Submitted by AuthorSnow t3_103exna in newhampshire
anarchir t1_j30e3ly wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in New Hampshire Bill Would Ban “No-Knock” Warrants by AuthorSnow
I think I'm going to believe the comment from the other guy, because we all know the police lie.
NathanVfromPlus t1_j30ltjw wrote
It's funny. Whenever I mention anything too critical of police to my dad, he's always like, "huh, you should talk to my friend, the police chief, and see what he has to say about that. Surely, his perspective on the matter should be valuable!"
Umm... no. That's really not how that works.
Maldonian t1_j32me2j wrote
Yet we entertain people who think that we should listen to teachers when they say how much (more) money should be shoveled into the government schools.
Let's at least try to be consistent.
NathanVfromPlus t1_j32p6he wrote
Because State workers are killing our children, and that is equally as heinous as State workers educating our children. It would be inconsistent to not treat these two atrocities as moral equivalents.
Maldonian t1_j32vqph wrote
I’m not sure what killings you’re talking about. And the state does a pretty mediocre job of educating children. You notice how many dumb people are around? Most of them went to public schools, you know.
NathanVfromPlus t1_j332hb3 wrote
> I’m not sure what killings you’re talking about.
Sorry, having two similar conversations at the same time, and got my wires a bit crossed. This was in reference to that Gilford kid.
> And the state does a pretty mediocre job of educating children.
Maybe because... they're not getting enough funds to do the job right? Just a thought.
> You notice how many dumb people are around?
Oh come on, you're making this one way too fucking easy. The bait is just too obvious, here.
Maldonian t1_j34jzmp wrote
The majority of the government schools are billing the taxpayer more than many private schools. Last thing they need is more money.
[deleted] t1_j32qh64 wrote
[deleted]
NathanVfromPlus t1_j32vgh8 wrote
> “You should listen to all perspectives of stakeholders directly impacted by the issues you mention, it might help you learn and developed a more balanced world view”
If you sincerely believe this to be reasonable without exception, then you'd be listening to the teachers who are directly impacted by the issues you're mentioning. Let's at least try to be consistent.
[deleted] t1_j32xjm6 wrote
[deleted]
NathanVfromPlus t1_j331vkl wrote
Yep, my bad. Similar arguments at the same time, getting my wires a bit crossed. Sorry about that.
To what you said: no, that's not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying that, regardless of authority or expertise, I don't have to listen to anyone representing a group that's known to be dishonest. My comment was in response to someone else saying that cops lie. I agree with that person: yes, they do, and I have no reason to trust them to represent themselves honestly.
[deleted] t1_j334per wrote
[deleted]
NathanVfromPlus t1_j33cs2p wrote
> But you can’t make the conclusion that they lie if you don’t listen to them.
Sure I can. I can listen to and evaluate reliable outside sources.
> Listen, evaluate, determine. Three basic tenants that are required for critical thinking.
Sure, absolutely. But I don't need to do that with every possible source. I can listen to lawyers, activists, and cons/ex-cons all agree that cops can and will lie, evaluate the consistency of the claims over multiple sources, and determine that cops are an unreliable source of information. Once I've determined, through critical evaluation, that cops aren't reliable, then there's no point in me asking a cop if cops lie. Obviously the cop is going to say no, regardless of whether or not that's actually true.
> If you can’t even do those three basics, then there’s no legitimate basis to your beliefs.
Fortunately for me, I can.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments