azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

It's a bit off topic, but Floyd was being investigated for the counterfeit bill he apparently passed. He likely died due to the high levels of a highly dangerous opioid that he had consumed. The level to which his medical circumstances were exasperated by police will be hashed out in court. If you look up Walter Scott, you will find a black man who was known to be unarmed and was shot in the back while running from police. This is all on camera. I am curious to know if you recognize the name.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?That you expect anybody to answer that question on the basis of the single ten word sentence of information you have given them is just simply beyond my ability to even fathom. Mahatma Gandhi went on a walk. Did his legs get tired?
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

The shooting is at the 6:09 minute marker on the video that you posted in your own debate about how bad the riot was.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

Oh, look at that. What a surprise. You're fucking lying again. The rioter shot dead by police was female. You can also see in the video that the glass around her was intact, not smashed like it was in the incident at 6.09 in the other video:-https://www.military.com/video/rioter-killed-capitol-police-was-former- dc-national-guard-member And here is the other video, so others can check the 6.09 mark and see for themselves what a dishonest piece of shit you are:-https://youtu.be/lhjRXO72v1sYou're a total fucking liar, Amarel. On top of being a sneering idiot, you're also a goddamned liar.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

It's the same video, you're just an idiot. Ask the Washington Post.https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2021/01/08/ashli-babbitt-shooting-video-capitol/
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

It's the same videoNo it isn't you reprehensible fucking liar. There is live commentary against the incident in my video and nowhere does it mention this ended in a rioter being killed. It simply calls it a "disturbing video". The person fired at in my video is male, wearing different clothing and the condition of the surrounding glass is clearly much different. https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2021/01/08/ashli-babbitt-shooting-video-capitol/ How does dropping this link support your lie that these two clearly separate incidents are one and the same?Fuck off Amarel. You're literally a retard.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

That link is an article about the fatal shooting. In it is the exact same video that I referred to in your debate. Keep denying this. It's ridiculous.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

It's the same video, you're just an idiot. Ask the Washington Post.🤔 The man who hates appeals to authority has made 4 in this post alone 👌☺️
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

You never have been very capable of fallacy identification. Case in point. At least you realize how stupid it would be to continue arguing that Nom didn't have the shooting in his own posted video. Nom realized it too, but he never said so. He just slinked away and hoped I didn't notice that he gave up that fight
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

You never have been very capable of fallacy identification. Case in point.Which is why I pointed out 5 of yours in your gun debate where you attempted to hold two positions at once and thought you were being rational 😉At least you realize how stupid it would be to continue arguing that Nom didn't have the shooting in his own posted video. Nom realized it too, but he never said so. He just slinked away and hoped I didn't notice that he gave up that fightYour problem regards formulating coherent questions is yours , when two people point out your post is vague the problem lies with you not with them ......maybe that’s something you can work on
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

That depends on the people. Obviously.. .
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

That depends on the people. ObviouslyYes I’m sure it’s been pointed out to you many times .Obviously
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

When the two worst shit posters are posting the same shit, the fact that there's two of them doesn't give it merit.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

When the two worst shit posters are posting the same shit, the fact that there's two of them doesn't give it merit.That’s a bit harsh on you and Jace but respect for your “searing “ honesty 👏👏👏
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

Ah yes, the rubber and glue defense. Brilliant. Brilliant...
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

Ah yes, the rubber and glue defense. Brilliant. Brilliant...Thank you ....you and the wife still have your gun and mace defence 👌
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

When the two worst shit posters are posting the same shit, the fact that there's two of them doesn't give it merit.Do you know that you sound precisely like Donald Trump?A) Does something wrong or says something stupid.B) Looks around for someone he can blame to make it all go away.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

I don't believe Trump ever used the word "merit".Is comparisons to Trump going to be your new comparison to Hitler? Awesome
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

You didn't comment on the police shooting like there were black people out there.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

If he is lying, you should be in good company, now Boss Clown says we start work in an hour. Bring your comstume, and tape dance shoes. Here's lookin; at you, kid!
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

The shooting is at the 6:09 minute marker on the video that you posted in your own debate about how bad the riot wasHow does that translate into me being a legal expert?Fuck off Amarel. You're so stupid you're not even worth responding to.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

If you don't know anything about the subject matter and aren't comfortable presenting your opinion, then why would you bother engaging in the discussion? You wouldn't need to know the circumstances to know that you aren't a legal expert, so why bitch about vagueness?you're not even worth responding to.I wish you thought so
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

If you don't know anything about the subject matter and aren't comfortable presenting your opinion, then why would you bother engaging in the discussion?I didn't engage in any discussion you pointless imbecile. I told you that your question was vague to the point of absurdity. You provided no supporting information to familiarise people with the facts of the subject matter, and when challenged on this you blamed me and deflected to a lie you invented about a video I posted three days ago.You are a fucking IDIOT Amarel. Get it through your head that you're a fucking dummy.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

There's only one person who the police shot and killed in the DC riots. Everyone else seems to know what I was referring to. You certainly should have since it was literally in your own debate. No, that's not a lie. WaPo uses the same video you used because it shows the only fatal police shooting in the DC riot. You saw a video from a different angle and got confused. It happens.https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2021/01/08/ashli-babbitt-shooting-video-capitol/
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

There's only one person who the police shot and killed in the DC riots.Watching those two videos shows clearly that they are not the same incident. In my video, the glass is visibly shattered and smashed, and the person shot at is male. Anybody can watch those two videos and see what I am talking about so you gain nothing by continuously lying and deflecting to completely irrelevant statements like the one above when you are called out on it. Nobody died in the incident in my video otherwise the commentator obviously would have mentioned it.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

In your video is a clip that was used by the Washington Post to discuss the lethal shooting. The exact same video.Keep going.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

In your video is a clip that was used by the Washington Post to discuss the lethal shooting. The exact same video.It doesn't matter if it's the same video or not. What the fuck does a ten minute video I posted three days ago have to do with you asking a deliberately vague question with no surrounding context? Am I the only person you intended to solicit an answer from? Does a video of the shooting taken from a poorly recorded angle help me interpret whether or not it was legal?
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

You're the only one who found this topic vague. Jody just follows suit.There was only one rioter that the DC police shot and killed. There is no other circumstance that anyone could reasonably guess I am referring to unless they were completely unaware of the DC riot. No one here is unaware of the DC riotm
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

You're the only one who found this topic vague. Jody just follows suit.It isn't a topic you retard. You didn't give us any background information to help us determine an answer. You didn't even give us the name of the victim, let alone what they were doing which might have gotten them shot.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

Were you unsure if f I was referring to the most recent riots in DC as opposed to some earlier riot? Because "when" is the only thing not covered in my title. It's DC police and the one rioter they killed. That's who what and where. It's funny that you have to pretend to be completely oblivious and stupid just to accuse me of being stupid.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

Were you unsure if f I was referring to the most recent riots in DC as opposed to some earlier riot? Because "when" is the only thing not covered in my title.I don't understand why you are still pretending you can't see the problem with the total lack of information you gave us.The SS shot and killed a fleeing Jew. Was it a lawful shoot?
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

That SS scenario happened a lot. Find me one other circumstance of the DC Capital police shooting and killing one in a riot and I will concede that you might have confused this occurence with the other one.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

Whatever you believe it is. Other people didn't find it vague. There's only one rioter shot and killed by the Capital police at the riot. That's the only circumstance my title could possibly refer to. It was literally in your own video post.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

Whatever you believe it is. Other people didn't find it vague.A) The very first two people who came in here both ridiculed you for exactly the same thing you completely delusional retard. We didn't confer. We both arrived at the precise same conclusion independently. B) You don't get to decide what other people think and then use what you have told them they think as an argument. That's stupid.C) Your question is objectively vague. It is not a matter of opinion.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

A) Jody followed your lead and you ridicule everything all the time.B) You always claim that I believe something other than what I am saying and then use what you think I believe against me.C) If it's vague to you and not to Have them it's not objectively vague.D) Find me one other circumstance of the DC Capital police shooting and killing one in a riot and I will concede that you might have confused this occurence with the other, less relevant one.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

Jody followed your leadJody doesn't follow anybody's lead. Everything you write is absurd, false, and backed up by nothing except your own empty rhetoric. We both came in here and pointed out the obvious fact that your question can't be answered objectively because you haven't provided any relevant information or context. It's like calling a murder squad detective, pointing to a body and asking him who did it you ridiculous idiot.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

Find me one other circumstance of the DC Capital police shooting and killing one in a riot and I will concede that you might have confused this occurence with the other, less relevant one.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

You always claim that I believe something other than what I am sayingNo prizes to anyone who guessed it would be my fault that Amarel keeps telling us what everybody else thinks.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

Jody followed your lead and you ridicule everything all the time.Translation from Amarel - speak to english....That's your way of avoiding admitting you were being deliberately vague and it has been pointed out by Nom and IPerhaps in future take time to think and correctly formulate a question all this hurt pride is not helping your cause ....What Amarel is really saying is he does not know how to form a question without being vague ,this gives him a perfect opportunity of resorting to Amarel speak if things get tricky later
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

I haven t made any commentary on your post except to point out how vague it was , I’m sure you will attempt to force others to admit you’re right and they are wrong because that’s what you do
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

Yeah, it's not vague. There is only one possible circumstance I could be referring to. This topic could only appear vague to someone who is unfamiliar with the topic altogether. The only other possibility is that you couldn't tell which time I was referring to when the DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. So find me another time when the DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Otherwise the idea that this title is too vague is baseless.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

Yeah, it's not vague.Yeah, it was  There is only one possible circumstance I could be referring to. You’ve since amended your debate to give “clarity” I know This topic could only appear vague to someone who is unfamiliar with the topic altogether. It’s incredible the way you always make these sweeping generalizations The only other possibility is that you couldn't tell which time I was referring to when the DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. So find me another time when the DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Otherwise the idea that this title is too vague is baseless.Again another example of you thinking because you say something it’s true the reverse being nearly always the case Anyway I think you have the whole mystery solved to your satisfaction Poirot
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

You’ve since amended your debate to give “clarity” I knowI added the video clip that nom had in his own debate. I didn't change the title of the debate.I went through this entire conversation with Nom already. I guess I can go through it with his pup as well.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

I added the video clip that nom had in his own debate. I didn't change the title of the debate.You attempted to clear up the vagueness of your poorly formed debate I went through this entire conversation with Nom already. No you didn’t as usual you made several unfounded assertions I guess I can go through it with his pup as well.But I’ve just corrected you ....again You posted up an incoherent debate topic deliberately because you’re a prize jack ass always spoiling for fight BTW don’t get all butt hurt because you got thrashed in the gun debate then shoot your fool mouth off regards Trump and got owned again , Jace may still let you be his bitch if you plead 🥳
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

I posted some stats you didn't like, so Nom posted some stats too and you both pretended I didn't post any stats. If that made you feel good, then good for you. But the stats didn't change, and I've still got a gun.As for the rest, I just don't think you know how you come across.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

I posted some stats you didn't like, so Nom posted some stats too and you both pretended I didn't post any stats. Incorrect you posted stats and were called on your dishonesty regarding such, and you got all butt hurt If that made you feel good, then good for youIt should make you feel good as correction can help you develop coherent arguments moving forward . But the stats didn't change, and I've still got a gun.They sure did when what you left out was included.Sure you still have your gun as you need it for safety as you admitted has your bitch still got her mace just in case ?As for the rest, I just don't think you know how you come across.That’s the difference with you and me you actually care.......tragic
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

Nom always says I'm dishonest. Very often that's the sum of his response to me. You follow suit is kind of your thing so this interaction makes sense without saying anything at all about my actual argument. Which you almost never do anyway.It's true though. I do care how I come across. Even online to strangers if my conduct and comments could be mistaken for that of a cognitively delayed ill-mannered child, like yours, I would be embarrassed. Most people would. But not you.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

Nom always says I'm dishonest. A pretty accurate assessment Very often that's the sum of his response to me. You follow suit is kind of your thing so this interaction makes sense without saying anything at all about my actual argument.Yet you were the one beaten in the gun debate and then the Trump debate seeing absolutely no blame on Trumps part  Which you almost never do anyway.Which is why you took a whipping in the two arguments cited It's true though. I do care how I come across.Well you’ve “achieved “ that as you come across as a complete prick 👏👏👏 Even online to strangers if my conduct and comments could be mistaken for that of a cognitively delayed ill-mannered child, So why aren’t you embarrassed as you spout out your usual ire?Do you ever actually debate?l would be embarrassed.So would I if I was a hate filled runt like you who is so deluded he sees no wrongdoing on Trumps partIs your bitch ok for mace or running low yet ?
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

Is my bitch ok? Wow bro. I bet you get a ton of ass .
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

Is my bitch ok? Is she ? Has she enough Mace ?Wow bro. I bet you get a ton of ass You know me so well 😎
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

Nom always says I'm dishonest. Very often that's the sum of his response to me. You follow suit is kind of your thingYes, because obviously you are the victim when you mislead people, lie and omit information. Except no, you're a pathological narcissist looking to blame everybody else for your own faults.without saying anything at all about my actual argument. Which you almost never do anyway.Listen you persistently stupid fucking idiot: you were criticised legitimately for asking a vague question with no context. You could have chosen to accept that legitimate criticism but you did not. Instead you dove right into your usual behaviour and began blaming other people for your own stupid mistakes. You are still doing that a full 24 hours later.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

No context? Lol"What riot? Wtf is Amarel even talking about? What's a DC anyway? Fucking Amarel! That's so vague!"That's my impression of you being confused about the title. Wtf is short for what the fuck
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

I added the video clip that nom had in his own debate.To clarify the situation, I posted a completely different debate three days ago which contained a ten minute video, 6 minutes into which is (according to Amarel) a 15 second clip of the shooting. In Amarel's disturbing world of right wing pseudo-logic, this justifies him asking the entire world a question which it cannot answer because of a complete absence of relevant context. I've seen the video and I still can't answer the question, so as red herrings go he's really making a meal out of this one.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

You knew you couldn't answer the question with or without a video because, as you said, you're not a legal expert. You're here to shit post, which is fine. Others had not problem knowing that there is only one circumstance I could possibly be referring to.
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: No

Others🤣 You mean gender issues Jace ?  hp there is only one circumstance I could possibly be referring to.🤔 That must be it everyone else is to blame for your vaugeness 👏👏👏👏You’re having a rough time today I have corrected you , Nom has , Excon , and Al face it mate you’re one thick cunt
Debate: DC Capital Police shot and killed one of the rioters. Was it a lawful shoot?
Side: Yes

Jo, Jace, and Al all knew that there were rioters that engaged with police in DC. They were able to respond to this debate like normal aware people. Excon isn't in this debate.See, I didn't blame anyone for vagueness, I demonstrated that this title is not vague. You have nothing but Burrito's accusations to repeat. What authority did you consult to determine Nom would be a good one to follow?