Wait CNN and MSNBC aren't social media?

 

I will assume this is directed at me but I'm not sure exactly what your point is.

 

I will stand behind my belief that the majority of people who saw the video FIRST saw it on social media. It only make sense since that's where most people now get their news. I'm not sure what the debate is.

So lets say as he is running (and no threat in your thoughts) he barges into your house and kills you. Still not a threat?

 

I don't think officers legally can use that as justification. My guess (key) is that courts have already made rulings in this area and your scenario wouldn't pass the test of "threat."

I will assume this is directed at me but I'm not sure exactly what your point is.

 

I will stand behind my belief that the majority of people who saw the video FIRST saw it on social media. It only make sense since that's where most people now get their news. I'm not sure what the debate is.

 

Yes it is directed at you. You said the media doesn't try this stuff, and you were proven wrong by HB...

I'm not sure anyone has ever talked to either of you like you're idiots...

 

Just because we don't always take your opinions as the final word doesn't mean we think you are an idiot, not by any stretch of the imagination.

 

As much as I may disagree with you all, I'm glad you all offer your insight because I know on more than one occasion I have learned something from one of you that I had no idea about before.

 

No I'm saying Clyde in this instance. HB proved him wrong and he went all crickets.

Yes it is directed at you. You said the media doesn't try this stuff, and you were proven wrong by HB...

 

I said specifically that the media doesn't try to incite violence as you claimed. Let's be clear on that.

 

Now if you think 4 news anchors holding up a sign is them intentionally trying to incite violence in the name of ratings then we'll obviously disagree. You can question if it's right. Question their politics. Question their facts. I will never say their first goal (as you claimed) is to incite violence.

 

So if we're going to argue/debate let's make sure we stay on the real debate based on what was posted and being debated. I'm always down for that.

I said specifically that the media doesn't try to incite violence as you claimed. Let's be clear on that.

 

Now if you think 4 news anchors holding up a sign is them intentionally trying to incite violence in the name of ratings then we'll obviously disagree. You can question if it's right. Question their politics. Question their facts. I will never say their first goal (as you claimed) is to incite violence.

 

So if we're going to argue/debate let's make sure we stay on the real debate based on what was posted and being debated. I'm always down for that.

 

You can spin how you want, you're still wrong. Just admit that the media purposely tries to cause more violence because it equals ratings.

 

Of course "back to the topic". What a joke :lol2:

No I'm saying Clyde in this instance. HB proved him wrong and he went all crickets.

 

Crickets? My last post was yesterday at 5:00 and I just got back on BGP this evening.

 

You must be new if you think I hide.

You can spin how you want, you're still wrong. Just admit that the media purposely tries to cause more violence because it equals ratings.

 

Spin? I just took the words you typed and disagreed. Hardly spin. Again, I'm cynical. You and others are downright paranoid if you think a news editor is saying "what can we do to get a neighborhood to set fire to businesses or to shoot officers?" Come on.

Crickets? My last post was yesterday at 5:00 and I just got back on BGP this evening.

 

You must be new if you think I hide.

 

"Back to the topic" =refuse to admit you're not correct.

Spin? I just took the words you typed and disagreed. Hardly spin. Again, I'm cynical. You and others are downright paranoid if you think a news editor is saying "what can we do to get a neighborhood to set fire to businesses or to shoot officers?" Come on.

 

The hands up was proven to be a lie! And you don't see them still pushing it as trying to cause more rage? Foolish.

Stick to your guns, you've been proven wrong. If you want to blindly see the media as unbiased and good people, you're about as nieve as they come. Conversation over

"Back to the topic" =refuse to admit you're not correct.

 

Back to topic?

Back to topic?

 

You're whole debate the original debate, don't play stupid. Like I said, conversation over. Have a blessed evening

The hands up was proven to be a lie! And you don't see them still pushing it as trying to cause more rage? Foolish.

 

Stick to your guns, you've been proven wrong. If you want to blindly see the media as unbiased and good people, you're about as nieve as they come. Conversation over

 

A few things so I don't have to keep quoting posts.

 

We're expressing opinions that have no way of being proven so if you want to claim victory and say I've been proven wrong then have at it if it helps. I'm confident in my opinion.

 

You still haven't told me what my agenda with the media is. I'll wait.

You're whole debate the original debate, don't play stupid. Like I said, conversation over. Have a blessed evening

 

That debate is the crux of this topic. When can an officer fire? I'm not really sure there is another debate.