps offers even a shred of evidence. But we won’t will we…

another useless ehmac tussle no reasonable person wants to participate in!

Good job macfury!
What was said was that "The recording was incontrovertible proof, something one doesn’t easily get these days." To me it does not sound so cut and dry from the accounts in the Shapiro video. I think this is where the discussion went on the merits of video alone. The discussion has been pretty civil lately, opposing views without the name calling. Would be nice if we could keep it that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: polywog

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,538 Posts
I don’t think anyone actually read your post Freddie. No where did I see you suggest the video was the only evidence at trial, nor did you suggest the defendant shouldn’t have due process. These posters will make up anything to fight it seems. And now I see the blindingly stupid suggestion that it was a ‘social media video’. It was evidence at a trial you nitwit. Anyway, macfury is merely trolling you with his useless posts. As usual. I think those that suggest this rare guilty verdict is because the jury was afraid of violent reprisals should consider the facts before spewing stupidity, and perhaps offers even a shred of evidence. But we won’t will we…

another useless ehmac tussle no reasonable person wants to participate in!

Good job macfury!
I think you’re right. Sometimes it’s fun to watch people squirm tho.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,538 Posts
What was said was that "The recording was incontrovertible proof, something one doesn’t easily get these days." To me it does not sound so cut and dry from the accounts in the Shapiro video. I think this is where the discussion went on the merits of video alone. The discussion has been pretty civil lately, opposing views without the name calling. Would be nice if we could keep it that way.
That’s because a certain Albertan hasn’t entered the fray. I agree, it’s good to be able to talk about issues without resorting to insults.
 

·
peek-a-boo
Joined
·
16,511 Posts
What was said was that "The recording was incontrovertible proof, something one doesn’t easily get these days." To me it does not sound so cut and dry from the accounts in the Shapiro video. I think this is where the discussion went on the merits of video alone. The discussion has been pretty civil lately, opposing views without the name calling. Would be nice if we could keep it that way.
I think you’re right. Sometimes it’s fun to watch people squirm tho.
Then they start whining about civility after they spend a couple pages clearly trolling you. I mean come on! It's obvious to anyone observing. Because nothing they've gone after you for was ever in your post. Then they keep it up, even if you try to clarify your post. It doesn't matter. I merely pointed out the very obvious. And they don't like it is all. They prefer to just keep trolling without being called out on it is all. Free speech, but only if they like it!!! Civility!!! Wasn't it macfury that whined that only weak kneed people go to the Shang because they won't be confronted? HA HA HA HA HA. Let the whimpering commence...

Then they scratch their heads wondering why there aren't more people here participating.
 

·
peek-a-boo
Joined
·
16,511 Posts
What was said was that "The recording was incontrovertible proof, something one doesn’t easily get these days." To me it does not sound so cut and dry from the accounts in the Shapiro video. I think this is where the discussion went on the merits of video alone. The discussion has been pretty civil lately, opposing views without the name calling. Would be nice if we could keep it that way.
So you slice out a piece of his post, twist to mean something else to fit your ability to attack it, hmmmm. Yeah Ive seen this before. And then post something incredibly dumb like, one of the most import pieces of evidence at that trial, as what was you called it? Oh right. "a social media video'.

Come on man lets get real. If I was in person with people and someone made a statement like that, the mocking and jeers wouldn't only come from myself that's for sure. mIt couldn't be more ridiculous. Almost as ridiculous as those trying to paint this guilty verdict which is rare! as the jury being afraid of violence. It just defies description.,..

then macfury comes in with a cherry picked thing from an article one has to pay a subscription to access, and twists Freddie's post on defence for even further trolling. So. Where is this so civil discussion going? How long do you think twisting and trolling someone's posts continue until someone finally speaks out?

Sure, civility is good, but it's a two way street. I don't see anything civil about a couple other members here either. What would be nice, if people to engage far less in trolling. Period. When trolling is allowed in threads, that's when people flee. And that's been the problem here for years, and no moderator etc has really ever been allowed to deal with it. There was a brief hope there, but when that was canned, that's when everyone fled this place.

So, in short, it would be nice if people stopped trolling if they wanted more civil discussion.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,759 Posts
Only on account of this thread did I watch this Ben Shapiro video. Seems like there is more then enough there for some reasonable doubt.


I think Shapiro pointed out a few reasonable doubts in this case and don't think he was trying to proclaim innocence, just that it is not as cut and dry as it seems.
Knowing that George Floyd was having trouble breathing before the ground sequence, brings us back to asking; What role did fear of the response of the Burn Loot & Murder gang play in the verdict?

OTOH I was not really able to tell from that footage whether his knee was on the shoulder or the neck.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,404 Posts
So you slice out a piece of his post, twist to mean something else to fit your ability to attack it, hmmmm. Yeah Ive seen this before. And then post something incredibly dumb like, one of the most import pieces of evidence at that trial, as what was you called it? Oh right. "a social media video'.

Come on man lets get real. If I was in person with people and someone made a statement like that, the mocking and jeers wouldn't only come from myself that's for sure. mIt couldn't be more ridiculous. Almost as ridiculous as those trying to paint this guilty verdict which is rare! as the jury being afraid of violence. It just defies description.,..

then macfury comes in with a cherry picked thing from an article one has to pay a subscription to access, and twists Freddie's post on defence for even further trolling. So. Where is this so civil discussion going? How long do you think twisting and trolling someone's posts continue until someone finally speaks out?

Sure, civility is good, but it's a two way street. I don't see anything civil about a couple other members here either. What would be nice, if people to engage far less in trolling. Period. When trolling is allowed in threads, that's when people flee. And that's been the problem here for years, and no moderator etc has really ever been allowed to deal with it. There was a brief hope there, but when that was canned, that's when everyone fled this place.

So, in short, it would be nice if people stopped trolling if they wanted more civil discussion.
You seem to be the only one on an attack at the moment. What did I twist from that post? The discussion has been civil up till your posts and it seems all your posts end up the same calling people names and trolls. I think you missed the point on social media aspect. It was not about the video but about the masses declaring guilt before the trial was over on social media. Social media has plenty of influence in our world today. I am not saying it had an impact on this specific trial but would not be surprised as it is hard to not know anything about the event going in as a juror. Just as it was difficult finding a jury for the OJ Simpson trial. They do their best to get the most unbiased people as possible.

You seem to keep using civility requires from both sides, which I agree with but I have not seen name calling or anything of the sort in a while now from anyone but you. Not sure what trolling is going on, seems to simply be someone who holds a difference of opinion and that is not trolling.
 

·
peek-a-boo
Joined
·
16,511 Posts
What did you twist???? I seriously just explained it, probably twice! You wonder why people get frustrated? You never read freddies post at all, quite clearly made crap up and then dug in your heels. And now the Ben Shapiro stuff, you've got.... to be kidding me.

If that ain't trolling, I don't know what is. As far as being civil, macfury is the one to call it here. He jeered at those who only wish to hang at the Shang thread. Mainly though because he isn't allowed to go in there and troll people and wind people up.

If you're going to be obtuse, and spend your posts winding people up and trolling, it's pure cowardice to complain about civility afterwards. Don't like it? Don't troll then. Thats been the hallmark here for years. People posting ultra inflammatory nonsense to be obtuse, dig in because its winding some one up, and then cry civility! if someone gets frustrated and calls them out.

Over, and over, and over again. Gee I wonder why no one else participates here? I wasn't here 7 years and it only got worse, so dont look at me!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,404 Posts
What did you twist???? I seriously just explained it, probably twice! You wonder why people get frustrated? You never read freddies post at all, quite clearly made crap up and then dug in your heels. And now the Ben Shapiro stuff, you've got.... to be kidding me.

If that ain't trolling, I don't know what is. As far as being civil, macfury is the one to call it here. He jeered at those who only wish to hang at the Shang thread. Mainly though because he isn't allowed to go in there and troll people and wind people up.

If you're going to be obtuse, and spend your posts winding people up and trolling, it's pure cowardice to complain about civility afterwards. Don't like it? Don't troll then. Thats been the hallmark here for years. People posting ultra inflammatory nonsense to be obtuse, dig in because its winding some one up, and then cry civility! if someone gets frustrated and calls them out.

Over, and over, and over again. Gee I wonder why no one else participates here? I wasn't here 7 years and it only got worse, so dont look at me!
Have a great day.
 

·
peek-a-boo
Joined
·
16,511 Posts
Have a great day.
You as well.

it just would be so much better if the level of inflammatory windups were lower. Perhaps then an actual discussion could happen. But I suspect someone here (macfury) gets cranky if one tries to take a more factual non partisan position as that’s much harder to wind up.
 
21421 - 21440 of 21468 Posts
Top