Random Thoughts....

[Shawn]

Yep, because there are no people who have legitimate business there.

What legitimate business at 10pm on the night of the game 7 of the Stanley Cup playoffs?

Also, if you have a legitimate reason to be downtown then you either have a dwelling or a place of business downtown to retreat to and allow the police to do their job.

So please, spare me your technicalities. I was here, I know the downtown core like the palm of my hand, I know how it transforms every weekend and with every big spectacle and I know who has a valid reason to be here and who doesn't.

 

[Dr_Grip]

You also hate people who drink and dance and have a good time

 

[Shawn]

You also hate people who drink and dance and have a good time

No, I just hate pedantic tossers.

Edit: Also, Herr Doctor, please enlighten me as to what legitimate business people have to remain on the streets hours after the Riot Act is read? Taking photos for your Facebook isn't a good enough reason.

 

[Jay]

Also, if you have a legitimate reason to be downtown then you either have a dwelling or a place of business downtown to retreat to and allow the police to do their job.

So please, spare me your technicalities. I was here, I know the downtown core like the palm of my hand, I know how it transforms every weekend and with every big spectacle and I know who has a valid reason to be here and who doesn't.

Now everyone read those paragraphs in Dwight Shrutes voice.

 

[Labcoatguy]

What the hell Shawn? This is the second random thoughts thread you've derailed by snapping at people who might have the slightest deviation of opinion from you. Feel free to vent somewhere but don't take out whatever issues you're having on innocent bystanders.

 

[Dr_Grip]

No, I just hate pedantic tossers.

There's no need for name-calling. Would you please calm down and keep it civil while explaining to me I am defending the uncivilized?

 

[Shawn]

What the hell Shawn? This is the second random thoughts thread you've derailed by snapping at people who might have the slightest deviation of opinion from you. Feel free to vent somewhere but don't take out whatever issues you're having on innocent bystanders.

I have no issues with a deviation of opinion from mine. I just don't like it when people try to argue with me and tell me I'm wrong in a jokey, non-confrontational manner.

I really want to know what Dr_Grip thinks is a good reason to hang around and make out on the street after the police have read the Riot Act.

 

[Shawn]

There's no need for name-calling. Would you please calm down and keep it civil while explaining to me I am defending the uncivilized?

You can read, right?

So you know I'm pretty upset about the events of the last 24 hours. So you could have spared me your typical smartass response in this one instance.

 

[Topgearfanatic]

I'm sorry, those are rioters.

After the police read the Riot Act, if you still stuck around the downtown core then you are a rioter as far as I'm concerned.


Ugh, this situation is just ugly. The chief of police gave a press conference earlier saying this was the work of criminals and anarchists. Give me a break, what anarchists? We need to be honest and look at ourselves and realize we got too drunk and weren't mentally prepared for a loss because we are collectively so cocky as a city.

But to preserve our image and because nobody likes to admit fault, we're pinning this on anarchists who "aren't even from here."

But...But... Those legs! Oh god, those legs!

 

[Dr_Grip]

I just don't like it when people try to argue with me and tell me I'm wrong in a jokey, non-confrontational manner.

I don't want to confront you. I don't want to sound like a smartass. But I tend to disagree with much of what you say because I do not share your negative view of humankind you tend to thrust upon us. I kept out of the whole hockey fan debate and I don't condone rioting, in fact, i despise it. But saying that everyone who disobeys police instructions for whatever reasons is a rioter is just stupid and plain wrong. Someone who does this might be breaking a law, might be a stupid sensationalist onlooker, but he or she is not a rioter. Just because someone is not following police orders he's not necessarily a criminal. Heck, wanting to get a pack of cigarrettes is all the reason I'd need to justify leaving home even after the riot act was read.

I suppose these kids did the same thing as the rioters: They watched the game in a pub and got drunk out of their minds. But as they are no hooligans, they did not get aggressive but horny in the process of getting drunk. So they ended up where they were photographed.

EDIT: Shawn, I just let all the uncalled for personal aggression of your second post slip. Please stop it before you get me to the point where I start the name-calling, too.

 

[Shawn]

But I tend to disagree with much of what you say because I do not share your negative view of humankind you tend to thrust upon us.

First of all, thanks for your assessment of my psyche and my viewpoint. Just because somebody gave you a diploma on such matters doesn't mean I care for your input. You've called me out for being too negative and even sad repeatedly before, point taken.

Also, I'm sorry if you feel like I thrust jack shit on you. Feel free to ignore me - you would do both of us a favor because I haven't cared for your haughty replies in ages, if I ever respected your opinion.

But saying that everyone who disobeys police instructions for whatever reasons is a rioter is just stupid and plain wrong. Someone who does this might be breaking a law, might be a stupid sensationalist onlooker, but he or she is not a rioter.

You are putting words in my mouth, I never said everyone who disobeys any police instructions for whatever reason is a rioter.

Like I said, I know this situation much better than you - you can brush me off as a negative sad-sack who hates everything in life but fact of the matter is, some people sometimes might have better first-hand knowledge of some topic than you.

In this instance, all you have to go by are your theories on freedoms and whatnot. Like you said not everything in real life is clear cut, and that's why police have such tools as the Riot Act to use in extraordinary circumstances. Nobody, least of all Canadians, wants to see cops with elevated powers. But there are times when this is needed, and when the Riot Act is read that's one of them.

I'd be the first person to scoff at the mere thought of having my movement restricted, but sometimes you just need to take special measures. Last night was one, and it really would have served us all well if at least the spectators overcame their urge to stand and photograph and evacuated as requested by the police.

I never said "someone is not following police orders he's not necessarily a criminal", but it's not my issue if you can't see that the world is not always black and white. The Riot Act is not some everyday law, it's there for serious cases of emergency which call for having your basic rights reduced for a bit.

Heck, wanting to get a pack of cigarrettes is all the reason I'd need to justify leaving home even after the riot act was read.

Yeah, because you're addicted to nicotine.

Smart people would have planned ahead because they could see these events coming from a thousand miles away. I certainly did, I was running around town on foot earlier doing my errands because I knew win or lose, I wouldn't want to come out on the streets that night.

 

[Dr_Grip]

This is getting ridiculous. I'm off to bed.

Just one thing because this pisses me off: Philosophy != Psychology.

 

[Shawn]

This is getting ridiculous. I'm off to bed.

Just one thing because this pisses me off: Philosophy != Psychology.

Meh, I thought your expertise was in psychology. I already said why I thought that, you have repeatedly called me out for not being a happy individual. I wish I could help it, but alas I don't seem to.

Also, why is it getting ridiculous? I calm myself down and break your post down and write as mature a response as I can... and you find it ridiculous?

Okay, but it looks to me like a lot of stuff actually pisses you off.

 

[skidd]

time for y'all to make nice. hug it out, bitches!

 

[Dr_Grip]

EDIT: Lenghty reply removed. Too many names have been called, let's just leave it at this.

The only thing I ask for is being respected, even on the internet that's the least thing we, as civilized human beings, can do. I respect you (and your opinion) too, Shawn. That's why i even bother replying.

 

[rowd22]

 

[Shawn]

Let's say, because you work as a bartender and are on your way home.

See, so you were being pedantic as I suspected.

This is all about a photo of a couple making out on the street, taking in and enjoying the atmosphere.

If this was about a concerned-looking young bartender just minding her own business, walking quickly from her workplace to her home then her photo wouldn't be on the internet, I wouldn't have called her a rioter and you wouldn't have voice your two cents.


This is why I'm so angry. Because I'm in here trying to vent to people I feel comfortable enough with to do so about a really ugly incident, and you are here wanting to have an argument with me over technicalities of the words I used to give yourself a confidence boost or whatever. Yes, I basically said anybody who is still on the streets once the Riot Act is read can be considered a rioter.

Of course there are exceptions to this rule, like the bartender walking home from her shift. I know you are a smart guy, I know you know my comments were about the idiot bystanders who stood their filming (or making out in this case) and therefore exacerbating the situation.

So please, don't feel quite so butthurt that I couldn't control my feelings and briefly blew up.

 

[Dr_Grip]

See my edited post, please.

As what I originally wrote is not there any more and obviously did not deliver it's message, I'll re-phrase it:
I've been living right in the middle of the venue of a ritualized yearly riot for the better part of the century. For a multitude of reasons, from fetching a pack of cigarettes back when I was still smoking, to having to get from or to work, to other personal reasons, I saw the necessity to leave my home during "riot night" in more than one year. In every year, I made a point of not dressing like a rioter and keeping clear of any rioting action. Still, the police found it necessary to harrass (and in one case even physically attack me) on most of these occasions. That's why I do react negatively to "they are out on the streets, so they are rioters, even if they are not engaged in rioting themselves" generalisations. Again, I did not intend to offend or antagonize you.

 

[Mally Dangerous]

Don't make me get my belt!

 

[Shawn]

I sent you a PM Grip.

I didn't know about the riots where you live. You should provide some background sometimes so people know from where you're drawing the authority to speak on the subject, when you didn't offer any background I felt like you're just taking issue with my statement that I possessed some first-hand knowledge of the matter.

I mean I certainly do have some first-hand knowledge of this incident, in this case it seems like we just had a miscommunication over the technicalities of the words I used.