calling me a liar is not the same as telling the truth.
T
The Big Guy
Guest
how they came to have their condition is different.Here is the difference.
This:
Is a professional with an unfortunate genetic abnormality that he was born with, that makes life a lot harder for him every single day since he's been born, that he did absolutely nothing to bring upon himself, and that the President of the United States disgraced himself and his nation by mocking.
This, on the other hand:
Is a fat little cosplaying incel who thought he'd go feel like a badass by holding a gun and strutting around a place and a situation that he had absolutely no reason to be in, with absolutely no skills, training or experience to offer.
And then surprise surprise, he got himself into a situation waaaaay beyond his ability to handle.
That's really a direct equivalent to you?
??
the moral depravity of mocking them for their condition is the same.
happy to clarify that for you
no, I don't think the footage should be admitted as the software is interpolating pixel values as you zoom.I think thats the footage@Filthy wants thrown out for some reason
FWIW, the footage was much lower source resolution, further away and more overhead.
IIRC, that's the cop drone.
What if you don't think he has PTSD and you think it's just a tried and tested trick to make that putty face look more appealing to the honkys on the jury?
i'm so far from reeeeeeeee....
it's just silly that people who have not watched a minute of testimony are going to run around telling people how to interpret what happened because that's what they're confirmation-bias sources are telling them.
the REEEEE division is what the MSM is stoking.
It's still using the same media.
It's a misdirection from the defence team. If this is inadmissible then no digital image can be used in court ever again.
you're basing that on your preconceived notions of who he is, not on any experience with actual people who have PTSD.
and to be clear, shooting someone PTSD is not the "woke" PTSD that the progressives like to claim they get from watching police shoot people.
IMAO, it looks like PTSD because I know and have witnessed a lot of shooting-someone PTSD incidents. Even if you're completely morally square in your head with what happened, the trauma still overwhelms you.
not true at all.
did you answer my question?
what is the screen of the phone displaying when you zoom all the way in to 1 pixel?
a black screen?
I'm not sure I follow. I don't think you can get to one pixel on a camera phone. I don't think I could get to one pixel on my pro equipment.
If you could and wanted to the pixel would be of whatever your phone is pointed at I guess.
nope.
your screen would be a solid screen of Cyan, Magenta, or Yellow, but it would be made of over 2 million pixels.
so if I have an area where the black tip of the gun is 10 pixels, then when I 'pinch-zoom' in it's going to take that those black edge pixels and convert them in to 2 or 4 or 100 pixels for display.
that's the issue here, the software is interpolating edge values to make more pixels to fill the screen. Because it has to because it can't change how many pixels it displays.
it always makes 2M pixels. Always.
it's awesome that the only thing you can attack about his testimony is when he broke down.
pathetic AND awesome.
now do it with the guys he shot.
M
member 1013
Guest
We all REE sometimes Mon frere
for everyone saying "he had no business being there, prosecute him to the max!"...why aren't the other people who went there with the purpose of breaking the law getting the same treatment?
it's OK to burn buildings and assault people if you're social justice score is high enough?
it's OK to burn buildings and assault people if you're social justice score is high enough?
M
member 1013
Guest
Your logical fallacy is strawman
You misrepresented someone's argument to make it easier to attack.
yourlogicalfallacyis.com
that's not a strawman, dipshit.Your logical fallacy is strawman
You misrepresented someone's argument to make it easier to attack.yourlogicalfallacyis.com
you need better google skills.
just because someone posits a direct analogy to understand the application of your logic doesn't make it a strawman.
try answering the simple question of why he deserves the full brunt force of the law to ruin his life, but the people who went there with the explicit purpose for, and who engaged in, felonious behavior are exonerated.
Walk me through that ethical maze.