My actual words:
The words you’re attributing to me are not in that post. Neither is the general sentiment. I was commenting on the idea that the police “can’t win” because people were saying maybe they could’ve avoided killing someone. That’s ludicrous. I’m not going to reread that entire thread right now, but the general argument was that the cops weren’t horrible Nazis but with a different approach they might’ve been able to resolve that situation without killing anyone. Much straw was thrown around.
[quote=“Shodan, post:22, topic:696418”]
See, that’s the problem. If you are alleging that anyone who says anything about the shooting must be a member of the investigative groups or the grand jury, then either
[ul][li]you are a member of one of those groups, or[/li][li]you are not a member of those groups, and therefore your allegation is stupid and wrong.[/ul]I think we can be reasonably sure you aren’t a member, so that doesn’t leave a lot of options.[/li][/quote]
I think I explained what I was saying, but I guess it’s not working. I’ll try again: you suggested that the Brown shooting was “clearly justified.” I don’t think that’s so clear. So I said that either, one, you have more facts at your disposal than everyone else, or two, saying it’s “clearly justified” is empty bluster. Unless your first post in this thread was not about the Brown shooting at all, but was instead a lame attempt to snark on something else I said in another thread about a different situation - lame because it doesn’t even sorta come close to anything I said. That would make this whole thing kind of a waste of time.