Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by ShagNappy, Jan 6, 2015.
What they may or may not do in a simulation has nothing to do with what they HAVE DONE in reality.
I wonder if he really expected to hear a police officer say they were hoping to have shot a black person?
:laugh: The numbers of unarmed, shot and killed by the police black men vs the number of unarmed shot and killed by police white men tends to run directly counter to his prevailing interview results.
Again, was he expecting people to go on record saying they wanted to shoot and kill black people?
As the participants in the shooting exercise weren't behind the blue line, the study is irrelevant.
The original study which actually used a mixture of police officers, military and the public may have been more relevant.
But again, you're talking simulation vs reality.
To borrow a phrase: apples and pork rinds.
What's that I hear? The squawk of the SJW crying out in anguish when actual proof contrary to their "narrative" is produced.
What you should have been hearing was me attempting to give you and your still hurt feelings the benefit of the doubt.
What you should have be hearing is me trying to keep you from looking completely silly by trying to downplay the fact that you seem to think simulated results are a better measure of reality than reality.
What you should have been hearing is an adult telling a young man that you can't give me SIMULATED results as ACTUAL proof of anything when the ACTUAL runs contrary to your simulated. :laugh:
I'm sorry that I stepped on your toes. I didn't mean for it to turn you into this.
Wonder who he'll plagarize to answer back?:laugh:
Or will he just lie again?
You should have been honest about who and what the study included and not posted a bunch of garbage to try and sway people before they even read the article. However, as I proved in the thread about the NYPD commissioner, you lie on a regular basis to try and change the story to what you want it to be. Facts are clearly not something you care for, as we are still waiting for any proof of all the "documented" nonsense you claim.
Try Tumblr, they love special snowflakes like you! :thumbs:
Pure foolishness. I stated who the study included and even mentioned that perhaps the original including police officers would have been better suited.
The only garbage being displayed is coming from your fingertips thinking that you're discrediting reality with simulated results.
I read the article. It's a simulation not even using police officers. There is no comparison to be made, no matter how much you think you can, between those behind that blue line and folks in a simulation. It's just laughable.
What you've proven, is that your feelings got hurt and now you've taken to trying to stretch the truth to fit your new narrative.
I don't have a problem with facts. You apparently do. You're the one who is trying to present a simulation as proof to contradict reality. :laugh:
Oh that's cute.
Says the guy who just admitted to plagiarizing someone else's work in another thread.
You must already be a Tumblrina! Congrats! I know all I need to know about you.
You need some salve for your still hurt feelings?
:applause: :applause: :applause: