d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Minneapolis Ice Capades 2026
Prev12324252627120Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 7,150
Joined: Jul 22 2021
Gold: 1,065.00
Jan 9 2026 11:12pm
The mob tonight attacked a random woman driver for driving near the pedestrians as they blocked the road;
https://x.com/CrimeWatchMpls/status/2009819877582758088

physician, give thyself aids


Am I wrong to draw a parallel between this behavior and Nazi's? Would this be how the common brainwashed German would treat a jew?

Member
Posts: 12,286
Joined: Jul 22 2007
Gold: 84.67
Warn: 10%
Jan 9 2026 11:26pm
The mob tonight attacked a random woman driver for driving near the pedestrians as they blocked the road;
https://x.com/CrimeWatchMpls/status/2009819877582758088

physician, give thyself aids


With the responses in this thread I'm not surprised. If only any of these guys would touch grass I'd accuse some of them of being in that mob.
Member
Posts: 3,046
Joined: Oct 1 2021
Gold: 1,979.01
Jan 9 2026 11:59pm
I find it objectionable that execution was the response and is supposedly justified. The car wasn't going straight at anyone, it was turned to the right on its way to leave the scene. The gun shots came from the side well after there was any potential danger.

That said, it is a 70 IQ move to taunt armed feds and block the roads. What a silly way to throw away your life.
Member
Posts: 12,286
Joined: Jul 22 2007
Gold: 84.67
Warn: 10%
Jan 10 2026 12:43am
I find it objectionable that execution was the response and is supposedly justified. The car wasn't going straight at anyone, it was turned to the right on its way to leave the scene. The gun shots came from the side well after there was any potential danger.

That said, it is a 70 IQ move to taunt armed feds and block the roads. What a silly way to throw away your life.


Because taunting is now illegal.
Member
Posts: 3,046
Joined: Oct 1 2021
Gold: 1,979.01
Jan 10 2026 03:40am
Because taunting is now illegal.


No, it's just reckless. It's almost in the same league as high level road rage. It's petty, pointless, and could end up with you not making it home that night.
Member
Posts: 50,658
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,866.00
Jan 10 2026 04:47am
I find it objectionable that execution was the response and is supposedly justified. The car wasn't going straight at anyone, it was turned to the right on its way to leave the scene. The gun shots came from the side well after there was any potential danger.

That said, it is a 70 IQ move to taunt armed feds and block the roads. What a silly way to throw away your life.


I think this point needs to keep being restated just as often as the fallacy keeps being brought back up-

The officer is not prescient. His use of force has to be judged on what he saw before he drew his pistol and fired. The vehicle was going straight at him, that's when he pulled his gun. The tires were still facing forwards, the car lurched forwards. His decision to use deadly force can't be retroactively judged on the uncontrollable circumstances that occurred afterwards- the woman only turned her car as the gun was being pointed and fired, and still hit him anyway. And she spun out on the ice with no traction and lost several feet of forward motion, so she probably would have run him over completely otherwise.

I've repeated this many times and gotten a suspicious lack of rebuttal. Boil the arguments down to their core and find the sticking point, see if it sticks
Member
Posts: 9,093
Joined: May 11 2009
Gold: 5.01
Jan 10 2026 05:43am
It's sheer delusional narcissism. What compels a person and their partner to abandon their kids to go out to taunt, harass, and interfere with federal agents? And to be so arrogant to believe you can just drive away running them over in the process with no consequences.


This is the behavior that government entitlements yield. Most other families with two adults in their peak earning years are working one or two jobs. They literally can't afford to stalk protest as it risks homelessness.

Meanwhile in the cities. There seems to be no shortage of these people. They even flock up north to stand along the highways in my town.

"You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it." - 90s wisdom
Member
Posts: 50,658
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,866.00
Jan 10 2026 06:11am
This is the behavior that government entitlements yield. Most other families with two adults in their peak earning years are working one or two jobs. They literally can't afford to stalk protest as it risks homelessness.
Meanwhile in the cities. There seems to be no shortage of these people. They even flock up north to stand along the highways in my town.
"You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it." - 90s wisdom


well, like most of them- she was 37 years old and her expenses were being paid by her parents
Member
Posts: 3,046
Joined: Oct 1 2021
Gold: 1,979.01
Jan 10 2026 02:44pm
I think this point needs to keep being restated just as often as the fallacy keeps being brought back up-

The officer is not prescient. His use of force has to be judged on what he saw before he drew his pistol and fired. The vehicle was going straight at him, that's when he pulled his gun. The tires were still facing forwards, the car lurched forwards. His decision to use deadly force can't be retroactively judged on the uncontrollable circumstances that occurred afterwards- the woman only turned her car as the gun was being pointed and fired, and still hit him anyway. And she spun out on the ice with no traction and lost several feet of forward motion, so she probably would have run him over completely otherwise.

I've repeated this many times and gotten a suspicious lack of rebuttal. Boil the arguments down to their core and find the sticking point, see if it sticks


I don't think anyone reasonable is expecting the officer to be pre-cognition, what I am putting up on trial is the default to blasting someone's face off given the doubt. My personal moral framework has it that the default option is not execution. If he had let her keep driving, no bad would have come from it.
Member
Posts: 61,668
Joined: Mar 14 2006
Gold: 528.77
Jan 10 2026 03:32pm
Next time ICE rams a civilian with their vans, I wonder if someone will test out theory of it now being very cool :thumbsup: to execute the driver with multiple headshots
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev12324252627120Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll