Death threats is not a technical lynch mob unless they have a noose and pitchforks
"Death threats" are also not substantially a "lynch mob."
And not just because of the distinction between threats and actions. A lynch mob is an actual
mob, in the first place. It's a group of people sufficiently large to, literally, take the law into their own hands. And not just in the sense of enforcing their own personal view of justice in the situation, but in the larger sense of usurping the role of the authorities in the public sphere. Lynchings are public, social events. That is what separates them from mere violence (even, mob violence).
- But Lynchmobs are Death Threats.
And false equivocation isn't Neverfly's output, but Neverfly's output contains a lot of false equivocation.
Asguards commentary suggests a Kangaroo Court. Jump over the hedge of the law from "Arrested -> sentence him."
It's disturbing.
That's lynchmob mentality.
You think that "lynchmob mentality" is defined by... a preference for a
court of law to find someone guilty and duly sentence him?
Because that's the exact opposite of a "lynchmob mentality." The lynch mob mentality is: we can't depend on the courts, so let's go grab the guy, drag him into the street, and kill him ourselves. Any one who wants the process to go through the courts is necessarily not exhibiting "lynch mob mentality," regardless of what they think of the dude's guilt and what they'd like to see as the outcome of the court proceedings.
History is history. What about the recent history, even?What about the present?
Black men still get lynched in the present day. And so the courts respond by being extremely aggressive and proactive in prosecuting them when they are suspected of victimizing whites (especially, white women). The juries involved likewise exhibit corresponding racial bias. In marked contrast to the attitudes the authorities display when the races of victim and perpetrator are reversed, as in this case. We had to have weeks of national outcry, to the point where the tone-deaf chickenhawk crowd was crying "lynch mob! lynch mob!" just to get a jury involved.
If you don't know about that, then, again, you're clearly too ignorant to even participate in this discussion, let alone go around demanding anyone prove the obvious to you. This stuff is the basic, common background setting for any discussion of race and the criminal justice system in the USA, and anybody who'd pretend that such is a matter for debate is either a real fool or - more likely - trolling. And that sort of troll line is a common one around here, these days - it's a big part of the modern GOP playbook.
Either support the claim that lynchmobs are common... Or do as I have had to do and back down on the claim you cannot support.
Better yet, I'll just repeat my assertion that we are not epistemic peers, and that your demand that I subject the obvious and well-known to some process of "proof" to the likes of yourself is a standard troll tactic around here. I reject the assertion that I "cannot" support said claim, and also the implication that it requires support to begin with, as well as the demand that I have to prove anything at all to your personal satisfaction. You don't get a veto on reality or my aknowledgment of it, and you can expect to be reminded of that any time you try such with me.
Threads here are going to reflect obvious, basic reality, regardless of how inconvenient that may be for your politics and rhetoric, and any attempt on your part to control that with these troll tactics is going to get thwarted. You aren't the first conserva-troll to try that gambit, and you should not expect to do any better than any of your predecessors did (note that they all ended up leaving this site permanently once their failures became clear to them).
That said, according to your overbroad definition of "lynch mob" above, they are absolutely everywhere, by trivial observation. If you're going to pursue the whole "prove to me that the sky is blue" gambit, then don't go and define "sky" down to "anything that is colored blue" at the outset.
And you are talking about historical Lynchmobs- which falls under Actual mobs looking for vigilante justice.
And you are.... apparently defining "lynch mob" down to "death threats" and/or "opinions about the guilt of the accused that may or may not agree with what the jury finds?"
In that case, again, there are "Lynchmobs" absolutely everywhere, all the time.
Claiming that lynch mobs would be the result of something- even though that something does occur in the news frequently requires support.
Maybe to you. Adults with eyes in their heads are perfectly aware of the relevant history, and the resulting higher scrutiny that the police and courts apply to certain racially-charged combinations of perpetrator/victim races that are well known to inflame problematic passions. And the lowered scrutiny that said authorities apply when it's a black male that gets victimized, as they did here. If you want to insist that we all pretend we live in a color-blind post-racial utopia, and then use that as a basis for attacking people who are fed up with racial injustice, you can expect a lot of grief in return. Because that's a reprehensible goal pursued with dishonorable tactics, and also exactly the kind of bullshit that Sci has had quite enough of lately.
This is not troll baiting - it's valid.
That's exactly what a troll would say.
And if you dislike it- don't respond to my posts. It won't hurt my feelings any.:shrug:
What a strange implication, that idea that I would want to avoid addressing your nasty racist trolling because doing so might hurt your feelings.
Let's be clear: I don't care about your feelings at all. To the extent that you're going to engage in racist trolling, I'm going to hammer you mercilessly. If you don't like that, then stop. If you think you can browbeat me into giving you a pass, then think again. Worse than you have tried that approach, and failed.