Big announcement on the future of Orioles Hangout

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, DirtyBird said:

And this is a fallacy, with no eventual support. BLM is a joke.

I'm assuming you'd dismiss any evidence to the contrary because you've already made up your mind.

[allquixotic]

4 minutes ago, baltfan said:

Good lord please get out of the damn rabbit holes. 

Let me tell you a story second-hand from a friend of mine, who's an EMT, about a recent encounter he had with someone in public.

There was this woman who believed that the temperature sensors (basically infrared detectors) they used on people to scan them for elevated temperature were "mind control devices." This is what she said to him.

He spent several minutes calmly showing her and explaining to her how the device works, testing it on himself, etc. He even went into some of the science of it and showed her all the settings on it.

When he finished explaining, although she listened politely, she replied, "I don't believe a word you just said."

You're shouting at a wall. Let it go. This is why we don't discuss politics here. You can never change someone's mind.

[Ruzious]

2 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I post sometimes on the fourms on Billjamesonline.com.  They allow political discussions.  There are three or four regular posters there who probably start 1/3 of the threads, that I have to have on ignore because every single thread they post in becomes a ugly name-calling flame war.  The worst disputes on the Hangout are nothing compared to what happens there.  You could start a conversation about Al Kaline's batting stance, and there's a good chance you're going to get called a dirty %$#%$ing Marxist Fascist loser.

The no politics rule here is one of the things that keeps this a really good forum.

I post in a football forum on another site, and we have a very similar situation.  The lone moderator there called for a ban on politics a few months ago, and yet he often starts the political interruptions - which leads to others thinking it's fine to post on politics.  The odd thing is that he's been called out on it at least twice that I've seen, then is good enough to apologize for it, and then he keeps doing it again.    

[DirtyBird]

2 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I'm assuming you'd dismiss any evidence to the contrary because you've already made up your mind.

Just like the BLM crowd dismisses any talk of black people killing each other.

[Aristotelian]

2 hours ago, weams said:

I’ll let Tony decide that. If he is too busy I’ll address it. It’s an ask on my part at this juncture and most folks here are respectful of my asks. 

Lol...

[Moose Milligan]

6 minutes ago, DirtyBird said:

Just like the BLM crowd dismisses any talk of black people killing each other.

Well now you're just throwing bombs and being fussy.  

No one disagrees that black on black crime is a problem.  I am sure you're very concerned about it and wouldn't dare to bring it up unless you can use it to punch down on other topics.  I'm also pretty sure you've dedicated a lot of your time to researching black on black crime and working to raise awareness about the issue and how you can help stop it.  I can tell it's an issue near and dear to your heart.  

But black on black crime isn't how BLM started.  It's very simple, here:

Quote

In July 2013, the movement began with the use of the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter on social media after the acquittal of George Zimmerman in the shooting death of African-American teen Trayvon Martin 17 months earlier, in February 2012. The movement became nationally recognized for street demonstrations following the 2014 deaths of two African Americans: Michael Brown—resulting in protests and unrest in Ferguson Missouri, a city near St. Louis—and Eric Garner in New York City.^[8][9] Since the Ferguson protests, participants in the movement have demonstrated against the deaths of numerous other African Americans by police actions or while in police custody.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Lives_Matter#Loose_structure

Now...you can dig your heels in and keep pouting. 

I've learned in recent years that the people who get uncomfortable with discussing these things are usually just uncomfortable with themselves.  

[makoman]

While this thread has gone on for far too long IMO, on the plus side it's interesting to learn who some people are here. The typical moderation really covers up a lot of personalities.

[DirtyBird]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

Well now you're just throwing bombs and being fussy.  

No one disagrees that black on black crime is a problem.  I am sure you're very concerned about it and wouldn't dare to bring it up unless you can use it to punch down on other topics.  I'm also pretty sure you've dedicated a lot of your time to researching black on black crime and working to raise awareness about the issue and how you can help stop it.  I can tell it's an issue near and dear to your heart.  

But black on black crime isn't how BLM started.  It's very simple, here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Lives_Matter#Loose_structure

Now...you can dig your heels in and keep pouting. 

I've learned in recent years that the people who get uncomfortable with discussing these things are usually just uncomfortable with themselves.  

Michael Brown? That was the "hands up, don't shoot lie", right? The guy that assaulted an Asian store owner and reached for an officer's weapon? Is that the right one?

[dorfmac]

The white fragility and victimhood here is astounding. If OH goes down, so be it. If OH stays up, then even better.

But trying to play the victim of social efforts to improve our society is the ultimate "snowflake" move. This entire thread is an exercise of performative woe-is-me nonsense, especially the "my son is a cop" schtick. Policing is the mechanism by which the state is able to maintain and enforce the systemic racism that is in place. Any cop that can't look in the mirror and ask themselves what they can be doing to be better at their job for everyone doesn't have the integrity to wear the badge. Serving the community is looking outside of yourself and listening to others instead of assuming you're always in the right and know better. Meanwhile, we have federal law enforcement agents invading cities as a direct result of political motivations. It doesn't get more tone-deaf than trying to play cops as the victim with this occurring as the backdrop.

Sports have always been a vehicle for political action and discussion. If that's incompatible with someone's fandom, then maybe they sports isn't for them.

 

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, DirtyBird said:

Michael Brown? That was the "hands up, don't shoot lie", right? The guy that assaulted an Asian store owner and reached for an officer's weapon? Is that the right one?

Right, so that means he should have been shot and killed.  Glad you're happy about it.  

[Philip]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

Right, so that means he should have been shot and killed.  Glad you're happy about it.  

Well, I do not know the story, but if a guy grabs for my gun, I cannot be blamed for shooting him in response, because I don’t know what he wants to do with my gun.

Now again, I do not know the story, But if that comment is true, then it does change the story.

[Hazmat]

3 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Right, so that means he should have been shot and killed.  Glad you're happy about it.  

This is the kind of ridiculous argument that taints political discussions nowadays.  I guess when you have no intelligent retort, you must put words in someone's mouth.

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, Philip said:

Well, I do not know the story, but if a guy grabs for my gun, I cannot be blamed for shooting him in response, because I don’t know what he wants to do with my gun.

Now again, I do not know the story, But if that comment is true, then it does change the story.

C'mon, get it together. 

If a guy grabs for your gun but doesn't actually *take your gun* that means he's still unarmed and YOU are armed.  That doesn't give you carte blanche to shoot him because he unsuccessfully took your gun.  

[ChuckS]

Wow, this thread has turned into a great exercise on why political discussions should not be allowed in this forum. 

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, Hazmat said:

This is the kind of ridiculous argument that taints political discussions nowadays.  I guess when you have no intelligent retort, you must put words in someone's mouth.

Well enlighten me on what the proper response should have been?  Does assaulting a store owner and reaching for a police officer's weapon warrant being shot to death?  This isn't even a political discussion, it's just about being a decent person.