Smapti is Pitted

The BBQ Pit
1021

I understand completely. It is really easy to overstate your case when everyone else is being so angry. You innately want to create some sort of counterbalance to all the hate. Unfortunately, all that does is put everyone else on the defensive.

It is a false dilemma, but not the one you stated. There really are only two choices: say something or don’t say something. But there are plenty of choices besides saying nothing and blasting the other side.

Smapti’s views deserve to be vehemently repudiated. But the actual guy behind the username does deserve some sympathy for what his life has brought for him. And it took courage to bring that up. I’m very surprised he had the introspection necessary to figure this out. And I hope he will continue to explore this and hopefully find a happy, satisfying middle ground, instead of being an extremist.

But as long as he posts his fascist ideas, he’s gonna get flak for them, and–I’m sorry–he deserves it.

1022

This thread is certainly gold for those who like seeing people’s views completely misrepresented…

1023

I think it’s a lot harder to ignore if you are emotionally disturbed. Years ago very shortly after I joined, I started a Pit thread that went wrong at a very bad time in my life, and it took a while to get over. I wasn’t thinking rationally enough to anticipate the potential consequences and I wasn’t emotionally equipped to deal with the fallout. That experience certainly colored my participation in this thread, especially because in that case I was being accused of lying about my abusive childhood and/or trolling.

Hilariously enough, it was Dio who got the ball rolling on my pile-on! I notice he’s been compared to **Smapti **more than once in this thread. I know Dio isn’t here but I respectfully submit that while he was stubborn as all hell, I don’t remember him ever saying anything as egregious as Smapti. Yes, now I am defending Dio. Og help me, I actually liked that guy by the time they dropped the ban hammer. But I am 99% sure he had OCPD and have known sufferers IRL.

Really my experience bears little resemblance to this thread. But my point is, emotionally damaged people are more vulnerable to internet pile-ons than rational, healthy people.

Does that warrant consideration of how we approach a person on the internet? For me, it does. Obviously not everyone feels that way, or some people usually feel that way but feel an exception should be made in the worst cases. And you know what? There’s probably some exception I would make, too. I guess that’s a matter of personal perspective.

[QUOTE=Hentor]
Plus, what person volunteers that they wouldn’t save their kid if it presented some risk to themselves?
[/QUOTE]

Is that his real kid or his hypothetical kid? Does he actually have children?

Wise words, Big T.

1024

Misrepresented how, bitch?

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17774965&postcount=807

[Quote=iiandyiiii]
How about other human lives? Would you risk your life for your children?
[/quote]

[Quote=Smapti]
No.
[/QUOTE]
Which part did I misrepresent?

1025

Uh, I don’t think saying that someone is being kicked when they are down is in any way a comparison to being curb stomped. It’s an expression. That’s like saying “butthurt” is an allusion to anal rape.

Also, it’s the part before the but that can be ignored. Consider “I like you, but I don’t like what you did.” What’s the important part? “I don’t like what you did.”

Finally, a simple observation. You are mentioning a trauma to explain why you are offended.

1026

I wasn’t talking to you, moron. If I was, I’d have quoted your post. This really shouldn’t need spelling out, but I was commenting on peremensoe misrepresenting me, in addition to the other examples of misrepresentation I’d already called out.

1027

Nope. Closest he came was thinking that a woman who lived in another room in the same place as him, and who had sex in her room with various men on occasion, including him, was actually his monogamous girlfriend.

1028

Agreed, and if it was phrased like that, I would have let it slide. What was actually said was …

Which is a lot more more graphic and triggered some bad memories. I’ll happily concede my skin is probably not thick enough for this place, which is why I rarely post here. Anyhow, I think I’ve made my point as well as I am going to, so I’m bowing out. I just have to make one cheap shot on my way out …

Nope, cause his girlfriend is like the square root of -100. A ten, but also imaginary.

1029

I think he has worthwhile stuff to contribute, but god can the bot like reflexive posts stop?

I could write them myself, I don’t need to read em.

1030

I have no children and never will. This is by choice, because I don’t think I’d make a good parent and because I know I’d be unwilling to risk my life for a kid.

1031

I wish more people who knew they were not parent material would opt not to have children.

1032

So you admit you are trying to skirt the rules, so that you can express your hatred.

1033

Well here’s an unexpected gem. In response to the idea that police give whites better treatment than blacks:

Now, I would almost think this was some sort of satirical or sarcastic position, except that he’s never shown himself to engage in sarcasm, satire, or humor, as far as I know. And so I can only assume it sheds light on his bizarre philosophy: Police are treating people too well.

Apparently in his world, the police aren’t those who serve the public, and arrest who they think there’s enough evidence to go to trial. Rather, their purpose is to be some sort of harassment and execution squad who punish those who have the audacity to be suspected of some sort of crime. And if some people are abused, and others are treated better - that’s just a sign that there’s a problem with the system, and all people should be abused.

I guess that’s enlightening as to his attitude in the various threads.

1034

That’s a colorful and inaccurate description of my opinion. Police exist to protect and serve the law-abiding and to bring to justice the non-law-abiding. If white people are being given a free pass for committing crimes that black people would get arrested for, then that is a problem that needs to be addressed by holding white criminals to the same standard as black criminals.

1035

The police don’t judge who has commited a crime and then sentence them. That’s what a court is for. Police can suspect someone, gather evidence to support that suspicion, and arrest them and charge them with a crime in order to take it to court, where the issue of guilt is resolved.

You are assuming that not only are police always interacting with criminals and non-law-abiding-citizens (and is every traffic stop the same as dealing with a hardened criminal?), but that they have the power to abuse and punish people because of this notion. This isn’t an extreme “law and order” position, this is advocating for police to be judge, jury, and executioner against people who haven’t even had their crimes proved against them.

You go into every thread defending every potential police abuse, and if people point out a potential systemic unfairness to this abuse, your proposed solution is that police dish out more abuse to the lesser-abused groups, rather than taking their proper role as PEOPLE WHO DON’T DISH OUT ABUSE.

There are a lot of ambiguous situations in which anti-police people do jump on the police unfairly, but you aren’t a counterweight to that. You are your own form of crazy in which you’ll essentially defend any potential abuse of police power unconditionally. You seem to be unable to handle nuance. Everyone is either a law abiding citizen to you, in which case they never interact with the police and hence can never be abused, or a hardened criminal in which case the police are justified in abusing or executing them.

1036

Police Stand-off: Breaking News

A police siege ended in tragedy today when a three year old wheelchair-bound, developmentally delayed infant had her head strafed off her shoulders by eight hundred and thirty police officers.

The police were called to a local play park to investigate reports of an unidentified African-American male “acting all shifty, with intent to maybe get up to something”. When they arrived on the scene they witnessed 3 year old Rhonda Parker brandishing what appeared to be an IMI Desert Eagle. The object turned out to be a teddy bear.

Police spokesman S. Mapti said “The incident was regrettable, but early indications are that the many, many officers on the scene all acted properly and in accordance with procedure. Having identified the suspect as humanoid, and having received the all-clear from air support, they emerged from their battle tanks in a defensive formation, assessed the threat level as cataclysmic, and acted accordingly.”

Parker, who suffered from cerebral palsy and learning difficulties, was struck several thousand times during the encounter, which lasted for about 45 minutes.

Officer Mapti said “While some observers unfamiliar with police procedure have implied that the duration of fire was excessive, it’s important to remember that if you disregard the 0.08 seconds we gave the suspect to surrender, as well as reloading time and that coffee break we had around the 20 minute mark, all of which are just realities of modern policing, we were only firing for about half an hour.”

The department has also come under scrutiny for its actions immediately subsequent to the incident, in which a department stealth bomber subjected Parker’s headless body to a barrage of missiles packed with depleted uranium.

“Nuke the site from orbit.” said Mapti, “It’s the only way to be sure.”

An enquiry has been launched into the incident in order to definitively establish a timeline. Officer Mapti said “We ask the general public’s patience while we examine the facts of the case. If any of the officers acted improperly they will be dealt with accordingly.” Officers in the vicinity then proceded to laugh for several minutes.

Mapti concluded his remarks by stating “This is a very difficult time for the local community, particularly for Officers Joker, Raptorman, and Animal Mother, who were not only placed in fear for their lives but whose uniforms caught most of the splatter. We urge the community to remain calm and to bear in mind that, if you think about it, this was a pretty stupid place to have a three year old’s birthday party anyway.”

1037

Well, it certainly sucks that a bunch of assholes assaulted you, and in such a violent way, but that’s got zero to do with with you might be—metaphorically—kicking someone when their down. If you don’t like being put into the same broad category of your assailants, you might want to reevaluate your actions. Your attack, vile as it was, doesn’t make you immune to doing the same type of thing. Again, metaphorically.

1038

The coffee break was a nice touch. Well-crafted.

Any response, Smapti?

1039

I don’t believe it needs to be dignified with one.

1040

Are you really this fucking stupid? Not doing something because the rules do not allow it is not “skirting the rules” it is following the rules. It’s what the rules are for - so people can read them, and act in compliance with them.