Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_j32xjm6 wrote

Reply to comment by NathanVfromPlus in New Hampshire Bill Would Ban “No-Knock” Warrants by AuthorSnow

[deleted]

1

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.

1

[deleted] t1_j334per wrote

[deleted]

1

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.

0