Black Lives Matter, The Police, etc.

[kirby96]

Others see these people questioning the strategies as part of the problem

This is something that has got to stop, as it's used to shut down dissenting viewpoints in conversation. Luckily, it's not as bad here as it has gotten elsewhere (no one has been outright labelled anyone else a racist/misogynist for disagreeing yet, and/or exiled), but that isn't territory we should be dipping our toes into. One of the fundamental beliefs that sets liberals apart from conservatives is that private actors, not only government, can be oppressive. In certain circumstances, we can wind up being those oppressive private actors--something which we should avoid.

Couldn't agree more. In a day and age where nuance is already all too rare thanks in no small part to sound-bite 24 hour newscycle, social media, etc., the 'with us or against us' mentality, particularly from those purporting to be socially open-minded is distressing (although this is hardly a liberal phenomena). It leads to situations where people can become slaves to their ideology, supporting anything in it's name regardless of how absurd it may be.

I first really internalized this when Rahm Emmanual proposed trying to ban Chik-Fil-A.

[Snelbian]

Given what you're all saying, I'm starting to wonder if it's wise to allow marathons to take place at all, ever. Given the evidently fragile, potentially violent mental state it puts runner in near the finish line,...

That was never said in this thread.

Oh please. You yourself blatantly implied it.

[Anondson]

For whatever reasons you have, you inferred it.

[Snelbian]

Ok, I'll bite. Elaborate on

I think there is some underestimating of the mental and physical state of people at the end of their marathon race. Not all are as clear thinking as when they started the run and their physical health is far from stable as when they begin.

This could go poorly if some try to lay down in front of them so they have so obvious path. I hope there is something else planned that doesn't hinder the finish of these sorts of average (non-elite) racers.

What will happen if runners are faced with a line of people laying down across the street? What about their mental state at the end of a marathon am I underestimating that would be of concern in that situation?

[Tiller]

I thought that it was implied that with thousands of runners, there would be at least a handful who would want to actually finish enough to potentially lead to conflict. Remember that driver who drove through that BLM protest on the freeway?

Why is this even a point of contention?

[Snelbian]

It was further implied that there is something special about this case that makes a runner's mental state noteworthy as opposed to that of anyone else.

Otherwise, why even bring it up? As you say, we've already seen people make stupid, violent decisions when stopped by a protest. That has, until now, not been pointed out as a reason to not protest.

[Tiller]

There is well over an order of magnitude more people involved (two, actually), and there is no two-ton death cage between the two sides. Plus, while I may have been overly conservative in making my point, in situations that are already bad, it isn't helpful to further tack on factors that inhibit judgement. In this case, the effects after having ran a marathon. (brain not having as much oxygen as it would normally).

[Snelbian]

Bringing us back to "running a marathon makes you more likely to behave violently". The claim Anondson says nobody is making.

I'd like to propose, given the lack of judgement running imparts, a list of activities that should be legally prohibited following marathons, for the public's safety:

Operating a motor vehicle
Taking care of large dogs
Owning a handgun
Coming within 1/4 mile of a school
Interacting with law enforcement
Entering airport property

All situations with a potential for danger to oneself or others. A marathon will only add fuel to the fire.

Alternatively, we could expect that people not act like assholes even if they have just run an impressive distance.

[Tiller]

Bringing us back to "running a marathon makes you more likely to behave violently". The claim Anondson says nobody is making.

It's because you keep framing it in a disingenuous way. Cut the motte-and-bailey crap already.

"Given the evidently fragile, potentially violent mental state it puts runner in near the finish line, why would we be encouraging people to form giant mobs that could so easily turn unpredictably violent at the drop of a hat?

Runners cannot be trusted to not be psychotic rage machines. Ban the marathon!"

Edit: for reference: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/03/al ... the-motte/

[Snelbian]

People are saying that a marathon runner is more likely to react violently because of a fragile mental state and exhaustion. I pointed this out, and Anondson said nobody was saying a marathon runner was in a "potentially violent mental state". So then you say PRECISELY THAT. I'm pretty sure motte-and-bailey doesn't apply here, and I'm being a bit sarcastic, but not disingenuous.

Running the marathon will make runners more likely to react with physical violence or it will not. When four people in this thread now are saying or heavily implying that it WILL, it seems like the disingenuous comment here is "nobody said that".

Either way, I look forward to the "but your honor, I was tired!" plea if somebody decides to throw a punch. I'm sure it'll go over well.

[Anondson]

But I'll try this time to fill in blanks I didn't think needed filling in with a hypothetical that has zero to do with rage-filled violence.

The protesters might have done the "lay down in the path as a crowd". A not-clear-thinking competitor comes upon the scene and tries to move through the protesters stepping where there is pavement, trying to avoid harm. But after 24 miles is also weakened and less dexterous, ends up stepping accidentally on a young BLM protester.

No rage. No violence. IMO, entirely predictable. Entirely accidentally.

The level of good will in this, and level of assuming positive intent is not worth continuing. Carry on.

[Tiller]

I think there is some underestimating of the mental and physical state of people at the end of their marathon race. Not all are as clear thinking as when they started the run and their physical health is far from stable as when they begin.

This could go poorly if some try to lay down in front of them so they have so obvious path. I hope there is something else planned that doesn't hinder the finish of these sorts of average (non-elite) racers.

Given what you're all saying, I'm starting to wonder if it's wise to allow marathons to take place at all, ever. Given the evidently fragile, potentially violent mental state it puts runner in near the finish line,...

That was never said in this thread.

For whatever reasons you have, you inferred it.

This is all Anondson has posted, so part of the problem is that you're putting words in his mouth. His argument appears to be (reading it from his posts, not yours) that it could be dangerous for the runners if BLM protesters laid down in the runners' way, because some runners may not be in a state where they'd not trip over them. That would be why he mentioned "non-elite" racers and their "physical health".

You've constructed somewhat of a straw opponent by lumping any-one/thing you disagree with together.

Edit: anondson beat me to it

[Snelbian]

Seamonster, then, was presumably referring to tripping accidentally when he said nut all marathoners would be "docile" and we should expect physical violence?

[Tiller]

They are separate things, fullstop.

Some people would have been more inclined towards violence due to the circumstances involved, and if protesters had laid in the way, some runners may have accidently tripped over them, potentially dangerous for both runners and protestors.

They are separate things, fullstop.

[talindsay]

Can this odd reductio ad absurdam discussion stop? Out in the real world, where people are deeply passionate about outcomes on both sides, a truce has apparently been reached and BLM will protest with TCM's blessing, while allowing the race to complete. Here, the battle reaches absurd logical fallacies.

[seamonster]

Seamonster, then, was presumably referring to tripping accidentally when he said nut all marathoners would be "docile" and we should expect physical violence?

Actually, I was. I never used the term "violence" or insinuated punches being thrown or anything of the like.

I do apologize, though, for using the word "docile." It was employed as an intentional dig in rebuttal to the sarcastic term of "hardcore." I'm sorry.

I do agree with Talindsay and hope the discussion takes a turn towards something more productive/informative. I hope my apology to Snelbian and any others that I have caused offense can be that starting point.

[min-chi-cbus]

I thought that it was implied that with thousands of runners, there would be at least a handful who would want to actually finish enough to potentially lead to conflict. Remember that driver who drove through that BLM protest on the freeway?

Why is this even a point of contention?

Because some people here will attack anything that is even remotely non-PC.

[Didier]

Interesting photos of the protest: http://www.citypages.com/slideshow/blac ... on-7723981

[Anondson]

A stupendous read. Correspondence with a 58-year-old man about BLM and his reflections on the death around him.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... im/410908/

[jw138]

The MPD has a new website:

http://www.insidempd.com

I personally can't stand it. Way too busy and confused.