Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[GDT] Vancouver Canucks vs. Vegas Golden Knights | August 29th, 2020 | 6:45pm PT, SNP | R2G3

Rate this topic


Roberts

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Thanks for the response. 
I will greatly appreciate a way to watch the games without being exposed to political narratives.

Im likely chasing a unicorn, but if anybody can help me, please and many thanks. 

I think your best bet is the mute button between periods. 

 

I thought you might be OK with all this. In past threads, you've mentioned the "sheeple" that society has become. In this case we're hitting pause on some hockey in order to not let another incident pass by unnoticed. It may or may not be an action you agree with, but at least people are acting. I do think both the left and right media will try to use this for their own purposes, but that doesn't mean the players intentions are not honest ones. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Moose Nuckle said:

Check this study out. 3 things that lead to success and the difference each makes:

image.png.fa8cfd12dcf4ae385575f60fe4fc29ed.png

You missed my point entirely.

 

This more supports it...that our vision of "success" is placed solely on monetary status.   And that means people with money are "valued" higher in society (but could be real liabilities out there).

 

So if staying together as a family means monetary "success", what if it's with a potentially dangerous abuser?  Do we weigh that out at all?

 

Anyhow....off track and have to leave now.  Been a good discussion and it's NEVER a bad time to put things on pause and reflect on how we ALL can be/do better.

 

Have a great day everyone.  Be kind.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, cuporbust said:

Yes , when the "just in case" means u are at risk of losing ur life because of this guys decisions.

 

Hiw many cops have been shot or stabbed in these situations? 

 

Gee,  nobody's asking that. 

Under no direct and imminent threat 

 

luckily you are not on a police  force 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

really? they've sparked discussions on it all over the world. Seems to me like they are well on their way. 

Discussion, sure, the organization's initial mantra that gained the most popularity was "defund the police" which most on either side say is ridiculous and I disagree with vilifying the overall police force when they are a product of the system we live in today. If they are well on their way... has anything improved... 

 

Honestly though living in Canada I am of course ignorant to the reality on the ground down there and only see what is available through media etc. 

 

I think I need a break from this thread lol  

 

Time to enjoy the sunshine 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nuckin_futz said:

The point is even though he did things wrong. What he did was not deserving of 7 shots in the back.

It was once percieved that a "threat" actually had to be facing you with a weapon in hand in order to authorize the use of "Lethal Force". I guess this has changed or its interpreted differently now? There are many ways that an officer can get the job done but lethal force should be the last resort not the "go-to". 

If a suspect has his back to you, you are at the advantage because he doesn't know where you are. It is not wise to approach the suspect and put yourself in more danger. If you are perceiving danger as an officer then you must protect yourself, get behind your vehicle, wait for back up or in the very least, distance yourself from the danger area. 

If you are pulling out your lethal weapon and walking towards the danger, I don't think your intention is to deescalate the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Roberts said:

in that case, should i create a new GDT thread for the game when that time comes? or would it continue off this thread?

If it's not too much trouble, my vote is to start a new one so that there is less stink associated in the new thread with today's arguing.

 

Clean slate!

 

GCG!  And thanks as always!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Chicken. said:

Discussion, sure, the organization's initial mantra that gained the most popularity was "defund the police" which most on either side say is ridiculous and I disagree with vilifying the overall police force when they are a product of the system we live in today. If they are well on their way... has anything improved... 

 

Honestly though living in Canada I am of course ignorant to the reality on the ground down there and only see what is available through media etc. 

 

I think I need a break from this thread lol  

 

Time to enjoy the sunshine 

"defund the police" is more of a cry for "fund mental health" and not use police where a counsellor is better idea. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

- Abolish police unions

- End qualified immunity

- Stop throwing people in jail for victimless crimes (weed possession)

- Stop encouraging single motherhood and fatherlessness via welfare state programs

 

This $&!# is so easy, but nobody wants to take the necessary steps to actually solve the issue (Spoiler alert: They don't actually care). People have been so brainwashed into believing the "left vs right" dichotomy that they fail to see how these policies work in conjunction with each other to keep people and communities buried. 

 

But y'know, cancelling hockey should solve the issue. 

Yeah, i may be unintelligent and/or insensitive but I don't have a clue how not playing hockey,  something we love and hold dear, changes anything.

 

I guess maybe if in the future they cancel sports as a penalty to those who are in the wrong. Maybe they care that much about sports that they won't kill black people anymore or something. I don't know. It doesn't change my stance any but leaves me a little confused as to how to react or what this is supposed to mean to me. Frankly, I just feel like tuning the whole thing out now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Moose Nuckle said:

That's the cops job. Give them every opportunity to stop but the moment they put innocent people at risk of death, you get shot. I'm ok with that. A guy knowingly risking lives vs innocent people, hmmm... not a hard choice.

Incorrect 

 

that is NOT the litmus test for use off deadly force 

 

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, canuck2288 said:

Under no direct and imminent threat 

 

luckily you are not on a police  force 

When I first saw the video , that was my thought.  With the new information coming out , its not that cut and dried possibly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, debluvscanucks said:

You missed my point entirely.

 

This more supports it...that our vision of "success" is placed solely on monetary status.   And that means people with money are "valued" higher in society (but could be real liabilities out there).

 

So if staying together as a family means monetary "success", what if it's with a potentially dangerous abuser?  Do we weigh that out at all?

It's about making good life choices. Get educated, work hard, don't have kids as a teen. The argument for many is about "classism" and that black people are stuck in poverty.

 

This study is a huge eye opener for getting out of poverty. It's not telling you to get rich its saying how to not be in poverty. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mayor MCcheese said:

I'm done. Not supporting a SJW league. I hope the NHL goes bankrupt.

It was only a matter of time. With the NBA and others caving in....I saw it coming weeks ago. 40 years been Ive been an NHL fan....Today was my last day. I also will not support a SJW league. Watched my last game Tues night.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Robert Long said:

"defund the police" is more of a cry for "fund mental health" and not use police where a counsellor is better idea. 

I get that but why do we need to reinterpret the organization's messaging ?   Perhaps creating controversy is an avenue to change.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...