My only problem with that is the prefix “re”, it implies that they have gotten an education in the first place.
And that’s what they need, and are lacking.
I’m good with them naming an Air Force latrine after her.
I’m reminded of a scene from Night Court, where someone used the word “oxymoron”, to which Dan said, “I think he just called me a Nazi moron.”
Applicable here, I think.
I think I see your problem here.
At no stage—not even once—did @Hamlet suggest that the events at the Capitol were “completely unimportant.” Such a claim is not even hinted at in his contributions to this thread. As far as I can tell, his sole argument was that it is excessive to describe this single event, lasting a few hours, as the end of all rule of law in the United States.
Here’s the first post he made in response to that claim:
Maybe you can point me to his claim that the events were “completely unimportant.”
And just in case you forgot, these are the posts that he was responding to:
Emphasis mine.
Thanks mhendo, I doubt I could have responded better myself.
Here, here. How these deaths were initially and continue to be reported makes an enormous difference to how the incursion will be perceived. “One dead, an unarmed woman shot by plain clothes police officers” supports a very different narrative than, “Five dead, including a police officer mortally injured by rioters.”
Right, the rule of law isn’t dead.
The rule of law is on life support, and its family has been notified that they should come soon.
Bit of amusing hyperbole there, but it has taken quite the beating, and while it may have prevailed this time, it is weakened and still has enemies out to crush it under their foot.
But the rule of law is more than just what happens on the ground when the mob attacks. The rule of law is the sum total of how these things are dealt with, and if the perpetrators are identified, arrested, and charged, then the rule of law is doing its job.
I’m not arguing that this incident was not a challenge to the rule of law, and I think we need to ask some searching questions about why the authorities were apparently so unprepared for the violence and/or (in some cases) so willing to let the mob do what it wanted. I think some heads should probably roll among the law enforcement agencies involved here. I also think that the relative kid gloves with which this mob was handled, compared to the response to BLM protests, is a problem for the rule of law, because one crucial facet of a functioning system is the notion of equity in terms of treatment by law enforcement. The imbalances, often related to race and ethnicity, in how our law enforcement treat people really need to be investigated and addressed.
But as someone who spends a lot of time reading about criminal justice and the legal system, and who really believes in proper criminal justice reform, I want the reform to be of the type that treats everyone better, not worse. While it would have given me some visceral pleasure to see some of those MAGA morons on the wrong end of police batons, my general position is that I want police to show more restraint, not less. My general position is that I want the police to treat BLM protests less harshly, not MAGA protests more harshly.
There is no doubt in my mind that the shooting of the woman inside the Capitol was legally justified. You could also argue, quite reasonably, that she got what she deserved: “play stupid games, wins stupid prizes.” But while it was probably justified, I’m still not completely sure that it was necessary. And if law enforcement had been more committed and more resistant at the entrances and the surroundings of the building, they wouldn’t have needed to use deadly force inside it.
I thought this Onion headline was on point:
Don’t dis the Chewbacca:
YMMV I guess.
Anyone who thinks the rule of law is in much worse shape than it ever was is a bit ignorant of how things have been. When precisely were these halcyon days when the rule of law was so much better that you wax so nostalgic for?
The health issues that beset the rule of law are of a chronic disease nature, not akin to a car crash. Sometimes we are able to control it a bit less poorly than usual, sometimes we are like someone who skipped an insulin dose and didn’t check our sugars, but we have never managed it very well let alone with equity.
That’s the thing about American elections, at least on a national level; they are AMAZINGLY close. People are now saying, and seriously meaning it, that Biden won in “a landslide.” It was a really, really close election.
In popular vote terms, Biden won 51 percent of the vote, Trump 47. If I showed you a crowd of 98 people, 51 wearing blue shirts and 47 wearing red shirts, you could not tell at a glance which kind of shirt was more prevalent. That is basically one person out of 25 representing a Biden victory, and thanks to the electoral college, you could in theory flip about one out of every 3000 to flip the election.
I think your illustration is not a good one, because the difference is not of 4 people, but several million. The scale is important in this case. Saying you ran 51% of a 100 yard dash vs your friend running 47% then yes, there is almost no difference, but the same is not true of a marathon.
Of course if you are blue-red color blind it would not matter either way.
//i\\
One politician – I didn’t catch the name – who was sheltering with Pence said that Pence was pissed! He had never seen the VP so upset.
Must’ve been Jim Inhofe:
Percentages are everything here.
The USA used to have actual landslides. Five straight elections from 1980 to 1996, the winner got more electoral votes than any president has since, and all those popular vote margins were greater than any election since except that 1992 was slightly less than 2008.
I don’t think that they should treat MAGA protests more harshly either.
Insurrection attempts, OTOH…
I don’t think that the MAGA crowd should have been dispersed with tear gas or rubber bullets or pepper balls. I don’t think that they should have been kettled and then ordered to disperse. I don’t think that they should have been assaulted for bumping into a fence.
But once they actually were crossing the lines, they were assaulting the Capitol, then some pushback would have been certainly warranted. If they had been met with teargas and less than lethal munitions while they were climbing the steps and the scaffolding, then there may not have been any need for the use of more lethal munitions for those trying to climb through the windows of the House chamber.
I’m generally fairly doubtful on many “legally justified” shootings, but I have no doubts on this one.
100% agreed on this. The insurrectionists had no reason to take it seriously, as it didn’t seem as though the police were. I am sure that she was quite surprised that someone would actually shoot her as she attempted to climb her way into the occupied House chambers.
I also think that that was the first time that anyone in that mob realized how serious things were. That was the first sign of any resistance. If they hadn’t been stopped there, however, and they managed to get in and overwhelm the security inside the chambers before they had been evacuated, then things would have gotten ugly fast. We would have been dealing with a hostage situation.
Hey, @mikecurtis! With a U.S. Capitol Police officer now dead from injured sustained “while physically engaging with protesters," would you care to revisit this post:
“An unarmed person is never a threat to an armed one. Never.”
I dunno, I just watched a mob get let into the Capitol building.
January 5th 2021.
It’s never been perfect, it’s always been an uphill battle to maintain law over lawlessness, but the events of the last couple of days were a bloody battle, that we won, but did not emerge unscathed.
Poor Mikey. His God has forsaken him.
One other thing that occurs to me:
Remembering that – with the CFSG – every accusation is actually an admission …
I think we have learned over the last few years, and had that knowledge dramatically refined two days ago, who the true “suckers” and “losers” (epithets trump used about the rank-and-file military) are.
I’m actually just a tiny bit surprised she had room to fit through that window – what with having to share the confined space with the 45th President of the United States (who’ll ‘be there right beside you’) and all.
To reiterate: Dopers, and others, have done an amazing job of characterizing this man’s innumerable faults and his boundless awfulness, and – yet – we’ve only scratched the surface.
Easily. You quoted part of it:
That was him downplaying what happened, making it out to be less of a deal than it actually was.
And here he is saying he’s histrionic for daring to express anger in the Pit. This is the part followed by the hypocritically childish remark that I pointed out, the main thrust of my post and the part you conveniently ignored.
Did he it was literally nothing? No. But he did underplay it, making it relatively nothing compared to what it actually was. All the while having emotional reactions to someone expressing emotions.
Like I said, the actual position is between the two. But, due to the circumstances, neither is really being childish. Both are having normal emotional reactions, and neither deserve to be treated like shit over it.
Now will you please stop with your constant need to be condescending towards me in every reply. I always have an answer for why I say what I say–I’m not stupid. You may disagree with me, but that doesn’t make me stupid, either.
I’m going to experiment with putting you on mute, since you often say fine things when you’re not going after me and trying to piss me off.