Yes, I was referring to the initial claims of murder that were being promoted by the media outlets and the internet.
I find it amazing that media outlets can find so many pundits, alleged experts, and propagandists who are willing to so quickly provide an explanation for a situation where there are so few established facts. It’s as if “I don’t know the facts but…” has become the norm.
If that’s the case, I think many here in this debate do believe she committed suicide. If you follow my posts you can see I never really thought it was murder.
I think you can stop accusing people in this thread now. So tedious.
:yawn: “Tedious”? Really? I find it tedious when, once again, the media outlets, pundits, internet propagandists, bullies, and trolls champion their foregone conclusions before all (most of?) the facts are known. But that’s just me.
Perhaps you don’t like being reminded that the initial claims of cop murders black women were wrong??? Those stories weren’t at all tedious. In hindsight, those stories were just plain embareassing. But I suspect that the usual suspects will try the same tactic in the near future.
“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”
-Rahm Emanuel
And you’re not championing foregone conclusions, for example blaming her family for her suicide and absolving the people that were responsible for her care while she was in their custody?
No kidding.
If I were given custody of a teenager from a foster care program, and they committed suicide 3 days after living with me, don’t you think there ought to be an investigation into my culpability?
To not do so would be irresponsible.
Sandra Bland was not a teenager; she was an adult. And she did not come from a foster program - she was arrested for assaulting an officer. And I do not recall seeing doorhinge say that there should not be an investigation.
Apart from that, spot on.
Regards,
Shodan
Not hip on analogies, I can see.
OK lets stick to the law here: The state was responsible for her care when in their custody. The family wasn’t.
As long as you promise to “stick to the law” in further discussions, sure.
That’s right! No fucking jaywalking in this thread!
Ouch. Take it easy on me willya. Next it’s gonna be the “comfy chair.”
So go on with your discussion of the family’s responsibility in the matter.
You probably missed it, but the family’s apparent inability to bail Sandra Bland out was brought up in response to someone (Frylock?) in this thread claiming that the arresting officer had “moral culpability” for her suicide. If he did, then the family had just as much if not more “moral culpability”.
If you don’t want to discuss “moral culpability” anymore, I am fine with that.
That only follows if you really, truly believe being thrown in jail for three days was the proper and logical outcome from what transpired.
I can buy that everything was legal, but I don’t think her arrest was even close to being necessary. In that sense, she shouldn’t have been in custody in the first place.
Ah so that decision to “stick to the law” only lasted for a couple of posts then. Or I guess it was only drad dog’s decision, not yours.
:shrug:
I guess.
I abide by the forums rules. Making up your own debate rules only makes it look like you’re incapable of debate, so are employing some “handicaps”. GLWAT.
The moral culpability can be a function of legal responsibility. I think the family is entitled to not bail her out and have their privacy about why they may not have. It wasn’t on the surface unreasonable. Ms Bland was under the legal custody of the state, not her family.
You make a lot of little pin pricks to distract but they’re so small. Can’t you ever respond to the issue you’re in the middle of?
Your reply was non-responsive, in that it was a directive for me to “search this thread.” (See the reply quoted just below.) As I was not the one who had made a claim about what was “usual” for people to post, it is not up to me to provide evidence of the claim. It’s your claim; it’s up to you to support it.
In the same post you seem to be confused, stating both that those who make the “usual” remarks reside only on dailykos, and that they are to be found in “this thread.” ??? Here’s that post:
Then we have this post:
It’s an interesting theory, but it strikes me as specious. If doorhinge had posted something like this:
…then, I would think, no one would have any criticisms to offer. That claim seems reasonable. But, of course, what doorhinge actually posted was this:
These two things are not equivalent. For the theory (that all doorhinge meant to do was to point out that posters hadn’t retracted their earlier remarks*) to be valid, then the two bits in quotes would have to be roughly equivalent. And they are not.
So doorhinge’s claim that it’s “usual” for posters here to claim that the arresting officer murdered Bland would appear to remain short on supportive evidence.
*More specifically, that a few posters, in the day or so after the video release, had posted remarks implying that the arresting officer had murdered Bland–and then had failed to return to the thread to say ‘I’ve changed the views I posted right after that video came out.’
Except for the fact that I haven’t blamed the Bland family for Sandra’s choice of suicide AND I haven’t absolved the people responsible for her care while she was in custody AND I’m not championing foregone conclusions, you’re post is spot on.
cmyk, meet drad dog.