"Group of eight women stab Manhattan subway rider after he makes wisecrack"

[Threxx]

All of you who are stating that the guy should have shut up and got what he deserved are all idiots. What kind of society is this that it's acceptable for someone to get stabbed, especially over a verbal comment? So that means it's ok to stab someone whenever a comment is made that you don't like? Savages. You're no different than these animals. No wonder we're going down a downward spiral where criminals have more rights than victims.

 

 

Saying that we're no different from those animals is a bit strong, don't you think?

 

No one is downplaying what happened here. We're saying that it could have been prevented if he kept to himself, tried to move to another car, etc. No one said the girls' reaction was called for, and what we said should not have been interpreted as such. On the other hand, what could have been prevented dosen't change the fact that it happened, and these young women are monsters.

[Dj Hammers]

First of all, let me say I do not want to voice my opinion about stop & frisk, and that the content of my post has nothing to do with it.

 

 

While I rarely post here, I do read these forums regularly, and reading this thread was the straw that broke the camel's back.

 

To be honest VG8, I'm sick of you constantly mentioning riverdale and your never-ending posts that to everyone else make you look like an egotistical twit with a false sense of superiority.

 

It seems as if in 4/5 of the posts you make (When you are not caught up in arguing to defend your pride) insinuate SOMETHING about Riverdale. Nobody cares anymore!

I get it that you may be on the wealthier side, but PLEASE, don't shove it down our throats to feed your ego. You say you dislike people who act in an uncivilized manner, but your behavior, while different, is also uncivilized.

 

 

Whether or not you think you are doing this is irrelevant. It does not matter what you literally SAY. What matters is how what you say COMES ACROSS to others. So don't even think about analyzing your posts word by word, because it doesn't matter anyway.

 

 

Not only were you disrespectful to the OP by turning what could have been an interesting discussion in to a debate about something that is off topic, your antics caused the debate that followed to deteriorate in to an argument. This is not a unique incident, I see it happening all the time here (Such as in the Chambers Street thread).

It has gotten to the point where I stop reading a thread the moment I see a post from you, because I know that inevitably you will ruin the thread with pointless arguments with undertones that apear to everyone else as class warfare.

 

 

I know I'm not a moderator, and I'm sure that I'm crossing the line a bit here, but it has to be said by somebody.

 

 

 

I would like to be talking and reading about the subject of the OP's post, not this mindless argumentative fodder being thrown out by VG8.

[qjtransitmaster]

Look at these pictures! There so happy!

 

 

 

THE WONDERS OF DRUGS Never cease to amaze me I bet they are gay but hay I've been wrong before no man would sleep with these fugly skanks. These attacks will stop when someone pulls out a gun to defend themselves.

First of all, let me say I do not want to voice my opinion about stop & frisk, and that the content of my post has nothing to do with it.

 

 

While I rarely post here, I do read these forums regularly, and reading this thread was the straw that broke the camel's back.

 

To be honest VG8, I'm sick of you constantly mentioning riverdale and your never-ending posts that to everyone else make you look like an egotistical twit with a false sense of superiority.

 

It seems as if in 4/5 of the posts you make (When you are not caught up in arguing to defend your pride) insinuate SOMETHING about Riverdale. Nobody cares anymore!

I get it that you may be on the wealthier side, but PLEASE, don't shove it down our throats to feed your ego. You say you dislike people who act in an uncivilized manner, but your behavior, while different, is also uncivilized.

 

 

Whether or not you think you are doing this is irrelevant. It does not matter what you literally SAY. What matters is how what you say COMES ACROSS to others. So don't even think about analyzing your posts word by word, because it doesn't matter anyway.

 

 

Not only were you disrespectful to the OP by turning what could have been an interesting discussion in to a debate about something that is off topic, your antics caused the debate that followed to deteriorate in to an argument. This is not a unique incident, I see it happening all the time here (Such as in the Chambers Street thread).

It has gotten to the point where I stop reading a thread the moment I see a post from you, because I know that inevitably you will ruin the thread with pointless arguments with undertones that apear to everyone else as class warfare.

 

 

I know I'm not a moderator, and I'm sure that I'm crossing the line a bit here, but it has to be said by somebody.

 

 

 

I would like to be talking and reading about the subject of the OP's post, not this mindless argumentative fodder being thrown out by VG8.

 

VG8 Is surounded by civilived ppl I don't think he is a racist he is simply expressing his experience making himself look snobbish. However you said it in a BRUTALLY honest way VIA 8 I understand ur pride but you need to stop with the riverdale we get it now stop if you were really made of money you would have moved to westchester county and use metro-north since money is nothing to you you can afford it right? why not yorktown heights or scarsdale? You have knowledge of condos and how it relates to express buses but plz STOP. God its worse than my old off topic random ideas that I honestly knew were crap but made em look smart.

[qjtransitmaster]

due to my personality type I usually tame those types with jokes and randomness I wouldn't get attacked by those types shockingly enough I know I avoid conflict instinctively

[realizm]

Let me make a general statement here. Many people of color are very angry when things like this happen too. It's punks like these whores here that puts us law abiding citizens of color in a bad light. Nethertheless its really disturbing when some people of color blanket label all minorities as criminals protraying themselves as honorary white citizens in the process.

[Threxx]

First of all, let me say I do not want to voice my opinion about stop & frisk, and that the content of my post has nothing to do with it.

 

 

While I rarely post here, I do read these forums regularly, and reading this thread was the straw that broke the camel's back.

 

To be honest VG8, I'm sick of you constantly mentioning riverdale and your never-ending posts that to everyone else make you look like an egotistical twit with a false sense of superiority.

 

It seems as if in 4/5 of the posts you make (When you are not caught up in arguing to defend your pride) insinuate SOMETHING about Riverdale. Nobody cares anymore!

I get it that you may be on the wealthier side, but PLEASE, don't shove it down our throats to feed your ego. You say you dislike people who act in an uncivilized manner, but your behavior, while different, is also uncivilized.

 

 

Whether or not you think you are doing this is irrelevant. It does not matter what you literally SAY. What matters is how what you say COMES ACROSS to others. So don't even think about analyzing your posts word by word, because it doesn't matter anyway.

 

 

Not only were you disrespectful to the OP by turning what could have been an interesting discussion in to a debate about something that is off topic, your antics caused the debate that followed to deteriorate in to an argument. This is not a unique incident, I see it happening all the time here (Such as in the Chambers Street thread).

It has gotten to the point where I stop reading a thread the moment I see a post from you, because I know that inevitably you will ruin the thread with pointless arguments with undertones that apear to everyone else as class warfare.

 

 

I know I'm not a moderator, and I'm sure that I'm crossing the line a bit here, but it has to be said by somebody.

 

 

 

I would like to be talking and reading about the subject of the OP's post, not this mindless argumentative fodder being thrown out by VG8.

 

1. The fact that this post is rather condesending itself dosen't help the thread much...

2. Where do you see an argument here? I don't see one.

3. Stop-and-frisk is somewhat on topic, as it relates to how these young women could have possibly been stopped.

 

I agree with you on everything else though...

[Quill Depot]

Let me make a general statement here. Many people of color are very angry when things like this happen too. It's punks like these whores here that puts us law abiding citizens of color in a bad light. Nethertheless its really disturbing when some people of color blanket label all minorities as criminals protraying themselves as honorary white citizens in the process.

 

Great post.

[Quill Depot]

What about the man. Is he ok.

[RTOMan]

Anybody in this thread grew Up in the 80's?? If you Did this whole stop and firsk "debate" here would sink in..

[Brooklyn]

Funny how now some elected leaders are now calling for more Stop & Frisk... Before they didn't want it so the cops backed down and now that you've got innocent kids being shot and people being stabbed on the subway, let's step up Stop & Frisk. These folks don't know what they want.

 

 

I don't understand: what is the connection among "stop and frisk" , elected leaders and the incident that happened? That seems like a non-sequitur.

 

There are three different things you are connecting, and I am about sure where you're going, unless you are implying that 'stop and frisk" would have prevented this attack. Which in that case, you would have to present evidence supporting your argument.

 

Now about the incident:

 

It was horrible and those individuals need to be charged by as much as the law allows. I was disgusted when I heard this. Some people just have no respect or regard for anyone, and that's unfortunate.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I don't understand: what is the connection among "stop and frisk" , elected leaders and the incident that happened? That seems like a non-sequitur.

 

There are three different things you are connecting, and I am about sure where you're going, unless you are implying that 'stop and frisk" would have prevented this attack. Which in that case, you would have to present evidence supporting your argument.

 

 

Well if you've been following the news you would know that this incident, along with a string of other events have some leaders that were against Stop and Frisk saying that they now support it, the idea being that it could prevent some attacks from happening, perhaps this one for example. That was the reason I asked earlier in the thread what do these politicians want...

 

---

As for other comments, quite frankly I didn't see any argument going on. There was a mature discussion had with no name calling or any of that nonsense, so perhaps some folks can't handle a thread with a mature discussion...

[Brooklyn]

Well if you've been following the news you would know that this incident, along with a string of other events have some leaders that were against Stop and Frisk saying that they now support it, the idea being that it could prevent some attacks from happening, perhaps this one for example. That was the reason I asked earlier in the thread what do these politicians want...

 

---

As for other comments, quite frankly I didn't see any argument going on. There was a mature discussion had with no name calling or any of that nonsense, so perhaps some folks can't handle a thread a mature discussion...

 

 

So you're on the news?

 

I am not saying this as a joke, but I specifically asked FOR YOUR REASONING and why YOU made the argument and for you to support it. You clearly have opinions about this. I just asked for you to support them. That's all--nothing ill-will about it.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

So you're on the news?

 

I am not saying this as a joke, but I specifically asked FOR YOUR REASONING and why YOU made the argument and for you to support it. You clearly have opinions about this. I just asked for you to support them. That's all--nothing ill-will about it.

 

 

Well it's pretty simple... The three things are all related... I mean what else can be said about the incident aside from the fact that the guy should've kept to himself and moved? It seems like you're asking me why I brought it up and I explained why. As for my position on it, I think I've already made that clear, so I see no need to bring it up again.

[GojiMet86]

I wouldn't provoke a group of probably intoxicated, rowdy group of young people.

[Brooklyn]

Well it's pretty simple... The three things are all related... I mean what else can be said about the incident aside from the fact that the guy should've kept to himself and moved? It seems like you're asking me why I brought it up and I explained why. As for my position on it, I think I've already made that clear, so I see no need to bring it up again.

 

 

Because you say so?

 

"Well it's pretty simple... The three things are all related..."

 

It's not simple to me and you haven't demonstrated how these things are related.

 

The problem I am having now is that people are injecting a policy here out of the blue and taking incidents and saying: "Well, if we had such and such, then this wouldn't have happened".

 

That is fallacious reasoning.

 

To top it off, they present NO EVIDENCE to support the claims they make, rather they respond by saying :"It's simple" or It's obvious or "I don't need to explain", or the like....it gets tiring hearing people make arguments yet not have the burden of proving the claims that they bring forth.

 

I really don't see how any S and F could have prevented those girls from going off...not all of these actions can be prevented. I am not talking about you specifically, but it is ludicrous to think that a policy could have prevented something like this.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Because you say so?

 

"Well it's pretty simple... The three things are all related..."

 

It's not simple to me and you haven't demonstrated how these things are related.

 

The problem I am having now is that people are injecting a policy here out of the blue and taking incidents and saying: "Well, if we had such and such, then this wouldn't have happened".

 

That is fallacious reasoning.

 

To top it off, they present NO EVIDENCE to support the claims they make, rather they respond by saying :"It's simple" or It's obvious or "I don't need to explain", or the like....it gets tiring hearing people make arguments yet not have the burden of proving the claims that they bring forth.

 

I really don't see how any S and F could have prevented those girls from going off...not all of these actions can be prevented. I am not talking about you specifically, but it is ludicrous to think that a policy could have prevented something like this.

 

 

Oh I see what you're getting at... Well let me clarify... I never took the position or any position for that matter that Stop & Frisk would've prevented this event. It was politicians that seemed to be insinuating that and they were the ones that brought this incident up along with others saying that Stop & Frisk is needed when they previously were against Stop & Frisk. I simply asked that they make up their mind one way or another. As for whether or not Stop & Frisk would've prevent this event, you're right, there is no evidence to support that claim and I never stated that there was. My point in saying that the three things are related was to say that there is a correlation between the three because they've been tied together in the media.

 

I think my position in the whole discussion was that I support Stop & Frisk because it helps prevent crimes before they occur (generally speaking even if only a few).

[Brooklyn]

Oh I see what you're getting at... Well let me clarify... I never took the position or any position for that matter that Stop & Frisk would've prevented this event. It was politicians that seem to be insinuating that and they were the ones that brought this incident up along with others saying that Stop & Frisk is needed when they previously were against Stop & Frisk. I simply asked that they make up their mind one way or another. As for whether or not Stop & Frisk would've prevent this event, you're right, there is no evidence to support that claim and I never stated that there was. My point in saying that the three things are related was to say that there is a correlation between the three because they've been tied together in the media.

 

 

Ok, thanks for the clarification...but you did bring them up in the thread, and I simply saw that as incongruous, because it was.

 

Bottom line is that that group needs to be locked up. They are a danger to people and they demonstrated that.

 

I do not fault the man for saying something. Trust me, kids can get EXTREMELY LOUD--ear grating. He shouldn't have to move to another car. Why should he?

 

It's a shame seeing their reactions--like they're proud.

[Brooklyn]

And yes, when people bring forth claims and have no evidence to support it, there's a word for that: bull*&^!

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Ok, thanks for the clarification...but you did bring them up in the thread, and I simply saw that as incongruous, because it was.

 

 

Well they should've been brought up because it was part of the topic. Whether this particular article mentioned it or not, it has been mentioned in the media with this topic, so I don't see why it shouldn't be discussed.

[TheSubwayStation]

Sorry, guys. It was kind of my fault for restarting the stop and frisk debate...I realize that it wasn't the most relevant to the thread, but I had things that I really wanted to say about it .

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Sorry, guys. It was kind of my fault for restarting the stop and frisk debate...I realize that it wasn't the most relevant to the thread, but I had things that I really wanted to say about it .

 

 

I don't see why you're apologizing. It was part of the topic and we were having a civil discussion on it. If some folks didn't like that we were discussing it well what can you do? I mean I didn't realize that we could only mention parts of an article that is posted in a thread, which seems to be what folks are implying.

[TheSubwayStation]

I don't see why you're apologizing. It was part of the topic and we were having a civil discussion on it. If some folks didn't like that we were discussing it well what can you do? I mean I didn't realize that we could only mention parts of an article that is posted in a thread, which seems to be what folks are implying.

 

I'm apologizing because it annoys me when other people do what I did (getting into a back-and-forth debate about something repetitive and only slightly relevant), when I'm not interested in the topic being discussed. Here, I was interested in talking about stop and frisk, so I talked a lot about it...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I'm apologizing because it annoys me when other people do what I did (getting into a back-and-forth debate about something repetitive and only slightly relevant), when I'm not interested in the topic being discussed. Here, I was interested in talking about stop and frisk, so I talked a lot about it...

 

 

Well I think it's great to have a discussion on the topic at hand but as I said before, the damage has been done. The guy was stabbed, so all we can discuss really is what he should've done and how horrible these young women are. The back part of the topic quite frankly is a good one to discuss even if you want to call it only slightly relevant. This incident along with the other violent ones that have happened in the last few weeks should garner a deeper discussion about what can be done to stop future events like this from happening, which quite frankly IMO is quite important. One discussion which has run its course is Stop & Frisk. The other topic floating about is finding ways to get more illegal weapons off of the streets. I most certainly find both topics relevant to the overall discussion at hand.

[Brooklyn]

Well they should've been brought up because it was part of the topic. Whether this particular article mentioned it or not, it has been mentioned in the media with this topic, so I don't see why it shouldn't be discussed.

 

Sorry, guys. It was kind of my fault for restarting the stop and frisk debate...I realize that it wasn't the most relevant to the thread, but I had things that I really wanted to say about it .

 

 

Well it appears VG 8 was the first to mention it in the thread. The article said NOTHING about stop and frisk....he injected it into the debate (the second comment on the thread). That's where I came in to ask the question: What does S&F have to do with this thread? To which he replied that politicians and others were calling on in and naming this incident as "evidence" of its need. So he wasn't making the argument about it either way, just pointing out what others were saying. But I still have a problem with him mentioning it anyway, but I will let that go.

 

Keeping people on topic and trying to point out fallacies is something I do for a living lol.

 

The other topic floating about is finding ways to get more illegal weapons off of the streets. I most certainly find both topics relevant to the overall discussion at hand.

 

 

Was the weapon that they used illegal?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Well it appears VG 8 was the first to mention it in the thread. The article said NOTHING about stop and frisk....he injected it into the debate (the second comment on the thread). That's where I came in to ask the question: What does S&F have to do with this thread? To which he replied that politicians and others were calling on in and naming this incident as "evidence" of its need. So he wasn't making the argument about it either way, just pointing out what others were saying. But I still have a problem with him mentioning it anyway, but I will let that go.

 

Keeping people on topic and trying to point out fallacies is something I do for a living lol.

 

 

That's correct... The article itself said nothing about Stop & Frisk even though the topic overall has garnered discussion about S & F and illegal weapons in the media, which is where this article came from in the first place, but if we're going to be so strict about only sticking to what articles say then we should never interject any outside information in a thread aside from what is listed, which quite frankly would mean very little could be discussed.

 

Was the weapon that they used illegal?

 

 

That I don't know, but most folks don't go walking around with knives just because. The other point made a politician this morning was training young individuals to stop resorting to using weapons in the first place, most of which are usually illegal.