Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You understand pretty much any testimony can be - and usually is - "disputed" and it doesn't mean it is wrong? "Disputed" just means somebody said "no, it is not so". Anybody can say that - just as anybody could have said they saw the police officer shooting Brown in the back, despite the autopsy finding no trace of that. Some did. That doesn't mean the officer actually shot Brown in the back with vanishing bullets.

>>> Brown was not armed in any way

I think it's time to lay that "not armed in any way" to rest. Most physically fit males - especially ones of Brown's physical build - are "armed" to cause serious physical harm, up to lethal, to many other people. People regularly harm and murder other people with their bare hands (or feet, etc.) - over 800 cases happen even year[1], btw about the same as rifles and shotguns taken together. Does it mean police is justified to shoot any male? Of course not, since means to do something not equals to doing something. But it does not mean that if somebody is not wielding a shotgun, he is automatically harmless. There are a lot of ways to cause harm to people, and some of them require nothing more but the will to do it and a bit of strength.

[1] http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0310.x...

Edit: I used the word "complexion" instead of "physical appearance" meaning: "General character, aspect, or appearance:" but it looks like people took it to mean "skin color". Of course I did not mean to refer to color of his skin, it's completely irrelevant, but rather to his physical build - i.e. height, weight and fitness. Looking at the dictionary (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/complexion) my meaning appears to be old one, and now it is used as "skin color". It didn't help that in my native tongue the same word also means "physical appearance". I certainly did not mean it that way, so sorry for misleading.



Just as a note on communication:

I think it would really help if

(1) You would correct "Brown" to "Brown's" -- it is possessive, and as written its not clear if you omitted the possessive or if you mistakenly capitalized "brown", the color, and

(2) You would be even more explicit with what feature you were referring to and said "build" rather than "physical appearance" (which -- especially with the issue with "Brown" -- could still quite easily, without the extended explanation at the end of your post, be viewed as a veiled comment about race.)


Thanks, corrected as suggested. I suspect my unfortunate slip has derailed the discussion anyway, but in case there's still hope I have made the edits.


Are you serious? The color of your complexion is the same as being "armed" to cause serious physical harm?

Really look at that and think about it: a pale John Boehner turns into a lethal John Boehner just by adding a bit of spray tan. I put on too much bronzer and suddenly I'm a killer (perhaps a killer clown). My multiracial husband is more physically harmful after mowing the lawn in the summer, maybe even more "lethal". (The complexion change is dramatic, certainly.) Hm. The things I never knew.

There's a reason blacklivesmatter is a hashtag that resonates, and that reason is illustrated by your comment. Better go get my bronzer so I can prepare for the fight for justice.


Please see the edit - I did not mean "complexion" as color, but as "physical appearance". Looks like I used the word which has different meanings one of which is completely wrong for my point.


Is English your native language? I also interpreted your "complexion" as build/constitution because the word for "complexion" in my native language is "compleição" and can be translated as complexion/build/constitution.


Indeed, English is not my native language, and in my native language the same word means exactly as in Portuguese - build/constitution/physical appearance. It looks like English one also has this meaning, but the "skin color" meaning seems to be most frequent, which I did not realize. I probably would if I thought about it specifically, and usually I am aware of the words which mean different things in different languages, but in this case looks like it slipped my attention and completely derailed the discussion. May it be a lesson for me to be more attentive.


Thank you for your clarification. We may still disagree on some things, but at least not on something so foolish!


uh... "most physically fit males - especially ones of Brown complexion - are armed to cause serious physical harm"

It's a good idea to rephrase that.

edit - yes, a lot of black athletes have lower body fat than whites, hispanics, and asians. No, they're not "especially" armed to cause serious physical harm.


It has nothing to do with Brown being black. It has everything to do with him being 193 cm male weighting 95 kg. It is fascinating how discussion of something having zero to do with race suddenly turns into discussing "black athletes" vs. "whites, hispanics, and asians".


> It is fascinating how discussion of something having zero to do with race

It started out about race -- "especially those of Brown complexion" isn't "zero to do with race".


https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8747065 I now understand why you took it wrong, it was my fault.


Yow, bit by the English as a second language bug.

Yeah, that one word really changes the meaning of that phrase.

Yes, absolutely a more reasonable statement knowing that it's the way 'complexion' is similar to 'constitution' in some languages.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: