Scott Adams describes the spectacular persuasion technique as a charismatic BLM leader speaks to Trump supporters. … https://t.co/6f4cn9D5pt
— Scott Adams (@ScottAdamsSays) September 20, 2017
२० सप्टेंबर, २०१७
"Scott Adams describes the spectacular persuasion technique as a charismatic BLM leader speaks to Trump supporters. (Wow)."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
७८ टिप्पण्या:
Color diversity politics.
I assumed this was a set-up, and I fail to see anything that convinces me otherwise.
Where's DeRay McKesson, and his ridiculous powder blue vest?
I read Newsome's short speech. It was unifying and I'm glad he was given the chance to speak. There are bad cops as well as bad PDs and cops do seem to be above the law in too many instances and not just regarding blacks. It's something we should all be concerned about because these officers are working for us and we are responsible for their behavior.
My first impression was that the BLM guy was bullshitting. After Scott's analysis, my second impression was that the BLM guy was bullshitting, or, as Scott would put it, being a master persuader. Otherwise, why march into the rally? However, there is a small possibility that he was serious, so maybe it wasn't a total fail.
This is all fine and in line with Adams' schtick, and his analysis is good
But I would offer that the hostility to BLM was never about Black lives NOT mattering, there is almost nobody who would argue that. It was about BLM shutting down events, speeches, classrooms, sometimes with physical violence, often by packing a room and shouting down others or seizing the stage and not letting others speak. In doing so, they angered people and generated hostile responses.
If they hadn't done all that in the first place, this incident and the crowd's sympathetic reaction would not seem so unique or newsworthy.
Content is everything. Adams obscures that as he thinks he lives in a Matrix sequel.
>they angered people and generated hostile responses.
They were also quite adamant that "all live matter" was not an acceptable alternative. As the saying goes, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." So we will see.
Advice for BLM:
1. If you agree that All Lives Matter, but also want to include Black Lives in your slogan as being particularly threatened, or of particular concern to yourselves, there's a very easy way to get that across. Change your slogan to Black Lives Also Matter or Black Lives Matter, Too. Granted, the initials are not great: BLAM sounds like a gunshot, and BLMT sounds like a sandwich (bacon, lettuce, mayo, and tomato?). Then again, BLM is not so great, either: it makes many of us think first of the Bureau of Land Management.
2. Stop trying to make us agree that Treyvon Martin and Mike Brown were murdered. They were both clear cases of justifiable homicide in self defense. Stick to Eric Garner and the teenager with the toy gun in Cleveland and the guy in Minnesota (?) who told the police about the legal gun in his glove-compartment, and . . . there are dozens of instances where the police really are obviously stupid and out of control. And maybe include a couple with white victims, like the Australian woman shot by the Somali cop in Minnesota, to show that everyone is endangered by out-of-control cops, even if blacks are in the most danger - which brings us right back to the BLAM/BLMT slogan.
3. Clearly repudiate assassination of cops sitting in squad cars, or mobs chanting "Fry 'Em Like Bacon".
There is a huge opportunity for a political movement that would push a reasonable centrist compromise in which bad cops are punished for a change, good cops are respected by all classes and races, and no cops (or non-cops) are shot dead in ambush killings or have rocks and urine thrown at them by assholes in black masks. Surely this is an obviously good idea all around?
Isn't it amazing what can come of actual free speech, instead of having to shut down the opposition? People can hear different arguments that might make them view something in a different way! This is case in point of why 1st Amendment is so important.
A pro-Trump activist who showed up at a BLM rally espousing a similar message would probably be viciously beaten. At best he'd be shouted down by the crowd and menaced.
"It's something we should all be concerned about because these officers are working for us and we are responsible for their behavior."
Especially because we are granting them a monopoly license to use violence on behalf of the government against individuals. They better be good, competent people who can handle pressure and at least try to get it right.
Eric Garner died because he was a grotesquely overweight diabetic with heart disease and apnea who CHOSE to resist a lawful arrest. "THIS ENDS TODAY!" -- how right he was.
Tamir Rice drew on a cop and garnered a bullet. Bye, Tamir!
mockturtle wrote: "It's something we should all be concerned about because these officers are working for us and we are responsible for their behavior."
As Dr. Weevil points out, BLM always seems to champion cases where the cops were justified in shooting the suspect, while the iffy, or downright outrageous cases are ignored. Some of the ones which highlight outrageous abuse happened to whites though; and I guess that destroys the "white privilege" narrative.
"There is a huge opportunity for a political movement that would push a reasonable centrist compromise in which bad cops are punished for a change, good cops are respected by all classes and races, and no cops (or non-cops) are shot dead in ambush killings or have rocks and urine thrown at them by assholes in black masks."
It would also help if Democrat politicians and politically motivated police chiefs didn't order cops to stand down when non-violent Trump supporters are attacked with bike locks by antifa scum and Starbucks is vandalized just because Milo is in the neighborhood.
If BLM would pivot to: (a) all lives matter and (b) only a tiny percentage of police are bad actors, then, hey, we would be making societal progress!
The one that really gets to me is Philando Castile. That cop was just outrageously incompetent and therefore dangerous. Oh, also the one in South Carolina where the cop shot the guy who was "running" away (more like slowly stumbling). Eric Garner troubles me somewhat, mostly because I believe there were other ways to handle a low level offense, but again I really don't think race was the issue there. I also think the cops didn't expect that the level of force they used might kill him.
That said, many of the examples used by the BLM movement and their supporters in the media end up going the other way once all the facts are in. The cops end up demonstrating that their actions were justified, and in my mind these "boy who cried wolf" examples do damage to the BLM movement. Their credibility gets destroyed, and then when an unhinged follower of their movement assassinates cops, I just can't take them or their complaints seriously anymore.
There are plenty of individual cases of police misconduct, even racially motivated misconduct ... always have been, always will be. Is there a systemic problem with racism in police departments around the country? I don't think so, but what the heck do I know.
Philando Castile IMMEDIATELY reached into his pocket after, or while, telling Yanez he had a gun -- a very stupid thing to do! He didn't give Officer Yanez even a split second to tell him to get it or not, or to change his mind. Phil was going to comply, but he got high.
I was pulled over about two years ago in downtown Madison for a minor traffic stop, and the cop stood slightly behind me at the driver's side door frame while her partner watched from the passenger side, hand at holster. I kept MY hands at 10 and 2 until I ASKED PERMISSION, to retrieve my ID, even after she told me to get it, and despite my white privilege.
In short, Black Shit Splatters.
I don't like the alternative slogan, "All Lives Matter."
Too collectivist.
"Every Life Matters" or "Every Life Matters Equally" is an improvement, focusing on the individual.
Char Char Binks said...
Philando Castile IMMEDIATELY reached into his pocket after, or while, telling Yanez he had a gun...
You know this how?
Tamir Rice drew on a cop and garnered a bullet. Bye, Tamir!
No, he did not.
I don't know where you get your information, but it seems to have a significant racist bias.
The great persuasion isn't working on me. Maybe they're really crowd control techniques. Sort of a sheepdog thing.
I think, on watch a black man choked, it wasn't a choke hold and he was resisting. Persuasion vs discredited facts, I guess.
A bad cop will kick your cracker ass just as fast as a black ass.
In sheep control, three sheep equals one sheep. If you get three or more, they all move the same direction. If you get two, you're in trouble. They're independent.
We need more coverage of their outstanding efforts against black on black violence in Chicago...Obama taking time out from building that prez library to energize them...
Philando Castile IMMEDIATELY reached into his pocket after, or while, telling Yanez he had a gun...
You know this how?
From the testimony of both Officer Yanez and Diamond "The Hammer" Reynolds. Philando remains silent on the subject.
"Tamir Rice drew on a cop and garnered a bullet. Bye, Tamir!
No, he did not."
It's in the video.
Ignorance is Bliss INDEED!
I can't figure out how Adams managed to boil down his thoughts to 3 cartoon panels.
Nice teaching by Adams. The BLM guy was spot on. And as I recall he is a Christian leader. And Scots Irish rules accept all who accept the culture's rules like this guy made a show that he does. Welcome to today's Black and White Anglo Saxon Protestant supremacy.
X lives matter is a policy position, not a personal truth.
Earthquakes and landslides are always taking out thousands and it's just an interesting bit of entertainment.
Don't forget bus plunge stories. They're column fillers, if there are still columns somewhere.
We've been on a progressive slope ever since the Democratic Party established their Pro-Choice Church and reopened the abortion chambers to deny lives deemed unworthy, inconvenient, and profitable (e.g. Planned Parenthood) in order to appease female chauvinists. We made great progress to deny individual dignity in the form of racism, sexism, etc. with normalization of the left's diversity doctrine (i.e. judgement of people by the "color of their skin"). Their latest coup d'etat was when liberal judges overrode the Democratic base and forced political congruence ("=") in order to appease a faction favored by the Party and selectively exclude/include others. And to think they sold all this with the promise of redistributive change (e.g. welfare industry, social complex, excessive/reformed immigration) that destroyed black communities, wrecked male-female relationships, and is a first-order forcing of climate change.
There was a similar change of heart and mind by a Black Panther who became a born-again Christian after indulging in diversity for several decades. Time will tell if there is a conservation of principles or progress.
Stop trying to make us agree that Treyvon Martin and Mike Brown were murdered.
Yes, but I see no incentive to get reasonable on the part of the BLM thugs.
The persuasion I saw in that video, and I rarely watch videos, was the Trump guys inviting him to speak.
He turned out to be a clever lawyer and did a good job but the thugs who took over the Bernie rally did not persuade anyone, and didn't seem to want to do so.
Dr. Weevil, Well said.
A bad cop will kick your cracker ass just as fast as a black ass.
Exactly. Like the Australian woman. And just the other day, the student at Georgia Tech. Totally uncalled for. I don't think cops are particularly racist, as claimed by BLM. I do think some are all about protecting themselves and each other on the scene or in the courtroom.
I thought and still think that this was a preagreed setup. I think it was a good tactic, and the fact is that white people, too, are worried about bad cops. I don't really find this a bad setup, but I refuse to take it at face value.
To model for the country how we CAN talk to each other is something that's necessary right now, because the model in the media, academia and politics is pure opposition, without any attempt to find common ground and at least diminish our problems.
Also, if Adams is trying to get us to talk to each other effectively, then I can have more tolerance for him. I had written him off as an irritating gasbag.
Black lives matter is such an innocuous phrase. I don't know why it bothers people so much or why so many feel the need to qualify it.
BDNYC said...
A pro-Trump activist who showed up at a BLM rally espousing a similar message would probably be viciously beaten.
True dat. If you'll notice, conservatives are simply more tolerant of differing points of view. They might not agree with what you had to say, but they'll listen to you saying it without shutting your black/white lib ass up.
@John Christopher:
Black lives matter is such an innocuous phrase. I don't know why it bothers people so much or why so many feel the need to qualify it.
I can't speak for everyone, but I can tell you what bothers me about it. Of course the phrase in and out itself is "innocuous," and no morally decent human being would deny it. Every human life "matters." And for a lot of people in the world, many non-human lives "matter" as well. But it's the organized political agenda and it's assumptions about the way the world works. I think they are completely antithetical to empirical reality. For one, it is an implicit message to "white America," and yet whites commit very little violence towards black, and police officers commit even less. If every single cop shooting of a black man were to be undone, it would have a minimal effect on the total number of black homicide victims. And so the group that would overwhelmingly need to internalize the message that "black lives matters" is black men. But somehow I doubt they feel protested against by these groups. In fact, if you talk to the average black guy living in the hood, he'll likely tell you that BLM is a conspiracy theory and is full of gays (yes, this topic is thoroughly discussed in the black community).
" I don't know why it bothers people so much or why so many feel the need to qualify it."
Seven dead cops could explain it to you if they were only alive.
And just the other day, the student at Georgia Tech. Totally uncalled for
Since I always agree with and value posts from Mockturtle, I am tripped up on this one. Maybe tazing him would have been an alternative, assuming they had devices at time, but under the circumstances, it's tough to say it was totally uncalled for. He was the one who called 911 reporting a man with a knife skulking around and saying something about a gun. The cops repeatedly tried to get him to comply and then he rushed toward one of them. The result was inevitable.
I start with the view that cops generally have spouses and kids at home who want to see them at dinner, and I don't see any reason why any cop should take an unnecessary risk with his or her life beyond being there in the first place. After that, what happens is entirely up to the citizen.
If we want to take the policy view that if control cannot be quickly established, cops should return to the safety of their squad cars and sort out a strategy for dealing with the situation when more resources are available, certainly Ferguson wouldn't have happened...at least that day...but more shopkeepers would be in jeopardy and students on campus potentially knifed or shot because the police were worried about arm chair guessing about cudda wudda shudda.
I'm missing the part where the police are the problem when the citizen doesn't comply in a dangerous situation. If I don't comply, I fully expect to righteously get my ass thoroughly kicked, and I'll deal with the justice of it later. That nurse in the University of Utah hospital is a very good example of how things get worked out afterwards. The cop and his lieutenant are suspended and likely in the way out the door. Shultz invited his own death and other than putting other civilians at risk by backing off, the cops did their job. An officer in Chula Vista was stabbed a number of times yesterday before being shot. I don't think it is good public policy to require receiving an actual knife wound before an officer is permitted to shoot the f*ker.
- Krumhorn
"True dat. If you'll notice, conservatives are simply more tolerant of differing points of view. They might not agree with what you had to say, but they'll listen to you saying it without shutting your black/white lib ass up."
Ha ha.
Yup, that's what happened at DJT rallies.
Dilbert's -- I mean Scott's -- theme is persuasion, not substance. Substance is what he calls "getting into the weeds". What Newsome gave us was the opposite of Orwell's 2-minute hate, and he did it well, and it could be a good start. If you persuade opposing sides of a conflict that there's common ground, then you can begin to reduce their conflicts. But you still have to deal with the conflicts. At some point you have to get into the weeds. Black Lives Matter became a thing because of Ferguson. Either Michael Brown put the police officer (whose name almost everyone has forgotten) in reasonable fear of death or severe bodily injury, or the police officer wrongfully killed an innocent man. Or both sides have to accept that we will never really know and should put it all behind us and move on. When I see signs of that, I'll begin to have hope.
....the policeman wasn't shot, the perp was shot after repeatedly stabbing the cop.
- Krumhorn
... and the althouse all lives matter crowd wanders off into the weeds of their abyss to assuage their fears of alternative views.
Martin writes:
"But I would offer that the hostility to BLM was never about Black lives NOT mattering, there is almost nobody who would argue that. It was about BLM shutting down events, speeches, classrooms, sometimes with physical violence, often by packing a room and shouting down others or seizing the stage and not letting others speak. In doing so, they angered people and generated hostile responses."
But clearly BLM disagrees with your premise that everyone would agree that Black Lives matter. That's the whole freakin' reason they are demonstrating!
Yup, that's what happened at DJT rallies.
AntiFa showed up.
harrogate said...
But clearly BLM disagrees with your premise that everyone would agree that Black Lives matter. That's the whole freakin' reason they are demonstrating!
They may disagree but this only proves they are are a combination of (1) activists seeking to aggrandize themselves rather than have a positive impact on the problem and (2) idiots.
As Dr Weevil wrote above the political move to achieve progress was to embrace ALM and work together. Instead they called ALM racist demonstrating their own racism as their demands white supporters march in the rear and chanting "pigs in a blanket, fry 'em like bacon" had already demonstrated. Their extremism is still clear from people like Colin Kaepernick who as a political neophyte is taking his lead from his activist girlfriend and wears socks depicting cops as pigs.
They alienated every decent person interested in the problem. So while this one person sounds great by focusing on BLM's stated goals rather than the organization itself decent people still aren't going to support them.
but more shopkeepers would be in jeopardy and students on campus potentially knifed or shot because the police were worried about arm chair guessing about cudda wudda shudda.
The police at Columbine High School were severely criticized for waiting outside while the two murders were still killing students.
Something similar happened at the nightclub in Florida.
The cops can't win. The LAPD saved the life of Rodney King because CHP office Melanie Singer was about to shoot him when they arrived and took him down with batons. They were rewarded with prison.
Singer testified against the LAPD cops at both trials and then retired on a stress disability.
It's difficult for people who cling to class diversity, including color, to recognize individual dignity... and give up the financial profit and political leverage that follows with selectively denying the latter.
The guy's name is Harry (Hawk) Newsome. He's been around for a while and he is not a conventional thinker. Read this article about his calling for black voters to boycott the 2016 election and not settle for the lesser of two evils (Hillary Clinton.) Have not located more about his background.
It's interesting to me that the media have not tried to dig more out about him or bring him on the air. It's dangerous for both conservative and liberal ,media to do so. He does not fit into any of the stereotypes they like to put in opposition to each other. He might say or do something original and then where would they be?
He did do it very effectively. He emphasized the common denominators of the supposedly different groups, but stuck with his issue, which is the bad deal that too many blacks still get in this country. This seems to come from a personal store of good will the man has.
Will we hear from him again? It would be a good thing but don't expect the mainstream media or politicians to do much to make it happen.
"Maybe tazing [the Georgia student] would have been an alternative, assuming they had devices at time, but under the circumstances, it's tough to say it was totally uncalled for."
It was totally uncalled for, but probably a product of bad training. These were the campus police. Did they ev en have tazers? How well were they trained for situations like this? Were they trained with the doctrine that most police forces seem to use, which is never take a step back in a confrontation nation? To me that's a shaky doctrine. The student was a fool, but there is no way he should have been shot and killed in that situation.
harrogate said...
"But clearly BLM disagrees with your premise that everyone would agree that Black Lives matter. That's the whole freakin' reason they are demonstrating!"
Well, no. They also seem to like rioting, especially if it creates an opportunity for looting. Mm-mmm, looting! Free shit, Man!
3rdGradePB_GoodPerson said...
"True dat. If you'll notice, conservatives are simply more tolerant of differing points of view. They might not agree with what you had to say, but they'll listen to you saying it without shutting your black/white lib ass up."
Ha ha.
Yup, that's what happened at DJT rallies.
That this rally the people in charge gave someone with an alternate view time to speak on the stage.
Lefties promote "no platforming," whereby speakers they disagree with are prevented from being allowed to speak at all, even on those speakers' own stages.
Lefties congratulate themselves over shutting down rallies and events other people try to put on.
But yeah, Trump supporters are the REAL anti-speech examples in the news lately. Big time.
The student was a fool, but there is no way he should have been shot and killed in that situation.
The student was clearly mentally unstable, including suicidal. Unstable makes them dangerous, especially if they had a gun, which was the information the police had ( because that was the information the student gave them ).
The student went out of their way to set this situation up. I think the police should look for better ways to handle such a situation, but I don't blame them for acting the way that they did in this case.
"Change your slogan to Black Lives Also Matter or Black Lives Matter, Too."
Hey, they got there first with this slogan. Shouldn't it be "white lives matter too?"
David said...
"Maybe tazing [the Georgia student] would have been an alternative, assuming they had devices at time, but under the circumstances, it's tough to say it was totally uncalled for."
It was totally uncalled for, but probably a product of bad training. These were the campus police. Did they ev en have tazers? How well were they trained for situations like this? Were they trained with the doctrine that most police forces seem to use, which is never take a step back in a confrontation nation? To me that's a shaky doctrine. The student was a fool, but there is no way he should have been shot and killed in that situation.
They did step back. There's video. They didn't have tasers; they don't carry 'em. They were on the scene for about 15 minutes apparently, holding the person at gunpoint and talking to them. The person finally walked towards one of the officers despite being ordered not to (having been asked/begged to drop the weapon in their hand over and over again earlier). The person who died was intent on getting the cops to kill them. They were successful at that.
Cops fuck up enough stuff that you can point to actual examples and get me to nod along any time. This is not an example of cops fucking up.
"My first impression was that the BLM guy was bullshitting. After Scott's analysis, my second impression was that the BLM guy was bullshitting, or, as Scott would put it, being a master persuader. Otherwise, why march into the rally? However, there is a small possibility that he was serious, so maybe it wasn't a total fail."
It's not his first rodeo. He has a movement in NY trying to persuade blacks not to vote until black lives really matter. Not the plantation approach of the Democrats, or the head in sand of Republicans.
Is he a NY hustler? Probably, but you have to be able to hustle to make an impact in this crazy mess. I never mind an honest hustle.
"They didn't have tasers; they don't carry 'em."
Bingo! Why the hell would you give campus police guns but not tazers?
Individual dignity matters. Reject color, sex, etc. diversity, their advocates, and their activists.
Intrinsic value matters. Close the abortion chambers and clinics. The truth of their operation is no longer a well kept secret.
Lose your Pro-Choice religion.
HoodlumDoodlum said...
"The person finally walked towards one of the officers despite being ordered not to (having been asked/begged to drop the weapon in their hand over and over again earlier). The person who died was intent on getting the cops to kill them. They were successful at that."
Normally I would get on your case for using plural pronouns for a single indivisual. But it appears that "The president of the Georgia Tech Pride Alliance, Schultz identified as nonbinary and intersex, preferring the pronouns "they" and "them," and could often be found on campus promoting LGBT rights and causes."
So, perhaps you are merely respecting the wishes of the deceased.
Krumhorn contends: Since I always agree with and value posts from Mockturtle, I am tripped up on this one. Maybe tazing him would have been an alternative, assuming they had devices at time, but under the circumstances, it's tough to say it was totally uncalled for. He was the one who called 911 reporting a man with a knife skulking around and saying something about a gun. The cops repeatedly tried to get him to comply and then he rushed toward one of them. The result was inevitable.
I agree it was probably a successful 'suicide by cop'. But in the two videos I saw of the altercation he did not 'charge' at the officers but did refuse to drop the knife. There were two officers involved and they presumably could have subdued him.
There is a major difficulty with mentally ill subjects. It's a dilemma for police and for the families of the subject. There was an instance near where I lived where a mother phoned the police because her 20-something son, who was schizophrenic, was in the shower with a knife, threatening suicide. Of course, the subject 'charged' at the officer and was shot dead. The mother must have been horrified. There should be psychiatric teams that deal with such issues rather than police. I think there were such services at one time but no funding these days.
John Christopher:
You need to understand that hurting children is wrong. You really need to understand that. So I say to you, hurting children is wrong. Hurting children is wrong. Do you get it yet? Hurting children is wrong.
Dammit John Christopher. Hurting children is wrong.
My guess is you now understand what is wrong with "Black lives matter." When you belligerently repeat a truism you are implying your target is denying it. And no-one is.
Hurting children is wrong!
There should be psychiatric teams that deal with such issues rather than police. I think there were such services at one time but no funding these days.
This society abandoned the mentally ill 50 years ago. I watched the "deinstitutionalization" movement throw them on the streets.
Read "My Brother Ron."
It is a tragedy but there is no solution until society realizes its mistake.
Farmer,
All of what you point out suggests the BLM movement is only tangentially about preserving black lives. This guy and his crew wear unified nicely designed BLM attire..including capes(?). But this guy is not the only face of BLM. There was reference to a long contentious lead up to the shown moments. I'm curious how he was behaving during that.
It's all fine and well to allow the guy to speak and invoke the power of working together to solve a problem. But eventually you have to move into "the weeds" where actual persuasion happens or not.
"It is a tragedy but there is no solution until society realizes its mistake."
Even worse, the mistake is obvious but the will to remedy the mistake is not there.
@walter:
All of what you point out suggests the BLM movement is only tangentially about preserving black lives.
Even "tangentially" may be too generous an adjective. From my perspective, BLM is just the latest incarnation of a phenomenon we have seen over and over for decades. The dynamic was described 30 years ago in Tom Wolfe's The Bonfire of the Vanities. The Duke lacrosse hoax was 20 years after the Tawana Brawley hoax. Each of these are battles in an ideological war. On the social justice side, blacks are victims of a "system" (never precisely described) of white supremacism that disadvantages and victimizes blacks and this explains the black gap in numerous social and economic indicators (e.g net worth, employment, criminality, education, etc.). On my side, what some have called the "race realist" side, though I am not sure if I am totally comfortable with the term. That said, I try to make it a habit not to quarrel people who agree with me. Those on our side say that no, most of the deprivation observed among the black community is innate to black cultural and perhaps even to innate features more common, on average, among blacks than among other population groups. I don't think there is sufficient evidence to have a strong opinion one way or the other. But among the social justice side, any consideration of innate differences is a priori rejected, and to speak of it is to literally commit blasphemy. The white supremacy theory is sacred faith among the social justice sect.
Well..Sowell and Moynihan have weighed in on what black culture was before vs after the well intended (charitable on this) got to work helping it.
I care about black lives as much as Blacks care about my life -- not at all.
The Ga Tech student shot by police phoned 911 to report himself as a suspicious person just before the fatal encounter. He did not say he was describing himself, but acted like a bystander, not himself. His call said the "suspicious person" had a knife and a possibly gun. Then, when confronting police officers, he asked them to shoot him while behaving in an unpredictable manner. He also had left suicide notes in his room, and had previously attempted suicide in 2015 and was diagnosed with depression. Clear case of suicide-by-cop.
Also, people making up their own pronouns is BS. It is hard enough to remember people's names, much less various pronouns that are incorrect English.
""It is a tragedy but there is no solution until society realizes its mistake."
Even worse, the mistake is obvious but the will to remedy the mistake is not there."
Presumably the remedy is to block grant dough to the states, and then after 2026 take away all of the grant, by then the various states' laboratories of innovation will have figured out how to provide services w/o money. Plus tax cuts for the job creators are needed.
Got it.
They took away the money the wrong way w/ the loony bin shutdowns.
This time it'll work.
This society abandoned the mentally ill 50 years ago. I watched the "deinstitutionalization" movement throw them on the streets.
Read "My Brother Ron."
It is a tragedy but there is no solution until society realizes its mistake.
Thanks, Michael K. I just ordered the book. A friend's husband, a well-liked high school teacher, became psychotic and was hospitalized. I went with her once to visit him and he seemed very content to be in a secure and predictable environment. Unfortunately, they turned him out and shortly afterward he killed himself by running his car into a tree at high speed.
Mock,
I lost a very good friend via a similar process. After a narrowly failed attempt, I visited him and asked him if he honestly thought he would be safe (to himself) on the outside. He said no.
I brought that up in a family and friends meeting about potential discharge..but they asked him in front of his mother (of unstable mental state herself) and his roommate (she had a non-reciprocated love interest him) ...and he changed his tune. I got no traction with my information. He was given a new med shortly before release. One which later was determined to have "paradoxical effects" during dose adjustment period. Roommate was gone from the apartment when he followed through about 10 days later..
There is another side to the "deinstitutionalization", though. Supervised residential group homes and supported employment programs are a middle ground that allows some that were "inside" to to thrive. In a video production I worked on years ago, I profiled a pretty popular Wisconsin artists who was old enough to have gone through that process. He was a very gentle soul who suffered a lot on the inside. His only view from his institution was a gas station..so that's what he drew. Once out, he was set up in a group home and connected via Supported Employment to a greenhouse (Felly's) where he became a model worker for many years. His exposure to the greenhouse transformed his art.
Robert Hanneman at VSA Wisconsin
..A more representative piece
Robert Hanneman at VSA Wisconsin
..A more representative piece
The student was a fool, but there is no way he should have been shot and killed in that situation.
Not just a fool, a suicidal idiot who left three suicide notes and charged cops with a dangerous weapon in his hand shouting "shoot mew!" at the cops. The university police there do not have tasers or other LTL weapons but they will probably get some soon, along with additional training. It's very hard to prevent suicide by cop when the perp has a knife. Fighting people who are wielding edged weapons is a very particular skill and Kevlar is useless against a knife. Those vests stop bullets but the energy of a penetrating blade is not the same. This was a stand-off with deadly weapons on both sides and the perp kept advancing, even as the line of officers backed up, trying to defuse the situation.
When he lunged at the cops it was all over. They have no choice but to protect themselves and others from knife-wielding idiots. It's sad. Dude was sick. But he made very bad choices that he knew would lead to his death (unlike his previous two tries to kill himself). My sympathies here lie with the poor officers who were forced to participate in this guy's sick scheme, as well as the poor guy who died. Sads all around.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा