Man arrested for putting soda in water cup at Springdale McDonald's

[chipbennett]

And Michael Brown was killed for walking in the middle of the street.

Some other classics:

And Eric Garner was killed for selling loose cigarettes.

And Trayvon Martin was killed for walking with Skittles.

Ex hoc ergo propter hoc headlines FTW.

 

[eldirector]

Ex hoc ergo propter hoc headlines FTW.

Its like Facebook as invaded INGO.

 

[kalboy]

Wrong Coke to put oneself in harm's way over...

And now you know why places with self-serve fountains give clear cups to those who pay less for water.

This is why the retirees in the morning breakfast club at our local McDs drink Sprite
They would need a couple paddywagons to get all the soda thiefs here.

 

[JettaKnight]

Its like Facebook as invaded INGO.

I think Facebook learned it from INGO.

 

[HoughMade]

I think Facebook learned it from INGO.

All I know is that if cops were involved, they were wrong.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Some other classics:

And Eric Garner was killed for selling loose cigarettes.

And Trayvon Martin was killed for walking with Skittles.

Ex hoc ergo propter hoc headlines FTW.

I'm not sure that I'd put the Eric Garner instance in with the others. The other two were active combatants, Garner passively resisted. The amount of force used to subdue Garner was over the top. And the reason for the arrest appears to be somewhat iffy.

 

[chipbennett]

I'm not sure that I'd put the Eric Garner instance in with the others. The other two were active combatants, Garner passively resisted. The amount of force used to subdue Garner was over the top. And the reason for the arrest appears to be somewhat iffy.

The ex hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy applies to Garner, too, regardless, given that people claim that he was killed for "selling loosies".

 

[dusty88]

The ex hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy applies to Garner, too, regardless, given that people claim that he was killed for "selling loosies".

Well it is a very appropriate example of the possible outcome of having excessive legislation. Another individual was shot over a seat belt violation. While you can claim in both cases that no officer of the government intended to kill or wound these people for their infractions, that is ultimately a risk of enforcement of any law.

The person mentioned in this thread, otoh, was a thief. If we don't enforce laws against stealing, we would have no way of maintaining our property rights.

Very different issues, IMO. Government has no business in cigarette sales, seat belts, or a myriad of other activities and choices. Government does have a business in preserving personal liberty, which includes your property.

Saying that Eric Garner wasn't killed over selling cigarettes is like telling me I won't go to jail if I refuse to pay my taxes. There may be other intermediate enforcement steps, but ultimately you give in to the violation or force is used against you.

 

[chipbennett]

Well it is a very appropriate example of the possible outcome of having excessive legislation. Another individual was shot over a seat belt violation. While you can claim in both cases that no officer of the government intended to kill or wound these people for their infractions, that is ultimately a risk of enforcement of any law.

There are two different stories you might be referencing here. In either case: you're still exhibiting ex hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

The person mentioned in this thread, otoh, was a thief. If we don't enforce laws against stealing, we would have no way of maintaining our property rights.

Very different issues, IMO. Government has no business in cigarette sales, seat belts, or a myriad of other activities and choices. Government does have a business in preserving personal liberty, which includes your property.

Saying that Eric Garner wasn't killed over selling cigarettes is like telling me I won't go to jail if I refuse to pay my taxes. There may be other intermediate enforcement steps, but ultimately you give in to the violation or force is used against you.

No, because the statutory penalty for not paying your taxes includes incarceration. If you wanted to make an analogous statement, you would have to say that you could be killed for not paying your taxes.

 

[dusty88]

There are two different stories you might be referencing here. In either case: you're still exhibiting ex hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.



No, because the statutory penalty for not paying your taxes includes incarceration. If you wanted to make an analogous statement, you would have to say that you could be killed for not paying your taxes.

Well I'll certainly have the potential to be killed if i try to refuse the incarceration.

We as citizens should not support the type of regulations that are not worth dying over.

 

[indiucky]

I can't believe the manager put himself in harms way for a coke.

Well....Rick James says......

[video=youtube;Q_4bp8bBNVw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_4bp8bBNVw[/video]

 

[HoughMade]

Well I'll certainly have the potential to be killed if i try to refuse the incarceration.

We as citizens should not support the type of regulations that are not worth dying over.

So we shouldn't attempt to arrest someone unless the crime they have committed is death penalty worthy?

 

[dusty88]

So we shouldn't attempt to arrest someone unless the crime they have committed is death penalty worthy?

That's not what i said.

I refer to the type of crime.

Stealing a coke doesn't deserve the death penalty. But stealing is necessarily regulated and prosecuted so that we can maintain property rights for everyone.

OTOH there is no valid protection of anyone's liberty when you regulate product sales. Yet violation of such regulations can and did lead to someones death.