MovieChat Forums > BreakbeatSavant > Replies
BreakbeatSavant's Replies
Thank you for proving my point, that you're simply too stupid and incoherent to define what a country is.
You should really get a job.
lol! What's hilarious is that you're already floundering because you're so inept and unable to defend your own argument.
You're clearly not the brightest pipe in the crack house are you? It explains your 12495 comments because all you're capable of doing is spewing incoherent babble on a message board because you're unemployable.
So please learn how to read yourself before making critical comments. When you don't it makes it easy to dismiss you as an invalid.
"I did not say the the US and Western Europe defines what a country is"
I never said you did, learn to read. I asked YOU to define what you believe what westerners consider a country to be. You keep making allusions to "us" having our own idea what a country is but you're simply too stupid to define what that is. Since you're having such difficulty processing simple sentences lets try and get you to do this simple task before proceeding onto more complex arguments that will melt your brain.
"First fallacy is that Ukraine is a country, in the sense that we in the US and Western Europe understand countries."
So please do tell. How do you think we in the US and Western Europe define what a country is? Until you spell this out, your arguments as to why Ukraine isn't a country are utterly incoherent.
Why are you not treating it as a badge of pride?
It really is.
"but a cop doesn't know whether a suspect is unarmed until after the fact"
You're out of your mind. Their job is to ensure they are unarmed after immobilizing them. If they're still armed after that, it's gross incompetence on the part of the trooper.
"An unarmed handcuffed suspect restrained with a knee in the neck might not be a danger, but what if you let go?"
With their other knee in the middle of their back, their arms locked around their handcuffed arms, and 3 other officers backing him up? I'm sure the officer would be just fine. Far less risk to the officer than keeping the knee firmly affixed to the suspect's neck. But you don't care about that do you? Because in your bigoted worldview the suspect is a "criminal" for all you're concerned.
You just can't admit that you know I'm right. An unarmed handcuffed suspect face down on the ground is not a danger to four officers. That's why you had to cite articles where the suspects were able to pull a gun on the officers.
Oh stop. Those situations aren't even remotely the same because the suspect hadn't been padded down and disarmed yet. George Floyd was never armed in the first place and had already been padded down. An unarmed handcuffed suspect face down on the ground is not a danger to four officers. Get a grip lady.
Like I said, you've been brainwashed by so many fictitious cop movies that you're embarrassing yourself.
How often do you think a suspect gets violent with handcuffs on behind their back and surrounded by cops?
One out of every thousand suspects they handcuff maybe? I think that's even being generous. So I challenge you to show me five instances of that happening. I bet you can't because of how rare it is. God you're so mentally challenged it's hilarious.
"There are plenty of ways to resist arrest AFTER being handcuffed."
lolz. The stupidity of this statement speaks for itself. You've been watching too many fictitious cop shows to think criminals are eager to resist arrest when they've got handcuffs on behind their back. As if anyone, even criminals, would welcome getting their face bashed in if they resisted arrest with handcuffs on.
God you're an idiot.
lolz. Pretty hard to resist arrest with handcuffs on behind your back.
You're just not very sharp are you?
FYI: Posting a legit headline article from justsecurity.org about far right infiltrators and agitators at the Floyd protests is not 'racist'. You might want to look up the meaning of the word. You sound mentally addled.
Racist eh? lolz. Never been called that before. FYI the person making accusations without evidence is the "conspiracy nut". That would be you.
"Even criminals don't like being restrained, so they play the victim."
So what's the harm in taking their jackboot off their neck when they've already got them on the ground and handcuffed miss nazi?
Lets just entertain your loony hypothetical for a minute and assume they are lying for god knows whatever loony reason your obergruppenfuhrer ilk thinks they might be lying about. What's the harm in letting up taking their jackboot off the neck of a prone victim being choked, even if they can breathe just fine, with handcuffs on laying on the ground?
You're just not the sharpest tool in the drawer are you? Either that or you're just a sadistic wench.
So why can't you provide a straightforward answer to my question?
Why would anyone, criminal or not, handcuffed with a cop jackboot on their neck ... why lie about not being able to breathe if they actually can breathe perfectly fine?
What would be the point? Do you really think saying they can't breathe when they can breathe is going to prevent them from getting arrested when they've got a cop jackboot on their neck?
You haven't really thought this through have you? How old are you actually? 16?
Do you understand what the word 'racist' means? You should look it up, it's apparent you've got a deficient vocabulary too.
Yup ... he's an evil one.
Though he was last reported May 21st in China training their security forces. Though maybe Trump's got him on a short leash retainer on emergency detail for urgent subversive jobs like this.
Yeah if you want to take the police word for it. History has taught us to be more skeptical.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/officer-jacob-pederson-protests/
Snopes ruling: Unproven. The police provided no evidence for their finding.