<details class=“spoiler”><summary>spoiler-CW</summary>

“A 1-year-old child is dead because police officers in Mississippi opened fire on a car in a crowded Walmart parking lot,” said attorney Ben Crump.

</details>

  • chuckleslord@lemmy.world
    2·
    1 day ago

    ASD is Autism, you fuck. Gods, you’ve got Google.

    Someone surrounding words with quotes either is for emphasis (if you’re older than 50), to denote someone else’s word choice, to clarify what word you’re talking about (how I’ve been using), or to denote that you’re sarcastically saying those words. The first one makes no sense, I could maybe see the second but again I’m not seeing how it makes sense to read it that way, third makes no sense, and the last option seems to me to pour derision and hate on the victim.

    I’m not weaponizing incompetence to make some fucking twisted point, like you claim I am. I see someone using sarcasm to be a dickhead and I’m expressing incredulity about the dickheadedness. Please, for the love of fucking God, explain how I’m supposed to read these quotes in that comment that doesn’t result in that person saying that the cops were justified in killing a kid. Because I want that to be the case, but I literally don’t see how it could be so.

    And I am making no point about Marxism. I respect all leftists until they make themselves out to be fuckwads.

    • deathmetaldawgy@lemmy.mlEnglish
      2·
      1 day ago

      I just don’t think your interpretation is correct.

      Please, for the love of fucking God, explain how I’m supposed to read these quotes in that comment that doesn’t result in that person saying that the cops were justified in killing a kid

      Because of the context of the first two quotations , it reads to me like they are not supporting this but rather the opposite. I think the last one was probably just a mistake and not a very clear way to convey what they meant which is the typical status quo, because I don’t interpret it as “the victim doesn’t deserve an answer”. I think it’s clear that they meant this way of investigating police violence is all that will happen in this case and that’s unfortunate.

          • cone_zombie@lemmy.mlEnglish
            1·
            1 day ago

            I will. I in no way justify the cops and I think it’s a tradegy. I also think the headline was knowingly misleading, hence I thought I’d provide some context. I don’t know all the details and neither do you, so we can only speculate, but IMO she was too reckless and put her child in danger, knowing how dangerous it is to run from cops in America. In no way do I support the American police system. I’m also not a 100 % Marxist if it makes any difference.

                • deathmetaldawgy@lemmy.mlEnglish
                  5·
                  1 day ago

                  you blamed the victim of a hate crime. This mother did not endanger her child the fucking police did by shooting at her. People who think like you make me sick and you got a lot to unpack

                  • cone_zombie@lemmy.mlEnglish
                    1·
                    1 day ago

                    People like you don’t make me sick, just uncomfortable because it’s impossible to have a normal conversation with you. You’re just putting labels on everyone you disagree with, like you calling me racist when I never even mentioned race, never even thought of it. I’m not part of your culture, I have no reason to be racist towards black people. There are thousands of cases when the police shot white people in US doing dumb shit and even “because they felt threatened”. And you’re not calling it hate crime. Maybe the cop in question was racist, I don’t know. I’m just saying there’s more to the story, that’s all. And judging people over a comment on the internet, I’m sorry, but maybe I’m not the one with “a lot to unpack”