UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
every country has mental health issues. only we have gun massacres every week.
but your fellow klan buddies in the NRA appreciate your pathetic attempt at distracting from the real issue.
What level of gun control do you support?
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
but your fellow klan buddies in the NRA appreciate your pathetic attempt at distracting from the real issue.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
we get it. he's black, and you are a white supremacist.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
jared loughner was stopped when he went to change clips, as has been the vase with other would be gun massacrists.
you are ignorant, and 4'11''.
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
On October 21, Pew Research Center released findings that show the annual rate of firearm-related homicides in America declined by nearly 50 percent between 1993 and 2013.
That’s the same time period in which The Washington Post (WaPo) reported that firearm ownership doubled in the United States.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/10/24/pew-annual-firearm-related-homicides-nearly-50-percent-20-years-ago/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
That’s the same time period in which The Washington Post (WaPo) reported that firearm ownership doubled in the United States.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/10/24/pew-annual-firearm-related-homicides-nearly-50-percent-20-years-ago/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
nitro harley
Well-Known Member
Are you trying to convince someone that you are smart? Out of all of your posts I fail to find anything you say that would convince me of thinking that you could be smart. Your posts remind me of someone that has their little arms just a swinging wildly. Its going to be a long year so pace yourself so your zit doesn't pop before you have a chance to vote.So when you're in jail for some marijuana offense, you'll just keep repeating because I'm a businessman, yeah that's it.
Smart as rocks.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
what did you think of hillary laughing her way through that sham of a hearing?
i was entertained by how badly she destroyed the GOP, weren't you?
LOL!
benghazi.
nitro harley
Well-Known Member
Poopy pants,
I thought it was funny because I was thinking what the FBI thought of the laughter at the same time.lol
BENGAZI!!
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
i thought that all the FBI found was that the GOP tried to falsify hillary's emails and managed to out a CIA operative in the process?
LOL!
nitro harley
Well-Known Member
DRIP, DRIP, BENGAZI!!
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
is the "drip drip" syrup cascading from your wife's fat mouth?
nitro harley
Well-Known Member
No, just next weeks emails. Drip Drip, BENGAZI!!
D528
Well-Known Member
Well , seams all these propagated shootings spurring this question are in gun free zones by people on big pharma meds. I fear not ! Come to my house criminal..... Maybe citizens should register with the gov before taking thier mind castration pills for emotion support..oh thats right , their already tracked. lol. Laws are for Citizens , criminals dont follow the law., and whats owning a gun have to do with a papsmear.lol. I was on head pills for reali1ty back in late 90s. What a scam. Now the governmet wants to make it illegal for me because i have a ssi payee . I love shooting. I love protecting myself. What am i supposed to do out in the woods when soemones break into my house ? Call a cop to come and shoot me the owner like these mental giants do all the time. I must be getting punked. Damn , my pants are not even low like a prison bitch. lol. Assault rifles are awsome for assaulting criminals. Funny how you can take a regular rifle and put a tach kit on it and all of a sudden its an assault rifle. Reminds me of holloween.,lol. Seams fear and msm bullshit runs the u.s. mind. Nothing like msm brainwashing the slaves. You shouldnt have to pass a test to be free. I can see the criminals lining up to take the test now . righty O. The police in the u.s. actually hand out assault rifles to cambodian gangs in seattle. jeeze. WAKE UP ! So like in Africa the cia hands out guns and drugs and hardcore rap to brainwash and let them go after each other doing the mudering for the gov. Thinkin your gov cares about your safety is a complete scam. Putting gov. in charge of your safety can kill you ! So a upstanding citizen gets his job taken out of the country and cant pay for kids meds or morgage and is on meds and looses it as the meds say. How do you stop that. At the root i would think , get rid of fascist oppressing gov. Change laws locally and wokr out. Bring our fucking jobs back and quit racebaiting on t.v. U.s. people are the mots brainwashed people on earth .Fuck you pentagone sponcered serf flicks and msm news. Go to another door to , it aint trick or treat here !
Last edited:
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
the ones the GOP got caught falsifying because they had nothing?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
D528
Well-Known Member
Hum , which would i rather be ? Why would i trust adolescenct coward pigs to protect me ? why would i truts cops trained by aparthied occupations to keep me safe. gimmi a a fucking break. Little cowards believe all they see on t.v. so now , constitutionalist are terrorist. fuck you u.s. gov. your terrorising scum ! You obvioslty kill your own first. lol. Go back to watching yourselfs shoot eachother. lol.
I certainly cant trust these brainiacs. They are so hyped up they shoot each other during filming cops show. What loosers. theres a reason you gotta have a low i.q. for service work. No thinkin allowed. lol. Yep peoplel wnt protection from these idiot. They are so "after the fact " lol. Reminds me of the armed narc in my school in early 70s Pacoima ca. Never kept anything from happening. lol. Protection , whta a laugh !
Last edited:
D528
Well-Known Member
I really got a laugh ta how msm brainwashs masses. lol.
More Legislators Think Underprivileged Cops Need 'Hate Crime' Law Protections
by Tim Cushing
Another US city has stepped up to shelter some of its most privileged citizens from "hate crimes."The Red Wing (MN) City Council passed a resolution last week calling for crimes against law enforcement to be prosecutable as hate crimes.
The picturesque town on the banks of the Mississippi River is believed to be the second place in the nation — and the first city — to pass such a resolution.
“It seems that anyone wearing a blue uniform has become a target in the minds of a lot of people — a target not because of what they’re doing, but a target because of who they are, which for me really kind of moves it into the hate crimes area,” said Council Vice President Peggy Rehder. “In this case, it’s not the color of their skin, but the color of their uniform.”First off, cops aren't being targeted with any more regularity than they've ever been. In fact, the last time cops were "targeted" at a level anyone rational would consider to be a problem was during Prohibition, nearly 100 years ago. (The second spike is due to another round of prohibition -- the declaration of the "War on Drugs" by President Richard Nixon.)
What "hate crimes" laws attempt to do (in their very inept, redundant way) is address inequality. Underprivileged groups often subjected to racism and other biases are the beneficiaries of these well-meaning laws. But even the most ardent supporter of hate crime legislation would be hard-pressed to find a reason to "protect" a group with vast amounts of authority and power.
If evening out inequality is the goal, the law's intentions are being severely twisted by resolutions like these. To paraphrase George Orwell, law enforcement officers are animals much more "equal" than the public they're supposed to serve. Much like the politicians that so often shield them, cops, sheriffs and others are a step or two above the laws they enforce. It takes an incredible stretch of the imagination to find police officers deserving of additional protections.
As Overlawyered's Walter Olson points out in his editorial at the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, this resolution is a solution in search of a problem. And applying it will only create more problems.It is common for hate-crime laws to create multiple jeopardy at different court levels arising from a single offense, which is often considered a danger to liberty, even if courts do not always find that it formally violates the Bill of Rights’ double jeopardy clause. But defenders of these laws argue that local authorities in many parts of the country long refused to take seriously crimes against certain scorned or disenfranchised minorities, thus in their view justifying a second layer of prosecutorial attention.
But there’s no evidence that authorities now or in the past have brushed off lethal attacks on police as something not worth investigating or prosecuting.If a person shoots a cop, a manhunt immediately ensues. The same cannot be said about racially or religiously-motivated killings. In those cases, an investigation ensues before such a motive is firmly established. Recently though, any act of violence against an officer has almost always been portrayed as a "targeted" attack.
Law enforcement officers work in a violent business. They will often find themselves in situations where they may be injured or killed. This is part of the job. What it isn't, however, is a non-stop sequence of "hate crimes. But if this law goes into effect, any act of violence -- even the BS "assault" of officers (attacking fists with faces, inadvertent contact, not somehow materializing fully-cuffed and seated in a squad car the moment an officer declares you under arrest, etc.) -- can subject a person to additional legal penalties. And this would be on top of existing additional legal penalties.Attacking a police officer already carries serious consequences in Minnesota. Under state law, an assault on a law enforcement officer can mean increased fines and jail time. If the officer is injured, a misdemeanor assault can bump up to a felony. State law also carries enhanced penalties for attacks on many professions, including firefighters, judges, prosecutors, teachers and postal workers, among others.This isn't stopping police unions and the politicians who listen to them from pushing for these extra protections. And they're doing so with a dearth of evidence supporting their claims that being a cop is more dangerous than it's ever been. Even the National Law Enforcement Memorial Fund's official stats show an 18% decline in fatal shootings of officers compared to last year.
Pay no attention to the statistics, though. It's what law enforcement officers feel is happening that really matters.Over time, the number of officers killed has remained “relatively static,” [Fraternal Order of Police Executive Director] Jim Pasco said, but the numbers don’t take into account the better equipment, training and medical care benefiting police in recent years. “The overwhelming anecdotal evidence that comes to us: There’s an increased hostility,” Pasco said.The words "overwhelming" and "anecdotal" should never be combined with "evidence." You can strike either "overwhelming" or "anecdotal" and still form a credible sentence. But you can't combine both and expect to be taken seriously. Not when the actual stats don't back up these assertions.
These are legislative proposals based on nothing more than law enforcement's unwillingness to reap what years of abusive behavior has sewn. These entities aren't pushing these laws to address known flaws in the justice system. They're pushing them to forcefully "restore" the respect they've squandered.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out these adolescent sandbox warriors. lol. Notice whta he uses for proof of need. Might as well shoot himself.lol. So glad i unplugged my cable.lol
BA BA BA ,
More Legislators Think Underprivileged Cops Need 'Hate Crime' Law Protections
by Tim Cushing
Another US city has stepped up to shelter some of its most privileged citizens from "hate crimes."The Red Wing (MN) City Council passed a resolution last week calling for crimes against law enforcement to be prosecutable as hate crimes.
The picturesque town on the banks of the Mississippi River is believed to be the second place in the nation — and the first city — to pass such a resolution.
“It seems that anyone wearing a blue uniform has become a target in the minds of a lot of people — a target not because of what they’re doing, but a target because of who they are, which for me really kind of moves it into the hate crimes area,” said Council Vice President Peggy Rehder. “In this case, it’s not the color of their skin, but the color of their uniform.”First off, cops aren't being targeted with any more regularity than they've ever been. In fact, the last time cops were "targeted" at a level anyone rational would consider to be a problem was during Prohibition, nearly 100 years ago. (The second spike is due to another round of prohibition -- the declaration of the "War on Drugs" by President Richard Nixon.)
What "hate crimes" laws attempt to do (in their very inept, redundant way) is address inequality. Underprivileged groups often subjected to racism and other biases are the beneficiaries of these well-meaning laws. But even the most ardent supporter of hate crime legislation would be hard-pressed to find a reason to "protect" a group with vast amounts of authority and power.
If evening out inequality is the goal, the law's intentions are being severely twisted by resolutions like these. To paraphrase George Orwell, law enforcement officers are animals much more "equal" than the public they're supposed to serve. Much like the politicians that so often shield them, cops, sheriffs and others are a step or two above the laws they enforce. It takes an incredible stretch of the imagination to find police officers deserving of additional protections.
As Overlawyered's Walter Olson points out in his editorial at the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, this resolution is a solution in search of a problem. And applying it will only create more problems.It is common for hate-crime laws to create multiple jeopardy at different court levels arising from a single offense, which is often considered a danger to liberty, even if courts do not always find that it formally violates the Bill of Rights’ double jeopardy clause. But defenders of these laws argue that local authorities in many parts of the country long refused to take seriously crimes against certain scorned or disenfranchised minorities, thus in their view justifying a second layer of prosecutorial attention.
But there’s no evidence that authorities now or in the past have brushed off lethal attacks on police as something not worth investigating or prosecuting.If a person shoots a cop, a manhunt immediately ensues. The same cannot be said about racially or religiously-motivated killings. In those cases, an investigation ensues before such a motive is firmly established. Recently though, any act of violence against an officer has almost always been portrayed as a "targeted" attack.
Law enforcement officers work in a violent business. They will often find themselves in situations where they may be injured or killed. This is part of the job. What it isn't, however, is a non-stop sequence of "hate crimes. But if this law goes into effect, any act of violence -- even the BS "assault" of officers (attacking fists with faces, inadvertent contact, not somehow materializing fully-cuffed and seated in a squad car the moment an officer declares you under arrest, etc.) -- can subject a person to additional legal penalties. And this would be on top of existing additional legal penalties.Attacking a police officer already carries serious consequences in Minnesota. Under state law, an assault on a law enforcement officer can mean increased fines and jail time. If the officer is injured, a misdemeanor assault can bump up to a felony. State law also carries enhanced penalties for attacks on many professions, including firefighters, judges, prosecutors, teachers and postal workers, among others.This isn't stopping police unions and the politicians who listen to them from pushing for these extra protections. And they're doing so with a dearth of evidence supporting their claims that being a cop is more dangerous than it's ever been. Even the National Law Enforcement Memorial Fund's official stats show an 18% decline in fatal shootings of officers compared to last year.
Pay no attention to the statistics, though. It's what law enforcement officers feel is happening that really matters.Over time, the number of officers killed has remained “relatively static,” [Fraternal Order of Police Executive Director] Jim Pasco said, but the numbers don’t take into account the better equipment, training and medical care benefiting police in recent years. “The overwhelming anecdotal evidence that comes to us: There’s an increased hostility,” Pasco said.The words "overwhelming" and "anecdotal" should never be combined with "evidence." You can strike either "overwhelming" or "anecdotal" and still form a credible sentence. But you can't combine both and expect to be taken seriously. Not when the actual stats don't back up these assertions.
These are legislative proposals based on nothing more than law enforcement's unwillingness to reap what years of abusive behavior has sewn. These entities aren't pushing these laws to address known flaws in the justice system. They're pushing them to forcefully "restore" the respect they've squandered.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out these adolescent sandbox warriors. lol. Notice whta he uses for proof of need. Might as well shoot himself.lol. So glad i unplugged my cable.lol
BA BA BA ,
Last edited:
D528
Well-Known Member
Chief's Counsel
No Duty to Protect: Two Exceptions
By L. Cary Unkelbach, Assistant County Attorney Representing the Arapahoe County Sheriff's Office, Centennial, Colorado
http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=341&issue_id=72004
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect-someone.html
Who you gunna call ? lol.
No Duty to Protect: Two Exceptions
By L. Cary Unkelbach, Assistant County Attorney Representing the Arapahoe County Sheriff's Office, Centennial, Colorado
http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=341&issue_id=72004
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect-someone.html
Who you gunna call ? lol.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Could you find me some stats on how many people shit on the floor in other countries?
I'm guessing the USA is the world leader there and something needs to be done about it. I suggest diapers for everyone...if we can save just one floor from being massacred...it will be worth it. What do you say Wendy?