Dashcam recording of Castile's shooting released.

[seer]

Is euthanizing a 3 month old?

ouch...

[Sparko]

The cop was calm when the guy told him about the gun. He calmly said "well don't reach for it then"

Apparently the guy started reaching for SOMETHING at that point. The officer then gets excited and starts yelling "don't move" and the guy apparently keeps reaching. That is when the shot goes off.

I think the officer was not convicted because he had no way at the time to know if he was reaching for a gun or not. He reacted wrongly, but we only know that after the fact.

[Bill the Cat]

The cop was calm when the guy told him about the gun. He calmly said "well don't reach for it then"

Apparently the guy started reaching for SOMETHING at that point. The officer then gets excited and starts yelling "don't move" and the guy apparently keeps reaching. That is when the shot goes off.

I think the officer was not convicted because he had no way at the time to know if he was reaching for a gun or not. He reacted wrongly, but we only know that after the fact.

Exactly. Just a few weeks ago, a State Police Officer got shot and killed on a routine check of a parked car a few blocks from my daughter's apartment. He never even got the chance to un-holster his weapon. Cops have a split second to make a life and death decision, and for armchair foreigners like Starfruit who have absolutely no context to pass judgment on this situation makes me want to puke.

[Mountain Man]

ouch...

Dimbulb won't see it that way. He has a callous disregard for those he considers "non-persons". He only cares about this particular issue because he sees it as a club for beating conservatives over the head.

[RumTumTugger]

No on both counts, and you're deliberately misstating me.

That's Starlights' mo in all of his "discussions" with those who disagree with him and his views.

[Starlight]

Is euthanizing a 3 month old?

Euthanasia is not currently legal here, but there are ongoing discussions about changing that.

[Bill the Cat]

Euthanasia is not currently legal here, but there are ongoing discussions about changing that.

That's not what I asked.

[Starlight]

That's not what I asked.

I pity your inability to express your thoughts clearly as questions then. I answered the question you actually asked. If you want to try and rephrase the question so that you ask it more clearly, go ahead.

[mossrose]

Is euthanizing a 3 month old?

Yeah. All his rhetoric about the "murder of innocents" rings pretty hollow, doesn't it.

[Bill the Cat]

I pity your inability to express your thoughts clearly as questions then.

It's a simple principle, Starfruit. Do you admit to conflicting standards of moral outrage with the shooting of allegedly innocent motorists and the killing of 3 month old babies?

I answered the question you actually asked.

No you didn't. you obfuscated about it "being discussed". You feign moral outrage about Castile being "murdered by NZ standards" yet you have directly stated your support for 3 month olds being "murdered by NZ standards". That it MAY be getting discussed is inconsequential to your hypocrisy on the matter.

[Meh Gerbil]

After reading this train wreck of a thread I only have one question: How does Starlight feel about cops shooting 3 month olds?

[Starlight]

Yeah. All his rhetoric about the "murder of innocents" rings pretty hollow, doesn't it.

About an order of magnitude less hollow than US conservatives who pretend that not-yet-human fetuses have an absolute and unquestionable right to life, yet are quite happy and even applaud killings in other circumstances such as:
- Wars
- Death penalty
- Cops doing it
- People with guns 'standing their ground' or 'feeling threatened'
- Eating animals for meat

When it's a full grown adult conservatives can't seem to kill the infidels fast enough to satisfy them in their perpetual wars and never seem to think the state is executing enough people, but when it's 5 cells in a womb conservatives suddenly develop an absolute passion for life that would put even the most extreme hippy liberal to shame. It's literally stunning how fast they can twist on a dime, and it shows how utterly hollow their beliefs and rhetoric are.

Whereas the common liberal position that development of mental faculties is what matters, is much more consistent and non-arbitrary. There is thus a gradient from lower to higher animals (a cow is worth more than an insect because it has more mental functions) and a human fetus/infant grows from being a completely non-conscious entity (when it is just a clump of few cells and its value is zero akin to a plant or any other non-conscious biological organism) to the point of adult-human-level consciousness as the child develops a sense of self and language skills and memory etc (where its value is that of a full human adult). As a result, liberals tend to not like the killings of animals with higher brain functions nor fetus/infants once they have begun to cognitively develop. It's a rational and coherent position.

You seem to be confused as to how the concept of the "murder of innocents" applies. Obviously murdering an innocent plant is not bad at all because a plant has no mind at all, while murdering a bunch of biting insects is a tiny bit bad because they have only a tiny amount of mental function, and so on up until you reach murdering an innocent adult-level-mental-functions-human which is obviously the worst. Murdering an 'innocent' 20-celled fetus is as meaningless as murdering an innocent plant, because it has not mind at all, and as the fetus/infant develops mental functions it becomes gradually worse.

[Bill the Cat]

About an order of magnitude less hollow than US conservatives who pretend that not-yet-human fetuses

Idiotic statement...

have an absolute and unquestionable right to life, yet are quite happy and even applaud killings in other circumstances such as:
- Wars

Only in defending our country or our allies. Enemy combatants are trying to kill us first, so it is morally acceptable to kill them before they kill us or our allies.

- Death penalty

As a means of equitable justice, yes. It's a morally acceptable position for the government to kill someone who has intentionally killed someone else as a criminal offense.

- Cops doing it

Circumstantial differences are extremely important here.

- People with guns 'standing their ground' or 'feeling threatened'

Circumstantial differences here too.

- Eating animals for meat

Well, considering we are omnivores...

When it's a full grown adult conservatives can't seem to kill the infidels fast enough to satisfy them in their perpetual wars and never seem to think the state is executing enough people,

And you call ME stupid...

but when it's 5 cells in a womb conservatives suddenly develop an absolute passion for life that would put even the most extreme hippy liberal to shame.

The "5 cells in a womb" has threatened no one. It has attacked no one. It has not attacked an ally. It is innocent of any reason for taking its life.

It's literally stunning how fast they can twist on a dime, and it shows how utterly hollow their beliefs and rhetoric are.

It's literally stunning how stupid you are when you can't see that there is a difference between a fetus who has committed no crime, no offense worthy of death, and John Wayne Gacey.

Whereas the common liberal position that development of mental faculties is what matters, is much more consistent and non-arbitrary.

It is arbitrary. It picks one out of dozens of biological functions to elevate to "what matters".

There is thus a gradient from lower to higher animals (a cow is worth more than an insect because it has more mental functions) and a human fetus/infant grows from being a completely non-conscious entity (when it is just a clump of few cells and its value is zero akin to a plant or any other non-conscious biological organism) to the point of adult-human-level consciousness as the child develops a sense of self and language skills and memory etc (where its value is that of a full human adult). As a result, liberals tend to not like the killings of animals with higher brain functions nor fetus/infants once they have begun to cognitively develop. It's a rational and coherent position.

It is not rational. It devalues a complete organism of our species that simply hasn't specialized to your arbitrary stage of development.

You seem to be confused as to how the concept of the "murder of innocents" applies. Obviously murdering an innocent plant is not bad at all because a plant has no mind at all, while murdering a bunch of biting insects is a tiny bit bad because they have only a tiny amount of mental function, and so on up until you reach murdering an innocent adult-level-mental-functions-human which is obviously the worst. Murdering an 'innocent' 20-celled fetus is as meaningless as murdering an innocent plant, because it has not mind at all, and as the fetus/infant develops mental functions it becomes gradually worse.

And you seem to be confused about basic human biology that explains the dozens of interrelated biological systems (the brain being one that can't survive without the others), and how the lack of full development of one does not negate the overall reality that the organism is fully human, and fully an individual member of our species.

[JonathanL]

An Officer Jeronimo Yanez was Latino, I believe.

Latinos are either white or colored, depending on what agenda liberals are currently pushing.

[Zymologist]

Since mental development (and consequently the value of life, apparently) is a spectrum, I wonder how much less my brother's life is worth, since he has Down Syndrome?

Also, the talk about "adult-human-level consciousness" seems to suggest that adults are worth more than children. How far should we take this?