Riots in Oakland

[slim 1,514]

And the above makes you lazy. You have the time to post in the thread, yet not the time to actually back up opinions you are presenting as matters of "fact".

It's not convincing in the least.

Why are you insisting that I do your fact-checking for you? I mean, if I posted "the sky is blue" would you demand a wikipedia link?

Once again, I'm not trying to convince you. I'm posting facts. If you choose to disagree, that's your right, just don't put it on me.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Why are you insisting that I do your fact-checking for you? I mean, if I posted "the sky is blue" would you demand a wikipedia link?

Once again, I'm not trying to convince you. I'm posting facts. If you choose to disagree, that's your right, just don't put it on me.

No Slim, you are posting opinion and claiming that that opinion has the weight of fact, with no evidence with which to support that claim.

I expect you'll go on in this fashion for post after post, because you are more interested in butting heads than you are in actually supporting your own claims.

[Heracles 417]

A cold-blooded murderer who thinks he's above the law (as most cops do)?

I think you mean certain city cops.

I have no problem with the cops around here.

[slim 1,514]

No Slim, you are posting opinion and claiming that that opinion has the weight of fact, with no evidence with which to support that claim.

I expect you'll go on in this fashion for post after post, because you are more interested in butting heads than you are in actually supporting your own claims.

Where did I post opinion? I have posted only facts in this thread. I don't need to support FACTS because they're not opinions that need support. They're true and factual statements of the way the world really is. If you don't believe that, you need to support your OPINION somehow. Good luck with that because as you'll find out, it's tough to support an opinion when facts are in defiance of it.

[Heracles 417]

Yes, the news is sensationalist in nature, I am perfectly aware of that, however, it is pretty difficult to miss the fact that in other European countries, and specifically the UK, suspects are not shot and killed during arrest no matter how threatened the police officers feel during that arrest, as I mentioned, despite the rowdy nature of drunken British yobs who frequently shout their mouths off at the police and throw punches, the police manage to arrest these miscreants without the uses of guns or tazers and very few UK police officers are injured during the arrest process.

Totally different ball game. The crime rate, type of crime and level of violence in the UK let alone the rest of Europe is pale in comparison to what is going on here. The United States has some serious crime issues, particularly with one demographic that seems to be drawn to it like a magnet. The reality is that had the UK or any other European country had the United States level of crime rate, police would probably have even more power to do their job than police do here. For example, youths with knives are becoming an issue in Melb, AUS. In response, the police there now have the legal authority to conduct random spot-checks on teens in public places - particularly public transport. That is simply not an option here without probably cause period.

American police are dealing with probably the scum of the earth, yet you guys actually expect them to serve tea and scones.

Edited July 10, 2010 by Booyah!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Where did I post opinion? I have posted only facts in this thread. I don't need to support FACTS because they're not opinions that need support. They're true and factual statements of the way the world really is. If you don't believe that, you need to support your OPINION somehow. Good luck with that because as you'll find out, it's tough to support an opinion when facts are in defiance of it.

Round and round we go

[elmcitymaven 9,711]

Where did I post opinion? I have posted only facts in this thread. I don't need to support FACTS because they're not opinions that need support. They're true and factual statements of the way the world really is. If you don't believe that, you need to support your OPINION somehow. Good luck with that because as you'll find out, it's tough to support an opinion when facts are in defiance of it.

Wow, that just blew the whole concept of the scientific method out of the water for me.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

TThe United States has some serious crime issues, particularly with one demographic that seems to be drawn to it like a magnet.

Where's Otto when you need him?

[slim 1,514]

the police there now have the legal authority to conduct random spot-checks on teens in public places - particularly public transport. That is simply not an option here without probably cause period.

First we give up our sugary drinks... next we're being searched without PC. Way to set the standard, AUS!

Wow, that just blew the whole concept of the scientific method out of the water for me.

So if a scientist proved something, published it, and then someone posted the conclusion, why would they need to go back through and post the whole scientific method if it's been proven already? What I'm getting on here is basically it's my job to support facts with the entire process of where those facts came from.

Have you folks ever heard of Google? If you don't believe me, try doing a search. I'm not going to do it for you.

[elmcitymaven 9,711]

So if a scientist proved something, published it, and then someone posted the conclusion, why would they need to go back through and post the whole scientific method if it's been proven already? What I'm getting on here is basically it's my job to support facts with the entire process of where those facts came from.

Have you folks ever heard of Google? If you don't believe me, try doing a search. I'm not going to do it for you.

They wouldn't have to publish it, but a reference from a verifiable source would be necessary. However, I have yet to see any references for the so-called facts you have set forth. For a living, I write and I have to support both my opinions and those statements that I set forth as fact. It is incumbent upon ME to prove the veracity of my statements, and to distinguish that which has already been proven, that which I am proving and that which is purely the opinion of myself or others. I don't ask my readers to prove it for me; that's lazy and sloppy writing. We are merely asking you to do just that -- prove to us that what you say is true. I readily admit that my own experience is purely anecdotal, and frankly I would love to be disproven. I am very much open to hearing differing points of view and have even been known to change my mind on occasion when presented with verifiable facts that contradict what I believe.

Prove it to me.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think we know you aren't going to support your own statements. So why spend all this time saying the same thing over and over?

Wouldn't the best way of silencing your opposition be to actually follow through on your own statements?

[slim 1,514]

I have yet to see any references for the so-called facts you have set forth. For a living, I write and I have to support both my opinions and those statements that I set forth as fact. It is incumbent upon ME to prove the veracity of my statements,

Prove it to me.

You have a lot of experience checking facts. Go do it. It may be incumbent on you to earn your living but that has very little to do with what I post here on VJ. Once again.... this is the internet. It's not that serious. However, facts are facts and if you don't like checking them out on your own, that's not my problem. I'm not going to prove it to you. That's your business.

I think we know you aren't going to support your own statements.

I think I've made it very clear I'm not going to post anything in support of the facts. If you don't believe the facts I've posted, you can remain ignorant in your opinion.

So why spend all this time saying the same thing over and over?

I can repeat the facts all day. It doesn't matter to me how long you choose to ignore them.

Wouldn't the best way of silencing your opposition be to actually follow through on your own statements?

Follow through on what? I've never said I was going to do anything. I've posted facts. You've ignored them. What do I need to follow through on?

The best way to silence you would be illegal.

[elmcitymaven 9,711]

Okay. I submit to your will, especially since I know you have guns and aren't afraid to use them. I am alas armed only with a can of Pledge and a dying butane lighter (disposable) Your facts is facts, and I shan't be so bold as to ask you to prove them. Far be it from me to expect anyone to back up their statements.

What leaves me puzzled is this: you state that this is the internet and it isn't that serious. If that's the case, why are you still defending a nearly indefensible position (i.e. "them's facts because I say so") so many pages on?

The best way to silence you would be illegal.

Oh and by the way, reported.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You posted opinion and called it fact. You've said that it is my responsibility to prove you wrong but that your statements should be accepted as fact with no proof.

You then post the same thing over and over demanding that your statements stand as fact and to take your word for it, yet in all the time you've spent on this you could just as easily have proven your point with some actual concrete references.

If we were playing poker is say you are bluffing. Badly.

And threats now? Well that really helps matters doesn't it.

Edited July 10, 2010 by Its a MADHOUSE

[Heracles 417]

The UK has violent areas - council estates that are infamous for criminal activity. I don't think anyone would dispute that.

But we don't have entire cities that are like that. The US does.

And not just one city but city after city.