These are screenshots and don’t prove anything.

deleted by creator

It’s important to me that when someone makes a big claim they back it up. The challenge is that the article doesn’t say what was claimed.

I didn’t make the claim therefore nothing for me to back up.

https://lemmy.world/comment/13344953

“Too much effort to go look for it”

See how I give a source and a relevant quote?

Still being lazy I see

“I’m not lying, I’m lazy”

Dope

Why didn’t you quote the part where they are discussing restricting it?

Yes, I did read the comments.

Aside from perhaps a couple fringe exceptions, there is noting enshrined in law that prevents a felon from getting a job. A company may decide to not hire someone because they are a felon, that is their choosing and not a result of a law.

An individuals eligibility for running for president does not impact whether or not justice, as defined by our laws, is perused against them.

If I’m understanding correctly you think that criminals should not be eligible. It appeared that you were arguing that in our current system folks are able to be above the law because they are eligible to run from president. I was asking how someone’s eligibility causes them to be above the law.

I know things are very emotional now and that totally makes sense and perhaps is leading to the hostility of your comments. With that in mind I feel I have presented what I’ve set out to and will not reply to your further.

How does it result in that?

Being eligible to run for president is not a factor in someone being perused for justice.

Yes, blame the minorities, let the hate flow through you.

What was breathless about the article? Seemed pretty matter of fact in its presentation.

You call the other person a name

You don’t respond to anything they say directly

You do it twice in the same thread

You call something context without providing context

I get why people throw that stat around but I don’t think it’s a fair way to view the sport. You can go in and only focus on those minutes but if you’re choosing to watch closely there’s lots in the middle bits too. It’s probably better to think of that stat as time of action. During that time there’s a chance to analyze how the teams are setting up, what movement and audibles are they making, consider strategy and future actions, etc.

I think probably most of our activities have an ebb and flow and highlighting only one aspect of it would certainly empower someone to try to ridicule or treat it as a waste of time.

Just trying to offer a different perspective because I do think the risk of concussion is worth highlighting but your ignorance is on display which can take away from the argument I think your trying to make.

I’m gonna hold the politicians that lied to progress their career, the pundits that argued in bad faith, the clergy that put their faith aside for their political agenda, the people that sought to hide history instead of teaching it, those that worked hard to dehumanize those they disagree with, the leaders that opted for violence as a way to garner support, and I’m sure others, as responsible also.

I’m a Mets fan.

This tension is gonna kill me! :)

I see what you’re saying but I do think it’s important to mention his duty as a father is to be there for his kid and extrajudicial “justice” means this father will be in jail causing further trauma for his kid and severely restrict his ability to be a father.

Ooo, an example of the bad faith you dislike so much.

Whoa, were you there?

🪞

Why are there quotes around that? Is that a quote from someone?