f7ben Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 Violating people’s constitutional rights is great derp!!!!! I swear to god some of you fucking morons don’t deserve to live here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Rigid1 Posted February 8, 2020 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted February 8, 2020 2 hours ago, Mileage Psycho said: No. Big city crime. Nope. You guys do not understand big city crime and gangs, the police know who the assholes are so why not target the assholes and put them away for carrying an illegal gun, it's pretty simple and who really gives a fuck about some inner city gang banger? No one does, and no one really cares when it is the motherfuckers shooting and killing each other, but the problem is when innocents get get killed by these sloppy shooting fucks, the solution is to get these fucks and there illegal weapons off the streets. Targeted enforcement, I'm not worried about it because I'm not simple enough to think that anyone is coming to get my guns, I ceratinly wasn't one of the stupid bastards who went out and bought guns and ammo at inflated prices when Obama was POTUS, kudos to the dopes that did It really cracks me up how ignorant these wood chucks are to what goes down in the cities.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchy Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 6 minutes ago, f7ben said: Violating people’s constitutional rights is great derp!!!!! I swear to god some of you fucking morons don’t deserve to live here Only one amendment in the constitution means anything to these self described constitutionalists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchy Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 21 hours ago, motonoggin said: Gen X you fat cunt He’s so stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 17 minutes ago, frenchy said: Only one amendment in the constitution means anything to these self described constitutionalists. FRUM MUH COLD DEAD HANDS DERRRR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 26 minutes ago, frenchy said: Only one amendment in the constitution means anything to these self described constitutionalists. Well, I see your point but, that’s not all true. Fact is, if one’s chosen activity of lifestyle is suspect in blatantly and purposely violating somebody else’s constitutional rights or freedoms, in any way, they forfeit some or all of theirs to rectify the situation. That’s how it works...and that’s how it supposed to work. We all have to temporarily give a little to ensure a safer society. But...if that’s not acceptable to some who don’t want to live in a civilized society with some semblance of order, I’m all for going “wild, wild west” I just wonder how many crying about it have the stomach for something like that? I’d bet a very, very tiny amount. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 12 minutes ago, Zambroski said: Well, I see your point but, that’s not all true. Fact is, if one’s chosen activity of lifestyle is suspect in blatantly and purposely violating somebody else’s constitutional rights or freedoms, in any way, they forfeit some or all of theirs to rectify the situation. That’s how it works...and that’s how it supposed to work. We all have to temporarily give a little to ensure a safer society. But...if that’s not acceptable to some who don’t want to live in a civilized society with some semblance of order, I’m all for going “wild, wild west” I just wonder how many crying about it have the stomach for something like that? I’d bet a very, very tiny amount. If someone’s observed behavior is not grounds for probable cause and a lawful search then their rights to be free from illegal search and seizure should be secure. Simply being black and wearing a purple hat is not probably cause and sufficient to stop someone and search them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriftBusta Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 (edited) 23 hours ago, motonoggin said: Boomers had their chance and completely fucked the next few generations with their short sightedness and spending habits. They should sit down, shut the fuck up, and fall in line with those who are actually going to have to clean up the massive mess they made. Well your generation is the largest voting bloc, have at it hind tit. The boomers have most of the money, until they start passing it down to the millennials, so it looks like your little socialist/communist/communal or whatever the fuck you're calling it paradise ain't ever going to happen. Because you're too fucking lazy to clean up after yourselves, let alone establish a causal relationship that some abstract notion that a group of people, based on their age, is somehow responsible for your state of affairs. How about the generation before boomers, do they bear any responsibility in your ignorant little narrative? Dipshit. 1 hour ago, f7ben said: Violating people’s constitutional rights is great derp!!!!! I swear to god some of you fucking morons don’t deserve to live here awwww Bens mad. Again. Edited February 8, 2020 by DriftBusta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 37 minutes ago, f7ben said: If someone’s observed behavior is not grounds for probable cause and a lawful search then their rights to be free from illegal search and seizure should be secure. Simply being black and wearing a purple hat is not probably cause and sufficient to stop someone and search them. I agree. I guess we need to look at three things then; 1.) What are the grounds in the "observed behavior" 2.) Was/is as this method successful in dropping crime rates. 3.) Are citizens of these areas implementing something like this open to surrendering some of their rights temporarily to help assure safety of all worth it? I think it's up to them. I think of the population in areas like Chicago or other cities of high gun crime where the citizens would be open to this. I think there is a place for it...in certain areas. But as a widespread, city/county/state campaign...nope. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 1 hour ago, f7ben said: Violating people’s constitutional rights is great derp!!!!! I swear to god some of you fucking morons don’t deserve to live here Like not being able to question accusers and not having council available? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 3 minutes ago, Zambroski said: I agree. I guess we need to look at three things then; 1.) What are the grounds in the "observed behavior" 2.) Was/is as this method successful in dropping crime rates. 3.) Are citizens of these areas implementing something like this open to surrendering some of their rights temporarily to help assure safety of all worth it? I think it's up to them. I think of the population in areas like Chicago or other cities of high gun crime where the citizens would be open to this. I think there is a place for it...in certain areas. But as a widespread, city/county/state campaign...nope. The grounds were rooted in racial profiling. This is exceptionally problematic when introduced as policy in policing. Statistics proved out that stop and frisk had zero beneficial impact on reducing crime and the reality was it sewed deep seeds of distrust further into communities of color. On your last point , that isn’t how a constitutional republic works and you know this. The irrational fears of a certain segment of society are not justification for circumvention of an individuals constitutionally guaranteed freedoms. If there is an issue with crime in an area then the law biding citizens and law enforcement must work within the confines of what’s legal and ethical to come up with a strategy to combat the behavior they are seeking to deter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 Just now, f7ben said: The grounds were rooted in racial profiling. This is exceptionally problematic when introduced as policy in policing. Statistics proved out that stop and frisk had zero beneficial impact on reducing crime and the reality was it sewed deep seeds of distrust further into communities of color. On your last point , that isn’t how a constitutional republic works and you know this. The irrational fears of a certain segment of society are not justification for circumvention of an individuals constitutionally guaranteed freedoms. If there is an issue with crime in an area then the law biding citizens and law enforcement must work within the confines of what’s legal and ethical to come up with a strategy to combat the behavior they are seeking to deter Well, it's not racial profiling when everyone in the area is of the same race. I've read differing statistics and fact is, crime dropped. Trying to fine point the reasons is just gas lighting. "Irrational fears". I think violent crime statistics can justify the fear. I also think it can justify what that particular area wants to do about it. The rest of this is somewhat contradictory. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 2 minutes ago, Zambroski said: Well, it's not racial profiling when everyone in the area is of the same race. I've read differing statistics and fact is, crime dropped. Trying to fine point the reasons is just gas lighting. "Irrational fears". I think violent crime statistics can justify the fear. I also think it can justify what that particular area wants to do about it. The rest of this is somewhat contradictory. Bottom line is stop and frisk was immediately found unconstitutional and there was zero grounds to defend it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 5 minutes ago, f7ben said: Bottom line is stop and frisk was immediately found unconstitutional and there was zero grounds to defend it Actually, as you've forced me to do a bit more research on it, it's all very debatable and I think I'll stay with my original claim that the citizens of any high crime area should be able to dictate how to fix it themselves. NOW...I found this fucking nugget from the soon to be crowned leader/owner of the Dem party...and I just can't wait to see how he answers for this.and how the Dem party and their media cover for him: "In response to allegations that the program unfairly targets African-American and Hispanic-American individuals, then-Mayor Michael Bloomberg has stated that it is because African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans are more likely to be violent criminals and victims of violent crime.[14]" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriftBusta Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 2 minutes ago, Zambroski said: Actually, as you've forced me to do a bit more research on it, it's all very debatable and I think I'll stay with my original claim that the citizens of any high crime area should be able to dictate how to fix it themselves. NOW...I found this fucking nugget from the soon to be crowned leader/owner of the Dem party...and I just can't wait to see how he answers for this.and how the Dem party and their media cover for him: "In response to allegations that the program unfairly targets African-American and Hispanic-American individuals, then-Mayor Michael Bloomberg has stated that it is because African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans are more likely to be violent criminals and victims of violent crime.[14]" dats raisssis!!! Moto oughta dox that Bloomstein dude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motonoggin Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 I just find it odd that Bloomberg, who used to be a republican, gave the DNC a few hundred grand and they let him in to the debates... And democrats are ok with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 3 minutes ago, motonoggin said: I just find it odd that Bloomberg, who used to be a republican, gave the DNC a few hundred grand and they let him in to the debates... And democrats are ok with it. It’s because the DNC is broke and crooked as fuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motonoggin Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry ginger Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 4 minutes ago, motonoggin said: I just find it odd that Bloomberg, who used to be a republican, gave the DNC a few hundred grand and they let him in to the debates... And democrats are ok with it. the election cycle between a former Pub turned Dem and a dem turned pub will be tremendous. one with short man syndrome the other a braggart, it will be totally entertaining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted February 8, 2020 Share Posted February 8, 2020 19 minutes ago, motonoggin said: I just find it odd that Bloomberg, who used to be a republican, gave the DNC a few hundred grand and they let him in to the debates... And democrats are ok with it. I’m surprised you can’t answer this VVVVVVVVVVV 16 minutes ago, ACE said: It’s because the DNC is broke and crooked as fuck 13 minutes ago, Angry ginger said: the election cycle between a former Pub turned Dem and a dem turned pub will be tremendous. one with short man syndrome the other a braggart, it will be totally entertaining. Bernie v. Trump would be much better. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.